This article explores archaeological practice as regards the study and publication of unprovenanced artifacts, particularly elements of ancient arms and armor. It describes the reasons why publication is thought to be prejudicial for archaeological research and considers the possible utility of some counterarguments by way of an examination of the publication policy of the European Association of Archaeologists. It concludes by arguing that archaeologists in favor of study and publication need to do more to validate their position.

Repatriation of human remains and associated funerary objects under NAGPRA and the increased use of culturally informed curation practices for sacred, religious, and ceremonial objects are important steps toward restoring control over cultural patrimony to Native Nations in the United States. Many museums holding Indigenous belongings have begun a collaborative care approach involving Indigenous community voices and improving access to collections. However, this framework has not been applied to many animal remains curated in American archaeology museums, which remain broadly beyond the care or administrative purview of Native people. Because many Indigenous worldviews do not hold a clear separation between the human and animal spheres, common practices applied to animal remains are not congruent with the idea of respectful or culturally informed care. Here we outline steps to shift the treatment of animals through the application of Indigenous knowledge to museum collections.

Over the last decades, archaeology has experienced a transformative revolution in the wake of the digital that has shaped the ways in which it is researched and published. A key concept, openness, has emerged from this shift. This article explores digital approaches to data management conducted within the framework of the PERAIA project, which provides a comprehensive open database and a web application that integrate data on archaeological heritage spanning from late prehistory to antiquity, covering the Aegean area (Crete) and northeastern Libya / northwestern Egypt (Marmarica). We used a methodology that integrates legacy data with historical aerial and satellite imagery to identify archaeological features in the landscape, thereby enriching them with associated environmental and historical (meta)data. Our open data practices reflect a commitment to open science, in which digital technology and the LOUD+FAIR principles have been at the core of the project to achieve data openness, fair access to information, and enhanced data reusability potential.

The use of programming languages in archaeological research has witnessed a notable surge in the last decade, particularly with R, a versatile statistical computing language that fosters the development of specialized packages. This article introduces the tesselle project (https://www.tesselle.org/), a comprehensive collection of R packages tailored for archaeological research and education. The tesselle packages are centered on quantitative analysis methods specifically crafted for archaeology. They are designed to complement both general-purpose and other specialized statistical packages. These packages serve as a versatile toolbox, facilitating the exploration and analysis of common data types in archaeology—such as count data, compositional data, or chronological data—and enabling the construction of reproducible workflows. Complementary packages for visualization, data preparation, and educational resources augment the tesselle ecosystem. This article outlines the project's inception, its objectives, design principles, and key components, along with reflections on future directions.

Field schools are foundational training for archaeologists and the corresponding methods for instruction are largely consistent within the discipline. The expectation is that at some point early in their careers students will enroll in a field school. To participate, students must pay summer tuition, dedicate a minimum of four weeks (usually longer) to full-time fieldwork, and in many cases travel to remote locations. The reality is that for many students such expectations make field school participation an impossibility—and ultimately make archaeology a nonviable career option for students from historically underrepresented backgrounds. Offering local field opportunities within the context of a regular school year alleviates those problems. A recent field school in north Idaho demonstrated how traditional field school structure excludes many students and how archaeologists can adjust instruction to make field training more accessible to students.