Post on 13-Jul-2020
Transatlantic Currents: Exploring the past, present and future of globalhistorical archaeology
Horning, A. (2016). Transatlantic Currents: Exploring the past, present and future of global historicalarchaeology. Historical Archaeology, 50(3), 111-126. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03377337
Published in:Historical Archaeology
Document Version:Peer reviewed version
Queen's University Belfast - Research Portal:Link to publication record in Queen's University Belfast Research Portal
Publisher rights© 2016 The Author(s).This work is made available online in accordance with the publisher’s policies. Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.
General rightsCopyright for the publications made accessible via the Queen's University Belfast Research Portal is retained by the author(s) and / or othercopyright owners and it is a condition of accessing these publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associatedwith these rights.
Take down policyThe Research Portal is Queen's institutional repository that provides access to Queen's research output. Every effort has been made toensure that content in the Research Portal does not infringe any person's rights, or applicable UK laws. If you discover content in theResearch Portal that you believe breaches copyright or violates any law, please contact openaccess@qub.ac.uk.
Download date:23. Aug. 2020
AudreyHorning
SchoolofGeography,ArchaeologyandPalaeoecology
Queen’sUniversityBelfast
BelfastBT71NN
NorthernIreland
TransatlanticCurrents:ExploringthePast,PresentandFutureofGlobalHistorical
Archaeology
Abstract
Thepast,presentandfutureofglobalhistoricalarchaeologyisaddressedfirstthrougha
comparativeanalysisofthedevelopmentofthedisciplineinNorthAmericanandtheBritish
Isles,andsecondlybyaconsiderationoftherecentexpansionofinterestaroundtheworld
andparticularlyinpostcolonialcontexts.Drawingfromarangeofglobalcasestudies,itis
arguedthatthemostproductivewayforwardforthedisciplineliesinitsabilityto
productivelyengagewithcontemporarysocietalproblemsandglobalchallengesinlocally-
rootedandcontingentways.
Asfirstdefined,globalhistoricalarchaeologywasunashamedlydominatedbyNorth
Americanconcernsandvoices,whichoccasionallyresultedinthemutingandelidingof
disparateglobalexperiences.Increasingly,andpositively,scholarsaroundtheworldand
outsideoftheNorthAmericantraditionhavebeguntoengagewithanddirectpracticesin
andofhistoricalarchaeology.Inconsideringthefutureofthediscipline,akeyquestionis
whetherthereis,orwhetherthereshouldbe,anyunityinpractice,focus,andframework.
Havingspentmycareerthusfarpracticinghistoricalarchaeologyonbothsidesofthe
Atlantic,andseeingfirst-handthedivergencesinpracticebetweenthoseregions,Ihave
cometovaluediversityoverunity.Thereisarichnesstothemanyvarietiesofglobal
practice;withanastoundingvarietyofcontexts,frameworks,questionsandinterpretations.
Greaterattentiontoandrespectforthesevariationstomeconstitutesthewayforwardfor
historicalarchaeology,asistheincreasingemphasisuponsituatinghistoricalarchaeologyas
politicallyengagedandrelevant.RatherthanexportingsomeversionofNorthAmerican-
stylehistoricalarchaeologyaroundtheglobe,Iwouldprefertoseeafutureforthe
disciplinewhenthepracticesoutsideofNorthAmericanotonlyaretakenintoconsideration
bythehistoricdisciplinarycore,butinfactcanbegintodriveinnovationanddevelopglobal
synergies.Theprincipalarenaforsuchemergentsynergiescentresonpolitics,engagement,
andsocialjustice,particularlyinpostcolonialcontexts.
Beforeaddressingthesecurrentandfuturedirections,itisusefultoreviewand
considercommonalitiesanddivergencesintransatlanticapproachestohistorical
archaeologyinthetraditionalcentresforthefield,NorthAmericaandtheBritishisles.As
such,thisarticleinevitablydrawsheavilyfromAnglophonehistoricalarchaeology.My
principalaimistocapitaliseuponmyowntransatlanticcareertoreflectuponthedifferent
trajectoriesofresearchintothemateriallegaciesofthelastfivehundredorsoyears,witha
particularemphasisuponthedevelopmentandcharacterofIrishhistoricalarchaeology.I
setoutsuggestionsforthefutureintermsofbroaderlessonsthatmightbelearnedfrom
theregionaltraditions,andthensecondlyIconsiderkeythemesforthefuturedrawingon
theexpansionofhistoricalarchaeologicalresearchoutsideoftheAnglophoneworld.WhileI
highlightaseriesofglobalprojectsasexemplarsofnewlyemergentpractice,thediscussion
isfarfromanexhaustivesummary.Instead,Ifocusprimarilyuponthemannerinwhich
historicalarchaeologycanandisengagingwithsocietalproblemsandglobalchallenges,
albeitinlocally-rootedandcontingentways.
Frommyownperspective,oneofthemoreremarkabledevelopmentsofthelast
fifteenyearshasbeenamassiveincreaseininterestinthearchaeologicalstudyofthelater
historicalperiodintheUnitedKingdomandinIreland.Indeed,thedevelopmentoflater
historicalarchaeologyinIreland,northandsouth,isnothingshortofmiraculous.Priorto
the1998GoodFridayAgreement,whichusheredinanuncertainbutnonethelesscrucial
periodofreflectionaspartoftheNorthernIrelandpeaceprocess,anyeffortstoconsider
thearchaeologyofthepost-medievalperiodwasliabletobringaccusationsofpartisanship-
focusingonlyonthe‘archaeologyoftheEnglish.’Giventhetimingofitsemergence,Irish
historicalarchaeologyisthereforeexceptionallypoliticallyawareinamannerthathasnot
alwaysbeenthecaseinNorthAmericanhistoricalarchaeology,wherethearchaeological
studyofcoloniallifeisalongacceptedandvenerabletradition.AspectsofNorthAmerican
historicalarchaeologycertainlyarepoliticallyengaged,mostnotablytheinfluentialstrand
ofcriticalarchaeologywhichfocusesuponacritiqueofcapitalism(e.g.,McGuire2008;
Leone1999,2005);archaeologiesoftheAfricanDiaspora(e.g..OgundiranandFalola2007);
andthegrowingbodyofliteratureonthehistoricalarchaeologyofNativecommunities
(e.g.,Silliman2009,2014;Mrozowskietal.2009;Jordan,thisissue).ButasIwillexplore
furtherbelow,contemporaryIrishhistoricalarchaeologyhasadditionallybenefitedfromits
emergenceatatimewhenpublicengagementandinclusivearchaeologiesarewidely
practiced,encouraged,andtheorised,allowingforanewarchaeologicalpraxisalignedwith
peacebuildingandcentraltoconflicttransformation.
TransatlanticComparisons:TheDevelopmentandCharacterofHistoricalArchaeology
Differenttheoreticalinfluenceshavelongframedresearchinhistoricalarchaeology
onbothsidesoftheAtlantic.ThedistinctivegeographyandnationalhistoriesofEurope,in
theestimationofBritisharchaeologistPaulCourtney(2009b:93),hasshapedthecharacter
ofpost-medievalarchaeology:“whatPierreBourdieuhastermedhabitusinfluences
differenttrans-Atlanticoutlooks…thepatchworkofdistinctiveEuropeanpaysafewmiles
acrosscontrastswiththevastdistancesofmanyAmericanregions…aEuropefullof
barriers…notan‘open’frontier.”Nationalboundariesandthedistinctivenessofnational
historiesandEuropeanregionalengagementsfosterawidevarietyofdistinctresearch
questionsandagendas,ifattimesalsohamperingpan-Europeanengagementwithhistorical
archaeology.ThediversecharacteroftheEuropeanUnionitself,withits28memberstates
speaking24differentofficiallanguages,exemplifiesthenatureofthechallenge(Brooks
2013:5).
Perhapsevenmoresignificantistheimportanceofaddressingissuesofcontinuity
fromthemedievaltothemodern.FromaNewWorldperspective,1492mayseema
convenientstartingpointforhistoricalarchaeology,coincidingasitdoeswithwhatis
consideredamajorhistoricalruptureinthehistoriesofmanyindigenouspeoplesandby
extensionoftheEuropeanswhoencounteredthem.Buthowimportantwasthisdateand
eventfromaEuropeanperspective?Canwereallyviewthemedievalperiodasoneof
traditionandstasis,awaitingtransformationthroughthemechanismofAtlanticexpansion?
Or,aslongarguedbyscholarslikeFransVerhaeghe(1997:28)“themedievalworldequally
wentthroughnumerouschanges,someofthembeingquitefundamentalsuchasthe
emergenceofnewurbansocieties,networksandcultures,andmostifnotallleadingto
greatercomplexityintermsofsocietyandsocialstratification,economy,andsocialand
culturalbehaviour.Thisconstitutesyetanothergoodreasontopayatleastasmuch
attentiontowhatsurvivedfromthemedievalperiod(andifpossiblewhy)astowhat
changedandwhy.”ConsiderationofthecomplexityanddynamismoflatemedievalEurope
exposesthelimitationsofsomeofNorthAmericanhistoricalarchaeology’smostcherished
models,themostobviousofwhichbeingtheGeorgianworldview,whichoversawan
apparentabandonmentofmedievalpreceptsandpracticespresumedtostillbeinoperation
aslateastheturnoftheeighteenthcentury.
TheanthropologicalcharacterofNorthAmericanhistoricalarchaeologyisclearly
oneofitsmostdistinctivestrengths(Schuyler1970,1988),butthishasinspiredatendency
onthepartofNorthAmericanstobelievethatbyvirtueofbeinganthropologists,theyare
alsodefactomoretheoreticallysophisticatedthantheirEuropeancounterparts,whoare
moreoftentrainedinhistoryorinarchaeologyasastand-alonediscipline.Itcannotbe
deniedthatsincethe1966establishmentoftheSocietyforPost-MedievalArchaeology,the
disciplineintheUnitedKingdominparticulargainedthereputationofexcellencein
descriptivestudiesoffinds,buildings,andlandscapes,butlaggedfarbehindwhenitcame
toconsideringthemeaningandsignificanceofarchaeologicaldata.Asignificantcritiqueof
thisbrandofpost-medievalarchaeologycoalescedinthe1990s,encapsulatedbythe
theoretically-informedworkofMatthewJohnson(1996;1999:21),whohimselfovertly
referencedthe“greaterintellectualstrengthofNorthAmericanhistoricalarchaeology”,
alongsideacollectionofpapers(TarlowandWest1999)thatshowcasedtheworkofanew
generationofself-describedlaterhistoricalarchaeologists.WhenWest(1999:1)wrotethat
“post-medievalarchaeologydoesnothaveaflourishingimageasaresearcharea…yearsof
datacollectionhavenotbeenilluminatedbyquestionscentredonpeople,”shewas
expressingthefrustrationsofmanyonbothsidesoftheAtlanticwiththetraditional,data-
drivenapproachofpost-medievalarchaeology.
However,thissituationhasnowbeenalmostcompletelyreversed,totheextentthat
thereisgrowingconcernamongstprofessionalsabouttheerosionofmaterialculture
knowledge,exacerbatedinrecentyearsbytheuntimelylossoftwokeyfindsspecialists,
GeoffEgan(1951–2010)andPaulCourtney(1955-2013).Thisreversalinemphasisisowed
inparttotheinfluenceofNorthAmericanapproaches,butalsototheimpactofthe
strengthofpost-processualapproachestointerpretationthatcharacteriseteachingina
numberofUKhighereducationinstitutions,whichhasproducedanewgenerationof
scholarswillingandabletoapplytheoreticalframeworkstotheirstudy.Thiswelcome
development,however,hasalsooccurredatatimewhenuniversitytimetablesandfinances
increasinglycompressandlimitthetimeandinfrastructurerequiredfortheintensivefield
andlaboratorytrainingessentialtothedevelopmentofaprofessionalarchaeologist.Most
studentsareintroducedtomaterialculturethroughconceptslikematerialityandobject
agency,butfewaretaughthowtotellthedifferencebetweencreamwareandpearlware,or
howtoidentifyanddateatransferprintpatternandmoreimportantly,howthatknowledge
canactuallycontributetodata-richyetsophisticatedanalysesofearlymodernproduction
andconsumptionexemplifiedbytheworkofscholarslikeAlasdairBrooks(2009).Influenced
aswellbythemoveawayfromtraditionalmaterialculturestudies,historicalarchaeologyin
theBritishIsleshasincreasinglybeguntoemphasisecontemporaryarchaeology:applying
theoreticalconstructstointerpretthepresentday,andblurringthedisciplinaryboundaries
betweenarchaeology,culturalgeography,andculturalstudies(Harrison2011,thisvolume;
Horning2011).
Incompilingmythoughtsforthisarticle,Ireturnedtoasimilarefforttoreflecton
thepastpresentandfutureofhistoricalarchaeologythatformedthecoreofanacademic
conferencein2008andsubsequentbook(HorningandPalmer2009).There,ouraimwasto
tapintothediversityofapproachesandtocriticallyaddressthesenseoffragmentationthat
seemedtocharacterisepracticeontheislandsofBritainandIrelandspecifically.Atthe
time,therelativelysmallcommunityofscholarsfocusingonthemateriallegaciesofthelast
fivehundredorsoyearsappearedrivenbyfactionalism—separatingintodiscretegroupings
ofpost-medievalarchaeologists,industrialarchaeologists,andcontemporary
archaeologists—tothedetrimentoftheoveralldiscipline.Whatemergedfromthose
conversationswasasensethatdifferenceswereinmanywaysillusory.Inshort,approaches
constantlychange.
ThefirstvolumeofthejournalPost-MedievalArchaeologyin1967definedthechronological
scopeofthesocietyas“theperiodoftheunificationofstateswithintheBritishIsles,the
establishmentofBritainuponthepathofmaritimecolonialexpansionandtheinitialstages
ofindustrialgrowth”,coincidinginAmericawiththeperiod“extendingfromthearrivalof
thefirstEuropeansettlersuptotheDeclarationofIndependence”(Butler,1967:1).From
thefirst,then,post-medievalarchaeologyinBritainemployedaterminaldateofc.1750-
1780.Inthesameinauguralissue,IvorNoëlHume(1967:104)describedAmericanhistorical
archaeologyasintended“tofosterthestudyofnon-aboriginalarchaeologyinthewestern
hemisphere”andwhose“sphereofinterestwaslimitedbycultureratherthanbytime.”
FewwouldagreenowwithNoëlHume’sculturalexclusionism,justaspost-medieval
archaeologynolongeremploysacut-offdate--asparticularlyexemplifiedbytheriseof
contemporaryarchaeology.
WhatofthecurrentcontrastbetweenNorthAmericaandtheBritishIsles?
Significantdifferencesdoexistbetweenthewaysinwhichhistoricalarchaeologistson
eithersideoftheAtlanticselectandapproachevidence.Forexample,buildingsarchaeology
isawell-establishedbranchofpost-medievalarchaeology,andinsomeplacesisthe
dominantbranch(HicksandHorning2007).ButinNorthAmerica,studiesofstanding
buildingsarestillgenerallytheprovinceofarchitecturalhistorians,notarchaeologists.
Similarly,onemightpointtothevaryingincorporationofscientificanalyticaltechniquesin
historicalarchaeology.Thestudyofpost-medievalfaunalmaterialisunfortunately
exceptionallyrareoutsideofNorthAmerica(Thomas2009),whileuseofLIDARandlarge
scalesurveytounderstandtheevolutionofhistoricallandscapes(Dalglish2009)isless
commoninNorthAmerica,understandablyafactoroftheimmensedifferencesinscale.
InNorthAmerica,amajorthreadofresearch(albeitmuchofitcompliancedriven)
focusesonruraldomesticsites(e.g.,Cabaketal.1999;Wilson1990).Asacknowledgedby
PaulCourtney(2009b:97),however,the“belowgroundarchaeologyofeverydayagrarian
lifeandsociety”isprobablythemostarchaeologicallyneglectedtopicinbothBritainand
Ireland.Legislativeframeworksmatteraswell,oftenlaggingfarbehindacademicinterestin
particularsitetypes.IntheRepublicofIreland,forexample,thislackofattentionto
vernacularsitesisfurtherexacerbatedbynarrowreadingsofthelaw.NationalMonuments
legislationstipulatesthatsitespre-dating1700areautomaticallyeligibleforinclusiononthe
RecordofMonumentsandPlaces,givingthemsomemeasureofprotection,whileastrong
casehastobemadetoincludelatersites.Theresulthasbeenthatlatersiteshavebeen
onlysporadicallyadded,withonlyCountyCorkroutinelyconsideringeighteenthand
nineteenth-centurysitestobeofpotentialarchaeologicalvalue.Othercounty
archaeologicalsurveystendtostopcoveragebefore1700,andinsomecases,1600.This
attitudetowardslaterhistoricalsitescanbedirectlyattributedtothepoliticsofnationhood,
andspecificallytheemergenceofthenewlyindependentRepublicofIreland:“Fromthe
outsetthenewstatewasveryclearaboutthepastitbelievedmoreappropriateto
commemorate,ormoreproperly,thosepaststhatitchosetoignore.Thisselectivememory
waseffectivelyenshrinedintheRepublicofIreland’sNationalMonumentslegislation,
beginningwiththeActof1930,inwhichtheperiodafterAD1700wasofficiallyconsidered
nottobeofarchaeologicalinterest”(Rynne2009:168).
Theongoingcontestationoverthevaluesplaceduponparticularheritagesis
underscoredbytherevelationin2012thatpost-1700siteswerequietlybeingremoved
fromtheRMP(McDonald2011).Concernsfromdeveloperswerecited,asdevelopmentsin
thewell-documentedandsurveyedCo.Cork,forexample,mighthavetomitigateimpacts
onrecordedpost-medievalsites,whereasinDonegaltheymightnotbecausethe
ArchaeologicalSurveyofDonegalonlyrecordedsitespre-dating1600.Theubiquitousand
appealingcharacterofIreland’slaterhistoricalbuiltandmaterialheritage,exemplifiedby
thethousandsofextanteighteenthandnineteenthbuildingsandstreetscapes,
paradoxicallyservesasadisincentivetowardstheirstudyandpreservation.Thatany
associatedarchaeologicaldepositswillberepletewithsignificantquantitiesofindustrially-
producedmaterialculturealsopresentsasignificantpragmaticchallengetoasystemin
whichthestateownsallarchaeologicalobjectsand,assuch,hasaresponsibilitytocurate
andhousetheassemblagesderivedfromarchaeologicalexcavations.
CompetingFrameworks:InterpretingHistoricalArchaeology
Farmoreimportantthanthedifferencesinsitesinvestigatedandeventhevariable
legislativeframeworksguidingarchaeologicalinvestigationandinterpretationarethe
questionsposedofarchaeologicalsites,whichvaryconsiderablyoneithersideofthe
AtlanticandbetweencountriesandregionsintheBritishIslesandEurope.Theimportance
ofconsideringcolonialismisonesuchissue.Withoutdoubt,colonialismiskeytohistorical
archaeologyinlandsthatexperiencedintensivesettlercolonialism,asintheAmericasand
Australasia,butrecognitionofboththeoperationofsmallerscalecolonialism,aswellasthe
impactofthecolonisedonthecoloniser,isstillnotwidelyrecognisedorappreciated.Both
PaulCourtney(2009a,2009b)andNatashaMehler(2013)havecommentedfroma
EuropeanstandpointabouttheplaceofcolonialisminEuropeanhistoricalarchaeology.In
consideringthegeneralBritishdisinterestinemployingcolonialismasaframingdevice,
Courtney(2009a:181)founda“collectiveamnesiaandembarrassmentabout
colonialism……anyoneover60wasprobablybroughtuponthehistoryandgloriesofthe
BritishEmpire.Anyoneyoungerhasprobablygonethroughtheireducationwithoutthe
barestmentionofempireandcolonialism.”InMehler’sestimation(2013:40),continental
Europeansareevenlesslikelytoengagewithcolonialism:“thesubjectsofcolonialismor
immigrationasamajorcomponentofglobalisationhavehardlybeendealtwithbynon-
BritishEuropeanarchaeologists.”AsanAmerican-trainedhistoricalarchaeologistworkingin
Ireland,colonialismisacentralthemeofmyownresearch(Horning2013b),anditalso
featuressignificantlyintheworkofotherIrishhistoricalarchaeologists(e.g.,Lyttletonand
Rynne2009).ButconsiderationsofcolonialismwithinEurope--evenwithinaplacelike
Irelandwhichexperiencedaformofcolonization--areinevitablydifferentincontent,form,
andimpactthansuchconsiderationsareinlandswhereindigenouspopulationswereclearly
displacedanddispossessed.
IrishhistoricalarchaeologyisnotalonewithinEuropeinaddressingcolonialism.
TherehasbeenarecentexplosionofstudiesthroughoutScandinaviathatareovertly
addressingthecolonialhistoriesofnationsincludingDenmark,Sweden,Finland,Norway,
andIceland.CentraltothisnewconcentrationonexploringScandinaviancolonialhistories
andlegaciesis,assummarisedbytwoofitskeypractitioners,JonasNordinandMagdalena
Naum(2013:4),adesiretochallengetheprevailingviewthatsomehow“Scandinavian
participationincolonialpoliticswasbenignandtheirinteractionswiththeencountered
peoplesinAfrica,AsiaandAmericaweregentlerandbasedoncollaborationratherthan
extortionandsubjugation.”Thedeconstructionofthisdominantnarrativeisongoing,via
scholarshiponDanishengagementsintheCaribbean(Armstrongetal2013),Africa(Weiss
2013)andinSouthAsia(Jørgensen2013);SwedishcoloniesintheNewWorld(DeCunzo
2013)andtheimpactofindigenousAmericancultureinSweden(Nordin2012,2013);and
ontheoperationofcolonialismwithinScandinavia,e.g.,thedisplacementofFinns
(Ekengren2013)andparticularlythetreatmentofSamipeoplesbyanexpansive,capitalist
Swedishstate(Fur2006;Ojala2009;Lindmark2013).
ScholarsintheIberianPeninsulaarealsocriticallyengagingwithcolonialismandits
legacies,influencedinparticularbytherichscholarshiponcolonialismemanatingfrom
SouthAmericawhichhasfosteredinterestinSpanishandPortuguesecolonialism(Funari
andSenatore2015;Schavelzon2014,2000),aswellasthelongerhistoryofexplorationof
SpanishcolonialisminNorthAmerica(e.g.,Deagan1987,2003).M.DoresCruz(2007)has
writteneloquentlyaboutthelastinglegacyofPortuguesecolonialismwithinPortugal
throughananalysisofschooltextbooksduringtheEstadoNovoperiod(1933-1974)and
criticalreflectionsonherownPortugueseupbringingatthetimeofdecolonization.
PortuguesecolonizationinAfricahasalsobeenproductivelyexploredbyInnocentPikirayi
(2009),whilescholarswithinPortugalhaveproducedaseriesoffoundationalstudiesofthe
Portuguesematerialculturewhichcanbefoundaroundtheworld(GomesandCasimiro
2013;Teixieraetal.2015)andwhichdirectlyimpactuponunderstandingsofthePortuguese
colonialreach.
Capitalism,anditsimpacts,remainsone,ifnotthe,keyconcernthatdrivesmuch
researchinNorthAmericanhistoricalarchaeologyandwhetheritis,defacto,the
archaeologyofcapitalism(e.g.,Leone1999,Matthews2010,WurstandMrozowski,this
volume).Atitsmostbasiclevel,thisisundeniablytrue.Whenyoulookatthearchaeologyof
thelast500years,anywhereontheplanet,capitalismhasbeenandcontinuestobe
influential.Indeed,manyofthestudiesIreferencedaboveinrelationtoregionaltraditions
ofhistoricalarchaeologyalsoacknowledgeglobalinterconnectednessintermsofthe
movementofgoods.Differencesandtensionsarisewhenconsideringissuesofscale,and
theextenttowhichanoveremphasisoncapitalismasanall-pervadingforcecanmaskreal
regionaldifferencesandover-simplifypasthumanexperiences(CroucherandWeiss2011).
InaSouthAmericanexample,BrooksandRodriquezY(2012:85)overtlyaddressthistension
betweenconsideringVenezuelanhistoricalarchaeologyfromaglobalperspectiveand
consideringitslocalcontext.Forthem,thattensionisthedefiningattributeofVenezuelan
historicalarchaeology“beingsimultaneouslypartoftheWestanditsperiphery,between
engagementwithandseparationfromglobaltrade,betweencosmopolitanismandlocal
context,areanaturalpartofSouthAmericanhistoricalarchaeology.”Similarly,PedroFunari
(1999;FunariandFerreira,thisvolume)hasarguedagainsttheNorthAmericanfocuson
capitalismbystressingthecontinuedoperationandinfluenceofindigenousandpre-
capitalistfeudalEuropeanpracticesinBrazil.
ReturningtoEurope,MarkPluciennik,AntoonMientjesandEnricoGiannitrapani
haveconsideredthecharacterofthecapitalistengagementsinnineteenth-andearly
twentieth-centuryruralSicily.Inexaminingthelandscapesandmaterialcultureassociated
predominantlywiththelandless,agriculturalpoor,theyeschewastraightnarrativeof
dominationandresistancetoinsteadexploretheoperationofaspirationamongsttheir
studypopulation.Intheirestimation,thisfocus“ascribestoruralworkersandtheirculture
theirowndynamicsandagency,ratherthancharacterizingthemonlythroughreactionsto
thepowerful,althoughitwasclearlyanunequalsituation”(Plucienniketal.2004:29).
Argumentsovertheexactroleofcapitalismunfortunatelycananddobecomeacrimonious,
andeffortstochallengeandcomplicatemonolithicconstructionsofcapitalismthrough
movingawayfromstraightforwardnarrativesofdominationandresistancehaveattracted
fiercecriticism(Orser2011:539).Regardlessofthespecificroleplayedbycapitalismin
shapinglocalsocietiesaroundtheglobe,formeapointofcongruenceamongst
practitionersliesinagenuineconcernoverthecontinuingoperationofinequalityand
oppressionthatcanbelinkedinonewayoranotherwiththeemergenceofthemodern
worldandthevariableoperationoftheforcesofcapitalism,colonialism,andglobalisation.
ThePastinthePresent:AnEmergingPraxis
Turningattentiontosuchissuesofinequalityandinjustice,formethemost
intellectuallyexcitingavenuesinlaterhistoricalarchaeologyatpresentaretheincreasingly
sophisticatedwaysinwhichscholarsareattemptingtoaddresscontemporaryissues
throughthestudyofthepastbyengagingcommunitiesbeyondtheacademicand
professionalworlds.HereIwanttodistinguishbetweenversionsofcommunityarchaeology
thatcapitaliseonvolunteerlabourandcommunityfundingtoperformotherwisetraditional
archaeologicalprojectswiththosemuchmoredifficult,andrare,projectsthatprioritise
inclusivityandco-production(Horning2013c;Schmidt2014).Howwemovefromone
modeltotheotherisnotstraightforward,butdoingsocarriesthepotentialforprecipitating
genuinesocialchange.Shiftingfromtraditionaltopdownmodelsofpublicarchaeologyinto
collaborativepracticeeffectivelyrequiresphilosophicalreskilling.Advocacyandinclusivity
necessitatealesseningofcontrol,andaconscious(nottacit)acknowledgmentthatoneis
makingachoiceinhowtointerpretandapproachthepast.Doingsowithoutcompromising
orabandoningourconcomitantethicalresponsibilitiestothedeadandtheactualitiesof
theirexperiencesisextraordinarilydifficult.Lessphilosophicallychallenging,butperhapsof
greaterimportancetoourcollaboratorsistherealitythatoftenitistheprocessof
communityarchaeologythatmattersmorethantheoutcome.
Therealriskhere,andonethatIhaveagonisedoverthroughoutmycareer,isthatin
relinquishingcontrolandinprioritisingthepresentoverthepastwesimplyconstruct
useablepasts:narrativesthatareexplicitlyformulatedtoserveacontemporaryneed.
Balancingresponsibilitiestothepastandtothepresentisadeadlyseriousendeavour,as
useablepastslieattheheartofnationandempirebuildingandinthosecontexts,inevitably
privilegetheeliteand,inacapitalistworld,justifyinequality.Focusingintentionallyonthe
workingclass,orcolonisedother,isacommonripostetoconcernsoverelitebias,butwe
cannotjustcreateheroicfiguresinoppositiontodominantnarratives.Ultimately,whatis
ourpurpose?Isitilluminatingpastlivesandanalysingtheunderpinningofinequalityorisit
possibletousearchaeologytochallengecapitalistdriveninequalityinthepresentand,at
thesametime,dojusticetothecomplexityofpastexperiences?
Ananswer,ifnotnecessarilytheanswer,liesinpragmaticphilosophy.HereItake
inspirationfromtheworkofStephenMrozowski(2014:343),whoadvocatesapragmatic
approachwhichspecificallyrequirespractitionersto“explicitlyidentifythepractical
outcomesoftheirresearch”andrecognisethat“:socialscienceneedstobepolitically
engaged.”Ofcourse,theaimofsituatingarchaeologyaspoliticalengagementisneither
necessarilycomplementarywithnorconducivetoinclusivityinarchaeologicalpractice.YetI
believethetwoarenotincompatible,andthatthecombination,withallofitsinherent
tensionsandcontradictions,mayinfactleadtomoremeaningful,deeperunderstandings
andpotentiallynewpraxis.Toillustratethepotentialofsuchanapproach,Iofferup
ongoingeffortstoactivelysituatearchaeologicalpracticeinNorthernIrelandwithinthe
ongoingpeaceprocess(Horningetal.2015).
ContemporaryNorthernIrelandisadividedsociety.Itscommunitiesareprincipally
drawnfromtwomaintraditions,CatholicandProtestant,whoself-identifywith,
respectively,theGaelicIrishandtheBritishwhocametoIrelandaspartofaseriesof
colonialschemesintheseventeenthcentury.Geographicalsegregationisthenorm,only8%
ofschoolchildrenareeducatedinanintegratedenvironment,and,inBelfast,over80so-
called‘peacewalls’arestilldeployedtophysicallyseparatecommunitiesinconflict.While
thehighlevelsofviolenceassociatedwiththethirtyyearsoftheperiodknownasThe
Troubles(1969-1998)havethankfullydecreasedandsocietyhasbecome“normalised”,
securityalertsstillcontinueonadailybasisandtheriskofareturntoviolenceisever
present.Thepsychologicalimpactofconflictismanifestedinhighlevelsofpost-traumatic
stressdisorderandelevatedsuicideratesthathavebeendirectlyattributedtothelegacyof
conflict(Tomlinson2012),particularlyaffectingthoseofmygeneration,whogrewupduring
theheightoftheconflictinthe1970s.Paradoxically,thestructureofthepeaceprocess
itselfimpedesfullintegrationofsocietyasitisfoundeduponaprincipleofensuringparity
betweenthetwocommunities.Parityandmutualrespectwereandarecriticalaspectsof
peacebuilding,butinevitablyreifydifference,renderingeffortstoexploreandencourage
commonaltiesoverdifferenceextremelychallenging,butallthemorecriticaltobuildinga
trulypeacefulsociety.Directlyimplicatedincontemporarydifferencearethestillcontested
andunresolvedhistoriesofthesixteenthandseventeenthcenturies,whentheEnglish
Crownextendedcontrolthroughthemechanismofplantation,acolonialefforttosupplant
theGaelicIrishpopulationthat,despiteintent,didnotsucceedinthisaim.The
archaeologicalrecordofthisperiodovertlycomplicatestheaccepteddichotomous
narrativesthroughhighlightingcomplexityandparticularly,extensiveevidenceforshared
practiceand,inparticular,therelianceofplantationsettlementsuponthedemographically
dominantIrishpopulation(Breen2012;Horning2001;Donnelly2005;Horning2013b).
Overthelastdecade,archaeologicalprojectsfocusingonthelatesixteenthandearly
seventeenthcenturyhaveconsciouslybegunincorporatingcommunitygroupsandschools
inexcavations,withanemphasisuponthefieldexperienceandthepotentialforshared
discovery.Suchimmersivepracticegivesindividualstheopportunitytophysicallyengage
withprocessofdiscoveryandimportantly,thespacetoindividuallydecidewhatthe
evidenceactuallymeans.Indicativeofthepositiveimpactoftheseeffortsarecomments
fromoneofthecommunitygroupsinvolved,theBallintoyandDistrictLocalArchaeological
andHistoricalSociety(2013):“theknowledgewegainedofthecomplicatednatureofthe
Plantationperiodchallengedourpreviouslyheldviews.Members…fromdifferent
backgroundsarenowmorewillingtodiscusstheimpactofthePlantation…willingto
reconsidertheirownidentitiesinlightofwhattheyhavelearntthroughengagingwith
professionalarchaeologists.”Fromthesecomments,andothers,itisclearthatthephysical
engagementwiththediscoveryprocessallowsindividualstomakeuptheirownminds,in
theirowntime,aboutthesignificanceoftheevidence.Thisisnotaprocesstobecontrolled
byheritageprofessionals,butitisonethatwecansetintomotion.
Todate,effortshavebeenfocusedonthosegroupswhotraditionallywouldbeopen
toexplorationsofthepast—localhistorygroupsandschools(Horning2013;Horninget
al.2015).Thesuccessoftheseefforts,measuredthroughtestimonialssuchasthatcited
above,hasledustodevelopamorechallengingseriesofprojectsinconjunctionwiththe
CorrymeelaCommunity,asharedgovernancecivilsocietyformedin1965withtheaimof
bringingpeopletogetherfromacrossthesectariandivideinsafeandneutralsurroundings.
Thesteeringgroupfortheproject,madeupoftrainedCorrymeelafacilitators,
archaeologists,andmuseumprofessionals,isgenerallyagreedontheimportanceof
engaginggroupsthataremoredifficulttoreach(includingbothex-paramilitariesand
survivorsofTroubles-relatedviolence)withthetangibilityofplantation-periodarchaeology
inanefforttoimpactuponthepresentandfuture.However,agreementonpreciselyhow
todothis,andindeedwhattheevidencemightactuallyhavetocontributetopeace-
building,islessstraightforwardbuthasledtosomeveryproductivediscussions.
Mostimportanthasbeentheevolutionoftheprogrammeitself.Togetherwehave
draftedandsigneduptoacodeofpracticethatisagreedwithparticipantsatthestartof
anyprogramme.Inadditiontobeingupfrontaboutouraimtoconnectanexplorationofthe
pastwithpeacebuildinginthepresent,thecontractisbaseduponaseriesofprinciplesthat
insummaryprioritiserespectforpeoplebothinthepresentandthepast.Akeyoutcome
fromtheCorrymeelaperspectiveliesinjustbringingpeopletogetherandcreatingaspacein
whichparticipantscanfeelfreetoexpressthemselvesandlistentootherswithrespect.For
mypart,whatIhopeforissimplyforindividualstodevelopawarenessthatpeopleinthe
past—theIrishandEnglishandScotswhoforbetterorworsewerecompelledtoengage
withoneanother—hadnoforeknowledgeofthepresent.TheTroublesmayseeman
inevitableoutcomeoftheUlsterPlantationfromtheperspectiveofthe21stcentury,but
‘doinghistorybackwards’remindsusthatfromthevantagepointof1609or1611or1630,
theeventsofthelatetwentiethcenturywerefarfrominevitable.Offargreaterconcernto
themajority,ofwhateveridentity,wasnegotiatingtheneedsandrealitiesoftheday,from
thequotidiantothecreative.
AsIhavearguedelsewhere(Horning2006;2014)theambiguouscharacterof
Ireland’scolonialexperience,andthewaythatNorthernIreland—evenlydividedbetween
communitieswhoeachseethemselvesasthemarginalisedother—challengesblanket
assumptionsaboutIreland’scurrentpostcolonialityandprovidesaspacewithinwhichto
complicateoverlyprescriptiveunderstandingsofcolonialentanglements.Asarchaeologists
begintomorewillinglyengagewithIreland’slaterhistoricalarchaeology,whetheraspartof
theinclusivepracticeoutlinedaboveorsimplybeginningtoacknowledgethatthematerial
remainsofthelast500yearshaveheritagevalue,thereispotentialtobothinformand
engagewiththearchaeologiesofothernationsandplacesgrapplingwithcoloniallegacies
andpostcolonialformulations,asconsideredbelow.
ExploringGlobalPractice
Historicalarchaeologyisincreasinglytakingrootaroundtheworld,butinvariably
theseeffortsareentwinedwithcontemporarypoliticalissuesandpowerstruggles.Veryreal
differencesinculture,regionalhistories,andespeciallyengagementswiththeWestall
combinetoensuredistinctivepracticesandtrajectories.Callsforanoverarchingglobal
historicalarchaeologytoreplacenarrow,localstudiesfalterinthefaceofthisdiversity,
underscoringoneofFrederickCooper’scriticismsofglobalisationasananalyticcategory:
“Thatglobalshouldbecontrastedtolocal,evenifthepointistoanalysetheirmutual
constitution,onlyunderscorestheinadequacyofcurrentanalyticaltoolstoanalyseanything
inbetween”(Cooper2005:93).Ratherthantheemergenceofglobalisedhistorical
archaeology,whatweseeinsteadarearangeofpracticesandinfluencesverymuch
contingentuponthelocalcontextoftheiremergence,butwiththepotential,often
demonstrated,tobetranslatedandtransformedinotherlocales.Forexample,overthelast
twodecades,thepracticesandconcernsofhistoricalarchaeologyinAustraliaandinSouth
Africahavebeenparticularlyinfluentialonthedisciplineatlarge.Theemergenceand
strengthofindigenousrightsandtheleadershiproletakenbyAboriginalarchaeologistsand
communitieshasinfluencedthestruggleforindigenousrightsandcontroloverheritage
elsewhere(e.g.,Fredriksen2012),whiletheexplicitlycriticalarchaeologiesemergingfrom
SouthAfrica(especiallySchrire1996;Hall2000)haveendeavouredtore-centreviolencein
considerationsofcolonialisminplaceslikeNorthAmerica,wherethestrengthofthe
dominantnationalistnarrativeobscurestherealityofthesamekindsofconflictand
inequalityseeminglysomuchmoreapparentinpost-ApartheidSouthAfrica.
Importantlessonsarebeingdrawnfromhistoricalarchaeologyelsewhereonthe
Africancontinent,whichistakingplacewithinawiderangeofcontemporarycultural
settingsandaddressingdiversehistories.EffortstodecoloniseAfricanarchaeology
increasinglyandproductivelyexploreAfricanconstructionsofhistoryandidentitythatoften
sitatoddswithWesternunderstandingsofAfricanhistoriesandcultures(Jopelaand
Fredriksen2015;Lane2011,2014;Schmidt2014;Ogundiran2007;DémeandGuéye2007).
Present-dayinequalityandconflictalsosignificantlyinfluencearchaeologicalpractices,as
acknowledgedbyPeterSchmidt(2010:270),giventhe“deep-seatedtensionbetweenour
practiceasscientificarchaeologistsandourbehaviorassentienthumanswithfriendsand
collaboratorswhoaredailysufferingfromthedepredationsofdiseaseorpoorwateror
authoritarianrule–whatevertheaffliction.”Pragmatism,asaddressedabove,becomes
particularlyimportantinsuchcircumstancesandhasledtotheproductivecouplingof
heritagepracticewitheconomicsustainability(e.g.,Breen2014;BreenandRhodes2010).
WithinEurope,archaeologicalattentionisincreasinglybeingpaidtotwentieth-
centuryconflicts.Innumerablearchaeologicalinvestigationshavebeenlaunchedexamining
thebattlefieldsandlandscapeassociatedwithWorldWarIintandemwithitscentenary.
TheSpanishCivilWar(1936-39)hascommandedintensiveinvestigationsandnoshortageof
tension,giventhehighlypoliticisedcharacterofthatconflictandthesubsequentlegaciesof
theFrancoregime(Gonzalez-Ruibal2007).Similarly,andevenmorechallenging,havebeen
theeffortsofhistoricalarchaeologiststoaddressthemateriallegaciesofNazism,andin
particularthearchaeologyofconcentrationcamps(Theune2013,2015).InNorthern
Ireland,wearecurrentlystrugglingwithhowbesttocommemoratetheanniversariesnot
justofWorldWarI,butofthe1916EasterRising,whichultimatelyledtopartitionofthe
island.Untilveryrecently,understandingsofIrishengagementintheGreatWarwere
groundedinsectarianismThemassivecasualtiesexperiencedbyUlsterregimentsatthe
Somme,whichstillimpactfamilyandcommunitymemories,gavesupporttoanarrative
thatonlynorthernProtestantsvolunteeredassoldiers.Suchanarrativeallowedforthe
convenientforgettingofamorecomplicatedhistoryinwhichCatholicsfromnorthand
southalsoparticipated,notwithstandingarmedinternalrebellionagainsttheBritishstate
theofficialneutralityofthenewlyemergingIrishstate.Inthepost-Troublesperiod,ithas
becomeincreasinglypossible,ifnotstraightforward,toalsobegintolookatthematerial
legaciesofTheTroubles,asproductivelyexploredbyLauraMcAtackney(2014),andto
combinetheseexplorationswitheffortsatconflicttransformationasdiscussedearlierin
thisarticle.
MovingbackawayfromIrelandandfromEurope,inthediscussionthatfollows,I
wanttobrieflyreflectonaselectionofotherlocaleswherehistoricalarchaeologyis
developinginwaysthatholdthepotentialtosignificantlyshiftthedirectionofthediscipline
asawhole.Clearly,researchquestionsinevitablyvaryaccordingtogeographiclocale,while
atthesametimethemannerofknowledge-makinganddisseminationisalsoheavily
dependentuponculturalpracticeandvalues,oneexamplebeingthecentralityofmentoring
inacademicwritingaspresentedbyDevendraandMuthucumurama(2013)intheir
overviewofmaritimearchaeologyinSriLanka.ElsewhereintheIndiansubcontinent,the
shadowofempirecontinuestohangovereffortstopursuehistoricalarchaeology.Historical
archaeology,toputitsimply,isnotaneasysellbecauseitisdefactounderstoodasthe
archaeologyofempireandthearchaeologyofoppression.Particularlytellingisthefactthat
inavolumeentitledHistoricalArchaeologyofIndia(Dhavalikar1999),whichdescribesitself
astheonlystudy“whichcoversalltheaspectsofhistoricalarchaeologyfromca.1000BCto
1800AD,”theterm‘British’doesnotappearintheindexandonlyinthecontextofthe
formationofthearchaeologicalsurveyofIndiainthetext,whiletheEastIndiaCompany
warrantsonlyasinglemention.Europeisreferencedonlyinrelationtothewidespread
climatedownturn(socalledLittleIceAge)anditsprobableimpactsinIndia(Dhavalikar
1999:119).
ThelackofinterestinandconsiderationofthearchaeologyoftheperiodofBritish
imperialdominationofIndiacomesasnorealsurprisegivenIndia’spostcolonialstatusand
thecentralityofnationalism.Thatthedisciplineofarchaeologywas“institutionalizedin
IndiabythecolonialBritishrulers”(Selvakumar2010:469)furthercomplicateseffortsto
approachthecolonial-periodarchaeologywithinthepresent-daypoliticalandinstitutional
structures.Thosestructuresdoincludegovernmentsupportforarchaeologyviathe
venerableArchaeologicalSurveyofIndia(ASI),establishedunderBritishrulein1861but
recastafterindependenceas“simultaneouslybothapost-colonialbureaucraticinstitution
andanorganisationthatproducesarchaeologicalknowledge”(Chadha2010:231).TheASI
facesanuphillbattlenotjusttodeflectthelegacyofitsownorigins,butcruciallyalsoinnot
beingseenmerelytoproducethearchaeologicalknowledgesoughtbyIndia’spoliticalelite.
ThereputationoftheASIwasclearlytarnishedbyitsintegralroleintheAjodhya
controversy.
Atpresent,therapidurbanisationanddevelopmentcurrentlyunderwayinIndia
posesanimmensethreattothebuiltfabricandbelowgroundarchaeologyofthelastfive
hundredyearsinparticular.Thereareencouragingsigns,however.Governmentfundinghas
beenmadeavailabletoexploreandsupportcapacitybuildingandsustainabilityfocusingon
urbanheritage.Indianheritagelegislation(unlikethatoftheRepublicofIreland),provides
foranysiteormonumentolderthan100yearstobeconsideredarchaeological.Wider
recognitionoftheheritagevalueoflaterhistoricalsitesremainsdependentupon
acceptanceofthenotionthatthemateriallegaciesoftheBritishEmpirearerelevanttothe
contemporaryIndianpopulation,insofarasitistheirownancestorswhoseliveswerelived
andmeaningfullyconstructedwithintheconstraintsandinequitiesofthatEmpire.One
interesting(albeitverypragmatic)exceptiontothisgeneraldisinterestincolonialmaterial
heritageliesinthepreservationandpresentationofthebuiltheritageofTranquebarin
southIndia,onceaDanishtradingportfrom1620-1845.AsexploredbyHelleJørgensen
(2013),thedominantnarrativeofScandinaviancolonialismbeingsomehow‘kinderand
gentler’underpinstouristicpresentationsofTranquebar,gearedpredominantlytowards
western(oftenDanish)visitors.Thosevisitorsprovideaconsiderableeconomicboosttothe
region.
FarmorecomplicatedeventhanpursuinglaterhistoricalarchaeologyinIndiaare
effortstoaddressthelegaciesofcolonialisminEastAsia,where,asdiscussedbyKoji
Mizoguchi(2006;2010),Japanesearchaeologistsinparticularhavetodealnotonlywiththe
legaciesofWesterncolonialismintheregion,butalsotheroleofJapanasacolonisingforce
inthelatenineteenthandearlytwentiethcenturies.Paradoxically,asheargues,scholarly
relianceonMarxisttheoreticalframeworksininterpretingthearchaeologyofearlierperiods
“allowedJapanesepeopleandJapanesearchaeologiststoinsulatethemselvesandtoforget
their(orJapan’s)colonialactivitiesinKoreaandChina.”Atpresent,theforcesof
globalisationandamovementawayfromrelianceonMarxistmodelshascreatedasituation
where“Japanesearchaeologistsarestrugglingtorecognize,self-examine,andamend
coloniallegaciesandtofindwaystoconfrontreemergentnationalisticsentiments”
(Mizoguchi2010,89).GreaterawarenessofJapan’sambiguousrelationshipwith
colonialism,asbothacolonisingforceandnon-Western‘other’,hasthepotentialto
significantlyadvancediscourseoverhistoricalarchaeologiesofcolonialismelsewhereinthe
world.
Similarly,thearchaeologyoftheOttomanEmpireservesasanothercriticalcheckon
narrowunderstandingsofcolonialism(BaramandCarroll2000;Carroll2010)framedbya
Westernviewoforientalism(Said1978).Notwithstandingthechallengesposedbypresent-
dayregionalsociopolitics,interestinthecontemporaryarchaeologyofsomepartsofthe
MiddleEastisbeginningtointersectwithsocialcritiques.Forexample,acollaborative
Iranian-Britishproject(YoungandFazzeli2013)hasrecentlyemployedarchaeologicaland
ethnographicresearchintolandlordvillages(enclosedsettlementsthatwereabandoned
duringtheWhiteRevolutionofthe1970s)toaddressissuesofgenderandclass.Such
criticalattentiontoinequalityintherecentpastcarriesamorethanimplicitcritiqueofthe
present.
Evenmoreimmediate(andrisky)initsimplicationsisthethoughtfulanalysisby
IranianarchaeologistsMaryamDezhamKhooyLeilaPapoliYazdi(2010)oftheruinsofthe
housesdestroyedinthe2003Bamearthquake,andthepersonalnarrativesoftheir
inhabitants.Buildingonthisresearch,Yazdi(2010:44)alsoconsideredthematerial
evidenceforhouseholdbehaviourinlightoftheextremedividebetweenthepublicandthe
privateselfinIran.Shenotesthat“Iranianscarefullyconcealaspectsoftheirlivesthatmust
behiddenastheyarecontrarytobothtraditionandthelaw.Thepublicappearanceof
theseaspectsoflifecanhavedangerousresults…Thesepracticesofconcealmentresultin
paradoxicalbehavioralpatternsbetweenhowpeopleactinsidetheirhomesandhowthey
actoutsidetheirhomes.Aswithmostaspectsofhumanbehavior,thesepatternsleavesigns
andmarkersinmaterialculture.”Thisresearchsharesmuchincommonwithhistorical
archaeologyasithasdevelopedinNorthAmerica:afocusonthehouseholdandon
illuminatingthelivesofpeoplewhoarepoorlydocumented.Butnomatterhowempirically
groundedintheverymaterialityofthehouseholdarchaeologiesofpre-earthquakeBam,
thedecisionbyYazdiandDezhamKhooytoundertakesuchastudymustbeunderstoodasa
politicalaction.Inthisexample,contemporaryhistoricalarchaeologyposesanexplicit
threattothesocio-politicalorderofcontemporaryIranbyunderminingassumptionsabout
compliancewithlegislatedbehaviour.
Conclusion
Historicalarchaeologyisnowpractised,insomeform,inmuchoftheworldtoday.
Butwhatwillitlooklikeinthedecadestocome?WhatIhopeisthatthedisciplinewill
continuetoembeditselfinarangeofformsaroundtheglobe,andIparticularlyhopethat
practitionersbasedinthehistoriccoresofthediscipline,NorthAmericaandtheBritishIsles,
becomemoreopentoandengagedwithalternativeformulationsforthestudyofthelast
fivehundredyears.Fundamentallytherecentpastmatters,asisabundantlyclearfromthe
contestednatureoftheperiodandoftheevidenceinsomanypartsoftheworld.Without
doubt,myviewonthevalueofhistoricalarchaeologyisshapedbymyowncontingent
practicelivingandworkinginapost-conflictsociety.Mydesireasacitizentocontributeto
conflictresolutionandpeacebuildinginfluencesmyprofessionalpracticeandmy
understandingoftheroleofthepastinthepresent.Ihavefoundarchaeologytobe,
perhapssurprisingly,notjustrelevanttothepresentbutattimespositivelytransformative.
Awillingnesstoacknowledgethispowerandpotential,beitcomplicatingpostcolonial
constructionsofnationhoodinIrelandorIndia,challenginggenderdiscriminationinIran,or
combatingpovertyandinequalityintheUnitedStates,willprovideavaluablepointof
convergenceforanincreasinglydiverseanddynamicdiscipline.
Acknowledgments
IwishtothankChrisMatthewsfortheinvitationtocontributetothisspecialissue,and
especiallyforhispatienceandeditorialguidance.NickBrannon,ColinBreen,Alasdair
Brooks,StephenMrozowski,andRuthYoungcontributedmeasurablytomyunderstanding
oftheissuesraisedinthispaperthroughgraciouslysharingtheirknowledge,insights,and
researchmaterials.IamgratefultoChrisMatthews,MatthewJohnson,LynetteRussell,and
AlfredoGonzalez–Ruibalfortheirhelpfulcommentsontheoriginalversionofthisarticle.
Finally,IwishtoacknowledgeaconsiderabledebttomylatecolleaguePaulCourtney,
whoseunderstandingofEuropeanhistoricalarchaeologywasasunrivalledaswashis
generosityinsharingthatknowledge.
References
ARMSTRONG,DOUGLASV.,CHRISTIANWILLIAMSON,ANDALAND.ARMSTRONG2013
NetworkedInteratcion:ArchaeologicalExplorationofWalledandTerracedHouse
CompoundsintheDanishColonialPortTownofCharlotteAmalie,St.Thomas.In
ScandinavianColonialismandtheRiseofModernityM.Naum&J.M.Nordin,editors,pp.
275-296.NewYork,Springer.
BARAM,UZIandLYNDACARROLLeditors2000AHistoricalArchaeologyoftheOttoman
Empire:BreakingNewGround.Plenum/KluwerAcademicPress,NewYork.
BREEN,COLIN2014WorldHeritageSites,CultureandSustainableCommunitiesinAfrica.In
ManagementofCulturalWorldHeritageSitesandDevelopmentinAfrica,pp.83-92.
Springer,NewYork.
BREEN,COLIN2012.RandalMacDonnellandearlyseventeenth-centurysettlementin
northeastUlster,1603-30.InThePlantationofUlster:ideologyandpractice.M.OSiochru
andE.OCiardha,editors,pp.143-147.ManchesterUniversityPress,Manchester.
BREEN,COLINandDANIELRHODES2010ArchaeologyandInternationalDevelopmentin
Africa.DuckworthAcademicPress.
BROOKS,ALASDAIR2009TheViewfromAfar:InternationalPerspectivesontheAnalysisof
post-1750CeramicsinBritainandIreland.InCrossingPathsorSharingTracks:Future
DirectionsintheArchaeologicalStudyofPost-1550BritainandIreland,AudreyHorningand
MarilynPalmer,editors,pp.287-300.BoydellandBrewer,Woodbridge.
BROOKS,ALASDAIR2013TheWorldisWhatitis:Theroleofsubjectivityandpersonal
experienceinGlobalHistoricalArchaeologies.HistoricalArchaeology47(1):1-9.
BROOKS,ALASDAIRandANACHRISTINARODDRIQUEZY2012AVenezuelanhousehold
clearanceassemblageof19thcenturyBritishceramicsininternationalperspective.Post-
MedievalArchaeology46(1):70-88.
BUTLER,L.A.S.1967Editorial.Post-MedievalArchaeology1:1-2.
CABAK,MELANIE,MARKGROOVER,MARYINKROT1999RuralModernizationduringthe
recentpast:FarmsteadArchaeologyintheAikenPlateau.HistoricalArchaeology33(4):19-
43.
CARROLL,LINDA2010Buildingfarmsteadsinthedesert:Capitalism,Colonialism,andthe
TransformationofRurallandscapesinlateOttomanperiodTransjordan.InTheArchaeology
ofCapitalisminColonialContexts.SarahCroucherandLindsayWeiss,editors,pp.105-120.
NewYork,Springer.
CHADHA,ASHISH2010TheArchaeologicalSurveyofIndiaandtheScienceofPostcolonial
ArchaeologyinHandbookofPostcolonialArchaeology,JaneLydonandUzmaRizvi,editors,
pp.227-234.NewYork,Springer.
COOPER,FREDERICK2005ColonialisminQuestion:Theory,Knowledge,History.Universityof
CaliforniaPress,Berkeley.
COURTNEY,PAUL2010SocialTheoryandPost-medievalArchaeology:aHistorical
perspective.InExchangingMedievalMaterialCulture:Studiesonarchaeologyandhistory
presentedtoFransVerhaeghe.KoenDeGroote,DriesTys&MarnixPieters,editors,pp.317-
346.FlemishHeritageInstitute.
COURTNEY,PAUL2009TheCurrentStateandFutureProspectsofTheoryinEuropeanPost-
MedievalArchaeology’inInternationalHandbookofHistoricalArchaeology,Teresita
MajewskiandDavidGaimster,editors,pp.169-189.NewYork:Springer.
COURTNEY,PAUL2009Post-MedievalArchaeology:APersonalPerspective.InCrossing
PathsorSharingTracks:FutureDirectionsintheArchaeologicalStudyofPost-1550Britain
andIreland,AudreyHorningandMarilynPalmer,editors,pp.91-100.BoydellandBrewer,
Woodbridge.
CROUCHER,SARAHandLINDSAYWEISS2011TheArchaeologyofCapitalisminColonial
Contexts,anIntroduction:provincializingHistoricalArchaeologyinTheArchaeologyof
CapitalisminColonialContexts:PostcolonialHistoricalArchaeologies,SarahCroucherand
LindsayWeiss,editors,pp.1-38.NewYork,Springer.
CRUZ,M.DORES2007PortugalGigante:Nationalism,Motherland,andcolonialencounters
inPortuguesetextbooks.Giolânia5(2),395-422.
DALGLISH,CHRIS2009UnderstandingLandscape:InterdisciplinaryDialogueandthePost-
medievalCountryside.InCrossingPathsorSharingTracks:FutureDirectionsinthe
ArchaeologicalStudyofPost-1550BritainandIreland,AudreyHorningandMarilynPalmer,
editors,pp.233-256.BoydellandBrewer,Woodbridge.
DEAGAN,KATHLEEN2003Transformationofempire:TheSpanishcolonialprojectin
America.HistoricalArchaeology37(4):3-13.
DEAGAN,KATHLEEN1987ArtifactsoftheSpanishColoniesofFloridaandtheCaribbean,
1500-1800.Washington,SmithsonianInstitutionPress.
DECUNZO,LUANN2013BorderlandintheMiddle:theDelawareColonyontheAtlantic
Coast.InScandinavianColonialismandtheRiseofModernityM.Naum&J.M.Nordin,
EDITORS,PP.189-208.NewYork,Springer.
DÉME,ALIOUNEandNDÉYEGUÉYE2007EnslavementintheMiddleSenegalValley:historicaland
archaeologicalperspectives.InTheArchaeologyofAtlanticAfricaeditedbyAkinwumiOgundiran
andToyinFalola,pp.122-139.IndianaUniversityPress,Bloomington.
DEVENDRA,SOMASIRIandRASIKAMUTHUCUMURANA2013MaritimeArchaeologyandSri
Lanka:Globalization,ImmigrationandTransformationintheUnderwaterArchaeological
Record.’HistoricalArchaeology47(1):50-65.
DEZHAMKHOOY,MARYAMandLEILAPAOLIYAZDI2010Thearchaeologyof
lastnight…whathappenedinBam(Iran)on25–6December2003.WorldArchaeology,
42(3):341-354.
DHALAVIKAR,M.K.1999HistoricalArchaeologyofIndia.NewDelhi:BooksandBooks.
DONNELLY,COLM2005.TheI.H.S.monogramasasymbolofCatholicresistancein17th-
centuryIreland.InternationalJournalofHistoricalArchaeology9(1):37-42.
FREDRIKSEN,CLAYTON2002Caringforhistory:TiwiandarchaeologicalnarrativesofFort
Dundas/Punata,MelvilleIsland,Australia.WorldArchaeology34(2):288-302.
FUNARI,PEDRO2007AreportonhistoricalarchaeologypublicationsinLatinAmerica.
InternationalJournalofHistoricalArchaeology11(2),183-191.
FUNARI,PEDRO1999HistoricalArchaeologyfromaWorldPerspective,inHistorical
Archaeology:backfromtheEdgePedroFunair,MartinHall,andSîanJones,editors,pp.37-
66.London,Routledge.
FUNARI,PEDRO1997Archaeology,historyandhistoricalarchaeologyinSouthAmerica.
InternationalJournalofHistoricalArchaeology3(1),189-206.
FUR,GÜNLOG2006ColonialismintheMargins:CulturalEncountersinNewSwedenand
Lappland.Leiden,Brill.
GOMEZ,ROSAVARELAandTÂNIACASIMIRO2013Post-medievalarchaeologyinPortugal.
Post-MedievalArchaeology47(1):17-34.
GONZÁLEZ-RUIBAL,ALFREDO2007Makingthingspublic:ArchaeologiesoftheSpanishCivil
War.PublicArchaeology6(4),203-226.
HALL,MARTIN2000ArchaeologyoftheModernWorld:ColonialTranscriptsinSouthAfrica
andtheChesapeake.London,Routledge.
HARRINGTON,J.C.1984JamestownArchaeologyinretrospect.InTheScopeofHistorical
ArchaeologyDavidGOrrandDanielG.Crozier,editors.
HARRISON,RODNEY2011SurfaceAssemblages:TowardsanArchaeologyinandofthe
present.ArchaeologicalDialogues18,141-96.
HICKS,DANandAUDREYHORNING2007HistoricalArchaeologyandBuildings.InThe
CambridgeCompaniontoHistoricalArchaeology,DanHicksandMaryBeaudry,editors,pp.
273-292.CambridgeUniversityPress,Cambridge.
HORNING,AUDREY2014ChallengingColonialEquations?TheGaelicExperienceinEarly
ModernIrelandinRethinkingColonialPaststhroughArchaeologyNealFerris,Rodney
Harrison,andMichaelV.Wilcox,editors,pp.293-314.OxfordUniversityPress,Oxford.
HORNING,AUDREY2013aExertinginfluence?Responsibilityandthepublicroleof
archaeologyindividedsocieties.ArchaeologicalDialogues20(1):19-29.
HORNING,AUDREY2013bIrelandandBritainintheAtlanticWorld:ColonialismintheBritish
Atlantic.UniversityofNorthCarolinaPress.
HORNING,AUDREY2013cPolitics,PublicsandProfessionalPragmatics:Re-Envisioning
ArchaeologicalpracticeinNorthernIreland’inArchaeology,thePublicandtheRecentPast
ChrisDalglish,editor,pp.95-110.SocietyforPost-MedievalArchaeologyMonograph7.
BoydellandBrewer,Woodbridge,Suffolk.
HORNING,AUDREY2011Compellingfuturesandever-presentpasts:realigningthe
archaeologyofus.ArchaeologicalDialogues18,161-164.
HORNING,AUDREY2006Archaeology,conflict,andcontemporaryidentityinthenorthof
Ireland:ImplicationsfortheoryandpracticeinIrishhistoricalarchaeology.Archaeological
Dialogues13(2):183-199.
HORNING,AUDREY2001‘DwellinghousesintheoldIrishBarbarousManner’:
ArchaeologicalevidenceforGaelicArchitectureinanUlsterPlantationvillage.InGaelic
Ireland1300-1650:Land,Lordship,andSettlementP.Duffy,D.Edwards,andE.Fitzpatrick,
editors,pp.375-396.FourCourtsPress,Dublin.
HORNING,AUDREY,COLINBREEN,andNICKBRANNON2015FromthePasttotheFuture:
IntegratingarchaeologyandconflictresolutioninNorthernIreland.Conservationand
ManagementofArchaeologicalSites17(1).
HORNING,AUDREYandMARILYNPALMEReditors2009CrossingPathsorSharingTracks:
FutureDirectionsintheArchaeologicalStudyofPost-1550BritainandIreland.Boydelland
Brewer,Woodbridge.
JOHNSON,MATTHEW1999TheNewPost-MedievalArchaeology.InOldandNewWorlds
GeoffEganandR.L.Michael,editors,pp.17-22.Oxbow,Oxford.
JOHNSON,MATTHEW1996AnArchaeologyofCapitalism.Oxford,Blackwell.
JOHNSON,MATTHEW1993HousingCulture:TraditionalArchitectureinanEnglish
Landscape.WashingtonDC,SmithsonianInstitutionPress.
JOPELA,ALBINOandPERDETLEFFREDRIKSEN2015Publicarchaeology,knowledge
meetingsandheritageethicsinsouthernAfrica:anapproachfromMozambique,World
Archaeology47(2):261-284.
JØRGENSEN,HELLE2013‘HeritageTourisminTranquebar:ColonialNostalgiaorPostcolonial
Encounter?InScandinavianColonialismandtheRiseofModernityM.Naum&J.M.Nordin,
editors,pp.69-88.NewYork,Springer.
LANE,PAUL2014Being‘Indigenous’andBeing‘Colonized’inAfrica:ContrastingExperiences
andtheirimplicationsforaPostcolonialArchaeologyinRethinkingColonialPaststhrough
ArchaeologyNealFerris,RodneyHarrison,andMichaelV.Wilcox,editors,pp.423-444.
OxfordUniversityPress,Oxford.
LANE,PAUL2011Possibilitiesforapostcolonialarchaeologyinsub-SaharanAfrica:
indigenousandusablepasts.WorldArchaeology43(1):7-25.
LEONE,MARK2005TheArchaeologyofLibertyinanAmericanCapital.Universityof
CaliforniaPress,Berkeley.
LEONE,MARK1999ceramicsfromAnnapolis,Maryland:AMeasureofTimeRoutinesand
WorkDiscipline.HistoricalArchaeologiesofCapitalism,MarkP.LeoneandParkerB.Potter,
editors.,pp.195-216.Kluwer,NewYork.
LINDMARK,DANIEL2013ColonialEncountersinearlymodernSápmi.InScandinavian
ColonialismandtheRiseofModernityM.Naum&J.M.Nordin,editors,pp.131-146.New
York,Springer.
LYTTLETON,JAMESandCOLINRYNNEeds.2009PlantationIreland.Dublin,FourCourts
Press.
MCATACKNEY,LAURA2014AnarchaeologyoftheTroubles.OxfordUniversityPress,Oxford.
MCDONALD,FRANK2011Archaeologistswarnagainstde-listingofpost-1700historic
structures.IrishTimes,http://www.irishtimes.com/news/archaeologists-warn-against-
delisting-of-post-1700-historical-structures-1.600549
MAGUIRE,RANDALL2008 ArchaeologyasPoliticalAction.UniversityofCaliforniaPress,
Berkeley.
MATTHEWS,CHRISTOPHER2010TheArchaeologyofAmericanCapitalism.Universityof
FloridaPress,Gainesville.
MEHLER,NATASCHA2013Globalization,Immigration,andTransformation:Thoughtsfroma
EuropeanPerspective.HistoricalArchaeology47(1):38-49.
MIZOGUCHI,KOZI2010TheColonialExperienceoftheUncolonizedandtheColonized.
HandbookofPostcolonialArchaeology,JaneLydonandUzmaRizvi,editors,pp.81-91.
Springer,NewYork.
MIZOGUCHI,KOZI2006Archaeology,SocietyandIdentityinModernJapan.Cambridge
UniversityPress.
MROZOWSKI,STEPHENA.2014ImagininganArchaeologyoftheFuture:Capitalismand
ColonialismPastandPresent.InternationalJournalofHistoricalArchaeology18:340-360.
MROZOWSKI,STEPHENA.,HOLLYHERBSTER,DAVIDBROWNandK.L.PRIDDY2005
Magunkaquog:NativeAmericanConversionandCulturalpersistence.InEighteenthCentury
NativeCommunitiesofSouthernNewEnglandinColonialContext,J.Campsi,editor,pp.57-
71.MashantucketMuseumandResearchCenterOccasionalPaper1.
NAUM,MAGDALENAandJONASNORDIN2013Introduction:SituatingScandinavian
Colonialism.InScandinavianColonialismandtheRiseofModernityM.Naum&J.M.Nordin,
editors,pp.3-16.NewYork,Springer.
NOËLHUME,IVOR1967HistoricalArchaeologyinAmerica.Post-MedievalArchaeology1:
104-105.
NORDIN,JONAS2013TheCentreoftheWorld:ThematerialconstructionofEurocentric
dominationandhybridityinaScandinavian17th-centurycontext.JournalofMaterialCulture
18(2):189-209.
OGUNDIRAN,AKINWUMIandTOYINFALOLA2007editors.ArchaeologiesofAtlanticAfrica
andtheAfricanDiaspora.IndianaUniversityPress.
OJALA,CARL-GÖSTA2009SámiPrehistories:ThePoliticsofArchaeologyandIdentityin
NorthernmostEurope.PhD,UppsalaUniversity.
ORSER,CHARLES2011TheArchaeologyofPovertyandthePovertyofArchaeology.
InternationalJournalofHistoricalArchaeology15:533-543.
PIKIRAYI,INNOCENT2009Palaces,FeirasandPrazos:AnHistoricalArchaeological
PerspectiveofAfrican-PortugueseContactinNorthernZimbabwe.AfricanArchaeologial
Review26(3):163-185.
PLUCIENNIK,MARK,ANTOONMIENTJES,andENRICOGIANNITRAPANI2004Archaeologies
ofAspiration:HistoricalArchaeologyinRuralCentralSicily.InternationalJournalofHistorical
Archaeology8(1):27-65.
RYDÉN,GÖRAN2014‘ConnectingandComparingSwedishEighteenth-CenturyIronMaking
withthePlantationSystem’.PaperpresentedattheEntangledColonialism:Scandivaian
TradeintheAtlanticandinAsiaworkshop,UniversityofAmsterdam,14November.
RYNNE,COLIN2009Haulbowlineisland,CorkHarbour,Ireland,c.1816-1832:Anew
ArchaeologicalperspectiveonIreland’sColonialityInCrossingPathsorSharingTracks:
FutureDirectionsintheArchaeologicalStudyofPost-1550BritainandIreland,Audrey
HorningandMarilynPalmer,editors,pp.167-178.BoydellandBrewer,Woodbridge.
SAID,EDWARD1978Orientalism:WesternConceptionsoftheOrient.PantheonBooks.
SCHAVELZON,DANIEL2013ArgentinaandGreatBritain:Studyinganasymmetrical
relationshipthroughdomesticmaterialculture.HistoricalArchaeology47(1):10-25.
SCHAVELZON,DANIEL2000TheHistoricalArchaeologyofBuenosAires:Acityattheendof
theworld.Kluwer,NewYork.
SCHMIDT,PETER2014aDeconstructingArchaeologiesofAfricanColonialism:Makingand
UnmakingtheSubalterninRethinkingColonialPaststhroughArchaeologyNealFerris,
RodneyHarrison,andMichaelV.Wilcox,editors,pp.445-468.OxfordUniversityPress,
Oxford.
SCHMIDT,PETER2014bRediscoveringCommunityArchaeologyinAfricaandReframingits
Practice.JournalofCommunityArchaeologyandHeritage1(1):37-55.
SCHMIDT,PETER2010SocialmemoryandtraumainnorthwesternTanzania:organic,
spontaneouscommunitycollaboration.JournalofSocialArchaeology10(2):255-279.
SCHRIRE,CARMEL1996DiggingthroughDarkness:ChroniclesofanArchaeologist.
UniversityPressofVirginia.
SCHUYLER,ROBERT1988ArchaeologicalRemains,Documents,andAnthropology:ACallfor
anewCultureHistory.HistoricalArchaeology22(1):36-42.
SCHUYLER,ROBERT1970Historicalandhistoricsites/archaeologyasanthropology:basic
definitionsandrelationships.HistoricalArchaeology4(1):83-89.
SILLIMAN,STEPHEN2014ArchaeologiesofIndigenousSurvivanceandResistancein
RethinkingColonialPaststhroughArchaeology.NealFerris,RodneyHarrison,andMichaelV.
Wilcox,editors,pp.57-75.OxfordUniversityPress,Oxford.
SILLIMAN,STEPHEN2009ChangeandContinuity,memoryandPractice:NativeAmerican
persistenceinNewEngland.AmericanAntiquity74:211-230.
SLEVAKUMAR,V.2010Theuseandrelevanceofarchaeologyinthepost-modernworld:
viewsfromIndia.WorldArchaeology42(3):468-480.
TARLOW,SARAHandSUSIEWESTeds.1999TheFamiliarPast?Archaeologiesoflater
HistoricalBritain.London,Routledge.
TEIXIERA,ANDRÉ,JOANABENTOTORRESandJOSÉBETTENCOURT2015TheAtlantic
ExpansionandPortuguesematerialcultureintheearlymodernage:anarchaeological
approach.InArchaeologyofculturecontactandcolonialisminSpanishandPortuguese
America,editedbyPedroPauloFunairandMariaXimenaSenatore,pp.19-38.Springer,
NewYork.
THEUNE,CLAUDIA2015ArchäologieinehmaligenKonzentratzionlagern.InMittlelungend
derGesellschaftLandeskundeundDenkmalfegeÖberosterreich45,2:7-10.
THEUNE,CLAUDIA2013ArchaeologyandRemembrance:theContemporaryArchaeologyof
ConcentratoinCamps,Prisoner-of-warcamps,andBattlefields.InNataschaMehlereditor,
ThearchaeologyofCentralEurope.RockvilleMD:SocietyforHistoricalArchaeologyspecial
publicationpp.241-260.
THOMAS,RICHARD2009BonesofContention:WhyLaterPost-MedievalFaunal
AssemblagesinBritainMatter.InCrossingPathsorSharingTracks:FutureDirectionsinthe
ArchaeologicalStudyofPost-1550BritainandIreland,AudreyHorningandMarilynPalmer,
editors,pp.133-148.BoydellandBrewer,Woodbridge.
TOMLINSON,MICHAELW.2012WarPeaceandSuicide:thecaseofNorthernIreland.
InternationalSociology27(4):464-482.
VERHAEGHE,FRANS1997TheArchaeologyofTransition:aContinentalView.InTheAgeof
Transition:theArchaeologyofEnglishCulture1400-1600DavidGaimsterandPaulStamper,
editors.Oxbow.
WEISS,HOLGER2013TheDanishGoldCoastasMultinationalandEntangledSpace,c.1700-
1850.InScandinavianColonialismandtheRiseofModernityM.Naum&J.M.Nordin,New
York,editors,pp.243-260.Springer,NewYork.
WEST,SUSIE1999Introduction.InTheFamiliarPast?ArchaeologiesoflaterHistorical
Britain,SarahTarlowandSusieWest,editors,pp.1-16.Routledge,London.
WILSON,JOHNS.1990We’vegotthousandsofthese:whatmakesanhistoricfarmstead
Significant?HistoricalArchaeology24(2):23-33.
YAZDI,LEILAPAPOLI2010PublicandPrivateLivesinIran:AnIntroductiontothe
Archaeologyofthe2003BamEarthquake.Archaeologies6(1):29-47.
YOUNG,RUTHandHASSANFAZELI2013WomenandClassinLandlordVillagesofthe
Tehranplain,Iran.HistoricalArchaeology47(2):76-98.