Diaz-Andreu M 2014 -Transnationalism and Archaeology-libre

150 anni di preistoria e protostoria in Italia

IntroductIon. transnatIonalIsm and globalIzatIon

The literature on the connection between archaeology and nationalism has been growing for the last twenty ive years (Díaz-Andreu and Champion 1996, Kohl and Fawcett 1995, Meskell 1998, Silberman 1989). It has become generally accepted that archaeology is not a neutral discipline, but rather that its birth as a profession is closely linked to Modernism and the organization of the modern state based on the idea of the nation (Díaz-Andreu 2007). The many analyses focusing on particular case studies linking archaeology and nationalism have understandably been framed in the context of the nation-state. In this article I will argue that in doing this, they show only part of the picture. This is because nationalism is a global phenomenon in which people glocalize their own way of understanding their own nation.

However, beyond each frontier there is much that has been used as an example to emulate in order to express one’s own national identity. In the same way as nationalism is behind many of the events and practices that mark its evolution, in the history of archaeology there are many cases in which it is extremely useful to observe international relationships as a way of determining why and when particular developments took place.

This article will try to go beyond the narrow nation-state perspective to analyse the inluence of international connections in the organization of three institutions dealing with prehistory in Western Europe at the start of the twentieth century. I will argue that their almost simultaneous establishment can be understood as an example of transnation-alism before the explosion of electronic mediation and mass migration (Appadurai 1996: 8). It is proposed here that many of the issues that are seen as novel and described as the effects of recent globalization already existed earlier (and older examples could have been chosen). The circulation and meeting of people and ideas of

RIASSunTo - transnazIonalIsmo e archeologIa. I prImI contattI delle prIncIpalI IstItuzIonI che sI occupano dI archeologIa preIstorIca nell’europa occIdentale: Iph, Il cIpp e Il crpu (1910-1914) - L’articolo tratta delle origini e dello sviluppo di tre istituzioni che hanno a che fare con la preistoria dell’Europa occidentale all’inizio del ventesimo secolo. Esse sono l’Istituto parigino di Paleontologia umana (IPH), la Comisión de Investigaciones Paleontológicas y Prehistóricas (CIPP) di Madrid e il Comitato Italiano per le ricerche di Paleontologia umana (CRPu). L’analisi va al di là dei ristretti conini dello Stato-nazione e giunge al risultato che lo sviluppo simultaneo di queste tre istituzioni può essere considerato un caso di “transnazionalismo”. L’articolo si occupa anche di globalizzazione e “glocalizzazione” e di come questi due concetti possano illuminare la storia delle istituzioni archeologiche.

SuMMARY - transnatIonalIsm and archaeology. the connectIng orIgIns of the maIn InstItutIons dealIng wIth prehIstorIc archaeology In western europe:the Iph, the cIpp and the crpu (1910-1914) - This article examines the origins and development of three institutions which dealt with prehistory in Western Europe at the start of the twentieth century. These three institutions the Parisian Institut de Paléontologie Humaine (IPH), the Comisión de Investigaciones Paleontológicas y Prehistóricas (CIPP) based in Madrid and the Italian Comitato per le ricerche di Paleontologia umana (CRPu). The analysis undertaken goes beyond the narrow nation-state perspective, for it is argued that the almost simultaneous establishment of these three institutions can be understood as an example of transnationalism. The article also deals with globalization and glocalization and how these concepts can illuminate the history of archaeological institutions.

margarIta díaz-andreu*

Transnationalism and archaeology.The connecting origins of the main institutions

dealing with prehistoric archaeologyin Western Europe: the IPH, the CIPP and

the CRPU (1910-1914)

*ICREA- universitat de Barcelona. Departament de Prehistòria, H. Antiga i Arqueologia, Facultat de Geograia i Història, ICREA-uni-versitat de Barcelona; Carrer de Montalegre 6; 08001 Barcelona. e-mail: [email protected]

m. díaz-andreu164

France, Spain and Italy respectively. The many publications on their development do not fully silence the links of the second and third with the irst, but the impression the reader gets is of almost independent development. In contrast, this article will highlight the multi-layered connections between the three of them.

the InstItut de paleontologIe humaIne In parIs (1910)

The Parisian Institut de Paléontologie Humaine is seen today as a key component in the professionalization of prehistoric archaeology in France (Hurel 2000-01, Hurel 2003: 8). Its creation was the result of a series of personal encounters between Prince Albert I of Monaco (1848-1922) and the palaeontologist Marcellin Boule (1861-1942), between Boule and the prehistorian Henri Breuil (1877-1961) and between Breuil and the German prehistorian, Hugo obermaier (1877-1946). Regarding the irst of these, Albert I of Monaco’s interest in new sciences encouraged him to sponsor Boule’s excavations in the Grimaldi Caves, which were named in his honour. The excavations had been started decades earlier by his grandfather Prince Florestan I (1785-1856) in 18481 when the territory belonged to Monaco. The area was sold to France in 1861 by Florestan’s son, King Charles III. Despite this, the grandson, Prince Albert I (King Albert from 1889), who since his student years at university had been acquainted with the debates regarding human origins, became deeply (and physically) involved in their excavation for a few months from november 1882 (Boule 1923, Hurel 2000-01: 51). This irst excavation was followed by a gap of some years until 1895, when it was continued by the future director of the Museum of Prehistoric Anthropology of Monaco, Léonce de Villeneuve. From June 1897 he collaborated with Marcellin Boule, then an assistant at the Museum d’Histoire naturelle in Paris (ibidem), who continued working there until the end of this excavation phase in 1902 (MAPM 2013). Also participating in the study of the Grimaldi Caves was one of the most important prehistorians of the time, Émile Cartailhac (1844-1921), whose role was to study the archaeological remains (Villeneuve et al. 1906-1919). By the time Cartailhac became involved in the study of the Grimaldi inds he had already had as young companions irst Boule himself in the 1880s (Boule 1921a: 592-3) and then Henri Breuil twenty years later (ibidem: 596). With the latter

11846 after MAPM (2013).

different backgrounds and the annexation of the global into their own practices of the modern (cf. Appadurai1996: 4) is not new. What is new in globalization is the percentage of the population it affects today, as nowadays it percolates the whole population. However, regarding the middle classes and, in our case study, a professional group such as the one formed by those interested in the remote past, globalization was in place much earlier and certainly by the beginning of the twentieth century.In this article I will use the concept of transnationalism to encompass processes that scholars usually think of as part of the development of the national state, but that are in fact linked to others elsewhere. Transnationalism has been deined sensu strictu as “the process by which immigrants forge and sustain simultaneous multi-stranded social relations that link together their societies of origin and settlement... many immigrants today build social ields that cross geographic, cultural, and political borders” (King 2006: 2220). Sensu latu, however, it can be employed to describe the same social relations and their consequences, not necessarily among migrants, but among individuals living in different countries who are communicating with each other and perhaps even travelling to the other countries for short periods. This last meaning of transnationalism was used by Peter Aronsson and Gabriella Elgenius in a recent book on the origin of national museums in Europe, where they see such institutions as the result of transnational values and identities (Aronsson and Elgenius 2011: 9). Sensu strictu, obermaier is the best example of a transnational researcher. By focusing on transnationalism sensu latu, this article will go beyond the description of the relationships between archaeologists of two or more particular countries, which, despite their value, are not my focus here (see for good examples of the other approach (Gracia Alonso 2010, 2012, Reimond 2012)). Rather, my account will serve as the basis on which to explore connections that go beyond correspondence and personal meetings and will frame all events in a global context.Transnationalism and globalization will be the background for the analysis to be undertaken in this article on the founding and the earliest years of three centres for the study of Prehistory and Palaeontology in Western Europe: the Institut de Paléontologie Humaine in Paris (1910), the Comisión de Investigaciones Paleontológicas y Prehistóricas in Madrid (1912) and the Comitato per le ricerche di Paleontologia umana in Florence (1913). These three institutions are seen as key to the development of prehistoric archaeology in

Transnationalism and archaeology. The connecting origins of the main institutions dealing with prehistoric archaeology in Western Europe:the IPH, the CIPP and the CRPU (1910-1914) 165

rush from Vienna to Spain so that he could welcome the Prince (Hurel 2011: 203).At the end of october 1909, Prince Albert I of Monaco informed Breuil of his intention to establish an institute of human palaeontology with Boule as director and Breuil and obermaier as workers. Breuil was asked to draft a project to this effect. This was ready on 21 December. In the project presented by Boule and Breuil to the Prince (Hurel 2000) they mentioned that, in addition to paying for excavations, the Prince should sponsor a monographic series similar to that of the Bureau of Ethnology in the united States (for this institution see Hinsley 1981, Woodbury and Woodbury 1999). Breuil must have been thinking of The North American Indian series, whose irst ive volumes appeared from 1907 to 1909. on 23 July 19103 the Prince’s solicitor registered the Institute of Human Palaeontology in Monaco, a foundation aimed at encouraging the “advancement of the science related to the origin and history of fossil man” (in Hurel 2000-01: 55). on 16 november 1910 the administrative council was formed (Breuil 1951: 288) and Albert I wrote a letter to the French Ministry of Public Instruction informing about his intention to construct a building for the encouragement of the study of human origins, stating that he wanted it to be of public utility (utilité publique). This was granted on 15 December of that year. on 24 January 19114 Breuil and obermaier were oficially chosen to work at the Institute under the direction of Marcellin Boule (Hurel 2000-01: 55), who had also been given the chair of Palaeontology at the IPH. Breuil was designated for the Chair of Prehistoric Ethnology and obermaier for that of Geology. The establishment of the IPH brought envy and criticism among other French prehistorians. They disapproved of it, among other reasons because all the members were priests, leading them to call the IPH the “modern castle of popes” (Hurel 2003: 3-4, see also Lanzarote Guiral 2011: 69).

As a new institution one would have expected it to have its own publication series and a building. To start with the IPH did not set up a new periodical publication, as it used the journal L’Anthropologie5.

3 Breuil provides the date of 24 July 1910 (Breuil 1951: 288).4 Again, there is a difference of a day between the dates stated by Hurel and those by Breuil. The latter provides the date of 25 January 1911 (Breuil 1951: 288).5 L’Anthropologie was the heir of another publication, the Matériaux pour l’Histoire naturelle et primitive de l’Homme, which Cartailhac had bought to Mortillet in 1869. The journal had become the oficial publication of the CIAPP International Congresses (Boule 1921a: 591). In 1889 it had changed its name to L’Anthropologie, having as its editors Cartailhac and Boule, among others (Boule 1921a: 594).

he travelled to the north of Spain to visit Altamira and other painted caves in the area (Madariaga de la Campa 1996: 60). The result of this visit was the often cited article “Mea Culpa d’un sceptique” (Cartailhac 1902), in which Cartailhac recognized the authenticity of Altamira. The documentation of the Altamira Cave by Émile Cartailhac and Henri Breuil in 1902 grabbed Prince Albert I’s attention to the extent that he decided to pay the cost of its publication. In December 1904 he signed a contract with the two French researchers, as well as with Louis Capitan and François Daleau, to publish the book, together with other artistic evidences from the same period documented in a series of French caves (Hurel 2000-01: 52). By the time this happened, Breuil had been helping the prince to organize the CIAAP International Congress in Monaco. He was not the only one, as Hugo obermaier, whom he had met in 1904 when the German undertook a study visit to Paris, was with him as congress secretary. Breuil and obermaier´s help must have come as a relief to the prince, as the initiative of holding the CIAAP in Monaco had only been taken in 19032, when its original organizers in Vienna had explained the impossibility of going ahead and the Prince had stepped in to save the day (Hurel 2000-01: 52, Lanzarote Guiral 2011: 67). In June 1906, only two months after the 13th International Congress of Anthropology and Prehistoric Archaeology (CIAAP), the Prince extended his publication funding to a series of caves in northern Spain that Breuil had been studying with a Spanish scholar, the director of the local arts and crafts school, Hermilio Alcalde del Río (1866-1947) (Hurel 2000-01: 52).In 1908 the Abbots Amédée and Jean Bouyssonie, and Louis Bardon’s discovery of the skeletal remains of a neanderthal individual in the Bonneval Cave, La Chapelle-aux-Saints (Bouyssonie, Bouyssonie, and Bardon 1908), raised a huge amount of interest. The remains were moved to the laboratories of the national Museum of natural History in Paris to be studied by Marcellin Boule, then recently promoted to a chair of Palaeontology (Boule 1911-13). Boule showed them to Prince Albert I of Monaco (Hurel 2000-01: 52, Hurel 2005, Richard 1999: 263). During this visit the idea was raised as to whether it would be a good idea to have an institute dealing with Human Palaeontology in Paris. In July 1909, the Prince visited Breuil and obermaier in Spain, as he wanted to see the sites they were working on and he was taken to visit the caves of Covalanas, Castillo and Altamira. Hurel explains how obermaier had to

2 or 1904 after Hurel (2011: 165).

m. díaz-andreu166

Thus, in the mid-1930s Breuil visited Italy and helped Alberto Carlo Blanc with the extraction of a neanderthal skull and later excavations at Saccopastore (Rome) (Hurel 2003: 5, Hurel 2011: 348-352).Regarding Spain, Breuil and obermaier met with the Count of Vega del Sella and Count Bégouën in Cantabria in 1925. The“Concilium of Altamira”, as it became known, was held to discuss the possible condemnation of the theory of evolution by the Church and to ask Count Bégouën to intercede on Teilhard de Chardin’s behalf with the Pope (Breuil in Hurel 2003: 4-5, Lanzarote Guiral 2011:77, Ripoll Perelló 2002: 313).Breuil went on to publish many articles on Post-Palaeolithic rock art. With the death of Albert I of Monaco in 1922, however, he lost his main sponsor and as a result he struggled to publish his large volumes on Spanish rock art. A irst one was published in English in 1929 thanks to Burkitt, who became a co-author, and the other four were published in French in his name only in 1933-35, thanks to the Singer-Polignac Foundation. This was a charity that had been set up in 1928 to provide funding for the arts and sciences in some way linked to the Collège de France, where he was the irst to occupy the chair of Prehistory in 1929. Breuil also continued to collaborate with obermaier from the mid-1920s, not only publishing on Spain (for example Breuil and obermaier 1935, obermaier and Breuil 1927, Porcar Ripolles, Breuil, and obermaier 1935), but also, although not together, on South Africa (Breuil 1930, obermaier and Kühn 1930) (see also Burkitt 1928). other members of the IPH became also involved in Spanish archaeology. This was the case of Raymond Vaufrey, Henri Vallois and Teilhard de Chardin. They respectively studied the fauna, human remains and phosphates from Castillo, whereas obermaier and Breuil analysed the typology and stratigraphy of the cave (Cabrera Valdés, Bernaldo de Quirós, and Hoyos Gómez 1996: 186-187, Lanzarote Guiral 2011: 77).

the comIsIón de InvestIgacIones paleontológIcas y prehIstórIcas In madrId (1912)

In 1907 the Junta para la Ampliación de Estudios e Investigaciones Cientíicas (JAE, Council for the Expansion of Study and Scientiic Research) was established. This was an initiative of a group of major scholars willing to put a halt to what they perceived to be the centuries-long unremitting decadence of Spain, which had resulted in the end of the Spanish empire in 1898. The JAE had

The control of the journal by the IPH director made it unnecessary to issue another publication to begin with. However, a series indeed started in 1920 and it received the tite of Archives de l’Institut de Paléontologie Humaine (Richard 1999: 263- 4). Regarding the building, the land for the institute was bought in July 1911 and construction was inished in 1914, just before the start of World War I. Two years were needed after the war to bring the building back into operation. Its inauguration, irst planned for november 1914, but postponed because of World War I, did not take place until 23 December 1920, with Carthailhac giving the inaugural speech (Boule 1921a: 597).The institutional history of the IPH after its creation was not without problems. on the one hand, the large size of the building proved to be inancially costly, something that Cartailhac had feared from the start (Hurel 2000-01: 57-58). There were personal tensions among its members. Hurel explains how the relationship between Marcellin Boule and Henri Breuil became tense, with daily disputes over thirty years (Hurel 2003: 2). Perhaps this rivalry affected obermaier, who only worked for the IPH oficially until January 1915. In reality, however, he had already stopped working for it in August 1914, at the start of World War I, as his German nationality became a problem during the conlict, especially in an institution in which the director was overtly anti-German (see, for example, Boule (1914), only one of many such examples) (Hurel 2000-01: 60, Richard 1999: 265)). As we have seen, the members of the IPH had worked in Spain and Italy before World War I. After the conlict, however, collaboration would have to wait largely until the mid-1920s. Boule encouraged one of his students, Raymond Vaufrey (1890-1967), to work on the Italian Palaeolithic (Vaufrey 1928, Vaufrey 1929), although somehow he was forced to end his excavation in Sicily in 1927 (Tarantini and Parenti 2011: 147, 149). It is unclear whether politics was involved. Schnapp comments that Vaufrey was a sympathizer of right wing totalitarianism (Schnapp 1980: 27-28, see also Hurel 2011: 399-403) and it may be worth mentioning that irst Gian Alberto Blanc and then his son, Alberto Carlo Blanc (1906-1960), also of right-leaning views, often worked with him (Guidi 2010: 16). Despite Vaufrey having been forced to end his excavation in Sicily, collaboration between archaeologists linked to the IPH and Italian archaeologists continued.

Also, from 1905 Boule had directed a journal called Les annals de paléontologie.


from 1910 until 1914. They may have well met there. Sadly, historians of archaeology remain silent about the connections between Spanish and Italian prehistorians and palaeontologists at that time, not because they were not taking place, but probably because historians consider the connections between the two “satellite” countries of France of minor importance and not worthy of study (see comments on this in Díaz-Andreu 2012a). However, a future analysis of these “peripheral” relationships may provide unexpected results and explain much.Returning to the formation of the CIPP, it should be said that its connection to the IPH was a mixture of love and hate. Indeed, the format of the institution, the number of people working for it, its bond to a natural Sciences museum, its link to an aristocrat, and its remit indicate great similarities to the IPH. However, the correspondence shows us that a strong impulse behind its creation was a nationalist reaction against French colonialism. In a letter dated 1 november 1913, Eduardo Hernández-Pacheco wrote to the Count of Vega del Sella (one of the main collaborators of the institution):“French archaeologists were against the possibility of rock paintings [referring to the Peña Tú prehistoric art site] in Asturias and Cantabria given how wet the climate is! Do not speak about this with the members of the French Commission and do not tell anybody where the site is, for they will immediately send a sleuthhound [sabueso] to make a recording and in eight days you will read about it in L’Anthropologie” (in Márquez uría 1988: 486).Similar comments were published a couple of years after (Hernández Pacheco 1915: 39-40) (see also Rasilla Vives 1997: 432). The head of the CIPP expressed in this way his feeling that Spanish archaeologists had to be cautious in order to prevent French archaeologists appropriating the information. Hernández-Pacheco felt that Breuil was trying to monopolize prehistoric archaeology in Spain and in the same letter mentioned above he referred to French archaeologists as “our scientiic conquistadors and civilizers” (Márquez uría 1988: 487). The establishment of the CIPP was seen a means of halting French advances. It is in this context that we should perhaps consider the appointment of Hugo obermaier to the CIPP, after he had to leave the IPH in 1914. only the previous year Hernández-Pacheco had written in a private letter commenting that Hugo obermaier was less cunning than Breuil (Márquez uría 1988: 487). At the outbreak of World War I obermaier was in northern Spain. He and his companion, the Alsatian Paul Wernert, found themselves in a

two centres where archaeologists were housed. one was the Centro de Estudios Históricos (CEH, Centre for Historical Studies), where a section for the archaeology of late prehistory to the Islamic period was set up in 1914. The other was the national Institute for Physics and natural Sciences, in which the institution we are interested in this article was established in 1912 under the name of the Commission for Speleological Explorations. Its title, however, signiicantly changed in 1914 to the Comisión de Investigaciones Paleontológicas y Prehistóricas (CIPP, Commission for Palaeontological and Prehistoric Research) (Sánchez Ron 1988: 41-49).The idea of opening a centre for palaeontology and prehistoric archaeology came up during a study trip to Paris by the chair of Geology at the university of Madrid, Eduardo Hernández-Pacheco (Hernández Pacheco 1959: 719). He had received a grant from the JAE to undertake a study trip to France, Italy, England, Belgium and Switzerland, although he spent much of the time in Paris. There he worked under Boule at the IPH and a few other researchers at other institutions during the months of october to December 1911 (JAE: 1910 and 1911, 63). It was in Paris that Hernández-Pacheco met the 17th Marquis of Cerralbo (1845-1922), Enrique de Aguilera y Gamboa, who was temporarily living in Paris (Anon. 1954: 12). Cerralbo was one of the patrons of the Museum of natural Sciences in Madrid and someone who, as a senator, had argued in favour of the Law of Antiquities that was inally passed in 1911. They discussed the idea of setting up a similar institution to the IPH and once in Spain they put this proposal to the JAE (Hernández Pacheco 1959: 719). on 28 May 1912 the CIPP was founded under the name of Commission for Speleological Explorations (JAE 1914: 261). It had the marquis as director and Hernández-Pacheco as head of works. The founding of the CIPP took place almost two years after the solicitor’s registration of the IHP and a year before the establishment of the Comitato per le Ricerce di Paleontologia umana. However, it may be signiicant that only twenty days after the creation of the Italian Comitato per le Ricerce di Paleontologia umana (see below), on 20 May 1913 the Commission for Speleological Explorations changed its name to the CIPP. Although no source has been found to conirm this, it is most likely that the Spanish institution’s change of name was connected to the establishment of the Italian one. In favour of this connection is the fact that both Gian Alberto Blanc and Hernández-Pacheco visited the site of Castillo in northern Spain, where obermaier excavated

m. díaz-andreu168

Hernández Pacheco 1914, Hernández Pacheco and Cabré 1914). The fourth book in the series was by the Count of Vega del Sella and had apparently already been prepared in 1913 (Conde de la Vega del Sella 1914). Perhaps the start of World War I and the fact that Breuil was occupied with other matters (i.e., his interest in rock art did not have to be neutralised) that the subject of the publications in the Memorias broadened to cover other ields of prehistory, although rock and cave art were kept on the agenda (Hernández Pacheco 1917). of the 36 volumes published in total, seventeen (47.22%) had information on prehistoric art, of which twelve (33.33%) dealt with cave art or rock art. In contrast, only four books (a mere 11.11%) related to palaeontology (and not 50% as the name of the institution would lead one to expect).The CIPP’s huge achievements did not stop tensions from emerging in its institutional biography. The irst originated in the tension between Cabré and Breuil in 19156, and this was followed by that between Cabré and obermaier in 1917 and inally between Hernández-Pacheco and obermaier, which resulted in obermaier leaving the CIPP in 1919 (Díaz-Andreu 2012b: 27-35). After the death of the CIPP’s director and protector, the Marquis of Cerralbo, in 1922, oficial support for the institution weakened. In 1922, despite Hernández-Pacheco’s complaints, and thanks to the hand of the very powerful Duke of Alba, obermaier was given the chair of Primitive History of Man (Historia Primitiva del Hombre, a translation of urgeschichte), i.e. Prehistory, at the Faculty of Letters (Filosofía y Letras) of the university of Madrid. From now on, in Spanish universities Prehistory would not be included in the ield of Sciences, but in Humanities, which meant that Hernández-Pacheco, who in addition to his post at the CIPP was also Professor at the Faculty of natural Sciences at the university of Madrid, was sidelined and that also meant that the CIPP was effectively on death row (Díaz-Andreu and Cortadella 2006).The ideals of the IPH and the CIPP were ultimately transferred by Hugo obermaier to his teaching at the university of Madrid. obermaier trained many of the future prehistoric archaeologists in Spain, notably those who later directed Spanish archaeology after the Spanish Civil War, irst Julio Martínez Santa-olalla and then Martín Almagro Basch, as well as other archaeologists such as Carlos Alonso del Real,

6one could also mention the quarrel between Cabré and Bosch Gim-pera, although the latter was by that time based in Barcelona (Gracia Alonso and Fullola Pericot 2008).

dificult situation, to the extent that they had to sell their scientiic equipment to survive. In view of the situation, the Count of Vega de Sella decided to give them refuge at his house at nueva de Llanes in Asturias. By the end of 1914 they were in Madrid, probably living in the Count’s house in the capital (later obermaier lived at the school of El Pilar), and were working at the CIPP (Márquez uría 1996: 80). obermaier became the chaplain to one of the wealthiest aristocrats in Spain, the Duke of Alba, apparently thanks to Breuil´s discrete arrangements (Gloria Mora, pers. comm. 3.7.2013). During his years at the CIPP he published his El Hombre Fósil (1916), an update of his German book Der Mensch der Vorzeit (1912). It is perhaps signiicant that Marcellin Boule, only ive years later, published a similarly successful book with an almost identical title, Les hommes fossiles (Boule 1921b), although with a very different content, although it perhaps only shows that the term “fossil man” was in fashion at that time. Boule’s book was translated into English in 1923 and obermaier’s in 1925.Despite the similarities highlighted above, the CIPP was different to the IPH in many ways. It was a state institution and did not have a separate building for itself, but used the national Museum of natural Sciences (Museo nacional de Ciencias naturales) in Madrid. Also, it did not have a previously founded journal such as L’Anthropologie in which to publish its results. Instead, two new publication series were set up, Memorias and Notas, that dealt with the work being undertaken. Publication of Memorias began in 1915, preceding its French sister publication, the Archives de l’Institut de Paléontologie Humaine, by ive years. However, one should take into account that such an advantage may have been related to Spain’s neutrality during World War I and France’s part in it. In France the war may well have delayed a publication project already in place before the start of the conlict in 1914. During its lifetime the CIPP published a total of 36 extensive reports in the Memorias series. An analysis of them further reveals how keen the CIPP was to curb French interest in Spanish prehistory and in particular in rock art studies, as an attempt (probably by the Marquis of Cerralbo and Cabré) to discourage Breuil from further researching on prehistoric art in Spain. The irst Memoria was that on rock art by Juan Cabré (1915), who a few years earlier had been paid by Breuil to document some of the art and had even published with him (Breuil and Cabré Aguiló 1909, Breuil and Cabré 1911, Breuil, Serrano Gómez, and Cabré 1912). Two others followed, also on rock art (Cabré and


1 1915 cabré, J arte rupestre en españa x

2 1914 hernández pacheco, e. cabré, J.

las pInturas prehIstórIcas de peña tú x

3 1914 cabré, J.hernández pacheco, e.

avance al estudIo de las pInturas prehIstórIcas del extremo sur de españa (laguna de la Janda)

x

4 1914 conde de la vega del sella

la cueva del penIcIal (asturIas) x

5 1914 hernández pacheco, e. - dantín, J.

geología y paleontología del mIoceno de palencIa p

6 1915 hernández pacheco, e. - obermaIer, h.

la mandíbula neandertaloIde de bañolas

7 1915 bosch gImpe-ra, p

el problema de la cerámIca IbérIca

8 1915 schmIdt, h. estudIos acerca de los prIncIpIos de la edad de los metales en españa

9 1916 obermaIer, h. el hombre fósIl (x)10 1916 hernández

pacheco, e.nomenclatura de voces técnIcas y de Instrumentos típIcos del pale-olítIco

11 1916 cabré, J. - wernert, p.

El PalEolítico infErior dE PuEntE Mocho.

12 1916 wernert, p. representacIones de antepasados en el arte paleolítIco


paleolítIco de cueto de la mIna (asturIas)

14 1917 cabré, J. las pInturas rupestres de aldeaquemada x

15 1917 lantIer, r. el santuarIo IbérIco del castellar de santIsteban

16 1917 obermaIer, h. yacImIento prehIstórIco de las carolInas (madrId)17 1917 hernández

pacheco, e.los grabados de la cueva de penches x

18 1918 frankowskI, e. hórreos y palafItos de la península IbérIca

19 1918 motos, f. 1918 la edad neolítIca en vélez blanco (x)20 1918 obermaIer, h.

- conde de la vega del sella

la cueva del buxu (asturIas) x

21 1918 pan, I.del PalEogEografía dE los MaMífEros cuatErnarios dE EuroPa y nortE dE África

p


el dolmen de la capIlla de santa cruz (asturIas) (x)

23 1919 obermaIer, h. - wernert, p.

las pInturas rupestres del barranco de la valltorta (castellón) x

24 1919 hernández pacheco, e.

la caverna de la peña de candamo: asturIas x

25 1920 frankowskI, e estelas dIscoIdeas de la península IbérIca (x)26 1919 obermaIer, h. el dolmen de matarrubIa (sevIlla)27 1921 correIa, v el neolítIco de pavía (alenteJo-portugal) (x)

Tab. I. Reports published by the CIPP. x= prehistoric art as main or secondary subject. (x) prehistoric art mentioned. P= palaeontology

m. díaz-andreu170

power - in this case France - therefore skewing our vision of what actually happened in the history of the discipline.

the comItato per le rIcerche dI paleontologIa umana (Italy, 1913)

The founding of the Institut de Paléontologie Humaine in Paris in 1910 was not only followed in Spain but also in Italy, where the Comitato per le ricerche di Paleontologia umana (CRPu) was set up in 1913. The IPH and the CRPu were intimately connected, as the former served as inspiration for the latter and, as happened in the case of the Spanish CIPP, they had much in common: not only part of their names, but also in their aim - the study of the earliest periods in European history. However, again, as in the example of the CIPP, the Italian institute also became embedded in the alternative universe of its own country’s institutional politics. This was characterized by the existence of two rival groups based respectively in Rome and Florence (Guidi 2010: 13). The irst was dominated by Luigi Pigorini (1842-1925), whose leadership became apparent from 1871 and more marked from 1877, the year he was designated to the Chair of Palaeoethnology in Rome (Guidi 2010: 14). The second originated with the naturalist Paolo Mantegazza (1831-1910), who in 1871 encouraged the creation of the Società Italiana di Antropologia ed Etnologia (Italian Society of Anthropology and Ethnology) in Florence and its journal Archivio per l’Antropologia e la Etnologia.

It was in this second group that the CRPu became a reality. An important factor behind its

Julio Caro Baroja, Antonio García Bellido, José Pérez de Barradas and Julián San Valero Aparisi (Díaz-Andreu, Mora, and Cortadella 2009). As seen above, after his period at the CIPP, for many years continued with his collaboration with Breuil on projects related to prehistoric art. The collaboration between Spain and France, therefore, had continuity through obermaier (and we could also mention initial contacts by younger archaeologists such as Pericot (Díaz-Andreu 2012a: 56)). But what about the collaboration between Spain and Italy. Did obermaier had a similar role? Very little is known about any possible collaboration between obermaier and Italian archaeologists, Tarantini and Parenti mention that when the Istituto Italiano di Paleontologia umana was established in 1927, the irst correspondents included not only Boule and Breuil, but also Hernández-Pacheco and obermaier (Tarantini and Parenti 2011: note 53). After he had left Spain for good and moved to Switzerland, obermaier also published a note on “Problems of the Quaternary in upper Italy and Tuscany” (obermaier 1937) and there is a photograph of him at the Romanelli Cave dated September 1938 (Tarantini and Parenti 2011: Fig. 3). There seem to have been closer relations between Spanish and Italian archaeologists after the Spanish Civil War thanks to the prehistoric archaeologists belonging to the next generation (Pericot 1941, Pericot 1945, Pericot 1949, Pericot and Almagro 1949). There were other links established between those interested in protohistory and classical archaeology (Gracia Alonso 2010, 2012). As mentioned above, however, historians of archaeology keep generally silent about the links between what are considered to be peripheral countries such as Spain and Italy are considered during this period. This has the effect of reinforcing the belief on the power of the centers of


la llanura manchega y sus mamíferos fósIles. yacImIento de la pue-bla de almoradIer

p


el paleolítIco de cueva morín (santander)

30 1922 royo gómez, J. el mIoceno contInental IbérIco y su fauna malacológIca p


la vIda de nuestros antecesores paleolítIcos, según los resultados de las excavacIones en la caverna de la paloma (asturIas)

x


el asturIense; nueva IndustrIa preneolítIca

33 1923 roman, f. algunos dIentes de lofIodóntIdos descubIertos en españa p34 1924 hernández

pacheco, e.las pInturas prehIstórIcas de las cuevas de la araña (valencIa) x

35 1927 vega del sella teoría del glacIarIsmo cuaternarIo por desplazamIentos polares

36 1929 goméz llueca, f.

los numulítIdos de españa p


become acquainted with prehistory, producing his irst publication on the subject in 1907.

It seems that it was only in 1912 that Blanc came up with the idea of creating a version of the IPH in Italy (Tarantini and Parenti 2011). In August 1912 he had collaborated on the excavation of Castillo led by the IPH chair, Hugo obermaier (Cabrera Valdés, Bernaldo de Quirós, and Hoyos Gómez 1996: 178, Fernández Acebo 2012:52). In September, Mochi, Blanc and Breuil met at the 14th International Congress of Prehistoric Anthropology and Archaeology in Geneva (Tarantini and Parenti 2011: 143) (where the Marquis of Cerralbo was also present, and gave a talk on the Lower Palaeolithic site of Torralba (Santonja et al. 2005: 19)). Later, Blanc attended a meeting at the IPH (Parenti and Sanso 2011). It was in these encounters that the idea of the CRPu originated, and the project was turned into reality on 1 May 1913, the date of the oficial founding of the Comitato per le Ricerche di Paleontologia umana. For this to be possible, Blanc and Mochi had needed to seek private donations. They struck lucky among the afluent classes of Florence and in the irst year they received almost twice as much as they had expected. As with the IPH, no new publication had been required for the new institution: the Comitato maintained a dependency on the Italian Society of Anthropology and Ethnology and its journal (Tarantini and Parenti 2011: 146). More than being a separate institution, Blanc and Mochi used the Comitato as a meeting point for a series of scholars interested in “quaternary man”, i.e. in Palaeolithic archaeology, and as a way of obtaining funding for research (Tarantini and Parenti 2011: 146). The CRPu ceased its activities in 1922, but restarted them in 1926, thanks to the arrival of a new scholar, Count David Augusto Costantini (1875-1936) (Vaufrey 1937). The count had met Mochi at the 12th International Congress of Americanists in Florence in 1926, for which he sponsored the restoration of the Americanist collection in the museum (Tarantini and Parenti 2011: 146). In fact, from this emerged the Istituto Italiano di Paleontologia umana (IsIPu) with headquarters in Florence at the Palazzo noninito (Tarantini and Parenti 2011: 147). In 1927 the CRPu was transformed into the Istituto Italiano di Paleontologia umana (IsIPu, Italian Institute of Human Palaeontology) with Costantini as its irst president and from 1936, Gian Alberto Blanc. one of the irst activities of the IsIPu was the organization of a congress which would mark a turning point regarding the rejection

creation was Pigorini’s reaction to the results of the excavation of the Romanelli Cave, which had been carried out at the beginning of the century by the Florentine society members, Ettore Regalia (1842-1913) and Paolo Emilio Stasi (1840-1922). These scholars had identiied the inds as being from the upper Palaeolithic and the fauna as being typical of a steppe environment, alluding to the interglacial oscillations proposed by the Viennese professor, Albrecht Penk (Regalia and Stasi 1905, Stasi and Regalia 1904, Tarantini 1998-2000:23-27, Tarantini and Parenti 2011: 143). Their conclusions were criticized by Pigorini, who had published against the existence of the upper Palaeolithic in Italy and against the use of palaeontology to date archaeological deposits (Pigorini 1904). However, they were backed by another member of the society, Mantegazza’s scientiic heir, Aldobrandino Mochi (1875-1931), one of the future founders of the CRPu (Tarantini and Parenti 2011: 143). It is most likely that Regalia would also have been one of the organizers of the CRPu had he not been too ill at the time. He was indeed very close to the IPH, and this explains why, after several unsuccessful attempts in Italy (Tarantini, pers. comm.), he sold his collection to the Parisian institution (Lumley 2011: 123, Tarantini and Parenti 2011: note 33). Because of his illness and subsequent death, the honour of the initiative fell to Mochi and Blanc, with the help of others (nello Puccioni and Elio Modigliani are mentioned by Tarantini (1998-2000: 29)). At the time the CRPu was founded, Mochi had taken over the anthropology teaching position left vacant by Mantegazza´s death in 1910 (Mochi would later be promoted to the chair in 1924). In 1910 he also encouraged the foundation of the Laboratory of Anthropology of Florence (Laboratorio antropometrico iorentino), perhaps linked to his rejection of the Tertiary nature of Homo pampaeus, as against the theories proposed by the Argentinean scholar of Genoese ancestry and director of the national Museum of Buenos Aires, Florentino Ameghino (Ameghino 1911, Mochi 1910, Politis and Bonomo 2011) (he had already dealt with Argentinean matters two decades earlier (Mantegazza and Regalia 1886)). Mochi´s newly found interest in the earliest prehistoric periods took off and in 1911 he wrote as many as seven publications on prehistory (Tarantini and Parenti 2011: 143). The year 1911 would also be important as it was when he met for the irst time the other co-founder of the CRPu, Baron Gian Alberto Blanc (1879-1966). Blanc was a physicist who had spent some time in 1907-09 in Paris, a city where he had

m. díaz-andreu172

of globalization or the incorporation of the global into local practices and creations. This article is an attempt to ill this gap. In this essay the analysis has focused on a particular example of a global trend, the unremitting institutionalization of the state in the modern period and its effects on the ield of prehistoric archaeology in the early twentieth century. This trend towards institutionalization was behind a key transformation that led prehistoric archaeology from being a study effectively circumscribed to intellectual curiosity, a mere interest, hobby or passion, to becoming integrated into the machinery of the state (even if this integration was in part thanks to private funds).Globalization on an institutional level is sustained by the travelling of ideas, thoughts of institutional possibilities, ideas about hierarchies, structures, publications and communication. Ideas originating in one place travel to another and create new situations. In the case discussed in this article, we see this in several instances. Thus, the publication series of the American Smithsonian Bureau of Ethnology served as an inspiration for the Archives de l’Institut de Paléontologie Humaine, perhaps not in its format but in something more important, making thinkable that an institution could be res-ponsible for the publication of a thematic series. A series would make it unnecessary to have to ask for sponsorship for every book to be published, which is what had happened until then in the case of the volumes produced on Palaeolithic cave art (the irst of these being that of Altamira (Cartailhac and Breuil 1906)).8

This article has also detailed how the IPH itself served as an example to be followed in other countries, with many obvious similarities among the two following institutions in terms of their names, their funding, their structure, the approximate number of people working for them and, to a certain extent, their type of publications. However, it could also be said that all these aforementioned items were organized in slightly different ways that made them diverge from the model followed. Thus, only the IPH seems to have enjoyed a brand new building for itself, as the others used the ofices of existing institutions as their headquarters. Transference of ideas may also happen, of course, within the same country,

8However, the dificulties encountered by Breuil at a later period in publishing his ive volumes of schematic art in Spain have already been commented on in the text. This means that the series did not completely end all the troubles of at least one member of the IPH, perhaps because he was very demanding regarding the size and qua-lity of what he wanted to publish. Breuil, therefore, continued to need alternative sponsorship.

of the Palaeolithic in Italy (Mochi and Cardini 1928, Tarantini and Parenti 2011: 148). Although Marcellin Boule did not attend, Breuil did. The IsIPu also re-started the excavation of the Grimaldi Caves in 1928.In the late 1930s and early 1940s, under Blanc’s presidency, several satellite headquarters of the IsIPu were set up in Rome, Salerno, Florence, Pisa, Milano, Ferrara, Capri and Sardinia. This expansion has to be seen in the political context of the time and the political stature that Blanc senior had acquired under Mussolini. He had been one of the earliest fascism supporters, had participated in the “March on Rome” in 1922 and had become a Member of Parliament in 1924.7

The relationship between the Italian archaeologists linked to the CRPu/IsIPu and the French and Spanish archaeologists of the IPH and the CIPP has been commented on above. It only remains to make a inal note regarding globalizing networks. We have already commented above that from the 1930s the International Congress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences (CISPP in its French abbreviation) managed to unify three different nineteenth-century networks of prehistoric anthropologists. In the 1950s there was a further step towards strengthening the ties with those coming from the geological sciences. In 1953 the IsIPu organized the 4th International union for Quaternary Research (InQuA) Congress in Rome (Blanc 1956). The InQuA congress represented an alternative network of researchers with geological and palaeontological backgrounds that had been formed in Central and northern Europe in the late 1920s (Alexandrowicz 2006). With this move the network that dominated the CISPP international congresses and that of the InQuA came to overlap. on the editorial board of Quaternaria, the new journal of the InQuA, the names of IPH members Breuil and Teilhard de Chardin were included, in addition to those of IsIPu members Blanc and Cardini. To reinforce this point it is worth mentioning that the following InQuA meeting was held in Spain, the country where the 4th CISPP was held in 1954 (Smalley 2011).

dIscussIon

In the ield of the history of archaeology, especially when works are written within the framework of the national state, it is dificult to ind any mention

7 Blanc was a member of the Executive Board of the national Fascist Party and between May 1926 and December 1928 took part in the meetings of the Grand Council, to be re-elected a member, by reason of their duties, by the decree in 1929.


jumping from one disciplinary ield to another. Thus, possibilities born in one discipline may open the way for the new schemes to be applied in another. This can be seen in the effect that the creation of the oceanographic Institute in Paris in 1906 had (Inizan 2011: 6), as this new institution seems to have made it possible to consider the Institute of Human Palaeontology.It may be necessary to point out that it is not the wish of this article to argue that all the inspiration in Italy and Spain came from France, from the IPH, the earliest institution of the three analysed here. As the names of Comitato-Comisión hint, the two resulting institutions - the CRPu and the CIPP - may have inluenced each other, although this statement is more a suggestion than an actual deduction based on known data. As we have already mentioned above, more research is needed on transversal movements between countries that are considered to be on the periphery and in which current historians of archaeology do not expect to ind an alternative independent transferral of ideas and therefore do not search for it.9

It may be worth asking why globalizing trends may affect some countries more than others. In our example we could wonder why only Spain and Italy mirrored France, whereas Germany, for example, did not. The answer can be, in this case, related to the historical background of the international relations in prehistoric archaeology in the last decades of the nineteenth century. As I have highlighted elsewhere (Díaz-Andreu 2007: 380-1), in that period there were three major international circuits in Europe: from East to West that of the Slavic Congresses, the meetings of the German Anthropological Society and those of the International Congresses of Prehistoric Anthropology and Archaeology (CIAAP). France, Italy and Spain belonged to the last of these, with France as the key player in them. After World War I German archaeologists were even prevented from participating in the meetings of the CIAAP’s successor, the congresses of the Institut international d’anthropologie. So it would be possible to argue that once communication is impeded, emulation becomes more dificult, although not impossible, as is shown by the fact that a younger generation rebelled against this situation and created an alternative international congress in which all the three geographical networks were included, the International Congress of Prehistoric and Protohistorical Sciences or CISPP (Díaz-

9García Bellido (1947), for example, provides a list of publications by Hugo obermaier in which there is no mention to his 1937 article on Italy.

Andreu 2012a: 245-259).If the reasons given above as to why German archaeologists did not try to follow the example of the IPH seem logical (globalizing trends are affected by previous experiences), this does not explain why nobody in the united Kingdom followed suit (o’Connor 2007). It will be proposed here that age10 is also another factor that facilitates or impedes movement of ideas. The main archaeologists who headed these institutions had been born in the 1860s and 1870s and by the early years of the 1900s had been able to garner suficient prestige to be selected for their positions. not only that, they had shared international politics, undergone comparable experiences regarding technological change, and faced the same global trends. They had grown in parallel lines as professionals, having a comparable status because of their age and had seen each other at international meetings playing similar roles - from subordinate to leading igure of their institutions. If age was such a key factor, one may wonder who were the scholars of similar status in England at the time and what were their ages. Looking at Eng-land, and starting with Cambridge, the professor of Geology who had encouraged Burkitt, who was younger and became one of Breuil´s disciples (Díaz-Andreu 2013), learn about the Stone Age was Thomas McKenny Hughes. Having been born in 1832, he belonged an earlier generation (he died in 1917). The anthropologists James Frazer and Alfred Haddon were also slightly older, having been born in the mid-1850s. The person in England who was of the same generation and seems to have been in a similar position was John Myres. Born in 1869, he edited Man and the journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute between 1901 and 1903 and 1931-1946 and was its president between 1928 and 1931. Despite this attachment to anthropology, in 1910 he became the Wykeham professor of ancient history at the university of oxford. It would have been extremely incongruent, it seems logical to deduce, if he had organized anything similar to the IPH. So, perhaps, generationally, there was nobody in England in the position to emulate the Parisian institute. Thus, when Dorothy Garrod wanted to study the Palaeolithic, she went to Paris to learn with Henry Breuil (Davies 1999, Smith 2009: ch. 4). Later on, Burkitt, who had also been with Breuil, helped to transmit what he had learned from the French abbot (Díaz-Andreu 2013, Smith 2009: ch. 2).

10The factor “age” may be distorted in individuals with late vocations such as that of Vaufrey (Bordes 1968).

m. díaz-andreu174

Española de Historia Natural 54:7-34.appaduraI, a. 1996. Modernity at Large: Cultural

Dimensions of Globalisation. Minneapolis, Minn.: university of Minnesota Press.

aronsson, p., and g. elgenIus 2011. Making national Museums in Europe - A Comparative Approach. In p. aronsson, p., and g. elgenIus (eds.), Building National Museums in Europe 1750-2010. Conference proceedings from EuNaMus, European National Museums: Identity Politics, the Uses of the Past and the European Citizen, Bologna 28-30 April 2011. EuNaMus Report No. 1: 9-26, Linköping: Linköping university Electronic Press (Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings, no. 64).

blanc, a. c. ed. 1956. Actes du IV Congres Internationale du Quaternaire Rome-Pisa aout-septembre 1953. 2 vols. Roma: Istituto Italiano di Paleontologia umana.

blanc, g. a. 1907. Hache a rainure trouvée dans le lac du Bourget. Revue préhistorique 1:5-8.

bordes, f. 1968. In Memory of Raymond Vaufrey. Current Anthropology 9:337-338.

boule, m. 1911-13. L’homme fossile de La Chapelle-aux-Saints. Annales d’Anthropologie 6 (1911), 7 (1912), 8 (1913): passim.

—. 1914. La guerre. L’Anthropologie 25:575-580.—. 1921a. Émile Cartailhac (1845-1921). L’Anthropologie

31:587-608.—. 1921b. Les hommes fossiles. Eléments de paléontologie

humaine. Paris: Masson.—. 1923. L’oeuvre anthropologique du Prince Albert Ier de

Monaco. L’Anthropologie 23:1-15.bouyssonIe, A., J. B. Bouyssonie, and L. Bardon. 1908.

Découverte d’un squelette humain moustérien à la Boufia de la Chapelle-aux-Saints (Corrèze). L’Anthropologie 19:513-519.

breuIl, h. 1930. Premières impressions de voyages sur la préhistoire sud-africaine. L’Anthropologie XL:209-223.

—. 1933-35. Les peintures rupestres schématiques de la Peninsule Ibérique. 4 vols. Lagny: Fondation Singer-Polignac.

—. 1951. Souvenirs sur le Prince Albert de Monaco et son oeuvre pehistorique. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française 48:287-288.

breuIl, h., and m. c. burkItt. 1929. Rock Paintings of Southern Andalusia. A Description of a Neolithic and Copper Age Art Group. oxford: Clarendon Press.

breuIl, h., and J. cabré aguIló. 1909. Les peintures rupestres du Bassin Inferieur de l’Ebre: I. les roches peints de Calapatá à Cretas (Bas Aragon); II, Les fresques à l’air libre de Cogul, province de Lérida (Catalogne). L’Anthropologie 20:1-21.

breuIl, h., and J. cabré aguIló. 1911. Les peintures rupestres d’Espagne. III. Los Toricos de Albarracín (Teruel). L’Anthropologie 22:641-8.

breuIl, h., and h. obermaIer. 1935. The Cave of Altamira at Santillana del Mar, Spain. Madrid: Junta de las Cuevas de Altamira, The Hispanic Society of America and the Academia de la Historia.

breuIl, h., p. serrano gómez, and J. cabré aguIló.

Summing up, this article has dealt with globalization and glocalization, i.e. the interpretation of the global into the local, in archaeology. The examples chosen are only a selection from the many available, but help to illustrate that histories of archaeology need to look at the international context to explain many of the developments that are perceived as local but are in fact are much better understood in a wider, transnational framework.

acknowledgements

This work is the result the research project “Archaeology without frontiers - the international contacts of twentieth-century Spanish archaeology” funded by the MInECo-Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad, Plan nacional I+D+i, ref. HAR2012-334033/Hist. The content of the pages above originated in a brief comment given in my paper to the XLVI Riunione Scientiica dell’Istituto Italiano di Preistoria e Protostoria on “150 anni di Preistoria e Protostoria in Italia” held on 23-26 november 2010 at the Museo nazionale Preistorico Etnograico Luigi Pigorini in Rome. I am extremely grateful to the organizers of the event, as the invitation to join it was a fantastic opportunity to learn from the many colleagues from Italy and elsewhere I met there. I undertook some extra work during my stay in Cambridge as Visiting Scholar of the MacDonald Institute (2013-2014). As always, I need to express my profound gratitude to a group of international colleagues who have been extremely helpful in answering my many questions and suggesting new avenues. These include Marcello Barbanera, Francesca Buscemi, Virgilio Fernández Acebo, Alessandro Guidi, Arnaud Hurel, José María Lanzarote, Fedra Pizzato, Ian Smalley, James Snead, Massimo Tarantini and IanTattersall.

references

alexandrowIcz, s.w. 2006. The Polish initiative in creation of the International union for Quaternary Research (InQuA). In M. KoKoWSKI (ed.). The Global and the Local:- The History of Science and the Cultural Integration of Europe. Proceedings of the 2nd ICESHS Conference, Cracow September 6-9 2006: 194-197, on-line publication (http://www.2iceshs.cyfronet.pl/proceedings.html)

ameghIno, f. 1911. observations au sujet des notes du Dr.Mochi sur la paléoanthropologie argentine. Anales del Museo Nacional de Buenos Aires 22:181-230.

anon. 1954. Sucinta biografía del Profesor Eduardo Hernández-Pacheco. Boletín de la Real Sociedad


1912. Les peintures rupestres d’Espagne. IV, Les abris del Bosque à Alpera (Albacete). V, Tortosilla à Ayora (Valence). L’Anthropologie 23:529-561.

burkItt, m. c. 1928. South Africa’s Past in Stone and Paint. Cambridge: Cambridge university Press.

cabré aguIló J. 1915. Arte rupestre en España: Regiones septentrional y oriental. Memoria 1. Madrid: Comisión de Investigaciones Paleontológicas y Prehistóricas.

cabré aguIló J., and e. hernández pacheco. 1914. Avance al estudio de las pinturas prehistóricas del extremo sur de España (Laguna de la Janda). Memoria 3. Madrid: Comisión de Investigaciones Paleontológicas y Prehistóricas.

cabrera valdés, v., f. bernaldo de quIrós, and m. hoyos gómez. 1996. Hugo obermaier y la Cueva del Castillo. In A. MouRE RoMAnILLo (ed.). ‘El hombre fósil’ 80 años después: 177-194, Santander: universidad de Cantabria, Fundación Marcelino Botín, Institute for Prehistoric Investigations.

cartaIlhac, é. 1902. La grotte ornée d’Altamira (Espagne): Mea culpa d’un sceptique. L’Anthropologie 13:348-354.

cartaIlhac, é., and h. breuIl. 1906. La caverne d’Altamira á Santillana, près Santander. Monaco: Imprimerie de Monaco.

conde de la vega del sella. 1914. La cueva del Penicial (Asturias). Memoria 4. Madrid: Comisión de Investigaciones Paleontológicas y Prehistóricas.

davIes, w. 1999. Dorothy Annie Elizabeth Garrod: A Short Biography. In W. DAVIES and R. CHARLES (eds.), Dorothy Garrod and the Progress of the Palaeolithic: 1-14, oxford: oxbow Books.

díaz-andreu, m. 2007. A World History of Nineteenth-Century Archaeology. Nationalism, Colonialism and the Past. Oxford Studies in the History of Archaeology. oxford: oxford university Press.

—. 2012a. Archaeological encounters. Building networks of Spanish and British archaeologists in the 20th century. newcastle: Cambridge Scholars.

—. 2012b. A Hundred years of post-Palaeolithic rock art studies in Spain / Cien años en los estudios de pintura rupestre post-paleolítica en la investigación española. In J. J. GARCÌA ARRAnZ, H. CoLLADo, and G. nASH (eds.), The Levantine Question: the development of Spanish Levantine Rock-art: 23-53, Budapest: Archaeolingua.

—. 2013. The roots of the irst Cambridge textbooks on European prehistory: An analysis of Miles Burkitt´s formative trips to Spain and France. Complutum 24: 109-120.

díaz-andreu, m., and J. cortadella. 2006. Success and failure: alternatives in the Institutionalisation of pre- and proto-history in Spain (Hernández-Pacheco, obermaier, Bosch Gimpera). In J. Callmer, M. Meyer, R. Struwe, and C. Theune-Vogt (eds.), The beginnings of academic pre- and protohistoric archaeology (1830-1930) in a European perspective: 295-305, Berlin: Verlag Marie Leidorf (Berliner Archäologische Forschungen 2).

díaz-andreu, m., and t. champIon. eds., 1996. Nationalism and Archaeology in Europe. London; Boulder, Co.: uCL Press; Westview Press.

díaz-andreu, m., g. mora, and J. cortadella. eds., 2009. Diccionario Histórico de la Arqueología en España (siglos XV-XX). Madrid: Marcial Pons.

fernández acebo, v. 2012. Primer álbum de autógrafos de las grutas del Monte Castillo (1912-1970). Altamira, Revista del Centro de Estudios Montañeses LXXXII:337-419.

garcía y bellIdo, a. 1947. Necrología. Hugo Obermaier. Madrid: Imprenta y Editorial Maestre.

gracIa alonso, f. 2010. Contactos hispano-italianos en la arqueología durante la Guerra Civil y el primer franquismo. In R. olmos, T. Tortosa, and J. P. Bellón (eds.), Repensar la Escuela del CSIC en Roma. Cien años de memoria: 425-440, Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientíicas.

—. 2012. Academic Relations Between Italian and Spanish Archaeologists and Prehistorians, 1916-1936. Bulletin of the History of Archaeology 22:12-22.

gracIa alonso, f., and J. m. fullola perIcot. 2008. Pere Bosch Gimpera y Juan Cabré: la pugna por el control de las Excavaciones de San Antonio de Calaceite y el Bajo Aragón (1914-1916) y su inluencia en la creación del Servei d’Investigacions Arqueològiques del Institut d’Estudis Catalans. Pyrneae 39:129-174.

guIdI, a. 2010. The Historical Development of Italian Prehistoric Archaeology: A Brief outline. Bulletin of the History of Archaeology 20:13-20.

hernández pacheco, e. 1915. Estado actual de las investigaciones en España respecto a Paleontología y Prehistoria. Asociación Española para el Progreso de las Ciencias. Congreso de Valladolid: 1-60, Madrid: Eduardo Arias.

—. 1917. Los grabados de la Cueva de Penches. Memoria 17. Madrid: Comisión de Investigaciones Paleontológicas y Prehistóricas.

—. 1959. Prehistoria del Solar Hispano. Memoria 20. Madrid: Real Academia de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y naturales de Madrid.

hernández pacheco, e., and J. cabré aguIló. 1914. Las Pinturas Prehistóricas de Peña Tú [con la colaboración de Conde de la Vega del Sella]. Memoria 2. Madrid: Comisión de Investigaciones Paleontológicas y Prehistóricas.

hInsley, c. m. 1981. Savages and Scientists: The Smithsonian Institution and the Development of American Anthropology, 1846-1910. Washington DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.

hurel, a. 2000. L’Institute de Paléontologie Humane. La revue pour l’histoire du CNRS 3:digital.

—. 2000-01. La création de l’Institute de Paléontologie Humaine para le Prince Albert 1er de Monaco. une étape vers l´institutionnalisation de la préhistoire. Bulletin du Musée d’Anthropologie préhistorique de Monaco 41:49-62.

—. 2003. un prêtre, un savant dans la marche vers l’institunnalisation de la préhistoire. L’abbé Henri Breuil (1877-1961). La revue pour l’histoire du

m. díaz-andreu176

aprile 1927. Archivio di Antropologia ed Etnologia 58:1-541.

obermaIer, h. 1912. Der Mensch der Vorzeit. Berlin: Allgemein Verlags-gesellschaft.

—. 1916. El hombre fósil. Memoria 9. Madrid: Comisión de Investigaciones Paleontológicas y Prehistóricas. 1925.Fossil Man in Spain. new York: The Hispanic Society of America by the Yale university Press of the Quaternary in upper Italy and Tuscany. Research and progress: quarterly review of German science 3:283-287.

obermaIer, h., and h. breuIl. 1927. Las pinturas rupestres de los alrededores de Tormón (Teruel). Boletín de la Academia de la Historia 90:511-531.

o’Connor, A. 2007.Finding time for the old Stone Age: a history of palaeolithic archaeology and quaternary geology in Britain, 1860-1960. oxford: oxford university Press.

obermaIer, h., and h. kühn. 1930. Buschmankunst aus SudwestAfrika. Leipzig: Pantheon Verlag fuer Kunstwissenschaft.

parentI, f., and I. sanso. 2011. Istituto Italiano Di Paleontologia umana.Cenno Storico. Paper given at the XLVI Riunione Scientiica dell’Istituto Italiano di Preistoria e Protostoria. 150 anni di Preistoria e Protostoria in Italia. Roma, 23-26 novembre 2011.

perIcot, l. 1941. [Review of] Alberto Carlo Blanc, nuove manifestazioni di arte paleolítica superiore nella Grotto Romanelli in terra d’otranto (Rendiconti delta classe di Scienze isiche, matematiche e nazurali, 1, Roma, 1940). Ampurias III:159-160.

—. 1945. [Review of] A. C. Blanc, nuove manifesfazioni di arte paleolítica superiore nella grotta Romanelli in Terra d’otranto (Roma. 1940). Archivo de Prehistoria Levantina II:434.

—. 1949. [Review of] Paolo Graziosi, Gli uomini paleolitici della Grotta di S. Teodoro (Mesina) (Riv. de Science Prehistoriche, II, Florencia, 1947). Ampurias XI:230.

perIcot, l., and m. almagro. 1949. [Review of] Fasti Archaeologici (Annual Bulletin of Classical Archeology, I, 1946, Florencia, 1948). Ampurias XI:238-240.

pIgorInI, l. 1904. La grotta Romanelli presso Castro in Terra d’otranto. Bullettino di Paletnologia Italiana XXX:145-155.

polItIs, g., and m. bonomo. 2011. nuevos datos sobre el “hombre fósil” de Ameghino. In J. c. fernIcola, a. r. prIeto, and d. g. lazo (eds.), Vida y obra de Florentino Ameghino: 101-119, Buenos Aires: Asociación Paleontológica Argentina (Publicación Especial 12).

porcar rIpolles, J. b., h. breuIl, and h. obermaIer. 1935. Excavaciones en Cueva Remigia (Castellón). Memorias 136. Madrid: Junta Superior del Tesoro Artístico.

rasIlla vIves, m. de la 1997. La Comisión de Investigaciones Paleontológicas y Prehistóricas y la Arqueología Prehistórica en España. In G. MoRA and M. DÍAZ-AnDREu (eds.), La cristalización del pasado. Génesis y desarrollo del marco institucional de la arqueología en España: 431-7, Madrid, Málaga: Ministerio de Cultura, universidad de Málaga

CNRS 8:http://histoire-cnrs.revues.org/document550.html?format=print.

—. 2005. La decouverte de l’homme fossile de la Chapelle-aux-Saints (1908). Practiques de Terraine, debats et representations des neandertaliens. Organon (Institute for the History of Science of the Polish Academy of Sciences) 34:97-118.

—. 2011. L’abbé Breuil. Un préhistorien dans le siècle. Paris: CnRS Éditions.

InIzan, c. 2011. L’institut océanographique de Paris. In Situ 17:digital.

Jae. JAE. Memorias.kIng, d. e. 2006. Transnationalism. In H. J. BIRX (ed.).

Encyclopedia of Anthropology: 2220-1, London: Sage.kohl, p. l., and c. fawcett. eds., 1995. Nationalism,

Politics, and the Practice of Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge university Press.

lanzarote guIral, J. m. 2011. La stratigraphie d’une vide consacrée à la préhistoire. Hugo obermaier, sa chaire et les fouilles du Castillo. In H. de LuMLEY and A. HuREL (eds.), Cents ans de Préhistoire. L’Institut de Paléontologie Humaine: 65-82, Paris: CnRS éditions.

lumley, h. de 2011. Les collections scientiiques de l’Institut de paléontologie humaine. In H. de LuMLEY and A. HuREL (eds.), Cents ans de Préhistoire. L’Institut de Paléontologie Humaine: 121-125, Paris: CnRS éditions.

madarIaga de la campa, b. 1996. Hugo obermaier en el contexto de la Prehistoria cántabra: una valoración de Altamira. In A. Moure Romanillo (ed.). ‘El hombre fósil’ 80 años después: 51-78, Santander: universidad de Cantabria, Fundación Marcelino Botín, Institute for Prehistoric Investigations.

mantegazza, p., and e. regalIa. 1886. Studio sopra una serie di crani di Fuegini. Archivio per l’Anrropologia e la Etnologia XVI:463-51.

mapm. 2013. un musée, une histoire [Musée d’Anthropologie préhistorique de Monaco. Fondé par le Prince Albert Ier]. http://www.monaco-sciences.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=89&Itemid=109

márquez uría, c. 1996. obermaier y el Conde de la Vega del Sella. El paradigma cientíico. In a. moure romanIllo (ed.). ‘El hombre fósil’ 80 años después: 79-98, Santander: universidad de Cantabria, Fundación Marcelino Botín, Institute for Prehistoric Investigations.

—. 1988. El Conde de la Vega del Sella (1870-1941) y la Comisión de Investigaciones Paleontológicas y Prehistóricas. In J. M. Sánchez Ron (ed.). 1907-1987. La Junta para Ampliación de Estudios e Investigaciones Cientíicas ochenta años después II: 485-500, Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientíicas.

meskell, l. ed. 1998. Archaeology under ire. Nationalism, politics and heritage in the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East. London: Routledge.

mochI, a. 1910. Appunti sulla Paleoantropologia argentina. Archivio per l´Antropologia e la Etnologia 40:203-254.

mochI, a., and l. cardInI. 1928. Atti della I Riunione dell’Istituto Italiano di Pa¬leontologia umana, 21-24


Internationale Quartarvereinigung, etc). Loess Letter 65:1-23.

smIth, p. J. 2009. A Splendid Idiosyncrasy: Prehistory at Cambridge 1915-50. British Archaeological Reports 485 oxford: Archaeopress.

stasI, p. e., and e. regalIa. 1904. Grotta Romanelli (Castro, Terra d’otranto) stazione con faune interglaciali calda e di steppa. Archivio per l’Antropologia e la Etnologia XXXIV:17-81.

tarantInI, m. 1998-2000. Tradizioni e tensioni disciplinari nell’archeologia prehistorica italiana tra ottocento e novecento. Origini XXII:7-43.

tarantInI, m., and f. parentI. 2011. L’origine de l’Institut Italien de Paléontologie Humaine: science, institutions et relations internationales (1911-1936). In H. de LuMLEY and A. HuREL (eds.), Cent ans de préhistoire. L’Institut de Paléontologie Humaine: 141-151, Paris: CnRS.

vaufrey, r. 1928. Le Paléolithique italien. Archives de l’Institut de Paléontologie Humaine 3. Paris: Institut de Paléntologie Humaine.

—. 1929. Les Eléphants nains des iles méditerranéennes. Paris: Institut de Paléntologie Humaine.

—. 1937. David Costantini [1875-1936]. L’Anthropologie 47:181-182.

vIlleneuve, l. de, m. boule, r. verneau, and é. cartaIlhac. 1906-1919. Les grottes de Grimaldi. Monaco: Imprimerie de Monaco.

woodbury, r. b., and n. f. s. woodbury. 1999. The Rise and Fall of the Bureau of American Ethnology. Journal of the Southwest 41:283-296.

regalIa, e., and p. e. stasI. 1905. Grotta Romanelli. Seconda nota. Due risposte ad una critica. Archivio per l’Antropologia e la Etnologia XXXV:113-172.

reImond, g. 2012. Preservar «le génie de chaque siècle». Estado y patrimonio nacional en Francia y en España en el siglo XIX. In C. Papí Rodes, G. Mora, And M. Ayarzagüena (eds.), El patrimonio arqueológico en España en el siglo XIX. El impacto de las desamortizaciones: 322-349, Madrid: Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte.

rIchard, n. 1999. Marcellin Boule. In T. MuRRAY (ed.). Encyclopedia of Archaeology. The Great Archaeologists. vol 1: 263-273, Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIo.

rIpoll perelló, e. 2002. Abate H. Breuil. Antología de textos. Madrid: universidad nacional de Educación a Distancia.

sánchez ron, J. m. 1988. La Junta para Ampliación de Estudios e Investigaciones Cientíicas ochenta años después. In J. M. SÁnCHEZ Ron (ed.). 1907-1987. La Junta para Ampliación de Estudios e Investigaciones Cientíicas ochenta años después vol. I: 1-61, Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientíicas.

schnapp, a. 1980. Archéologie et nazisme (II). Quaderni di Storia 11:19-33.

sIlberman, n. a. 1989. Between past and present: archaeology, ideology and nationalism in the modern Middle East. new York: Henry Holt and Company.

smalley, I. 2011. notes for a History of InQuA- the International union for Quaternary Research (Association pour l’etude du Quaternaire,

12

m. díaz-andreu178

Documents

Diaz-Andreu M 2014 -Transnationalism and Archaeology-libre