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.