BOOK REVIEWS

ously simplistic historicist treatment of the Making sense of the past relationship between recent historical events, such as the dropping of the atom bomb or the Vietnam war, and the arch­ aeological thought of the time. That the A History of Archaeological Thought. By Bruce G. Trigger. Cambridge University Press: Zeitgeist should influence writers and 1990. Pp. 500.£37.50, $59.50. thinkers comes as no surprise, and Trigger's comments on the outlook and THE late Glyn Daniel was the first to more than 1 ,300 titles. social milieu of individuals, such as Sir realize that the really .important advances Not surprisingly, Trigger's new book Arthur Evans, are perhaps reasonable in were not the great dis­ reflects in large measure the preoccupa­ enough. But time and again snap judge­ coveries, the spectacular excavations or tions of his earlier writings. Gordon ments about the spirit of the time are used the gold of the pharaohs. The real task of Childe is given pride of place among to 'explain' dominant trends in archaeolo­ archaeology is not the unearthing of relics, archaeological thinkers, reflecting the gical thought. For instance (page 289): although that too has its place, but the interests developed in Trigger's Gordon "The nco-evolutionism that developed in undertaking of making sense of the past. Childe: Revolutions in Archaeology the United States in the 1960s was yet This view was already implicit in his A (Thames and Hudson, 1980). I would cer­ another attempt by anthropologists living Hundred Years of Archaeology (Duck­ tainly not quarrel with that assessment, in a politically dominant country to 'natur­ worth, London, 1950), the first, and until and the discussion of Childe here (as well alize' their situation by demonstrating it to now the only satisfactory history of the as that of Grahame Clark) is particularly be the inevitable outcome of an evolution­ subject. It found its most coherent satisfying. Less satisfying in my own ary process ... "; or (page 323): "While the expression in his The Idea of evaluation is the bias already evident in his origin of ideas has no necessary bearing on (Watts, London, 1962), which remains the Time and Tradition: Essays in Archaeolo­ whether or not they are correct, it is fairly most coherent and attractive introduction gical Interpretation (Edinburgh University obvious that the high-level evolutionary to archaeology-as-thought rather than Press, 1978), where Trigger contrasted the theories that guided the interpretation of archaeology-as-dug. "nomothetic" tendencies, which he saw as archaeological evidence in the 1970s It is the great merit of Bruce Trigger's A characteristic of the new archaeology, reflected a serious and prolonged eco­ History of Archaeological Thought that it with the "idiographic" approach of the nomic, political and social crisis in which builds on the perception of Daniel that the historical tradition. the interests of the dominant middle true is the history This dichotomy underlies Trigger's classes were perceived as deeply of ideas, using and reflecting the great treatment of the archaeological thinking threatened." This seems to me pure self-awareness in matters of theory and of the past 25 years. He is critical of the claptrap. For one who would eschew the method which came to the subject with the constellation of ideas which he identifies generalizing approaches of processual arch­ emergence of the 'new archaeology' by linking the 'positivist' aspects of the aeology, Trigger seems remarkably ready around the time that the first edition of new archaeology with what he regards as to generalize about these highly nebulous The Idea of Prehistory was published. Of the 'nco-evolutionism' of US writers in linkages. As hypotheses they might be course the new archaeology ensures that it recent years. He does not respond by worth investigating (if one could devise a remains a materialist discipline. But with embracing wholeheartedly the position strategy for doing so): as a serious com­ its inception came what the late David of the self-proclaimed "post-processual" mentary on recent archaeological thought Clarke aptly termed ''the loss of inno­ school which has grown up in opposition they appear to me of a superficiality which cence", and innocence once lost can never to the processual outlook of the new arch­ contrasts markedly with the careful and be regained. aeology, for he sees the dangers inherent scholarly treatment of the book as a Trigger's volume has several merits in the extreme relativist position which whole. There are many such examples of which establish it without question as the they have not been able to avoid. But it is this politico-philosophical historicism. only adequate successor to date to not quite clear what he sees as an appro­ But the reader (and perhaps the author, in Daniel's A Hundred Years of Archae­ priate alternative. His approach is clearly a second edition) can readily discount ology. In the first place, Trigger is well a particularist one, but he seems dimly them. They may be an irritation, but they read in the archaeology of Europe as well aware that explanation usually entails do not seriously damage what is in most as of North America. He is well aware that some elements of generalization. For me other ways a major and frequently very the upsurge of archaeological theory in this is the weakness in Trigger's position, satisfying contribution to the field. the United States over the past 25 years and it is one which colours his entire This is the only good and up-to-date does not automatically establish North approach, making him (in my view) history of archaeology now available, and America as the only place where interest­ undervalue the originality and the lasting a worthy successor to those mentioned ing theoretical developments are taking value of the contributions made by Lewis earlier. The author has succeeded admir­ place, or even the most important. He Binford and some of his colleagues. Of ably in accomplishing what is almost a does not suffer from that intellectual course Trigger does not dismiss these - world survey, presenting a wide variety of myopia which afflicts in this respect so many his intention is to offer a balanced view, ideas both lucidly and accurately. It is a of his North American colleagues. This is and many of his criticisms are reasonable work which all thinking archaeologists will the first book which sets out to review the ones. But generalization gets a bad press wish to have on their shelves. theoretical developments of our time in a in this book, frequently being lumped Colin Renfrew is Director of the McDonald manner beyond the parochial. Indeed he together with the supposed excesses of Institute for Archaeological Research and Dis• makes a real effort here - perhaps not 'nco-evolutionist' thought, whose signifi­ ney Professor of Archaeology in the University entirely successful - to go beyond the cance for US archaeology he considerably of Cambridge, Downing St. Cambridge CB2 confines of the English-speaking world: exaggerates. The breadth of Trigger's 3DZ, UK. there is a serious attempt to bring Soviet reading, and the catholicity - pluralism almost - of his position means that this • Cambridge University Press has recently archaeology into the discussion, as well published The Archaeology of Human Origins, as that of Japan, Africa, New Zealand bias does not fatally damage his argument. a collection of the most important and influen• and Australia. The work is up-to-date But as a critique of current positions it is tial papers written by the late Glyn Isaac. (to 1986 or 1987) and Trigger is exceed­ hardly a dispassionate treatment. Edited by Isaac's wife and collaborator Bar• ingly well read: the bibliography contains More obviously irritating is the curi- bara Isaac, price is £37.50, $59.50. NATURE · VOL 345 · 28 JUNE 1990 777 © 1990 Nature Publishing Group