W&M ScholarWorks
Arts & Sciences Articles Arts and Sciences
2016
Transatlantic Currents: Exploring the Past, Present, and Future of Global Historical Archaeology
Audrey Horning Queens Univ Belfast, Sch Geog Archaeol & Palaeoecol, Belfast BT7 1NN, Antrim, North Ireland;
Audrey Horning Coll William & Mary, Dept Anthropol, Williamsburg, VA 23185 USA
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/aspubs
Recommended Citation Horning, A. (2016). Transatlantic Currents: Exploring the Past, Present, and Future of Global Historical Archaeology. Historical Archaeology, 50(3), 111-126.
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Arts and Sciences at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Arts & Sciences Articles by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 111
Audrey Horning relevant. Rather than exporting some version of North American–style historical archaeol- Transatlantic Currents: ogy around the globe, I would prefer to see a future for the discipline in which the practices Exploring the Past, Present, outside North America are not only taken into and Future of Global Historical consideration by the historic disciplinary core, but, in fact, can begin to drive innovation Archaeology and develop global synergies. The principal arena for such emergent synergies centers on ABSTRACT politics, engagement, and social justice, par- ticularly in postcolonial contexts. The past, present, and future of global historical archaeol- $ Before addressing these current and future development of the discipline in North America and the directions, it is useful to review and consider British Isles, and second by a consideration of the recent commonalities and divergences in transatlantic expansion of interest around the world and particularly in approaches to historical archaeology in the postcolonial contexts. Drawing from a range of global case $ ? studies, it is argued that the most productive way forward for the discipline lies in its ability to engage productively and the British Isles. As such, this article with contemporary societal problems and global challenges inevitably draws heavily from Anglophone in locally rooted and contingent ways. historical archaeology. My principal aim is to capitalize upon my own transatlantic career Introduction to reflect upon the different trajectories of research into the material legacies of the last ? - 500 or so years, with a particular emphasis ogy was unashamedly dominated by North upon the development and character of Irish American concerns and voices, which occa- historical archaeology. I set out suggestions sionally resulted in the muting and eliding for the future in terms of broader lessons that of disparate global experiences. Increasingly, might be learned from the regional traditions, and positively, scholars around the world and and then, secondly, I consider key themes outside the North American tradition have for the future, drawing on the expansion of begun to engage with and direct practices in historical archaeological research outside the and of historical archaeology. In considering Anglophone world. While I highlight a series the future of the discipline, a key question is of global projects as exemplars of newly whether there is, or whether there should be, emergent practice, the discussion is far from any unity in practice, focus, and framework. an exhaustive summary. Instead, I focus pri- Having spent my career, thus far, practicing marily upon the manner in which historical historical archaeology on both sides of the archaeology can and is engaging with soci- ? etal problems and global challenges, albeit in in practice between those regions, I have locally rooted and contingent ways. come to value diversity over unity. There is From my own perspective, one of the a richness to the many varieties of global more remarkable developments of the last 15 practice, with an astounding variety of con- years has been a massive increase in inter- texts, frameworks, questions, and interpreta- est in the archaeological study of the later tions. Greater attention to and respect for historical period in the United Kingdom and these variations constitutes, to me, the way in Ireland. Indeed, the development of later forward for historical archaeology, as does historical archaeology in Ireland, north and the increasing emphasis upon situating his- south, is nothing short of miraculous. Prior torical archaeology as politically engaged and to the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, which
Historical Archaeology, 2016, 50(3):111–126. Permission to reprint required. 112 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 50(3)
ushered in an uncertain, but, nonetheless, foster a wide variety of distinct research crucial period of reflection as part of the questions and agendas, if at times also Northern Ireland peace process, any efforts to hampering pan-European engagement with consider the archaeology of the postmedieval historical archaeology. The diverse character period were liable to bring accusations of of the European Union itself, with its 28 partisanship—focusing only on the “archae- & ^ $$ $ ology of the English.” Given the timing of $ - its emergence, Irish historical archaeology is lenge (Brooks 2013:5). therefore exceptionally politically aware in - a manner that has not always been the case tance of addressing issues of continuity from in North American historical archaeology, the medieval to the modern. From a New where the archaeological study of colonial World perspective, 1492 may seem a conve- life is a long-accepted and venerable tradi- nient starting point for historical archaeology, tion. Aspects of North American historical coinciding as it does with what is considered archaeology certainly are politically engaged, a major historical rupture in the histories of $ many indigenous peoples and, by extension, archaeology that focuses upon a critique of of the Europeans who encountered them. capitalism, e.g., McGuire (2008) and Leone But, how important was this date and event (1999, 2005); archaeologies of the African from a European perspective? Can we really diaspora, e.g., Ogundiran and Falola (2007); view the medieval period as one of tradition and the growing body of literature on the and stasis, awaiting transformation through historical archaeology of native communities, the mechanism of Atlantic expansion? Or, as e.g., Silliman (2009, 2014), Mrozowski et al. long argued by scholars like Frans Verhaeghe (2005), and Jordan (this issue). But, as I will (1997:28), that explore further below, contemporary Irish his- the medieval world equally went through numerous from its emergence at a time when public changes, some of them being quite fundamental such as the emergence of new urban societies, engagement and inclusive archaeologies are networks and cultures, and most if not all lead- widely practiced, encouraged, and theorized, ing to greater complexity in terms of society and allowing for a new archaeological praxis aligned with peace building and central to behavior. This constitutes yet another good reason to pay at least as much attention to what survived $ from the medieval period (and if possible why) as to what changed and why. Transatlantic Comparisons: The Development and Character Consideration of the complexity and dyna- of Historical Archaeology mism of late medieval Europe exposes the limitations of some of North American histori- Different theoretical influences have long cal archaeology’s most cherished models, the framed research in historical archaeology on most obvious of which being the Georgian both sides of the Atlantic. The distinctive worldview, which oversaw an apparent aban- geography and national histories of Europe, donment of medieval precepts and practices in the estimation of British archaeologist Paul presumed to be in operation as late as the Courtney (2009b:93), has shaped the character turn of the 18th century. of postmedieval archaeology: “[W]hat Pierre The anthropological character of North ' $- American historical archaeology is clearly ferent trans-Atlantic outlooks ... the patchwork one of its most distinctive strengths (Schuyler of distinctive European pays a few miles 1970, 1988), but this has inspired a tendency across contrasts with the vast distances of on the part of North Americans to believe many American regions ... a Europe full of that, by virtue of being anthropologists, they barriers ... not an ‘open’ frontier.” National are also, de facto, more theoretically sophis- boundaries and the distinctiveness of national ticated than their European counterparts, histories and European regional engagements who are more often trained in history or in AUDREY HORNING—Transatlantic Currents 113 archaeology as a stand-alone discipline. It tell the difference between creamware and cannot be denied that since the 1966 estab- pearlware, or how to identify and date a lishment of the Society for Post-Medieval transfer-print pattern and, more importantly, Archaeology, the discipline in the United how that knowledge can actually contribute to Kingdom, in particular, gained the reputa- data-rich, yet sophisticated, analyses of early tion of excellence in descriptive studies of modern production and consumption exempli- fied by the work of scholars like Alasdair far behind when it came to considering the ' & _^Z` meaning and significance of archaeologi- away from traditional material culture studies, ? $ historical archaeology in the British Isles has of postmedieval archaeology coalesced in increasingly begun to emphasize contemporary the 1990s, encapsulated by the theoretically archaeology: applying theoretical constructs informed work of Matthew Johnson (1996, to interpret the present day, and blurring the 1999:21), who, himself, overtly referenced disciplinary boundaries between archaeology, the “greater intellectual strength of North cultural geography, and cultural studies (Har- American historical archaeology” alongside rison 2011, this issue; Horning 2011). a collection of papers (Tarlow and West In compiling my thoughts for this article, I 1999) that showcased the work of a new $$ generation of self-described later historical past, present, and future of historical archae- archaeologists. When West (1999:1) wrote that ology that formed the core of an academic “post-medieval archaeology does not have a conference in 2008 and subsequent book (Horning and Palmer 2009). There the aim of data collection have not been illuminated was to tap into the diversity of approaches by questions centered on people,” she was and address critically the sense of fragmenta- expressing the frustrations of many on both tion that seemed to characterize practice on sides of the Atlantic with the traditional, data- $ ' driven approach of postmedieval archaeology. At the time, the relatively small community of However, this situation has now been scholars focusing on the material legacies of almost completely reversed, to the extent that the last 500 or so years appeared riven by fac- there is growing concern amongst profes- tionalism—separating into discrete groupings of sionals about the erosion of material culture postmedieval archaeologists, industrial archae- knowledge, exacerbated in recent years by ologists, and contemporary archaeologists—to $ & the overall detriment of the discipline. What Geoff Egan (1951–2010) and Paul Court- emerged from those conversations was a sense ney (1955–2013). This reversal in emphasis that differences were in many ways illusory. In $ short, approaches constantly change. American approaches, but also to the impact $ = Post-Medi- of the strength of post-processual approaches eval Archaeology YZ\¨ - to interpretation that characterize teaching logical scope of the society as “the period of in a number of UK higher-education institu- $ ' tions that have produced a new generation of the establishment of Britain upon the path of scholars willing and able to apply theoretical maritime colonial expansion and the initial frameworks to their studies. This welcome stages of industrial growth,” coinciding, in development, however, has also occurred at a America, with the period “extending from the $ Q increasingly compress and limit the time Declaration of Independence” (Butler 1967:1). and infrastructure required for the intensive in Britain employed a terminal date of ca. development of a professional archaeologist. 1750–1780. In the same inaugural issue, Ivor Most students are introduced to material 9 _YZ\¨Y` ? culture through concepts like materiality and historical archaeology as intended “to foster object agency, but few are taught how to the study of non-aboriginal archaeology in 114 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 50(3)
the western hemisphere,” and whose “sphere considering 18th- and 19th-century sites to of interest was limited by culture rather than be of potential archaeological value. Other P county archaeological surveys tend to stop Hume’s cultural exclusionism, just as postme- coverage before 1700, and, in some cases, dieval archaeology no longer employs a cut-off 1600. This attitude toward later historical MM $ sites can be directly attributed to the politics contemporary archaeology. $ What of the current contrast between North of the newly independent Republic of Ireland: ? ' % $- “From the outset the new state was very clear ferences do exist between the ways in which about the past it believed more appropriate to historical archaeologists on either side of the commemorate, or more properly, those pasts Atlantic select and approach evidence. For that it chose to ignore. This selective memory example, buildings archaeology is a well- was effectively enshrined in the Republic of established branch of postmedieval archae- Ireland’s National Monuments legislation, ology, and in some places is the dominant beginning with the Act of 1930, in which the branch (Hicks and Horning 2007). But in $ ?Y¨ $ North America, studies of standing buildings not to be of archaeological interest” (Rynne are still generally the province of architec- 2009:168). tural historians, not archaeologists. Similarly, The ongoing contestation over the values one might point to the varying incorporation placed upon particular heritages is underscored $ - by the revelation in 2011 that post-1700 sites cal archaeology. The study of postmedieval were quietly being removed from the Record faunal material is unfortunately exceptionally of Monuments and Places (McDonald 2011). rare outside of North America (Thomas 2009), Concerns from developers were cited, as while use of LiDAR (Light Detection and developments in the well-documented and Ranging) and large-scale survey to understand well-surveyed County Cork, for example, the evolution of historical landscapes (Dalg- might have to mitigate impacts on recorded lish 2009) is less common in North America, postmedieval sites, whereas in Donegal they understandably a factor of the immense dif- might not because the Archaeological Survey ferences in scale. of Donegal only recorded sites predating In North America, a major thread of 1600. The ubiquitous and appealing character research (albeit much of it compliance driven) of Ireland’s later historical built and mate- focuses on rural domestic sites, e.g., Cabak et $ al. (1999) and Wilson (1990). As acknowl- extant 18th- and 19th-century buildings and edged by Paul Courtney (2009b:97), however, streetscapes, paradoxically serves as a disin- the “below ground archaeology of everyday centive toward their study and preservation. agrarian life and society” is probably the That any associated archaeological deposits most archaeologically neglected topic in both $ Britain and Ireland. Legislative frameworks industrially produced material culture also matter as well, often lagging far behind aca- demic interest in particular site types. In the a system in which the state owns all archaeo- Republic of Ireland, for example, this lack logical objects and, as such, has a responsi- of attention to vernacular sites is further bility to curate and house the assemblages exacerbated by narrow readings of the law. derived from archaeological excavations. National Monuments legislation stipulates that sites predating 1700 are automatically Competing Frameworks: eligible for inclusion on the Record of Monu- Interpreting Historical Archaeology ments and Places, giving them some measure of protection, while a strong case has to be Far more important than the differences made to include later sites. The result has in sites investigated and even the variable been that later sites have been only sporadi- legislative frameworks guiding archaeologi- cally added, with only County Cork routinely cal investigation and interpretation are the AUDREY HORNING—Transatlantic Currents 115 questions posed of archaeological sites, which key practitioners, Jonas Nordin and Magdalena vary considerably on either side of the Atlan- Naum, a desire to challenge the prevailing tic and between countries and regions in the view that somehow “Scandinavian participa- British Isles and Europe. The importance of tion in colonial politics was benign and their considering colonialism is one such issue. interactions with the encountered peoples in Without doubt, colonialism is key to historical Africa, Asia and America were gentler and archaeology in lands that experienced inten- based on collaboration rather than extortion sive settler colonialism, as in the Americas and subjugation” (Naum and Nordin 2013:4). and Australasia, but recognition of both the The deconstruction of this dominant narra- operation of smaller-scale colonialism, as well tive is ongoing, via scholarship on Danish as the impact of the colonized on the colo- engagements in the Caribbean (Armstrong et nizer, is still not widely recognized or appre- al 2013), Africa (Weiss 2013), and in South ciated. Both Paul Courtney (2009a, 2009b, Asia (Jørgensen 2013); Swedish colonies in 2010) and Natascha Mehler (2013) have the New World (De Cunzo 2013) and the commented from a European standpoint about impact of indigenous American culture in the place of colonialism in European historical Sweden (Nordin 2013); and on the operation archaeology. In considering the general Brit- of colonialism within Scandinavia, e.g., the ish disinterest in employing colonialism as a displacement of Finns (Ekengren 2013) and framing device, Courtney (2009a:181) found a particularly the treatment of Sámi peoples by “collective amnesia and embarrassment about an expansive, capitalist, Swedish state (Fur colonialism. … Anyone over 60 was probably 2006; Ojala 2009; Lindmark 2013). brought up on the history and glories of the Scholars on the Iberian Peninsula are also British Empire. Anyone younger has prob- critically engaging with colonialism and its ably gone through their education without the barest mention of empire and colonialism.” In scholarship on colonialism emanating from Mehler’s estimation, continental Europeans are South America, which has fostered interest in even less likely to engage with colonialism: Spanish and Portuguese colonialism (Schável- “[T]he subjects of colonialism or immigration zon 2000, 2013; Funari and Senatore 2015), as a major component of globalization have as well as the longer history of exploration hardly been dealt with by non-British Euro- of Spanish colonialism in North America, pean archaeologists” (Mehler 2013:40). As an e.g., Deagan (1987, 2003). M. Dores Cruz American-trained historical archaeologist work- (2007) has written eloquently about the lasting ing in Ireland, colonialism is a central theme legacy of Portuguese colonialism within Por- of my own research (Horning 2013b), and it tugal through an analysis of school textbooks $ & $ during the Estado Novo period (1933–1974) Irish historical archaeologists, e.g., Lyttleton and Rynne (2009). But considerations of colo- upbringing at the time of decolonization. Por- nialism within Europe––even within a place tuguese colonization in Africa has also been like Ireland that experienced a form of colo- productively explored by Innocent Pikirayi nization––are inevitably different in content, (2009), while scholars within Portugal have form, and impact than are such considerations produced a series of foundational studies of in lands where indigenous populations were the Portuguese material culture that can be clearly displaced and dispossessed. found around the world (Gomes and Casimiro Irish historical archaeology is not alone 2013; Teixiera et al. 2015) and that directly within Europe in addressing colonialism. impact understandings of the Portuguese colo- There has been a recent explosion of stud- nial reach. ies throughout Scandinavia that are overtly Capitalism, and its impacts, remains a, addressing the colonial histories of nations if not the, key concern that drives much including Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Norway, research in North American historical archae- and Iceland. Central to this new concentration ology and whether it is, de facto, the archae- on exploring Scandinavian colonial histories ology of capitalism, e.g., Leone (1999), and legacies is, as summarized by two of its Matthews (2010), and Wurst and Mrozowski 116 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 50(3)
(this issue). At its most basic level, this narratives of domination and resistance have is undeniably true. When one looks at the attracted fierce criticism (Orser 2011:539). archaeology of the last 500 years, anywhere Regardless of the specific role played by on the planet capitalism has been and con- capitalism in shaping local societies around the tinues to be influential. Indeed, many of globe, for me a point of congruence amongst the studies I referenced above in relation to practitioners lies in a genuine concern over the regional traditions of historical archaeology continuing operation of inequality and oppres- also acknowledge global interconnectedness in sion that can be linked in one way or another terms of the movement of goods. Differences with the emergence of the modern world and and tensions arise when considering issues of the variable operation of the forces of capital- scale, and the extent to which an overempha- ism, colonialism, and globalization. sis on capitalism as an all-pervading force can mask real regional differences and oversim- The Past in the Present: plify past human experiences (Croucher and An Emerging Praxis Weiss 2011). In a South American example, Brooks and Rodriguez Y (2012:85) overtly Turning attention to such issues of inequal- address this tension between considering ity and injustice, for me the most intel- Venezuelan historical archaeology from a lectually exciting avenues in later historical global perspective and considering its local archaeology at present are the increasingly sophisticated ways in which scholars are attribute of Venezuelan historical archaeology; attempting to address contemporary issues “being simultaneously part of the West and through the study of the past by engaging its periphery, between engagement with and communities beyond the academic and pro- separation from global trade, between cos- fessional worlds. Here I want to distinguish mopolitanism and local context, are a natural between versions of community archaeology part of South American historical archaeol- that capitalize on volunteer labor and commu- ogy.” Similarly, Pedro Funari (1997, 1999, nity funding to perform otherwise traditional 2007; Funari and Ferreira, this issue) has archaeological projects and those much more argued against the North American focus on difficult, and rare, projects that prioritize capitalism by stressing the continued operation inclusivity and coproduction (Horning 2013c; $ V Schmidt 2014b). How we move from one feudal European practices in Brazil. model to the other is not straightforward, but Returning to Europe, Mark Pluciennik, doing so carries the potential for precipitating Antoon Mientjes, and Enrico Giannitrapani genuine social change. Shifting from tradi- have considered the character of the capitalist tional top-down models of public archaeology engagements in 19th- and early-20th-century into collaborative practice effectively requires rural Sicily. In examining the landscapes and philosophical reskilling. Advocacy and inclu- material culture predominantly associated with sivity necessitate a lessening of control and the landless, agricultural poor, they eschew a a conscious (not tacit) acknowledgment that straight narrative of domination and resistance, one is making a choice in how to interpret to instead explore the operation of aspiration and approach the past. Doing so without com- within their study population. In their estima- promising or abandoning concomitant ethical tion, this focus “ascribes to rural workers and responsibilities to the dead and the actualities their culture their own dynamics and agency, $ $ rather than characterizing them only through Less philosophically challenging, but perhaps reactions to the powerful, although it was of greater importance to collaborators is the clearly an unequal situation” (Pluciennik et al. reality that, often, it is the process of com- 2004:29). Arguments over the exact role of munity archaeology that matters more than capitalism unfortunately can and do become the outcome. acrimonious, and efforts to challenge and com- The real risk here, and one that I have plicate monolithic constructions of capitalism agonized over throughout my career, is that through moving away from straightforward in relinquishing control and in prioritizing AUDREY HORNING—Transatlantic Currents 117 the present over the past we archaeologists associated with the 30 years of the period simply construct useable pasts: narratives that known as the Troubles (1969–1998) have are explicitly formulated to serve a contem- thankfully decreased, and society has become porary need. Balancing responsibilities to the “normalized,” security alerts still continue on a past and to the present is a deadly serious daily basis, and the risk of a return to violence endeavor, as useable pasts lie at the heart is ever present. The psychological impact of of nation and empire building and, in those $ $ V contexts, inevitably privilege the elite and, in traumatic stress disorder and elevated suicide a capitalist world, justify inequality. Focusing rates that have been directly attributed to the intentionally on the working class, or colonized $ _ ^Y^` - Other, is a common riposte to concerns over larly affecting members of my generation, who = - $ ures in opposition to dominant narratives. Ulti- the 1970s. Paradoxically, the structure of the mately, what is our purpose? Is it illuminating peace process itself impedes full integration past lives and analyzing the underpinning of of society, as it is founded upon a principle inequality, or is it possible to use archaeology of ensuring parity between the two communi- to challenge capitalist-driven inequality in the ties. Parity and mutual respect were and are present and, at the same time, do justice to the critical aspects of peacebuilding, but inevitably complexity of past experiences? reify difference, rendering efforts to explore An answer, if not necessarily the answer, lies and encourage commonalties over difference in pragmatic philosophy. Here I take inspira- extremely challenging, but all the more critical tion from the work of Stephen Mrozowski to building a truly peaceful society. Directly (2014:343), who advocates a pragmatic implicated in contemporary difference are the still-contested and unresolved histories of the to “explicitly identify the practical outcomes 16th and 17th centuries, when the English of their research” and recognize that “social Crown extended control through the mecha- science needs to be politically engaged.” Of nism of plantation, a colonial effort to supplant course, the aim of situating archaeology as the Gaelic Irish population that, despite intent, political engagement is neither necessarily did not succeed in this aim. The archaeological complementary with nor conducive to inclu- record of this period overtly complicates the sivity in archaeological practice. Yet, I believe accepted dichotomous narratives through high- the two are not incompatible, and that the lighting complexity and, particularly, extensive combination, with all of its inherent tensions evidence for shared practice and the reliance and contradictions, may in fact lead to more of plantation settlements upon the demographi- meaningful, deeper understandings and poten- cally dominant Irish population (Horning 2001, tially new praxis. To illustrate the potential of 2013b; Donnelly 2005; Breen 2012). such an approach, I offer up ongoing efforts Over the last decade, archaeological proj- to actively situate archaeological practice in ects focusing on the late 16th and early 17th Northern Ireland within the ongoing peace century have consciously begun incorporating process (Horning et al. 2015). community groups and schools in excavations, Contemporary Northern Ireland is a divided society. Its communities are principally drawn and the potential for shared discovery. Such from two main traditions, Catholic and Prot- immersive practice gives individuals the estant, who self-identify with, respectively, opportunity to physically engage with the pro- the Gaelic Irish and the British who came to cess of discovery and, importantly, the space Ireland as part of a series of colonial schemes to individually decide what the evidence actu- in the 17th century. Geographical segregation ally means. Indicative of the positive impact is the norm, only 8% of schoolchildren are of these efforts are comments from one of the educated in an integrated environment, and, in community groups involved, the Ballintoy and Belfast, over 80 so-called peace walls are still District Local Archaeological and Historical deployed to physically separate communities Society (2013): $ 118 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 50(3)
[T]he knowledge we gained of the complicated present and the past. A key outcome from the nature of the Plantation period challenged our Corrymeela perspective lies in just bringing previously held views. Members … from different people together and creating a space in backgrounds are now more willing to discuss the impact of the Plantation ... willing to reconsider which participants can feel free to express their own identities in light of what they have learnt themselves and listen to others with respect. through engaging with professional archaeologists. For my part, I simply hope for individuals to develop awareness that people in the past— From these comments, and others, it is the Irish and English and Scots, who, for clear that the physical engagement with the better or worse, were compelled to engage discovery process allows individuals to make with one another—had no foreknowledge up their own minds, in their own time, about of the present. The Troubles may seem an $ inevitable outcome of the Ulster Plantation a process to be controlled by heritage profes- from the perspective of the 21st century, but sionals, but it is one that archaeologists can “doing history backwards” is a reminder that, set into motion. from the vantage point of 1609 or 1611 or To date, we archaeologists have focused 1630, the events of the late 20th century were our efforts on those groups who tradition- far from inevitable. Of far greater concern ally would be open to explorations of the to the majority, of whatever identity, was past—local history groups and schools (Horn- negotiating the needs and realities of the day, ing 2013a, 2013c; Horning et al. 2015). The from the quotidian to the creative. success of these efforts, measured through As I have argued elsewhere (Horning 2006, testimonials, such as that cited above, has led 2014), the ambiguous character of Ireland’s us to develop a more challenging series of colonial experience, and the way that North- projects in conjunction with the Corrymeela ern Ireland’s even division between commu- Community, a shared-governance civil soci- nities that see themselves as the marginal- ety formed in 1965 with the aim of bring- ized Other—challenges blanket assumptions ing people from across the sectarian divide about Ireland’s current post-coloniality and together in safe and neutral surroundings. provides a space within which to complicate The steering group for the project, made up overly prescriptive understandings of colonial of trained Corrymeela facilitators, archaeolo- entanglements. As archaeologists begin to gists, and museum professionals, is generally engage with Ireland’s later historical archae- in agreement on the importance of engag- ology more willingly, whether as part of the $ inclusive practice outlined above or simply (including both ex-paramilitaries and survivors beginning to acknowledge that the material of Troubles-related violence) with the tangi- remains of the last 500 years have heritage bility of plantation period archaeology in an value, there is potential to both inform and effort to impact upon the present and future. engage with the archaeologies of other nations However, agreement on precisely how to do and places grappling with colonial legacies this, and, indeed, what the evidence might and postcolonial formulations, as considered actually have to contribute to peace building, below. is less straightforward, but has led to some very productive discussions. Exploring Global Practice Most important has been the evolution of the program itself. Together group members Historical archaeology is increasingly taking have drafted and signed on to a code of root around the world, but invariably these practice that participants agree to at the start efforts are entwined with contemporary of any program. In addition to being up political issues and power struggles. Very front about the program’s aim to connect an real differences in culture, regional histories, exploration of the past with peace building and especially engagements with the West all in the present, the contract is based upon combine to ensure distinctive practices and a series of principles that, in summary, trajectories. Calls for an overarching global prioritize respect for people both in the historical archaeology to replace narrow, local AUDREY HORNING—Transatlantic Currents 119 studies falter in the face of this diversity, collaborators who are daily suffering from underscoring one of Frederick Cooper’s the depredations of disease or poor water or criticisms of globalization as an analytic MM $ P category: “That global should be contrasted Pragmatism, as addressed above, becomes par- to local, even if the point is to analyze ticularly important in such circumstances and their mutual constitution, only underscores has led to the productive coupling of heritage the inadequacy of current analytical tools practice with economic sustainability; e.g., to analyze anything in between” (Cooper Breen (2014) and Breen and Rhodes (2010). 2005:93). Rather than the emergence of Within Europe, archaeological attention globalized historical archaeology, what is seen is increasingly being paid to 20th-century $ - very much contingent upon the local context tigations have been launched examining the of their emergence, but with the potential, battlefields and landscape associated with often demonstrated, to be translated and World War I in tandem with its centenary. transformed in other locales. For example, The Spanish Civil War (1936–1939) has over the last two decades, the practices commanded intensive investigations and and concerns of historical archaeology in no shortage of tension, given the highly Australia and in South Africa have been $ particularly influential on the discipline subsequent legacies of the Franco regime at large. The emergence and strength of (Gonzalez-Ruibal 2007). Similarly, and even indigenous rights and the leadership role taken more challenging, have been the efforts of by Aboriginal archaeologists and communities historical archaeologists to address the mate- has influenced the struggle for indigenous rial legacies of Nazism, and, in particular, the rights and control over heritage elsewhere, archaeology of concentration camps (Theune e.g., Fredriksen (2002), while the explicitly 2013, 2015). In Northern Ireland, archaeolo- critical archaeologies emerging from South gists are currently struggling with how best Africa––especially Schrire (1996) and Hall to commemorate the anniversaries, not just (2000)––have endeavored to re-center violence of World War I, but of the 1916 Easter in considerations of colonialism in places Rising, which ultimately led to partition of like North America, where the strength of the island. Until very recently, understandings the dominant nationalist narrative obscures of Irish engagement in the Great War were $ & $ grounded in sectarianism. The massive casu- inequality seemingly so much more apparent alties experienced by Ulster regiments at the in post-apartheid South Africa. Somme, which still impact family and com- Important lessons are being drawn from munity memories, gave support to a narrative historical archaeology elsewhere on the that only northern Protestants volunteered as African continent, taking place within a soldiers. Such a narrative allowed for the wide range of contemporary cultural settings convenient forgetting of a more complicated and addressing diverse histories. Efforts to history in which Catholics from north and decolonize African archaeology increasingly south also participated, notwithstanding armed and productively explore African construc- internal rebellion against British rule. In the tions of history and identity that often sit at post-Troubles period, it has become increas- odds with Western understandings of African ingly possible, if not straightforward, to also histories and cultures (Déme and Guéye 2007; begin to look at the material legacies of the Ogundiran 2007; Lane 2011, 2014; Schmidt Troubles, as productively explored by Laura 2014a, 2014b; Jopela and Fredriksen 2015). McAtackney (2014), and to combine these V - $$ $ - mation, as discussed earlier in this article. acknowledged by Peter Schmidt (2010:270), Moving back away from Ireland and from given the “deep-seated tension between our Europe, in the discussion that follows, I want $ behavior as sentient humans with friends and where historical archaeology is developing 120 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 50(3)
in ways that hold the potential to shift in not being seen merely as producing the significantly the direction of the discipline archaeological knowledge sought by India’s as a whole. Clearly, research questions political elite. The reputation of the ASI was inevitably vary according to geographic clearly tarnished by its integral role in the locale, while, at the same time, the manner of Ayodhya controversy. knowledge making and dissemination is also At present, the rapid urbanization and heavily dependent upon cultural practice and development currently underway in India values, one example being the centrality of pose an immense threat, in particular, to the mentoring in academic writing, as presented built fabric and belowground archaeology by Devendra and Muthucumurama (2013) in of the last 500 years. There are encourag- their overview of maritime archaeology in Sri ing signs, however. Government funding has Lanka. Elsewhere in the Indian subcontinent, been made available to explore and support the shadow of empire continues to hang capacity building and sustainability, focusing over efforts to pursue historical archaeology. on urban heritage. Indian heritage legislation Historical archaeology, to put it simply, (unlike that of the Republic of Ireland) pro- is not an easy sell because it is de facto vides for any site or monument older than understood as the archaeology of empire and 100 years to be considered archaeological. the archaeology of oppression. Particularly Wider recognition of the heritage value of telling is the fact that, in a volume entitled later historical sites remains dependent upon Historical Archaeology of India (Dhavalikar acceptance of the notion that the material 1999) that describes itself as the only study legacies of the British Empire are relevant to “which covers all the aspects of historical the contemporary Indian population, insofar archaeology from ca. 1000BC to 1800AD,” the as it is their own ancestors whose lives were term “British” does not appear in the index lived and meaningfully constructed within the and in the text only in the context of the constraints and inequities of that empire. One formation of the archaeological survey of India, interesting (albeit very pragmatic) exception while the East India Company warrants only a to this general disinterest in colonial material single mention. Europe is referenced only in heritage lies in the preservation and presen- relation to the widespread climate downturn tation of the built heritage of Tranquebar in (the so-called Little Ice Age) and its probable south India, a Danish trading port from 1620 impacts in India (Dhavalikar 1999:119). to 1845. As explored by Helle Jørgensen The lack of interest in and consideration (2013), the dominant narrative of Scandi- of the archaeology of the period of British navian colonialism being somehow “kinder imperial domination of India comes as no and gentler” underpins touristic presentations real surprise, given India’s postcolonial of Tranquebar, geared predominantly toward status and the centrality of nationalism. Western (often Danish) visitors. Those visi- That the discipline of archaeology was tors provide a considerable economic boost “institutionalized in India by the colonial to the region. British rulers” (Selvakumar 2010:469) further Far more complicated even than pursuing complicates efforts to approach the colonial later historical archaeology in India are efforts period archaeology within the present-day to address the legacies of colonialism in East political and institutional structures. Those Asia, where, as discussed by Koji Mizoguchi structures do include government support for (2006; 2010), Japanese archaeologists, in par- archaeology via the venerable Archaeological ticular, have to deal not only with the lega- Survey of India (ASI), established under cies of Western colonialism in the region, but British rule in 1861, but recast after also the role of Japan as a colonizing force in independence as “simultaneously both a the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Para- post-colonial bureaucratic institution and an doxically, as he argues, scholarly reliance on organization that produces archaeological Marxist theoretical frameworks in interpreting knowledge” (Chadha 2010:231). The ASI the archaeology of earlier periods “allowed $ = Japanese people and Japanese archaeologists legacy of its own origins, but crucially also to insulate themselves and to forget their AUDREY HORNING—Transatlantic Currents 121
(or Japan’s) colonial activities in Korea and This research has much in common with China.” At present, the forces of globaliza- historical archaeology as it has developed tion and a movement away from reliance on in North America: a focus on the household Marxist models has created a situation where and on illuminating the lives of people who “Japanese archaeologists are struggling to rec- are poorly documented. But, no matter how ognize, self-examine, and amend colonial leg- empirically grounded in the very material- $ ity of the household archaeologies of pre- nationalistic sentiments” (Mizoguchi 2010:89). earthquake Bam, the decision by Yazdi and Greater awareness of Japan’s ambiguous rela- Dezhamkhooy to undertake such a study must tionship with colonialism, as both a coloniz- be understood as a political action. In this ing force and non-Western “Other,” has the example, contemporary historical archaeology potential to significantly advance discourse poses an explicit threat to the sociopolitical over historical archaeologies of colonialism order of contemporary Iran by undermining elsewhere in the world. assumptions about compliance with legislated Similarly, the archaeology of the Ottoman behavior. Empire serves as another critical check on narrow understandings of colonialism (Baram Conclusion and Carroll 2000; Carroll 2010) framed by the influence of Western orientalism (Said Historical archaeology is now practiced, 1978). Notwithstanding the challenges posed in some form, in much of the world today. by present-day regional sociopolitics, interest But, what will it look like in the decades in the contemporary archaeology of some to come? What I hope is that the discipline parts of the Middle East is beginning to will continue to embed itself in a range of intersect with social critiques. For example, forms around the globe, and I particularly a collaborative Iranian-British project (Young hope that practitioners based in the historic and Fazzeli 2013) has recently employed cores of the discipline, North America and archaeological and ethnographic research into the British Isles, become more open to and landlord villages (enclosed settlements that engaged with alternative formulations for the were abandoned during the White Revolution study of the last 500 years. Fundamentally of the 1970s) to address issues of gender and the recent past matters, as is abundantly clear class. Such critical attention to inequality in from the contested nature of the period and of the recent past carries a more-than-implicit the evidence in so many parts of the world. critique of the present. Without doubt, my view on the value of Even more immediate (and risky) in its historical archaeology is shaped by my own implications is the thoughtful analysis by contingent practice living and working in a Iranian archaeologists Maryam Dezhamkhooy V and Leila Papoli Yazdi (2010) of the ruins of the houses destroyed in the 2003 Bam $ earthquake and the personal narratives of and my understanding of the role of the past their inhabitants. Building on this research, in the present. I have found archaeology to Yazdi (2010:44) also considered the material be, perhaps surprisingly, not just relevant to evidence for household behavior in light of the present, but, at times, positively trans- the extreme divide between the public and the formative. A willingness to acknowledge this private self in Iran. She notes that power and potential, be it complicating post- colonial constructions of nationhood in Ireland Iranians carefully conceal aspects of their lives or India, challenging gender discrimination that must be hidden as they are contrary to both in Iran, or combating poverty and inequality tradition and the law. The public appearance of these aspects of life can have dangerous results. … in the United States, will provide a valu- These practices of concealment result in paradoxical able point of convergence for an increasingly behavioral patterns between how people act inside diverse and dynamic discipline. their homes and how they act outside their homes. As with most aspects of human behavior, these patterns leave signs and markers in material culture. 122 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 50(3)
Acknowledgments BROOKS, ALASDAIR 2009 The View from Afar: International Perspectives I wish to thank Chris Matthews for the on the Analysis of Post-1750 Ceramics in Britain and Ireland. In Crossing Paths or Sharing Tracks: invitation to contribute to this special issue, Future Directions in the Archaeological Study of and especially for his patience and editorial Post-1550 Britain and Ireland, Audrey Horning guidance. Nick Brannon, Colin Breen, Alas- and Marilyn Palmer, editors, pp. 287–300. Boydell dair Brooks, Stephen Mrozowski, and Ruth & Brewer, Woodbridge, UK. Young contributed measurably to my under- 2013 The World Is What It Is: The Role of Subjectivity and Personal Experience in Global Historical standing of the issues raised in this paper Archaeologies. Historical Archaeology 47(1):1–9. through graciously sharing their knowledge, insights, and research materials. I am grateful BROOKS, ALASDAIR, AND ANA CHRISTINA RODRIGUEZ Y to Chris Matthews, Matthew Johnson, Lynette 2012 A Venezuelan Household Clearance Assemblage Russell, and Alfredo González-Ruibal for their of 19th Century British Ceramics in International Perspective. Post-Medieval Archaeology helpful comments on the original version of 46(1):70–88. this article. Finally, I wish to acknowledge a considerable debt to my late colleague Paul BUTLER, LAWRENCE A. S. Courtney, whose understanding of European 1967 Editorial. Post-Medieval Archaeology 1:1–2. historical archaeology was as unrivalled as CABAK, MELANIE, MARK GROOVER, AND MARY INKROT was his generosity in sharing that knowledge. 1999 Rural Modernization during the Recent Past: Farmstead Archaeology in the Aiken Plateau. References Historical Archaeology 33(4):19–43.
CARROLL, LINDA ARMSTRONG, DOUGLAS V., CHRISTIAN WILLIAMSON, AND ALAN D. ARMSTRONG 2010 Building Farmsteads in the Desert: Capitalism, Colonialism, and the Transformation of Rural 2013 Networked Interaction: Archaeological Exploration Landscapes in Late Ottoman Period Transjordan. In of Walled and Terraced House Compounds in the The Archaeology of Capitalism in Colonial Contexts, Danish Colonial Port Town of Charlotte Amalie, St. Sarah Croucher and Lindsay Weiss, editors, pp. Thomas. In Scandinavian Colonialism and the Rise 105–120. Springer, New York, NY. of Modernity, M. Naum and J. M. Nordin, editors,
pp. 275–296. Springer, New York, NY. CHADHA, ASHISH
BALLINTOY AND DISTRICT LOCAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND 2010 The Archaeological Survey of India and the Science HISTORICAL SOCIETY of Postcolonial Archaeology. In Handbook of 2013 Letter to Audrey Horning, 26 August. Manuscript, Postcolonial Archaeology, Jane Lydon and Uzma School of Geography, Archaeology and Rizvi, editors, pp. 227–234. Springer, New York, Palaeoecology, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, NY. UK. COOPER, FREDERICK
BARAM, UZI, AND LYNDA CARROLL (EDITORS) 2005 Colonialism in Question: Theory, Knowledge, 2000 A Historical Archaeology of the Ottoman Empire: History. University of California Press, Berkeley. Breaking New Ground. Plenum/Kluwer Academic COURTNEY, PAUL Press, New York, NY. 2009a The Current State and Future Prospects of Theory BREEN, COLIN in European Post-Medieval Archaeology. In 2012 Randal MacDonnell and Early Seventeenth-Century International Handbook of Historical Archaeology, Settlement in Northeast Ulster, 1603–30. In The Teresita Majewski and David Gaimster, editors, pp. Plantation of Ulster: Ideology and Practice, M. O 169–189. Springer, New York, NY. Siochru and E. O Ciardha, editors, pp. 143–147. 2009b Post-Medieval Archaeology: A Personal Perspective. Manchester University Press, Manchester, UK. In Crossing Paths or Sharing Tracks: Future 2014 World Heritage Sites, Culture and Sustainable Directions in the Archaeological Study of Post-1550 Communities in Africa. In Management of Cultural Britain and Ireland, Audrey Horning and Marilyn World Heritage Sites and Development in Africa, Palmer, editors, pp. 91–100. Boydell & Brewer, pp. 83–92. Springer, New York, NY. Woodbridge, UK. 2010 Social Theory and Post-Medieval Archaeology: A BREEN, COLIN, AND DANIEL RHODES Historical Perspective. In Exchanging Medieval 2010 Archaeology and International Development in Material Culture: Studies on Archaeology and History Africa. Duckworth Academic Press, London, UK. Presented to Frans Verhaeghe, Koen De Groote, Dries Tys, and Marnix Pieters, editors, pp. 317–346. Flemish Heritage Institute, Brussels, Belgium. AUDREY HORNING—Transatlantic Currents 123
CROUCHER, SARAH, AND LINDSAY WEISS EKENGREN, FREDERIK 2011 The Archaeology of Capitalism in Colonial 2013 Materialities on the Move: Identity and Material Contexts, an Introduction: Provincializing Historical Culture among the Forest Finns in Seventeenth- Archaeology. In The Archaeology of Capitalism Century Sweden and America. In Scandinavian in Colonial Contexts: Postcolonial Historical Colonialism and the Rise of Modernity, M. Naum Archaeologies, Sarah Croucher and Lindsay Weiss, and J. M. Nordin, editors, pp. 147–165. Springer, editors, pp. 1–38. Springer, New York, NY. New York, NY.
CRUZ, M. DORES FREDRIKSEN, CLAYTON 2007 Portugal Gigante: Nationalism, Motherland, and 2002 Caring for History: Tiwi and Archaeological Colonial Encounters in Portuguese Textbooks. Narratives of Fort Dundas/Punata, Melville Island, Giolânia 5(2):395–422. Australia. World Archaeology 34(2):288–302.
DALGLISH, CHRIS FUNARI, PEDRO PAOLO 2009 Understanding Landscape: Interdisciplinary 1997 Archaeology, History and Historical Archaeology in Dialogue and the Post-Medieval Countryside. South America. International Journal of Historical In Crossing Paths or Sharing Tracks: Future Archaeology 3(1):189–206. Directions in the Archaeological Study of Post-1550 1999 Historical Archaeology from a World Perspective. Britain and Ireland, Audrey Horning and Marilyn In Historical Archaeology: Back from the Edge, Palmer, editors, pp. 233–256. Boydell & Brewer, Pedro Paolo Funari, Martin Hall, and Siân Jones, Woodbridge, UK. editors, pp. 37–66. Routledge, London, UK. 2007 A Report on Historical Archaeology Publications in DEAGAN, KATHLEEN Latin America. International Journal of Historical 1987 Artifacts of the Spanish Colonies of Florida and Archaeology 11(2):183–191. the Caribbean, 1500–1800. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC. FUNARI, PEDRO PAOLO, AND MARIA XIMENA SENATORE 2003 Transformation of Empire: The Spanish Colonial (EDITORS) Project in America. Historical Archaeology 2015 Archaeology of Culture Contact and Colonialism 37(4):3–13. in Spanish and Portuguese America. Springer, New York, NY. DE CUNZO, LU ANN 2013 Borderland in the Middle: The Delaware Colony on FUR, GÜNLOG the Atlantic Coast. In Scandinavian Colonialism and 2006 Colonialism in the Margins: Cultural Encounters the Rise of Modernity, M. Naum and J. M. Nordin, in New Sweden and Lapland. Brill, Leiden, the editors, pp. 189–208. Springer, New York, NY. Netherlands.
DÉME, ALIOUNE, AND NDÉYE GUÉYE GOMES, ROSA VARELA, AND TÂNIA CASIMIRO 2007 Enslavement in the Middle Senegal Valley: 2013 Post-Medieval Archaeology in Portugal. Post- Historical and Archaeological Perspectives. In Medieval Archaeology 47(1):17–34. The Archaeology of Atlantic Africa, Akinwumi Ogundiran and Toyin Falola, editors, pp. 122–139. GONZÁLEZ-RUIBAL, ALFREDO Indiana University Press, Bloomington. 2007 Making Things Public: Archaeologies of the Spanish Civil War. Public Archaeology 6(4):203–226. DEVENDRA, SOMASIRI, AND RASIKA MUTHUCUMURANA 2013 Maritime Archaeology and Sri Lanka: Globalization, HALL, MARTIN Immigration and Transformation in the Underwater 2000 Archaeology of the Modern World: Colonial Archaeological Record. Historical Archaeology Transcripts in South Africa and the Chesapeake. 47(1):50–65. Routledge, London, UK.
DEZHAMKHOOY, MARYAM, AND LEILA PAOLI YAZDI HARRISON, RODNEY 2010 The Archaeology of Last Night ... What Happened 2011 Surface Assemblages: Towards an Archaeology in Bam (Iran) on 25–6 December 2003. World in and of the Present. Archaeological Dialogues Archaeology 42(3):341–354. 18(2):141–196.
DHAVALIKAR, MADHUKAR K. HICKS, DAN, AND AUDREY HORNING 1999 Historical Archaeology of India. Books and Books, 2007 Historical Archaeology and Buildings. In The New Delhi, India. Cambridge Companion to Historical Archaeology, Dan Hicks and Mary Beaudry, editors, pp. 273–292. DONNELLY, COLM Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. 2005 The I.H.S. Monogram as a Symbol of Catholic Resistance in 17th-Century Ireland. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 9(1):37–42. 124 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 50(3)
HORNING, AUDREY LANE, PAUL 2001 “Dwelling Houses in the Old Irish Barbarous 2011 Possibilities for a Postcolonial Archaeology in Manner”: Archaeological Evidence for Gaelic Sub-Saharan Africa: Indigenous and Usable Pasts. Architecture in an Ulster Plantation Village. In World Archaeology 43(1):7–25. Gaelic Ireland 1300–1650: Land, Lordship, and 2014 Being ‘Indigenous’ and Being ‘Colonized’ in Africa: Settlement, P. Duffy, D. Edwards, and E. FitzPatrick, Contrasting Experiences and Their Implications for editors, pp. 375–396. Four Courts Press, Dublin, a Postcolonial Archaeology. In Rethinking Colonial Ireland. Pasts through Archaeology, Neal Ferris, Rodney ^\ ? > > Harrison, and Michael V. Wilcox, editors, pp. in the North of Ireland: Implications for Theory 423–444. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. and Practice in Irish Historical Archaeology. Archaeological Dialogues 13(2):183–199. LEONE, MARK P. 2011 Compelling Futures and Ever-Present Pasts: 1999 Ceramics from Annapolis, Maryland: A Measure Realigning the Archaeology of Us. Archaeological of Time Routines and Work Discipline. Historical Dialogues 18(2):161–164. Archaeologies of Capitalism, Mark P. Leone and 2013a Exerting Influence? Responsibility and the Parker B. Potter, editors, pp. 195–216. Kluwer, Public Role of Archaeology in Divided Societies. New York, NY. Archaeological Dialogues 20(1):19–29. 2005 The Archaeology of Liberty in an American Capital. 2013b Ireland and Britain in the Atlantic World: University of California Press, Berkeley. Colonialism in the British Atlantic. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill. LINDMARK, DANIEL 2013c Politics, Publics and Professional Pragmatics: 2013 Colonial Encounters in Early Modern Sápmi. Re-Envisioning Archaeological Practice in Northern In Scandinavian Colonialism and the Rise of Ireland. In Archaeology, the Public and the Recent Modernity, M. Naum and J. M. Nordin, editors, Past, Chris Dalglish, editor, pp. 95–110. Society for pp. 131–146. Springer, New York, NY. Post-Medieval Archaeology Monograph 7. Boydell LYTTLETON, JAMES, AND COLIN RYNNE (EDITORS) & Brewer, Woodbridge, UK. 2014 Challenging Colonial Equations? The Gaelic 2009 Plantation Ireland. Four Courts Press, Dublin, Experience in Early Modern Ireland. In Rethinking Ireland. Colonial Pasts through Archaeology, Neal Ferris, MATTHEWS, CHRISTOPHER Rodney Harrison, and Michael V. Wilcox, editors, pp. 293–314. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. 2010 The Archaeology of American Capitalism. University of Florida Press, Gainesville. HORNING, AUDREY, COLIN BREEN, AND NICK BRANNON MCATACKNEY, LAURA 2015 From the Past to the Future: Integrating Archaeology and Conflict Resolution in Northern Ireland. 2014 An Archaeology of the Troubles. Oxford University Conservation and Management of Archaeological Press, Oxford, UK. Sites 17(1):5–21. MCDONALD, FRANK
HORNING, AUDREY, AND MARILYN PALMER (EDITORS) 2011 Archaeologists Warn against De-Listing of 2009 Crossing Paths or Sharing Tracks: Future Directions Post-1700 Historic Structures. Irish Times in the Archaeological Study of Post-1550 Britain
MROZOWSKI, STEPHEN A. RYNNE, COLIN 2014 Imagining an Archaeology of the Future: Capitalism 2009 Haulbowline Island, Cork Harbour, Ireland, c. and Colonialism Past and Present. International 1816–1832: A New Archaeological Perspective on Journal of Historical Archaeology 18(2):340–360. Ireland’s Coloniality. In Crossing Paths or Sharing Tracks: Future Directions in the Archaeological MROZOWSKI, STEPHEN A., HOLLY HERBSTER, DAVID Study of Post-1550 Britain and Ireland, Audrey BROWN, AND K. L. PRIDDY Horning and Marilyn Palmer, editors, pp. 167–178. 2005 Magunkaquog: Native American Conversion and Boydell & Brewer, Woodbridge, UK. Cultural Persistence. In Eighteenth Century Native Communities of Southern New England in Colonial SAID, EDWARD Context, J. Campsi, editor, pp. 57–71. Mashantucket 1978 Orientalism: Western Conceptions of the Orient. Museum and Research Center Occasional Paper 1. Pantheon, New York, NY. Mashantucket, CT. SCHÁVELZON, DANIEL NAUM, MAGDALENA, AND JONAS M. NORDIN 2000 The Historical Archaeology of Buenos Aires: A City 2013 Introduction: Situating Scandinavian Colonialism. at the End of the World. Kluwer, New York, NY. In Scandinavian Colonialism and the Rise of 2013 Argentina and Great Britain: Studying an Modernity, M. Naum and J. M. Nordin, editors, Asymmetrical Relationship through Domestic pp. 3–16. Springer, New York, NY. Material Culture. Historical Archaeology 47(1):10–25. NOËL HUME, IVOR 1967 Historical Archaeology in America. Post-Medieval SCHMIDT, PETER Archaeology 1:104–105. 2010 Social Memory and Trauma in Northwestern Tanzania: Organic, Spontaneous Community NORDIN, JONAS M. Collaboration. Journal of Social Archaeology 2013 The Centre of the World: The Material Construction 10(2):255–279. of Eurocentric Domination and Hybridity in a 2014a Deconstructing Archaeologies of African Scandinavian 17th-Century Context. Journal of Colonialism: Making and Unmaking the Subaltern. Material Culture 18(2):189–209. In Rethinking Colonial Pasts through Archaeology, Neal Ferris, Rodney Harrison, and Michael V. OGUNDIRAN, AKINWUMI, AND TOYIN FALOLA (EDITORS) Wilcox, editors, pp. 445–468. Oxford University 2007 Archaeologies of Atlantic Africa and the African Press, Oxford, UK. Diaspora. Indiana University Press, Bloomington. 2014b Rediscovering Community Archaeology in Africa and Reframing Its Practice. Journal of Community OJALA, CARL-GÖSTA Archaeology and Heritage 1(1):37–55. 2009 Sámi Prehistories: The Politics of Archaeology and Identity in Northernmost Europe. Doctoral SCHRIRE, CARMEL dissertation, Institute of Archaeology and Ancient 1996 Digging through Darkness: Chronicles of an History, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. Archaeologist. University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville. ORSER, CHARLES E., JR.
2011 The Archaeology of Poverty and the Poverty of SCHUYLER, ROBERT L. Archaeology. International Journal of Historical 1970 Historical and Historic Sites/Archaeology as Archaeology 15(4):533–543. ? ' Historical Archaeology 4:83–89. PIKIRAYI, INNOCENT 1988 Archaeological Remains, Documents, and 2009 Palaces, Feiras and Prazos: An Historical Anthropology: A Call for a New Culture History. Archaeological Perspective of African-Portuguese Historical Archaeology 22(1):36–42. Contact in Northern Zimbabwe. African Archaeologial Review 26(3):163–185. SELVAKUMAR, VEERASAMY 2010 The Use and Relevance of Archaeology in the PLUCIENNIK, MARK, ANTOON MIENTJES, AND ENRICO Post-Modern World: Views from India. World GIANNITRAPANI Archaeology 42(3):468–480. 2004 Archaeologies of Aspiration: Historical Archaeology in Rural Central Sicily. International Journal of SILLIMAN, STEPHEN Historical Archaeology 8(1):27–65. 2009 Change and Continuity, Memory and Practice: Native American Persistence in New England. American Antiquity 74(2):211–230. 126 HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 50(3)
2014 Archaeologies of Indigenous Survivance and VERHAEGHE, FRANS Resistance. In Rethinking Colonial Pasts through 1997 The Archaeology of Transition: A Continental Archaeology, Neal Ferris, Rodney Harrison, and View. In The Age of Transition: The Archaeology Michael V. Wilcox, editors, pp. 57–75. Oxford of English Culture 1400–1600, David Gaimster and University Press, Oxford, UK. Paul Stamper, editors, pp. 25–44. Oxbow, Oxford, UK. TARLOW, SARAH, AND SUSIE WEST (EDITORS) 1999 The Familiar Past? Archaeologies of Later WEISS, HOLGER Historical Britain. Routledge, London, UK. 2013 The Danish Gold Coast as Multinational and Entangled Space, c. 1700–1850. In Scandinavian TEIXIERA, ANDRÉ, JOANA BENTO TORRES, AND JOSÉ Colonialism and the Rise of Modernity, M. Naum BETTENCOURT and J. M. Nordin, editors, pp. 243–260. Springer, 2015 The Atlantic Expansion and Portuguese Material New York, NY. Culture in the Early Modern Age: An Archaeological Approach. In Archaeology of Culture Contact and WEST, SUSIE Colonialism in Spanish and Portuguese America, 1999 Introduction. In The Familiar Past? Archaeologies Pedro Paulo Funari and Maria Ximena Senatore, of Later Historical Britain, Sarah Tarlow and Susie editors, pp. 19–38. Springer, New York, NY. West, editors, pp. 1–16. Routledge, London, UK.
THEUNE, CLAUDIA WILSON, JOHN S. 2013 Archaeology and Remembrance: The Contemporary 1990 We’ve Got Thousands of These: What Makes Archaeology of Concentration Camps, Prisoner-of- 9 % Historical > ' The Archaeology Archaeology 24(2):23–33. of Central Europe, Natascha Mehler, editor, pp. 241–260. Society for Historical Archaeology, YAZDI, LEILA PAPOLI Special Publication No. 10. Rockville, MD. 2010 Public and Private Lives in Iran: An Introduction 2015 Archäologie in ehemaligen Konzentrationslagern to the Archaeology of the 2003 Bam Earthquake. (Archaeology in former concentration camps). In Archaeologies 6(1):29–47. Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft für Landeskunde und ; < => 45(2):7–10. YOUNG, RUTH, AND HASSAN FAZELI 2013 Women and Class in Landlord Villages of the Tehran THOMAS, RICHARD Plain, Iran. Historical Archaeology 47(2):76–98. 2009 Bones of Contention: Why Later Post-Medieval Faunal Assemblages in Britain Matter. In Crossing AUDREY HORNING Paths or Sharing Tracks: Future Directions in SCHOOL OF GEOGRAPHY, ARCHAEOLOGY the Archaeological Study of Post-1550 Britain AND PALAEOECOLOGY and Ireland, Audrey Horning and Marilyn QUEEN’S UNIVERSITY BELFAST Palmer, editors, pp. 133–148. Boydell & Brewer, BELFAST BT7 1NN Woodbridge, UK. UNITED KINGDOM TOMLINSON, MICHAEL W. DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY 2012 War, Peace and Suicide: The Case of Northern COLLEGE OF WILLIAM AND MARY Ireland. International Sociology 27(4):464–482. WILLIAMSBURG, VA 23185