Durham E-Theses Conditions of emergence and existence of archaeology in the 19th century: the royal archaeological institute 1843 -1914 Ebbatson, Linda How to cite: Ebbatson, Linda (1999) Conditions of emergence and existence of archaeology in the 19th century: the royal archaeological institute 1843 -1914, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/4585/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk 2 The copyright of this thesis rests with the author, No quotation from it should be published without the written consent of the author and information derived from it should be acknowledged. Conditions of Emergence and Existence of Archaeology in the 19th Century: The Royal Archaeological Institute 1843 -19 Linda Ebbatson Ph.D. Thesis of Durham Department of Archaeology 1999 13 AUG 1999 Linda Ebbatson Conditions of Emergence and Existence of Archaeology in the 19th Century: The Royal Archaeological Institute 1843-1914 Ph. D. 1999 Traditional histories of archaeology have left lacunae in understanding of both the discipline and elements within it. Using the Royal Archaeological Institute and its product, the Archaeological Journal, as a pattern site for research the archaeological paradigm is applied to history rather than vice-versa. After a short explanation of method the published membership of the Institute between 1845 and 1942 is analysed in terms of geographical distribution, social composition and occupational interest. In the process the dynamics of a will to discourse are revealed in conjunction with the areas of discourse which were problematic. The text of the Journal (1843-1914) is then analysed on the basis of format, citations, terminology, tropes and objects of discussion in order to identify any 'statements', in the Foucauldian sense, which constitute the objects of discourse. Three major phases emerge. These are characterised at one level by similarities and differences in social and cognitive topography. At another level the conditions of existence and emergence revealed in the study suggest that archaeology itself is a characteristic of the Modern episteme, intimately linked in its successive modes of exploration and interpretation of the past with the Enlightenment project and the nation state. Table of Contents Preface 1 Abbreviations 3 Introduction Traditional Histories of Archaeology 4 Archaeological Method - The Paradigm 6 The Limitations 8 A Possible Approach -A Specific Field of Inquiry 10 Part I - Royal Archaeological Institute Membership 1845-1942 Introduction 12 Geographical Distribution 16 Artists, Architects and Engineers 26 Patrons, Presidents and Politicians 40 Historians and Handmaidens 51 The Clergy 71 The Geologists 77 Comparative Anatomy and the Medical Profession 80 The Ordnance Survey 85 The Explorers 86 Spreading the Word - Publishers, Printers and Writers 86 Ladies and Gentle Women 91 Conclusion 102 Part II - Analysis of the Text Introduction 105 Format 109 Citations 116 Terminology 130 Tropes 147 Objects of Discussion 199 Part ED - Conditions of Emergence and Existence Paths to a Profession 233 Paths to Discourse (Formalization) 243 Conditions of Emergence and Existence 246 Postscript -1914 and After 256 Appendix 1 - Presidents of the Archaeological Institute 1843-1942 264 List of illustrations Table 1 Known occupational groups in Royal Archaeological Institute membership 1845-1942 Table 2 Royal Archaeological Institute Membership 1845-1942 - Geographical Distribution Table 3 Citations ranked by subject area Table 4 Terminology applied to Medieval Period, 1843-1913 Table 5 Terminology applied to Early Medieval Period, 1843-1913 Table 6 Terminology applied to Romano-British Period, 1843-1913 Table 7 Terminology applied to Prehistoric Period, 1843-1913 Fig.l . Total Membership of the Royal Archaeological Institute between 1845 and 1942 Fig.2 Some 19,h century Networks in the Royal Archaeological Institute Fig.3 Titled People in the Royal Archaeological Institute, 1845-1942 Fig.4 Clergy in the Royal Archaeological Institute, 1845-1942 Fig.5 Women in the Royal Archaeological Institute, 1845-1942 Fig.6 Archaeology in the Epistemological Space of the 19th Century Fig.7 Field of Competency Model Fig.8 Objects of Discussion by Category Fig.9 Objects of Discussion - Standing Buildings Fig.10 Objects of Discussion - Total Numbers at ten yearly intervals Fig.ll Objects of Discussion - Below Ground Fig.12 Objects of Discussion - Art Fig.13 Objects of Discussion - Documents Fig. 14 Objects of Discussion - Artefacts Fig.15 Frequency of Artefacts Unassigned to Period Fig. 16 Frequency of Prehistoric Artefacts Fig.17 Frequency of Roman Period Artefacts Fig. 18 Frequency of Early Medieval Artefacts Fig. 19 Frequency of Medieval Artefacts Fig.20 Frequency of Post Medieval Artefacts Fig.21 Frequency of Artefacts by Period (Other) The material offered here has not previously been submitted as part of a degree in this or any other university. It is entirely my own work. Statement of Copyright The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be published without their prior written consent and information derived from it should! be acknowledged. Preface PREFACE This monograph was prompted by the writings of three men. Tilley (most particularly 1990, 281-347, but see also 1989, 41-62) and Trigger (1989) had remarked upon the need for a fresh approach to the history of archaeology and a very obvious lacuna in research dealing with national and local societies. Foucault had already exposed the teleological grid of traditional epistemology (Foucault 1981, 1988, 1990, 1991). While there were obvious linkages between Foucault's earlier and later works I was more interested in his use of a paradigm with which 1 was more familiar, namely that of archaeological method (Foucault 1977, 1994). It seemed to me that here was a possible basis for open-ended inquiry founded as it was upon a paradigm which had at its core the trivial and the mundane. Such a methodology, if it could be applied to a modern discipline such as archaeology, could not merely unearth the exclusivity of the discipline we see mirrored in the histories of, for example, Glyn Daniel or Joan Evans, but must be inclusive; it must unearth a range of statements existing appositionally, oppositely or discretely whose significance would change over time. Such an approach offered the possibility of a critical understanding of archaeology and its position within a system of knowledge which was not necessarily contingent upon present day perceptions or agendas. In one sense I wanted to attempt an archaeology of archaeology. As a result the research was rather unorthodox and, although the method is explained where necessary in the body of the text, certain aspects might be better clarified at the very beginning. The Archaeological Journal (Vols 1-71) and, by association, the Royal Archaeological Institute are explored, to use Petrie's description of Tel Defenneh, as a pattern site for research (Petrie, 1887, 31). References to The Archaeological Journal are given in abbreviated form, e.g. AJ44, 1887, 31, and are not listed in the bibliography because they are the finds, features, structures and contexts of the site. They are not citations in the usual sense: where this is the case an orthodox reference is given both in the text and in the bibliography. Likewise with regard to specific authors and their works, e.g. W.Boyd Dawkins' Cave Hunting (1874), where a comment in the Journal is the significant statement it is located by reference to the text of The Archaeological Journal, e.g. AJ32, 1875, 114-126. This monograph is not and cannot be a total history of archaeology in the nineteenth century. Ideally it requires comparison 1 Preface with other similar sites to assess similarities and differences in the patterns of dispersion. It is hoped that this mode of referencing will facilitate such comparison. While the Introduction depicts, with all its weaknesses and doubts, the point from which I started out Parts I and II constitute the main body of the text. They follow more or less the model of an archaeological report; what Hodder (1989, 271) refers to as 'the modern order'. Part 1 is essentially concerned with site location and description. Part n records the emergence of layers and assemblages. On the one hand this is an accurate reflection and result of the research method, on the other, as author, I collude in presenting the data in this way so that others, who may not agree with my interpretation, can use them nevertheless. Part HI is a reflection on the (for me) significant moments in the journey and to some extent on the mode of transport (Foucault and the archaeological paradigm). I was both surprised and shocked by what emerged as a result of this research. Surprised at the constant tug of the personalities involved in the Archaeological Institute and their interplay. They became like fellow passengers on a long bus journey in a strange land. Some I wanted to know better, I felt regret when they left. Others, equally intriguing but not ideal companions, I hoped would alight sooner rather than later. I was shocked at the endemic racism and wondered at times where the liberal or humanitarian statement was to be found.