Nationalism and Archaeology in Europe

Margarita Diaz-Andreu, Timothy Champion, eds.. Nationalism and Archaeology in Europe. Boulder and San Francisco: Westview Press, 1996. vi + 314 pp. $59.95, cloth, ISBN 978-0-8133-3051-8.

Reviewed by Charles C. Kolb

Published on H-SAE (September, 1997)

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed herein This book is neither a history of archaeologi‐ are those of the reviewer and not of his employer cal research--as in the tradition of the writings of or any other federal agency. Because this is an Brew (1968), Daniel (1975), Trigger (1989), or Wil‐ electronic book review in ASCII format, it is not ley and Sablof (1993)--nor is it a summary of Eu‐ possible to insert appropriate accents and diacriti‐ ropean archaeology in the manner of the late Stu‐ cal marks, and this reviewer ofers his apologies art Piggott's (1966) well-known text or Phillips' to the contributors. (1980) more recent synthesis. From another per‐ Nationalism and Archaeology in Europe spective, it is not a methodical review of archaeol‐ ogy as a science (see Pollard and Heron 1996). Introduction However, what we do have is a well-crafted set of In this assessment, I shall provide introducto‐ social science and humanities-oriented essays that ry comments, consider the scope and place of the collectively report the development of archaeolo‐ compendium in sociocultural history, summarize gy as a discipline in the context of national politi‐ the salient points from each of the essays, and cal history for several European polities. The book then assess the book as a whole. I believe that the is similar in scope to Kohl and Fawcett's edited set signifcance of the essays in the volume goes well of nation-state case studies entitled Nationalism, beyond European studies and further afeld than Politics, and the Practice of Archaeology (1995) merely the history of archaeology or perceptions which contains fve chapters on western Europe, and theories about the nation state and its agen‐ four on eastern Europe and Eurasia, and four on cies and institutions. There is much to consider East Asia. Margarita Diaz-Andreu (1995) and Vic‐ beyond anthropology, political science, and the tor Shnirelman (1995) have contributed chapters history of science. Because of the potential inter‐ (on Spain and Russia, respectively) to both vol‐ est to a variety of social scientists and scholars in umes. the humanities, I shall provide detailed remarks about the content of each essay in this volume. H-Net Reviews

Academic interest in the interrelationship of Ireland, Germany, Poland, Russia, Lithuania, and nationalism and archaeology is receiving re‐ Slovenia. The editors determined this sequence newed attention among both political scientists based upon the history of the development of pro‐ and anthropologists. This interest is exemplifed fessional archaeology in these nation states. Four at the third annual meeting of the European Asso‐ of the chapters have been translated into English ciation of Archaeology to be held in September from their original French, Spanish, German, and 1997 in Ravenna, Italy, which includes a session Polish versions. Since the authors of these chap‐ entitled "Archaeology, Nationalism, and the Poli‐ ters acknowledge the translators, one assumes tics of Identity." Likewise, the relationships be‐ that the English language versions met with their tween archaeology and political history have approval. been the subject of signifcant articles by Don In Nationalism and Archaeology in Europe, Fowler (1987), Philip Kohl (1993), and Bruce Trig‐ ffteen archaeologists from a dozen European ger (1984), among other scholars from the disci‐ countries examine the varied relationships be‐ pline of archaeology. Several books, including Jose tween nationalistic ideals and archaeological ac‐ Luis Lorenzo's (1976) treatise in which he exam‐ tivities during the nineteenth and twentieth cen‐ ines the roles and impact of archaeologists from turies. The editors contend that the resurgence of the United States working in Mexico, and a major‐ nationalism has become a prominent feature of ity of the chapters in Augusto Oyuela-Caycedo's the European political scene during the 1990s. (1994) edited compendium on the history of Latin The so-called "collapse" of the Soviet Union is re‐ American archaeology, reveal interrelationships sulting in the re-establishment of a sense of iden‐ between the nation, nationalism, and archaeologi‐ tity for many peoples in Eurasia, particularly in cal research. Several British and American schol‐ eastern Europe and Central Asia. In western Eu‐ ars have also recently examined the connections rope, the enhanced debate about federation has between archaeology and the nation state (Shanks important implications for the retention of indi‐ and Tilley 1987, Patterson 1995), often following vidual national identity (consider, for example, the concepts of Hobsbawm (1990, Hobsbawm and the proposals to expanded NATO membership and Ranger 1983). the recent EEC debates about Euro-currency). The Co-editor Margarita Diaz-Andreu is a Lecturer editors and their colleagues argue persuasively in the Department of Archaeology at the Universi‐ that the archaeological record provides a wealth ty of Complutense, Madrid, and has particular re‐ of concepts and images to support the claims of search interests in later European prehistory, es‐ national identity as being deeply rooted in past pecially the west Mediterranean. Her colleague, generations. They also perceive correctly that Timothy Champion, is Reader in Archaeology at both history and archaeology have been widely the University of Southampton, and is President used and abused in these modern arguments of the Prehistoric Society. His research interests about individual state nationalisms. Diaz-Andreu include the later prehistory of Europe and the ar‐ and Champion have assembled a collection of chaeology of complex societies. The editors have stimulating essays fashioned by authors who assembled fourteen chapters, a dozen of which share a common concern that archaeology and concern specifc European polities, plus an intro‐ the study of the past are intimately related to con‐ duction and epilogue. Each chapter has separate temporary sociopolitical questions--they might sets of references (a total of 711 citations and a have cited economic questions as well. The con‐ fourteen-page double-column index). The twelve tributors bring varied experiences from diferent nations represented are, in order in the volume: parts of Europe and represent older, established, Denmark, France, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Britain, independent nation states (England, France, and

2 H-Net Reviews

Spain); newly democratized, emerging countries to be recognized by professionals of the discipline (Poland and Russia); some where archaeology has in order to be able to understand and contextual‐ in the past been promoted for political ends (Ger‐ ize our work. many and Italy); and others experiencing strug‐ The authors contend that nationalism is gling with independent nationhood (Slovenia-- deeply embedded in the concept of archaeology portions of the former Yugoslavia). and in its development and institutionalization. The professionalization of archaeology, as op‐ They also consider the interrelationship between posed to antiquarian collecting, emerged in Eu‐ history and nationalism as a political ideology, rope during the late nineteenth century or at vari‐ and state that the three phases of nationalism de‐ ous times during the twentieth century during the fned by Hroch (1985:22-23)--intellectual organiza‐ period of imperialism and nationalism, and was tion, patriotic agitation, and ideological spread-- often interwoven with contemporary politics and may be seen in the history of archaeological theo‐ national goals. The history of the Elgin marbles ry. The relationship between nationalism and ar‐ and the importation of Egyptian and Near Eastern chaeology can be viewed in three ways: 1) the role material culture into the collections of the major of archaeology in the historical construction of European museums of natural history, art, and ar‐ national identities; 2) relationships between the chaeology sufce as examples. Social scientists construction of the national state and the insitu‐ have for many years pointed out how archaeology tionalization of archaeology, the public image of and the historical record can be used to inspire archaeology, and education about the past; and 3) nationalism. For example, Sergei Eisenstein's the role of archaeology in reinforcing linguistic, flms, particularly the 1925 epic The Battleship ethnic, and racial elements in the construction of Potemkin and his 1938 cinematic masterpiece a national identity. The periodization of the rela‐ Alexander Nevsky, convey nationalism and emo‐ tionship between nationalism and archaeology tion, respectively, associated with the overthrow follows the work of Hobsbawm (1990, Hobsbawm of Czarist Russia and a call to patriotism in pre‐ and Ranger 1983) in diferentiating nation-states paring for the Second World War. and subjugated nations. The authors attempt to The Essays demonstrate that the "special character" of ar‐ chaeology provides an opportunity for national‐ In "Nationalism and Archaeology in Europe: ism because archaeological evidence is "very ver‐ An Introduction" (Margarita Diaz-Andreu and satile" and that the evidence may be "very old" Timothy Champion, pp. 1-23), the editors com‐ (pp. 18-19). ment that "there is no such thing as a non-politi‐ cal, value-free archaeology" (p. 2) and that archae‐ "The Fall of a Nation, the Birth of a Subject: ology is not an exception among the social and The National Use of Archaeology in Nineteenth- natural sciences in its political involvement. Dur‐ century Denmark" (Marie Louise Stig Sorensen, ing the past decade several authors have written pp. 24-47) is an appropriate introductory treatise what the editors see as "incomplete accounts" of since European archaeology was founded upon the relationship between the variables of nation‐ the concept of the "Three Age System" (Stone, alism and archaeology; they write (p. 3) that Bronze, and Iron ages) defned by the Dane J.J.A. Worsaae. Archaeology became professionalized in without the existence of nationalism, archae‐ Denmark following the Napoleonic Wars ology of the study of the past might never have (1797-1813) and the subsequent British trade advanced beyond the status of a hobby or a pas‐ blockade. time. This profound interconnection between a political ideology and a scientifc discipline needs

3 H-Net Reviews

The author demonstrates the use of archaeol‐ torix) are cited as examples, and the Second Em‐ ogy in "inventing" the Danish nation by character‐ pire, Franco-Prussian War, and Third Republic izing the voluntary relationship between nation‐ are characterized. The French Revolution fostered alism and archaeology, and commenting on the the concept of national antiquities and the spread Danish political need to institutionalize the past, of the concept of archaeology, but the French de‐ whereby archaeological objects were transformed feat during the Franco-Prussian War (1870-1871) into symbols which in turn became signs with helped to solidify a French nationalist archaeolo‐ connotive emotions. Sorensen reviews the results gy. Notable was the unique development of over‐ when the past is "constructed from the outside" in seas French schools of archaeology (Egypt, Persia, order to legitimize tradition and instill national Afghanistan, and Algeria) while national antiqui‐ virtues (especially pride and esteem) and identity ties were being neglected because of the failure to by fashioning a mythical social prehistory, partic‐ establish regional French archaeological pro‐ ularly during the years following the abolition of grams and museums. Archaeological regions for the absolute monarchy in 1849 when political de‐ museums and for administration were estab‐ mocratization and decentralization of authority lished during the Vichy regime. However, the were desired sociopolitical results. Representa‐ founding of the CNRS (Caisse Nacional de la tions of archaeological sites and material culture-- Recherche Scientifque), rejuvinated under de barrows, standing stones, lithic, bronze, and gold Gaulle, reestablished archaeology as a component artifacts, etc.--were employed in contemporary of prehistory when it was grouped with anthro‐ contexts including political posters, postage pology and ethnology, while Celtic and Gallo-Ro‐ stamps, and corporate logos. Sorensen concludes man archaeology was afliated with classical that "to comprehend fully the social importance studies. By the 1990s, Schnapp observes, "the state of the past(s) we must allow for a simultaneous is endowed with a public service for archaeology; academic and emotional involvement in the sub‐ universities, museums and secondary education ject matter, or alternatively its emotional potency make ever more provision for a cultural approach will be reduced to a superfcial tracing of associat‐ that relegates national tendencies to a peripheral ed elements" (p. 46). Early nineteenth century position" (p. 65). agrarian reforms created new economic and po‐ "Islamic Archaeology and the Origin of the litical groupings, and institutionalized archaeolo‐ Spanish Nation" (Margarita Diaz-Andreu, translat‐ gy became politically useful, serving national dis‐ ed from the Spanish, pp. 68-89) reviews the histor‐ course and perceived virtues. This essay is well ical origins of the nation. Diaz-Andreu observes crafted and Sorensen's arguments are compelling. correctly that in most European nation states na‐ The third chapter is entitled "French Archae‐ tionalism is traced to the Middle Ages or Roman ology: Between National Identity and Cultural Empire. In this essay she documents the wide‐ Identity" (Alain Schnapp, translated from the spread "ignorance" of early periods in the Iberian French, pp. 48-67). The author contends that ar‐ Peninsula and a disregard for Muslim contribu‐ chaeology was a "dominated discipline" in France tions. She does not address the potent issue of cul‐ and was interwoven with a fascination with clas‐ tural and religious ethnocentrism, e.g. "racism." sical Greco-Roman and, later, Celtic, antiquities. From 711-1482 C.E. the peninsula was divided on Antiquarians were isolated from the public, and a religious basis into Muslim and Christian terri‐ the national dimensions of archaeology were ex‐ tories. She argues convincingly that Hispanic au‐ ploited politically to give credence to a conscience thors have failed to incorporate Spain's Islamic of patrimony. The Roman-Gaulish Wars and elab‐ past into a nationalistic discourse and traces the orate myths (such as those involving Vercinge‐ development of Arab or "Oriental" studies, censor‐

4 H-Net Reviews ship, enculturation and acculturation, and the im‐ 1721 but was inefectual since the cultural patri‐ pact of the 1859-1860 African War. The signif‐ mony was not a major concern of the state during cance of the Islamic past was realized diferential‐ the period of liberal monarchy or the republican ly in Andalusia and Catalan, and there was an Eu‐ regime. The author claims that a national perspec‐ ropeanization of the Islamic past in former Chris‐ tive developed in 1929, but conficts between ar‐ tian regions. She believes that the loss of Cuba chaeologists (and, perhaps, environmentalists?) and the Philippine Islands heightened an interest and architects and engineers continue, and he in the Visigothic period and the relationship be‐ laments the "neglect of archaeology for nationalis‐ tween France and Classical Roman culture on one tic reasons" (p. 105). The image of Portuguese na‐ hand versus National Socialist (Nazi) German and tionalism as being conceived during Medieval Visigoth culture on the other (a Levi Straus para‐ times has resulted in a lack of concern and a digm?). The Spanish Civil War and the Franco era paucity of archaeological research on sites and ar‐ and their consequences are well documented. By tifacts from previous periods. the late 1960s, a revival of Islamic archaeological Therefore, archaeology was perceived as studies began and resulted in an abandonment of counterproductive for nationalist purposes. Read‐ former nationalistic ideologies, a distancing of ar‐ ers should be aware that the period of the Second chaeological research from art history, and the World War and postwar era are covered in adoption of new feld and laboratory methods. greater depth by Lillios (1995). Andalusi and Medieval archaeology began to "Nationalism without a Nation: The Italian thrive after 1970, but the author contends that Case" (Alessandro Guidi, pp. 108-118) emphasizes Spanish nationalism yet remains problematic and the late nineteenth century. Until 1860, Italy was weak. The Islamic past has been used by Andalu‐ composed of numerous small states and foreign sian, Valencian, and Balearic nationalists arguing colonies. The period of political unifcation against Catalan and Spanish nationalisms. In the (1860-1870) resulted in the creation of a central‐ main, this essay covers the same basic material as ized agency for the conservation of cultural her‐ her previous writing on Spanish nationalism and itage. Guidi notes that the pioneers of Italian pre‐ archaeology (Diaz-Andreu 1995). historic archaeology were professional men from In the ffth chapter, "Archaeology and Nation‐ northern Italy and were linked to the industrial alism: The Portuguese Case" (Carlos Fabiao, pp. bourgeois of the nineteenth century, while classic 90-107), the essayist observes that for Portugal archaeology, concentrating on Etruscan and Ro‐ there have been no remarkable cases of a nation‐ man cultures, was especially signifcant among alistic appropriation of archaeological interpreta‐ scholars from the south. Archaeological accom‐ tions or use of monuments or artifacts as national plishments during the Fascist era were notable; symbols. Portugal has a long tradition of the cen‐ terrestrial and underwater excavations, and the tralization of political power, and, he reports the creation of museums, are particularly important. development of three schools of Portuguese ar‐ Regionalism was and remains a dominant trend chaeology: naturalistic, antiquarian, and paleo- in Italian archaeology. In the 1990s Italian archae‐ ethnological. Fabiao begins with the founding of ology exists in a "peculiar schizophrenic condi‐ the Real Academia in 1720, reviews Catholic tradi‐ tion, fuctuating between the temptation of a deci‐ tions, and illustrates attempts to integrate ancient sive atomization into diferent local schools and heritage (Lusitanian culture, hill forts, the of a regionalization of the former unitary State Celtiberian-Lusitanian Wars, and the heroic ex‐ Antiquities administration, and the demand for a ploits of Viriatus versus the Romans) with histori‐ desired but difcult methodological unity" (p. cal identity. National heritage legislation dates to

5 H-Net Reviews

117). Both prehistoric and classical archaeology ing the subsequent century. The author states that were strongly infuenced by nationalism until the Welsh were more concerned with restoring 1945, but a lack of archaeological nationalist unity the Welsh language than in their archaeological characterizes the postwar era. The essay is sur‐ heritage. Champion contends that the British state prisingly brief given the richness of extant data took a major interest in archaeological matters in‐ on Italian archaeological materials, the system of cluding the creation of national museums (British higher education, and political administration. Museum in 1753, National Museum of Scotland in In "Three Nations or One? Britain and the Na‐ 1851, and Wales National Museum in 1907). tional Use of the Past" (Timothy Champion, pp. British legislation to protect prehistoric monu‐ 119-145), the author undertakes the difcult task ments dated to the eforts of Sir John Lubbock in of characterizing a "uniquely complex" pattern of 1882 and the Disney Chair of Archaeology in Cam‐ distinctive national identities for England, Wales, bridge was established in 1852, while the Institute and Scotland (Ireland is considered separately in of Archaeology in London was created in the Chapter Eight). Champion commences with an 1930s. Champion also characterizes briefy the overview of the archaeological remains: England contributions of major archaeologists including (pre-Roman peoples and Roman, Anglo-Saxon, Wheeler, Childe, and Piggott. A section of his es‐ Viking, and Norman periods); Wales (pre-Roman say entitled "The Consequences of State Interven‐ Celtic, Roman, and Anglo-Norman periods), and tion" provides evidence for a "tardy" state involve‐ Scotland (pre-Roman Celts and Picts, Romans, Sax‐ ment in archaeological matters but suggests in‐ ons, Gallic and Norse settlers, and independent creased professionalism and scientifc neutrality populations since the ninth century C.E.). He also within the discipline. British universities have a states that because of maritime boundaries there long tradition of research activities abroad, in‐ were fewer territorial pressures than the nations cluding archaeological research well beyond the of Continental Europe experienced. The author classical areas (e.g., British colonial areas includ‐ also reviews "fanciful" Medieval visions--for ex‐ ing Egypt, India, East Africa, and various Asian ample, that Britain had been settled by migrants enclaves). Champion points out that "no universi‐ from ancient Troy. In England, regional and na‐ ty has devoted itself to the archaeology of Eng‐ tional professional societies emerged during the land" (p. 137); likewise, a systematic site inventory 1840s along with an interest in human origins as and the lack of a unifed state archaeological ser‐ well as national monuments; both archaeology vice are seen as drawbacks. He also candidly ad‐ and anthropology were employed (until ca. 1920) dresses the point that during the past half century to justify politically the British Empire and main‐ England has become a multicultural and multieth‐ tain traditional patterns of a hierarchical and nic society. A signifcant discussion about the rise aristocratic society. Champion notes that Scotland of the heritage industry (the commercialization of has a very complex prehistory and that archaeo‐ archaeology, cultural tourism, and leisure market) logical studies were infuenced signifcantly by provides a sobering paradigm for all European developments in Scandinavia (especially the and American students of archaeology. The Euro‐ works of Thomsen and Worsaae), so that by 1900 pean Common Market may predicate future unity Scottish archaeology was established on a frm in archaeological matters--for example events foundation. such as the 1994-1995 "Year of the Bronze Age," when cross-cultural European technical and artis‐ In Wales, the major eighteenth century ac‐ tic achievements were emphasized. However, the counts of Welsh antiquities were written by Eng‐ United Kingdom's concepts of economic integra‐ lish travelers; however, research languished dur‐ tion difer from those of France, Germany, and

6 H-Net Reviews

Italy and may, therefore, have signifcant conse‐ views the public interest in "Celtomania" and the quences for scientifc research and archaeology. astronomical interpretation of megalithic art Of all of the essays in this book, Champion's stim‐ through the 1980s. There appears to be no conclu‐ ulating and concise treatment is the most com‐ sive answer to the question of why archaeology plete and current. Readers interested in the cur‐ has not had a greater impact on nationalism. rent debates among Scottish and English archae‐ Cooney and Grogan provide a more fulsome ac‐ ologists and Marxist infuences should consult count of Irish nationalism and archaeology in several presentations in Iain Mackenzie's edited Irish Prehistory: A Social Perspective (1994). volume entitled Archaeological Theory: Progress In Chapter Nine, "German Archaeology and or Posture? (1994); an American perspective on Its Relation to Nationalism and Racism" (Ingo Wi‐ Marxist archaeology is contained in Patterson wjorra, translated from the German, pp. 164-188), (1995). two roots in German archaeology are related: na‐ The chapter "Building the Future on the Past: tional-romantic (e.g., patriotic antiquarianism) Archaeology and the Construction of National and prehistoric archaeology. The author's purpose Identity in Ireland" (Gabriel Cooney, pp. 146-163) is to demonstrate the relationship of archaeology relates directly to the foregoing essay. In contrast to nationalism and racism. In his discussion of pa‐ to England, Scotland, and Wales, archaeology in triotic antiquarianism, Wiwjorra begins ca. 9 C.E. Ireland has served as an important element in the with Arminius and Tacitus, and moves quickly fabrication of a national identity. The role of na‐ through nationalistic mythology, such as the tionalism has only recently been recognized as an Niebelungenlied, into the seventeenth century. important infuence on the way antiquarianism The concepts of Nordic race are traced from Taci‐ and archaeology developed in Ireland. Cooney tus to the Franco-Prussian War (1870-1871), the states that Irish archaeology is pragmatic and contribution of Rudolf Virchow, and postulated non-theoretical, that nationalism afected archae‐ beliefs in Indo-German origins. Wiwjorra demon‐ ology diferentially through time, and that two na‐ strates the zealous enthusiasm of amateurs such tionalism exist: Gaelic-Irish and Unionist. As in as Ludwig Wilser and Willy Pastor, and pseudo- Denmark, artifacts and sites became symbols link‐ scientifc ideas in the politicization of prehistory. ing the past and present. The author traces na‐ The importance of Gustaf Kossinna, a linguist who tionalism and archaeology from the establish‐ related archaeology to nationalism, and Herman ment of the Irish Royal Academy in 1785 and the Wirth's controversial research relating prehistoric Act of Union in 1800. He considers George Petrie signs and symbols as writing. Nationalist and to be the "father" of Irish archaeology and the pe‐ racist tendencies supported the concept of a Ger‐ riod 1830-1860 as formative prior to the institu‐ man national state. There is an engaging review tionalizing of archaeology. The efects of the of the justifcation of political borders with Church Disestablishment Act of 1869, Ancient France, Denmark, Upper Silesia, and Western Monuments Protection Act of 1882, and Irish Land Prussia, as well as the stigmatization of Slavic cul‐ Act of 1903 are perceived as evidence of increased ture. The coverage of the period of the Third Re‐ state involvement during the Victorian era. Espe‐ ich is rather brief, as is the review of the repres‐ cially illuminating is the discussion of archaeolo‐ sion of a "national prehistory" after 1945. I would gy and national identity in the "two Irelands"--for have liked to have had a more elaborate review of example contact between archaeologists working archaeology and nationalism in the "two Germa‐ in the north and south goes back to the 1930s and nies" and further documentation of archaeologi‐ the profession has been organized on an all-Ire‐ cal administration in the postwar era and, more land basis for nearly four decades. Cooney also re‐ recently, in the reunited Germany. In the postwar

7 H-Net Reviews era, a division between professional archaeolo‐ tions. Violent polemics between scholars such as gists who ignore the Nazi period and pseudoscien‐ Kostrzewski and von Richtofen on issues includ‐ titic idealogues has arisen. Readers may wish to ing the Polish-German border and national identi‐ supplement this chapter by consulting Bettina ty utilized both scientifc and ad hominem argu‐ Arnold's (1990) article on the use and abuse of ar‐ ments about Slavic prehistory. Boundary changes chaeology in Nazi Germany (see also Arnold and resulting from the Second World War and archae‐ Hassmann 1995). ology under communism are reviewed briefy. The author of Chapter Ten has selected an in‐ Postwar archaeology served as a way to legitimize teresting metaphorical title: "'Drang nach West‐ the newly created Poland and archaeologists en'?: Polish Archaeology and National Identity" sought to explicate the beginnings of the Polish (Wlodzimierz Raczkowski, translated from the state in order to demonstrate the longevity of Pol‐ Polish, pp. 189-217), one that implies an ofensive ish culture. The period is marked by much archae‐ rather than a defensive policy toward Germany ological research but minimal publication, an em‐ (p. 190). Raczkowski points out that Polish archae‐ phasis upon material culture studies but with a ology has taken two tracks: 1) the Slavs and their lack of interpretive treatises, and the ideological relationships with Germanic tribes, and 2) the ori‐ revisions of textbooks. gins and development of the Polish state begin‐ The contexts of Slavic and Baltic politics and ning with the Plast Dynasty. He traces archaeolog‐ archaeology are also considered. The author be‐ ical research to the early 1500s when pottery urns lieves that the First International Conference of were recovered and later interpreted as pagan in‐ Slavic Archaeology (Warsaw, 1965) marked a new terments, and he also reviews attempts to relate starting point in Polish prehistoric research. Un‐ prehistoric Slavic remains to the classical world. fortunately, his essay concludes abruptly in about The 1795 partition of Poland by Prussia, Russia, 1991, prior to major political changes. and Austria and the 1830-1831 uprising in the The essay entitled "The Faces of Nationalist Kingdom of Poland are landmark precursors to Archaeology in Russia" (Victor A. Shnirelman, pp. Raczkowski's discussion of "a nation without a 218-241), in the main, concerns European Russia country or archaeology." A failed series of upris‐ rather than the whole of the former Soviet Union ings, sociopolitical distinctions between east and and also relates directly to the chapters on Ger‐ west Slavs and the Balts, and the Lithuanians, many, Poland, and Lithuania. Shnirelman is at the Byelorussians, and Ukrainians are characterized. Center for the Study of Nationalism, Department Concepts of evolutionism and difusionism were of Sociology, Central European University, Taborit‐ employed by Polish and German scientists, and ska, Prague. The author is the only essayist to the former "proved" prehistoric Slavic expansion point out the need to distinguish the various kinds in the Oder and Elbe river valleys at the expense of nationalism (state versus ethnic, for example) of Germanic peoples during the early Middle Ages in order to comprehend meanings and uses. The (pp. 199-200). The discussion and interpretation of concept of Russian nationalism is considered dis‐ Virchow and Kossinna's contributions to national‐ tinct from western Europe because Russia is a ism and archaeology stands in contrast to Ingo large multicultural and polylinguistic state. Wiwjorra's essay on Germany. The revival of Shnirelman states that "nationalism is only one of Poland and creation of Lithuania in 1918 resulted the lines along which Russian archaeology devel‐ in a nationally inhomogeneous Poland which re‐ oped" (p. 219) but does not explicate the others. sulted in distinctions between the east and west, He demonstrates that--though "not well known in Polish and German ethnic issues, and the Polo‐ western Europe" (he contends)--archaeologists, so‐ nization of the church and educational institu‐

8 H-Net Reviews ciocultural and physical anthropologists, and lin‐ nia" (Giedrius Puodziunas and Algirdas guists played important roles in the development Girininkas, pp. 243-255), provides an important of the discipline during Imperial Russian times view into one of the Baltic states. The authors re‐ and during the Soviet era. He discusses the place view the successive domination of Lithuania by of nationalist ethnogenetic mythologies (e.g., Poland until Russian conquest in 1795, and myths based upon human physical appearance, through independence in 1991. This illuminating language, and cultural factors), the Napoleonic essay considers the origins of national archaeolo‐ Wars, the Kievian Rus (Eastern Slavs), and Scythi‐ gy beginning with the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, an legacy. The history of Russian archaeology is with an emphases on ancient monuments and ar‐ considered within the context of fve periods: 1) tifact collecting on the one hand and the studies of ca.. 1820-1917 (a period of interest in Russian the origins of the polity on the other. Early theo‐ Slavs, Orthodox Christianity, ignorance of Muslim ries postulated either Roman or Gothic origins for achievements, and attempts to justify the multi‐ Lithuanian culture. The authors characterize at‐ cultural Russian Empire), 2) 1917-1930 (a complex tempts to employ Worsaae's "Three Age System," period of transition with appeals to the "glorious" and the uprisings against Russia and subsequent past and ethnic traditions, and the formulation of repressions. Archaeological surveys and excava‐ the republic, although the essay's emphasis is on tions from 1886-1914 resulted in the export of European Russia), 3) the late 1920s to mid-1930s many objects to Russian museums (the materials (the forcible introduction of Marxism, trials of still reside there). Lithuanian ethnogenetic studies ethnic intellectuals, and the reorganization of the undertaken by Ludwik Krzywicki are detailed. Af‐ bureaucracy), 4) ca. 1934 f. (a shift from interna‐ ter 1904 when a ban allowing Lithuanians to con‐ tionalism to Soviet nationalism, ethnogenetic duct scientifc research was rescinded, archaeo‐ studies, and arguments about "Vikingism" and its logical and geographic studies resumed. The au‐ heritage--the Vikings versus the Goths--e.g., Ger‐ thors contend that the Soviets manipulated and mans versus Russians), and 5) ethnogenetic con‐ falsifed data from East Prussia and western cepts and the beginnings of the disintegration of Byelorussia for political ends (pp. 252-53) in order the USSR during which regional schools of histori‐ to suppress minorities and ethnic nationalisms ans, archaeologists, and ethnographers which "re‐ and to emphasize the Russian nation. Russian and sulted in the politicization and mythologization of Polish archaeologists working in Lithuania have many peoples of the former USSR, especially in stressed the non-Lithuanian origin of archaeologi‐ the Middle Volga region, in the Caucasus, and in cal materials. Further documentation might be of‐ the former Soviet Central Asia" (p. 238). In sum, fered to substantiate an assertion that archaeolo‐ this essay demonstrates conclusively the use of ar‐ gists in Lithuania were less repressed politically chaeology as source material for myth building than historians. and for ethnic and state-based nationalisms. This The penultimate essay--one of the most de‐ chapter parallels Shnirelman's (1995) chapter in tailed in this book--"Is There National Archaeolo‐ Kohl and Fawcett's Nationalism, Politics, and the gy without Nationalism? Archaeological Tradition Practice of Archaeology in which he provides ad‐ in Slovenia" (Bozidar Slapsak and Predrag No‐ ditional details about the era from ca. 1930-1950. vakovic, pp. 256-293) considers an extremely com‐ In this same volume, Chernykh (1995) details a plex region--one with distinct ethnic, linguistic, perceptive review of archaeology in Russia since and religious parameters. In the main, the au‐ the fragmentation of the USSR. thors consider Slovene-speaking peoples, com‐ Chapter Twelve, "Nationalism Doubly Op‐ mencing with Venetian and Habsburg infuences pressed: Archaeology and Nationalism in Lithua‐ since 1400 C.E. The antiquarian tradition among

9 H-Net Reviews

Slovenes has been strong, but the authors docu‐ Spanish fascism, and Soviet and Roumanian com‐ ment diferences in scientifc interests between munism), and he argues that archaeology should coastal and interior populations--including topics be "neutral" but remain subject to criticism. such as excavations, monuments, and epigraphy. Hroch also states that "national or political oppor‐ The results of the Napoleonic Wars (1797-1813) tunism seems to be one of the characteristics of and the Illyrian Insurrection are reviewed, and archaeology that was underplayed in this volume" the introduction of professional archaeology to (p. 297); he also views archaeology as scientifc re‐ Slovenia in 1852 by Karel Dezman is emphasized search but which remains dependent upon the and well documented. He is characterized as a lib‐ political state. Using postmodernist terminology, eral natural scientist, a clever political polemicist, archaeology has, he claims, a "defenceless past." and a nationalist. Dezman's legacy includes estab‐ Critique lishing a framework for professional museology This cohort of essays refects a maturation of and maintaining the national museum's neutrali‐ the discipline of archaeology progressing from ty during periods of nationalistic conficts; his suc‐ having borrowed techniques and methods from cessors, Mullner and Smidt, were less successful. mathematics and the natural sciences to a posi‐ The collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in tion whereby introspective analyses of the nation‐ 1918 and the founding of the Kingdom of Ju‐ al characters of European nation-state archaeolo‐ goslavia are also considered, and the authors note gy may be undertaken (see, for example, Macken‐ that archaeology as a discipline remained under‐ zie 1994, Patterson 1995). The book is a highly spe‐ developed and was used (and abused) for political cialised work created, in the main, for European ends during the period 1918-1939. Following the specialists. However, I believe that the book has Second World War a Soviet institutional model an applicability to a wider audience. was adopted but Marxism remained superfcial although ethnogenetic concepts dominated Yu‐ These essays will also be important to archae‐ goslav studies after 1945. The authors respond to ological theoreticians and scholars investigating the essay's title by stating that "theoretically, yes" the history of science well beyond the geographic there can be a national archaeology without na‐ confnes of Europe. Specialists on the prehistory tionalism--"academic archaeology can avoid na‐ of North and Sub-Saharan Africa--Algeria, Moroc‐ tionalism but nationalism cannot do without ar‐ co, Cameroon, Nigeria, Congo/Kongo, Uganda, chaeology in its myth creation and search for Kenya, Tanzania, South Africa, Zimbabwe, etc.-- identity" (p. 290). Therefore, language rather than and the Asian Subcontinent--particularly India, history or archaeology served as the basis for Pakistan, Bangaladesh, and Sri Lanka--will fnd Slovenian nationalism. much to contemplate. The discussions of British, French, Spanish, and German nationalism and ar‐ In the "Epilogue," (pp. 294-9), Miroslav Hroch chaeology elucidate colonial and commonwealth comments on several inherent problems that sur‐ underpinnings to the development of archaeologi‐ face in these essays: the concept of "nation" and cal research and interpretation in Africa and Asia "nationalism," how national identity is verifed, during the so-called colonial eras and the subse‐ and provincialism in regional archaeological re‐ quent period of independence from European po‐ search. He is the author of Social Preconditions of litical control. Nationalism and Archaeology in National Revival in Europe (1985) in which he Europe provides a framework for an enhanced considers European social history and autonomy understanding of the historical development of and independence movements for the period archaeology and the founding of archaeological 1789-1900. Hroch points out how archaeology has museums and academic programs at colleges and been misused (e.g., to support Nazism, Italian and

10 H-Net Reviews universities. Likewise, for New World specialists, nia, Portugal, and Spain. I would have hoped for a the historical overview of nationalism and ar‐ more complete set of parallel treatments. chaeological research in European nation states I have several concerns and questions about suggests important parallels and diferences in the contributors to the volume. How were the the practice of archaeology in Canada, Mexico, contributors selected? What are their back‐ and the United States at the national, individual grounds: archaeology (rather than prehistory) state, and territorial levels--particularly archaeo‐ and/or history (the history of science, or areal/ logical administration and museum organization. chronological-oriented specialisizations, etc.), po‐ There are lessons and cautionary tales for archae‐ litical or social science, and/or philosophy? Unfor‐ ologists afliated with, for example, the Smithso‐ tunately the editors did not provide any back‐ nian Institution and the National Park Service, ground information about the essayists which among others, in the consideration of the rise of tends to limit the volume to use by European spe‐ the heritage industry in England in relation to cialists who know these authors and their works. public archaeology and CRM (cultural resource However, by reviewing the citations at the ends of management) investigations (see pp. 137-8). There these essays I would conclude that a majority of are also viable parallel concepts to be considered the contributors appear to be practicing archaeol‐ in reviewing the relationships between Native ogists concerned with theory, or the history of sci‐ American nations and the U.S. federal govern‐ ence, and/or historiography. The time periods and ment and perceptions of archaeology and nation‐ emphases of the individual essays vary consider‐ alism. Those archaeologists familiar with the va‐ ably although the concentration is late nineteenth garies of federal and state-based archaeological and early twentieth centuries. A few contributors education, site and program administration, and sketch the prehistoric parameters from the Pale‐ legislation may fnd enlightening similarities to olithic or Neolithic through historic periods, oth‐ situations in some European nation states. ers concentrate upon the archaeology of the Me‐ Among the signifcant topics covered in this dieval Age, others focus almost exclusively upon compendium are nine national academies which the nineteenth century and consider superfcially are concerned with prehistory (Austrian, the majority of the current century. Some of the Byelorussian, French, German, Irish, Polish, Por‐ presentations terminate at crucial points and we tuguese, Slovenian, and Spanish); archaeological are left in the position of wanting to know more-- commissions (ffteen in seven nations--Britain, for example, the chapters on Germany and Poland Denmark, France, Lithuania, Portugal, Russia, and end before recent political changes in the early Spain); ten archaeological institutes (Austrian, 1990s, but there is also a paucity of material on British, French, German, Italian, Polish, Russian, the post-Second World War era and, especially, So‐ Slovenian, Spanish, and Ukrainian); archaeologi‐ viet infuence. Although the volume is not meant cal museums (national and major local reposito‐ to be comprehensive in its coverage, several im‐ ries); archaeological congresses (particularly portant regions and nations are missing from the those held during the nineteenth and early twen‐ discussion--the upper Scandinavian region (Nor‐ tieth centuries); national professional and learned way, Sweden, and Finland), Switzerland, the Baltic anthropological and archaeological societies; pro‐ region (Estonia and Latvia), and southeastern Eu‐ grams in archaeology at major colleges and uni‐ rope (Greece, Romania, and Bulgaria). Kaiser's versities; and primary archaeological and ethno‐ (1995) chapter on southeastern Europe in Nation‐ graphic journals (considered by country). Some alism, Politics, and the Practice of Archaeology archaeological legislation is briefy reviewed for (Kohl and Fawcett, eds.) helps to fll this void. Es‐ only six nations: Britain, France, Ireland, Lithua‐ says on archaeology and nationalism as repre‐

11 H-Net Reviews sented in several of these nations would make in‐ several other chapters would beneft from having teresting parallels to those polities considered in similar illustrations. Unfortunately, Westview the volume. Press has misspelled Diaz-Andreu's name as Mar‐ The authors often wrestle with the concept of guerita--printed incorrectly on book's spine and "nationalism." Certainly the term has diferential twice on the dust jacket. connotations for ethnic groups, cultures, and na‐ In sum, Diaz-Andreu and Champion must be tion-states. Linguistic, social, contextual, and complemented for their heroic efort to bring to‐ chronological parameters are or may be mitigat‐ gether a diverse set of descriptive and interpre‐ ing factors in defning nationalism. Then, again, is tive essays in Nationalism and Archaeology in Eu‐ nationalism necessarily equatable with patrio‐ rope. The book's strengths begin with a detailed, tism? However, one is reminded of the debates clear, and thoughtful introduction. Each of the es‐ about attempts to defne the nature of "civiliza‐ says is informative; some are longer and provide tion" and urban and non-urban distinctions. great detail; the stronger ones demonstrate to the Although the editors' introductory essay pro‐ reader (rather than tell him/her) the interrelation‐ vides a salient summary, a more fully developed ships of archaeology and nationalism. The volume conclusion or overview might be a useful emen‐ goes beyond Kohl and Fawcett's edited work Na‐ dation. Hroch's epilogue is interesting and percep‐ tionalism, Politics, and the Practice of Archaeolo‐ tive but another perspective from a member of gy (1995), which includes thirteen case studies the archaeological community would also beneft from Europe, Eurasia, and East Asia. Nonetheless, the reader. The European archaeological tradition there is a European overlap in only four chapters of providing a foundation in history, philosophy, so that these two works may be used in conjunc‐ and/or social anthropology may be seen clearly in tion. these essays. The scholars who have contributed References Cited these chapters demonstrate frequently their sub‐ Arnold, Bettina 1990 "The Past as Propagan‐ stantive backgrounds in international, national, da: Totalitarian Archaeology in Nazi Germany." and regional sociopolitical history, and historiog‐ Antiquity 64:464-468. raphy. This grasp of the larger issues and caprices Arnold, Bettina and Henning Hassman 1995 in national archaeology, politics, government, and "Archaeology in Nazi Germany: The Legacy of the nationalism is evident and provides an illumina‐ Faustian Bargain." In Nationalism, Politics, and tion of topics and issues that are either obscure or the Practice of Archaeology, edited by Philip L. of minimal interest to archaeologists trained in Kohl and Clare Fawcett, pp. 70-81. Cambridge: the United States' tradition of anthropological ar‐ Cambridge University Press. chaeology, quantifcation, and physicochemical analyses (Patterson 1995). The fourteen page dou‐ Brew, John (editor) 1968 One Hundred Years ble-column index is particularly detailed with of Anthropology. Cambridge: Harvard University both topical and proper noun entries--for exam‐ Press. ple forty topics under "archaeological symbols Chernykh, E. N. 1995 "Postscript: Russian Ar‐ used in nationalism." A majority of citations in chaeology after the Collapse of the USSR--Infras‐ each chapter are from the primary political and tructural Crisis and the Resurgence of Old and archaeological literature and language of that na‐ New Nationalism." In Nationalism, Politics, and tion state. The inclusion of maps in the contribu‐ the Practice of Archaeology, edited by Philip L. tion on Slovenia was important to a better under‐ Kohl and Clare Fawcett, pp. 139-148. Cambridge: standing of shifting political and ethnic frontiers; Cambridge University Press.

12 H-Net Reviews

Cooney, Gabriel and Eoin Grogan 1994 Irish Kohl and Clare Fawcett, pp. 57-69. Cambridge: Prehistory: A Social Perspective. Dublin: Word‐ Cambridge University Press. well. Lorenzo, Jose Luis 1976 La arqueologia mexi‐ Daniel, Glyn 1975 150 Years of Archaeology, cana y los arqueologicos norteamericanos. Mexi‐ 2nd ed. London: Duckworth. co, D.F.: Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e His‐ Diaz-Andreu, Margarita 1995 "Archaeology toria, Departamento de Prehistoria. and Nationalism in Spain." In Nationalism, Poli‐ Mackenzie, Iain M. (editor) 1994 Archaeologi‐ tics, and the Practice of Archaeology, edited by cal Theory: Progress or Posture? Worldwide Ar‐ Philip L. Kohl and Clare Fawcett, pp. 39-56. Cam‐ chaeology Series Vol.11. Aldershot, Great Britain bridge: Cambridge University Press. and Brookfeld, Vermont: Avebury/Ashgate Pub‐ Fowler, Don D. 1987 "Uses of the Past: Archae‐ lishing. ology in the Service of the State." American Antiq‐ Oyuela-Caycedo, Augusto (editor) 1994 Histo‐ uity 52: 229-248. ry of Latin American Archaeology. Worldwide Ar‐ Hobsbawm, Eric 1990 Nations and National‐ chaeology Series Vol. 15. Aldershot, Great Britain ism since 1780. Cambridge: Cambridge University and Brookfeld, Vermont: Avebury/Ashgate Pub‐ Press. lishing. Hobsbawm, Eric and Terence Ranger (editors) Patterson, Thomas C. 1995 Toward a Social 1983 The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge: Cam‐ History of Archaeology in the United States. Fort bridge University Press. Worth: Harcourt Brace. Hroch, Miroslav (Ben Fowkes, translator) Phillips, Patricia 1980 The Prehistory of Eu‐ 1985 Social Preconditions of National Revival in rope. Bloomington and London: Indiana Universi‐ Europe: A Comparative Analysis of the Social ty Press. Composition of Patriotic Groups Among the Piggott, Stuart 1966 Ancient Europe from the Smaller European Nations. Cambridge: Cam‐ Beginnings of Agriculture to Classical Antiquity: A bridge University Press. Survey. Chicago: Aldine. Kaiser, Timothy 1995 "Archaeology and Ideol‐ Pollard, A. Mark and Carl Heron 1996 Archae‐ ogy in Southeast Europe." In Nationalism, Politics, ological Chemistry. Letchworth: Royal Society of and the Practice of Archaeology, edited by Philip Chemistry. L. Kohl and Clare Fawcett, pp. 99-119. Cambridge: Shanks, Michael and Christopher Tilley 1987 Cambridge University Press. Social Theory and Archaeology. London: Polity Kohl, Philip L. 1993 "Nationalism, Politics, and Press. the Practice of Archaeology in Soviet Transcauca‐ Shnirelman, Victor A. 1995 "From Interna‐ sia." Journal of European Archaeology 1:181-189. tionalism to Nationalism: Forgotten Pages of Sovi‐ Kohl, Philip L. and Clare Fawcett (editors) et Archaeology in the 1930s and 1940s. In Nation‐ 1995 Nationalism, Politics, and the Practice of Ar‐ alism, Politics, and the Practice of Archaeology, chaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University edited by Philip L. Kohl and Clare Fawcett, pp. Press. 120-138. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lillios, Katina T. 1995 "Nationalism and Cop‐ Trigger, Bruce 1984 "Alternative Archaeolo‐ per Age Research in Portugal during the Salazar gies: Nationalist, Colonialist, Imperialist." Man 19: Regime (1932-1974). In Nationalism, Politics, and 355-370. the Practice of Archaeology, edited by Philip L.

13 H-Net Reviews

1989 A History of Archaeological Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Willey, Gordon R. and Jeremy A. Sablof 1993 A History of American Archaeology, 3rd ed. San Francisco: Freeman. Copyright (c) 1997 by H-Net, all rights re‐ served. This work may be copied for non-proft educational use if proper credit is given to the au‐ thor and the list. For other permission, please con‐ tact [email protected].

If there is additional discussion of this review, you may access it through the network, at https://networks.h-net.org/h-sae

Citation: Charles C. Kolb. Review of Diaz-Andreu, Margarita; Champion, Timothy, eds. Nationalism and Archaeology in Europe. H-SAE, H-Net Reviews. September, 1997.

URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=1310

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.

14