Northeast Historical Archaeology

Volume 28 Article 9

1999 Book Review: Historical Archaeologies of Capitalism, edited by Mark P. Leone and Parker B. Potter, Jr. LouAnn Wurst

Follow this and additional works at: http://orb.binghamton.edu/neha Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons

Recommended Citation Wurst, LouAnn (1999) "Book Review: Historical Archaeologies of Capitalism, edited by Mark P. Leone and Parker B. Potter, Jr.," Northeast Historical Archaeology: Vol. 28 28, Article 9. https://doi.org/10.22191/neha/vol28/iss1/9 Available at: http://orb.binghamton.edu/neha/vol28/iss1/9

This Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by The Open Repository @ Binghamton (The ORB). It has been accepted for inclusion in Northeast Historical Archaeology by an authorized editor of The Open Repository @ Binghamton (The ORB). For more information, please contact [email protected]. Northeast Historical Archaeology /Vol. 28, 1999 105

that the House of Seven Gables survived this HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGIES OF CAPTIALISM, process. It was an impressive 17th-century edited by Mark P. Leone and Parker B. home but it lacked the order, symmetry, and Potter, Jr. 1999, Kluwer Academid Plenum elegance the Turner family required in the Publishers, New York,262 pages, illus., 18th century. Indeed, in the 1740s John Turner $85.00 (hardcover).

III built a new mansion house and the old Reviewed by L~uAnn Wurst homestead was relegated to a summer home and center of family business activity. Ironi­ Mark Leone and Parker Potter, the editors cally, the high cost of the house, its grand fur­ of Historical Archaeologies of Capitalism and nishings and lavish entertainments would their contributors, do not mince words about help precipitate the family's financial ruin. their vision of the nature of historical archae­ While this is a well written and serious ology; for them, historical archaeology is about work, Goodwin's sense of humor occasionally capitalism. Period. shines through to keep a potentially dull topic For me, this volume is refreshing since I lively and enjoyable. This can be seen when have been disturbed by the general lack of she is talking about the "crudest hicks from theory-particularly that confronting capi­ the provincial sticks" or quoting Erasmus's talism-in current historical archaeological lit­ advice that "it is boorish to plunge your erature. A historical archaeologist told me hands into sauced dishes." I have few com­ that we have become the "Nike Generation;" plaints with this work. A couple of the we have already done the theory, now all that sources seem dated, particularly Thomas is left is to "just do it"-the archaeology. This Wertenbaker and Carl Bridenbaugh, promi­ comment is both amusing and disturbing. nent scholars of the 1930s and 1940s whose How quickly one rushes for an advertising work has been largely superceded by recent jingle from a global capitalist company which social and cultural historians. Yet, these is notorious in their exploitation of their labor authorities are not extensively relied on, and force. And, pretending that we have worked overall the citations demonstrate a thorough out our theoretical problems, and that we grasp of the literature. A more significant con­ simply have to "do it" is naive. Recent state­ cern is that like so many recent archaeological ments that define historical archaeology as the monographs, it is only available in an expen­ benign intersection of material culture and tex­ sive hardcover format. As such, it is inacces­ tual evidence, or as rooted in the role of indi­ sible to students, and it is just the sort of work vidual agency lose sight of the political nature they should read. It shows the potential of the of our work. field to take overlooked aspects of the past and The historical archaeology of capitalism, as to synthesize many lines of research into valu­ described in this book, is gloriously political able new interpretations. and is exactly why I became a historical archaeologist. Since, as the authors acknowl­ edge, our questions as scholars come from our Emerson W. Baker is an Associate Professor of own social setting within American society, it History at Salem State College and the Chair should come as no surprise that my reaction to of the Maine Cultural Affairs Council. Most this book arises from my own experience and recently he is the co-author of the New England social context. My father was a construction Knight, an award-winning biography of Sir worker who dropped out of school in the sev­ William Phips. He is currently working on a enth grade to go to work. He started out dri­ material culture history of northern New Eng­ ving a dump truck and ultimately ended his land in the 17th century. career as a crane operator. My father was a staunch union man and today I find it deli­ cious irony that the union that he belonged to Emerson W. Baker for over 30 years, the International Union of 37 Old East Scituate Road Operating Engineers, is the same union that York, ME 03909 represents the Archaeological Field Techni­ [email protected] cians. My mother was a registered nurse who 106 Book Reviews

went back to work full time soon after I was the volume. His argument also does not fit the born. Perhaps my experiences growing up in overall goal of exposing capitalism's inherent a working class household make it easier for relations of exploitation and inequality. me to pierce dominant capitalist ideology. Terry Epperson's article, concerning the Maybe not. But it is clear that research social construction of race, gets us back on agendas driven by ideas like social mobility, track. Epperson provides an elegant statement equality of opportunity, the gendered division of the social construction of race and how race of labor based on separate spheres, or even an relations have been transformed through time. emphasis on meaning based on textual and He reminds us that racial identities can serve thus literate understandings have very little simultaneously as the means of oppression salience for my family and thousands like and a basis for resistance and that we have to them. be careful since our efforts to deconstruct Historical Arcluleologies of Capitalism is orga­ essentialist concepts can also have the effect of nized into four parts. The first part tackles undermining powerful counter-hegemonic issues in a historical archaeology that is identity-based political actions that are built devoted to the study of capitalism. A single on these concepts. article by Mark Leone comprises this section, The third section of the book includes case and provides an amazingly accessible and suc­ studies that integrate concepts of impoverish­ cinct summary of capitalism. Leone addresses ment and capitalism, and force us to confront some of the dominant themes that relate to a the fact that the families who may have lived historical archaeology of capitalism such as on our isolated, individual sites, always advocacy, ideology, consciousness, com­ existed within a complex multi-scalar set of modity fetishism, and consumption. relations based on capitalism. Profit begets The second section, containing articles by poverty and "those without history are delib­ Wylie, Potter, and Epperson, is framed by the erately dispossessed, cursed, and cheated" (p. issue of where our questions come from. 111). All of the authors in this section chal­ Wylie passionately argues that we have to lenge us to develop creative ways to integrate study capitalism if we are to understand and archaeological data, although with various provide alternatives to the present which is levels of success. Margaret Purser addresses based on exploitative social relations. issues of capitalism in the late 19th-century Accepting this as given, Wylie addresses the western United States and the methodological implications of this statement for methodolo­ problems that arise from studying mass-pro­ gies of historical archaeology. She provides a duced artifacts. I agree with Purser that "it valuable discussion of the relationship has proved much easier to categorize the between material culture and text that makes material culture of Capitalism than to analyze our common notions of evidential indepen­ it" (p. 124). Following Purser, we must recog­ dence a difficult position to sustain. Funda­ nize that methodological creativity and inter­ mentally, the issue is not text versus material pretive flexibility will allow us to deal with the culture, but what the various lines of evidence complexity and variability of our subject (p. tell us about life in the past. I hope everyone 137). If a cookie cutter would really work, we takes Wylie's statements to heart so that we would already have accomplished our task. can finally move beyond the history versus Paul Mullins prov~des an insightful interpreta­ archaeology debate once and for all. tion of African-American use of brand-name Potter's contribution to this volume deals products. Instead of dusty interpretations with the issue of identity in modem America, such as assimilation or integration into the and attempts to extend the definition of our dominant economy, Mullins suggests that field to include the historical archaeology of African Americans actively chose brand-name identity. While I can certainly appreciate this products to avoid being cheated by local store goal, Potter's tone struck me as being apolo­ keepers and thus racial exploitation. getic; an attempt to provide validity and Charles Orser follows the "index authenticity to middle-class experience. This approach" to historical archaeology by exam­ article is not really in keeping with the rest of ining the purchasing power of various groups Northeast Historical Archaeology/Val. 28, 1999 107

in the southern agricultural class structure. The guy stealing wheelbarrows, my father, Orser assumes that the rigid class structure of and probably most working-class individuals southern agriculture would imply that "mem­ knew and know exactly how and by whom bers of each tenure class would have roughly they are being exploited. They just didn't the same access to portable goods" (p. 159), knoW what to do about it. and that material differences, evident in the The final section of the book, titled archaeological record, would stem from these "Beyond North America," contains a single class differences. It is not clear to me whether article by Matthew Johnson. Johnson does a the fact that Orser's results were ambiguous nice job wrapping up the volume by high­ relates to the fact that we have yet to define lighting several key issues: space, time, con­ clear material distinctions among these classes, text, material cultUre, and politics, and empha­ or if this is in reality not a particularly fruitful sizes that these issues are central to "the prac­ goal. In either case, facing tenancy and the tice of archaeology in all areas and places" (p. realities of agricultural class structures is 219). Johnson reminds us that a focus on capi­ essential to understanding capitalism. Cre­ talism does not imply only the United States, ating new essentialized categories may not and talks about the long historical develop­ actually further that goal. Mark Leone also ment of capitalism in England. I would have follows an "index approach" in his analysis of liked to see more of a global perspective in this ceramics from Annapolis. Leone uses an section-indeed the title led me to expect more index of ceramic variability from five sites in than just a nod to non-western capitalist con­ Annapolis to examine ideological issues of texts. individualism and the advent of time routines I would like to add one final caution that and work disciplines that are characteristic of addresses the sense of plurality in the title. I capitalism. The results show a great deal of am afraid that the recognition of archaeologies variation among sites, indicating to Leone a of capitalism, while clearly situated within great deal of variability in how households post-processual developments, may ultimately were integrated into the capitalist system. I make it difficult to recognize the unity of our was not swayed by these modest results, par­ goal. The term "Capitalism" implies a struc­ ticularly since the site assemblages utilized ture that either is or is not, and therefore the cover vast expanses of time, such as 1790-1852 archaeologies of capitalism cannot be plural. and 1852-1929 for the Charles Carroll house The form that capitalism takes in any real his­ (p. 208). Leone's conceptualization of ide­ torical context, however, is relational and thus ology, virtually unchanged since the William multifarious. It is this process that contains Paca article 16 years ago, also hit a nerve. I the plurality; plurality is not inherent in the find his claim that "the ideology of individu­ structure itself or in our unified goal to under­ alism is at the heart of why people work stand that structure as historical archaeolo­ within the exploitation that capitalism often gists. The way we approach this task must be produces" (p. 212) to be facile and simplistic. relational, historical, multi-scalar, and plural. His treatment of the impenetrability of ide­ To me, the variability in the "faces that capi­ ology reminded me of my father's favorite talism wears locally" does not imply different joke: or multiple archaeologies, but different sites, scales of analysis, and methodologies. To be On his last day Of work before retiring, Joe truly radical, historical archaeology must focus was walking past security. The guard on the singularity of Capitalism so that our says; "OK Joe, you've been coming out of target does not waver. In many ways, I think here every day with a tarp covered wheel­ barrow, and everyday I check to make that it is the singularity and monolithic nature sure you're not stealing something. Now, of the structure that makes ideology so pow­ I know you've been stealing, just tell me erful and why conceptualizing change is so what it was." Joe replies, "I've been difficult. This is why stealing wheelbarrows stealing wheelbarrows." can be resistance, providing the only option 108 Book Reviews

for satisfaction that most working class people between book covers." Herein we will find have, without being revolutionary. It would case studies, worksheets, and checklists, along be dangerous to lose sight of this. with "worldly advice" from experienced CRM The historical archaeology of capitalism as professionals. advocated in this book is nothing new; we Thomas King rises to this challenge with have all heard it all before. Whether we accept panache and an idiosyncratic flamboyance. The book covers the field of CRM systemati­ it or not, this is how the field must be defined. cally, under three broad section headings: Attempts to construct a de-politicized defini­ "Background and Overview;" "Law and Prac­ tion, whether framed as the intersection of tice;" and "Bringing It All Together." King material culture and text, or based on the role defines the intended scope of his book in the of individual agency, is doomed to fail. The introductory chapter. This is not a legal refer­ final question has to ultimately be whether our ence book, per se, although useful appendices research will support capitalism or critique it. are included covering "Abbreviations, Defini­ I suggest we "just do it." tions," "Laws, Executive Orders," "Regula­ tions," a "Model Section 106 Memorandum of Agreement," and a "Model NAGPRA Plan of LouAnn is an Assistant Professor in the Action." Readers in search of the full texts of Anthropology Department at SUNY College at laws or regulations are sensibly advised to Brockport. Her research has focused on issues consult the World Wide Web. Nor is this of class, gender, and consumption in 19th- and intended to be a cookbook that contains a early 20th-century rural and urban contexts in series of recipes or how-to strategies: "For the Northeast United States. She has recently such people I'd suggest culinary school rather been researching the development of tourism than CRM, although I think you'll find that and service industries and transformations in even the temperature at which water boils domestic food preservation technology. depends on the altitude," King comments dryly (p. 11). Instead, the book sets out to LouAnn Wurst examine the process of CRM: how, given the Department of Anthropology constellation of legislation, regulations, and SUNY College at Brockport contingent issues, "possibilities get explored, Brockport, NY 14420 selected, and implemented" (p. 11). [email protected] Inasmuch as all CRM is essentially the management of change (and this includes par­ adigmatic perspectives) Cultural Resource Laws and Practice is presented as a contribution to an CULTURAL RESOURCE LAWS AND PRACTICE:. AN ongoing debate, replacing King's earlier co­ INTRODUCTORY GUIDE, by Thomas F. King authored text (King, Hickman, and Berg 1977) 1998, Altamira Press, Walnut Creek, CA. 303 and supplementing a body of related theory pages, 9 figures, $46.00 (cloth); $22.95 (paper). (Murtagh 1977; Fitch 1982; Stipe and Lee 1987; Cantor 1996; Burdge 1994). Although the book is primarily intended as a text for college and Reviewed by James Symonds university students, including continuing edu­ cation classes, it is also regarded by the author Cultural Resource Laws and Practice is the as being of interest to a wider audience: first volume in a new series entitled Heritage "environmental and historic preservation per­ Resources Management, from the University sonnel in federal and state agencies, local gov­ of Nevada, Reno. On the inside of the dust ernments, and Indian tribes, and consultants cover the series editor, Don Fowler, proudly in environmental and historic preservation tells us that the series is based upon successful work" (p. 5). seminars sponsored by the University of So how far does King succeed in his Nevada and that the individual volumes have attempt to guide the reader through the been designed to serve as "workshops labyrinth of cultural resource laws and prac-