Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T08:32:14.679Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The perils of ethnographic analogy. Parallel logics in ethnoarchaeology and Victorian Bible customs books

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 November 2018

Jerimy J. Cunningham  and
Kevin M. McGeough
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In recent years, ethnoarchaeology and the use of ethnographic analogy have come under increasing criticism. Analogy seems necessary because, as post-industrial academics, archaeologists worry that they do not possess the knowledge necessary to interpret archaeological materials directly and thus must consult with coeval ‘premodern’ peoples to develop interpretive baselines. In this paper, we draw attention to a form of scholarly enquiry – 19th-century Bible customs books – that faced a similar challenge and used methodologies that parallel archaeology's use of ethnoarchaeological data. These were books written by missionaries who lived in Palestine for extended periods of time and studied Palestinian life to make sense of obscure elements of the biblical text, believing that life there had remained fundamentally unchanged for the past three thousand years. Using the Bible customs books as a kind of ‘cautionary tale’ typical of ethnoarchaeology, we argue that a consideration of this literature brings into focus some of the challenges faced by archaeologists’ use of analogy. Specifically, Bible customs books expose significant issues in how relations are conceptualized between archaeologists, others and ancients, and show how a strict empirical focus in ethnographic research can insulate key assumptions from critical scrutiny.

Keywords

ethnoarchaeologyBible customs booksmissionariesethnographic analogyboundary conditions19th-century Palestine
Type
Articles
Information
Archaeological Dialogues , Volume 25 , Issue 2 , December 2018 , pp. 161 - 189
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Appadurai, A., 2015: Mediants, materiality, normativity, Public culture 27 (2), 221–37.Google Scholar
Arnold, P., 2000: Working without a net. Recent trends in ceramic ethnoarchaeology, Journal of archaeological research 8 (2), 105–33.Google Scholar
Barrett, J., 1994: Fragments from antiquity. An archaeology of social life in Britain, 2900–1200 BC, Oxford.Google Scholar
Ben-Arieh, Y., 2007 (1979): The rediscovery of the Holy Land in the nineteenth century, Jerusalem.Google Scholar
Binford, L. 1967: Smudge pits and hide smoking. The use of analogy in archaeological reasoning, American antiquity 32 (1), 1–12.Google Scholar
Binford, L., 1978: Nunamiut ethnoarchaeology, New York.Google Scholar
Binford, L., 1981: Bones. Ancient men and modern myths, New York.Google Scholar
Binford, L., and Sabloff, J., 1982: Paradigms, systematics, and archaeology, Journal of anthropological research 38 (2), 137–53.Google Scholar
Carter, C., 1997: Ethnoarchaeology, in Meyers, E. (ed.), The Oxford encyclopedia of archaeology in the Near East, Vol. 2, Oxford, 280–84.Google Scholar
Conkey, M.W., 2007: Is there a gender of theory in archaeology, Journal of archaeological method and theory 14 (3), 285–310.Google Scholar
Cunningham, J., 2003: Transcending the ‘obnoxious spectator’. A case for processual pluralism in ethnoarchaeology, Journal of anthropological archaeology 22 (4), 389–410.Google Scholar
Cunningham, J., 2009: Ethnoarchaeology beyond correlates, Ethnoarchaeology. Journal of archaeological, ethnographic, and experimental studies 1 (2), 115–36.Google Scholar
Cunningham, J., 2013: The independence of ethnoarchaeology, in Chrisomalis, S. and Costopoulos, A. (eds), Human expeditions inspired by Bruce G. Trigger, Toronto, 51–72.Google Scholar
Cunningham, J., in press: Ethnoarchaeology, in López-Varela, S.L. (ed.), The encyclopedia of archaeological sciences, Malden, MA.Google Scholar
Cunningham, J., and MacEachern, S., 2016: Ethnoarchaeology as slow science. World archaeology 48 (5), 628–41.Google Scholar
Currie, A., 2016: Ethnographic analogy, the comparative method, and archaeological special pleading. Studies in history and philosophy of science 55, 84–94.Google Scholar
Dalman, G., 1964 (1937): Arbeit und Sitte in Palästina, Hildesheim (Schriften des Deutschen Palästina-Instituts, Bd. 3, 5–6, 8, 9, 10).Google Scholar
David, N., 1992: Integrating ethnoarchaeology. A subtle realist perspective, Journal of anthropological archaeology 11, 330–59.Google Scholar
David, N., and Kramer, C., 2001: Ethnoarchaeology in action, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Davis, J., 1996: The landscape of belief. Encountering the Holy Land in nineteenth-century American art and culture, Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
Davis, T., 2013: Ethnoarchaeology, in Master, D. (ed.), The Oxford encyclopedia of the Bible and archaeology, Vol. 1, AEL–INF, Oxford, 381–85.Google Scholar
Fabian, J., 1983: Time and the other. How anthropology makes its object, New York.Google Scholar
Ferguson, J. 2006: Global shadows. Africa in the neoliberal world order, Durham, NC.Google Scholar
Fewkes, J.W., 1893: A-WA’-TO BI. An archeological verification of a Tusayan legend, American anthropologist 6 (4), 363–76.Google Scholar
Fewkes, J.W., 1896: The prehistoric culture of Tusayan, American anthropologist 9 (5), 151–74.Google Scholar
Fewkes, J.W., 1900: Tusayan migration traditions, Bureau of American ethnology, annual report 19, 577–633.Google Scholar
Frei, H., 1974: The eclipse of biblical narrative. A study of eighteenth and nineteenth century hermeneutics, New Haven, CT.Google Scholar
Gatt, G., 1885: Industrielles aus Gaza, Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins 8, 69–79.Google Scholar
Gell, A., 1998: Art and agency. An anthropological theory, Oxford.Google Scholar
Gosselain, O., 2016: To hell with ethnoarchaeology!, Archaeological dialogues 23 (2), 215–28.Google Scholar
Gould, R., 1980: Living archaeology, Cambridge (New Studies in Archaeology).Google Scholar
Gould, R., and Watson, P., 1982: A dialogue on the meaning and use of analogy in ethnoarchaeological reasoning, Journal of anthropological archaeology 1, 355–81.Google Scholar
Hamilakis, Y., 2011: Archaeological ethnography. A multitemporal meeting ground for archaeology and anthropology, Annual review of anthropology 40, 399–414.Google Scholar
Hodder, I. (ed.), 1982a: Symbolic and structural archaeology. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hodder, I., 1982b: Symbols in action. Ethnoarchaeological studies of material culture, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hodgen, M., 1964: Early anthropology in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Johnson, M., 2011: On the nature of empiricism in archaeology, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 17 (4), 764–87.Google Scholar
Kirschenblatt-Gimblett, B., 1997: A place in the world. Jews and the Holy Land at world's fairs, in Shandler, J. and Wenger, B. (eds), Encounters with the ‘Holy Land’. Place, past, and future in American Jewish culture, Hanover, NH, 60–82.Google Scholar
Kleindienst, M., and Watson, P., 1956: ‘Action archaeology’. The archaeological inventory of a living community, Anthropology tomorrow 5 (1), 75–78.Google Scholar
Lane, P., 2006: Present to past. Ethnoarchaeology, in Tilley, C., Keane, W., Küchler, S., Rowlands, M. and Spyer, P. (eds), Handbook of material culture, London, 402–24.Google Scholar
Latour, B., 2007: Reassembling the social. An introduction to actor-network theory. Oxford.Google Scholar
Lee, R., and Devore, I. (eds), 1968: Man the hunter. The first intensive survey of a single, crucial stage of human development – Man's once universal hunting way of life, Chicago.Google Scholar
London, G., 2000: Ethnoarchaeology and interpretations of the past, Near Eastern archaeology 63 (1), 2–8.Google Scholar
London, G., 2016: Ancient cookware from the Levant. An ethnoarchaeological perspective, Bristol.Google Scholar
Luigi, F. 2013. Ethnoarchaeology in Italy, in Marciniak, A. and Yalman, N. (eds), Contesting ethnoarchaeologies. Traditions, theories, prospects, New York, 35–59.Google Scholar
Lydon, J., and Rizvi, U. (eds), 2010: Handbook of postcolonial archaeology, Walnut Creek, CA.Google Scholar
Lyons, D., and Casey, J., 2016: It's a material world. The critical and on-going value of ethnoarchaeology in understanding variation, change and materiality, World archaeology 48 (5), 609–27.Google Scholar
McGeough, K., 2015a: The ancient Near East in the nineteenth century. Appreciations and appropriations. I. Claiming and conquering, Sheffield (Hebrew Bible Monographs 67).Google Scholar
McGeough, K., 2015b: The ancient Near East in the nineteenth century. Appreciations and appropriations. II. Collecting, constructing, curating, Sheffield (Hebrew Bible Monographs 68).Google Scholar
Malinowski, B. 1982 (1922): Argonauts of the western Pacific. An account of native enterprise and adventure in the archipelagoes of Melanesian New Guinea, Prospect Heights, IL.Google Scholar
Marciniak, A., and Yalman, N. (eds), 2013: Contesting ethnoarchaeologies. Traditions, theories, prospects, New York.Google Scholar
Miller, D., 1985: Artefacts as categories. A study of ceramic variability in central India, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Morgan, L., 1877: Ancient society; or Researches into the lines of human progress from savagery through barbarism to civilization, Cleveland.Google Scholar
Murre-van den Burg, H., 2006: William McClure Thomson's The Land and the Book (1859). Pilgrimage and mission in Palestine, in Murre-van den Berg, H. (ed.), New faith in ancient lands. Western missions in the Middle East in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Leiden (Studies in Christian Missions 32), 43–63.Google Scholar
Raab, L.M., and Goodyear, A., 1984: Middle-range theory in archaeology. A critical review of origins and applications, American antiquity 49 (2), 255–68.Google Scholar
Robinson, E., 1841: Biblical researches in Palestine, Mount Sinai and Arabia Petræa. A journal of travels in the year 1838 by E. Robinson and E. Smith, Boston.Google Scholar
Sahlins, M., and Service, E. (eds), 1960: Evolution and culture, Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
Said, E., 2003 (1978): Orientalism, 25th anniversary edn, Oxford and New York.Google Scholar
Saidel, B., 2014: Ethnoarchaelogy, in Ziolkowski, E. (ed.), The encyclopedia of the Bible and its reception, Vol. 8, Essenes–Fideism, Berlin, 158–59.Google Scholar
Schiffer, M., and Skibo, J., 1997: The explanation of artifact variability, American antiquity 62, 27–55.Google Scholar
Schor, S., 1934: Palestine and the Bible, 20th edn, London.Google Scholar
Stahl, A. 1993: Concepts of time and approaches to analogical reasoning in historical perspective, American antiquity 58, 235–60.Google Scholar
Struwe, R., 2013. German ethnoarchaeological traditions from a theoretical and conceptual viewpoint. Past and present, in Marciniak, A. and Yalman, N. (eds), Contesting ethnoarchaeologies. Traditions, theories, prospects, New York, 61–82.Google Scholar
Thomson, W., 1880: The land and the book or Biblical illustrations drawn from the manners and customs, the scenes and scenery of the Holy Land, New York.Google Scholar
Trigger, B., 1980: Archaeology and the image of the American Indian, American antiquity 45 (4), 662–76.Google Scholar
Trigger, B., 1998: Sociocultural evolution. Calculation and contingency, Oxford.Google Scholar
Trigger, B., 2006: A history of archaeological thought, 2nd edn, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Van-Lennep, H., 1875: Bible lands. Their modern customs and manners illustrative of Scripture, New York.Google Scholar
Varisco, D., 2002: The archaeologist's spade and the apologist's stacked deck. The Near East through conservative Christian bibliolatry, in Amanat, A. and Bernhardsson, M. (eds), The United States and the Middle East. Cultural encounters, New Haven, CT (YCIAS Working Paper Series), 57–116.Google Scholar
Varisco, D., 2013: Orientalism and bibliolatry. Framing the Holy Land in nineteenth-century Protestant Bible customs texts, in Netton, I. (ed.), Orientalism revisited. Art, land and voyage, New York, 187–204.Google Scholar
Walde, D.A., 2006: Avonlea and Athabaskan migrations. A reconsideration. Plains anthropologist 51 (198), 185–97.Google Scholar
Watson, P., 1966: Clues to Iranian prehistory in modern village life, Expedition 8, 9–19.Google Scholar
Watson, P., 1979: The idea of ethnoarchaeology. Notes and comments, in Kramer, C. (ed.), Ethnoarchaeology. Implications of ethnography in archaeology, New York, 277–87.Google Scholar
Watson, P., 1980: The theory and practice of ethnoarchaeology with special reference to the Near East, Paléorient 6, 55–64.Google Scholar
Witmore, C., 2007: Symmetrical archaeology. Excerpts of a manifesto, World archaeology 39 (4), 546–62.Google Scholar
Wobst, H.M., 1978: The archaeo-ethnology of hunter-gatherers or the tyranny of the ethnographic record in archaeology, American antiquity 43 (2), 303–9.Google Scholar
Wolf, E., 1982: Europe and the people without history, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
Wylie, A., 1982: An analogy by any other name is just as analogical. A commentary on the Gould–Watson dialogue, Journal of anthropological archaeology 1, 382–401.Google Scholar
Wylie, A., 1985: The reaction against analogy, Advances in archaeological method and theory 8, 63–111.Google Scholar
Wylie, A., 1988: ‘Simple’ analogy and the role of relevance assumptions. Implications for archaeological practice, International studies in the philosophy of science 2 (2), 134–50.Google Scholar
Wylie, A., 1992: The interplay of evidential constraints and political interests. Recent archaeological research on gender, American antiquity 57 (1), 15–35.Google Scholar
Wylie, A., 1995. Alternate histories. Epistemic disunity and political integrity, in Schmidt, P.R. and Patterson, T.C. (eds), Making alternative histories. The practice of archaeology and history in non-Western settings, Santa Fe, 255–72.Google Scholar