There were differences in the representation of humans and animals between the regions of Thessaly and the central Balkans during the earlier Neolithic. These differences imply the constitution of distinct worlds. Representation is anthropocentric in Thessaly and it focuses on particular actions of the human body. In the central Balkans, there is more animal imagery, although here too humans predominate. The lack of specific traits suggests an ontological principle of generic identity.

Archaeologists who seek to examine people's roles in past societies have long assumed, consciously or unconsciously, the existence of individuals. In this study, we explore various concepts and dimensions of ‘the individual’, both ethnographic and archaeological. We show that many protagonists in the debate over the existence of ‘individuals’ in prehistory use the same ethnographic examples to argue their positions. These positions range from the claim that any suggestion of individuals prior to 500 years ago simply projects a construct of western modernity onto the past, to the view that individual identities are culturally specific social constructs, both past and present. Like most contributors to the debate, we too are sceptical of an unchanging humanity in the past, but we feel that thinking on the topic has become somewhat inflexible. As a counterpoint to this debate, therefore, we discuss Bourdieu's concept of habitus in association with Foucault's notion of power. We conclude that experiencing oneself as a living individual is part of human nature, and that archaeologists should reconsider the individual's social, spatial and ideological importance, as well as the existence of individual, embodied lives in prehistoric as well as historical contexts.

In the previous issue of CAJ, Heggarty (2007) set out how certain key principles and methods of historical linguistics can be exploited to open up another window on the past, from a perspective quite different and complementary to that offered by the archaeological record. Following this up, we turn here to an ideal case-study for exploring how the various patterns in linguistic (pre-)histories can be matched with their most plausible correlates in the archaeological data. Beyond our initial illustration of the Incas we now look further afield, to set the sequence of major civilizations of the Andes into its linguistic context, tracing the expansion trajectories of the main Andean language families further back in time, stage by stage, ultimately to their most plausible original homelands. The linguistic story emerges starkly at odds with assumptions widely held among archaeologists of the region. Indeed we encounter a paradigm case of how only a radical rethinking can reconcile our two disciplines' findings into a single, coherent, holistic prehistory for a human population — in the Andes, a prize now tantalizingly within our reach.

Time and change have been among the most widely discussed themes in archaeological theory, though they have varying fortunes in the vicissitudes of academic life. British and American anthropology, it has been observed, have long oscillated between history and evolution, between studying culture in its local context and in a long-term narrative. Following Steward and White rather than Kroeber and Boas, the New Archaeology's banner was evolution, and many of its theoretical goals were explicitly reductionist, for example, in viewing human actions as a local response to large-scale environmental conditions. Yet, at the same time, from its inception the New Archaeology also contained the seeds of a humanistic, historical approach (for instance, in tracing social stratification to chiefly power strategies to local, short-term political contexts).

This paper re-examines the concept of the archaeological event as a means to avoid dual or multiple levels for historical phenomena, which a scalar view of time creates. Central to this procedure is an examination of the nature of residuality in relation to the archaeological record; it is argued that our concept of residuality needs to be broadened to encompass a more general view of material organization where the property of reversibility is foregrounded. In doing so, a different conception of the event is generated which defines itself not in terms of particularity but reversibility.

Generation after generation, life after life, human existence flows through time. Person to person, community to community, the relationships of social existence spread out in space. Archaeology has come up with many different approaches to the central questions of temporality and sociality, but it has not been very successful with either.

One of the strengths of the archaeological discipline is our ability to examine social transformations over the course of centuries or millennia. However, we rarely think about the ways in which temporal scale affects our interpretations of these processes. Transformative social changes look different when seen from the perspective of the longue durée, a human lifespan, or a single day. Although they clearly result from human actions, long-term, major social changes cannot be understood simply as additive concatenations of short-term shifts.

Are there long-term processes invisible over short spans? And if so, how might they relate to the loci of long-term social change, those performative or practical moments wherein agents enact, embody, or otherwise engage traditions, landscapes, or structures? Here, we are particularly concerned with the experience of starry skies as these were historically reckoned through cluttered object fields and cosmic events. These are key to understanding the emergent properties of ethnoastronomies and cultural landscapes that, in certain moments, may be described as leading to historical conjunctures.

Colour symbolism permeated the world of indigenous North America. This symbolism was often tied to the cosmos where the earth was viewed as a quadrilateral disk and each of the four cardinal directions was linked with a colour array such as red, white, black, and blue. We suggest that the recurring use of certain colours and colour contrasts comprised a suite of long-term historical practices that were essential for reproducing certain views about the world and about being in the world. Further, the rendering of colour had a plasticity that allowed it to enter a discourse about daily life that was intertwined with notions of the long-term. As a case study, we focus on well-known ceramic head effigies in the central Mississippi Valley to argue that their veneers of contrasting red and white were imbued with a notion of time immemorial that converged with other conceptions of temporality, most importantly, a pressing concern with regional violence, personal safety, and spiritual integrity.

Mesoamerica was the time-place in the New World where the memory arts of writing and calendrical notation achieved their highest forms. Both had long histories going back at least to the first millennium bc and were part of an even longer and wider history of memorials and commemorations dating millennia earlier. In this essay we consider time and memorials as social constructs and forms of practice and provide data for sequential changes in both. As commonly deployed and materialized, history and memorials are about the evolving ‘now’ and future aspirations rather than a fixed past — but they are communicated by re-presenting supposed pasts. In Mesoamerica, the things remembered, the manner of remembering them, and the reasons for doing so evolved with changing social and political institutions and circumstances.

Over the last two decades, there has been increasing attention to community archaeology, an archaeology which acknowledges the impact of archaeological research upon the communities among which it is conducted. Doing fieldwork has tangible effects upon the people we work among: archaeologists provide employment, spend money locally, negotiate local power structures, provide exotic connections, and, not least, change the landscape of knowledge by helping local people understand more or different things about their ancestors and about their own historical identity. While this is true worldwide, within American Historical Archaeology this strand of research has converged with a tradition of sophisticated materialist analysis highlighting not only class domination but also resistance and the persistence of alternative practices, ideologies and identities. A key element of this archaeology is public participation in the process of revealing a past of domination, struggle and resistance. The result is an archaeology which aspires not only to revise traditionally endorsed accounts of American history, but also to be an activist archaeology.

Mark Leone began this line of activist, participatory historical archaeology many years ago in Annapolis, and many of the scholars currently contributing to this body of work have been trained or inspired by this project. In The Archaeology of Liberty in an American Capital, Leone summarizes twenty-five years of research at Annapolis.

The Archaeology of Liberty in an American Capital: Excavations in Annapolis has received the Society for Historical Archaeology's James Deetz Book Award for 2008.