Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T17:41:35.090Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Childe and the International Congresses of Archaeology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2017

Margarita Díaz-Andreu*
Affiliation:
Durham University, UK
*

Abstract

In this article Childe's commitment to internationalism and, in particular, to the International Congress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences (CISPP) is analysed. Personal correspondence between Childe and Myres and, to a lesser extent, other archaeologists, is used as the basis to consider the different stages in Childe's involvement in the CISPP. After an overview of the emergence of international congresses, the article looks at the formation of an interest group that resulted in the creation of the CISPP. The challenges brought by Nazi Germany to the international scene, and to Childe's positioning in it, are also explored. The article then examines his role in the revival of the international congress during and after the Second World War and his lesser commitment from the third conference in 1950. Finally, some comments are made on the value of archives for the history of archaeology, on the lack of connection between Childe's internationalism and Marxism, and on the need to further investigate the relationship between Childe and Myres.

Cet article analyse l'engagement de Childe envers l'internationalisme et plus particulièrement envers le Congrès International des Sciences Préhistoriques et Protohistoriques (CISSP). On analyse les différents degrés de l'engagement de Childe envers la CISPP en se basant sur la correspondance personnelle entre Childe et Myres et, à un moindre degré, entre Childe et autres archéologues. L'article fournit un aperçu de l'avènement des congrès internationaux, et s'intéresse ensuite de plus près à la formation d'un groupe d'intérêt qui résultait dans la fondation de la CISPP; ainsi qu'aux défis apportés par l'Allemagne Nazi à la scène internationale et au positionnement de Childe dans celle-ci. De même on considère son rôle dans la relance du congrès international durant et après la Deuxième Guerre Mondiale, et son engagement moins important pour la troisième conférence en 1950. Finalement, on ajoute quelques remarques sur la valeur des archives pour l'histoire de l'archéologie, sur le manque de connexion entre l'internationalisme de Childe et le marxisme, et sur le besoin d'examiner plus en détail la relation entre Childe et Myres.

Zusammenfassung

Zusammenfassung

In diesem Artikel wird Childes Einsatz für den Internationalismus und im Besonderen für den Congrès international des Sciences préhistoriques et protohistoriques (C.I.S.P.P.) analysiert. Die persönliche Korrespondenz zwischen Childe und Myres sowie in einem geringeren Maße mit anderen Archäologen wird als Grundlage genutzt, um die verschiedenen Phasen von Childes Einbindung in den C.I.S.P.P. zu eruieren. Nach einem Überblick zum Aufkommen internationaler Kongresse betrachtet der Aufsatz die Formation einer Interessengruppe, die in der Schaffung des C.I.S.P.P. mündete. Auch die Herausforderungen, die die Archäologie des NS-Regimes in Deutschland für die internationale Forscherszene mit sich brachte, und Childes Positionierung werden untersucht. Dann wird seine Rolle beim Wiederaufkommen internationaler Kongresse während des und nach dem II. Weltkrieg sowie sein zurückgehendes Engagement ab der dritten Konferenz 1950 behandelt. Abschließend folgen einige Anmerkungen zum Wert von Archiven für die Archäologiegeschichte, zur fehlenden Verbindung zwischen Childes Internationalismus und Marxismus sowie zur Notwendigkeit weiterer Forschungen zum Verhältnis zwischen Childe und Myres.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © 2009 Sage Publications 

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

Anon., , 1934. Proceedings of the First International Congress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Anon., , 1935. The Second International Congress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences. Man 35(October):153154.Google Scholar
Anon., , 1987. Obituary. Anthropology Today 3(1):26.Google Scholar
Arnold, B., 1990. The past as propaganda: totalitarian archaeology in Nazi Germany. Antiquity 64(244):464478.Google Scholar
Balout, L., 1963. Voyage de l'Abbé Breuil en France, en Europe, à travers le monde (1897–1957). Libyca 11:942.Google Scholar
Bordes, F., 1968. In memory of Raymond Vaufrey. Current Anthropology 9(4):337338.Google Scholar
Bosch Gimpera, Gimpera., 1980. Memòries. Barcelona: Edicions 62.Google Scholar
Bradley, R., 1997. ‘To see is to have seen’. Craft traditions in British field archae-ology. In Molyneaux, B.L. (ed.), The Cultural Life of Images: 6272. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Breton, A.C. and Buiuutt, M.C., 1921. Proceedings of Institut International d'Anthropologie. Man 21:155156.Google Scholar
Bruce-Mitford, R.L.S., 1991. Sir Thomas Downing Kendrick (1895–1979). Proceedings of the British Academy 76:445471.Google Scholar
Burkett, M.C., 1924. Report on the Anthropological Congress held in Prague under the auspices of l'Institut International d'Anthropologie. Man 24(November):174176.Google Scholar
Burkitt, M.C., Childe, V.G., Fox, C., Hawkes, C., Kendrick, T.D., Leeds, E.T. and Ralegh Radford, C.A., 1932. A Handbook of the Prehistoric Archaeology of Britain: Issued in Connexion with the First International Congress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Societies held in London, August 1–6, 1932. Oxford: Printed for the Congress by John Johnson, Printer to the University.Google Scholar
, C.P., 1945. Obituary notice: Hugh Sadler Kingsford, 1878–1944. Antiquaries Journal 25:78.Google Scholar
Childe, V.G., 1925. The Dawn of European Civilization. London: Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Childe, V.G., 1930. Second Baltic Archaeological Congress, Riga: August 18–23, 1930. Man 30 (December):224–225.Google Scholar
Childe, V.G., 1933. Is prehistory practical? Antiquity 7(28):410418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Childe, V.G., 1934a. Anthropology and Herr Hitler. Discovery 15:6568.Google Scholar
Childe, V.G., 1934b. Die Bedeutung der altsumerischen Metalltypen fiir die Chronologie der europäischen Bronzezeit. Mitteilungen der ant hropologische Gesellschaft in Wien 63:217222.Google Scholar
Childe, V.G., 1934c. Die Bedeutung einiger im Orient neu gefundenen Metalltypen fiir die bronzezeitliche Chronologie Europas. In Anon., Proceedings of the First International Congress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences, 1932:180182. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Childe, VG., 1934d. A fort and secondary souterrain on Castlelaw, near Edinburgh. In Anon., Proceedings of the First International Congress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences, 1932: 228229. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Childe, V.G., 1934e. Minister Dr Frick: the teaching of history and prehistory in Germany. Nature 133:298299.Google Scholar
Comas, J., 1956. Historia y bibliografía de los Congresos Internacionales de Ciencias Antropológicas: 1856–1954. México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Google Scholar
Cppeu, , 1944. Conference on the Problems and Prospects of European Archaeology, Sept. 16–17, 1944. London: University of London, Institute of Archaeology (Occasional Papers 6).Google Scholar
De Laet, S.J., 1970. Un siècle de collaboration internationale dans le domaine des sciences préhistoriques et protohistoriques. In Filip, J. (ed.), Actes du VIIe Congrès International des Sciences Préhistoriques et Protohistoriques. Prague, 21–27 août 1966:14231439. Prague: Academie Tchécoslovaque des Sciences. Institut d'Archéologie.Google Scholar
Díaz-Andreu, M., 2007a. Internationalism in the invisible college: political ideolo-gies and friendships in archaeology. Journal of Social Archaeology 7(1):2948.Google Scholar
Díaz-Andreu, M., 2007b. V. Gordon Childe i Espanya: notes d'arxiu. Cota Zero 2:8498.Google Scholar
Díaz-Andreu, M., 2007c. Christopher Hawkes and the International Summer Courses of Arnpurias. Bulletin of the History of Archaeology 17(1):1934.Google Scholar
Díaz-Andreu, M., 2008. Revisiting the ‘Invisible College’: José Ramón Mélida in early twentieth-century Spain. In Schlanger, N. and Nordbladh, J. (eds), Archives, Ancestors, Practices. Archaeology in the Light of its History: 121129. New York: Berghahn.Google Scholar
Díaz-Andreu, M., forthcoming. Geographies of Archaeological Knowledge.Google Scholar
Díaz-Andreu, M., Mora, G. and Cortadella, J. (eds), forthcoming. Diccionario Histórico de la Arqueologia en España (siglos XV-XX). Madrid: Marcial Pons.Google Scholar
Evans, C., 1989. Archaeology and modern times: Bersu's Woodbury 1938 & 1939. Antiquity 63:436450.Google Scholar
Evans, R., 1995. ‘Social Passion’: Vere Gordon Childe in Queensland, 1918–19. In Gathercole, P., Irving, T.H. and Melleuish, G. (eds), Childe and Australia: Archaeology, Politics and Ideas: 126. St Lucia QD: University of Queensland Press.Google Scholar
Filip, J., 1966/69. Enzyklopädisches Handbuch zur Ur- und Frühgeschichte Europas. Volume I [a-k] and Volume II [l-z] Prag: Tschechoslowakischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
Gracia, F., Fullola Pericot, J.M. and Vilanova, F., 2002. 58 anys i 7 dies. Correspondència de Pere Bosch Gimpera a Lluís Pericot (1919–1974). Barcelona: Universidat de Barcelona.Google Scholar
Green, S., 1981. Prehistorian: a Biography of V Gordon Childe. Bradford-on-Avon: Moonraker Press.Google Scholar
Grieg, S., 1953. Anton Wilhelm Brøgger [obituary]. Viking XVI: VXX.Google Scholar
Hassman, H., 2000. Archaeology in the ‘Third Reich’. In Härke, H. (ed.), Archaeology, Ideology and Society. The German Experience: 65139. Bern/New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Hawkes, C.F.C., 1950. The International Congress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences: Third Session, Zurich, August, 1950. Man 49:139.Google Scholar
Hossfeld, U. and Olsson, L., 2008. Nature and Hitler. Nature URL (accessed August 2008: http://www.nature.com/nature/history/full/nature06242.htrnl Google Scholar
IIA, 1928. Institut International d'Anthropologie. Liste des Membres au ler october 1927. Institut International d'Anthropologie. IIIe session Amsterdam. 2029 Septembre 1927: ixxl. Paris: Librairie E. Nourry.Google Scholar
Maischberger, M., 2002. German archaeology during the Third Reich, 1933–45: a case study based on archival evidence. Antiquity 76(291) 209218.Google Scholar
Moure Romanillo, A., 1996. Hugo Obermaier, la institucionalización de las investigaciones y la integración de los estudios de Prehistoria en la universidad espariola. In Moure Romanillo, A. (ed.), ‘El hombre fósil’ 80 años después:17–50. Santander: Universidad de Cantabria, Fundación Marcelino Botín, Institute for Prehistoric Investigations.Google Scholar
Müller-Scheessel, N., 2001. «dem Romanismus entgegentreten»: National animosities among the participants of the Congrès international d'anthropologie et d'archéologie préhistoriques. European Association of Archaeology Annual Meeting. Esslingen. Session on German archaeological theory unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Murray, T., ed., 1999. Encyclopedia of Archaeology. The Great Archaeologists. 2 vols. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.Google Scholar
Murray, T., ed., 2001. Encyclopedia of Archaeology. History and Discoveries. Volume I. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.Google Scholar
Myres, J.L., 1911. The Dawn of History. London: Williams and Norgate.Google Scholar
Myres, J.L., 1930. Presidential address. Anthropology: national and international. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 60:1745.Google Scholar
Myres, J.L., 1931a. International Congress and Institut International: an interim report of recent negotiations. Man 31:1720.Google Scholar
Myres, J.L., 1931b. International Congresses, anthropological or prehistoric? A further report of negotiations. Man 31:61–4.Google Scholar
Myres, J.L., 1931c. The old Congress and the new. A fourth report of negotiations. Man 31:131134.Google Scholar
Myres, J.L., 1932. International Congress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Archaeology. Man 32:201219.Google Scholar
Oxford Dictionary, nd. Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. URL (accessed May 2009: http://www.oxforddnb.com/ Google Scholar
Peace, W.J., 1988. Vere Gordon Childe and American Anthropology. Journal of Anthropological Research 44:417–33.Google Scholar
Richard, N., 1992. L'institutionnalisation de la préhistoire. Communications 54:189207.Google Scholar
Schnapp, A., 1980. Archéologie et nazisme (II). Quaderni di Storia 11:1933.Google Scholar
Union of International Associations, 1960. Les congres internationaux de 1681 à 1919. Liste complète. International Congresses 1681 to 1899. Full list. Publication UAI no. 164. Documents no 8. Brussels: Union des associations Internationales.Google Scholar
Vaufrey, R., 1931. Berne. L'Anthropologie 41:305315.Google Scholar
Wiell, S., 1999. The Congress of Anthropology and Archaeology in Copenhagen 1869 — behind the stage. Antiquity 73(279):136142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar