Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T17:46:20.742Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What is ‘European Archaeology’? What Should it be?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 January 2017

Staša Babić ,
Raimund Karl ,
Monika Milosavljević ,
Koji Mizoguchi ,
Carsten Paludan-Müller ,
Tim Murray ,
John Robb ,
Nathan Schlanger  and
Alessandro Vanzetti
Staša Babić
Affiliation:
University of Belgrade, Serbia
Raimund Karl
Affiliation:
University of Wales, Bangor, UK
Monika Milosavljević
Affiliation:
University of Belgrade, Serbia
Koji Mizoguchi
Affiliation:
University of Kyushu, Japan
Carsten Paludan-Müller
Affiliation:
Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage Research, Norway
Tim Murray
Affiliation:
La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia
John Robb
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge, UK
Nathan Schlanger
Affiliation:
École nationale des chartes, Paris, France
Alessandro Vanzetti
Affiliation:
University of Rome, Italy
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

‘European archaeology’ is an ambiguous and contested rubric. Rooted in the political histories of European archaeology, it potentially unites an academic field and provides a basis for international collaboration and inclusion, but also creates essentialized identities and exclusionary discourses. This discussion article presents a range of views on what European archaeology is, where it comes from, and what it could be.

«L'archéologie européenne» est une notion ambiguë et contestée. Avec ses racines dans l'histoire politique de l'archéologie en Europe, elle est capable d'unifier les branches de la discipline et d’établir les bases d'une collaboration et d'une intégration au niveau international mais elle est aussi à l'origine de la création d'identités unidimensionnelles et de propos exclusionistes. Le débat que nous amorçons ici présente une série de points de vue sur ce que l'archéologie européenne représente, d'où elle provient et ce qu'elle pourrait devenir. Translation by Madeleine Hummler

Der Ausdruck „Europäische Archäologie“ ist ein mehrdeutiger und bestrittener Begriff. Mit ihren Wurzeln in der politischen Geschichte der Archäologie in Europa ist die Disziplin in der Lage, das wissenschaftliche Fach zu vereinigen und die Grundlagen einer internationaler Zusammenarbeit und Eingliederung zu legen, aber es besteht auch immer die Gefahr, dass sie auch zur Erzeugung von übermäßig vereinfachten Identitäten und zur Förderung von ausschließender Diskurse leiten kann. Die vorliegenden Beiträge legen ein breites Meinungsspektrum über die Bedeutung, den Ursprung und die Zukunft der europäischen Archäologie vor. Translation by Madeleine Hummler

Keywords

EuropearchaeologypoliticsgeographyhistoryheritageEuropearchéologiepolitiquegéographiehistoirepatrimoineEuropaArchäologiePolitikGeographieGeschichteErbe
Type
Articles
Information
European Journal of Archaeology , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , February 2017 , pp. 4 - 35
Copyright
Copyright © European Association of Archaeologists 2017 

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

Babeş, M. & Kaeser, M-A. 2009. Archaeologists without Boundaries: Towards a History of International Archaeological Congresses (1866–2006). Oxford: Archaeopress.Google Scholar
Babić, S. 2002. ‘Still innocent after all these years?’ Sketches for a Social History of Archaeology in Serbia. In: Biehl, P.F., Gramsch, A. & Marciniak, A., eds. Archäologien Europas: Geschichte, Methoden und Theorien/Archaeologies of Europe: History, Methods and Theories. Tübinger Archäologische Taschenbücher 3. Münster: Waxmann, pp. 309–22.Google Scholar
Babić, S. 2014. Identity, Integration and Power Relations in the Study of the Iron Age. In: Stoddard, S. & Popa, C., eds. Fingerprinting the Iron Age: Integrating South-Eastern Europe into the Debate. Oxford: Oxbow, pp. 295–302.Google Scholar
Babić, S. 2015. Theory in Archaeology. In: Wright, J.D., ed. International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edition, Vol 1. Oxford: Elsevier, pp. 899–904.Google Scholar
Baram, U. & Carroll, L. 2000. A Historical Archaeology of the Ottoman Empire: Breaking New Ground. New York: Kluwer Academic, Plenum Publishers.Google Scholar
Borić, D. 2011. Adaptations and Transformations of the Danube Gorges Foragers (c. 13,000–5500 BC): An Overview. In: Krauß, R., ed. Beginnings: New Research in the Appearance of the Neolithic Between Northwest Anatolia and the Carpathian Basin. Rahden/Westfalen: Marie Leidorf, pp. 157–203.Google Scholar
Brather, S. 2008. Virchow and Kossinna: From the Science-Based Anthropology of Humankind to the Culture-Historical Archaeology of Peoples. In: Schlanger, N. & Nordbladh, J., eds. Archives, Ancestors, Practices: Archaeology in the Light of its History. New York: Berghahn Books, pp. 317–34.Google Scholar
Broodbank, C. 2013. The Making of the Middle Sea: A History of the Mediterranean from the Beginning to the Emergence of the Classical World. London & New York: Thames & Hudson.Google Scholar
Chakrabarti, D.K. 1997. Colonial lndology: Sociopolitics of the Ancient lndian Past. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Pvt.Google Scholar
Chapman, R.W. 2003. Archaeologies of Complexity. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Childe, V.G. 1958. The Prehistory of European Society. London: Pelican.Google Scholar
Coles, J.M. & Harding, A.F. 1979. The Bronze Age in Europe: An Introduction to the Prehistory of Europe c. 2000–700 BC. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Conard, N.J. 2008. A Critical View of the Evidence for a Southern African Origin of Behavioural Modernity. South African Archaeological Society Goodwin Series, 10: 175–79.Google Scholar
Conard, N.J. 2011. The Demise of the Neanderthal Cultural Niche and the Beginning of the Upper Palaeolithic in Southwestern Germany. In: Conard, N.J. & Richter, J., eds. Neanderthal Lifeways, Subsistence and Technology. London: Springer, pp. 223–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connah, G. 2010. Writing about Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Connah, G. 2013. Archaeological Practice in Africa: A Historical Perspective. In: Mitchell, P. & Lane, P.J., eds. The Oxford Handbook of African Archaeology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 15–33.Google Scholar
Demoule, J-P. 2010. The Crisis: Economic, Ideological and Archaeological. In: Schlanger, N. & Aitchison, K., eds. Archaeology and the Global Crisis: Multiple Impacts, Possible Solutions. Tervuren: Culture Lab Éditions, pp. 13–17.Google Scholar
Diamond, J. 1997. Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. New York: W.W. Norton and Co. Google Scholar
Díaz-Andreu, M. 2007. A World History of Nineteenth-Century Archaeology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Flannery, K.V. & Marcus, J. 2011. A New World Perspective on the ‘Death’ of Archaeological Theory. In: Bintliff, J. & Pearce, M., eds. The Death of Archaeological Theory. Oxford: Oxbow, pp. 23–30.Google Scholar
Gaddis, J.L. 2002. The Landscape of History: How Historians Map the Past. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gattiglia, G. 2014. Think Big about Data: Archaeology and the Big Data Challenge. University of Pisa – MAPPA Lab. Paper presented during the EAA 2014 session ‘Barriers and Opportunities: Open Access and Open Data in Archaeology’. [online] [accessed 10 December 2015]. Available at: http://www.ariadne-infrastructure.eu/ita/Media/Files/EAA2014_OpenAccess_session_13_Gabriele.Gattiglia_MAPPA_13092014 Google Scholar
Giddens, A. 1990. The Consequences of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
González-Ruibal, A. 2010. Colonialism and European Archaeology. In: Lydon, J. & Rizvi, U., eds. Handbook of Postcolonial Archaeology. Walnut Creek (CA): Left Coast Press, pp. 37–47.Google Scholar
González-Ruibal, A. 2014. Archaeological Revolution(s). Current Swedish Archaeology, 22: 41–45.Google Scholar
Gramsch, A. 2000. Reflexiveness in Archaeology, Nationalism, and Europeanism. Archaeological Dialogues, 7: 4–19.Google Scholar
Gramsch, A. 2011. Theory in Central European Archaeology: Dead or Alive? In: Bintliff, J. & Pearce, M., eds. The Death of Archaeological Theory. Oxford: Oxbow, pp. 48–71.Google Scholar
Graves-Brown, P., Jones, S. & Gamble, C. eds. 1996. Cultural Identity and Archaeology: The Construction of European Communities. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Guidi, A. 1996. Nationalism without a Nation: The Italian Case. In: Champion, T. & Díaz-Andreu, M., eds. Nationalism and Archaeology in Europe. London: UCL Press, pp. 108–18.Google Scholar
Guilaine, J. 2015. The Neolithization of Mediterranean Europe: Mobility and Interactions from the Near East to the Iberian Peninsula. In: Fowler, C., Harding, J. & Hofmann, D., eds. The Oxford Handbook of Neolithic Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 81–98.Google Scholar
Guldi, J. & Armitage, D. 2014. The History Manifesto. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardt, M. & Negri, A. 2000. Empire. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hølleland, H. 2010. Spells of History: Childe's Contribution to the European Identity Discourse. Bulletin of the History of Archaeology, 20: 30–37.Google Scholar
Humphreys, S.C. 2002. Classics and Colonialism: Towards an Erotics of the Discipline. In: Most, G. W., ed. Disciplining Classics. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, pp. 207–51.Google Scholar
Karl, R. 2014. Holy Cow! Hawks, Wolves, Sheep and the Archaeological Animal Farm. Norwegian Archaeological Review, 42: 1–4.Google Scholar
Kohl, P.L. & Fawcett, C. eds. 1995. Nationalism, Politics, and the Practice of Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kristiansen, K. 2008. Do we Need the ‘Archaeology of Europe’? Archaeological Dialogues, 15: 5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kristiansen, K. 2009. Contract Archaeology in Europe: An Experiment in Diversity. World Archaeology, 41: 641–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kristiansen, K. 2014. Towards a New Paradigm? The Third Science Revolution and its Possible Consequences in Archaeology. Current Swedish Archaeology, 22: 11–34.Google Scholar
Kristiansen, K. & Larsson, T. 2005. The Rise of Bronze Age Society: Travels, Transmissions and Transformations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Legendre, J-P, Olivier, L. & Schnitzler, B. 2007. L'archéologie nazie en Europe de l'Ouest. (trilingual edition, French, German, English, with summaries in the other two languages). Gollion: Infolio.Google Scholar
Liverani, M. 2013. The Ancient Near East: History, Society and Economy. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mizoguchi, K. 2006. Archaeology, Society and Identity in Modern Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mizoguchi, K. 2015. A Future of Archaeology. Antiquity, 89: 12–22.Google Scholar
Murray, T. 1996. From Sydney to Sarajevo: A Centenary Reflection on Archaeology and European Identity. Archaeological Dialogues, 3: 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niklasson, E. 2014. Shutting the Stable Door after the Horse has Bolted. Critical Thinking and the Third Science Revolution. Current Swedish Archaeology, 22: 57–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Novaković, P. 2012. The ‘German School’ and its Influence on the National Archaeologies of the Western Balkans. In: Migotti, B., Mason, P., Nadbath, B. & Mulh, T., eds. Scripta in Honorem Bojan Đurić. Monografije Centra za preventivno arheologijo 1. Ljubljana: Zavod za varstvo kulturne dediščine, pp. 51–71.Google Scholar
Olivier, L. & Coudart, A. 1995. French Tradition and the Central Place of History in the Human Sciences: Preamble to a Dialogue between Robinson Crusoe and his Man Friday. In: Ucko, P.J., ed. Theory in Archaeology: A World Perspective. London: Routledge, pp. 363–81.Google Scholar
Ortman, S.G., Cabaniss, A.H.F., Sturm, J.O. & Bettencourt, L.M.A. 2014. The Pre-History of Urban Scaling. [online] [accessed 10 December 2015]. Available at: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0087902 Google Scholar
Paludan-Müller, C. 2008. The Need for an Archaeology of Europe: Reasons and Perspectives. Archaeological Dialogues, 15: 48–51.Google Scholar
Paludan-Müller, C. 2009. Europe – A Constrained and Fragmented Space on the Edge of the Continental Landmasses: Crossroad, Battlefield and Melting Pot. In: Heritage and Beyond. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, pp. 75–83.Google Scholar
Paludan-Müller, C. 2013a. On Rivers, Mountains, Seas and Ideas: Or What Vast Spaces and Long Lines Mean to Culture and History. In: Bergerbrant, S. & Sabatini, S., eds. Counterpoint: Essays in Archaeology and Heritage Studies in Honour of Professor Kristian Kristiansen. British Archaeological Reports International Series 2508. Oxford: Archaeopress, pp. 617–22.Google Scholar
Paludan-Müller, C. 2013b. Caring About the Past Requires Care for the Present. In: Lagerlöf, A., ed. ‘Who Cares?’ Perspectives on Public Awareness, Participation and Protection in Archaeological Heritage Management. EAC Occasional Paper 8. Namur: Europae Archaeologia Consilium, pp. 87–91.Google Scholar
Popper, K.R. 1980. Die offene Gesellschaft und ihre Feinde II. Falsche Propheten. 6. Aufl. München: Francke.Google Scholar
Raczkowski, W. 2011. The ‘German School of Archaeology’ in its Central European Context: Sinful Thoughts. In: Gramsch, A. & Sommer, U., eds. A History of Central European Archaeology: Theory, Methods, and Politics. Budapest: Archaeolingua, pp. 197–214.Google Scholar
Renfrew, C. 1976. Megaliths, Territories and Populations. In: de Laet, S., ed. Acculturation and Continuity in Atlantic Europe. Brugge: De Tempel, pp. 198–220.Google Scholar
Renfrew, C. 1994. The Identity of Europe in Prehistoric Archaeology. Journal of European Archaeology, 2: 153–73.Google Scholar
Rowlands, M. 1994. Why Do We Need a European Association of Archaeologists? Journal of European Archaeology, 2: 175–78.Google Scholar
Rowley-Conwy, P. 2007. From Genesis to Prehistory: The Archaeological Three Age System and its Contested Reception in Denmark, Britain and Ireland. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Said, E.W. 1978. Orientalism. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
Schlanger, N. 2010. Postscript: On Dead Canaries, Guinea-Pigs and other Trojan Horses. In: Schlanger, N. & Aitchison, K., eds. Archaeology and the Global Crisis: Multiple Impacts, Possible Solutions. Tervuren: Culture Lab Éditions, pp. 107–15.Google Scholar
Settis, S. 2006. The Future of the ‘Classical’. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Sklenár, K. 1983. Archaeology in Central Europe: The First 500 Years. New York: St Martin's Press / Leicester: Leicester University Press.Google Scholar
Stoczkowski, W. 2008. How to Benefit from Received Ideas. In: Murray, T. & Evans, C., eds. Histories of Archaeology: A Reader in the History of Archaeology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 346–59.Google Scholar
Tarlow, S. & Gramsch, A. 2008. Editorial: Does the ‘Archaeology of Europe’ Exist? An Archaeological Dialogue. Archaeological Dialogues, 15: 1–69.Google Scholar
Thorpe, N. 2015. Northern and Western Europe. In: Fowler, C., Harding, J. & Hofmann, D., eds. The Oxford Handbook of Neolithic Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 215–34.Google Scholar
Todorova, M. 1997. Imagining the Balkans. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
van der Linde, S.J., van den Dries, M.H., Schlanger, N. & Slappendel, C.G. eds. 2013. European Archaeology Abroad. Global Settings, Comparative Perspectives. Leiden: Sidestone Press.Google Scholar
Veit, U. 2002. From Nationalism to Nazism: Gustaf Kossinna and his Concept of a National Archaeology. In: Härke, H., ed. Archaeology, Ideology and Society: The German Experience (second edition). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 41–66.Google Scholar
Vidale, M. 2000. ‘Colonial Indology’, a Review of the Book by D.K. Chakrabarti (Dehli 1997). East and West, 50: 588–96.Google Scholar
Voss, B. 2015. What's New? Rethinking Ethnogenesis in the Archaeology of Colonialism. American Antiquity, 80: 655–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, B. 2014. Ottoman Archaeology: Localising the Imperial. In: Smith, C., ed. Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology. New York: Springer, pp. 5642–64.Google Scholar
Wallerstein, I. 1974. The Rise and Future Demise of the World Capitalist System: Concepts for Comparative Analysis. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 16: 384–415.Google Scholar
Watkins, J. & Nicholas, G.P. 2014. Indigenous Archaeologies: North American Perspective. In: Smith, C., ed. Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology. New York: Springer, pp. 3794–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar