Nationalism, Colonialism, and the Past (Oxford Studies in the History of Archaeology)
Content
- Summary list
- A list of cards
- The nineteenth century offers an alternative history of archaeology.
- ORIGINAL RWANDA’S FIRST ARCHEOLOGY
- In antiquity and early modern times, political prestige played a significant role.
- Archeology of the French Revolution: The Discovery of and the Independence Revolution of the 1820s: Early Independence in Greece and Latin America
- THE EXTRAORDINARY ARCHEOLOGY OF FREEDOM European Imperialism and the Ottoman Empire: Connecting the Roots of Western Mythology
- Bible excavation of extra-European imperialism: an exploration of the great cultures of South America, China, and Japan COLONIES
- Archaeology in South and Southeast Asia was built by colonialism.
- The study of ancient and Islamic history in colonial archaeology focuses on the Russian Empire and French North Africa.
- Colonialism and primitive archaeology
- NATIONAL ARCHEOLOGY IN EUROPE
- Europe made an early discovery of national history between 1789 and 1820.
- Archeology and the Liberal Revolution (c. 1820-1860): The role of nation, race, and language in European historical studies
- Evolution and positivism (ca. 1860-1900)
- Results
- Map or See
- Directory
Preface
In 1999, while organizing a one-day conference on ‘Nationalism and Archaeology’ at the London School of Economics, I felt compelled to compose a summary, drawing inspiration from the renowned nationalism sociologist, Anthony Smith. I wasn’t new to this topic at that time. Over the years I have contributed to lively debates about the importance of understanding the political context of mining development. This was a reflection of an internal perspective on the history of archaeology, which prioritized the development of ancient ideas, often neglecting the sociopolitical and economic underpinnings. As part of this argument, I turn to the literature on patriotism (Dı’az-Andreu & Nyampinga 1996b; Dı’az-Andreu & Smith 2001) and university women (Dı’az-Andreu & Sørensen 1998b), and even more so on labor. forces. This argument pertains specifically to the mining industry in certain countries such as Spain and, to a lesser extent, the United Kingdom.
At the 1999 meeting it was clear that our understanding did not equate to the progress of discovery outside Europe. There was a failure to understand how imperialism and colonialism affected archaeology in the colonies, even in the anti-colonial regions of the world, such as China and Japan. Researchers have not linked the development of professional archaeology as a hegemonic discourse to its contestation by a minority of archaeologists, the community as a whole, or the discovery of alternative explanations. Such research was concentrated and short-lived from the late nineteenth century onward, but the literature on the impact of the rise of nationalism in the late eighteenth and early twentieth centuries, a subject analyzed by minor art historians, was neglected by archaeologists.
The organization of a joint meeting between archaeologists and sociologists demonstrated the potential of excavations, drawing on the insights of other social sciences such as history, sociology, art history, history of science, and research literature.
I have been working on issues related to this book for over ten years. This task necessitated extensive reading, and it took me time to reassess the unknown connections between various parts of the world. This does not imply a comprehensive list of all individuals involved in archeology worldwide. We cannot accomplish this alone; we can approach it in various ways. My main goal in this book was to cover the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, but I realized that I could not cover all the topics in a single book. However, I have already written the chapters on twentieth-century discoveries, with the hope that they will contribute to a future volume that will demand a significant effort to finish. This is a synthesis process. But this is a deeper study than previously thought. A total of studies were carried out for this project, based on three main types of reading. First, I researched a short selection of contemporary writings by ancients, archaeologists, and other scientists and thinkers. Second, this book draws heavily on historical analysis of science by anthropologists, historians, and philologists. Finally, and most importantly, I have done a lot of research on the history of archeology in many languages, including English, German (as my language skills allow), and several Romance languages (French, Italian, and Spanish). My work has greatly benefited from this, and I hope the bibliography at the end of the book accurately reflects it. However, I cannot claim to have read all the textbooks. I was surprised by my limited knowledge of many languages in the world, where there is undoubtedly a lot of interesting information available.
Although I am solely responsible for the text, I would like to express my gratitude to my company and colleagues for their outstanding support. A small but very useful Dean’s Fund in the summer of 2004 made it easier for me to use the British Library to find information that would otherwise be difficult to find. A generous grant from the AHRC provided me with additional research time from October to December 2004, as well as two sabbaticals from university. This enabled me to have a decent first draft of the audio ready when I returned to my commitments. When the book needed revision in the summer of 2006 based on reader feedback, my departmental research committee provided financial support to pay for the English translation of the initial text and to help reduce my administrative commitments. For a native English speaker, the successful completion of the project required a team of English writers: many thanks to Anwen Cavell, Gary Campbell, Jaime Jennings, Anne O’Connor, Megan Price, Kate Sharpe, and Angel Smith. I am also grateful to the many people who helped write this project over the years. I owe my deepest gratitude to Suzanne Marchand and two other anonymous readers at Oxford University Press who provided insightful critiques of my article. My response to their many comments improved the quality of the book. The following scholars commented and shared information after reading one or more chapters: Nadia Erzini, Anna Leone, and Stephen Vernoit on North African Archaeological History; Daniel Shavelson on South America; Jarl Nordbladh on the Beginning of Nineteenth-Century European Exploration; Rasmi Shoocongdej on Siam (Thailand); Neil Silberman on Biblical studies; Gina Barnes and Lothar von Fankhauser on East Asia; Daniel Saunders on the Russian Empire; Charles Higham on Southeast Asia, by Dilip Chakrabarti and Sudeshna
Download For Free in PDF Format