Archaeology in Society: Its Relevance in the Modern World

342 Pages·2012·3.28 MB·English

by  Marcy Rockman (auth.)

Archaeology in Society
w wwwwwwwwwwwwww
Marcy Rockman Joe Flatman
(cid:129)
Editors
Archaeology in Society
Its Relevance in the Modern World
Editors
Marcy Rockman Joe Flatman
National Park Service Institute of Archaeology
1201 Eye St. NW University College of London
Mail Stop 2202 London, UK
Washington, DC 20005, USA j.fl [email protected]
[email protected]
ISBN 978-1-4419-9880-4 e-ISBN 978-1-4419-9881-1
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4419-9881-1
Springer New York Dordrecht Heidelberg London
Library of Congress Control Number: 2011934047
© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012
All rights reserved. This work may not be translated or copied in whole or in part without the written
permission of the publisher (Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, 233 Spring Street, New York,
NY 10013, USA), except for brief excerpts in connection with reviews or scholarly analysis. Use in
connection with any form of information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software,
or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed is forbidden.
The use in this publication of trade names, trademarks, service marks, and similar terms, even if they are
not identifi ed as such, is not to be taken as an expression of opinion as to whether or not they are subject
to proprietary rights.
Photo credit: John Milner Associates, Inc., courtesy of the Smithsonian Institution
Printed on acid-free paper
Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com)
Joe Flatman: to Jennifer, for providing the
tenderest of care
Marcy Rockman: in grateful memory
of Roger M. Jacobi (1947–2009),
an archaeologist in his own class
w wwwwwwwwwwwwww
Editors’ Introduction
Contemporary relevance of archaeology means understanding the roles that
archaeology has in the present day and a sense of the contributions that it can make
through those roles both now and in the future. This volume is an innovative
approach to assessing the relationships between our studies of the past, present, and
future in that it draws from and represents the experiences and dreams of many
archaeologists in the different roles that they fulfi ll in the fi rst decade of the twenty-
fi rst century. The goals of this volume are to outline a wide range of the perspec-
tives, approaches, and problems that archaeologists are currently encountering with
respect to issues of relevance in the professional roles they fi ll and bring together
new research and thoughts on several major themes to which archaeology has the
potential to contribute substantially in the future – if at least some of the current
questions of relevance can be addressed.
The inspiration for this volume is a pair of personal and professional quests.
We the co-editors, Flatman and Rockman, both became archaeologists through
traditional academic routes with intentions of continuing academic career paths.
Through a combination of coincidence, serendipity, chance, and other forces at
play, we both have come to practice archaeology in variety of professional spheres
– governmental and cultural resource management as well as academic. Each of
these roles has placed demands on us to explain what archaeology is, why it is
necessary, and what level of funding is appropriate for it. Over several years of
employment, it became apparent to both of us that the questions asked by each role
are different and come out of different understandings and expectations for archae-
ology, and that these understandings and expectations are often at odds with our
own understandings of what archaeology is and can do.
This volume is a result of our efforts to reconcile these overlapping demands and
make not just our lives more comprehensible but also an opportunity to create a
more collective understanding of what archaeological relevance means and how it
can be explained to others outside of the fi eld and used effectively to address impor-
tant present and future issues.
vii
viii Editors’ Introduction
In overview, while strong divides in training and outlook remain between two of
the substantial branches of the archaeological profession (academic archaeology
and cultural resource management), these divides do not lie at the heart of the mat-
ter of the relevance of archaeology. Rather, questions of relevance stem from varia-
tions between the pursuits and interests that individual archaeologists bring to the
profession, the multiple messages that the fi eld presents to the outside world, and
the expectations that the outside world has in turn for archaeology. These interac-
tions are complex. For example, individuals come to archaeology to pursue special-
ized interests, engage in fi eldwork, undertake teaching, examine history, and
preserve the environment, among many other motivations. The fi eld of archaeology
itself has undergone many changes in the past 100 or so years, from the province of
individual antiquarians and museum expeditions to the development of academic
departments, private consulting fi rms, museum curatorships, and the very wide-
spread message of Indiana Jones and other media presentations of archaeology.
Expectations of the outside world appear divided between preservation (realized in
multiple pieces of legislation), education (including public engagement, university-
level teaching and research, and museums), tourism (such as realized in develop-
ment of historic parks and monuments), and entertainment (such as fi lms and
television programs). In our experience, these sources of perspective do not always
meet up directly. So questions arise – Why is archaeology necessary? What is an
appropriate role for archaeology in a particular undertaking? What value will be
received for support provided?
We have found that the development of answers to these questions has required
a careful articulation of our training and background, the broader goals and potenti-
alities of archaeology, and the nature of the questions and undertakings at hand. So
mutual questions arose – How are other archaeologists dealing with these questions
on a day-to-day basis? What specifi cally are they being asked? How are they
responding? Is there a balance of self, profession, and project that is particularly
effective?
In an effort to begin to address these questions, we organized a symposium for
the 2007 Society for Historical Archaeology (SHA) Annual Meeting in Williamsburg,
Virginia. The symposium brought together archaeologists from academia, cultural
resource management, museums, government positions, heritage societies, public
education positions, and the written and online media. Each contributor was asked
to describe:
(cid:129) For whom do you work? How are funds allocated for archaeology? Are you
asked to justify your budgets, and if so, how?
(cid:129) What brought you to the fi eld of archaeology?
(cid:129) Do you ever have to explain why archaeology is necessary and, if so, how do you
do so?
(cid:129) Is there information or models that you would like archaeology to have that it
does not yet provide?
(cid:129) What happens to the archaeological work that you do, and do you think there is
more that could be done with it?
Editors’ Introduction ix
Archaeology in Society: Its Relevance in the Modern World is based on the concepts
of SHA symposium, although its format is original and a majority of the contribu-
tors were invited to discuss additional topics that grew out of the symposium and
post-symposium discussions. In overview, archaeology is shown to be both a deeply
personal fi eld and a means of investigating ourselves and the past with implications
at the local, state, national, and global levels. Currently, there is no one answer to
how and what the fi eld of archaeology should do. Laying out the many ways in
which archaeology is and can be relevant to the present day is so very important.
In some respects, protection for and interest in cultural resources is increasing.
An example is state legislation (SB 18) in California that requires consultation with
Native Americans at the very start of the urban planning and development process
in order to better protect and accommodate cultural resources. A glance at online
news headlines and television shows frequently bring up a global array of archaeo-
logical items and programs. But there are also real threats. In the U.S. in the past
decade, there have been serious congressional-level efforts to reduce the power of
the U.S. National Historic Preservation Act, and globally problems in protecting
archaeological resources in areas of confl ict, such as Iraq, and ongoing traffi cking
in land-based and underwater antiquities. Academic archaeology is also facing new
challenges as professors respond to an ever-growing student need for transferable
skills, such as project management, budgeting, and legal skills. And, of course, as
indicated above, there are the perennial issues of appropriate levels of funding in all
corners.
The objective of this volume is to provide a state-of-the art tool for archaeolo-
gists, students, and those interested in the nature of the human condition to better
integrate what is known about the past and the tools of studying it into the present.
The volume is laid out in three main sections, Parts I, II, and III. In terms of orienta-
tion, these sections discuss what the fi eld of archaeology is, where it should be, and
what it may become. Rockman’s opening chapter provides an introduction to some
of the theory behind the modern-day relevance of archaeology with an extended
example of interpretation of archaeology for use in the U.S. federal level public
policy in the unfamiliar arena of risk communication and homeland security.
Flatman’s concluding chapter draws together the themes of the volume and situates
the importance of addressing these themes in the global economic and political
setting of the end of the fi rst decade of the twenty-fi rst century.
Part I is a sequence of 11 discussions between pairs of archaeologists in a wide
range of professional roles, including government compliance archaeology, museum
work, fi eld crews, public education networks and non-profi t advocacy, academia,
print media, legislative frameworks, fi lm media, and two archaeologists with differ-
ent careers who found themselves facing similar diffi cult ethical questions regard-
ing artifact traffi cking and treasure hunting – a different but very real defi nition of
value in archaeology.
The purpose of Part I is to identify barriers to different archaeological applica-
tions or improved relevance from the range of in-the-trenches and boots-on-the-
ground experiences gathered by the Part I contributors. As developed by Rockman
in the opening chapter, these discussions describe surface structure expressions or