Archaeology, Ideology and Contemporary Society

Author(s): Ian Hodder

Source: RAIN, No. 56 (Jun., 1983), pp. 6-7
Published by: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3033420 .
Accessed: 21/06/2014 02:16

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to RAIN.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.88 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 02:16:20 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Renfrew stressed the analogy between its own? and observed by the outsider, the way it is
comprehendingtime and comprehending Both archaeology and anthropology dug up and presented, is itself political. In
space: in both cases we may distinguish have tended to retreat from these the developing countries the process
between what is experienced by the subject problems, archaeology through its avowed smacks of liberal left neo-colonialism, in
(perceived time/space) and what is objectivism, anthropology through the the west of paternalism.
objectively covered (lapsed time/space). confusion (pointed out by Gellner) of the Some contend, in relation to developing
Gellner, on the other hand, argued that social with the synchronic. The gap has countries, that since the Third World has
time has a special quality about it that been filled by history, which - as Sherratt been linked by colonialism into a world
makes it different from space. This is that put it - has driven a wedge between the system there is an obligation for the west
time is the dimension of its own production; two disciplines. Yet it is precisely in this to continue its involvement and for
the events that happen in time constitute gap that the common ground between archaeologists to accept their
time. Or should we see time neither in the them is to be found. In a remarkable responsibilities. I find this a weak
linear flow of conscious.experience nor in exchange of disciplinary perspectives, argument, again based on the notion that
the sequence of events, but in the super- Renfrew identified the key problems as in some way the relationship between the
imposition of the latter upon the back- those dealing with change in the short past and the present, between the
ground of the former? The introduction of term, where people loom large in history; archaeological data and interpretations of
consciousness and intentionality into the whilst speaking for anthropology, Gellner them, can be 'controlled'. If that control is
argument (that is, to speak of action rather felt that the really inspiring questions lie in denied, then any involvement by
than just behaviour) introduces a host of confronting the long term. Such an archaeologists in developing countries
new problems. Whose consciousness, exchange augurs well for continuing imposes external attitudes. While the
asked Renfrew, are we talking about? Is dialogue, despite a persistent reluctance on effects may, hopefully, be less damaging
there a particular 'time-depth' to the part of anthropologists to enter their than the provision of Christianity, western
consciousness, beyond which intentionality side of the debate. technology, or steel axes for stone, the
ends and history takes on a momentum of existence of such colonial enterprises does
Tim Ingold
not justify a modern counterpart. While
world. For the 'young fogeys', complex social anthropologists widely recognise
ARCHAEOLOGY, anthropological interpretations of the past, these issues, it can be argued that
IDEOLOGY AND however competent theoretically, have the archaeology raises them in an especially
CONTEMPORARY SOCIETY danger of detracting from archaeology's acute form. A social anthropologist
Theoretical archaeology in Britain and down-to-earth, popular appeal that is participates, observes and provides new
America seemisto be a discipline looking in essential for public support. However, information. But an archaeologist working
on itself, fragmenting in terms of method even the anti-theoretical, back-to-data in an alien culture acts and creates 'facts':
and approach, lacking the forward-looking contingents can find pragmatic reasons for new material is dug up from under the
confidence of the 60s and 70s. The fourth being interested in the social contexts of ground. To say to a member of another
annual Theoretical Archaeology Group archaeologists and in the subjective nature culture, 'that mound which you think is a
('TAG') conference, held from 13 to 15 of archaeological facts, and this may be hill is actually an archaeological site, the
December 1982 in Durham, gave a clear part of the reason for the success of the home of your ancestors' can have
indication of these new trends in that the seasons at Durham. If the archaeologist momentous social impact. The participants
meetings were dominated by sessions can be seen as an essentially political at the Durham conference recognized this,
devoted to the past as ideology. The animal, actively involved in social debate, but it was less clear that the necessary
concern was to look inwards, to analyse then the future might be thought to be 'neo-colonial' basis of their involvement
the social contexts of archaeologists assured. was widely acknowledged.
themselves, and to demonstrate the bias of It is not clear, however, that It can be argued, then, that it is pre-
archaeological interpretations. The effect archaeologists have grasped the full sumptuous and dangerous for archaeol-
is ultimately to throw into question, rather implications of a recognition of the social ogists to write the past for others. To
later than in related disciplines, the nature of archaeological theories. For discover a past for the working class of
objective nature of archaeological 'facts'. example, we may accept that Britain, for women, for South African
Thus one session, organized by Robin interpretations of the past in developing blacks, or for any section of society except
Derricourt, was devoted to the use of the countries are linked to social interests, but the educated middle class WASP men that
archaeological past within social and what is the basis for our analyses of such make up most of the discipline, must
political strategies in non-European relationships between the past and the necessarily involve an attempt to control
contexts, from China and India to Libya, present if it is not our own social context? and incorporate those segments of society,
Zambia and S. Africa. Other sessions were The analysis of the political basis of to change their attitudes, and to
concerned with the relationship between archaeology is itself political. Many of the appropriate and thus to debilitate their
archaeology and the general public in studies to which we were treated at social statement. This is not to argue that
Britain, with feminist perspectives on the Durham acknowledged the social the past has not been effectively used in
past, and with a critical and social review responsibilities of archaeologists, in many social conflicts. Clearly examples such as
of the history of archaeology in Europe. In different parts of the world. But to Zimbabwe, or the differences between the
all these spheres the positivist emphasis recognize the subjective and relative nature Chinese and Indian views of the past so
which has dominated archaeology for the of the past must also be to recognize the clearly brought out by Danny Miller, or
last 20 years might be thought to be social nature of our analyses of the the relationship in Kossinna's work
questioned. present. At Durham the implicit political between archaeology and nationalism in
It is perhaps paradoxical that increasing stance appeared to be that independence Europe, or the way archaeology is
doubts concerning the ability of and ethnic consciousness should be involved in land rights claims in Australia
archaeology to provide objective scientific encouraged by archaeology; that this was a as shown by Peter Ucko or in Canada (Sue
knowledge should occur at a time when role archaeologists could well play. Yet the Rowley), all demonstrate that the past is
reconstructedto change andMartin
legitimate
many archaeologists are rejecting 'theory' same data can be used to stress the dangers present. For South Africa, Hallthe
altogether. Important figures such as of group factions and of the sovereign
Flannery in America have shown state, and this is the message of Grahame showed that Iron Age archaeology has not
impatience with the philosophizing and Clark's World Prehistory. It cannot be been taken
black South upAfricans
as part of the ideology
because of
it has been
law-seeking of their colleagues, and there possible for an archaeologist to work in his wollectedand studied within white
is a return by many to data, to knowledge or her own, or in any other society, archaeologyeven though most South
of the hard historical facts gained by 'dirt' without also intruding socially into the Africanarchaeologists are part of the
experience in the field. There is disillusion scene. There can be no provision of white
liberal opposition to apartheid. It is
among younger archaeologists, who neutral facts, or of neutral methods. There lifficult to see how one
group, social
dominated the 300 participants at the can be no 'providing what is wanted by the
Durham conference, concerning prospects people' whether that 'people' is the hioweverwell-intentioned, can ever provide
of employment and the value of their English working class or the South African lpast for another. The responsibility of an
training for obtaining jobs in the wider blacks, since the way the past is collected archaeologist who does act in this way

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.88 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 02:16:20 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 must be to continue to live in and with the past beginsto be recognised.But the past and shouldperhapsbe left to do so.
society he or she has helped, perhaps relationshipbetweenmodernsocial Althoughsuch a statementoffers little
unwittingly, to create. interestsand the past that is constructed immediatecomfortto young archaeol-
The confrontation of fact and theory withinthem is not one that can be 'taken ogists concernedwith theirfutureemploy-
has been the cornerstone of archaeology into account'and analysedat a distance. ment, it does offer the possibilityof debate
throughout its development, but Any involvementby archaeologistsin betweendifferentinterpretationsof the
particularlyin recent years. As that socialgroupsoutsidetheirown necessarily past, insteadof controlof the past from
dichotomy is questioned, the ideological involvesan elementof social control.Each withinone viewpoint.
basis of observation and analysis of the grouphas the abilityto constructits own Ian Hodder

SOCIAL ANTHR POLOGY IN THE 1980's

A SYMPOSIUM
A VIEW FROM INDIA whom they write, the two beinggenerally housewivesare reallyfreed, even if the
differentat least in the West wherethe resultis to give them scope for upgrading
AndreBeteilleisprofessorin theDepartment subjectwas born. So long as anthropology theirstandardsof housework.It seems
of Sociology,Delhi School of Economics. remainsin practiceif not in principlethe likelythat computerizationwill reducethe
Socialanthropologywas conceivedby studyof othercultures,the prospectof a demandsfor synchronizationin verymany
Radcliffe-Brown as the comparativestudy genuinelyMarxistanthropologywill fields. Anthropologistscan makereadyto
of the institutionsof all societies,fromthe remainuncertain,for Marxismis not analysethe effects of this radicalchangein
simplestto the most complex,by the appli- merelyabout modesof productionbut, the divisionof labour.
cationof methodssimilarto those of the moreprofoundly,aboutthe relationship Whenlabourcan be done in the
naturalsciences.That conceptionappealed betweentheoryand practice. worker'schosentime, all nightor in the
greatlyto anthropologistsin Asia and A ndre Beteille earlyhours, restaurantswill miss the
Africafor it freedtheirdisciplinefrom the excitementof peak hours.As flexi-time
taintof its historicalassociationwith becomesa more feasibleoffice practice,
'primitive','savage'or 'uncivilized' ASYNCHRONY shopswill extendtheiropeninghours.
societieswhilecreatingthe hope that social Whenmindscan meet and contractsbe
anthropologyand sociologywouldbecome MaryDouglas is A valonFoundation signedin computertime, blockedair
one. It was to some extentdisplacedin the Professorin the Humanities,Northwestern schedulesand commutertravelcan be
sixtiesby an alternativeconceptionof University relieved.Whathappensto leisurethen?
anthropologyas the studyof 'other The tennisand golf clubswill be freerto
cultures'in whichthe anthropologistwas This is a good momentfor re-examining set times for theirtournaments,and
representedas 'the astronomerof the the technologicalbasesof the divisionof meteorologicalconditionsratherthan
social sciences'.The preoccupationwith labourin moderntimes. The subjecthas weekendsmay come backinto prominence
the meaningsof exotic or seeminglyexotic alwaysbeen centralto anthropology,but as arbitersof whenthingshappen.People
ideasand beliefsrepresentedin some sense anthropologicalperspectivescould now be will be free to flock to the best mountain-
a returnto the originalconcernsof the appliedwith specialstrengthand point to top for seeingan eclipse.Sincework con-
subject,but it placedthe Asian or African our own society. We are currentlyunder- straintswill not set the patternof the days
anthropologistin an ambiguousrelationto going a revolutionin the temporalstruc- and weeksand annualholidays,
his field of studywhichwas in the typical tureof the work place. Inevitablya change assemblingfor familyfestivalsmay be
case his own societyand culture. in temporalconstraintsmeansa changein easierthan before - but possiblynot.
A strikingfeatureof the seventieswas spatialand social arrangements.As the Even the most extremechangesin condi-
the rise and spreadof the interestin industrialrevolutionprogressed,it drew tions of workcannotbe guaranteedto free
Marxismand Marxistmethodsof analysis people awayfrom cottageindustriesand up time for moreleisurelyenjoymentof
amonganthropologists.Marxistanthro- submittedthemto severepressuresfor family. None of these changeswill
pologistshave soughtto presentin a new synchronizationwithinthe factoryand necessarilyalterthe distributionof work
light a whole rangeof problemsfrom office. Indeed,the clock has beentakenas or reduceit. At one time hoursof work
primitiveexchangeto colonialdomination. the fittingemblemof the regimeit was variedinverselywith social status. But this
Marxismhas a strongattractionfor the used to control.1 But now the electronics is veryevidentlynot truenow.3Promises
younger'generation of anthropologistsin revolutionbids fair to relaxthose same that automationwouldreduceworking
the ex-colonialcountriesmanyof whom restrictionsof time and place. The deve- hourshave been deceiving.Some haveno
see it as a way not only of understanding lopmentof computersgives increasing work and otherswork harderthan ever.
the worldbut also of changingit. The link scope for asychronouswork. Some of the puzzlesaboutwork in modern
betweentheoryand practicewhichhas In The Worldof Goodswe drew timeswould be solvedif we stopped
been a centralconcernof Marxismevery- attentionto the significanceof periodicity thinkingof workonly as the cost side of
whereand at all timesis likelyto be constraintson the processesin the house- the tradeoff betweencosts and benefits.
stressedincreasinglyby anthropologists hold. Workmay be physicallyheavy,it This fundamentalidea in economics4is
engagedin the studyof theirown society. may entaillong hours, some workrequires liableto be appliedin too wholesalea
The moralpresuppositionsof the study periodicattentionthroughthe day without fashion. Some peopleactuallyenjoy their
of otherculturesare in manyways beingeitherheavyor otherwisetime- work. Some cannotbe draggedaway from
differentfrom those of the philosophyof consuming.2Most labour-saving theirbenches.Not any kind of work earns
praxis.How defensibleis it to treatother equipmentsuch as dishwashersand such devotion:it generallyhas three
humanbeingsas mereobjectsof investiga- washingmachinesalso afford relief from characteristics,it allowsscope for
tion? How responsibleis it, on the other periodicsequencedattention.The great creativity,it affordslargepersonalrein-
hand, to involvethe membersof a distant meritof the oven-timeris not that it is forcementsof esteem,and to some extent
societyin one's own politicalconcernsand labour-saving,but that it reducesthe or otherit is asynchronous.5The
projects?Althoughanthropologyhas been constraintof synchronization.The first 3 workaholictakes his workhome or always
describedas a moralscience,anthropol- days of the weekwhichused to meanwash worksat home or he is free to travel
ogists have not reflectedsufficientlyon the day, ironingday, then airingday, have widelyto meet co-workers.He who works
implicationsof theirwork for the people now lost that meaning.The morehouse- in his own time is apt to workin all of it.6
for whomthey writeand the peopleabout workbecomesasynchronous,the more Asynchronicworkingwill not be likelyto

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.88 on Sat, 21 Jun 2014 02:16:20 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions