CHAPTER What Is Historical Archaeology ? “Archaeology has revolutionized history” V. Gordon Childe, 1944 L the year 1781, Thomas Jefferson, the future president of the United States, retired to the peace of his country estate at Monticello, Virginia, where he indulged a passion for academic research. Surrounded by “his family, his farm, and his books,” Jefferson sat down to compile a lengthy discourse, which he entided Notes on the State of Virginia. He wrote of laws and money, of products “animal, veg- etable, and mineral,” and of the native tribes of his beloved state. Inevitably, too, he wondered about their origins. Many of his contemporaries asked who had built the silent earthen mounds that dotted the landscape of the eastern United States—in some places majestic and flattopped, in others small and rounded. Were the Mound Builders a vanished race of non-Indians who had migrated to the New World, perhaps from. as far away as the Holy Land, and then constructed the great mounds after battling and subjugating the Native Americans around them? Or were the mysterious earthworks built by the forebears of the scattered Native Amer- ican groups, who still lived in eastern North America? But Jefferson was cautious, and would not take a stand on the Mound Builders. The debate raged for years among Jefferson's friends in the coffee shops of Philadelphia and among other an- tiquariang. But Jefferson was one of the few people who then bothered to excavate to search for more information.__ WHAT IS HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY? oo IS HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY" Thomas Jefferson, early American archaeologist. Jefferson chose an earthwork near the Rivanna River, « small mound that was 4 “repository of the dead.” In 1784, his slaves dug a perpendicular wench through the tamulis, “so that Lmight examine its internal structure.” He recorded layers of human bones at different depths, lying in complete confusion, “so as, on the whole, to give the idea of bones emptied promiscuously from a bag or basket.” The story of America’s first scientific archaeological excavation, one of the earliest in the world, is well known. Jefferson was the first scientist to identify the Mound Builders as Native Americans, In the history of archacology he stands as the Brst person to make a careful and, for his day, scientific, excavation of a Native Amer can burial mound. What Jefferson would never have guessed, however, was that he and his con- temporaries—the slaves who actually performed the digging into the mound, the carriage driver who drove him to the earthwork, and the merchant who sold hitn the paper on which he would make his careful and pioneering notes —would one day themselves become the subject of archavological sudy (Figure 1.1). Liale would Jefferson suspect that two centuries later his own era would be putunder the _ WHEAT IS HISTORICAL ARCHABOLOGY? 3 Figure 1.1 Floor plan of Monticello, jefferson’s home. microscope of scientific archaeology, Perhaps he would be amused to learn that the many common, and to him, uninteresting, objects that he and his contempo- rarics used in their daily lives would be unearthed with the same care, interest, and wonder as he felt toward the smoking pipes and copper omaments used by the an- cient North American Mound Builders, Today, archaeology is as much a part of the sadly of history as the historic building, crabbed document, or government archive,i od fs ragged advencures overcoming all to retrieve a priceless ee an pyramids —these are some of the pI less relie, a ; ople know that archaeology deals with an- ene 3 ; hea Christie, the famed mystery writer and Sir Mas Mallowan, once remarked that ‘archaeologi se the older she became, the 4 Togist because the older she mame that arciiacology focuses on the old and more he liked the venerated, Nothing could th, Today's archacologists study the en- ld be from Ube tru! tire range of human me our origins in East Africa more than 2.5 million if ineweenth-century Western mining years ago, to Vie fl stations and nineteenth ry Western mining ‘ s oer d their carcers researching modern ¥ towns, Some archaeolog gen Spe i reting ancient rubbish heaps, en a ee contemporary ste management ses ispassionat ‘i y waste a . and as a dispassionate means of abadying contemporary waste management SAICTS. Modern archaeology treasure hunting, nor is it a fantasy searcl worlds: i is the systematic shidy of heumanity in the past. This general deBinition covers not only ancient technology and human behavior, but social organization, religious lief, ve aspect: : ‘human o culture. . vert havologinn eR teatine often divide the enormous span of human exis tence into prehistoric and historical times. Prehistory is that portion of human iristory that extends back before éhe,time of written documents and archives. Prehistoric archaeologists deal with a very long time seale, for prehistoric archaeology is the primary source of information on 99% of human history. Prehistoric archaeologists investigate how early societies all over the world came into being, how they differed from one an- other, and, in particular, how they changed through time. Their researches are, for example, the primary source of information on the development of Native Amer eties over the past 15,000 years. een eae eal umes is a generic term that refers to thet portion of aman History thal begins with the appearance of written records and continues until fader. Itis the history of literate societies, which first appeared in, Mesopotamia and in the Nile Valley in about 3,250 .c. Not that writing appeared simultaneously in all parts of the world, for prehistory continued much later in other regions. Literate civilization devel- oped in northwest India in about 2,000 .c., in northern China by yout the same time, and among the Maya of Central America about the time of Christ, Many parts of the world entered written history with the arrival of Enropean explorers after the fifteenth century a.D. Some parts of Central Africa, New Guinea, and the Amazon Basin remained effectively in prehistoric times until this century. / Many of the world's most spectacular discoveries come from the archaeologi- cal record of the earliest civilizations. The royal library of Assyrian King Assurbant- pal from Ninewh, the gold-rich tomb of Egyptian pharaoh Tutankhunun, she terracotta regiment buried by the tomb of Chinese emperor Xuang Ti in the se ond century, B.c.—all come from historical imes. They can be characterized as text- atded archavology, archaeology carried out with the aid of historical documentation that throws light on human life at tie time. ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE RECENT PAST There are many specialties within text-aided archaeology, the archacology of historical times. Assyriologists, Egyptologists, Mayanists, and Sinologists (specialists in Chinese civilization) are just a few of the highly specialized archavologists who focus on single societies, or even minute details of a single period. Then there are Classical archaeologists, who study the classical civilizations of Greece and Rome, Many of them concemuate on architecture and changing art styles, rather than on the minute economic and social problems that absorb archaeologists working on earlier periods. Finally, there is Aistorical archaeology, the archacological study of people documented in recent history—Vike Jefferson and his contemporatics—the subject of this book. Historical archacology is the archaeology of a more recent past. {t is a past that includes both the colonial and early modern American and the world history that most people learn in school, as well as the well-remembered history that has unfolded in living people's lifetimes. The latter is of vital importance, For historical archaeologists, the history that people carry around in their heads, their own per- sonal experiences, is often as important, and sometimes more so, than the “official” histories appearing in books, Historical archaeology breathes life into arid histories made up of serricd dates and dusty personages, and animates the people who fived in it. It wreats not only kings and queens, statesmen and the rich and famous, but the common folk, the anonymous heroes of history, The historical archaeologist studies European colonists, African-American slaves, Native American far traders, Chinese railroad laborers, German immigrant farm wives, early Australian convicts, and all those people who made the “modern” world, all too often the people wich- out documented history. Historical archaeology provides a unique opportunity for studying changing gender roies in the past or changing human societies from a truly multicultural perspecti Historical archacology is important not only because it is a means of studying: the past, but because it has the potential to teach us about ourselves, We may not be able to relate to the circumsiances faced by people who lived many centuries ago, but we can achieve an understanding of the long-forgotten and often com- pelling histories of once anonymous folk, whose direct descendants are alive today, British archaeologist Stuart Piggott once described archacology as the “science of rubbish.” He is partially right, for archaeologists spend much of their Ume delving into ancient garbage heaps and abandoned dwellings. Therein lies the importance of historical archacology, for the dispassionate eye of the archavologist can conjure up prosaic details of day-to-day history that never appear in government archives In recent years, for example, excavations at Red Bay, Labrador, have revealed as- toundingly comprehensive information on sixteenth-century Basque whaling in the Strait of Belle Isle off northeastern Canada, a chapter of European history virtually absent from the history books. The ensiavement of Africans centurics ago has di- rect relevancy (© many present-day problems faced by people of African descent in the United States, many parts of Africa, South America, and the Caribbean. Histor- ical archaeology studies African enslavement from the hunibic artifacts and dis- carded food remains found in slave quarters and planiations. One can even trace the survival of traditional African beliefs through telltale artifacts found in such sites, beliefs never mentioned in documents kept by their masters. ArchacologistsSFORIGAL ARTHALOLOGY? WHATS 4 and their nowels add an engsossing dimension to Abican-\merican history accessi- Me by no other means. Sintilarly, die archacology of carly modem eonsumerism sheds fight on current paltcrny of purchasing, and helps to demonstrate in clear, tangible ways how so many people in the world canne to depend so strongly on the mass, global market of today. / / Prehistoric archacology documents the emerging biologic and calual diver- sity of humankind, J, shows us how our carliest ancestors faced and solved the chak lenges of daily existence. Many of these problems, except for their antiquity are hoball that different from the dileminas of survival faced by much of humanity of its more recent focus, holds a today. In contrast, historical atchacology, becau mizror direculy before the face of the contemporary world and refleers precisely the complex 160t8 of our own increasingly diverse society. This unique reflection of our scent past isa vital (Go! in our achieving « beuer understanding of ourselves, Saal wonder the rapidly inaiuring discipline of historical archacology is becoming a vital tool for social scientist and historian alike, This book describes this exciting field of modern archaeology and how it cante into being. IEE PAST DEFINITIONS OF HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY Historical archacology has strong roots in the historical preservation movement. Io its earliest days, historical archaeology was a full paruet in often herculean efforts 1o interpret sites of national importance for an cager poblic, In the United States, archacology at places like Jamestown and Colonial Williamsburg provided many of the architectural dexails that made historic homes and their yards come alive for modern visitors. These preservation efforts made it clear that teal men and women, onceliving individuals, had (o be inserted into the reconstructed hnildings and landscapes. Mader historical archaeology came from this realization, The new dis. cipling has evolved a8 something different from prehistoric archacology, even if bath share the same basic excavation techniques and nuany similar analytical ap- proaches. It has developed as a rich diverse field of inquiry thar defies precise de&- nition, as the focus of research bas changed, Let us examine some definitions that have stood the tes of time. lorical Archaeology as the Study of a Period When the Conterence on Historic Sites Archacologys—the Hirst professional histari- cal archacalogy organization founded in the United Sttes—was organized in 1960 at the Cniversity of Florida, its expressed purpose was 10 focus on the “historical” period, a period that was clearly defined as *postprehistoric. Soon afterward, at- chaeologist Robert Schuyler defined historical archaeology simply as “the study of the material remains from any bistoric period,” an equivalent to prehistoric archac- ology. This viewpoint envisages human history as @ layer cake, the boom, 1 layer being prehistoric times; the thin Cop layer, the historical period, In reality, bowever, tie frontier between “prehistory” atid “history” is usually blurred. For ex: ample, Colonial New England Bourished within historical times, whereas the sur- THREE PAST DECININIONS OF HISTORICAL ARTHAEOLOGY 7 rounding Native American groups were technically still in prehistory. Some experts think in terms of transition periods, sometimes referred to as “protohistory,” liter ally primitive history, The noted British prehistorian Grahame Clark speaks of three archaeological periods: “autonomous prehistory,” “secondary prehistory,” and “history.” Under Schuyler’s definition, a broadly detined historical archaeology based simply on het being prehistoric is composed of numerous stubfields: classical at- chaeology, medieval archacology, posuncdieval archaeology, historic sites archae- ology, industrial archacology, and “a series of mainly unnamed areas of research sach as the study of literate civilizations in India and the Islemic world.” These sub- fields wre firmly rooted in different time periods, Classical archaeology focuses un a period beginning with dic Minoans around 3.000 8.¢. and ending with the Later Roman Empire at about a.0, 527; medieval archacology concentrates on the period Jrom abont 3.0, 400 19 1400; posimedieval archacology focuses on the period from A.D. 1450 to 1750; historic sites archacology considers the period from 4.0, 1415 to industrialization; and indusuial archaeology studies tae world's complex technolo- gies after about a.n, 1730, These subfields also are tied to various parts of the world: Classical archaeology is associated with the Mediterranean and Europe, medieval and postmedieval archaeology with Europe, historic sites archacology with the world colonized hy Europe, and indusurial archaeology with Europe and the Euro- pean postcolonial world. These periods of emphasis for the sutbfields of historical archavology are somewhat arbitrary—~for exampie, the postmedieval period in Scothuud is considered to extend from 1488 to 1609—but their usage demonstrat how historical archaeology ean be seen to focus on a broadly conceived period What cies all of these subfieids together, and what makes them “historical,” is the cenwal idea that the “historical” period encompasses ali Liose: periods for Which writen information is available. Archacologist James Deez. for example, ar- gues that “the literacy of the people it suudies is what sets bistorical archacelogy apart froni prehistory,” In this sense, then, we may take the word “historical” to mean “literate.” and the ward “prehistoric” 10 mean “nonliterate.” Clark's “sec~ ondary prehistory” is that time during which literate peoples came into comtact with and wrote about sonliterate peoples, Using this idea, «ttt archaeologist digging a sixteentheentury Portuguese settlement in Brauil woald be engaged in the study of the “historical” period: an archacologist studying a site once inhabited by it group of noniiterate Tupinamba Indians deseribed by the French friar Ande Thevet would be researcbing the “protobistorical” period: and an archacologist in- vesuigating a Tupinamba site that shows no evidence of foreign contact and pre- dates Portuguese involvement in Brazil would be studying “prehistoric” ime. Definitions of archaeology that divide Gime into two large periods make sense hecause “history” is, after all, widely understood as that part of the past for which documentation exists. In che Western iadition, we may imagine the historical pe riod to begin with the Grecks and to continue, perhaps unevenly in places, watil the present. In contrast, prehistory is literally hat period befére bistory, We may imagine that historical archacology may be viewed as studying « period that x= terids from the focus of Classical archacology (from 1,000 B.C.) on the earliest end ww industrial archacology (trom 4.9. 1750) at the most recent,WHATS HISTORICM. ARCHAEOLOGY? One can apply the same prehistoric-historical division to non-Western culture areas, like China, The Chinese past can be divided into "prehistory"—composed of Paleolithic (Old Stone Age: ahout 600,000-7,000 a,c.) and Neolithic (New Stone Age": about 7,000-1,600 B.C.) periods—and “history,” beginning with the Shang ‘Guilization, around 1,600 B.G, The earliest writings in China, appearing as “oracle bones"—shoulder blades of oxen used w foretell the future and inscribed with toval divinations-—serve to mark the beginning of Chinese “history.” These inscrip- tions, corrohorated by the later writings of the historian Ssu-ma Ch’ien in the first centiny 8.6, document the uninterrupted development of Chinese writing since about 1,000 1,¢. In this sense, then, we may say that historical archaeology in China focuses on sites dating from any time since the Shang Dynasty. orical Archaeology as a Method A second, common definition of historical archaeology focuses on the method- ologicai aspects of the field. This approach seeks an equal combination of “histor cal” and “archacological” materials in the study of che past. For William Adams, who used this approach in his study of the late nineteenth- and early ewentieth-cen- tury town of Silcott, Washington, historical archaeology is not restricted to a partic- ular time, but rather rests on the use of diverse sources of information in any study thar has archavology as a major component, Adams used writen documents, ar- chacological findings, and even recollections of living informane to interpret the history and culture of the people who once lived at Silcott, Adams learned, for ex: ampie, that the pickers in the town’s bountiful fruit orchards referred to their boss, Hiram Werst, as “Eliram Fire Em.” It was said that he would fire a man because he did not like the cut of his hair, Even though Hiram could “curse for owenty minutes without repeating himself once,” he did not hold a grudge for tong and would usu- ally rehire the fired man. Adams also learned from his informants that when ovo other Silcott residents, Weldon and Jennie Wilson, decided to huiid a new home to store-bought plans, dey adamantly refused to place the bathroom next to the hicchen, They were dead set against an indoor toilet, so they converted the room into a panury! In Adams’ view, such fields of research as Mayan civilization, Classical archae- ology, and Egyptology are ail historical archaeology. The periods are different in cach instance, but each field allows archaeologists to combine “nonarchacological matcrials with archaeological data, in essence working both as a historian and as an archaeologist. Definitions that focus on methodology give written records precedence over chronology, Thus. they include all literate cultures in the field, Under this rubric, we may consider that Heinrich Schliemann’s use of Homer's texts in his excava- ons at Troy in 187] represented an example of historical archaeology. So do ar- chacologist Neville Chittick's excavations at the fourteenthcentury Swahili town of Kilwa on the East Africa coast in the 1960s. Chittick combined Islamic chronicles with archaeology. By the same token, Robin Birley has recovered letters written on thin wood slivers from the Roman frontier fort at Vindolanda on Hadrian's Wall in THREE PAST DEFINITIONS OF HISTORICAL ARCHAFOLOGY northern Britain, They provide priceless information on Roman garrison life in the first century A.D, Under this definition, the dates of the sites are not important. What takes precedence is the presence of some form of written text—uanscribed on paper, clay, stone, or whatever—that may be used by archaeologists in their ef forts to interpret the past. In the late nineteenth ccunury, British Classical archaeol- ogist David G. Hogarth distinguished beeen “inerary documents” (chat is, writ ings) and “material documents” (artifacts) in an effort to explain how archaeologists use “nonarchaeological” pieces of information in their research. The combined interpretation of these different kinds of "documents" defines how historical archaeology can be viewed as a methodology. The methodological definition can be drawn even wider, by including some alternate but valuable sources of historical information obtained from ethnobistory and oral history. Ethnohistory is te study of the past using non-Western, indigenous historical records, and especially oval traditions, Like historical archaeology, ethnohistory also rests on the combined use of different sources of information. Ethnohistory often focuses on people that are known to have existed in history but who are known largely through the writings of outsiders, Ethnohistory became important in the United States with the creation of the Indian Claims Commission in August 1946, Both na- tive groups and governmental bodies needed expert testimony about the decu- mented history of native people, Anthropologists began to work as historians in archives and other documentary repositories, and historians starved to work as an- thropologists as they researched the histories of nonliterate peopies and used eth- nological language. For example, for the case Sac anu Fox Tribe of Indians, ot al. ¥ The United States, filed in 1955, the Native Americans, defendants, hired ethnohisto- rians to prepare several reports about their history and culture. Defendant’s Ex- hibit 97 is entitled “Aw Anthrapatogical Report on the Indian Occupancy (of land] Ceded (© the United States by the United Tribes of Sac and Fox under the Treaty of November 3, 1804.” Soine of these legal documents can be painfully dry reading. For instance, Defendant's Exhibit 57, “An Account of the Manners and Customs of the Sauk Nation of Indians,” hegins: “The original and present name of the Sauk Indians proceeds from the compound word Saw-kig alias A-sawave-kee literally Yel- low Earth, The Fox Indians call themselves Mess-qua-a-kie alias Mess-quawe-kie lit erally Red Earth.” Although dense reading, Claims Commission reports are cranuned with valuable ethnohistorical information about Native American history and culture, ranging from games and dances to cosmology and language, They demonstrated the power of ethnohistorical interpretation, and pushed the study of oral sources to the cutting edge of both anthropology and history. When Hernan Cortés and his conquistadors entered the Aztec capital, Tenochtitlin, in 1519, they marveled at a sophisticated, cosmopolitan city with a market larger than that of Constantinople (today known as Istanbul), Cortés over threw the Aztec rulers in 1521, bringing centuries of Indian civilization to an end. Fortunately for science, Dominican friar Bernardino de Sahagun later developed a passion for Aztec culture and devoted his lifetime to recording their history. He a sembled informants at strategic missions and took down many details of a cultureWHAT IS HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY? __ chat were transmitted with picture signs and oral recitations. Sahagun’'s History of the General Things of New Spain was considered so heretical hy his priestly superiors thar it was not published until the nineteenth century. But it is a mine of priceless cthnohistorical information for oventicth-century archavologists and historians, When Mexican archaeologist Eduardo Matos Moctezuma excavated the Templo Mavor (Great Temple) of the Aztec gods Huitilopochtlt and Tlatoc from beneath modem Mexico City, he found chat many details of the structure and its history were corrohorated by both Spanish accounts and Sahagun's informants, Ethnohistory is a powerful tool for historical archaeologists, especially wien combined with archacological and conventional historical sources, [tis a uly mu disciplinary form of research. we ‘smal iistom is historical tradition, often goneilogies, passed down from generation (0 uencration by word of mouth, Tis tansitory history in the sense that itis retained in {he memory, destined to vanish if not written down or passed on to the next gener- ‘tion, It is for this reason that much orai history is genealogy. for uacing tes back to ancestral kin amounts (6.2 major concer in many societies, including our own, Maya lords were obsessed with genealogy, with establishing their royal legitimacy back to divine ancestors. Many Africans think of the past in terms of generadons, of links to the ancestors who are intermediaries with the spiritual world and the land. Buc oral traditions treat of far more than geneaiogies. They retain vivid memories of major events like solar eclipses, wars, and famines, of ninewenth-centary family migrations from Ohio out west, and so on. fis only in recent vears that we have fully appreciated the value of the historical memories of ofd people, who often pass on without handing down their priceless legacy of historical information. The study of oral history has achieved great sophistication in. sub-Saharan Africa, which is rich in eightcenth- and ninetenth-century oral traditions, many of them recorded early in this century, when memories were still vivid. Such traditions are a historical minefield, for they require careful critical analysis before they can he accepted as accurate reflections of the past. When archaeologist Peter Schmidt studied the ancient Buhaya kingdoms in East Africa, he Combined oral traditions with data from archacological and historical sources. Schinidt Found that he had to spend neo to four hours with each of his informants. In doing so, he learned the art of extracting relevant information from men who had acquired « lifetime's experi: ence of local oral traditions, He had to learn how to evaluate the Buhaya’s rich mythology, the myths of the people’s cultural origins and early migrations, then correlate them with the archaeological sites he had discovered. Rather than just looking at the sites as isolated hahitations occupied at different dates, he used the myths to tic them together, combining archaeology with oral history. Oral history is a vital tool in more recent American history, especially when studying the experiences of ethnic groups and working class families, It began as a kind of local history focused on what people could remember about themselves and their times. In researching a particular region or place. like an urban neigh: borhood. some historians realized that much “documentation” of recent history wax not written down, hut was nevertheless remembered by stilMiving people. Tracking down such oral traditions required drawing on the field experience of an- thropologists and folklorists, who had a long history of collecting and interpreting a at oral information. During his ime in Tanzania, Schmidt heard several stories of the founding of the Buhaya kingdoms and many accounw of their royal Hincages, In one tale, he eared how the king Rugomora Mahe traveled through his domains Eventually he arrived ata piace where some people were smelting iron, a prehis torie technology documented by Schinidt’s research. “They failed to welcome Ru- gomora, who, then, out of pique, changed their clan name to Baluge, or ‘the dull ones.” Alter traveling further Rugomora saw more people making icon tools, whereupon “he drew up a plan to huild a tower to the heavens to see what they tooked like.” Schmidt's informant told him that he knew the precise spot where the iron for Rugomora’s tower was smelted, Thinking of historical archaeology as a methodology brings out a critical point. Like prehistoric archaeology, our field is a multidisciplinary enterprise, The prehistoric archaeologist draws on the researches of botanists, chemists, and zoolo- gists, to mention only a few. The historical archaeologist does exactly the same, but uses an even greater diversity of sources, everything {rom documents to oral tradi- tious, minute details of sixteen th-century art to the technology of nails in 1890. I is wuly multidisciptinary detective work, the only limit being the creativity and inge- nuity of the researcher in locating additional sources. Historical Archaeology as the Study of the Modern World A third definition focuses not only on chronology and on methodology, hut on a specific historical topic. Ln a now-classic definidon, James Deew defines historical archaeology as “the archavotogy of the spread of European culture throughout the world since the fiftcenth century and its impact on indigenous peoples.” Although Deew’s definition contains an element of time—"since the fifteenth century"—his main idea is that historical archaeology is the archacology of a specific subject, namely the spread of Europeans and European culture and instirutions through- out the world by adventurers, explorers, merchants, and traders. As these Euro- peans traveled outward from their homelands and into Africa, the Far East, the New World. and the Pacific, they carried with them the ideas, perceptions, and ma- terial chings with which they were familiar, Scholars sometimes refer to the inter= connected network of European outposts, trading ports, and towns as a “world s tem.” Historical archacology is unique as the archeology that studies this system and the spread of ideas and people that were part of it. This definition assumes that historical archaeology is a combined anthropo- logical and historical study of che modern world, By “modern world,” historical ar- chaeologists mean the world that contained the earliest elements of our own world, such as large-scale urbanization, complex industrial production, mercantilism and capitalism, widespread literacy, long-distance travel, and conwcts between large numbers of people from vastly different cultures. If there is one overriding assump- tion behind Deets definition, it is that of interconnectedness between different Western nations. and benween these nations and the non-Western world. This interconnectedness bepween far-flung human societies is nothing new, for it dates back to the beginnings of early civilizations in the Near East, and event carlier, By 2,500 8.¢., long-distance trade networks connected Mesopotamia withFigure 1.2 Trade routes through the Near East. the Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf with northwest India (Figure 1.2). By 200 A.C. coasting routes around thé Indian Ocean connected the Red Sea with India, Sci Lanka with China, East Africa with Arabia, The European Age of Discovery be- tween the fifteenth and twentieth centuries expanded international trade routes to every corner of the world, In archaeological terms, these burgeoning connections sre reflected in artifacts like, for example, Ming porcelain from China or majolica ware from Spain that were traded over cnormous areas of the world. With uade and voyaging went ideas and spiritual beliefs, and common cultures and goals. His: torical aehacologists can study Portuguese colonial settlements in central Africa, Brazil, and india, or English outposts in Virginia, South Africa, and Australia, swith, the understanding that each nation’s settlements were part of the same global “sys- tem,” In this way, many objects found by archaeologists at colonial sites in Massie chusetts, and in contemporary towns in South Africa and southern England, can be expecred to look similar or to be identical, because the people whe made, used, and discarded them were members of the same cultures, who for historical reasons lived in different parts of the globe, Deez calls the archaeological interest in these large-scale, modern connections the “comparative internacional perspective” be- cause this approach is a conscious attempt to examine the spread of Europeans across historically changing national boundaries. Anyone who attempts to study any global issue automatically discovers what geographer Peter Haggett learned when he said that the “problem posed by any subject which aims to be global is simple and immediate: the earth’s surface is so THREE PAST DEFINITIONS OF HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY 13 Shxteenth-century drawing of the Khoi Khoi. staggeringly large.” To which we should add, “and its people so diverse.” The use of an overt international perspective means that historical archacologists face a formi- dable task, not only because of the complexity of their data, but also because Uiey are researching complex interactions becween rapidly changing societies. When Portuguese explorer Bartolemeu Diaz rounded the Cape of Good Hope at the southern tip of Africa in 1488, he anchored in a bay with low hills where Khoi Khoi herders grazed their cattle, Two centuries later, Dutch colonists setted at the Cape and took over lands used by the Khoi Khoi for centuries, disrupting the herders" lifeways catastrophically. These disruptions continued for more than a century. Thus, an archaeologist excavating a seventeenth-century Colonial Dutch settlement has not only to achieve an understanding of European history and material culture, but also to be sensitive to the complex dynamics that governed indigenous cattle herding in the area,pips HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY? ; . DEFINING TODAY'S HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY These dynamics may be reflected in servants’ artifacts, for example, for many Khoi Khoi were forced off their lands and became indentured servants, As was the case with African-American slaves, the anonymous servants came from a radically different physical and spiritual world that did not include the Dutch, Did they per petuate these beliefs, or adopt the atien faith of their masters? Did they perc advantage in adopting a European diet. or did they maintain contacts with their wn group still living elewherc? Sometimes, an acute excavator can acquire an- swers to these questions. To even begin, be or she would need to know something about the complex history of at least two disparate peoples, the Dutch and the Khoi Khoi, the ever-changing nature of their cultural contacts, the material cultures } uscd by both, and the ways in which each group expioited the natural environment (see Chapter 11), Asamresult of the historical interactions of culturally distinct peoples from Exe rope and elsewhere, historical archacologists see the study of the modern world as | constituting tite study of a process. What keeps the Various colonial settlements of each nation from being identical copies of cities at home is the often significant in- fluence of indigenous peoples on the various Europeans who left Europe in seareh of wealth, power, or religious converts. Non-Westerners reacted to, embraced, 1e jected, and fought against the Spanish, Dutch, English, Porwguese, and French culnares in many complex ways. depending on their individual circumnstanees, cul- tural traditions, anc outlooks (Figure 1.3). Thus, even though Decuz tends to forus ov European cultures in his definition, most historical archacologists give equal weight to Uie actions and reactions of the many non-Westerners who accepted and rejected European social mores. economie ideas, political organizations, and reli- gious beliefS and traditions. Using this definition, a historical archaeologist may wish to study & purticular settlement of aative North Americans, not heeause these people lived in the “historical” or “modern” period, but hecause they constitute part of the history of the modem world, The actions, beliefs, and attivudes of these native peoples throughout the world are as important to the telling of world history | as were the actions, heliefs, and attitudes of the powerful nation-states that are Ue usual stuf of basic history courses, ive NING TODAY'S HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY Tis important to understand some of Use complexities subsuined hy these three de- finitions, for historical archacologists have grappled with them for more than a generation. Today, we have # lctier understanding of the special strengths of his- torical archaeology, of the ways in which it can enhance our understanding of the recent past. Current definitions of the field combine elements of the three earlier formulations, They can he summarized: historical archarology isa mattitiseiptinary - - — field that shares a speciul relationship with the formal disciplines of anthmpology and history, Figure 1.3 The massacre at'Cholula by the Spanish, according tq tle Aziecs focuses Us attention on the post-prehistoric past, and seeks ta understand the global naire of modem life, Lach clause in this detinition is particularly inyportant to framing a clear understanding of the nature aud direction of contemporary historical archacology. Letus dissect it a litle furtherWHAT IS HEORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY? cal Archaeology !s Multidisciplinary Adl modern archacology can be said to be multidisciphnary because alt archaealo- cists, regardicss of specialization, routinely use information from a series of related fields, including anthropology, botany. geogrphy, cology, sociology, and zooloxy. What makes historical archaeology unique is that itis By aatere multidisciplinary, 1 is rtuaily impossible for a historical archacolagist to conduct any sesions research without consulting a wide range of other disciplines, most notably history and cub turat anthropology. With feet firmly planted in history and anthropology, historical archaealogists regularly draw on the leters, maps, diaries, and governinental records that would be used by any modern historian, and the culture histories, ethnographies, and concepts of the cultural anthropologist, as well as the site pan maps, soil profile drawings, and artifacts that are common to all archacological re- rch. Historical archacology is textaided archacology, to the point that documents are a primary source for the field. Documents and texts of all Kinds support aud Supplement archacological information to such an extent Chat historical archacolo- 948s rust be as adroit at archival research and documentary interpretation as they are att site research and artifact analysis, They must be adept at locating and dissect- ing historical sources, just as historians are, but with the added dimension of relat ing these sources to the archaeological evidence. They must decide whether a set of documents are an independent source of information on their site or region, or whether they are purely a supplement to the archaeological evidence. Tf their as- sessment is that the sources are entirely independent, then the wo sources, one ar chavological, the other documentary, will throw light on the same problems, with each having equal weight. If, however, the documentary sources are supplemen- tary, then the archaeological and the historical information may shed light on the same issue in slightly different ways: one written, and one based on artifacts, but the archacological evidence will be more ceveating, Sometimes there are real tensions between archaeological and historical data, which can only be resolved by meticu- lous critical analysis. Suppose tee are involved in the excavation of a plantation slave cabin in the Amerivan South, dating 0 about the year 1800, We fave excavated the cabin and found that it has a limestone foundation measuring 12 by 16 feet (3.7 by 4.8m), and that it contains numerous artifacts—glass bottle fragments, ceramic dish pivoes, buttons, and so forth, We also have access to & series of leuters written by the plantadon's owner, In one or two of these lecers the owner describes the slaves" cabins and merions some of the articles the occupants uscd in their daily liv We decide that they are an important supplementary source of information, Depend- ing on the data at hand, we may consider the letters to supplement what we have learned from the archaeological remains, or our finds to amplity what we have learned from the documents, In either case, each af the two sources of information can be viewed as complcienting the other. The letters help us to understand the material remains of the excavated slave cabin. The physical remains are tangible amplification of the owner's comments about the slaves on his plantation, Imagine for a moment that we decide the archacological data and the Tete arc completely independent sources, each providing a differeut view of the actual $ __ ERNE TODAY'S HISTORY L ARCHAEOLOGY Excavation of a slave cabin in Virginia. historical reality of slave experience, By their activities the slaves created the ar chacological deposits found at the cabin site. This creative process was probably not exactly a conscivus one, When a dish was broken, a hutton lost, or a hoy hone discarded, the slaves were only living their daily lives, not secking to leave a record of their lives for future generations, It was almost accidental that the artifaets be- came part of the archacological record. ‘The plantation owner, who was generally a descendant of a different culture than his slaves (even though there were Africen- American slaveowners), was consciously attempting to create a record of life at his plantation in his leucrs, The owner may have misrepresented the lives of his slaveseither purposefully or through his own misunderstanding of them—or he may haye written ahout what he hoped their lives would be like based on his plans for his estate. In this case, we decide chat che archaeological and the ¢ocumentary sources of information are not supplementary hut are actually quite distinct Each. was creaied by a different sort of person For a unique reason, and each reflects the past in a disparate wav. This kind of interpretive cop roversy is iniportant for historical archacology because it forces us to continue exploring various wavs of incorporating nonar- chaeological materials into our research, That most of the nanarchacological sources used hy histarical archacologists derive {rom the formal discipline of his: tory means that texeaided archaeology has @ special relaGonship with that field, a relationship whose boundaries must be continually tested by new ideas and ap- proaches, This part of our definition draws ov the idea that historical archavology pro- vides a usefal method for examining the past, « method that combines “historicalican-American slaves at work on a plantation in the eighteenth century. Jd “archaeological” sources of information. The basic assumption is that histor I archaeologists have many sources of information available to Urem and the fail- to use them is simply bad historical archacology. aeology Focuses Its Attention on the Post-prehistoric Past is part of our definition assumes that historical archaeology focuses on historical es, not prehistory. Most historical archacology described in this book concen- Lies on the “modern age”—the age many historians say hegan in a.v. 1415 with brtugal’s successful capture of Ceuta in North Africa, This event was the catalyst jt Prince Henry the Navigator's African explorations and the Age of Discovery at took Portuguese and other Western navigators throughout the globe 1415 is, course, a purely arbitrary date, for many institutions of what can loosely be called e “modern age” developed much earlier, For instance, some elements of modern lercantilism, for instance, may be found in the ways in which Europe's Knights emplars—the powerful religious-military organization of the Middle Ages—trat cked in fabrics, wool, spices, dyes, porcelain, and glass. Although the link hetween hese medieval entrepreneurs and modern industrial capitalists may be weak in- ed, historical archaeologists understand that the practices of modern peoples have Jong traditions that extend backward in time beyond ..p. 1415. In this nse, then, we may expect some overlap benveen historical archaeology and Euro- DEFINING TODAY'S HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY nT) pean medieval archaeology based not solely on a similarity of method—although both make extensive use of written records—but on a similarity of subject matter. Nonetheless, the use of the term past-prehistoric signifies that historical archae- ology finds much of its subject mater in those places that Europeans visited and colonized. Thus, the term post-prehistoric stands in conwast to prehistoric, and is meant to suggest Unat the world was a different place after Europeans took Westen culture to various places on the globe. In this part of our definition we accept the special place of literacy in helping to transtorm the modem world, but we do not give literacy a primary role in shap- ing recent history. The adoption in the West of a movable type printing press in 1431, after cenuuries of use in China, made knowledge available to more people than simply the elites of society. The effects of printed books and increasing liter- acy eventually did change the world, but many of the individual Europeans who went into the non-Western world were illiterate. The actions of these people and the ideals of the nations that drove them forward were more important than whether they could read and write. Historical Archaeology Seeks to Understand the Global Nature of Modern Life Perhaps the most important facet of historical archacology is its focus on modern life. No matter where we choose to set the beginning of “the modern world,” the fundamental point is that the world of the late twentieth century was shaped in considerable part by compelling historical forces, The exploration of the New World, the African slave trade, the Industrial Revolution, the invention of the steamship and the railroad—these are but a few of the developments that have crafted the late wenticth-century world. Many of them affected hundreds of di- verse human societies throughout the world. The invention of the steamship alone sparked human migrations on a hitherto unheard-of scale in the nineteenth cen- tury, For this reason, historical archaeology js a global field that shuns often arbi- wary political boundaries in favor of understanding the large-scale events and broad processes that held people and groups together by their involvement in a common enterprise (such as colonial settlement or economic trade) or by com- mon, historical circumstances (such as slavery or membership in a social class). But for all this global perspective, historical archaeologists work on a smail scale, on forts, mining villages, and colonial towns, on slave cabins and isolated shipwrecks. They focus on the minute and the particular, on the humblest of artifacts, and on the usually anonymous people who made them. And from these small-scale re- searches come new insights into the larger issues of world history. Europe was not a monolithic empire during the Age of Discovery, It was an ever-changing mosaic of competing nation-states, each with their own goals, histo- ries, and waditions. Each had their own agenda, their own ambitions and values. Each was affected by the actions and technological achievements of societies across the world. For exampic, the technological innovations that helped to make it possi- ble for Portugal to become a major world power in the sixteenth century incudedrIS HISTORICAL Alt a _ ss the astrolabe from the § the magnetic compass from China, Thus, in using the term i ologists generally refer bouk to a rising. internationalism witk F Jobalization that took Europeans into the world. This openly Yaten Fmeans that historical archacologists fre- gay, multiculturalism, gender roles, the ef nt on native peoples and environments, jem, and the rise of the global mass racism, echnicity, market. a The prominence. porary issues in our field means that histori- cal archavologists co ‘between the past and the present, Many ar- chaeologists now a chacology, although it studies the past, is part af the contemporary : ig, our interpretations of the past are always bound within, and ted by, our perceptions and auitudes about tis currently the subject of much debate ¢ are those who argue that white archacolo- , however well trained, cannot legitimately interpret Native Ames tory from their excavations. The situation is somewhat different archaeology, where it is obvious that our cur- rent perceptions of the recent past are shaped by our own histories and ideas. For example. the history of consumerism that historical archaeology documents is still being played out, and we are all actors in this continuing drama, In a real sense, the past studied by historical archaeology is atill unfolding and, thus, historical archac- ologists find it difficult to argué that the past they study is long dead and too re- mote to be of relevance to the present. The conscious internationalism of historical archacology means that the ficid studies a vast array of people, Rather than focusing on an archaeological record that is essentially anonymous—as orians must do hecause of prehistoric archacology’s inability to focus on specific individuals—historical archacology has the ahility to concentrate on named, known people in history, Thus, a great deal of archaeology has been conducted at Monticello, Jefferson’s stately mansion, and on the properties of other people well known iu history. More importantly, historical archaeology also has the ability to document tie lives of people whose generat his- tories may be known, but whose daily lives remain a mystery. We can explore the daily lives of slaves, factory workers, public works laborers, farmers, colonists, and fur traders by excavating their humble abodes, workplaces, and artifacts. Archavol- ogy serites the history not only of the rich and famous, hut also of common folk. As such, it makes a priceless contribution to human history. Douglas Armstrong's excavations at Drax Hall, Jamaica, provide a perfect case in point, Drax Hall was built on St. Ann's Bay, on the north coast of the island (Fig- ure 1.4), This bay is where Columbus and his crew were marooned for a year and five days after his ship became infested with borers during his fourth voyage to the New World. During his survey of the plantation cstate lands, Armstrong found some 60 possible house locations lying behind che mansion, These dwellings were variously the residences of slaves (1760-1810), transitional laborers (1810-1840}, and fully freed slaves (1840-1925). Rather than focus specificaily on the mansion, © Lnwrone Boey josie BB Meena ce | © creeg Save * = Figure 1.4 House remains at Drax Hail, Jamaica as some earlier historical archacologists might have done, Armstrong sought to give voice to the laborers, the people who actuaily provided the wealth of the William Drax family. Here, archacolagy looked on both sides of the social fence, at the rich and the poor, the literate and the nonliterate. __ This means, too, that the archacologist hus a vital role to play in the fostering of national identity, of ethnic pride, Archaeologists have uncovered black cemcter- ies under New York and Philadelphia, documented We survival of waditional African beliefs in Southern slave communitics, and chronicled daily life at Catholic missions in the Southwest. Humble, day-to-day arvfacts. food remains, houses, and myriad other seemingly insignificant finds come together in complicated jigsaw puzzles of forgowen history as compelling as any document or faded nineteenth century photograph. It is from such palimpsests of finds that the historical archae- ologist restores a fabric of history to those whose past has been ignored, pushed aside, or just plain forgouen. Historical archaeology is far move chan historie preservation and dhe recon= struction of stately colonial homes. It shines like a searchlight into the recent past, clothing the deeds of common people with historical perspective, studying chang ing gender roles, ethnic communiues, and technological innovation over genera- dons and centuries.TAL ARCHAEOLOGY? The archaeology of the recent past is more than a fascinating curiosity, it pro- vides us with a truly multifaceted view of history during centuries when everyone on earth became part of an ever-closer web of interconnectedness. As such, it offers unrivaled opportunities for understanding the complex, and often subtle, forces that shaped our own ever more diverse world. It is changing the way we perceive our ancestors and ourselves._ FMistorical Archaeology Charles E. Orser, Jr. Mlinois State University Brian M. Fagan University of California, Santa Barbara