Advertisement

Imagining an Archaeology of the Future: Capitalism and Colonialism Past and Present

  • Stephen A. Mrozowski
Article

Abstract

This paper explores how doing history backward may allow archaeologists to begin imagining an archaeology of the future. The purpose of such an archaeology would be two-fold: first, to examine the past from the vantage point of the present as a way of better understanding the past as precondition, and second, to critically examine the present with an eye toward imagining how archaeology might be able to influence the future. Drawing on case studies that offer windows on the growth of capitalist production and the continuing impacts of colonialism, this paper seeks to demonstrate the power of using archaeology to link past and present. By focusing on the ideological dimensions of processes such as commoditization and the erasure of indigenous histories I hope to highlight the value of doing history backward and its potential for constructing an archaeology of the future.

Keywords

Abstraction Commoditizaton Capitalism Colonialism 

References

  1. Adams, J. (2004). Nipmuc say BIA got the facts wrong, Indian Country <http://www.indiancountrytoday.com/archive/28175229.html>.
  2. Allard, A. (2010). Foodways, Commensality and Nipmuc Identity: An Analysis of Faunal Remains from Sarah Boston’s Farmstead, Grafton, Massachusetts 1790–1840. Unpublished Masters thesis, University of Massachusetts, Boston.Google Scholar
  3. Baert, P. (2005). Philosophy of the Social Sciences: Toward Pragmatism, Polity Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  4. Bagley, J. (2013). Cultural Continuity in a Nipmuc Landscape. Unpublished Master’s thesis, University of Massachusetts, Boston.Google Scholar
  5. Beaudry, M. C., and Mrozowski, S. A. (2001). Cultural space and worker identity in the company city: Nineteenth-century Lowell, Massachusetts. In Mayne, A., and Murray, T. (eds.), The Archaeology of Urban Landscapes: Explorations in Slumland, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 118–131.Google Scholar
  6. Bhabba, H. (1994). The Location of Culture, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  7. Bonner, J. L., and Kiniry, E. (2003). Archaeological Reconaissance Survey, The Robinson Property, Grafton, Massachusetts, Andrew Fiske Memorial Center for Archaeological Research, University of Massachusetts, Boston.Google Scholar
  8. Bordieu, P. (1992). The logic of practice, Stanford University Press, Palo Alto.Google Scholar
  9. Connerton, P. (1989). How societies remember, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Connerton, P. (2008). Seven types of forgetting. Memory Studies 1: 59–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. De Certeau, M. (1984). The practice of everyday life, University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  12. De Laguna, F. (1960). American archaeology. In De Laguna, F. (ed.), Selected papers from the American anthropologist, 1880–1920, American Anthropological Association, Washington, pp. 218–222.Google Scholar
  13. Deleuze, G., and Guattari, F. (2003). A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.Google Scholar
  14. Den Ouden, A. E. (2005). Beyond Conquest: Native Peoples and the Struggle for History in New England, University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.Google Scholar
  15. Dewey, J. (1925). Experience and Nature, Open Court, Chicago.Google Scholar
  16. Dixon, R. B. (1913). Some aspects of North American archaeology. American Anthropologist 15: 549–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Doughton, T. L. (1997). Unseen neighbors: Native Americans of central Massachusetts, a people who had “vanished. In Calloway, C. G. (ed.), After King Philip’s War: Presence and Persistence in Indian New England, University Press of New England, Hanover, pp. 207–230.Google Scholar
  18. Freinkel, S. (2011). Plastics: A Toxic Love Story, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, New York.Google Scholar
  19. Friedman, E., and Lee, C. K. (2010). Remaking the world of Chinese labour: a 30-year retrospective. British Journal of Industrial Relations 48: 507–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gary, J. (2005). Phase I Intensive Archaeological Survey of Hassanamesit Woods Property, Grafton, Massachusetts, Andrew Fiske Memorial Center for Archaeological Research, University of Massachusetts, Boston.Google Scholar
  21. Gell, A. (1998). Art and Agency: Towards a New Anthropological Theory, Clarendon, Oxford.Google Scholar
  22. Gould, D. R. (2010). Contested Places: The History and Meaning of Hassanamisco. Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut. Storrs.Google Scholar
  23. Gould, D. R. (2013a). Cultural practice and authenticity: The search for real Indians in New England in the “historical” period. In Schmidt, P. R., and Mrozowski, S. A. (eds.), The Death of Prehistory, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 241–266.Google Scholar
  24. Gould, D. R. (2013b). The Nipmuc Nation, Federal acknowledgment, and a case of mistaken identity. In O’Brien, J. and Den Ouden, A. E. (eds.), Recognition, Sovereignty Struggles, and Indigenous Rights in the United States: A Sourcebook. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  25. Hambrecht, G. (2012). Zooarchaeology and modernity in Iceland. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 16: 472–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jian, Y. (2012). China’s river pollution “a threat to people’s lives.” People’s Daily Online <http://English.people.com.cn90882/7732438.html>.
  27. Kennett, D. J., Breitenbach, S. F. M., Aquino, V. V., Asmerom, Y., Awe, J., Baldini, J. U. L., Bartlein, P., Culleton, B. J., Ebert, C., Jazwa, C., Macri, M. J., Marwan, N., Polyak, V., Prufer, K. M., Ridley, H. E., Sodemann, H., Winterhalder, B., and Haug, G. H. (2012). Development and disintegration of Maya political systems in response to climate change. Science 338: 788–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Larkin, K., and McGuire, R. H. (eds.) (2009). The Archaeology of Class War: The Colorado Coalfield Strike of 1913–1914, University of Colorado Press, Boulder.Google Scholar
  29. Law, H. (2008). Daily Negotiations and the Creation of an Alternative Discourse: The Legacy of a Colonial Nipmuc Farmstead. Master’s thesis, University of Massachusetts, Boston.Google Scholar
  30. Law, H., Pezzarossi, G., and Mrozowski, S. A. (2008). Archaeological Intensive Excavations: Hassanamesit Woods Property, The Sarah Boston Farmstead, Grafton, Massachusetts, Andrew Fiske Memorial Center for Archaeological Research, University of Massachusetts, Boston.Google Scholar
  31. Law-Pezzarossi, H. (2010). Baskets and basketmakers in motion: the archaeology of Nipmuc social landscapes in 19th Century New England. Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of American Anthropological Association, New Orleans, Louisiana.Google Scholar
  32. Law-Pezzarossi, H., and Mrozowski, S. A. (2014). Final Report of the Archaeological Investigations of Hassanamesit Woods; The Sarah Boston Farmstead and Deb Newman Site. Cultural Resource Management Study #64, Andrew Fiske Memorial Center for Archaeological Research, University of Massachusetts, Boston.Google Scholar
  33. Lightfoot, K. G., Panich, L. M., Schneider, T. D., Gonzalez, S. L., Russell, M. A., Modzelewski, D., Molino, T., and Blair, E. H. (2013). The study of Indigenous political economies and colonialism in Native California: implications for contemporary tribal groups and Federal recognition. American Antiquity 78: 89–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lyman, L. R., and O’Brien, M. J. (2001). The Direct Historical Approach, analogical reasoning, and theory in Americanist archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 8: 303–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Martin, A. S. (1994). “Fashionable sugar dishes, latest fashion ware”: Creamware revolution in the eighteenth-century Chesapeake. In Shackel, P. A., and Little, B. J. (eds.), Historical Archaeology of the Chesapeake, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, pp. 169–187.Google Scholar
  36. Martin, A. S. (1996). Frontier boys and country cousins: The context for choice in eighteenth-century consumerism. In De Cunzo, L. A., and Herman, B. L. (eds.), Historical Archaeology the Study of American Culture, The Henry Francis du Pont Winterthur Museum, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. 71–102.Google Scholar
  37. Marx, K. (1904). A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, translated by N.I. Stone, Charles H. Kerr, Chicago.Google Scholar
  38. McGuire, R. H. (2008). Archaeology as Political Action, University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  39. Meikle, J. L. (1995). American Plastic: A Cultural History, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick.Google Scholar
  40. Miller, G. L., Martin, A. S., and Dickenson, N. S. (1994). Changing consumption patterns, English ceramics and the American market from1770 to 1840. In Hutchens, K. (ed.), Everyday Life in the Early Republic, 1770–1828, W.W. Norton, New York, pp. 219–246.Google Scholar
  41. Mrozowski, S. A. (1999). The commodification of nature. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 3: 153–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mrozowski, S. A. (2000). Managerial capitalism and the subtleties of class analysis in historical archaeology. In Delle, J., Mrozowski, S. A., and Paynter, R. (eds.), Lines that Divide: The Archaeologies of Race, Class and Gender, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. 276–306.Google Scholar
  43. Mrozowski, S. A. (2006a). The Archaeology of Class in Urban America, Cambridge University Press, London.Google Scholar
  44. Mrozowski, S. A. (2006b). Environments of history: Biological dimensions of historical archaeology. In Hall, M., and Silliman, S. W. (eds.), Historical Archaeology, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 23–41.Google Scholar
  45. Mrozowski, S. A. (2012a). Ethnobiology for a diverse world: spaces and natures: archaeology and the political ecology of modern cities. Journal of Ethnobiology 32: 129–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mrozowski, S. A. (2012b). Pragmatism and the relevancy of archaeology for contemporary society. In Rockman, M., and Flatman, J. (eds.), Archaeology in Society: Its Relevance in the Modern World, Springer, New York, pp. 239–256.Google Scholar
  47. Mrozowski, S. A. (2013). The tyranny of prehistory and the search for a deeper history. In Schmidt, P. R., and Mrozowski, S. A. (eds.), The Death of Prehistory, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 220–240.Google Scholar
  48. Mrozowski, S. A., Zeising, G. H., and Beaudry, M. C. (1996). Living on the Boott: Historical Archaeology at the Boott Cotton Mills, Lowell, Massachusetts, University of Massachusetts Press, Amherst.Google Scholar
  49. Mrozowski, S. A., Herbster, H., Brown, D., and Priddy, K. L. (2009). Magunkaquog materiality, Federal recognition, and the search for a deeper history. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 13: 430–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. O’Brien, J. M. (2006). “Vanishing” Indians in nineteenth-century New England: Local historians’ erasure of still-present peoples. In Kan, S. A., and Strong, P. T. (eds.), New Perspectives on Native North America: Cultures, Histories and Representations, University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, pp. 414–432.Google Scholar
  51. O'Brien, J. M. (2010). Firsting and Lasting: Writing Indians Out of Existence in New England, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.Google Scholar
  52. Ollman, B. (2003). Dance of the Dialectic: Steps in Marx’s Method, University of Illinois Press, Urbana.Google Scholar
  53. Ortner, S. B. (2006). Anthropology and Social Theory: Culture, Power, and the Acting Subject, Duke University Press, Durham.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Panich, L. M. (2013). Archaeologies of persistence: reconsidering the legacies of colonialism in Native North America. American Antiquity 78: 105–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Pauketat, T. R. (2001). Practice and history in archaeology: an emerging paradigm. Anthropological Theory 1: 73–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pauketat, T. R. (2007). Chiefdoms and Other Archaeological Delusions, AltaMira, Walnut Creek.Google Scholar
  57. Pezzarossi, G. (2014) Camouflaging consumption and colonial mimicry: the materiality of an eighteenth-nineteenth century Nipmuc household. International Journal Of Historical Archaeology 18 (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  58. Pezzarossi, G., Kennedy, R., and Law, H. (2012). “Hoe cakes and pickerel”: Cooking traditions and community at a nineteenth century Nipmuc farmstead. In Graff, S. R., and Rodreguez-Alegria, E. (eds.), The Menial Art of Cooking: Archaeological Studies of Cooking and Food Preparation, University of Colorado Press, Boulder, pp. 201–230.Google Scholar
  59. Poovey, M. (1994). The social construction of “class”: Toward a history of classifactory thinking. In Dimock, W. C., and Gilmore, M. T. (eds.), Rethinking Class: Literary Studies and Social Formations, Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 15–56.Google Scholar
  60. Poovey, M. (1998). A History of the Modern Fact: Problems of Knowledge in the Sciences of Wealth and Society, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Preucel, R., and Mrozowski, S. A. (eds.) (2010). Contemporary Archaeology in Theory: The New Pragmatism, 2nd ed, Wiley-Blackwell, New York.Google Scholar
  62. Pringle, H. (2012). Did pulses of climate change drive the rise and fall of the Maya? Science 338: 730–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Rorty, R. (1998). Achieving Our Country: Leftist Thought in Twentieth-Century America, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  64. Rorty, R. (1999). Philosophy and Social Hope, Penguin, London.Google Scholar
  65. Ruddiman, W. F. (2003). The anthropogenic greenhouse era began thousands of years ago. Climate Change 61: 261–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Sassaman, K. E. (2010). The Eastern Archaic, Historicized, AltaMira, Latham.Google Scholar
  67. Sassaman, K. E. (2012). Futurologists look back. Archaeologies: Journal of World the Archaeological Congress 8: 250–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Schimidt, P. R., and Mrozowski, S. A. (2013). The death of prehistory: Reforming the past, looking to the future. In Schimdt, P. R., and Mrozowski, S. A. (eds.), The Death of Prehistory, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 1–28.Google Scholar
  69. Silliman, S. W. (2009). Change and continuity, practice and memory: Native American persistence in colonial New England. American Antiquity 74: 211–230.Google Scholar
  70. Steward, J. H. (1942). The Direct Historical Approach to archaeology. American Antiquity 7: 337–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Strong, W. D. (1940). From history to prehistory in the northern Great Plains. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, vol. 100, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, pp. 353–394.Google Scholar
  72. Trouillot, M. R. (1995). Silencing the Past: Powers and the Production of History, Beacon, Boston.Google Scholar
  73. Wadel, W. R. (1938). The Direct Historical Approach in Pawnee Archaeology, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington.Google Scholar
  74. Walker, M. (2003). The Ludlow Massacre: class, warfare, and historical memory in southern Colorado. Historical Archaeology 37(3): 66–80.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fiske Center for Archaeological Research, Department of AnthropologyUniversity of Massachusetts BostonBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations