Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-d8cs5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-26T00:40:03.679Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Brexit hypothesis and prehistory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 December 2018

Kenneth Brophy Open the ORCID record for Kenneth Brophy [Opens in a new window]
Kenneth Brophy*
Affiliation:
Archaeology, School of Humanities, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, Scotland, UK (Email: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Archaeologists have more opportunities than ever to disseminate their research widely—and the public more opportunities to engage and respond. This has led to the increasing mobilisation of archaeological data and interpretations within the discourses of nationalism and identity politics. This debate piece introduces the Brexit hypothesis, the proposition that any archaeological discovery in Europe can—and probably will—be exploited to argue in support of, or against, Brexit. Examples demonstrate how archaeological and ancient DNA studies are appropriated for political ends, and a series of recommendations and strategies for combatting such exploitation are proposed by the author.

Keywords

EuropeBritainprehistoryBrexitnationalismaDNA
Type
Debate
Information
Antiquity , Volume 92 , Issue 366 , December 2018 , pp. 1650 - 1658
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd, 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arnold, N. 2006. ‘Arierdämmerung’: race and archaeology in Nazi Germany. World Archaeology 38: 8–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438240500509744Google Scholar
B.A.R.B. 2018. Viewing data: all the latest reports. Available at: www.barb.co.uk/viewing-data/ (accessed 28 August 2018).Google Scholar
Barclay, G.J. 2001. ‘Metropolitan’ and ‘parochial’/’core’ and ‘periphery’: a historiography of the prehistory of Scotland. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 67: 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0079497X00001596Google Scholar
Barclay, G.J. 2017. The birth and development of a factoid 2013–17: the invention of history in the Scottish independence debate. Darrow. Available at: http://darrow.org.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Factoid_2017_V_2.3.pdf (accessed 28 August 2018).Google Scholar
Baylis, M. 2017. Invasion! with Sam Willis: a good series but for the shrill voice and the crude arguments. Daily Express, 6 December 2017. Available at: www.express.co.uk/showbiz/tv-radio/888754/Invasion-with-Sam-Willis-TV-review-Kirstie-s-Handmade-Christmas-channel-four (accessed 28 August 2018).Google Scholar
Beard, M. 2017. Roman Britain in black and white. Times Literary Supplement August 2017. Available at: www.the-tls.co.uk/roman-britain-black-white/ (accessed 28 August 2018).Google Scholar
Bonacchi, C., Altaweel, M. & Krzyzanska, M.. 2018. The heritage of Brexit: roles of the past in the construction of political identities through social media. Journal of Social Archaeology 18: 174–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469605318759713Google Scholar
Borkhataria, C. & Allen, V.. 2018. How the builders of Stonehenge … were almost completely wiped out by mysterious Beaker people whose blood runs in Brit veins to this day. Daily Mail, 22 February 2018. Available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5413607/Neolithic-farmers-wiped-Beaker-people.html (accessed 28 August 2018).Google Scholar
Brewer, P.R. & Ley, B.L.. 2010. Media use and public perceptions of DNA evidence. Science Communication 32: 93–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547009340343Google Scholar
Brophy, K. 2017. Celebrate Neolithic Orkney—but leave out Stonehenge. Island Review. Available at: http://theislandreview.com/content/bbc-neolithic-orkney-neil-oliver-kenneth-brophy-archaeology-stonehenge (accessed 28 August 2018).Google Scholar
Campbell, A. 2017. The first Brexit: submerged landscapes of the North Sea and Channel. The Guardian, 26 April 2017. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/apr/26/the-first-brexit-submerged-landscapes-of-the-north-sea-and-channel (accessed 28 August 2018).Google Scholar
Clark, G. 1966. The invasion hypothesis in British prehistory. Antiquity 40: 172–89. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00032488Google Scholar
Devlin, H. 2018. First modern Britons had ‘dark to black skin’, Cheddar Man DNA analysis reveals. The Guardian, 7 February 2018. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/feb/07/first-modern-britons-dark-black-skin-cheddar-man-dna-analysis-reveals (accessed 28 August 2018).Google Scholar
Fernandez, C., Pettit, H. & Collins, T.. 2018. Face of the first Briton is revealed: DNA analysis shows 10,000-year-old man had ‘dark to black’ skin with BLUE eyes and curly hair—and he shares up to 10% of his DNA with today's Brits. Daily Mail online, 7 February 2018. Available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5358699/First-Brit-dark-skinned-blue-eyed.html (accessed 28 August 2018).Google Scholar
Gardner, A. 2017. Brexit, boundaries and imperial identities: a comparative view. Journal of Social Archaeology 17: 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469605316686875Google Scholar
Gardner, A. & Harrison, R.. 2017. Brexit, archaeology and heritage: reflections and agendas. Papers from the Institute of Archaeology 27: article 24, 1–6.Google Scholar
Hoffman, D. 2015. What have genetics ever done for us? The implications of aDNA data for interpreting identity in Early Neolithic Central Europe. European Journal of Archaeology 18: 454–76. https://doi.org/10.1179/1461957114Y.0000000083Google Scholar
Lotzof, K. 2018. Cheddar Man: Mesolithic Britain's blue-eyed boy. National History Museum website. Available at: http://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/cheddar-man-mesolithic-britain-blue-eyed-boy.html (accessed 28 August 2018).Google Scholar
O'Grady, S. 2017. TV Review. Invasion! with Sam Willis (BBC4). Who do you think we are? You might be surprised! Independent, 26 December 2017. Available at: www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/tv-review-invasion-with-sam-willis-bbc4-motherland-bbc2-a8087676.html (accessed 28 August 2018).Google Scholar
Olalde, I. et al. 2018. The Beaker phenomenon and the genomic transformation of northwest Europe. Nature 555: 190–96. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature25738Google Scholar
Prendergast, M.E. & Sawchuk, E.. 2018. Boots on the ground in Africa's DNA ‘revolution’: archaeological perspectives on ethics and best practices. Antiquity 92: 803–15. https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2018.70Google Scholar
Richardson, L. 2013. A digital public archaeology? Papers from the Institute of Archaeology 23: article 10, 1–12.Google Scholar
Richardson, L. & Booth, T.. 2017. Response to ‘Brexit, archaeology and heritage: reflections and agendas’. Papers from the Institute of Archaeology 27: article 25, 1–5.Google Scholar
Rincon, P. 2018. Ancient ‘Britons’ replaced by newcomers. Available at: www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-43115485 (accessed 28 August 2018).Google Scholar
Stout, M. 1996. Emyr Estyn Evans and Northern Ireland: the archaeology and geography of a new state, in Atkinson, J.A., Banks, I. & O'Sullivan, G. (ed.) Nationalism and archaeology: 111–27. Glasgow: Cruithne.Google Scholar