Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T09:05:01.175Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Archaeology within, archaeology without

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2016

Jeff Sanders
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The rise of the nation state has had a major influence on the development of archaeology. Nation states today, however, differ from their 19th- and 20th-century equivalents, and they both impact upon and use archaeology in different ways. By looking outwards from an individual country within a collective nation state, I will explore the forms that this can take. From a Scotland-based perspective, I will look at how various borders and boundaries, and the aims and objectives of those responsible for them, affect archaeological work. As well as looking at institutional and administrative boundaries and their effect on archaeology, I will also explore how archaeological work, and the stories we produce, can either question or reinforce the nation state. Ultimately, archaeology can be used in a very different way now than in the 19th and 20th centuries: it is less about the specific stories and more about the process of uncovering them. Rather than telling a national story, archaeology can be used as an instrument to deliver on wider objectives.

Keywords

Scotlandnation stateidentitywell-beingScARFDig It! 2015
Type
Discussion
Information
Archaeological Dialogues , Volume 23 , Issue 1 , June 2016 , pp. 10 - 18
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

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

Aitchison, K., and Rocks-Maqueen, D., 2013: Archaeology labour market intelligence. Profiling the profession 2012–13, Sheffield.Google Scholar
Arnold, B., 1990: The past as propaganda. Totalitarian archaeology in Nazi Germany, Antiquity 64, 464–78.Google Scholar
Commissie Ontwikkeling Nederlandse Canon, 2007: A key to Dutch history. Report by the Committee for the Development of the Dutch Canon, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Díaz-Andreu, M., and Champion, T.C. (eds), 1996a: Nationalism and archaeology in Europe, London.Google Scholar
Díaz-Andreu, M., and Champion, T.C., 1996b: Nationalism and archaeology in Europe. An introduction, in Díaz-Andreu and Champion (eds), Nationalism and archaeology in Europe, London, 1–23Google Scholar
ECOTEC, 2008: Economic impact of the historic environment in Scotland, at www.historic-scotland.gov.uk/econmomicimpact-ecotec2009.pdf, last accessed 2 January 2016.Google Scholar
Haselgrove, C., Armit, I., Champion, T.C., Creighton, J., Gwilt, A., Hill, J.D., Hunter, F. and Woodward, A., 2001: Understanding the British Iron Age. An agenda for action, Salisbury.Google Scholar
IfA Wales/Cymru, 2008: Introducing a research framework for the archaeology of Wales, Cardiff.Google Scholar
Jones, S., and Graves-Brown, P., 1996: Introduction. Archaeology and cultural identity in Europe, in Graves-Brown, P., Jones, S. and Gamble, C.S. (eds), Cultural identity and archaeology. The construction of European communities, London, 1–24.Google Scholar
Last, J., 2008: The agenda gap? Approaches to the Bronze Age in current research frameworks, Bronze Age review 1, 34–47, available at www.britishmuseum.org/pdf/BAR1_2008_4_Last_c.pdf, last accessed 30 December 2015.Google Scholar
Mansfield, S., and Moffat, A., 2013: The Great Tapestry of Scotland. The making of a masterpiece, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Museum Galleries Scotland, 2012: Going further. The national strategy for Scotland's museums and galleries, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
REF, 2012: REF 2014: Assessment framework and guidance on submissions, at www.ref.ac.uk/media/ref/content/pub/assessmentframeworkandguidanceonsubmissions/GOS%20including%20addendum.pdf, last accessed 2 January 2016Google Scholar
Rio Tinto, 2011: Why cultural heritage matters. A resource guide for integrating cultural heritage management into communities work at Rio Tinto, at www.riotinto.com/documents/ReportsPublications/Rio_Tinto_Cultural_Heritage_Guide.pdf, last accessed 30 December 2015.Google Scholar
Royal Society of Edinburgh, 2012: Treasure trove, at www.royalsoced.org.uk/cms/files/advice-papers/2012/AP12_13.pdf, last accessed 2 January 2016.Google Scholar
Scottish Government, 2014: Our place in time. The historic environment strategy for Scotland, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Scottish Government, 2015: A stronger Scotland. The Government's programme for Scotland 2015–16, at www.gov.scot/Resource/0048/00484439.pdf, last accessed 29 December 2015.Google Scholar
Scottish Strategic Archaeology Committee, 2015: Scotland's archaeology strategy, at http://archaeologystrategy.scot/files/2015/08/ScotlandsArchaeologyStrategy.pdf, last accessed 2 January 2016.Google Scholar
Sheridan, A., and Cooney, G., in press: The Boyne to Brodgar initiative. Understanding – and preserving, presenting and raising awareness of – Neolithic monuments and the people who built and used them in Ireland, Scotland and the Isle of Man, Journal of Irish archaeology.Google Scholar
Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, 2013: Telling Scotland's story, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Somerset Heritage Service, 2007: The archaeology of South West England, Taunton.Google Scholar
Tarlow, S., and Nilsson Stutz, L., 2015: Can an archaeologist be a public intellectual?, Archaeological dialogues 20 (1), 1–5.Google Scholar
Trigger, B., 2003: A history of archaeological thought, Cambridge.Google Scholar