Scholarly Publication and WAC: The Need for a Critical Response

This paper is a response to recent critiques of the World Archaeological Congress (WAC), including its Global Libraries Program. WAC should take greater leadership in addressing the current unequal state of international scholarly publication. Scholars from the global south disproportionately have more difficulty obtaining published works and fewer venues to publish their own research. This paper calls WAC to encourage and support local and non-English publications, open access works and journals, commons-based licensing, and e-repositories.     

The Process is the Outcome

Ethics are the key to what WAC is all about. It is our stated responsibility as WAC members to help shed the dark disciplinary past and forge a future archaeology of solidarity with the aim of fostering equality (but not sameness) among people everywhere. The present Forum section of Archaeologies showcases the scope and depth of the discussions surrounding this core aspect of WAC, which took place at the first meeting of the Committee on Ethics (henceforth CoE) at Stanford Archaeology Center (California, USA) from April 19th to 21st 2007. It is an invitation to WAC members and others to partake in the process of drafting a “General Code of Ethics” for WAC, a process that ultimately is much more about inclusive discussions and decisions on a framework for ethical practice than about writing a text or proscribing how to behave. The second affiliation for Julie Hollowell will be in effect from 15 December 2007.     

Eavesdropping on a Global Conversation

How do we negotiate our own positions as locally situated archaeologists in relation to a global discipline? On the one hand, we belong to a worldwide community of scholars, practitioners and activists whose conversations and debates crisscross national boundaries, continents, hemispheres and social classes. On the other hand, we are positioned in specific, local contexts through out national and institutional affiliations, which themselves are variously situated in relation to the fault-lines and cleavages that divide out world: North and South, West and non-West, developed and under-developed economies, and members of dominant and subaltern national groupings. These different forms of insertion often play a key determining role when it comes to the kind of archaeology that we practice, and our access to resources and networks. One of the strengths of WAC as an organization is that it pays close attention to the different ways in which we are situated as archaeologists, and thinks creatively around how to address this. One demonstration of this in practice is the WAC list-serve, where as a subscriber one eavesdrops on a global conversation, around a fascinating range of issues. Archaeologies has a new look and a new publisher! My co-editor, Anne Pyburn, and I are delighted to announce that Archaeologies has moved to Springer Press. The move has many potential benefits for WAC members, and takes the journal into the mainstream of scholarly publishing.     

The Cunning Means of Domination

This discussion started on the WAC listserv when I objected on 8 April 2007 to a short message sent by Claire Smith on the previous day. She had been announcing that her colleague “Heather Burke and [are] putting together a list of important non-Anglo archaeologists” and was asking whether “anyone has any recommendations” for that list and, if so, whether they would email her off list. I objected strongly. This paper explains why. In doing so I am describing the degree of complexity language use has acquired in the contemporary world with old linguistic maps quickly become obsolete. To insist that English is simply the lingua franca of academic discourse is to ignore that complexity. The wide use of English as an academic lingua franca means in practice that there are very strong asymmetries not only in individual archaeologists’ abilities to express themselves competently and confidently in that language but also in what is considered appropriate or possible to express. For a language is not simply a random code with which anything might be said to anybody. Language, and the conventions that govern how a given language is to be applied, influences to a large extent even what is a sensible thing to say in a given context. Language use in archaeology is not about translating the same archaeology into different languages but about translating between different archaeologies and associated cultural practices including languages. The only sensible way forward is for WAC to promote among its members the learning of more languages—which is something the vast majority of “non-Anglo” archaeologists already knows and accepts as a fact of life. We do not need lists of “non-Anglo” archaeologists that are considered worth reading about in English, but more archaeologists being able to appreciate the work of colleagues in its original language. In conclusion I urge exclusively Anglophone archaeologists to please stop finding excuses for learning foreign languages.     

WAC Matters: A Different View to that of Shepherd and Haber

This paper is a response to Shepherd and Haber??s (Public Archaeol 10(2):96?C115, 2011) critiques to World Archaeological Congress, from the viewpoint of the current Secretary of WAC. While most of the issues discussed have been already answered and corrected by Smith (Public Archaeol 10(4):223?C234, 2011), this paper adds my own views on two of these controversial issues: the meeting between WAC and Rio Tinto Limited in 2007 to explore options to work together on enhancing cultural heritage management and protection in mining activities (where I attended as the WAC Treasurer), and the Archaeologists Without Borders Program (as member of the committee for this program).     

Book Review

Abstract

The year 2011 marks the twenty-fifth anniversary of the World Archaeological Congress (WAC). WAC marked a bold intervention in the politics of knowledge in archaeology in the context of the mid-1980s. But how has it fared in contemporary worlds of practice? In this paper, two senior WAC members take a close and critical look at the changing fortunes, meanings, and contexts of the organization. At its centre, is an account of the controversial meeting between the WAC Executive and Rio Tinto Limited, the mining multinational, in Melbourne in 2007. Other parts of the paper engage with notions of the Indigenous, and discuss the assumptions informing the WAC programme Archaeologists Without Borders. Framed as a challenge, the paper invites response and commentary, as a way of opening debate which allows us to envisage alternative futures for the discipline, beyond the banal prospect of 'Archaeology Inc.'.     

Putting the Records Straight: ‘What is up with WAC?’

This paper is a reaction to the paper of Nick Shepherd and Alejandro Haber titled ??What is up with WAC? Archaeology and ??Engagement?? in a Globalised World??, published in Public Archaeology volume 10, number 2 of May 2011. Having been associated with WAC since its inception in 1986 and having been a player in all the programmes criticized by Nick Shepherd and Alejandro Haber, I am reluctantly obliged to provide some information to put the records straight. WAC being a true worldwide organization (not just international) has membership from different social, cultural, linguistic, political, economic, religious and ideological backgrounds. This calls for mutual respect and conscious effort to understand people and their points of view and also to be very sensitive to our differences. Summing up issues in the context of simplistic ??globalised world?? is big error of judgment.     

WAC Reflections Through Maori Eyes

For a while now issues surrounding ethics in archaeology have occupied my thoughts, as have case studies of ethical misconduct. In fact a large part of why I gravitated toward archaeology is rooted in past instances of poor ethical practice instigated against my people, and the overwhelming personal need I have, to seek redress and change for Iwi Maori. Part of my commitment to both of these endeavours, is expressed through my association with WAC, with whose present code of ethics and principles i find affinity with.     

Educating the masses: Cartoons from the populist press of the 1890s

Walter Bagehot's celebrated albeit ironical statement that the English were the model of a deferential nation appeared in The English Constitution in 1867. This is generally thought to have been the first formulation of the concept of deference, which has since been applied to explain social attitudes in other connections, including late colonial America. Curiously enough, Bagehot's observation had been anticipated in closely similar language by Richard Hildreth, the American historian and political scientist, in his Theory of Politics in 1853. Bagehot, who frequently quoted American commentaries and statistics in his own works, and used American comparisons with Britain, must certainly have read Hildreth, whose book was on sale in London. We cannot be sure, but we are left with the tantalizing probability that this essentially English theory was drawn from a contemporary American source.     

Reflections on the First Meeting of the WAC Committee of Ethics

WAC needs to recognise that it is not a fully developed organisation but a developing one. There are standpoints or ways-of-thinking in the world which are difficult to perceive through the lens of different customs and/or languages and with which the people in WAC may not be familiar. In addition, we need to follow the laws under which we carry out archaeological activities, so that society can maintain public order. Therefore, when involved in an archaeological activity, we should collect as much information, and as wide a variety of standpoints, as possible, and we should act honestly with respect for law and for human life in the societies in which we work.     

Foreword to the Jamaica Issue of the WAC Journal <Emphasis Type="Italic">Archaeologies</Emphasis>

Ainsley Henriques, who was the Conference Chair of WAC Inter-Congress in Jamaica in May 2007, commends the publication of the papers presented at the WAC Inter-Congress in the present special issue of the journal Archaeologies.     

Francis Harding’s “In Artem Volandi” (1679) and the early modern art of flying

The article examines a neglected Anglo-Latin poem on flying, entitled “In Artem Volandi” (1679) and penned by Francis Harding, an Oxford student. So far, the poem has neither received any critical attention nor has it ever been translated into English. The article contributes to the Anglophone understanding of the dynamic relationship between Restoration Science and satire by analysing the poem’s complex handling of a range of contemporary concerns. The prospect of human flight and the ideas about future interstellar travel in late seventeenth-century England enabled Harding to explore a host of cultural issues, including witchcraft, atomism, adultery, and colonialism. The article examines the poem’s intertext by relying on three main types of texts: works in English, works in Neo-Latin never before translated into English, and works in Latin for which translations were available. The first-time translation of the poem into English is provided at the end of the article.     

The Future of WAC: A Fringe or a Popular Professional-Social Network?

In response to Shepherd and Haber??s (Public Archaeology 10(2):96?C115, 2011) article ??What is up With WAC??? I argue that, on the one hand, it is possible to adopt the authors?? new definition of Indigenous with certain modifications that enable it to accept a diverse constellation of responses to dwelling-in-displacement and explain the origin of these inequalities. On the other hand, I argue that WAC is not a reactionary organization of colonial heritage but that it makes great efforts to respond to 21st century postcolonial archaeology.     

WAC at a Crossroads

The Sixth World Archaeological Congress in Dublin is likely to be a crossroads for the organisation, as it negotiates a number of key issues. One set of issues is concerned with the manner in which we negotiate the sharply politically divided nature of the contemporary moment. It is one of the extraordinary ironies of the current moment that the world of Dublin 2008 is, in many ways, more sharply divided, less securely predictable, and less amenable to immediate analysis than the world of Southampton 1986. So how does WAC find a way through these contending forces, pressures and identities? One answer comes from reminding ourselves that WAC has always been an oppositional organisation of a particular kind, cutting against the grain of received modes of thought and practice. Another answer comes from reminding ourselves of WAC’s core intellectual project. The WAC of 2008 exists as a loose conjunction of at least three different projects. The first is concerned with asserting the rights of Indigenous persons and groups in relation to archaeological processes. The second is about asserting the interests of archaeologists from the global South. The third is about contesting a particular politics of knowledge, and framing an epistemological challenge to received modes of thought and practice. These projects share a number of points in common, although they also pull in different directions. WAC was founded on a discussion of “sameness”, the extent to which we formed part of a “one world” archaeology. Perhaps it is time to find a way—seriously, respectfully—to talk about the points on which we differ?     

Hegel on the World-historical

The article considers the development and the diversity of the understandings of the Norman Conquest in Jacobean England. In 1603, James VI of Scotland ascended the throne of England, and one of his first policies to unify the two kingdoms culminated in failure in face of English opposition. Modern historians have demonstrated that at the heart of this quick collapse lay a constitutional struggle—the English fear of the loss of their sovereignty. Taking this as the vantage point, the article examines a number of historical publications composed by English lawyers in the following decade. The Jacobean period witnessed a significant proliferation of historical literature, and modern historians have stressed that English common lawyers staunchly adhered to a belief in the ancient constitution, a belief in the antiquity of English law that was counter to royal policies. The article demonstrates how the Union debate, despite its eventual collapse, produced unparalleled interest in the meaning of conquest in the 1610s. It also considers the works of civil lawyers in comparison. By comparing the differing accounts of the Norman Conquest, the article ultimately demonstrates the contested nature of James's kingship in England.     

Dimensions of remapping: Heinrich Schiffers and his mental map of Africa

ABSTRACT

At the beginning of the 1960s, the Athenäum publishing house in Germany planned a revised and extended edition of Heinrich Schiffers’ (1901–1982) successful book Wilder Erdteil Afrika (English translation: The Quest for Africa). The bestselling author had published several monographs about Africa since the 1930s, and authored and edited numerous works after World War II. Nearly all of these works, whose substantial print runs are testament to their popularity, are characterized by an engaging combination of text, images, and cartographic material, creating narratives and mental maps about Africa, its history, and the colonial past. In his later writings, he stressed the importance of “relearning” with regard to Africa and struggled to remap the imaginative geography of Africa. In this paper, I examine the characteristics of Schiffers’ imaginative geography and the change in his writings and maps. I explore whether his concept of “relearning” was an epistemological decolonization or if there were any continuities found in his imaginative geography. In order to grasp the specifics of his thinking, his geography will be briefly compared with that of his contemporary, Frankfurt zoo director Bernhard Grzimek.     

The congresses of Italian scientists between Europe and the Risorgimento (1839 – 75)

Abstract

This article reconstructs the history of the Italian scientific congresses from 1839 until 1875. The congresses are analyzed in the context of the political Risorgimento, but also as a reflection of relations among social groups, and between society and institutions. We examine the troubled coexistence of a minority interested primarily in encouraging the professionalization of science in state institutions of learning, and a broader sector of eminent citizens that placed the value of ‘expertise’ alongside the values of birth and social ranking. This complicated coexistence was the chief reason that the Italian congresses failed, and after 1861, as well, in their effort to establish a national scientific association comparable to those existing in many other countries, both inside and outside Europe. This essay reconstructs the main points and phases of the debate and the changes in the relations among the social and professional groups and scientific work, up until the foundation of a Società Italiana per il Progresso delle Scienze (SIPS, Italian Association for the Advancement of Science), which explicitly rejected the heritage of the Risorgimento.     

The Initial Meeting of the WAC Ethics Committee

Audie was struck by how far many had come to attend the meeting at Stanford, making the time together all the more precious. He discusses the challenges of first, determining what WAC stands for by identifying core concepts and foundational principles, many of them embedded in existing WAC documents and, second, of where the organization should draw lines when faced with the contradictions that are a part of most ethical dilemmas. A Code of Ethics would not be expected to draw these lines, but to bring these conflicts and contradictions into sharper focus and provide a dialogue and forum for their discussion. One of the many things Audie contributed to the meeting was a discussion and definition of consultation with Indigenous peoples, based on his many years of experience. Another was helping us put our ideas in a visual form that enhanced our understanding.     

Paul Cohen-Portheim: questions of nationalism,messianism and nostalgia in a prison camp in England, 1914–1918

ABSTRACT

This article focuses on the little-known Jewish writer Paul Cohen-Portheim (1880–1932) and his notions of nationalism and Zionism. Born in Berlin to Austrian parents of Sephardic origin, Cohen-Portheim was interned during the First World War in various English prison camps. This experience profoundly affected his intellectual outlook and he dedicated much of his effort to the fight against nationalism. It was in the English prison camps that he developed an eclectic theory of nationalism which combines a quasi-evolutionary progress towards global justice with a messianic notion of Zionism. The Jewish people play a crucial role in Cohen-Portheim’s vision of a world devoid of nationalism, whose absurdity is disclosed in the arrival of Zionism. Juxtaposing Europe’s crisis of culture and Asia’s spiritual vitality, Cohen-Portheim ascribes to Zionism a bridging of the gap that separates Europe and Asia, and fragments modern nationalistic man. This article follows Cohen-Portheim’s intellectual development and highlights shifts and continuities in his writing, arguing that he shows two different types of nostalgia, namely a longing for the East as developed in his early works and a longing for the past as displayed in his last major work.