I am organizing a WAC session on the “History of archaeology in the colony” in the Theme “Archaeological Theory? Legacies, burdens, futures”. Chiefly, the session seeks submissions on history of archaeology in Egypt; Mesopotamia (Iraq); Africa; South Asia, Mexico and South America – located in late nineteenth century and early twentieth century trajectory of archaeology in these disparate geographic areas. To an extent this session is envisaged to take the project forward by Peter Ucko’s edited “Theory in Archaeology: A World Perspective.” However, my attempt with this session is with writing and producing a deep and particularistic history of archaeological exploits in the colony.
Here is the ABSTRACT

The meta-theoretical approach of processual archaeology gave rise to
a history of archaeology, concentrating on the discipline as a
cultural and political practice. It narrated a historical trajectory
of a scientific discourse closely linked to the ascendancy of the
nation state in Europe. These histories were extensive chronological
accounts delineating the trajectory of archaeology in relation to
larger meta-narratives of nationalism, colonialism, and imperialism
with Europe as the centre of its historical genealogy. This session is
arguing for an epistemic shift. It specifically concentrates on the
ideology of archaeological micro-practice as methodological
intervention in the colony and underscores the distinction between
metropolitan archaeological practice and its colonial instantiation.
Archaeological practice in the colony was an efficacious location for
the consolidation of the disciplinary discourse and legitimized its
scientific validity. The colony was arguably a more effective location
than the metropole, for the emergence of the discursive framework of
the discipline. The archaeologically potent landscape of the colony –
Egypt, Mesopotamia, South Asia, South America, North Africa were
productive location for metropole archaeologists like Flinders Petrie,
Leonard Woolley, Mortimer Wheeler and many others to formulate the
discursive universe of the discipline. This session investigates the
modalities of these archaeological micro-practices in the colony not
as an instance of a European meta-practice but a key site to examine
archaeology’s deep colonial genealogy. It will focus on a deep and
particularistic history of archaeological intervention in the colony
and seeks to disturb the Eurocentric fixation of history of
archaeology. The session will attempt to reinstate the primacy of the
colonial location in the meta-narrative of archaeology?s historical
genealogy and argue that it was perhaps outside the European metroploe
that archaeology as a discipline gained its methodological and
discursive authority.
Contact:
Ashish Chadha
at AshishChadha@stanford.edu
Archaeologers’ Note: this is a partial entry which will be expanded soon