In recent years, considerable attention has been dedicated to the involvement of archaeology (and most notably prehistory) with nationalism. The probable causes of this recent fashion need not concern us here, but the movement itself is certainly welcome, testifying to the reflection of archaeologists on their own practices and those of their predecessors. For historians, this trend is quite welcome in so far as it contributes to a general renaissance of interest in the past of the discipline. However, a more careful examination of this historiography leads us to some caution about its significance. First, the majority of these historical studies adopt an internalist perspective that, combined with their self-declared reflexiveness, confers on them a rather presentist character. The result belongs to some sort of ‘history of ideas’ that has been embellished with a few sociological insights of varying subtlety. In line with the old sociology of science, social factors are only invoked to explain the ‘errors’ of archaeology. Such errors, therefore, always seem to be accounted for by external and, by definition, pernicious influences. As a consequence our discipline always escapes unscathed: its ‘purity’ is not at stake, simply because it is always ‘society’ and ‘politics’ that abuse it. Moreover, most attention is given to the interpretations of the past, not to archaeological research as such. It is not the historical practice of the discipline that is then under consideration, but rather its thematic scope—which is quite a different matter. However, conceptions of identity based on the past are by no means the exclusive preserve of archaeology. No one has been waiting for the birth of our discipline in order to gloat over the ‘heroic deeds of our glorious ancestors’. As a matter of fact, in terms of nationalism, archaeology has entered quite late into the fray, on a terrain that was by then already demarcated. The wealth of historical case studies suggests that from its origins, archaeology, and more specifically prehistoric archaeology, has been strictly dependent on the emergence of national ideologies. The general impression is clear: were it not for the dynamics of modern nationalism, the argument goes, our discipline would never have emerged.
THE PROBLEM OF TYPOLOGY IN CHINESE ARCHAEOLOGY
