Deep Histories and the Archaeology of Colonialism

Author(s):  
Martin Gallivan
Author(s):  
Christine D. Beaule

The introductory chapter argues that the archaeology of colonialism is hindered by scholars’ tendencies to avoid drawing on research that crosses two specific intra-disciplinary divides. The first is the frontier between historic and prehistoric archaeology. The second frontier is between cases of colonialism or political aggression initiated by European historical powers during the Age of Exploration and non-Western polities. Drawing also on relevant research from history and Classics, it offers a set of working definitions for key terms. This theoretical introduction offers the volume’s readers a new, productive approach to colonialism and imperialism by highlighting recent research in four areas of scholarship: prehistoric Western, historic Western, prehistoric non-Western, and historic non-Western case studies. It argues that theoretical foci such as community-level reorganization, social adaptations to epidemic disease, or ideological creolization are far more fruitful than adhering to a historically arbitrary tendency to avoid crossing disciplnary frontiers.


Author(s):  
Douglas C. Wilson

Fort Vancouver, located in southwestern Washington (USA), was the administrative headquarters and supply depot for the Hudson’s Bay Company (HBC) in the Pacific Northwest, essentially its colonial capital between ca. 1825 and 1845. The documentary record for Fort Vancouver suggests a spatial segregation between the fort and the village along class lines which separated the elite managers of the company from its employees (engagés). Archaeological and ethnohistoric data, however, tend to blur these sharp lines between the fort and the village as artifacts, pollen, and other data reveal a more complex colonial milieu tied to the unique multicultural nature of the settlement and ties to indigenous and other non-Western communities. The historical archaeology of colonialism at Fort Vancouver helps the modern descendants of these people, as well as others tied to the fort, reconnect to their history and heritage and develop a dialogue regarding past and current identities.


2015 ◽  
Vol 80 (3) ◽  
pp. 511-529 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tsim D. Schneider

The periodization used to distinguish sites and artifacts as "prehistoric" or "historic" translates to the selection of field methods and analytical techniques. This comes at the expense of developing new approaches to track continuities and adjustments in Native American site use, technologies, and other cultural traditions, such as mobility across an artificial divide between prehistory and history. To evaluate the mobility of Coast Miwok people in colonial San Francisco Bay, California, this article presents an experimental technique that compares radiocarbon and geochemical data from a Late period Phase 2(A.D. 1500-1800) shellmound (CA-MRN-114) to baptismal records from Spanish missions (A.D.l 776-1830s). Supported by eyewitness accounts of native fugitivism, furlough, and foraging at the missions, Coast Miwok baptisms before 1817 are at their lowest during traditional times of mussel harvests. After 1817, a different pattern is examined vis-d-vis the colonial landscapes taking shape in the region. Radiocarbon, geochemical, and documentary evidence supports the conclusion that seasonally oriented Coast Miwok mobility involving the collection of shellfish continued even during missionization. With further refinement, the proposed methodological framework holds promise for documenting patterns that often go unseen in the historical record and enhancing the archaeology of colonialism in North America.


Author(s):  
Peter Genger

By adopting the purview of Peace and Conflict Studies and the expository approach of historical archaeology of colonialism, this paper succeeds in enumerating the models the British used to establish and perpetuate colonial violence on the Indigenous Australians, and the traumatizing impacts the violence is exerting on them. The sole essence of the paper is not only to re-establish that the British colonization of Australia was deliberate, just as the heinous models they used. Most essentially, the paper identifies the following institutions: Peace and Conflict Studies (PACS), the UN and challenges them to move from their current inert condemnation of colonial violence and adopt effective, concrete and practical frameworks that will “overthrow” the Australian colonial violence. Their sincere disposition and uncompromised commitment to this cause is important and imperative. In conclusion, the paper poses some pertinent questions to prove that colonialism is a dispensable evil.


2003 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bonnie G. McEwan ◽  
Gregory A. Waselkov

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document