Nationalism and Archaeology in Europe 1138813338, 9781138813335

Citation preview

ROUTLEDGE LIBRARY EDITIONS: ARCHAEOLOGY

Volume 21

NATIONALISM AND ARCHAEOLOGY IN EUROPE

This page intentionally left blank

NATIONALISM AND ARCHAEOLOGY IN EUROPE

Edited by MARGARITA DÍAZ-ANDREU & TIMOTHY CHAMPION

First published in 1996 This edition first published in 2015 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN and by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 1996 Margarita Díaz-Andreu, Timothy Champion and contributors All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN: 978-1-138-79971-4 (Set) eISBN: 978-1-315-75194-8 (Set) ISBN: 978-1-138-81333-5 (Volume 21) eISBN: 978-1-315-74822-1 (Volume 21) Publisher’s Note The publisher has gone to great lengths to ensure the quality of this book but points out that some imperfections from the original may be apparent. Disclaimer The publisher has made every effort to trace copyright holders and would welcome correspondence from those they have been unable to trace.

Nationalism and archaeology in Europe E d it e d

by

Margarita Diaz-Andreu & Timothy Champion

UCL PRESS

CO Margarita Diaz-Andreu, Timothy Champion and contributors, 1996. This book is copyright under the Berne Convention. N o reproduction without permission. All rights reserved. First published in 1996 by U C L Press. U C L Press Limited University College London Gower Street London W C1E 6BT The name o f University College London (UCL) is a registered trade mark used by U C L Press with the consent o f the owner. ISBN :

1-85728-289-2 H B

British Library C ataloguing in Publication D ata A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

Typeset in Bembo. Printed and bound by Biddles Ltd, Guildford and K ing’s Lynn, England.

CONTENTS

N ation alism and archaeology in E u ro pe: an in troduction

1

Margarita Diaz-Andreu & Timothy Champion

T h e fall o f a nation, the birth o f a subject: the national use o f archaeology in nineteenth-century D en m ark

24

Marie Louise Stig Sorensen

French archaeology: betw een national identity and cultural identity

48

Alain Schnapp

Islamic archaeology and the origin o f the Spanish nation

68

Margarita Diaz-Andreu

A rch aeology and nationalism : the Portuguese case

90

Carlos Fabiao

N ation alism w ith out a nation: the Italian case

108

Alessandro Guidi

T h ree nations or one? Britain and the national use o f the past

119

Timothy Champion

B u ild in g the future on the past: archaeology and the construction o f national identity in Ireland

146

Gabriel Cooney

G erm an archaeology and its relation to nationalism and racism Ingo Wiwjorra

“ D ran g nach W esten ” ?: Polish archaeology and national identity Wlodzimicrz Raczkowski v

189

164

CONTENTS

T h e faces o f nationalist archaeology in R u ssia

218

Victor A. Shnirelman

N ation alism doubly oppressed: archaeology and nationalism in Lithuania

243

Giedrius Puodziunas & Algirdas Girininkas

Is there national archaeology w ith out nationalism ? A rch aeological tradition in Slovenia 256 Bozidar Slapsak & Predrag Novakovic

E p ilo g u e

294

Miroslav Hroch

Index

301

C H A P T E R ONE

Nationalism and archaeology in Europe: an introduction Margarita Diaz-Andreu & Timothy Champion

We have all been surprised by the growth o f a series o f ideologies in recent years that we thought had been definitively buried after the drama o f the Second World War. These ideologies now affect the lives o f millions o f people. At the same time, countries we felt were eternal are now divided, some happily and others as a result o f vicious armed conflicts. On the other hand countries that were divided - in the first place the two Germanies, one o f the detonators o f the whole process - have been united under one gov­ ernment. Other countries have radically altered their concept o f the state. This, for example, is the case in Spain, which has passed from a centralized unitary definition o f government to a pluralist one that accepts other national identities, such as Catalan and Basque, along with Spanish. All o f this has been done in the name o f nationalism, an ideology virtually censored during almost four decades and which no one felt was useful to reconsider. Archaeology has just passed through a phase in which the application o f mathematical techniques and other methods borrowed from the natural sciences led archaeologists to believe in the scientific objectivity o f their sub­ ject and in its objectivity in respect to political change. However, events o f recent years have shown that this is not the case and, in consequence, com­ ments such as the following have become not infrequent: I think we should drop the pretence o f absolute objectivity. Further, I suggest that drawing on present experience and interests is hardly “ unscientific” and that it strengthens, rather than weakens, our work. The connection between present and past is a source o f power, the power to offer legitimacy or attack.. . . Rather than condemning those who “ pervert” the past to their own political purposes, we should acknowledge that there is no neutral, value-free, or non-political past that if we take the present out o f the past we are left with a dry empty husk. (Wilk 1985: 319)

1

N A T I O N A L I S M & A R C H A E O L O G Y IN E U R O P E : I N T R O D U C T I O N

And if there is no such thing as a non-political, value-free archaeology, one o f the ideologies that has had most influence in its development is nationalism. Certainly it is possible to see the relationship between archaeology and nationalism in negative terms and, in the words o f Wilk, to denounce the attempt to “ pervert” the past. For some time now in connection with the rise o f nationalism there have been frequent denunciations o f the manipula­ tions that, in some places more than others, the archaeological record is suf­ fering. Moreover, this manipulation is being carried out not only by persons outside the profession but in some cases by archaeologists themselves (Kohl 1993, SlapSak 1993). In contrast to the apparent neutrality o f previous dec­ ades, we are faced with the question o f how to interpret this politicization. Is it something new or has archaeology come up against similar situations in the past, which in the optimistic post-war atmosphere were ignored because they were considered unrepeatable? O n the other hand, can archaeology be seen as an exception among the sciences in its political involvement? O ur disquiet with respect to the present situation and the need to answer these questions is the first reason for having produced the present book. Reflections on the negative effects o f the connection between politics and science, or more specifically between politics and history, is not new. Kuhnl’s discussion o f science during the Weimar Republic is a good example o f this attitude: A history book is never limited to the aseptic narration o f facts or neu­ tral information o f events. The simple selection o f the facts by itself requires a judgem ent o f what is and what is not essential. All historical exposition contains, explicitly or implicitly, a specific interpretation o f the causes, conditioning factors and forces which pushed forward or put a brake on historical development. . . . That is to say, a “ purely scientific” historical exposition does not exist, because all discourses and expositions have political implications (Kiihnl 1985: 7-8). It would be an exaggeration to say that archaeologists have totally ignored this relationship. There are several works that analyze the use which the Nazis and to a lesser extent the Italian fascists made o f archaeology (Clark 1957: 257-61; Bollmus 1970; Daniel 1985: 323; Losemann 1977; Schnapp 1977, 1980; Guidi 1988: 63-70; Veit 1988; Arnold 1990; Torelli 1991; and other articles cited by Guidi and Wiwjorra in this volume). Himmelman (1976) goes further and adds examples from Israel, M exico, Turkey, France and the U SA , and Sklenaf (1981) from Czechoslovakia. In other works on colonialism there tend to be tangential references to nationalism (Bray &

2

N A T I O N A L I S M & A R C H A E O L O G Y IN E U R O P E : I N T R O D U C T I O N

Glover 1987, Kaarsholm 1989, Holl 1990, Petricioli 1990). Reference is in general made to the influence nationalism has had on the interpretations and, on occasion, the development o f specific archaeological undertakings in colonial areas. But, from our perspective, these authors still provide a very incomplete account o f the relationship between archaeology and national­ ism, whose influence has been far more fundamental than has been admitted until now. The appearance o f nationalism stimulated the very creation o f archaeology as a science, and informed not only the organization o f archae­ ological knowledge but also its very infrastructure. Without the existence o f nationalism, archaeology or the study o f the past might never have advanced beyond the status o f a hobby or a pastime. This profound interconnection between a political ideology and a scientific discipline needs to be recognized by professionals o f the discipline in order to be able to understand and contextualize our work. It is, therefore, the intention o f this book to show that nationalism was not only influential in the archaeological interpretations o f a specific period o f German or Italian history, or in colonial archaeology, but that it is deeply embedded in the very concept o f archaeology, in its institutionalization and development. And this has been the case not only in countries such as D en­ mark, where archaeology developed at a very early date (Daniel 1975: 52; Sorensen 1986), but it can be seen as a generalized phenomenon, affecting each and every country over the past 200 years. The close tie between nationalism and archaeology is founded upon the concept o f the nation. The nation, the idea on which political nationalism is based, is conceived o f as the natural unit o f a human group, which by its very nature has the right to constitute a political entity. Hence, by definition, the simple existence o f nations implies the existence o f a past which, for their own good and that o f the individuals who belong to them, should be known and propagated. Therefore, the emergence o f political nationalism at the end o f the eighteenth century converted the production o f this history into a patriotic duty. History acquired a considerable political importance. States organized institutions to create and educate citizens, which legitimated state existence on the basis o f its identification with a nation. Institutions (mu­ seums, monuments commissions, universities . . .), organized on the politi­ cal territory o f the nation-state, served to justify it, as they took this territory as the basis for the history o f the nation. The histories produced by their per­ sonnel claimed to chart the origins and development characteristic o f each individual nation, and its particular spirit at each stage o f its evolution. This was a closed circle. The nation was at the same time the basis and the aim o f research. Nationalism as a political ideology owes its strength not only to its impor­

3

N A T I O N A L I S M & A R C H A E O L O G Y IN E U R O P E : I N T R O D U C T I O N

tance as the essence o f liberalism, and therefore its adoption as the motor for the functioning o f the state - and o f its institutions - but also to its popular base. The nation is not only something invented by nationalists, but as Ander­ son (1991) argues, it is something that is felt or imagined by many citizens. The growing number o f intellectuals responsible for the extensive apologetic historical literature produced in each nation certainly saw themselves as patri­ ots. Nationalism was born among intellectuals who searched for a place in a social world dominated by the Monarchy and Church. The decadence o f these two institutions was at the same time the cause (Anderson 1991: ch. 2) and the consequence o f the success o f nationalism as a political doctrine. At first, intellectuals usually organized themselves in groups, but they were iso­ lated and without any prevalent social influence. After a second phase o f patriotic agitation, in which these groups acquired a growing importance, the nationalist ideology spread through the whole o f the population. These three phases defined by Hroch (1985: 22-3) can be seen in archae­ ology. In the first phase only a few individuals centred their interest on the past in a way still greatly influenced by the Enlightenment, that is, not having the nationalist language which was developed afterwards. The first country to enter into the second phase was probably Denmark. The rapid increase in interest in antiquities among lower middle-class individuals at the beginning o f the nineteenth century shows the central importance o f antiquity in the construction o f Danish nationalism. The rest ofDanish society followed soon afterwards. Other nationalisms in which antiquity was not so central needed more time to attract the great masses either to the study o f or to an interest in the past. But today it is completely accepted that the past —history —is o f central importance to the present, a past shaped by the limits o f the nation. The diverse definition o f the elements that make up the “ nation” gives us a clue to the specific interests that have guided archaeologists in Europe and the rest o f the world. The concept o f the political nation, which grew out o f the French Revolution, had as its root the right o f citizens to show their wishes regarding the type o f government they wanted (Kedourie 1960: 43). But it was rapidly taken up and transformed by a line o f thought developed in the eighteenth century by philosophers such as Johann Gottfried Herder. This was based on the cult o f diversity, in the belief that each nation possessed something that made it unique and irreplaceable. But this unique and irre­ placeable (i.e. essential) element, which forms the basis o f the nation, is not something fixed but, depending on the nation, which can be cultural, linguistic, ethnic or racial. These two last elements are usually closely inter­ related, although ethnicity is the weaker term. The former, culture, is an ambiguous and versatile concept, whose appearance is profoundly related to the development o f nationalism (Diaz-Andreu forthcoming) and its need to

4

A R C H A E O L O G Y AND N A T IO N A L ISM

utilize a wide and non-exclusive term, which made possible the growing complexity o f the human component in each nation. Archaeological interpretations demonstrate the complexity o f national­ ism and the concept o f the nation. Hence archaeologists, above all from eastern European countries, have emphasized the ethnic or linguistic com­ ponent o f their past. In the case o f Russia and Poland, Slavic origins have been emphasized and Baltic origins in the case o f Lithuania. In the case o f Slovenia it was the country’s linguistic homogeneity that was pushed to the forefront. In Germany, from the late nineteenth century, the elements o f nation, race and language were interwoven through the identification o f the archaeological remains found with the original Indo-European race, and this was then used as the basis to justify the superiority o f the German nation. The religious element o f nineteenth-century Spanish nationalism was taken into account by Spanish archaeologists, when they argued that the Muslims who occupied the Iberian Peninsula for seven centuries were not Spanish. The versatility o f the meaning o f the nation in each particular case results in our being able to use works that are not specifically focused on the rela­ tionship between archaeology and nationalism in order to be able to under­ stand the problem. A clear example o f this is the recent interest in ethnicity (see especially works by Smith 1986, Shennan 1988 and Chapman 1992). This is also the case with works already mentioned in the context o f the rela­ tionship between colonialism and imperialism and archaeology, such as Evans & Meggers (1973), Lorenzo (1976), Trigger (1984), Bray & Glover (1987), Holl (1990) and Petricioli (1990). The question o f nationalism also frequently raises its head in more general works on the relationship between politics and archaeology, such as Canfora (1980), Garlake (1982), Kristiansen (1992), Fleury-Ilett (1993), Fowler (1987) or the books edited by Layton (1988, 1989; see, for example, Mangi 1988) and by Gathercole & Lowenthal (1990). At present there is a renewed interest in the subject o f nationalism, and some new publications, some o f which have already been cited, deal with the question directly.

Archaeology and nationalism The relationship between nationalism and archaeology can be studied from different points o f view. First, an important question to address is the role o f archaeology in the historical construction o f national identities. To what degree did prehistoric and historic archaeology contribute to the creation and maintenance o f national identities, whether or not the area had been

5

N A T I O N A L I S M & A R C H A E O L O G Y IN E U R O P E : I N T R O D U C T I O N

constituted as a state? Basques and Bretons are examples o f peoples in which a state has not been formed. A second focus o f attention is the relationship between the construction o f the national state and the institutionalization o f archaeology, or, in the case o f subjugated nationalisms, the organizations created in order to develop and propagate the consciousness o f the existence o f a particular nation. Particular issues are, on the one hand, when and why archaeological museums and specialized studies in archaeology in the universities and other educational institutions (e.g. ecoles superieures) appeared, and to what extent their appearance had any relation to nationalist ideology. In addition, heritage legislation is another source o f possible links; when and why did it appear, which periods and sites were specially protected and enhanced? A further area o f study relates to the public image o f archaeology. N ation­ alism has influenced the version o f the past given in education and presented to the public through museum displays, popular literature and other media such as art (paintings, literature, etc.). The role o f archaeology in the reinforcement o f linguistic, ethnic and rac­ ist elements in the construction o f a national identity is another issue to be analyzed; whether there have been identifications o f archaeological cultures with particular ethnic, racial or linguistic groups, or whether archaeology has been used as a means o f finding ancient human remains to justify the pres­ ence o f a particular race in a territory. A related approach is the analysis o f the territorial origin or ethnic or religious identification o f archaeologists. It can be very revealing to look at the area in the country from which came the archaeologists who collaborated in the historical construction o f state or regional identities (this can be useful in uncovering an appropriation o f the past by individuals from particular regions), or the changes in the level o f contribution from individuals coming from a particular region. It could also be interesting to look at the relationship between ethnic minorities and archaeology: the number o f archaeologists who belonged to any ethnic minority (e.g. Jewish or Gipsy), the number o f excavations on any ethnic minority's past enclave (e.g. a Gipsy camp), or the archaeologists attitude towards any particular past ethnic or religious presence in a country (e.g. the treatment o f Islamic archaeology in Spain). These are the fundamental questions that will be discussed in this book. The results are synthesized and discussed in the following sections.

6

TH E D EV E LO PM EN T OF TH E R ELA TIO N SH IP

The development o f the relationship The changes that nationalism as an ideology has undergone during its history (Hobsbawm 1990) have had an impact on the discipline o f archaeology. This has until now not been mentioned in any o f the literature on nationalism and archaeology. N o work has attempted to systematize the phases through which the relationship between archaeology and nationalism have passed. O ur periodization o f the relationship between nationalism and archaeology follows in part the periodization laid out by Hobsbawm (1990). This periodization serves to show that there are two main variants o f nationalist archaeology. The first, which is to be found in the nation-states, has become so naturalized that we are hardly conscious o f it. The second variant refers to the subjugated nations, where the political importance o f archaeology is frequently much stronger and more consciously practised. As Trigger (1984: 360) has argued, nationalist archaeology is strongest among peoples who feel threatened, insecure or deprived o f their political rights by more powerful nations. This political use o f archaeology is so easy to under­ stand that it often appears that in nations which enjoy greater political secu­ rity the role o f archaeology seems to be politically neutral. However, it is not necessarily the case. It can be argued that by the very fact o f being integrated into state and sub-state institutions and in general by adapting its findings to the frontiers o f the present states, archaeology is nationalist. Hence, although naturalized and therefore not perceived, archaeology carried out by archae­ ologists o f successful nations can be, in fact, more nationalistic. However, a conscious misuse o f archaeological interpretations is less frequent and this is clearly related to the fact that a triumphant nation does not need to be justi­ fied. The national character o f the archaeology carried out in this kind o f nation is not easily accepted by scholars studying the political use o f archae­ ology, and examples o f this can be seen in several o f the chapters in this volume (Chs 3, 5, 14), where the modern influence o f nationalism on archaeology is minimized. O ur history begins with the Renaissance and is closely bound up with the appearance o f humanism in the fifteenth century in Italy and in the sixteenth century in the rest o f Europe. This change in mentality, in contrast to the Middle Ages, is closely related to the appearance o f strong states grounded in monarchies whose powerbase was evidently more solid than in the previous period and supported by a growing bourgeois class in the cities. In Italy in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the fragmented political mosaic was simplified with the emergence o f six states, and the transformation was justified through recourse to the past. Antiquity became a measure o f the importance and reputation o f things. A city became important if it had a past

7

N A T I O N A L I S M & A R C H A E O L O G Y IN E U R O P E : I N T R O D U C T I O N

and especially if it was rooted in the classical era. Nobles could better sym­ bolize their position if various ancient objects and works o f art were on dis­ play in their houses. Members o f the clerical establishment were also affected and they showed an interest in the past. There is, therefore, a political usage o f the past, and this was exemplified by a series o f archaeological forgeries. Gasco (1993) gives a good example o f these forgeries carried out on inscrip­ tions. Inscriptions were forged to demonstrate that a particular city that was being exalted was the one in the sources, and on occasion these sources were even invented. And these new tendencies found in the printing press a pow­ erful new vehicle to support them. Political nationalism appeared at the end o f the eighteenth century at the time o f the French Revolution. In continental Europe the revolution and its aftermath resulted in the replacement o f the social organization o f the Ancien R egim e, which was based on estates (nobles, clergy and Third Estate), by new class divisions within society. A nation was conceived o f as “ a union o f individuals governed by one law, and represented by the same law-giving assembly” (Sieyes quoted in Kedourie 1960: 5). Therefore, the basis o f the nation as conceived by the French Revolution was the previous state unit. N ation was seen as equivalent to state, without (at least theoretically) any ref­ erence to its cultural origin. Yet Napoleon already used the potential o f the term nation, which since Herder had had an essentialist component, in order to divide the enemy states during his colonial drive. He convinced particular regions with a strong identity that they were nations in the new sense o f the word, and therefore they could ask for independence. This redefinition o f the concept o f the nation gives any group o f individuals who for whatever reason, be it territorial, ethnic, religious, linguistic or cultural, imagine they belong to the same homogeneous community, the right to call for political self-government. The demonstration o f the existence o f a nation requires a past that needs to be described. This totally changed the concept o f history. It was only at the end o f the eighteenth and the beginning o f the nineteenth century that history was transformed from an artistic and literary pursuit into a scientific discipline. This re-ordering first took place in Germany, where the foremost figures were Barthold Georg Niebuhr (1776-1831) and Leopold von Ranke (1795-1886) (Moradiellos 1992). The former was the instigator o f the “ historical-critical method” , which consisted o f the examination and criti­ cal analysis o f the historical documents and materials, and he used them systematically as the basis for the subsequent narration. The connection with nationalism is a result o f the historicist nature o f Ranke s work. Hence, according to Ranke, in contrast to Enlightenment beliefs, “ all past historical events and situations are unique and unrepeatable

8

TH E D E V E LO P M E N T OF TH E R E LA T IO N SH IP

and cannot be understood through universal categories but only through the study o f its own particular circumstances” (Moradiellos 1992). In this man­ ner Ranke rejected universalist rationalism, and maintained that all human phenomena, be they at the level o f the individual or o f cultural institutions (states, religions, etc.), were guided by a radical historicity. That is to say, they were all unique and unrepeatable in time and space. They evolved in accord with their own principles and, therefore, had to be understood in terms o f their singularity and not through recourse to universal laws. The history o f each nation became the main aim o f historical research. The connection with nationalism affected archaeology. Until the nine­ teenth century, archaeology had been merely anecdotal. Antiquities had been studied during the Renaissance, but only in the nineteenth century were they considered important enough to be organized as a discipline. This could be seen in various respects. Museums were created, a professional corps was formed, archaeology entered higher education (universities or ecoles superieures) and a body o f legislation was put in place to protect antiq­ uities and organize archaeological work. The creation o f museums was closely linked with the opening o f archives and libraries, sources which, as we have seen, the German school o f Niebuhr and Ranke considered indispensable as the basis for historical knowledge. The object was to store the original documents, considered the pristine sources o f knowledge, selected and ordered in accordance with the objective sought: the creation o f a national history. N ot every country opened national museums at the same pace. This in part depended on the specific symbols adopted as the basis for the definition o f the nation. In those countries in which it was related to antiquity, it was not long before museums were built and the infrastructure needed for the study o f antiquities set up. This was the case in Denmark where, as Marie Louise Sorensen explains, the farmers formed a new economic and political group following the early nineteenth century agrarian reforms. The farmers identified with the prehistoric mon­ uments common on their fields and transferred their image to the new liberal state. The presence o f archaeology was progressively consolidated during the first half o f the nineteenth century. Researchers were not unaware o f the sig­ nificance o f these developments. As the pioneering Danish archaeologist Worsaae stated in a speech to the Royal Irish Academy in 1846, he thought that the French Revolution had had a great deal to do with the development o f archaeology and prehistory in the early nineteenth century; “ with a greater respect for the political rights o f the people, there awakened in the nations (our italics) themselves a deeper interest in their own history, language and nationality” (Worsaae in Daniel 1975: 52). He continued by explaining that the Danes had turned to the study o f ancient history after

9

N A T I O N A L I S M & A R C H A E O L O G Y IN E U R O P E : I N T R O D U C T I O N

having suffered a series o f national disasters “ as a time from the contem­ plation o f which their spirit o f nationality might gain support and in whose m emories they found the hope o f a new and equally glorious era” (Worsaae in Daniel 1975: 52). The consolidation o f liberalism in the second half o f the nineteenth cen­ tury ensured the definitive institutionalization o f archaeology. It was at this time that the majority o f countries created a network o f museums, the work o f the antiquarian and archaeologist was professionalized and the new disci­ pline entered higher education. Furthermore, the number o f congresses multiplied and many journals were set up. At the same time, the erection o f statues - for instance o f Gauls in France (Pingeot 1982) - gave symbolic expression to the articulation o f a new nationalist landscape. Moreover, nationalism underwent an important change that would also affect archaeology. With the unification o f Italy in 1870 and Germany in 1871, the essentialist conception o f the nation definitively triumphed. As a result the search for and justification o f the ethnic or racist and linguistic roots o f the nation were intensified. As Eric Hobsbawm (1990: 102) states, “ in consequence o f this multiplication o f potential ‘unhistorical’ nations, ethnicity and language became the central, increasingly the decisive or even the only criteria o f potential nationhood” . This not only affected Europe but could be seen throughout the world (for the case o f Argentina see Quijada M aurino forthcoming). The institutionalization o f archaeology served to strengthen these tendencies. Congresses were a case in point. For example, as Shnirelman shows (this volume), nationalism was embedded into the strat­ egy o f the organization o f the pan-Russian archaeological congresses. The main goal was to search for the most ancient traces o f the Russian Slavs and Christianity. Another example was the appearance during this period o f associations that related anthropology and ethnology to prehistoric archaeol­ ogy, such as the Society for Archaeology, History and Ethnography at Kazan’ University, founded in Russia in 1878. Another consequence o f the consolidation o f essentialist nationalism was the growth o f non-state nationalist archaeologies. It was these years that saw an important increase in the formation o f cultural associations, for example archaeological or excursion societies, in cities outside the state capital. These societies had a popular base, and they served to support and foment nation­ alist movements such as Catalanism in the Spanish case. It was during the interwar years that the part played by archaeology in the construction o f nationalism was most explicit. The examples o f German and Italian archaeology are but two cases among many. They are two extreme cases, and therefore they have to be condemned for their role in the justifi­ cation o f territorial invasion and racial extermination. But, as the chapters in

10

TH E D E V E LO P M E N T OF TH E R E LA T IO N SH IP

this book demonstrate, in all countries without exception, archaeologists looked to justify the ethnic, racial, linguistic, religious and/or cultural bases o f their nation. As a consequence o f the horrors o f the Second World War the various scientific disciplines, among them archaeology, tried to wash away the stain o f nationalist implications and interpretations and sought refuge in an aseptic objectivity, which was supposedly achieved through publications that were purely descriptive (although on racism, nationalism and archaeology in this period see Schnapp & Svenbro 1980, and Zerubavel 1994 on Israeli nation­ alism and Masada). However, in reality the problem was never tackled at root. Far from distancing itself from nationalism, archaeology continued to be nationalist in terms o f its organization and structuring o f the data. It is easy to understand why this should be. The state administered the study, teaching and research o f history, and so it remained incorporated within and served nationalist structures. This is something assumed to be so natural that few archaeologists are conscious o f it. At the same time, archaeologists continued to classify data according to “ cultures” . This term was only adopted during the apogee o f nationalism and has, in fact, a clear political significance, and presupposes a specific, politicized - and nationalist —reading o f the history o f the past 200 years (Diaz-Andreu forthcoming). The uncritical main­ tenance o f this practice has made possible the return to the old abuses in present archaeological thought. The past few years have witnessed a certain renaissance o f nationalism in archaeological interpretations. The scale o f this rebirth cannot, at least in the case o f Europe, be compared to the situation in the interwar years. This is clear in a European context, where one can criticize certain abuses such as, for example, the invention o f a Celtic past and its connection with the con­ struction o f a pan-European identity (Champion, this volume), along with other misrepresentations on a more limited geographical scale (SlapSak 1993; see Diaz-Andreu (this volume) for the use o f the Islamic past by Andalusian, Valencian and Balearic nationalisms against Catalan and Spanish national­ isms). Outside Europe in some areas the situation is frankly worrying (Kohl 1993) and reminds one o f the tone o f debates in interwar Europe. However, we now have at hand the possibility o f criticizing the past and are conscious o f the political implications o f this type o f manipulation. But, above all, it is the intention o f this book to make clear that in no country has archaeology been totally free from nationalist influence, while this has been the dominant theory in the political ordering o f the world during the past two centuries.

11

N A T I O N A L I S M & A R C H A E O L O G Y IN E U R O P E : I N T R O D U C T I O N

Archaeology and nationalism in Europe The aim o f the book is to analyze the influence o f the political doctrine o f nationalism and the structures o f the nation-states on the appearance and institutionalization o f archaeology, and on its later development: interpreta­ tions, public influence, etc. The timespan the book covers is the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. We have chosen Europe as a focus for our study. The reasons for this decision are, first, that Europe was the first place in the world where archaeology developed; it was also in Europe that nationalism first made its mark. Also, European archaeology deals with quite a coherent set o f problems, and a broadly similar archaeological record from prehistory to modern times. Therefore, the political use o f the archaeological results by the different nations can be easily compared. This is the reason why we have omitted other areas that were closely connected with Europe (e.g. America) and could have been included in the book. Contrary to our initial purpose, this book shows an imbalance in the space dedicated to western and eastern Europe. This is a result o f the fact that various potential contributors from eastern Europe did not submit contributions because they feared the effect such publications could have had on their professional careers. This is in itself a further symptom o f the present importance o f the subject treated in this book. Each o f the chapters deals with a nation-state. This decision can be con­ troversial because a nation-state is not always accompanied by a successful national identity. Besides, there are nation-states where other national iden­ tifications exist (e.g. British against English, Welsh, Scottish or Irish; French against Catalan, Basque, Breton; etc.). The degree o f success o f the different national identifications (state against regional) depends on the countries and even on the different regions in those countries (for instance, the identifica­ tion o f state and nation differs greatly from England to Scotland). In addi­ tion, with the exception o f a few long-established countries in Europe (e.g. Great Britain, France, Spain and Portugal) the remaining nation-states have appeared in the past two centuries, and this is reflected in the national iden­ tifications. Moreover, although ethnic identifications sometimes coincide with nationalist identifications (e.g. Welsh, Catalan), at other times this is not the case (e.g. Jewish, Gipsy, Afro-Caribbean). The development o f archaeology and its relationship to politics have var­ ied greatly from one nation to another. According to Marie Louise Stig Sorensen, there are various aspects to the relationship between archaeology and nationalism. First, archaeology is only institutionalized when it becomes politically useful. Secondly, it is only then that it appears in the public sphere. Thirdly, it attained importance in certain political decisions, and fourthly it

12

A R C H A E O L O G Y A ND N A T I O N A L I S M IN E U R O P E

became popularised with the addition o f new messages. Sorensen analyzes how, in the Danish case, archaeology became a vehicle for images and objects that served the nationalist discourse. She maintains that the objects and events o f the past that filtered through to popular culture had been selected and used to represent national virtues. With the crisis produced by the loss o f a major part o f the country at the beginning o f the nineteenth century, there was a tendency to seek consolation through the search for a prehistoric golden age, which was limited to the remaining territories. This was the rea­ son why Danish archaeology was already being professionalized in the 1820s and became progressively incorporated into the search for a national identity. Hence, although during the Napoleonic Wars only a few intellectuals were interested in the past, by the 1860s archaeological data had been widely dif­ fused and it served as the unquestionable basis o f the explanation o f the Dan­ ish nation. The data were selected to emphasize moments o f collective endeavour and to promote the freehold peasantry. In this process, archaeo­ logical symbols passed from high culture to low culture, and on occasion their significance was at the same time transformed. As a result, the past became a means o f social communication and as such could not be objective and natural, and its emotional charge could make it very powerful and even dangerous. The birth o f archaeology in France was marked by a lack o f widespread interest and an unbalanced emphasis on history. The Revolution fostered the appearance o f the notion o f national antiquities and the spread o f the con­ cept o f archaeology. However, although the Romantic movement chose an ancient people —the Gauls —and an historical event —the defeat o f Gauls by the Rom ans at Alesia —as symbols o f the French nation, these symbols were not successful. As Alain Schnapp states, neoclassic tradition continued to give more importance to Rom ans than to Gauls. Archaeology was not essen­ tial to the construction o f the French nation. The first institutions created in order to study the past took into account not archaeology but history and monuments. It was only in the second half o f the nineteenth century that archaeology became important. The funding o f the excavations at Alesia and Bibracte in the 1860s began a trend o f nationalist archaeology increasingly stressed after the French defeat by Prussia in 1870. However, in contrast to the German example, the bulk o f intellectuals worked on the construction o f a French nationality based not on race or ethnie but on history and culture. Perhaps because o f this, Schnapp argues that national antiquities were left aside from 1871 to 1939; there was in France no activity corresponding to the creation o f museums and archaeological services in Germany or Scandi­ navia, and even a law on antiquities was not passed until 1941. Even then, the organization o f antiquities thus created was deeply embedded in an

13

N A T I O N A L I S M & A R C H A E O L O G Y IN E U R O P E : I N T R O D U C T I O N

authoritarian ideology. French archaeology has continued its institutionali­ zation thereafter and, as is to be expected in France, it is characterized by its centralization. The author ends his chapter by emphasizing the present neu­ tralization o f French archaeology. The relationship between religion and nationalism is the basis o f DiazAndreu s chapter. The definition o f Spain as a Catholic nation led to the alienation o f the Muslim past in the narration o f her history. The first studies o f Islamic archaeology stressed their foreign nature and lack o f importance for the Spanish past, thereby producing a poor analysis o f the relationship with Christian medieval Spain. One o f the major areas o f research on the Islamic period was the study o f archaeological remains o f Christian churches in Islamic territory. However, contradictory nationalisms in the Spanish state, the influence o f the admiration o f “ exotic” Islamic monuments by other Europeans, and colonial activity in N orth Africa, provided an oppor­ tunity for the historical and archaeological study o f Islam in Spain. Never­ theless, this was undertaken through a Europeanization and a loss o f the religious significance o f the Islamic past. Medieval archaeology has been one o f the areas that has most clearly shown its weakness when faced with polit­ ical pressures during the turbulent history in the twentieth century, and the two poles o f the Spanish medieval past clearly exemplify this. However, thanks to the secularization o f Spanish life, it has become far easier to use images resulting from the Islamic past, and this has converted them into powerful symbols for the creation o f pasts and the legitimation o f the various nationalisms nowadays present in a quasi-federalist Spanish state. The Portuguese case serves, as Carlos Fabiao suggests, as the opposite o f successful national archaeologies. The leading nationalist image o f Portugal is o f a nation born in medieval times, perceived through the portrait o f rural villages and castles. This left previous periods, and therefore archaeology, in an inferior position. This does not mean that archaeologists did not develop various arguments based on megaliths, the northwestern hill-forts, Viriatus and Lusitania in favour o f a remote origin for the Portuguese nation. H ow ­ ever, their efforts, although to a certain extent productive, did not prove fruitful in practical terms in combating the predominant version. Even if laws for the national archaeological heritage were made, they were scarcely applied, and archaeological proposals had little or no funds. Once the legend had been accepted, it was not useful to invest in order to corroborate or research into it. In short, archaeology was considered as counterproductive for nationalist purposes. Alessandro Guidi sees the interrelationship between nationalism and archaeology in Italy as clearly negative. Both prehistoric and classical arch­ aeology were powerfully influenced by nationalism. In the first case this

14

A R C H A E O L O G Y A N D N A T I O N A L I S M IN E U R O P E

relationship can be seen in the dates at which the profession was institution­ alized, in the interest shown by politicians in the new discoveries, and in the interpretations advanced. These stressed that it had been the north o f the country (which had also been the supporter o f unification) that had civilized the south in prehistoric times. The rise o f fascism stimulated the study not o f prehistory but o f classical archaeology, which then promoted an identifica­ tion between classical R o m e and modern Italy. This interest led to the massive expansion in university professorships and the generous financing o f excavations, the most important o f which were the Rom an forum and others undertaken in Italian colonies. From the Second World War, on the other hand, there has been a tendency towards dispersion which, the author maintains, has accelerated in recent years. Britain is an example o f a country with competing nationalisms, as T im ­ othy Champion explains, but archaeology has seldom been invoked to legit­ imate them. England has rarely been seriously threatened since its unification in the eleventh century A D , and English nationalism is very weakly developed. As a result, there is little sign o f a purely English archaeology; no national museum, no national journal, no single national association, no synthetic reviews. Scotland, on the other hand, showed an early development o f archaeology in the eighteenth century, centrally organized and carried out on a national scale. Despite Scotland’s political domination by England, Scot­ tish nationalism existed alongside an acceptance o f the Act o f Union, and national archaeology contributed to Scottish cultural self-awareness rather than to political separatism. Wales was different again; it so far lacked political and cultural institutions that archaeology was scarcely able to take root before the beginning o f the twentieth century. In both countries, twentieth-century nationalist movements have focused on political and economic issues, and a separate cultural identity has been established through language and literature rather than archaeology. Overarching these three national identities has been the concept o f Britain, particularly from the eighteenth century - a useful concept for emphasizing the cultural identity o f the unified kingdom. The late development o f the state s involvement in archaeology has meant, how­ ever, that an increasingly professional discipline has been less amenable to the political uses o f the archaeological past. In Ireland, by contrast, as Gabriel Cooney explains, the archaeological past has been an important element in the construction o f a national identity, and linked in a complex and changing pattern o f relationships with political nationalist programmes. A flourishing period o f archaeological research in the middle o f the nineteenth century provided a wealth o f evidence for the cultural achievements o f the Irish past, and laid the foundations for a percep­ tion o f a separate Irish cultural identity; this, however, contrasted markedly

15

N A T I O N A L I S M & A R C H A E O L O G Y IN E U R O P E : I N T R O D U C T I O N

with the misty mythological gloss given to the past in the later nineteenth century Celtic revival. Archaeology has been used as part o f the debate about the nature o f Ireland and Irish nationalism, and this is still true o f the present. The partition o f Ireland symbolizes and enforces the existence o f conflicting identities within Ireland, and has influenced the way that some archaeolog­ ical debates have been initiated and perpetuated. In his chapter on Germany, Ingo Wiwjorra distinguishes two types o f archaeology in the nineteenth century, based on philology and anthropology, and three types o f authors: professionals, amateurs and pseudo-scientists. The early nineteenth century saw an idealization o f German prehistory, knowledge o f which came predominantly from written sources that were used to complement the growing archaeological finds. Theories that indi­ cated a “ foreign” influence in the German past - whether they stressed the provenance o f the Germans from the Caucasus and therefore their barbarism in prehistoric times, or centred their attention on the classical world —were progressively rejected. On the contrary, so-called anthropological archaeol­ ogy linked the idea o f a German race with prehistoric cultures. This connec­ tion was already common in the 1880s and it identified the Germans with the pure Indo-European race. Amateurs such as Ludwig Wilser and Will Pastor were at the forefront o f this tendency, but it was then professionalized by figures such as Gustaf Kossinna through the methods o f settlement archaeology combined with a belief in the superiority o f the German race. Contemporaneously archaeology was employed to justify German expan­ sion in the east. During the National Socialist period there was a massive creation o f professorships and a justification o f National Socialist policies in archaeological circles. After the Second World War a divide has opened up between the arid scientificism o f professionals who ignored the previous period and pseudo-scientific ideology in which elements o f the pre-war discourse can still be seen. Interest in the past increased greatly in Poland after her loss o f independ­ ence in 1795 and antiquarianism became one o f the pillars o f the Polish national movement, as Wlodzimierz R^czkowski illustrates. Archaeological remains were identified with the Slavs. Importance was given to archaeology as a way to fix a territorial border between Germans and Slavs, i.e. between Prussia and Poland. However, because o f the might o f pan-Slavism, there was no similar attempt in relation to the other borders, as Lithuanians, Byelorussians and Ukrainians were considered as Slavs. The former discus­ sion continued after the independence o f Poland in 1918 and had two major representatives, Kostrzewski and von Richthofen for the Polish and the German sides respectively. The Slav past, and its territory, was promoted via newspapers and other popular media, and in popular lectures and courses for

16

A R C H A E O L O G Y AND N A T I O N A L I S M IN E U R O P E

teachers. The Polish past was, furthermore, symbolized by the archaeologi­ cal site o f Biskupin. Archaeology was again used as a way to legitimize the newly created Polish borders after 1945, at least until the late 1960s and early 1970s when the borders were internationally accepted; archaeology there­ fore lost part o f its importance, although dominant views are still present in school manuals and guide books o f the site o f Biskupin, the key symbol o f the Slavic past. Ethnicity is the main focus o f Viktor Shnirelman s chapter on Russia. As the author states, nationalism in Russian and Soviet archaeology expressed itself mainly in ethnogenetic studies. In Hobsbawm s words, archaeologists, like historians, were and are contributing “ consciously or not, to the crea­ tion, dismantling and restructuring o f images o f the past which belong not only to the world o f specialist investigation but to the public sphere o f man [i.e. the human being] as a political being” (Hobsbawm 1983: 13). Russian archaeology changed its object o f study from classical remains to local - Slav - antiquities mainly from the 1840s. Slavic-Russian interpretations began to be fostered by other ethnic (i.e. non-Russian) intellectuals from 1917, a trend allowed by the state because o f its powerful symbolic opposition to the defeated Old Russia. This situation changed drastically for a short period in the late 1920s and early 1930s, because o f the introduction o f Marxism to Soviet science and the consideration o f previous research as bourgeois. The search for past ethnic roots was forbidden and changes in the archaeological record were considered as socio-economic stages. Soviet nationalism, a nationalism o f a theoretical multi-ethnic base, was born by 1934-6 and ethnicity was thereby re-installed. Soviet nationhood was, however, being constructed on the base o f a Slavic (Russian) past. This situation led from the 1950s to competing views between Russian and non-Russian archaeologists and to the politicization and mythologization o f the ethnic origin o f peoples o f the former U S S R . Lithuanian archaeology is another good example o f the relationship between archaeology and nationalism. As Puod£iunas and Girininkas explain, after the closure o f Vilnius University in 1831, intellectuals turned to the col­ lection o f antiquities as a way to prove their right to demand an independent Lithuanian-Polish state. As a result, after the 1863 uprising, one o f the actions by the governor o f Vilnius was to ban the Archaeological Commission and to take measures to control the Museum o f Antiquities. From this date through to the First World War it was mainly Russian and some Polish archae­ ologists who carried out archaeological work, and this resulted in the bulk o f theories pointing to a non-Lithuanian origin o f the archaeological remains. The lifting o f the ban was followed by the appearance o f Lithuanian scientific societies. However, the U S S R scientific policy enforced the manip-

17

N A T I O N A L I S M & A R C H A E O L O G Y IN E U R O P E : I N T R O D U C T I O N

ulation o f data in order to “ Russify” interpretations, although archaeologists were less oppressed than historians. Since independence, the dominant archaeological interpretation has defended the Baltic ethnogenesis o f Lithua­ nians, stressing in this way an origin distinct from that o f their more powerful Slav neighbours. The Slovenian case has been analyzed by Bo£idar SlapSak and Predrag Novakovic. They conclude that there was no indication before the Second World War o f the involvement o f archaeology in nationalist discourse. In this case, language and not history was the basis o f Slovenian nationalism and, accordingly, archaeology only played a secondary role. The history o f Slov­ enian archaeology was therefore one o f weakness, poor institutionalization and underdevelopment. Personal matters were also influential. The M useum o f Ljubljana was run by a pro-German for almost 30 years from the 1850s to the 1880s, a fact that bestowed on archaeology the stigma o f a suspicious discipline in nationalist eyes. The Second World War saw the introduction o f ethnic-nationalist theories in the archaeology carried out in Slovenian territory. Ethnicity continued to be linked to Slovenian archaeology after the war, although opposed by the historian Grafenauer and the von Merhard school o f prehistoric research. The non-involvement o f academic archaeol­ ogy in the nationalist struggle o f the late 1980s and early 1990s has been crit­ icized. The authors conclude that “ while academic archaeology can avoid nationalism, nationalism cannot do without archaeology in its myth creation and search for identity, and that can create a lot o f pressure” .

The nationalist value o f archaeology Finally, we can ask whether there are any distinctive features o f archaeology that predispose it to such a relationship with nationalism. Many o f the authors in this volume have emphasized that nationalist ideologies rely heav­ ily, if not inevitably, on the past, and on a particular construction o f the past. It is not just that the nation provides a seemingly natural framework and an appropriate scale for archaeological research, or even that the state, as the main sponsor o f archaeological work, tends to encourage research that re­ inforces its own identity. The past provides a mirror image o f the future to which the nationalism aspires, whether it is the cultural aim o f re-establish­ ing an identity or the political one o f regaining territory or autonomy. But the past can be experienced and investigated in many ways, o f which archae­ ology is only one. What is the special character o f archaeology that provides such an opportunity for nationalism?

18

TH E N A T IO N A L IST VALUE OF A R C H A E O LO G Y

First, archaeological evidence is very versatile. It needs interpretation, and the limits o f possible interpretations are often not set very narrowly. As archaeological knowledge has improved, especially about the geographical distribution or chronological range o f a particular artefact or cultural prac­ tice, but also in respect o f our understanding o f the nature o f pre-modern societies, so the limit o f possible or acceptable interpretations has been restricted. It was not until as late as the 1870s that the chronological devel­ opment o f the material culture sequence o f later European prehistory was established in any detail; until then, many objects could be attributed to the Slavs, Celts, Germans or Romans indiscriminately and without fear o f scientific contradiction. Nationalism did indeed stimulate the development o f archaeology in the nineteenth century, but one o f the reasons why archae­ ology was so useful was the comparatively poor state o f knowledge about the past, which allowed it to be used very flexibly in social and political debate. But nationalism thus sowed the seeds for the development o f knowledge o f the past to the point where the more extravagant claims could be confronted by firm archaeological arguments. The growth o f a professional archaeology, mostly in institutions established by the nation-states themselves, and the eventual application o f new techniques and scientific methods, have created a more robust body o f evidence. Secondly, archaeological evidence can be very old. Outside the classical world o f the Mediterranean, the documentary historical tradition does not reach far back in time. If nationalist claims, especially claims to territory once occupied and now lost, were to be based on the antiquity and longevity o f occupation, then only archaeology could supply the proof. This demanded a method for fixing the relative sequence o f material in order to show antiq­ uity, and a means o f establishing a connection with the modern nation. The Three Age system, and the culture—historical tradition more generally, were ideally suited to the first o f these aims. The chronological ordering o f the evidence, which has supplied the basis for all future work, and the emphasis on continuity and development o f material culture, underpinned arguments for the continuity o f settlement. But this had to be matched by an identifi­ cation o f certain traits as distinctively those o f a nation or its predecessors: Slavic pottery or German burial rites. This identification was the most pow­ erful and most emotive link in the chain o f argument, and it is also the one that has suffered most from recent developments in archaeological theory. O ur understanding o f material culture and its social uses makes us much less ready to accept such simple correlations o f an artefact type or a cultural prac­ tice with a single ethnic group or nation. Such identifications are, however, very resilient and they tend to survive well in more popular literature, long after they have been questioned by archaeologists.

19

N A T I O N A L I S M & A R C H A E O L O G Y IN E U R O P E : I N T R O D U C T I O N

N ext, archaeological evidence is physical. Until the emergence o f anti­ quarian studies in the Renaissance, the status o f the written word as the sole authority on the past was unchallenged. By the nineteenth century, however, the growing body o f physical evidence collected by antiquarians and archae­ ologists had begun to offer an alternative source o f knowledge, and one that could be experienced in many different ways. Historical knowledge can be transmitted only via the written or spoken word, but the physical evidence offered by archaeology opens up many new possibilities for engaging with the past. Archaeological objects can be more than just an illustration o f the knowledge provided by the written word, and can constitute an independ­ ent source for understanding the past. Many such collections o f objects were originally made by amateur antiquarians, but, from the eighteenth century, state museums were increasingly founded to accommodate them; the collec­ tions were transformed from symbols o f the enthusiasm, learning and taste o f the individual to symbols o f the history and achievements o f the nation. The visible evidence o f the past supplied by museums opened up an impor­ tant new means o f understanding the past, and museum visiting became an important cultural and educational practice for some sectors o f society. Equally important were the opportunities offered by archaeological sites and monuments. In some countries, such as Denmark, the entire landscape became historicized as a metaphor for the nation itself. In others, single sites took on a critical significance for their key role in the nation s history: Tara in Ireland, Numantia in Spain, or Alesia in France, although both the latter were the sites o f ultimate defeat. In other cases, a site without specific histor­ ical significance was adopted as a sign o f the nation, often, like Biskupin in Poland, because o f the role it played in the development o f archaeology and its role in recent politics. The potential o f such sites can be exploited in many ways. They can be used for political meetings, as was Tara; or for regular ceremonial events to enforce social memory o f the nation s history; for archaeological excava­ tions, to improve knowledge and heighten awareness o f the past; or for edu­ cational visits, whether by individuals, or schools or archaeological societies; more and more in the twentieth century they have been exploited for an increasingly commercialized tourist industry. The exploitation o f these new opportunities depended greatly on tech­ nological progress in the nineteenth century. Sites are o f little ideological use if they cannot be visited, and improvements in transport were vital in per­ mitting the sort o f systematic site-seeing that was the main activity o f many archaeological societies in the last century. Both sites and objects also pro­ vided many new images that could be disseminated by the rapid improve­ ments in the printing industry. The graphic illustrations o f the past, repeated

20

TH E N A T IO N A L IST VALUE OF A R C H A E O LO G Y

in books, magazines, newspapers and pictures, took on a power o f their own. The rising standards o f literacy and education, often sponsored by the state while it was supporting the development o f archaeology, ensured that this flood o f new material reached a wider audience where its message could be assimilated. Smith (1986: 192) has identified some o f the recurring features in any national mythology or myth o f ethnic origins: myths o f origins in time or space; o f ancestry, migration and liberation; o f golden ages, decline and rebirth. Archaeological material and monuments can be very successfully exploited to provide evidence for such myths and to provide them with authenticity; myths can merge into history. Archaeology was particularly good for the documentation o f origin myths. Timescales could not be estab­ lished with any confidence in absolute terms, but archaeology could at least demonstrate that things were comparatively old in historical terms. Origins in space were much easier to show, once the treacherous identification o f nation and artefact had been accepted, and were o f central importance to modern disputes about territorial control. Archaeology has also been able to provide the visible evidence for past golden ages. For some nations, these were periods o f military and political power, or great territorial domination; for others, technological and artistic achievement; for others again, idyllic rural prosperity. For all these variants, archaeology can be pressed into service to provide the evidence. It can also provide the evidence for heroes and, less frequently, heroines, to populate the golden ages. The earliest years o f recorded history have proved a fertile source o f named individuals, often associated with great events or important sites, who can be brought to life through archaeology. France has Vercingetorix, Portugal Viriatus, Germany Arminius; all have become national heroes, essential elements in the national myth, historically documented and authenticated by archaeology. Archaeology has thus for the past 200 years been inextricably intertwined with nationalism. It would be pointless to speculate how antiquarianism would have developed without the influence o f nationalism, but one o f the consequences o f its growth has been its increasing maturity as a professional discipline. N ot only can it now survive without nationalist support, but it can, as the authors in this volume demonstrate, turn a self-critical eye on its own development and evaluate its own involvement in 200 years o f social and political change in Europe.

21

N A T I O N A L I S M & A R C H A E O L O G Y IN E U R O P E : I N T R O D U C T I O N

Bibliography Anderson, B. 1991. Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. London: Verso. Arnold, B., 1990. The past as propaganda: totalitarian archaeology in N azi Germany. Antiq­ uity 64, 464-78. Bollm us, R . 1970. Das Amt Rosenberg und seine Gegner. Stuttgart: Deustche Verlags-Anstalt. Bray, W. & I. C. Glover 1987. Scientific investigation or cultural imperialism: British archae­ ology in the Third World. Bulletin of the Institute of Archaeology 24, 109-25. Canfora, L. 1980. Ideologie del classicismo. Turin: Einaudi. Chapm an, M . 1992. The Celts: the construction of a myth. Basingstoke: Macmillan. Clark, J. G. D. 1957. Archaeology and society 3rd edn. London: M ethuen. Daniel, G. E. 1975. 150 years of archaeology. London: Duckworth. D iaz-A ndreu, M . forthcom ing. Constructing identities through culture. T h e past in the forg­ ing o f Europe. In European communities: archaeology and the construction of cultural identity, S. Jones, C. Gamble, P. Graves (eds). London: R outledge. Evans, C. & B. J. M eggers 1973. U nited States “ imperialism” and Latin Am erican archaeol­ ogy. American Antiquity 38, 257-8. Fleury-Ilett, B. 1993. T h e identity o f France: the archaeological interaction. Journal of Euro­ pean Archaeology 1, 169-80. Fowler, D. D. 1987. U ses o f the past: archaeology in the service o f the state. American Antiquity 52, 229-48. Garlake, P. S. 1982. Prehistory and ideology in Zimbabwe. Africa 52(3), 1-18. Gasco, F. 1993. Historiadores, falsarios y estudiosos de las antigiiedades andaluzas. In La antiguedad como argumento: historiografla de arqueologia e historia antigua en Andalucta,]. Beltran & F. Gasco (eds), 9—28. Seville: Junta de Andalucia. Gathercole, P. & D. Lowenthal (eds) 1990. The politics of the past. London: U nw in Hyman. Gellner, E. 1983. Nations and nationalism. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Guidi, A. 1988. Storia della paletnologia. R o m e : Laterza. Him m elm ann, N. 1976. D ie Antike in der Ideologie des nationalistischen Staates. Utopische Vergangenheit. Archaologie und moderne Kultur, 119-30. Berlin: Mann. Hobsbaw m , E. 1983. Introduction: inventing traditions. In The invention of tradition, E. H obsbaw m & T. R an ger (eds), 1-14. Cam bridge: C am bridge University Press. — 1990. Nations and nationalism since 1780. Cam bridge: Cam bridge University Press. Holl, A. 1990. West African archaeology: colonialism and nationalism. In A history of African archaeology, P. Robertshaw (ed.), 296-308. London: Jam es Currey. Hroch, M . 1985. Social preconditions of national revival in Europe. Cam bridge: Cam bridge University Press. Kaarsholm , P. 1989. The past as battlefield in R hodesia and Zimbabwe: the struggle o f com ­ peting nationalisms over history from colonization to independence. Culture and History 6, 85-106. Kedourie, E. 1960. Nationalism. London: Hutchinson. Kohl, P. L. 1993. Nationalism, politics, and the practice o f archaeology in Soviet Transcauca­ sia. Journal of European Archaeology 1, 181-9. Kohl, P. & C. Fawcett (eds) forthcom ing. Nationalism, politics, and the practice of archaeology. Cam bridge: C am bridge University Press. Kristiansen, K ., 1992. “ T h e strength o f the past and its great m ight” : an essay on the use o f the past .Journal of European Archaeology 1, 3-32.

22

BIBLIO GRAPHY Kiihnl, R . 1985. Die Weimarer Republik. Hamburg: Row olth Taschenbuch. Layton, R . (ed.) 1988. Conflict in the archaeology of living traditions. London: Unw in Hyman. — 1989. Who needs the past? Indigenous values and archaeology. London: U nwin Hyman. Lorenzo, J. L. 1976. La arqueologia tnexicana y los arqueologos norteatnericanos. M exico: Departamento de Prehistoria, Instituto Nacional de Antropologia e Historia. Losemann, V. 1977. Nationalsozialisinus und Antique. Hamburg: Hoffmann & Cam pe. M angi, J. 1988. The role o f archaeology in the construction o f the nation. In Conflict in the archaeology of living traditions, R . Layton (cd.), 2X7-27. London: Unwin Hyman. M oradicllos, E. 1992. Las caras de Clio: introduccion a la historia y a la historiografia. Oviedo: Universidad de Oviedo. Petricioli, M . 1990. Archeologia e Mare Nostrum: le missioni archeologische nella politica tnediterranea delVItalia 1898/1943. R om e: Valerio Levi. Pingeot, A. 1982. Les Gaulois sculptes (1850-1914). In Nos ancetres les Gaulois, P. Viallaneix 8c J. Ehrard (eds), 255-82. Clerm ont-Ferrand: Universite de Clerm ont-Ferrnand. Quijada Maurino, M. forthcoming. Los “ incas arios” : historia, lengua y raza en la construccion nacional hispanoamericana del siglo X IX . In Historia y universidad: honienaje a Lorenzo Luna, E. Gonzalez Gonzalez (ed). M exico: UNAM. Schnapp, A. 1977. Per una discussione sul classicismo nell’eta deH’imperialismo, IV : Archeologie et nazisme. Quadertii di Storia 5, 1-26. — 1980. Archeologie et Nazisme (il). Quaderni di Storia 11, 19-33. — 1981. Les annales et l’archeologie; une rencontre difficile. Mefra 93, 469-78. Schnapp, A. & J. Svenbro 1980. D u Nazisme a “ nouvelle ecole” ; reperes sur la pretendue nouvelle droite. Quaderni di Storia 11, 107-19. Shennan, S. J. (ed.) 1988. Archaeological approaches to cultural identity. London: Unwin Hyman. Sklenar, K. 1981. The history o f archaeology in Czechoslovakia. In Towards a history of archae­ ology, G. Daniel (ed.), 150-8. London: Thames & Hudson. SlapSak, B. 1993. Archaeology and the contemporary myths o f the past. Journal of European Archaeology 1, 191-5. Smith, A. 1986. The ethnic origins of nations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Sorensen, M . L. S. 1986. “ . . . Foie Oldtidens Kraft Til Nutidens Klogt . . .” . Stofskifte, Tidsskriftfor Antropologi 13, 35-46. Torelli, M. 1991. Archeologia e fascismo. In Historiografia de la arqueologia y de la historia antigua en Espaha (siglos XVIII—XX), J. Arce &c R . Olm os (eds), 243-9. Madrid: M inisterio de Cultura. Trigger, B. G. 1984. Alternative archaeologies: nationalist, colonialist, imperialist. Man 19, 355-70. — 1989. A history of archaeological thought. Cam bridge: Cam bridge University Press. Veit, U. 1988. Ethnic concepts in Germ an prehistory: a case study on the relationship between cultural identity and archaeological objectivity. In Archaeological approaches to cultural identity, S. Shennan (ed.), 35-56. London: Unwin Hyman. Wilk, R . 1985. The ancient Maya and the political present .Journal of Anthropological Research 41, 307-26. Zerubavel, Y. 1994. The death o f m em ory and the m em ory o f death: Masada and the H o lo­ caust as historical metaphors. Representations 45, 72-100.

23

C H A P T E R TWO

The fall of a nation, the birth of a subject: the national use of archaeology in nineteenth-century Denmark Marie Louise Stig Sorensen

. . . the ideology o f nation, state or movement is not what has actually been preserved in popular memory, but what has been selected, writ­ ten, pictured, popularized and institutionalized by those whose func­ tion is to do so . . . Yet all historians, whatever their objectives, contribute . . . to the creation, dismantling and restructuring o f images o f the past which belong not only to the world o f specialist investiga­ tion but to the public sphere o f man as a political being. (Hobsbawm 1983: 13)

Introduction: archaeology and the search for identity The Danish use o f archaeology in the creation o f national identity and the building o f the nation during the nineteenth century is an interesting case study for several reasons. As regards the sociopolitical context, the case study illustrates several aspects o f the relationship between archaeology and nation­ alism. First, there was a close and clearly expressed association between per­ ceived political needs and the institutionalization o f the past. Secondly, archaeology’s move out o f the private domain into the public sphere can be traced through a few specific stages, and its consequences can be analyzed. Thirdly, it shows how the newly formulated national identity (national virtues) was harnessed to practical political issues such as intensifying and changing land-use patterns. From another angle, this study also reflects upon the role o f archaeology per se in such contexts where nationalism appropri­ ates the past. The analysis o f the archaeological objects and images selected

24

A R C H A E O L O G Y AND N A T IO N A L IS M

for public consumption (e.g. political posters, stamps, songs) shows that the past presented was a selected, censored past. These connections between nationalism and archaeology demonstrate two significant points o f general relevance. First, the role o f the past in the present is largely dictated and created outside the scene o f the archaeological profession and, secondly, the present controls the past, which in its defence­ lessness cannot protest against what is done to it. Finally, the further devel­ opment shows that the archaeological objects in the public sphere were gradually transformed into symbols and from there into signs.

Archaeology and nationalism Nationalism is a significant characteristic o f the present political scene, and it often includes archaeology and the past in its language. It is therefore impor­ tant that the discipline o f archaeology engages with current debates on the nature o f nationalism, and in particular involves itself with investigations o f how that relationship can be formed and what it creates. Nationalism bonds the individual to the abstract notion o f nation-state, and it often creates a powerful emotional attachment that can be empowered to various ends. Nationalism relates to the individual and his/her identity; but although most aspects o f identity are acquired and expressed on a personal or group level, we imply a different and more abstract kind o f identity when we refer to national identity. Although an overlap exists with other levels o f identity, the relationships that exist between the individual and the nation-state (nation­ alism), as well as the experiences drawn upon and created, are rather special (see also discussions o f its artificial or imagined character in Gellner (1983) and Anderson (1983) respectively). In nationalism, identity, behaviour, sen­ sation and experiences - a whole range o f emotions derives from a bonding between individuals and political structure. This relationship between the individual and the nation is not a face-to-face encounter; in fact it is not even a clearly situated experience. Nationalism in this sense is less clearly located than, for example, ethnicity and other exclusively group-oriented cohesive movements. Nationalism at the same time appears as a voluntary relation­ ship. The subde nature o f national identity in terms o f how it is acquired (you hardly realize when and how you entered into this relationship) stands in an interesting contrast to the usually very coarse characteristics o f national identities (e.g. “ Germans are thorough and have no sense o f humour” ). M uch o f contemporary attitudes towards the state/nation arises to some extent from (unconscious?) recognition o f this valuation, and location o f the

25

A R C H A E O L O G Y IN N I N E T E E N T H - C E N T U R Y D E N M A R K

individual vis-a-vis the state. The dehumanized worlds o f Kafka’s novels are felt to be almost familiar places. Such attitudes epitomize several aspects o f the modern relationship between citizen and nation-state. The feeling o f distance or lack o f engagement is commonly referred to as alienation and this is stressed as contrasting to “ how it used to be” . Meanwhile, despite this strong, and increasingly negative, image o f the state, nationalism is still a significant force in society and for identities. It is in fact one o f the strongest motivating forces, and one that in extremely interesting ways seems to be able to override the self-interest o f the individual or the group. Such nation­ alism can be harnessed to different aims, and in this it clearly shows itself as part o f politics and ideologies. To further understanding o f nationalism, it is important to appreciate its nature. One o f the most influential works in this regard has been Anderson’s notion o f “ imagined communities” , which captures some o f the artifice o f the relationships embedded in nationalism (Anderson 1983). As an extension o f this view, I suggest that it can be useful to approach nationalism as a cultural construction. That means that it is not natural, to be taken for granted, but on the contrary it is a relationship that has to be created. It comes into being in specific contexts and in doing so it will require a language. It is from such perspectives that archaeology’s contribution to the investigation o f national­ ism becomes clear. We have essentially two major contributions. The first is investigation o f how archaeology itself provides a glossary o f objects and images appropriate for the intended messages. This derives from the obser­ vation that the past and the various sentiments embedded in our notions o f origin are a forceful conceptual resource variously used in the cultural con­ struction and manipulation o f nationalistic feelings. The case study in this paper represents this kind o f investigation. The second contribution consists o f using the archaeological experience o f “ reading” material culture to understand and deconstruct the symbolic language o f nationalism. This is based on the recognition o f material objects being active and on their dynamic involvement in social discourse. Objects not only have immediate meaning, they also act as memory caches, as con­ tainers o f emotions. They represent, in a apparently timeless form, values, symbolic meaning and created associations. They bridge generations and create contacts in a unique manner between that which was, which is and which will be. At the same time, however, they can also be compared to text. They need to be activated, read and understood, and in so doing they change their values, symbolic meaning and created associations. In this sense they are utterly passive. Material culture as memory and symbols limits the freedom o f the individual and creates order and long-term structures. Archaeology can therefore be used to investigate how emblems o f the past are used as

26

TH E B E G IN N IN G OF N A T IO N A LISM

props for action and as symbols o f particular values and emotions. “ As an example, it may be difficult to articulate what it is you are feeling when you feel British (or Danish or French), but you may nonetheless be able to expe­ rience such feelings prompted by the flag, a piece o f music, the Parthenon or barrows. They speak to us in a language o f symbols and emotions which is difficult to deconstruct.” (Sorensen & Uzzell 1993). To trace and investigate such constructions it is first necessary to recognize under what conditions they can be created, as well as the means through which they are articulated and assimilated. This paper will therefore briefly consider which aspects o f nineteenth-century societies were seminal for developing nationalism. In addition, it will consider why and how the past became one o f the vehicles through which national behaviour, virtues and common norms - in short, identity with the nation - were created.

The beginning o f nationalism Nationalism (patriotic feeling or principles or efforts) is a bonding relation­ ship created between the nation-state and the individual aimed at creating a desired sense o f belonging, attachment, o f being an insider. Through this, individuals become members or citizens (civilian, member or inhabitant o f state) o f the nation in such a way that this belonging in principle cross-cuts other social groupings such as gender, class, and ethnicity. National identity is shared despite differences that affect the reality o f life-experiences. In prin­ ciple, this identity is acquired, not gained nor learned, and the experiences to which it relates tend to lie beyond the daily world. This particular bond developed in the nineteenth century in Europe, and some o f its necessary preconditions and seminal aspects can be suggested. First, nationalism requires social systems in which individuals are free to feel loyalty towards an abstract concept o f the nation, which is beyond the structures, institutions and persons who influence their daily existence. The new and more democratic social systems that emerged in Europe during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century made such bonding possible. N ew social groups came into being, and others changed their position in society, such as the industrial urban population, the independent farmers, and the trades and crafts organizations. The power o f the landed aristocracy, who traditionally would have received loyalty in place o f King and God, also changed. As a result, a large part o f the population no longer had masters in the earlier sense o f the word. The attachment to the nation could fill an empty place in the sociopolitical system and, depending on the cultural-

27

A R C H A E O L O G Y IN N I N E T E E N T H - C E N T U R Y D E N M A R K

political contexts, different types o f nations and nationalism developed. Secondly, most o f the relevant population must have cultural behaviour and norms in common. This is necessary in order to ensure that the role o f citizen and the meaning o f the nation are reasonably shared, and thus can be the basis for the sense o f unity, o f being the same vis-a-vis a commonly under­ stood “ nation” . It is for the nation to create this illusion, and this necessitates realistic means o f communication throughout the nation as well as relatively free access to such communications. If the nation cannot reach its citizens, the nature o f their relationship will change, and nationalism weakens. For nationalism to remain strong in contemporary Europe, media such as news­ papers, television and radio are, for instance, vital, since they make it possible for large numbers o f the population to share the same knowledge at the same time (this is the basis for shared norms and behaviour). D uring the nine­ teenth century, the expansion and innovations within communication and transport were essential elements behind the new concept o f citizens, and conduct manuals created shared codes o f behaviour.

Why does archaeology/the past becom e involved? R ecognizing the above conditions as necessary for the development o f nationalism does not in itself reveal how particular national identities are constructed and maintained. It is with regard to this aspect o f nationalism that the past often plays a significant role. Nationalism explores a range o f different aspects o f societies and human characteristics; but among this vari­ ability is a common tendency o f including the past. Analysis o f how and what the past articulates within nationalism may give a useful insight into some o f its psychological dimension. T he primary role o f the past is that it can be used to anchor the nation by making it simultaneously timeless and very old, and, through this, national­ ism itself has its reasons as well as its roots in the past. Through the past it is possible to create the historically very interesting illusion o f the nation as natural. Naturalness is, at the same time, a strongly cohesive quality and a very effective legitimating force. I would furthermore suggest that nationalism, as opposed to ethnicity or class, is less concerned with distinctiveness from others and thus focused on the present, but rather is concerned with creating the bonding between individuals and the nation. Group identities, such as ethnicity and class, are largely dependent on immediate experiences, such as can be created through language, religion/rituals, clothing and appearance. For nationalism the con­

28

WHY DOES A R C H A E O L O G Y /T H E PA ST BE C O M E IN V O LV ED ?

cern is to make natural the relationship between individual and nation, to be taken for granted, and to give it emotional strength. Emotions are the focus in the construction and maintenance o f nationalism. It is, as mentioned before, a voluntary relationship, and nationalism is dependent on the indi­ vidual feeling nationalistic. Therefore, although not always the case, the past is often integrated in nationalism and it fits those needs indicated above superbly. The past is immensely pliable, at the same time as it can give time-depth and thus natu­ ralness to the belonging between the individual and the nation-state. It also provides a context that exploits the emotional impacts and psychological significance o f the sense o f time, origin, birth/beginning and ancestry. If, however, the past is to be understood as more than just a general element o f nationalism, we need to comprehend the ways in which it becomes able to “ stand in” for the nation. The past is commonly assigned the ability to characterize or represent the nation and national identities. This apparently happens at least at two differ­ ent levels. At one level the past is given the characteristics o f the present nation, both literally in terms o f geographical extent and more abstractly by its embodying the character o f the people/nation (e.g. industrial, innovative, communal). The other level is more physical and involves the actual use o f past objects, monuments or deeds as reference points. In a sense this is the more important level, since it is through this that expressions o f nationalism take on a form that gives it the ability to filter down into mass culture. It is also through this level that originally explicit statements and specific sym­ bolic representations become transformed into slogans, signs and emotions. Through such mechanism the past and its physical representations become part o f a wider paraphernalia o f issues and objects that enables the transfer­ ring o f meaning/values o f the past into the present. The creation o f Danish nationalism and national identity during the nine­ teenth century provides a good example o f these various relationships and mechanisms, since there is a very close association between the political history, the social history and the rise o f new cultural institutions, as well as a well defined group o f leading players in this process. For the purpose o f this chapter it will not be possible to give a detailed account o f this process, but it will be used to demonstrate and analyze the exploitative relationship nationalism can establish with the past and how this affects national identi­ ties.

29

A R C H A E O L O G Y IN N I N E T E E N T H - C E N T U R Y D E N M A R K

Archaeology and the Danish national virtues Having argued that the past often acts as a resource for national virtues, pride and self-esteem, in short as the basis for the sentiment o f nationalism, the aim o f the Danish case study is to illustrate this in greater detail. An analysis o f the images relating to the past that were filtering through to popular culture shows what values were given to the past and through that to the present. The data looked at in this study were primarily popular songs (which, in the Danish cultural contexts o f the nineteenth century, played a specific and dominant role in communal activities and which, as a means o f mass com ­ munication, can be understood as a norm-creating vehicle (Folkehojskolens Sangbog 1969, 0stergard & Wahlin 1984)), supplemented with observa­ tions o f political and society posters, stamps, banknotes, and for more recent periods also advertisements. The analysis (Sorensen 1986) shows that, among the many possible archaeological facts and objects, a few were used repeat­ edly, gradually taking on symbolic meaning. The characteristics o f these selected items can then be used to reconstruct the national virtues created and to consider why they were desired.

The fall o f a nation The first part o f the title o f this chapter —“ The fall o f a nation” —is meant to indicate the context o f a devastated nation, whose territory had become increasingly restricted. During the early nineteenth century, various political and socio-economic changes co-existed in Denmark, causing a crisis o f iden­ tity at several levels o f society. The nation was in decline, literally becoming smaller as Norway was lost at the end o f the Napoleonic war, and the West Indies, Indian, and African colonies were sold in response to the financial cri­ ses caused by the English trade blockade and the destruction o f the commer­ cial fleet during the bombardment o f Copenhagen. This was a “ Dark A ge” for the participants, and therefore a situation in which the desire, sentiments and longings for a previous “ Golden A ge” could easily find roots. This atti­ tude became even more exaggerated by a sense o f defeat being caused by political naivete, inappropriate economic enterprises and increasingly also technological backwardness. In addition, with the abolition o f the absolute monarchy, the constitutional changes gave political powers and influence to a small cultural elite at a time when new socio-economic groups came into being, as the bond between manors and farm-hands had been dissolved and free-traders had been established. Social groupings and feelings o f contractual

30

FROM RA R ITIES TO N A T IO N A L H E R IT A G E

loyalty had been loosened, new identities had to be created and the need for belonging satisfied. For the people, and in particular the new social classes, it was difficult to relate to the contemporary society, to find one s identity there, and to feel any pride or self-gratification in current events. It is in this context that the impact o f the use o f the past must be seen. This sociopolitical situation combined with a strong Rom antic movement to create a situation in which the need for pride and self-esteem naturally looked to the past for satisfaction (Stybe 1972). The past was used to glorify the nation and, by establishing particular national virtues, it created the basis for a firm national identity. It gave rise to the notion o f restoring former national glory by turning attention away from external possessions to the reclamation and intensification o f the internal wasteland (Olwig 1984) - and by reclaiming the past. This link between the past and national identity is not particularly unique, but the strength o f this association in Denmark is unu­ sual and it has created a very strong association between “ who we were” and “ who we are” , which still provides a basic element in Danish identity. The following account outlines how and when this association was made, how this affected both the image o f the nation and the newly created archae­ ological discipline, and how the values created have been regenerated and maintained over time.

From rarities to national heritage The basic aim o f this link between past and present was to legitimate and naturalize Denmark, in the form it took from the end o f the Napoleonic war, and as a result o f its gradual loss o f its colonies and finally in 1864 also o f Schleswig-Holstein (about one-third o f its territory; Olwig 1984: 57), as a natural, eternal entity. The fink between past and present is treated literally, and it is found as a common reference point in many sectors o f society, rang­ ing from very mundane contexts to quite sacred ones. References to this link are, for example, frequent in the national songs (which play a very significant role in Danish cultural life, see also Kristiansen 1993), in political posters, union logotypes, banknotes, stamps, and in general popular culture. The Danish equivalent to English song lyrics such as “ land o f hope and glory” or “ green and pleasant land” would, for example, be: “ if you desire to fathom the roots o f your being/value the treasures they left behind” or “ In that our prehistory lived/ and there our future grows” . The songs from which these lines come are emotionally very powerful. They represent and express the togetherness o f the nation in a most significant manner. This image would

31

A R C H A E O L O G Y IN N I N E T E E N T H - C E N T U R Y D E N M A R K

furthermore gain a sense o f truth by the confirming quality that arose from their recurrent use in the communal singing in societies, schools, and at fam­ ily celebrations. It is possible to trace this formal connection between national awareness and archaeology as an intentional exercise over a short intensive period o f the nineteenth century, whereafter it gradually became embedded as a naturally accepted relationship, that is, it became mythological (Petersen 1938, Klindt-Jensen 1975, Kristiansen 1981, Sorensen 1986). Before this period we find isolated individual expressions o f interest in the past, such as for example Ole Worm (1588-1654), but the formal beginning o f archaeology as a discipline and subject is usually placed early in the nineteenth century. This division in time between archaeology as a subject and archaeology as a reflection o f individual interest can be questioned. It is, however, the case that archaeology in the course o f the 1820s was being established as a profes­ sion and most importantly that it became an institutionalized and centralized activity with a “ national” focus. In the following years the subject was fur­ ther changed from consisting o f the collection o f rarities and information about them as well as research concerning the earliest historical sources and the saga texts, to becoming increasingly concerned with the Nation s, and through that the peoples, past. The concern with this past furthermore aimed at the people as a unity, who existed before the present political bor­ ders. In this way the past was used to create a myth about a united unmixed people, who from the dawn o f time had developed independently and who represented a high spiritual and cultural stage (Sorensen 1986). This also meant that it was increasingly the most remote periods that were o f interest. This was probably attributable to their remoteness providing greater freedom to assign them specific characteristics, as well as the desire for disassociation from history. A remarkable outcome is that, apart from some isolated early discussions (mainly Worsaae) in connection with the Danish/Germ an bor­ der (Adriansen 1990: 53—4), there are hardly any expansionist tendencies in the nineteenth-century political use o f archaeology, or rather they were sup­ pressed in the official institutionalized structures that were coming into being (for a thorough analysis o f the use o f folk culture in the conflict between Danish and German in Southern Jutland, see Adriansen 1990). Arguments for a (re)united Norway—Denmark are also very uncommon in the official writings o f the discipline (i.e. the various journals), and there clearly seems to be an emphasis on accepting the imposed borders and on legitimizing them as the limits o f the people.1 This acceptance and the emphasis on the “ little land” have since then marked the national image. One o f the characteristics o f the “ Danish use” o f the past can be found in exactly this combination o f apparent modesty/acceptance and a simulta­

32

F R O M R A R IT I E S TO N A T I O N A L H E R I T A G E

neous emphasis on the people’s and the nation s unique character. The “ her­ itage from the past” is thus used not merely to support the nation as a demographic and political unit, to a large extent it also participated in push­ ing a consciousness and pride about “ us” , our common roots and heritage, and through that our responsibilities for our future. And, since it is certain, that the perusal o f our glorious ancient tradi­ tions will powerfully contribute to excite the feeling for our independ­ ence o f character, so, is it also certain, that antiquities and barrows, inasmuch as they explain these traditions, have also a deep importance for us, as national memorials. (Worsaae 1849: 149). Show Danish men and women, and not least the Danish youth, how rich a heritage they possess. There are no reasons to cultivate national inferiority complexes (. . .) gain strength and force to build Denmark’s future (. . .) by emerging yourselves in the history o f the Fatherland. (Kock & Falk Hansen 1946: VI). This association between past and future, as mentioned, was established over a short period in the nineteenth century. The Romantic movement created in the beginning o f the nineteenth century an ideological framework that enthroned history and tradition hand in hand with emotions. The Dan­ ish political scene, after the defeat by the English (1801) and later the state bankruptcy (1813), did at the same time create a need for focusing the inter­ est o f the nation somewhere else than on its own present, and the ideological framework did make the choice easy: resurrect the history o f the nation and o f the people. Interest, emphasis, glorification, and research into the national idea and establishing the egenart (unique character, particularity) o f the nation were now the priorities. Already early in the nineteenth century we can see the study o f the past starting to change its form and status in radical ways. From being a hobby exercised by single individuals, it became a profession - and most impor­ tantly it became an institutionalized and centralized national activity (for example, organized recording o f prehistoric monuments conducted through

1. This need possibly explains why the Vikings (who represents an expansionistic phase) have generally played only a modest role in the construction o f Danish identity. This is in con­ trast to Norway and Sweden (Welindcr 1987), w ho at the time underwent very different political transformations. A clear emphasis on the Vikings is a very recent phenom enon, and its obvious association to tourism may suggest that this is responding to others’ image o f the nation rather than an expression o f self-identity.

33

A R C H A E O L O G Y IN N I N E T E E N T H - C E N T U R Y D E N M A R K

the parish vicars) and it was turned into the scenery for studying the heritage and thus for establishing the peoples special character. The increased national political interest in and use o f the past is especially noticeable during the first formative years o f archaeology as a profession within the institutional framework o f Oldsagskommisionen (The Committee for Antiquities) and D et Kongelige Nordiske Oldskrift Selskab (The Royal Nordic Antiquarian Society). These two institutions took it upon themselves respectively in 1807 and 1825 to inform, order and organize communication about the past through the establishment o f a museum, via publications and through the maintenance and study o f antiquities (Klindt-Jensen 1975). The change in the interpretation o f what this means is interesting and can be followed over the ensuing years to reveal growing consciousness about the use o f the past as a platform for political and national manoeuvres. Early in the nineteenth century the aim was to exhibit and inform about finds and objects in order to replace the lack o f written sources for the oldest periods o f history (Annaler 1836: preface). It should be remembered that, at the time, archaeology was financially dependent on (and to a certain extent directed by) the economic powers o f society, since Denmark was an absolute monarchy until 1849. The subject, furthermore, had not as yet become an independent discipline and did not have any links to the university (that happened first in 1855, with Worsaae s professorship in archaeology at Copenhagen University). In the beginning, attention was especially focused on saga texts, early historic sources and, in connection with the antiquities, on ethnographic analogies, especially through references to material from the N orth American Indians (Annaler 1832). The not that few interesting analogue pieces, which are found in col­ lections o f wild nations, weapons and tools, which in a very clear way explain, how our earliest ancestors could have used these items in the infancy o f culture. (Annaler 1832: 422) Com parison between single phenomena was in the foreground, and one meets expressions such as “ weird antiquities” . It was the “ friends o f the past” who spoke, and the aim was to provide general knowledge, which was emphasized. “ Greater light” was spread at the same time as the present com ­ bined with historical sources and ethnography to make the past understand­ able. The past was illuminated through the present, and as yet there was no notion o f the present being enriched by the past (Nordisk Tidsskrift for Oldkyndighed (Nordic Antiquarian Journal) volumes 1832 to 1836 and Annaler for Nordisk Oldkyndighed (og Historie) (Annals of Nordic Antiquarianism (and History)), vols 1837 to 1863).

34

FROM RA R ITIES TO N A T IO N A L H E R IT A G E

This changed in the course o f the 1840s as archaeology became increas­ ingly concerned with the nation’s, and through that the people s, past. It became independent as a profession and as an academic subject, and its clear political involvement became increasingly obvious. Jens Jacob Asmussen Worsaae (1821-85), whose earliest works were financially sponsored by the King, was the leading figure in the generation after Christian Jiirgensen Thomsen. His involvement in National Liberal politics took him to the office o f Minister o f Culture from 1874 to 1875, and his archaeological work was o f widespread national and international importance. His works and his example did much to contribute to the inclusion o f the past in the rebuilding o f Denmark, the nation. The study o f the past now focused attention on the people, as a unit that existed before the present political borders, and which was o f interest to the present. The attention, which already now is paid to the Monuments o f the past, is therefore certainly not without deeper reasons. It is a sign that the Danish people in its coming higher development will not blindly follow behind other countries, but that it rather, by turning the eye in­ side towards itself, will unite the strength o f the past with the wisdom o f the present and thus educate itself independently and free. (Worsaae 1843: 116) The specific position that archaeology still has in Danish national con­ sciousness was to a large extent founded in this period from the early 1840s to the 1860s. The last stages in the formation o f the subject as an independ­ ent discipline and the clear formulation o f its role in society can be traced to this period. Archaeology had now become a profession with a professor, research committees, full-time employees and museums in all major cities, and one that presented itself as having a contribution to contemporary soci­ ety. The emphasis on the past, as something from which we should learn, furthermore inspired the poets and painters o f that period, and it was being used by its politicians and teachers. Through this the past became part o f the present and it became an integral part o f the idea o f “ Danish identity” . It was used to legitimize the nineteenth-century borders and restraints as “ natural” , but its impact went beyond this particular context. Thus, from the time o f the Napoleonic war until the 1860s, the interest in the past changed from being about individual curiosity and antiquarianism to an institutionalized attention towards the nation s (pre)history. The past was used to create a myth o f the nation and the people, which from the dawn o f time had existed as an unmixed, independent and free people with a highly developed spiritual and cultural life.

35

A R C H A E O L O G Y IN N I N E T E E N T H - C E N T U R Y D E N M A R K

The material expressions and symbolic reflection o f this association is seen in the transference and detachment o f archaeological objects and monuments from their original prehistoric or archaeological contexts and their sub­ sequent inclusion in present activities and concerns: paintings o f the army include barrows in the background and the butter became Lurpak (see below).

What national identity was created? Starting from the significant observation that much o f the factual archaeol­ ogy was actually ignored in this use o f the past (Sorensen 1986), we can now look at what the past was used to create by tracing which aspects o f the past were selected and extracted from archaeology. The past referred to in con­ temporary culture is a popular and politically constructed past rather than the archaeological past. When investigating the uses and references to the past in popular culture it becomes clear that an established repertoire o f references was created at this time. It is composed o f references to three archaeological objects, the lur, the sun-wagon and the “ Golden Horns” , and to one m on­ ument group, the barrows (koempeh0j e / “ Giants, Graves” ). These stand out from the rest as particularly popular, commonly used in national contexts, being integrated in national symbols and used by the state (such as on money and stamps), having clear political and emotional significance, appearing in logos and more recently in advertisements (Fig. 2.1). They are common property, and they appear laden with strong emotions and powerful symbol­ ism2. It is difficult to understand why exactly these aspects o f the available archaeological record were selected and had the ability to remain within the sphere o f national symbolism. It is, however, possible to define their shared characteristics further and thus possibly suggest what in particular they were used for, to establish the identity they were used to create and which groups o f the population this was primarily aimed at. The objects and the barrows served slightly different needs and relate to different sociocultural concerns. The three object types are primarily all unusual and remarkable in comparison with the general archaeological record. However, this cannot be the decisive criterion since we have other objects that are clearly archaeologically outstanding but which nonetheless did not gain national importance or were not incorporated in the national 2. As an illustration o f the almost sacred symbolic nature o f “ The Golden H orns” , their inclusion in the ceremonies surrounding the reunion o f northern Schlesw ig-H olstein to D enm ark in 1920 serves well.

36

W H A T N A T IO N A L ID E N T IT Y W AS C R E A T E D ?

Figure 2.1 Im ages o f the past used in contem porary contexts. (a) A prehistoric barrow appears as the cen­ tral image in the member's plate issued by the central organization o f the Jutland guild o f hairdressers. (b) Exam ples o f stamps using prehistoric barrows or a sun-chariot as their central motifs.

37

A R C H A E O L O G Y IN N I N E T E E N T H - C E N T U R Y D E N M A R K

paraphernalia. This is most clearly illustrated by the fact that the Nydam boat, despite actually playing a certain role in connection with the drawing o f the Danish/Germ an border in 1864 (Klindt-Jensen 1975: 76; 0rsn es 1969), did not remain o f national importance and did not become a symbol. Likewise, an object like the Gundestrup cauldron, which from an archaeo­ logical point o f view surely is one o f the more outstanding objects from Europe, never attracted the public attention to the same extent. Those objects, which appear to have gained an especially prominent national posi­ tion must therefore be further characterized. An obvious further character­ istic is that all three object types are made locally in contrast to, for example, the Gundestrup cauldron, and they are therefore not only remarkable but also Danish. They are also striking, beautiful and very skilled products o f outstanding technical and artistic qualities. For the types in question, it is furthermore the case that they appeal easily to the imagination and provide a colourful platform on which intuition and fantasy can play. They are objects that can be connected in an apparendy straightforward way with the communal social ceremonies and processions o f the past. Furthermore, such activities are presented as repeatedly happen­ ing, being staged and participated in by past communities. The activities are also imagined as collective activities, maybe under the leadership o f a few powerful individuals, but nonetheless conducted by the people as such images for which there is no archaeological basis. They are presented as part o f recurrent activities, as part o f an eternal cycle (Fig. 2.2). In subtle ways they seem to hint that the past goes on. These objects can therefore be asso­ ciated with a living past, an active past. Such objects could stand in for and symbolize the ritual togetherness o f society as an almost God-given eternal state. What is created is a mythical social prehistory, o f which we are the inheritors, rather than a presentation o f archaeological knowledge. The objects are therefore used entirely to communicate a particular image o f the past or o f desired social virtues, and it is through their abilities to represent the desired image that they become and remain national symbols - part o f the paraphernalia o f popular culture. The picture created is vividly illustrated from contemporary historic paintings, poems and poetry and from school material. The collective aspect o f society is emphasized and reflected by the chosen objects, and the part o f the archaeological record that might relate to the individual is not empha­ sized in the selection o f objects or symbols. In that connection it is further­ more interesting to emphasize that the past that is presented always portrays a society where the objects are used, and in particular reflects on their cere­ monial usage. The lurs, for example, are eternally blowing for assembly, the sun-wagon is driven into/over the scene/village/place, and the Golden

38

W H A T N A T I O N A L I D E N T I T Y WAS C R E A T E D ?

Figure 2.2 Objects as active in the past and engaging with the present. (a) A popular image o f life in the Bronze Age (after Dreyer 1901). (b) The lurs have been used in many political contexts as a symbol o f “ awakening” as in this example o f a 1920s election poster from Schlesw ig-Holstein; the Danish text reads “ Wake up and vote D anish” , and the “ roadsigns” show the Danish lions and the Germ an eagle respectively with the associated images o f day and night.

Horns are used by the chief/king at banquets, feasts or similarly special occa­ sions (Fig. 2.3). It is the participation in these activities that is emphasized. At the same time, such activities are not archaeologically established, and the archaeological “ reality” o f these objects as sacrifices or deposited objects is ignored, actively forgotten, and not reflected in the public/national image in which they are presented.

39

A R C H A E O L O G Y IN N I N E T E E N T H - C E N T U R Y D E N M A R K

The last image, the barrows, clearly has a prominent position in Danish national consciousness. The remains o f antiquity thus bind us more firmly to our native land; hills and vales, fields and meadows, become connected with us, in a more intimate degree; for by the barrows, which rise on their surface, and the antiquities, which they have preserved for centuries in their bosom, they constantly recall to our recollection, that our forefathers lived in this country from time immemorial. (Worsaae 1849: 150) W hen in foreign parts we see Denmark for our inner eye it was often a beech forest or a barrow (. . .) or an old whitewashed village church. (Kock Sc Falk Hansen 1946: viii) This image, I suggest, was used to promote a particular group within the society: the freehold peasant. The socio-economic background for such attention was the need for agricultural improvement and expansion through

Figure 2.3

The Golden H orns. T h e horns appear on many items o f popular culture including these postcards: (a) card, sent 19 June 1916, showing a drawing o f the horns with the text merely recording the dates o f their discovery; (b) card, sent 12 O ctober 1920, show­ ing the celebration at D ybbol Banke (the battlefield o f 1864) at the reunion o f 1920: the copies o f the Golden H orns are placed on either side o f the king.

40

W H A T N A T I O N A L I D E N T I T Y WAS C R E A T E D ?

land reclamation. This emphasis was at the time particularly well summa­ rized in the motto o f the Danish Heath Society: “ For every loss, compensa­ tion can be found again / What is lost without, must be won within” . As in other countries, large parts o f the land were at the time lying waste because o f their marginal productive character and, during the nineteenth century, this was recognized as a potential resource for the rebuilding o f the land, a process in which the newly created class o f independent farmers were the heroes and pioneers. The peasants accordingly were now sung about as those who built the land, then and now,; and the barrows are emphasized as the vis­ ible monuments o f their/our farming ancestors. This was nationalism on the domestic level. It was not about rituals and sacredness, but about farmers just like us. It is therefore significant that the representation o f this image was readily available and could easily be comprehended. The barrows, especially the so called koempehoje, were superbly suited. Barrows, as the traces o f the ancestors in the landscape, are without any doubt the most marked and easily accessible aspect o f the remote past, and this was even more obvious in the nineteenth century, when the barrows in many parts o f the country were a prominent and centralizing aspect o f the visual landscape, such as the com­ mon phenomena o f churches being located next to barrows. Thus, barrows were a distinct element o f the immediate, local landscape, they were very highly visible, and they were there in the midst o f your own daily life to be experienced. In the creation o f national symbols it is often important that the phenom­ ena selected can be understood and can participate in the daily life and reality o f those social groups at which they are aimed. For the Danish peasants in the nineteenth century, the barrows were a perfect choice. These monu­ ments from the past were an easily recognized part o f their own surroundings and they were at the same time mystical (as reflected in their general as well as specific names). The barrows were the clearest possible proof that the Danish peasants walked in the footsteps o f their ancestors, and that they were taking up the heritage given to them from the past. Against the background o f these associations, it can be suggested that the identity whose creation was attempted in the nineteenth century, and which has influenced Danish self-image and understanding since then, to a large extent aimed at the peasant population by emphasizing the past that sur­ rounded them in their daily work. This interest in the “ people” is further­ more documented by a change in focus within the archaeological institu­ tions. This change has been interpreted as a general democratizing and decentralizing tendency in the years after the abolition o f the absolute mon­ archy (1849). The change consists in the establishment o f local museums for the local population (Kristiansen 1978: 295; 1993: 24-5), as well as in the

41

A R C H A E O L O G Y IN N I N E T E E N T H - C E N T U R Y D E N M A R K

academic rejection o f the comparative studies and international contacts that had characterized the archaeological journal Annaler for Nordisk Old­ kyndighed og Historie. Critique was expressed o f the form and focus o f archae­ ological studies, it was stated that the research conducted had been too inaccessible for the broad public and that the international contacts had been too expensive (in comparison to their importance; 0rsnes 1966: 132). The Danish people should be the focus o f research and they should be given access to their own prehistoric heritage. The barrows therefore gradually became a signifier o f the sentiment o f a relationship between the people and the land. It is worth noticing that such barrows commonly became parts o f the landscape image, both as represented in settings in the photographer s studio, stage backdrops and, most signifi­ cantly, as part o f military paintings, as they legitimize the nation and the citizen’s role in its defence (Fig. 2.4). In summary, during the first half o f the nineteenth century a small cultural elite was instrumental in using aspects o f the archaeological record to emphasize particular virtues in the national mentality. These were primarily concerned with establishing pride in the people and through that the nation. Togetherness, artistic skills, and an industrious, peaceful people were por­ trayed. The historical depth, the strength o f the community as an entity, and its eternal qualities, were used as sources o f pride and gratification. Being Danish and a member o f the Danish people were, despite contemporary political and economic disasters, given qualities that made these strong and inspiring emotions. It is obvious that only some aspects o f the available archaeological data were included in the creation o f the national identity and used in the legiti­ mization o f the nation. Furthermore, it is also only certain types o f objects or monuments that continue to contain and reflect national symbolic mean­ ing (possibly as relics, such as Lurpak butter). Against the background o f the character o f those aspects o f the past that were selected and used, it is sug­ gested that the past desired and stressed in nineteenth-century Denmark was about peace, communality, and unity. By emphasizing this aspect o f the past, the national identity was enforced, and the people were increasingly taught to see themselves as a naturally closed group that gained strength from itself and its past. The peasants became a metaphor for the image and the process o f reclaiming strength internally. It was stressed that the land and peasants had grounded the Danish past, and that the future was resting on these same strengths. The barrows as a sign o f the heritage followed the warriors to the battlefield and was the reflection o f the peasants. And, increasingly, the work o f the latter was being depicted and written about as a patriotic contribution o f similar worth and importance as formerly that o f the soldier.

42

W H A T N A T IO N A L I D E N T IT Y WAS C R E A T E D ?

Figure 2.4 Barrows as part o f landscape and identity. (a) A painting o f the army with a barrow in the background (N. Habbe, 1848, “ R eserveSoldater pa M arch” (Reserve soldiers on the march)). (b) A backdrop used in a photo­ graphers studio from 1871.

43

A R C H A E O L O G Y IN N I N E T E E N T H - C E N T U R Y D E N M A R K

As the sociopolitical needs for this image faded and the archaeological objects had become established parts o f the national cultural and mental structures, we see various changes both in how they are articulated and how they are used. For example, they slide down the scale from high literature and poetry (high culture) to advertisements, slogans, and political campaigns (low culture). There are two interesting observations to make regarding this, which relate to the analysis o f the use o f objects in the construction o f national identity. The first is that, as these objects had become established in the national self-understanding in terms o f what it is they stand for, then they need no further elaboration or explanation even when they are moved into very different contexts. The meaning and values assigned to these signs stick to them as they move into different contexts, in fact they become a vehicle that can carry meaning into new areas. Secondly, since the nationalistic sentiments are still attached to the symbol, their use in very different and mundane domains must be a very uncontrollable way for such sentiments affecting many different experiences and apparently totally unrelated situa­ tions. As an example, the lur, as mentioned, is one o f the archaeological objects frequently used. Initially it is presented and interpreted in terms o f a desired image o f past society, and it becomes profoundly associated with Danishness and Danish village life. In this it becomes detached from any attempt at archaeological contextualization and in itself it is the symbol repre­ senting certain qualities. We therefore start to see it used in that capacity in society at large, such as in the Dairy U nion’s logo, on Danish political posters in the 1920 election in Schleswig-Holstein, and as the logo on the butter Lurpak. In all these contexts the lur signifies Denmark and Danish and at a lower level o f significance also something about quality —and to me, being Danish is emotional. Lurpak butter at the same time also illustrates how the gradual transformation o f the message can involve very drastic changes as the name Lurpak now has begun to be used alone and have implication even without the visual presence o f the figurative lur (Fig. 2.5). The significance o f this case study is that it shows, even in this extremely abbreviated form, the cultural investment in nationalistic sentiments and how the past provides images and virtues that are strongly desired. But it also illus­ trates, and this may be more significant as it is a much more subtle phenom­ enon, how the values established permeated into different levels o f society.

44

CON CLUD IN G REMARKS

Figure 2.5 The wrappings from Lurpak butter with both name and logo referring to Bronze Age lurs.

Concluding rem arks We should not be misled by a curious but understandable paradox: m odern nations and all their impedimenta generally claim to be the opposite o f novel, namely rooted in the remotest antiquity, and the opposite o f constructed, namely human communities so “ natural” as to require no definition other than self-assertion. (Hobsbawm 1983: 14) I should like to conclude by emphasizing that our understanding o f the role o f archaeology should not primarily be conducted by “ us” as archaeologists, but should rather rise from our simultaneous roles as members o f a public and o f a discipline. The public is not only them, but also it is us. An ambiguity between the past created by archaeologists and that o f society at large is clearly expressed in various uses o f the past for political and ideological pur­ poses. The involvement o f us, the public, is especially powerful when these purposes draw upon emotional involvement and where the past is being linked with a present sense o f identity and belonging. The potential strength o f the past as a stage for ideological exercises is therefore only secondarily

45

A R C H A E O L O G Y IN N I N E T E E N T H - C E N T U R Y D E N M A R K

related to the work o f the archaeologists. Furthermore, the impact and the emotional power o f these dimensions in the uses o f the past cannot be fully appreciated if we separate ourselves from those subjected to these influences. To comprehend fully the social importance o f the past(s) we must allow for a simultaneous academic and emotional involvement in the subject matter, or alternatively its emotional potency will be reduced to a superficial tracing o f associated elements. The case study shows the explicit use o f archaeology in the creation o f a national identity. It relates this use to specific social and political needs o f that time, and furthermore suggests that these were the needs o f particular social groups, although largely assigned to the society at large or the peasants spe­ cifically. The important point is that this was a past created and desired - an invented past. Meanwhile, although this association was created in a partic­ ular sociopolitical context o f the nineteenth century, the characteristics o f the then-created nation and national identity have remained alive to today. Thus, an emphasis on the past as a part o f ourselves can be observed as a continuous element in the expression o f a “ Danish identity” . Its intensity and conscious political aims have varied through time, but it has nonetheless continuously participated in legitimating and making natural the created national/social need to merge the remote past with the present. Its position and importance have been reproduced through national symbols such as the blowers o f the lurs and through the national songs, and it has become synthesized and fossilized in a national mythology about the people s special character. The case shows how the specific usage made o f the past is uniquely dependent on the particular context o f use. Moreover, it makes it clear that no use o f the past can be said to be “ natural” , predictable or necessary. O n the contrary, it is but one o f the means through which society can commu­ nicate various social interests and messages. The link between the past and the present is, however, a peculiar emotionally laden association, and that makes it dangerous!

Acknowledgem ents For inspiring and constructive comments on my original research on this topic I should like to thank C. Evans and E. & T. Vestergard. For comments and advice on the version published as Sorensen 1986, A. Knudsen and E. and T. Vestergard deserve much thanks, and I would like to acknowledge Torben for making me aware o f the past being defenceless.

46

B IB L IO G R A P H Y

Bibliography Adriansen, I. 1990. Fcedrelandet, folkeminderne og modersmalet. Brug affolkeminder ogfolkesprog i mtionale identitetsprocesser iscer belyst udfra striden melletn dansk og tysk i Sondetjylland. Sonderborg: M useum sradet for Sondeijyllands Amt. Anderson, B. 1983. Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. London: Verso. Annalerfor Nordisk Oldkyndighed (og Historie). 1837-1863. Dreyer, W. 1901. Danmarks folk. Copenhagen: D et Nordiske Forlag. Folkelwjskolens Sangbog 1969. 15th edn. Odense: Foreningfor Hojskoler og Landbrugsskoler. Gellner, E. 1983. Nations and nationalism. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Hobsbaw m , E. 1983. Introduction: Inventing traditions. In Hobsbawm & R anger (1983), 1 15). Hobsbaw m , E. & T. R an ger (eds) 1983. The invention of tradition. Cam bridge: Cam bridge University Press. Klindt-Jensen, O. 1975. A history of Scandinavian archaeology. London: Thames & Hudson. Kock, H. & A. Falk Hansen (eds) 1946. Dansk Daad. Copenhagen: Steen Hasselbalchs. Kristiansen, K. 1978. Dansk arkaeologi - fortid og fremtid. Fortid og Nutid XXVIl(3), 279-319. — 1981. A social history o f Danish archaeology (1805-1975). In Towards a history of archaeol­ ogy, G. D aniel (ed.), 20-44. London: Thames & Hudson. — 1993. “ The strength o f the past and its great might” : an essay on the use o f the past. Journal of European Archaeology 1, 3-32. Nordisk Tidsskriftfor Oldkyndighed. 1832-1836. Olw ig, K. 1984. Nature's ideological landscape: a literary and geographic perspective on its development and preservation on Denmark's Jutland Heath. London: Allen & Unwin. Orsnes, M. 1966. Arboger for nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie. 1866-1966. Arboger for nordisk Oldkyndighed og Historie, 131-4. — 1969. Forord. In Sonderjyske og fynske mosefund (vol. I). C. Engelhardt, reproduction edition. Copenhagen: Z A C . Ostergard, U. & V. Wahlin 1984. National identitet o f national sang i Danmark i det 19. arhundrede. N YT, Center for Kulturforsking 20, 38-40. Petersen, C. S. 1938. Stenalder. Broncealder. Jernalder. Bidrag til Nordisk Arkceologis Litteratur historie 1776-1868. Copenhagen: Levin & Muunksgaard. Sorensen, M . L. S. 1986. . . . foie oldtidens kraft til nutidens klogt. . . Stofskifle 13, 35-46. Sorensen, M . L. S. & D . Uzzell 1993. Constructing and deconstructing national identities: the role o f the past in the present. Paper presented at the conference on “ C hanging European identities: social psychological analyses o f social change” , Farnham, England. Stybe, E. 1972. Idehistorie. Vorkulturs ideerog tanker i historiskperspektiv, 4th edn. Copenhagen: Gyldendal. Welinder, S. 1987. Arkeologiske bilder. Oslo: Universitetets Oldsakssamling (Varia 14). Worsaae, J. J. A. 1843. Danmarks Oldtid oplyst ved Oldsagerog Gravhoje. Copenhagen: Selskabet for Trykkefrihedens rette Brug. — 1849. Primeval antiquities of Denmark. London: John Henry Parker.

47

CHAPTER THREE

French archaeology: between national identity and cultural identity Alain Schnapp

In a country that possesses a long national tradition and whose structure is one o f the most centralized possible, the place o f archaeology is paradoxical. The creation o f a public archaeological service has come very late, the role o f archaeology in cultural life (exhibitions, novels, films) is limited, and the fame o f archaeologists is slight. I do not know o f any contemporary French archaeologist who has enjoyed a reputation equivalent to that o f M ortimer W heeler or Glyn Daniel in Britain, let alone that o f Manolis Andronikos in Greece.

Archaeology, a dom inated discipline In France, archaeology has always been the servant o f history, a dominated discipline in the sense in which Bourdieu uses the term. In France, historians have often been people in public life (or vice versa): one only needs to think o f Benjamin Constant or o f Thiers, and certainly in academic circles o f Jules Michelet, o f Fustel de Coulanges, o f Camille Jullian, o f Marc Bloch, indeed o f Fernand Braudel. The only archaeologist o f the end o f the nineteenth cen­ tury to have achieved fame o f this sort was the curator o f the M useum o f National Antiquities at St Germain en Laye, Salomon Reinach. But this fame was related more to his moral and political activities (he was the brother o f the famous Dreyfusard Joseph Reinach), and the trials and tribulations o f a symbolic fake o f which he was the convinced defender, the tiara o f Saitaphernes. Under the influence o f Capetian jurists (for the role o f the clerics in the

48

ARCHAEOLOGY, A DOM INATED DISCIPLIN E

definition o f the monarchy, see Huppert 1970, Guenee 1986, BarretKriegel 1988), French culture has always given priority to the written sources over others. French antiquarians o f the Renaissance and the modern period were, with a few exceptions, commentators on classical texts, numis­ matists and iconographers, and French scholarship did not produce topo­ graphical writers such as Camden in England, Bure in Sweden or W orm in Denmark (Schnapp 1993). Since the Renaissance, French antiquarians have been fascinated by Rom an antiquities: one only has to remember in this context the excavations o f Rabelais and o f Cardinal du Bellay in R om e. It is not that France lacked antiquarians, but they were, in contrast to the AngloSaxons, men o f the towns who surveyed the landscape via their informants or touts. A man such as the Lyons doctor, Jacob Spon, is an isolated figure whose taste for Greece, which led him to an extraordinary journey to the Orient, did not divert him from the antiquities o f the Lyons area (Etienne & Mossiere 1993). In contrast to antiquarians from Scandinavia and Great Britain, lovers o f French antiquity did not need to find in the countryside a supplement to the noble or monastic archives so well maintained by lawyers or the various ecclesiastical communities. It could be said that by the eve o f the Revolution certain important fea­ tures o f the relationship between the French and archaeology were already in place. The antiquarians were men from the capital who were interested above all, like the famous Montfaucon, in classical antiquities. They were lit­ tle attracted by the exploration o f the land: the Comte de Caylus, with Winckelmann certainly one o f the most brilliant antiquarians o f the eight­ eenth century, was a theoretician, an observer, a collector o f ideas and tech­ nical facts, but not a man o f the land like Rudbeck in Sweden or Stukeley in England. With him there was no messianic evangelism as with Rudbeck, no desire to establish a continuity between the religion o f the ancient inhabit­ ants o f the kingdoms o f Great Britain and the Church o f England, as with Stukeley, but an almost positivist wish to explain and to classify, to make o f the antiquarian a natural philosopher (Denis 1993). Although for various reasons European archaeologies o f the eighteenth century were already col­ oured by ethnic and nationalist interests (the role o f the Goths in Scandina­ via, relations between Germans and Celts in Germany, contacts with Scandinavians, Gauls and French in Britain), French antiquarians, like Italian antiquarians o f the same period, left debates o f this type to historians who tore each other apart from the Renaissance onwards to know whether the French were Gauls, Franks or Romans. This kept the antiquarians isolated from discussions that now seem to us ridiculous but, at the same time, this lack o f curiosity about local or national questions held back the interest o f the knowledgeable public in archaeology: the antiquarian curiosity o f the

49

FRENCH ARCHAEOLOGY: NATIONAL

& CULTU RA L ID EN TITY

French was less specific, more universal than that o f other Europeans o f the period. This is also apparent from the institutional point o f view. While in Scandinavia the idea o f the creation and development o f a public archaeol­ ogy service appeared at this time, and while in Germany and England local initiatives were flourishing, the taste for antiquities in France seems to have been limited to the “ great state bodies” . It was the religious communities, the administrators, the civil engineers who gave their support to the enquir­ ies o f Caylus, or later o f Turgot or Necker (Pinon 1991). The taste for the past, which united all European elites, was in France more centralized and more in state control than elsewhere.

Revolution and the idea o f the nation In a way the Revolution served to accentuate these early features. The dis­ solution o f the Academies, the emergence o f the idea o f the nation, and the overturning o f the propertied regime were to have contrasting consequences on curiosity about the past. The disappearance o f religious communities, in particular the Maurists, was indubitably a catastrophe o f the first order for the practice o f humanist research. It was the same with the universities and the academies. Conversely, the creation o f central schools, and o f the M useum o f Natural History, and the transformation o f the Louvre into a museum would have a happy influence on antiquarian studies (Chastel 1986). The Abbe Gregoire did indeed invent the term “vandalism” to describe the many acts o f destruction that would affect French heritage, but against the vandals were ranged exceptional personalities such as Alexandre Lenoir and his M usee des Monuments Fran^ais, which was to be the model for an historic and national museology, but was unfortunately destroyed by the Restoration (Poulot 1986). What characterized French antiquarians at the beginning o f the nine­ teenth century was disruption. Disruption o f a particular way o f doing his­ tory restricted to ecclesiastics and nobility, disruption o f the universalist curiosity o f the preceding period. The revolutionary antiquarian par excel­ lence was Legrand d’Aussy, who saw himself as the founder o f an archaeol­ ogy o f France (Laming-Emperaire 1964): a great reader o f his Anglo-Saxon predecessors, he wanted to base the history o f France on a funerary chro­ nology that came from the land, from excavations, from finds: an active pro­ gramme that contrasted with that o f a Caylus or o f a Beaumenil, who saw the basis o f the discipline in drawing. Legrand d’Aussy took up from the European topographical writers the idea o f excavation, o f the exploration o f

50

TH E FO G OF C E L T IC O RIGINS AND TH E FLO O D

the soil; he was not looking for precious objects, he was no longer haunted by the mirage o f classical antiquity, he wanted to understand the succession o f human settlement in this land called France. His programme was thus one o f a national (not a nationalist) archaeology, and with that went opposition to fanatics o f all types such as Coret la Tour d’Auvergne (the best known o f N apoleon’s grenadiers) or Cambry who, carried away in a holy fervour o f pan-Celticism, wanted to resurrect the Gauls, doubly betrayed by the R om ans and the Franks (Pomian 1992). The beginning o f the nineteenth century coincided in France with the romantic movement, and was the occasion o f a Celtic cult that had as its equivalent only the craze for Ossian or the success o f the Germans in Germany. But the French drama stemmed from the fact that the first event o f national history was identified with the defeat o f Alesia rather than the victory in the Teutoburg forest: to expurgate this primitive drama required no less than a century o f denial and erudite toil.

The fog o f Celtic origins and the flood Glyn Daniel has shown how the archaeology o f the first half o f the nineteenth century was paralyzed by two major obstacles: the fog and the flood (Daniel & Renfrew 1986). The Celtic question in France came into both these cat­ egories. The Celts were situated in the fog because practically nothing could be said about their origins, and they were attached to the flood because many antiquarians, beginning with Cambry, attributed to them the construction o f the megaliths. The basic problem for antiquarians thus consisted in break­ ing out o f the vicious circle o f diluvial chronology in order to give to the finds, ever increasing in number and thus suggestive o f a long past, a place in their chronological system. It is striking to note that it was in Scandinavia, thanks in particular to the innovative work o f Christian Jiirgensen Thomsen (KlindtJensen 1975), that a new chronological system was to appear, classification according to the three ages o f stone— bronze— iron, while the discoveries o f many French antiquarians, and especially o f Boucher de Perthes, showed that fossil humans existed as contemporaries with fossil animals. If the discovery o f protohistory was in most cases a national enterprise in which Scandinavians, Germans and English were successively the principal investors, the discovery o f prehistory was an international enterprise that Boucher de Perthes would never have brought to fruition without the help o f the English geologists. The fact that France has been the eponymous ter­ ritory o f the major classifications o f the stone age perhaps explains the long stagnation o f later prehistory (protohistory) in France. But doubtless it

51

FRENCH ARCHAEOLOGY: NATIONAL

& C U LTU R A L ID EN TITY

should also be seen as one o f the effects o f the break between Paris and the provinces. Certainly the growth o f prehistory was the fruit o f observations o f the land undertaken by a variety o f people, o f whom the most prestigious were provincials: Jouannet, Tournal, Boucher de Perthes and Lartet. But this debate had its roots in Paris, at the Academie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, at the Academie des Sciences and at the Musee d’Histoire (Grayson 1983, R ichard 1992). The same thing did not happen with the more recent past, from protohistory to the R om an period. N o more in nineteenth cen­ tury France were there great encyclopaedic enterprises like those o f M ontfaucon and Caylus. Enquiries such as those o f Com te Alexandre de Laborde (1816), “ The monuments o f France chronologically classified and considered in relation to historical facts and the study o f the arts” , were the continuation o f projects from the preceding century, hardly innovative except for the quality o f the reproductions. This stagnation o f method and enterprise can perhaps be explained by the fact that there were no longer nobles and clerics with the means necessary to support research o f this kind, and that the state was not yet endowed with institutions capable o f replacing the lost patrons. It was, however, in this context that a naturalist and antiquarian, AubinLouis Millin (1759-1818), invented the term antiquites nationales (national antiquities): Millin applied this title to a collection o f five volumes, which he published (1790) with the following subtitle: “ Collection of monuments of use for the general and particular history of France, such as tombs, inscriptions, statues, windows, frescoes etc . . . taken from abbeys, monasteries, castles and other places which have become national properties” . The link that Millin established

between the past o f a country and the idea o f nation is clear. Like Legrand d’Aussy and Abbe Gregoire, he was struck by the threats o f destruction hanging over the historic heritage in a country in the grip o f social turmoil on a scale unparalleled to this day; also he was seeking to reconcile the ideals o f the Enlightenment and the acts o f the revolutionaries. Antiquities were not just Greek, Rom an, or Celtic, they became national. In so doing, the term took on a wider meaning, and the medieval and modern world became part o f archaeology, in the wider definition that was henceforth applied to it: in fact it looks like a much more contemporary idea than that o f Caylus. Millin was an active supporter o f a new word, used already in the seven­ teenth century by Jacob Spon, the antiquarian from Lyons, but to which he gave a much wider sense than did his predecessors: . . . archaeology is thus the knowledge o f all that relates to the manners and customs o f the ancients: he who possesses it is called an archaeolo­ gist, and more vulgarly an antiquarian; however, one applies the

52

B I R T H OF A C O N S C I E N C E OF P A T R IM O N Y

former term more commonly to him who studies the manners and customs, and the latter to him who studies the monuments; the latter is also called an archaeographer. (Millin 1826, 3-4) In France at least, the idea o f archaeology and the notion o f national antiquities were contemporary. They illustrate the slow emergence o f the modern form o f a discipline characterized at the same time by the expansion o f its focus (archaeologists are interested in the past from the most distant antiquities up to the modern period) and by its ideological importance in the constitution o f a national history. Like Thomsen in Denmark, and Biisching and Lindenschmidt in Germany, the archaeologists o f the nineteenth cen­ tury were discovering the national dimension o f their discipline. In Germany, a country badly treated by Napoleon and its division into kingdoms and principalities, pan-Germanism was in a way the crucible o f archaeology. In France the situation was different. National unity had been a reality for some long time, and for a long time too royal power had main­ tained privileged relationships with historians, whose knowledge was offi­ cially protected by the monarchy. The archaeologists o f the revolutionary period, Legrand d ’Aussy, Millin, and certainly Alexandre Lenoir, encap­ sulated continuity in a way; they were looking to preserve for the nation what their predecessors had offered to the king. Theoreticians o f a Gaulish pan-Celticism, such as Cambry and La Tour d’Auvergne, had only a limited influence, because in antiquarian circles Rom an antiquities and the neoclas­ sical tradition largely prevailed over the Gauls, who barely merited a place in the emergence o f national feeling: between the Gauls and the membership o f the nation there has always been in France something like a gap.

Birth o f a conscience o f patrim ony Thus, the idea o f national antiquities had little or no ethnic connotations in the first half o f the nineteenth century; it corresponded to a revolutionary heritage looking to modernize a vision o f the past inherited from the men o f the Enlightenment (Chastel 1986). The July monarchy (1830-48: initiated by the revolution o f July 1830) had demonstrated a desire to nationalize the past in endowing the state with the necessary institutions for protecting the past. The foundation o f the Ecole de Chartes (School o f Palaeography) in 1821 already represented a step towards the creation o f a public service de memoire (heritage service), which would be completed in 1834 under the inspiration o f Guizot (Theis 1986) by the Comite des travaux historiques

53

FRENCH ARCHAEOLOGY: NATIONAL

& CULTURAL IDENTITY

(Committee for Historic Works) destined to favour the study o f the monu­ mental heritage; the same year also saw the foundation o f a Commission des travaux historiques (Commission for Historic Works), which, under the direction o f Prosper Merimee, was to take charge o f the protection and res­ toration o f historic monuments (Fermigier 1986). But this desire to give to the state the means o f listing and studying the monuments was unfortunately to find its limitations in the relegation o f archaeology to an ancillary position. Parisian culture could cope with the idea o f restoring and drawing monuments, but it lacked curiosity for objects, for the soil, for the very essence o f archaeological research. The failure and the dispersal o f the work o f Alexandre Lenoir and his M useum o f French Monuments had prevented the capital from having at its disposal a collection o f national antiquities equivalent to those in London, Copenhagen and the major towns in Germany. The suggestions o f Legrand d’Aussy regarding an archaeological exploration o f Gaul based on systematic excavations had not met with any more success. This absence o f archaeological understanding did not signify an absence o f national feeling. On the contrary, the French school o f history that had been created fully asserted the mystical dimension o f national identity. Among historians such as the brothers Augustin and Amedee Thierry, or Henri Martin, among such men as Arbois de Jubainville, the three components o f the “ French nation” , Gaulish, R om an and Frankish, had passed through the filter o f philological and textual critique but, without excavations and without museums, archaeology’s contribution was minimal. Guizot and the Thierry brothers represent a type o f history that gives a central place to the nation and in order to do this picks up the old theme o f opposition, latent throughout the history o f France, between the Gauls and the Germans, embodied in the third estate and the nobility. Published in 1828, Amedee Thierry’s history o f the Gauls ran to ten editions and consti­ tuted the most popular and effective presentation o f the Gaulish myth in the nineteenth century (Hartog 1988: 120-47). It is a poetic representation o f warriors who were to inspire painters and poets, but also, as Pomian (1992: 74-5) has emphasized, an historical reconstruction that borrowed its models from medieval history; the Gauls freed themselves from the druidical theoc­ racy just as the citizens o f the Middle Ages freed themselves from the seigneurial yoke. Thierry crafted the psychological and moral ideal o f the Gaul, all o f whose traits stemmed from the average Frenchman o f the nineteenth century, and he affirmed himself a patriotic Gaul against the R om an invader. In so doing, he sketched the traits o f a Vercingetorix as unifier o f the Gaulish nation, an invention o f his period. Guizot, however, in opposition to this nationalist article o f faith, paid tribute to the peace that Rom an administra-

54

B IR T H OF A C O N S C I E N C E OF P A T R IM O N Y

tion, at the end o f the day, brought to reign in Gaul (Pomian 1992: 76). For in spite o f prophets inspired by the Gaulish dream, the elites and the university remained fundamentally attached to a Rom an Gaul, which active archaeology helped to reveal. With the Second Empire (1852—70) R om e was in fashion. Napoleon III, before funding the excavations at Alesia, was a reader o f Caesar, whom he made the subject o f commentary by the best scholars o f the period. H e set up a commission to make an archaeological map o f the Gauls, which secured the collaboration o f staff officers and schol­ ars. In 1860, Alesia became a sort o f state excavation entrusted to an officer collaborating directly with the emperor (Biichsenschiitz & Schnapp 1992), and in 1867 it was on the Gaulish site par excellence, M ont Beuvray (Bibracte), that Bulliot began his excavations, always with financial aid from the emperor. Even if the emblematic figure o f Vercingetorix was deployed in this period, R om an Gaul and Celtic Gaul appeared as the two faces o f an antique France that a ruler who wished to be thought enlightened would attempt to uncover. The great work, the great success o f Napoleon III would, in the last resort, be the creation o f a museum institution, the lack o f which had been sorely felt. In 1862 the chateau at St Germain was destined to become a GalloR om an museum; it opened in 1867 as a Musee des Antiquites Nationales (Museum o f National Antiquities), a repository for all types o f antiquities from the beginning to the high Middle Ages. Modelled on the museums in Copenhagen and Mainz, the new museum would rapidly become the heart o f French archaeological activity with, at its head, men o f influence such as Alexandre Bertrand and Gabriel de Mortillet, and above all with important technical resources, a conservation laboratory and a cast gallery (Grenier 1931: 63—4). The M useum o f National Antiquities was the first museum institution that claimed to be truly archaeological, in contrast to the Louvre and to Cluny. It appeared as the institutional realization o f an idea that Millin had invented: that o f a past no longer defined solely by cultural variables but which existed in a truly national context. Faced with this official archaeology (which knew how to win for itself good will at the local level, as in the case o f Bulliot and the excavations at M ont Beuvray), the territory o f France was covered with learned societies, all aspiring to rediscover their local past. Arcisse de Caumont (1801-72) could be considered as the most characteristic o f these discoverers o f regional antiquities. From Normandy, he was the theoretician o f the rediscovery o f the national past, the tireless supporter o f the archaeological congresses that annually mobilized all the antiquaries o f the French provinces. Arcisse de Caum ont was there the incarnation o f a type closer to the natural sciences, sharing with Boucher de Perthes a taste for observation, for classification, for

55

FRENCH ARCHAEOLOGY: NATIONAL

& CULTURAL IDENTITY

the land, which contrasted strongly with that o f their predecessors. Michelet emphasized that Caum ont’s colleagues in Normandy were as much anti­ quaries as naturalists (1959: 84). This spirit o f curiosity, this regionalism, was in contrast to Merimee, who saw in it a sort o f private competitor to public initiatives (Berce 1986: 549), and also represented a particular France, that o f traditional society and an aristocracy who would willingly go back to the political order o f the ancien regime.

The Franco-G erm an quarrel Set up by Louis-Philippe and nourished by Napoleon III, a national, if not nationalist, archaeology saw the light o f day during the nineteenth century. The defeat o f 1870 in the Franco-Prussian War served only to reinforce it. Certainly Germany, with its universities, which were unsurpassed at the time, and its archaeological museums such as Mainz and Bonn, seemed to be a stronger and more ambitious rival. But the annexation o f Alsace-Lorraine was to trigger offa sort o f Historikerstreit (historian s war) between French and German historians. For it was no longer just a case o f debating about antiquity, but about Alsace and Lorraine, pieces o f French soil which had been inte­ grated into the empire. Since the Middle Ages, history had been one o f the weapons o f territorial debate in Europe, but never had a question such as that o f Alsace-Lorraine seen a confrontation o f two such developed nation-states over a quarrel o f such a nature. Historical tradition recognized Germanists and Romanists: for a long time in France, the Germanist tradition was no longer tenable. The “ German crisis in French thought” , to quote a famous phrase (the title ofD igeon 1959), was to spread across all the human sciences and to unite such prestigious men as Taine, Renan and Fustel de Coulanges in a demand for self-examination concerning the foundations o f national feeling, and the cultural, ethnic and even racial dimensions that differentiated the German nation from the French. Because this reflection emanated from the camp o f the vanquished, it was charged with anguish and with a wish for revenge. In the Revue des Deux-Mondes, the anatomist Quatrefages demon­ strated that Germany united under the Prussian rod was not a nation but a bi-racial state dominated by Prussians o f Finno—Slav origin (Quatrefages 1871). In a letter to M ommsen, who had become the defender o f Prussian interests in the Italian press, Fustel de Coulanges went on the attack against race as a key to national identity: I am amazed that a historian like you (Mommsen) affects not to know

56

T H E C R A F T S M E N OF S C I E N T I F I C R E F O R M

that it is not race or language which makes nationality. It is not race: cast your eyes on Europe, and you will see clearly that peoples are almost never constituted on the basis o f their primitive origins. G eo­ graphical convenience, political or commercial interests are what has formed populations and founded states. Each nation is thus formed little by little, each fatherland emerges without anyone being preoc­ cupied with these ethnographic matters which you would like to bring into fashion. (LAlsace est-elle allemande ou frangaise? Reponse a M. Mommsen, quoted by Hartog 1988: 379) Faced with triumphant German science and with a conquering German army, Fustel (like Renan) was appealing to a common European ideal that would give to nations a cultural and civilizing dimension. Does the need to have to defend a multi-ethnic and multicultural nation (Fustel admitted that five languages were spoken in France!) explain this denial o f racism among the majority o f French scholars? It is sufficient only to refer to Quatrefages’ theory on the “ Prussian race” to perceive that racism had also taken root in France. Nevertheless it remains true that Paul Broca, the most important personality in physical anthropology in France, did not adhere any more than Fustel and Renan to the idea o f a confusion between race and nation: Whence come, in fact, the races who people Europe? From Europe. Whence come the languages spoken in Europe? From Asia. . .. This is the reason why I could not agree with a doctrine which, starting from too close an assimilation o f language and race, would posit in principle that conformity o f language indicates unity o f stock. (Broca 1864) Craniometry and raciology constituted for anthropologists in the second half o f the nineteenth century a positive instrument o f knowledge, but they did not lead them to exalt race as the cement o f national unity. For scholars after Sedan, the understanding o f defeat and the re-foundation o f French power came through an historical study o f the French nation understood as a social and cultural mixture rather than a racial unity.

The craftsm en o f scientific reform R enan repeated loud and clear that it was not only the German soldier who had conquered France but also the German schoolteacher. To regain its place among the great nations, France needed a thorough review o f its educational

57

FRENCH ARCHAEOLOGY: NATIONAL

& CULTURAL IDENTITY

and university system. In place o f the stagnating universities o f the Second Empire, the Third Republic (1871—1940) was looking to create a network o f universities close to the German model. The best students at the univer­ sities and at the Ecole N or male received bursaries to go to Germany. Louis Liard, the dynamic director o f higher education, encouraged the creation o f libraries and laboratories. Archaeology was not forgotten, for the Sorbonne and later the provincial universities created chairs in the discipline. But most o f the time this was classical archaeology, taught and researched by the former members o f the French School at Athens (created in 1846) and later the French School at R om e (1871). However, Camille Jullian, the most prolific and most famous historian o f Gaul, did indeed teach regional antiquities at Bordeaux before spreading his science o f the “ Gaulish patriot” from the illus­ trious chair at the College de France. But assimilation to Germany (and soon after to Great Britain) was prac­ tised more outside the metropolitan area o f France: in the foundation o f the French Archaeological School at Cairo (1901), in the permanent archaeo­ logical missions in Persia (1897) and in Afghanistan (1922), and in the crea­ tion o f an Algerian Antiquities Service (1923) (Chevalier 1992). Scientific missions abroad played a very dynamic role in the support o f young archae­ ologists whose activity was linked to the development o f the colonial empire (on the creation and role o f the office for scientific expeditions in 1850, see Chevalier 1992: 343—9 and Annex 48—9). This interest in research outside France, which established its pedigree in the expedition to Egypt and M orea, corresponded to a tradition stretching at least as far back as the mission o f the Marquis de Nointel to the Aegean in the reign o f Louis X IV . It was sustained by the interest o f the diplomatic corps and the political class in classical antiq­ uity. D id not Ernest Beule, excavator o f the Acropolis, become Minister o f the Interior, and Charles Henry Waddington, the successor to Renan in the exploration o f the N ear East, Minister o f Education and then, the ultimate distinction, President o f the Council? Clemenceau himself did not hesitate to visit the oriental galleries in the Louvre in order to reassure himself that, contrary to the allegations o f the left-wing press, the Republic’s money was being well spent by the director o f the archaeological mission to Persia (Chevalier 1992: 169). It could be seen that the Republic could set powerful scholars up against prestigious figures such as Gladstone and Disraeli.

58

T H E N E G L E C T OF N A T IO N A L A N T IQ U IT IE S

The neglect o f national antiquities The governments o f the Third Republic up until the First World War con­ centrated their efforts on the development o f a powerful educational machine o f which the primary school teachers were the foot-soldiers, the secondary school professors were the officers, and the university professors the generals. Archaeology thus appeared as much to politicians as to writers to be a disci­ pline susceptible o f convergence with “ the higher interests o f France” (and this theme is still current in ministerial literature in contemporary France). But they neglected, as did British governments o f the time, their famous “ national antiquities” . Certainly the historical myth o f Vercingetorix knew no more intense moment than the days after the defeat, but this infatuation with the Gauls had no effect on institutions. The Museum o f National Antiq­ uities at St Germain en Laye, thanks to the work o f Alexandre Bertrand, Gabriel de Mortillet and Henri Hubert, became one o f the centres o f archae­ ological knowledge, but its activity did not extend to important excavations, or the creation o f regional museums capable o f stimulating the archaeology o f a whole region such as those at Bonn or Trier. The archaeology o f the national territory (and also prehistoric archaeology) remained an archaeology o f amateurs. There was no such thing as a full-time archaeological career. Those rare museums with mainly archaeological collections employed only a curator, frequently part-time. The innovators o f prehistoric archaeology belonged to the scholarly tradition o f the old regime: the best example o f this was Joseph Dechelette, an industrialist from Roanne, nephew o f Bulliot, whose limitless curiosity, sense o f organization and methodical spirit were to lay the foundations o f a protohistory o f Gaul that would finally rival the best products o f British or German scholarship (Binetruy 1994). Dechelette s patriotism led him to die at the front at the age o f 52 in the first few days o f the First World War, but he was the opposite o f a nationalist, and learnt Czech so that he could follow the traces o f his beloved Gauls as far as Bohemia. The university world is well represented by Henri Hubert, student, teacher, curator at the museum at Saint Germain, disciple o f Lucien Herr and eager working companion o f Marcel Mauss, creator o f the gallery o f comparative archaeology at Saint Germain (Strenski & Hubert 1987). An intellectual o f the Durkheimian school, he was not only the first in a long line o f mythologists, and the popularizer o f the sociological approach in archaeological science, but he was also a scrupulous historian o f the Gauls, a notable critic o f the racist roots o f anthropo-biology, and at the same time the heir o f Fustel and Michelet. For him the Gaulish myth, shorn o f its a priori ethnicists, was one way o f capturing the national uniqueness o f France, o f rediscovering an old Celtic foundation, invisible but always present:

59

FRENCH ARCHAEOLOGY: NATIONAL

& CULTURAL IDENTITY

We said above that historians o f France who have written a singularly beautiful history carried within them the spirit o f the Celtic race. But the very history which they have written, the history o f this indestruct­ ible people, o f peasants, warriors and artists, with its glories and its tumults, its hopes and its spirits, its discords and its renaissances, is that not the history o f a nation whose blood and bones have been essentially constituted by the celtic contribution? (Hubert 1932: 395) This severe critic o f all the mythologies o f race and blood, this scrupulous sociologist here uses once again the tone o f Camille Jullian to glorify the Celtic element. This shows that the rationalists o f the Durkheimian school were not without a poetic feeling for national identity. Be that as it may, the attraction o f the majority o f universities to the M ed­ iterranean and the Orient, the resistance o f learned societies who were not anxious to see their activities regulated by the state, and the excessive cen­ tralization that allowed the regional elites few resources to create local or provincial institutions, led to archaeology in France between 1871 and 1939 being the victim o f a state indifference that was expressed in parliament in 1913 when, at the moment o f the vote on the Historic Monuments law, the deputies refused (partly under pressure from the French Prehistoric Society) to pass legislation for archaeology (Grenier 1934: 364-6; Binetruy 1994: 164—9). Neither France in 1914, seething for revenge, nor France bled white in 1918 when it took back Strasbourg, really cared about protecting her antiquities. Admittedly, Albert Grenier, who was to occupy a chair o f national archaeology at Strasbourg before being installed at the College de France, took up the glorious tradition o f Jullian and Dechelette, and brought to completion his Manuel d}archeologie gallo-romaine; yet in France nothing existed between the two wars equivalent to the systematic activity o f Ger­ man and Scandinavian archaeologists who expanded the foundation o f museums and archaeological services, and who adapted legislation and inventories to the constraints o f the modern economy, nothing similar to the reformist movement o f Mortimer Wheeler in Great Britain that was to lead to the development o f regional archaeology in the universities, and to the integration o f archaeology into the maps o f the Ordnance Survey. In 1934, celebrating the centenary o f the Historic Monuments service, Albert Grenier underlined the necessity for intervention by the state and public organizations to defend national archaeology: If it is true that the social class which, at the time ofLouis-Philippe and the Second Empire, set up and developed our museums is in the proc­ ess, if not o f disappearing, at least o f transformation; if it is true that it

60

A R C H A E O L O G Y AND TH E VICHY REGIM E

has lost, in part, its concern for intellectual matters, and for the past o f its land; if it is no longer capable, materially or morally, o f guaranteeing the research, the study and the care o f its monuments or o f taking in hand popular education, let it be replaced; for the outdated organisa­ tions o f the past let better organisations be substituted. But the initia­ tive for this transformation can only come from local power, from communes, departments and regions themselves. (Grenier 1934: 376) It is true that the powerful figure o f the Abbe Breuil and the development o f the Institute o f Human Palaeontology founded by Prince Albert o f M onaco in 1911 (Ferembach 1988) endowed France with an internationally prestigious school o f prehistory, but the small number o f excavators, the absence o f public funding for excavations and the protection o f monuments were to be considered by all commentators on the period as one o f the signs o f crisis for French archaeology (Vaufrey 1941).

Archaeology and the Vichy regim e The situation o f national archaeology in France in the 1930s was dramatic: many foreign researchers, but also some French scholars more lucid than oth­ ers, were astonished by it. Some o f them, such as R . Vaufrey, professor at the Institute o f Human Palaeontology and moving spirit behind the journal L }Anthropologie, did not fail to be seduced by the attention and the resources the German National Socialists had given to prehistory. To the anxious warn­ ings o f Gordon Childe and o f several other English scholars he replied: In concerning themselves, above the conflict o f party politics, with giving the people a feeling o f national dignity and o f the grandeur o f their country, the politicians on the other side o f the Rhine show us an example which our politicians could follow, if not to their own advan­ tage, at least to that o f our country. (Vaufrey 1933: 205) The batde for France lost, the Republic beaten, it was specifically the government o f the Etat Fran^ais (the Vichy regime, 1940—4) underpressure from Jerom e Carcopino, a brilliant Rom an historian and sympathizer o f the Mussolini regime who had become Secretary o f State for Education, which brought about the promulgation o f an antiquities law and the creation o f an embryonic archaeology service (Gran Aymerich & Gran Aymerich 1990; for Carcopino’s attachment to Vichy and the university politics o f the

61

FRENCH ARCHAEOLOGY: NATIONAL

& CULTURAL IDENTITY

regime, see Singer 1992). N ot content with owing its mythological birth to the defeat at Alesia, France thus found itself endowed with archaeological regulations by an abnormal regime that was the product o f another defeat. Should the law on archaeological excavation be considered as a con­ sequence o f collaboration? Without doubt that would be going too far, for in fact this law contains in its principles some o f the ideas advanced in 1913 by those who wanted to give an explicit place to archaeology in the protec­ tion o f ancient monuments. Carcopino had already proposed in 1933 to the society o f Latin studies, in collaboration with the archaeologist Albertini, Professor at the College de France and Director o f Antiquities for Algeria, the idea o f an archaeology service, although this did not see the light o f day. In fact, the promulgation o f the 1941 act was the result o f insistent pressure from such prehistorians as Vaufrey and classical archaeologists such as Alber­ tini, Carcopino and Grenier, the successor to Camille Jullian at the College de France. These men saw in the Vichy regime a chance to impose a reform that the disorganization o f the high public offices made easier: to the same initiative belonged the Alexis Carrel foundation, which was richly endowed by the regime and was to become a pioneer institution in social science research (Drouard 1990). It is not one o f the least paradoxes that the regime that had abolished the Republic also created institutions that could not have seen the light o f day in the political and social confusion o f the latter years o f the Third Republic. The 1941 law, however, did not create a true archaeological service. The national territory was divided into circonscriptions (archaeological regions), each run by a director whose services were voluntary and who acted as a rep­ resentative o f the state. It was thus more a case o f watching measures rather than the programming and implementation o f research. The originality o f the new organization lay, however, in the rapport it established between the archaeological circonscriptions and the Caisse Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique (National Office for Scientific Research), an organization for basic research, reorganized in 1935 linking the Comite des Travaux Historiques (Committee for Historic Works), founded by Guizot, and the Service des Missions (Expedition Service), funding scientific expeditions (Dumoulin 1985, Gran Aymerich & Gran Aymerich 1990: 91-8). There again the Vichy regime succeeded in integrating organizations dependent on different ministries - Education, Foreign Affaires and Arts (Ministry o f Culture) - a feat the Republican regime had not achieved: the main result o f this effort o f co-ordination was the creation by Albert Grenier in 1943 o f the journal Gallia, which gave archaeology for the first time a scientific organ modelled on Notizie degli Scavi in Italy. In reopening the symbolic excavations at Alesia and Gergovia, with public funds and under the direction o f university

62

TH E FO U N D A TIO N OF THE CNRS AND A SC IEN TIFIC POLICY

archaeologists, Carcopino offered to the Vichy regime two lieux de memoire (historic places), which contributed to the cult o f the chief embodied by Marshal Petain. A mixture o f conservatism and technocracy, the Vichy regime thus gave a legacy to post-war France o f an embryonic archaeologi­ cal organization strongly tainted with authoritarian ideology and with a return to the mythological origins o f the French nation.

The foundation o f the CN RS and a scientific policy for archaeology The government that resulted from liberation hastened to restructure the organization o f scientific research: at the end o f August 1944, Frederic JoliotCurie was named Director-General o f the C N R S with the specific mandate to transform the institution. But, for archaeology, restructuring began with dismemberment, for the XVIth commission o f C N R S , charged with “ excava­ tions outside France” , saw its responsibilities transferred to the Ministry o f Foreign Affairs. In fact the wish o f the new and dynamic directors o f C N R S was to manage an autonomous establishment devoted to basic research. For the leaders it required a disengagement from administrative burdens o f all types, among which was the administration o f excavations; when carried out abroad, these came under the care o f the Ministry o f Foreign Affairs, whereas in France they came under the Secretariat aux Beaux-Arts (Ministry o f C ul­ ture). So that was what they made o f the co-ordination o f archaeological research. However, what the C N R S lost in breadth it gained in depth. The new organization established a permanent team o f researchers who gave a prom­ inent place to archaeology and in particular to prehistory. Prehistory was grouped with anthropology and ethnology, while Celtic and Gallo-Rom an archaeology was associated with classical archaeology. This internal division within the C N R S had the advantage o f associating prehistorians with social anthropology, then in full expansion, but it accentuated the separation between prehistoric archaeology and archaeology as a whole, which had shown itself to be so damaging throughout the whole institutional history o f archaeology in France. Certainly, in 15 years, that is to say up until the begin­ ning o f the 1960s, the C N R S would contribute to the complete modification o f the structure o f national archaeology. By recruiting several dozen researchers, and by setting up teams, it would contribute to the birth o f pre­ historic and protohistoric regional archaeology, typified by P. R . Giot at Rennes, F. Bordes at Bordeaux, M. Escalon de Fonton and G. Barruol and

63

FRENCH ARCHAEOLOGY: NATIONAL

& CULTU RA L ID EN TITY

later J. Guilaine in the Midi. In Paris, A. Leroi-Gourhan would make the Centre o f Prehistoric Documentation o f the Musee de FHom m e an inter­ national centre o f research whose influence was decisive. In concentrating on its jo b , basic research, the C N R S undoubtedly gave a new boost to archae­ ological work in France itself (and also outside France). It certainly contrib­ uted to the development o f a universalist model o f archaeology, which was lacking in the France o f the Third Republic. But this restructuring had some negative consequences. Until 1964, the date when Andre Malraux created the Office o f Excavations in the Ministry o f Culture, the public service for archaeology remained a simple administrative addition to the Historic M on­ uments Service. The review, protection and exploitation o f the buried archaeological heritage were left to the control o f the architects o f Historic Monuments. Admittedly, C N R S researchers filled the office o f Director o f Antiquities, but they did not have access to the personnel necessary to carry out and publish excavations. The regional museums o f archaeology, such as Lyon, Rennes, Marseille or Bordeaux, were not able to make an effective contribution to regional archaeology, unlike those in Great Britain and Ger­ many. As for the universities, if they were generous to classical archaeology, they provided only a bare subsistence for prehistory; there were only three chairs in the 1960s: one at Bordeaux, another at Toulouse and a third in Paris. The relaunch o f a national policy o f research that coincided with the return to power o f General de Gaulle and the foundation o f the Fifth R epublic was slow to take effect. However, the enthusiasm o f Andre M al­ raux and pressure from the C N R S led to progressive augmentation o f the funds o f the Office o f Excavations, to its development by the creation o f full-time jobs, the creation o f a Conseil Superieur de la Recherche Archeologique (Higher Council for Archaeological Research), a sort o f par­ liament o f French archaeology, and the support given to rescue excavation. It is to an ethnographer, J. Soustelle, a pupil o f P. Rivet, brilliant member o f the resistance (but also a former leader o f the terrorist movement, the O A S , which organized armed opposition to the Algerian policies o f General de Gaulle), that is owed the creation in 1975 o f a Fund for Rescue Archaeol­ ogy, which constituted the first effective financial structure for the protec­ tion and exploitation o f archaeological sites threatened by major works (Soustelle 1974). At the bottom line it was only with the doubling o f funds to the Ministry o f Culture decided by the government o f Francois Mitterand in 1982 that the Excavation Service, which became the Sous-Direction de l’Archeologie, had funds comparable to those o f most o f its European equiv­ alents: it remains the case that the status o f the personnel (about 1000) who work on rescue excavations in France is still obscure, for they are considered in a certain way as employees o f the building sector.

64

TH E FO U N D A T IO N OF TH E CN RS AND A SC IE N T IF IC

PO LICY

M ore than elsewhere, archaeology in France depends on the direction o f central power, more than ever it has encountered difficulties in establishing itself in an autonomous scientific milieu with its own traditions, its own spe­ cificities and its own means o f intervention. Centralism is a constant that has privileged Paris over the provinces and a global approach to archaeology to the detriment o f regional visions. Certainly one can detect regional nuances in French archaeology, but in no case do they constitute different schools as in Germany. The recent development o f archaeological services at the level o f the departement or commune is much less the reflection o f a wish to priv­ ilege local archaeology than to allow local politicians to be seen as patrons o f the heritage in the same way as the ministers o f the Republic. In inaugurat­ ing in 1984 the chair o f National Antiquities at the College de France, the current holder, Christian Goudineau, justified thus his return to this old description o f his field o f learning: 1905, 1936 [the dates o f the inaugural lectures o f C. Jullian and A. Grenier]. In those years, as you can easily imagine, the expression “ National Antiquities” carried a strong emotional charge. Certainly it has lost sight o f the original meaning given to it by the revolutionary language o f 1790, for one includes under this term medieval or mod­ ern works o f art which have certainly become national. It refers to patriotic values. Evident or implicit, this reference is omnipresent in the work o f Jullian who, all his life, tried to show how France was con­ stituted, considering the efforts o f the men who made it with the sharp regard o f a scholar but also with the respect o f an affectionate son speaking o f his fathers and m oth ers. . . We no longer have frontiers to reconquer as they did in 1905; we no longer feel, as we did in 1936, threats, whether precise or confused, looming over us more and more. . . . national antiquities also means the policy for national antiq­ uities. O n one hand to teach, prospect, choose, prevent, preserve, on the other to analyse, understand, publish, present, make known. (Goudineau 1984: 6, 13). French archaeology in the 1990s has become normalized. The state is endowed with a public service for archaeology; universities, museums and secondary education make ever more provision for a cultural approach that relegates national tendencies to a peripheral position. It remains true that archaeology has not yet found its place in the shared culture o f the French. So that it may, the development o f scientific methods should go hand in hand with a policy o f information and o f scientific diffusion, which are still often lacking.

65

FRENCH ARCHAEOLOGY: NATIONAL

& CULTURAL IDENTITY

Acknowledgem ents This chapter has been translated from the French by Sara Champion.

Bibliography Barret-Kriegel, B. 1988. La defaite de Verudition. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Berce, F. 1986. Arcisse de Caum ont et les societes savantes. In Les lieux de tnemoire, vol. II: la nation, 2: le patrimoine, P. N ora (ed.), 533-68. Paris: Gallimard. Binetruy, M . S. 1994. De Vart roman a la prehistoire, des societes locales a VInstitut, itineraires de Joseph Dechelette. Lyon. Broca, P. 1864. Bulletin de la Societe d*Anthropologie de Paris 4, 194-5. Biichsenschiitz, O. & Schnapp, A. 1992. Alesia. In Les lieux de tnemoire, vol. Ill: les France, 3: de Varchive a Vetnbletne, P. N ora (ed.), 273-315. Paris: Gallimard. Chastel, A. 1986. La notion de patrimoine. In Les lieux de tnemoire, vol. II: la nation, 2: le patrimoine, P. N ora (ed.), 405—50. Paris: Gallimard. Chevalier, N . 1992. L ’administration de la recherche archeologiquefrangaise dans le Moyen-Orient du milieu du X D fme siecle a la seconde guerre mondiale. Thesis, Paris. Daniel, G. 6c Renfrew, C. 1986. The idea of prehistory, 2nd edn. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Denis, F. 1993. Le cotnte de Caylus et Vantiquite. Thesis, Paris. D igeon, C. 1959. La crise alletnande de la pensee frangaise 1870-1914. Paris: Presses Universi­ taires de France. D rouard, A. 1990. La fondation frangaise pour l’etude des problemes humains et l’organisation de la recherche en sciences sociales en France. Cahiers pour I’histoire de CNRS 1939-89, 9, 107-24. Paris: Editions du CNRS. D um oulin, O. 1985. Les sciences humaines et la prehistoric du CNRS. Revue frangaise de sociologie 26, 363—74. Etienne, R . & Mossiere, J. C. 1993. Jacob Spon; un humaniste lyotmais du X V lfme siecle. Paris. Ferembach, D. 1988. A history of biological anthropology in France, Part 3. Occasional Papers 2(3), International Association o f Hum an Biologists, Newcastle upon Tyne. Fermigier, A. 1986. M erim ee et l’inspection des monuments historiques. In Les lieux de memoire, vol. II: La nation, 2: le patrimoine, P. N ora (ed.), 593-612. Paris: Gallimard. Goudineau, C. 1984. Legon inaugurate, Chaire d’Antiquites Nationales, College de France. Paris: C ollege de France. Gran-Aym erich, E. & J. Gran-Aymerich 1990. L’archeologie au CNRS, origine et mise en place. Cahiers pour Vhistoire du CNRS 1939-89, 9, 81-105. Paris: Editions du CNRS. Grayson, D. K. 1983. The establishment of human antiquity. N ew York: Academic Press. Grenier, A. 1931. Manuel d’archeologiegallo-rotnaine: 1ere partie. Paris: Picard. — 1934. Les monuments antiques, cent ans de conservation et de recherche. Congres archeologique de France XCVIl, 341-79. Guenee, B. 1986. Chancelleries et monasteres. In Les lieux de tnemoire, vol. II: la nation, 1, P. N ora (ed.), 5-30. Paris: Gallimard. H artog, F. 1988. Le dix-neuvieme siecle et Vhistoire, le cas Fustel de Coulanges. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

66

BIBLIO GRAPHY Hubert, H. 1932. Les Celtes depuis Yepoque de la Tetie et la civilisation celtique. Paris: La R enais­ sance du Livre. Huppert, G. 1970. The idea of perfect history: historical erudition and historical philosophy in renais­ sance France. Urbana: University o f Illinois Press. Klindt Jensen, O. 1975. A history of Scandinavian archaeology. London: Thames & Hudson. de Laborde, A. 1816. Les tnonutnens de la France classes chronologiquetnent et consideres sous le rapport desfaits historiques et de Yetude des arts. Paris: Didot. Laming-Emperaire, A. 1964. Origines de Yarcheologie prehistorique en France. Paris: Picard. M ichelet, J. 1959. Journal, vol. I: 1828-48 [P. Viallaneix, ed.]. Paris: Gallimard. Millin, A-L. 1790. Antiquites nationales, ou receuil de tnonutnens pour servir a Yhistoire generale et particuliere de Vempirefrangois, tels que totnbeaux, inscriptions, statues, vitraux,fresques, etc.; tires des abbayes, tnonasteres, chdteaux et autres lieux devenus dotnaines nationaux. Paris: Drouhin. — 1826. Introduction a Yetude de Yarcheologie, des pierres gravees et des medailles. Paris: Girard. Pinon, P. 1991. La Gaule retrouvee. Paris: Gallimard. Pomian, K. 1992. Francs et Gaulois. In Les lieux de tnemoire, vol. Ill, part 1: conflicts etpartages, P. N ora (ed.), 41-105. Paris: Gallimard. Poulot, D. 1986. Alexandre Lenoir et les musees des monuments fran^ais. In Les lieux de tnemoire, vol. II: la nation, 2: le patrimoine, P. N ora (ed.), 497-532. Paris: Gallimard. de Quatrefages, A. 1871. Histoire naturelle de l’homme, la race prussienne. Revue des DeuxMondes, 15 February. Richard, N. (ed.) 1992. L!invention de la prehistoire: une anthologie. Paris: Presses Pocket. Schnapp, A. 1993. La conquete du passe: aux origines de Yarcheologie. Paris: Carre. Singer, C. 1992. Vichy, Yuniversite et les juifs: les silences et la tnemoire. Paris: Belles Lettres. Soustelle, J. 1974. Rapport sur la recherchefrangaise en archeologie et anthropologie. Paris. Strenski, I. & H. Hubert, H. 1987. Racial science and political myth. Journal of Behavioural Sciences 21, 353-67. Theis, L. 1986. Guizot et les institutions de memoire. In Les lieux de tnemoire, vol. II: la nation, 2: le patrimoine, P. N ora (ed.), 569-92. Paris: Gallimard. Vaufrey, R . 1933. La prehistoire et les hommes politiques: en Allemagne. L }Anthropologie 43, 205. — 1941. L’organisation des recherches et des etudes prehistoriques en France. Revue Scientifique 79, 483-518.

67

CHAPTER FOUR

Islamic archaeology and the origin of the Spanish nation Margarita Diaz-Andreu

Introduction Political nationalism is founded on the idea o f the nation. This is conceived as the natural unit o f a human group, which by its very nature has the right to constitute a political entity. If nations exist, they must, by definition, have a past that, for their own good and that o f the individuals who belong to them, should be known and propagated. From the end o f the eighteenth century, therefore, the emergence o f political nationalism converted the production o f this history into a patriotic duty. The growing number o f intellectuals responsible for the extensive apologetic historical literature produced in each nation certainly saw themselves as patriots. These histories claimed to chart the origins and development characteristic o f each individual nation, and its particular spirit at each stage o f its evolution (Kedourie 1970: 36 quoted in de Bias Guerrero 1984: 87). This chapter focuses on the first o f these func­ tions, namely reflection on the historical origins o f the nation. Throughout the nineteenth century and even up to the present, o f all the periods liable to be selected as the birth o f the nation, the different European nationalisms most frequently opted for the Middle Ages. Although there were certainly many attempts to locate the origins o f nations in earlier times, throughout the two centuries o f nationalism's existence undoubtedly the most popular option has been to establish the germ o f each nation in the medieval period. Various reasons can be put forward to explain this. On the one hand, given that during the first centuries o f our era the R om an Empire extended over much o f Europe, it was clearly inappropriate to seek in this the origins o f the distinguishing characteristics o f any individual nation, even if, as Canfora (1980) has shown, much o f the nationalist discourse was derived from the study o f this period. On the other hand, the widespread ignorance o f earlier periods at the beginning o f the nineteenth century

68

INTRODUCTION

meant that these could scarcely be incorporated into national histories. Significantly, the subsequent development o f prehistoric studies did not radically change this situation. Prehistorians, at least those o f countries with a R om an presence (although with the exception o f Greece) were only partially successful in imposing their ideas (for the Spanish case, see Diaz Andreu, forthcoming a,b). In opposition to them, those who defended the medieval origins o f the nation put forward the powerful argument that the states then in existence were the direct heirs o f medieval kingdoms. Finally, the political importance that Christianity had until then enjoyed in much o f Europe (above all in Catholic countries) signified that the period in which this had been introduced, or at least popularized, would be taken as the obvi­ ous beginning o f each European nation. And this period was the Middle Ages. In most European countries the medieval origin o f the nation did not pose significant problems for accounts o f the national past. However, in southern European countries, such as Greece and Spain, the Muslim pres­ ence during much o f that period or towards the end o f it was evidently prob­ lematic. In the case o f Greece, historians chose to omit all references to the Turkish period from the national history. In Spain, however, the process was more complex, as between 711 and 1482 the Iberian Peninsula had been divided on a religious basis into two great territories, one Muslim and the other Christian. In a country characterized by hundreds o f years o f strict Catholicism, the location o f the origins o f the Spanish nation in the medieval period presented an evident contradiction for the nationalist construction. As a result, authors opted to emphasize the role played by Ferdinand and Isabella, the Catholic Monarchs, in creating the Spanish nation. They united the various Christian kingdoms in the peninsula, conquered the last Muslim stronghold in Spain (Granada) in 1492, and initiated the most glorious period in Spanish history through their support for Columbus and the sub­ sequent discovery o f America. The failure to incorporate Spain’s Islamic past into the nationalist dis­ course has meant that during the past two hundred years the importance attached to research into the Arab - as opposed to the Christian - medieval periods has varied enormously. Moreover, and this is what I wish to empha­ size here, this has also been reflected in archaeological studies. This chapter, therefore, is an attempt to analyze the impact and influence o f nationalist ideology on the development o f medieval Islamic archaeology in Spain. The problems facing this study derive from the fact that, in contrast to earlier periods for which written documents are scarce and material remains are rare, enormous amounts o f evidence o f this type exist for the medieval period. As a result, it is difficult to identify purely archaeological studies and

69

ISLAM IC ARCH AEOLO GY AND THE SPANISH NA TION

avoid confusing these with historical studies o f written sources or with lin­ guistic or artistic analyses.

Islam ic m edievalism in the nineteenth century From the union o f the Iberian kingdoms in a single monarchy in the sixteenth century (including Portugal between 1580 and 1640) until the nineteenth century, Spanish historiography was characterized by the predominance o f the perception o f its Arab legacy as something intrusive, as something alien to the purely Spanish. This attitude is exemplified in the pre-nationalist H is­ toria general de Espana written in 1592 by Father Mariana, a work that must be understood within the context o f the tangible ethnic conflict continuing a century after the conquest o f the last Muslim stronghold. The loss o f the kingdom o f Granada in 1492 implied the imposition on the M oriscos (the name given to the inhabitants o f the disappeared Islamic Kingdom o f Granada and to their descendants) not only o f a new Christian nobility, but also o f their religion itself. This was achieved by the use o f force, applied for example though the Holy Office or Inquisition established in the sixteenth century, and threats to expel those who did not convert to Christianity, which were ultimately carried out in 1609 and 1610. Father Mariana considered the M us­ lim period a great catastrophe for Spain. The day the Muslims arrived had been “ ill-fated, a sad and tearful day” , as “ there disappeared the illustrious name o f the Goths, their military might, the eminence o f times past, there the hope for the future ended; and the [Visigothic] empire which had endured more than three hundred years was defeated by this ferocious and cruel people” . After seven centuries the Arab presence had been brought to an end in his view “ with honour and to the advantage o f all Spain” . Mariana s opinions would have a great influence on later writers as a consequence o f the widespread diffusion o f his work, which, for example, resulted in the pub­ lication o f several editions, even in the nineteenth century. Significantly, in the nineteenth-century edition consulted for this article, there is not a single engraving o f an Muslim monarch (compared to six o f Christian kings). In the eighteenth century, the traditional disdain for the Middle Ages persisted. In contrast to the classical period, the Middle Ages were consid­ ered, in the words o f the conservative Enlightenment author Forner, as those “ seven centuries o f darkness and barbarity” in the history o f Spain (quoted in Maravall 1991: 45). However, despite the prevalence o f adverse opinion, it was in the eighteenth century that the first Arab studies were undertaken in Spain. In the field o f art, the R eal Academia de Bellas Artes

70

I S L A M I C M E D I E V A L I S M IN T H E N I N E T E E N T H C E N T U R Y

de San Fernando published in 1780 a study o f the palace o f the Alhambra. At the same time, some authors began to express a positive assessment o f Islamic Spain, defending it as the only redoubt o f civilization in an otherwise barbarian Europe. This idea was shared by foreign intellectuals who had visited Spain (Murphy 1815) and was accompanied by the “ orientalization” o f the image o f Spain. In the 1820s, the French poet Victor Hugo com­ mented in his Orientals that Spain had a highly African character, by which he intended to stress its exoticism and hence its non-Europeanness. It should be noted that opinions o f this type were expressed by citizens o f then dom­ inant nations, such as France, Great Britain and, from 1871, Germany. These ideas were repeated throughout the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, when it was possible to read paragraphs such as the following, written by Alfred Fouille in his Equisse psychologique des peuples europeens (The psyche of European peoples) published in 1903: “ Occupied by the Moors [note the negative connotation o f the use o f this word] for various centuries, Spain had received a strong measure o f African blood. Some Celtic and Germanic elements are found in the North and West. These, however, are mainly pre­ served in the Spanish aristocracy” (Fouille 1903: 143). The first proponent o f Arab or Oriental studies in Spain was the Enlight­ enment scholar Jose Antonio Conde (1765-1820) (Moreno Alonso 1979: 506). This early interest, however, was effectively strangled by the severe censorship o f liberalism, and also, therefore, o f nationalism and the study o f history. This censorship was established under Ferdinand VII (1813-33) and as a consequence o f the civil war (the First Carlist War) that followed his death and only ended in 1840. In the context o f a nationalist culture that, as we shall see, was largely hostile to the incorporation o f Arab elements into the national past (see for example Aparisi y Guijarro 1843), it is only possible to understand how the institutionalization o f the study o f Muslim Spain was possible by reference to the declining influence o f the Catholic Church in Spain. With the establishment o f the liberal regime in 1833the state took meas­ ures to reinforce its own power by weakening that o f the Church. The main measures were carried out in 1834, when several convents were suppressed, and in 1835, when most religious orders were dissolved and their properties confiscated, thereby causing the financial ruin o f the Catholic Church in Spain. N ot even the conservative Moderates, in power for much o f the nineteenth century, reversed these measures. All this did not impede the signing o f a Concordat with the Holy See in 1851 or the proclamation o f Spain as a confessional State in the various constitutions enacted before 1868. In opposition to this official position, a popular anti-clericalism emerged that sometimes found expression in convent burnings and uncon-

71

ISLAM IC ARCH AEOLO GY AND THE SPANISH NATIO N

trolled violence (1834, 1835, 1868). Although they did not go to such extremes, many intellectuals also became distanced from the Church, and it was they who made it possible to contemplate the defence o f the study o f the Islamic past o f the Catholic state. This does not mean that researchers had necessarily renounced all religious beliefs, but rather that their interest in history took precedence. In this way, religion put itself at the service o f the nation-state and its need to construct the quasi-mythological past that con­ stituted its very raison d'etre. H owever, despite the peculiar features outlined above, the promotion o f Oriental studies in Spain was not isolated from the wider European context. This can be seen, for example, from the active correspondence that Spanish specialists maintained with their European counterparts, and, albeit more rarely, the participation o f the former in international meetings (Marin 1992: 385). M ore exceptionally, the close contact some Spanish Arabists had with foreign countries was exemplified by the case o f Pascual de Gayangos y Arce, who married an English woman and spent much o f his life in London, where he achieved great prestige (.Enciclopedia 1930 (25): 1118). It was in this context o f broadening horizons that a chair o f Arabic was established in the University o f Madrid in 1843, a post occupied by Pascual Gayangos. Three years later, Jose M oreno Nieto was appointed to the second chair established in Granada (Moreno Alonso 1979: 506-71). In this period it also became possible to hear more favourable, and sometimes distinctly positive, evaluations o f Spain’s Islamic legacy. Writing in a history textbook published in 1850, the priest Joaquin Rodriguez declared that he did not believe that religious differences were: sufficient motive to deprive them (the Arabs) o f justice, to abuse their name and insult their creed; these are things against Christian morals and even if they were not, there would never be grounds for taking pride in being descended from the Goths, that barbarian people which destroyed the sciences and the arts in our land, nor for being reluctant to call ourselves descendants o f the Arabs who, with their good gov­ ernment and wisdom, drew back the veil o f ignorance that blinded us, and gave our character that energy which made us the arbiters o f the world in the fifteenth century. (Quoted in Cirujano Marin et al. 1985: 62-3) A negative vision o f the Arab world nevertheless continued to predomi­ nate in Spain. In his influential Historia general de Espana (1850), the historian M odesto Lafuente associated the Spanish nation exclusively with Christian medieval Spain. This became clear, for example, in his reply to the question

72

I S L A M I C M E D I E V A L I S M IN T H E N I N E T E E N T H C E N T U R Y

as to whether the Muslim invasion had led to the disappearance o f all traces o f Visigothic society, and to the death o f Spain as a nation. The answer, he argued, was that it had not. The nation had remained alive “ although help­ less and poor, in a small corner o f this once vast and powerful kingdom” (Lafuente 1850: 57). Tomas M unoz R om ero (1860) expressed a similar idea when he called for the promotion o f the study o f the Middle Ages, again equated solely with the Christian world. He maintained that their impor­ tance stemmed from the formation during this period o f “ the Christian kingdoms in the Peninsula, their nationalities, institutions, the language and character o f their inhabitants, their literature and art” . Therefore, whereas specialists considered it “ necessary to demonstrate the utility o f the study and promotion o f the Arabic language in order to illustrate the history o f our nation with documents written in Arabic” (Simonet 1867: 6), they could also portray the Mozarabs (the Christians who in the Middle Ages lived in Muslim territory) as having preserved under Arab occupation “ the religion, the national spirit and the culture o f Ancient Rom an, Visigothic and Chris­ tian Spain” (Simonet 1897-1903: VII). Equally, it was argued that they, along with the Muladtes (the Christians who had converted to Islam and lived among the Muslims) had contributed “ considerably with their num­ bers, knowledge and culture, to the splendour and prosperity o f the Spanish-Arab Em pire” (Simonet 1897-1903: X V II). Simonet maintained, therefore, that the Arabs themselves had added little to the culture o f Spain (Caro Baroja 1957: 153) as everything could be attributed to the descendants o f the Visigoths, irrespective o f the religion (Christianity or Islam) they pro­ fessed. In the introduction to a book by Simonet, it was even asserted that many o f the most admirable aspects o f Islamic Spain were the product o f communication and contact maintained with the Christian peoples o f the West (de Madrazo 1858: X III). In the vision o f history disseminated through both painting (Diez 1992) and historical literature set in the medieval period (Moreno Alonso 1979: 98), references to the Muslim world were almost totally absent, or at most exceptional. An exception was Francisco Martinez de la Rosa's novel La moraima ( The Moors) (Espadas Burgos & Urquijo Goitia 1990: 398). The con­ trast with the abundant representations o f the Christian world was evident. It was in this ideological climate that medieval archaeology began to emerge as a discipline. As the heir to antiquarianism, the first archaeological investigations in the nineteenth century were essentially artistic, devoted to the study o f monuments (Monumentos . . . 1859), inscriptions (Lafuente Alcantara 1859, Amador de los R ios 1875, 1880, Almagro Cardenas 1879) and coins (Codera y Zaidln 1879, Conde 1982, de la R ada y Delgado 1892, Vives y Escudero 1893). These early antiquarians—archaeologists firmly rein­

73

ISLAM IC A R C H A E O LO G Y AND THE SPA NISH N A TIO N

forced the vision o f Islamic Spain as being extraneous to Spanish culture. This attitude was justified by their conviction that religion constituted a fun­ damental factor, “ an indelible mark o f a civilization" (Monumentos . . . 1859: 3). Accordingly, the multi-volume study o f architectural monuments in Spain (a study that has to be considered as archaeology, as specified in the prologue), published between 1856 and 1882, reflected the belief that the most appropriate division in Spanish art and archaeology was that which distinguished between the pagan, the Christian and the Muslim. The com ­ mission o f experts responsible for the work considered that the M iddle Ages could not be treated as a whole, as Spain had then been divided into two totally hostile and incompatible worlds (.Monumentos . . . 1859: 3). Although some researchers called for this perspective to be abandoned, in practice they continued to perceive the Islamic world as essentially nonSpanish. This was the case, for example, o f the historian Emilio Lafuente Alcantara who in 1859 drew attention to the way in which the Arab world had been ignored by experts “ as a result o f their deep opposition to the cus­ toms and beliefs, and o f that kind o f fatality which always seems to dog the defeated, their language, their ideas, their artistic and literary monuments had been . . . considered o f little importance, totally incapable o f providing any useful lesson, and unworthy o f the attention o f the erudite" (Lafuente Alcan­ tara 1859: V ). However, this d id not prevent him from affirming that one o f the characteristic features o f the Spanish people was its disdain for “ that intru­ sive race, with which it had to struggle for long centuries” . Similarly, despite being one o f the most important experts on Muslim archaeology (a field in which he would be followed and surpassed by his son Manuel Gom ez M oreno y Martinez), Manuel Gomez M oreno y Gonzalez, lecturer at the School o f Fine Art in Granada, also saw the Arab invasion as a disaster (Gomez M oreno 1890: 3), and a terrible calamity (Gomez Moreno 1892: 12). In opposition to the general trend, some researchers began to include what they characterized as the brilliant Arab period in their accounts o f national history. One example was R odrigo Amador de los R ios, who could speak Arabic and who compiled the first catalogue o f Islamic coins in the M useo Arqueologico Nacional (M A N ) (National Archaeology Museum). H e considered that it was important to study Arabic inscriptions, as these would “ contribute in some way to clarifying that part” o f the national his­ tory still most unknown and would complement and bolster the then still scarce archaeological investigations (Amador de los R ios 1875: 6). One o f the most positive authorities was the professor o f Arabic, Francisco Codera y Zaidin (1879: V ), who included the Islamic legacy in his study o f national history, arguing, for example, that through the analysis o f Spanish-Arabic coins it was possible to reconstruct the history o f the Spanish people. He

74

I S L A M I C M E D I E V A L I S M IN T H E N I N E T E E N T H C E N T U R Y

could not conceive o f the possibility o f studying the history o f Spain without a knowledge o f Arabic and hence called for this to be taught in university history departments and not only to philology students (Codera 1903). Nevertheless, in a report made on a journey to Algeria and Tunisia, Codera did note “ the distance which separates the Muslim race from our own” (Pons Boigues 1952 [1888]: 157). N ot only were Oriental studies included in accounts o f national history, but by their very nature they were to a certain extent nationalist, because, unlike in other countries, the field o f analysis was limited to Spain. H ow ­ ever, a rather different reading o f this situation might be suggested, namely the distinct lack o f enthusiasm in Spain for colonial adventures, a con­ sequence o f the Spanish economic depression and, at the ideological level, the profound feeling o f decadence that overcame nineteenth-century Spain (Jover 1994). In fact, the most notable action o f this type during the nine­ teenth century, the African War o f 1859-60, was said by contemporary specialists to have stimulated interest in Arabic studies (Fernandez y Gon­ zalez in Lopez Garcia 1979: 283). The work o f the painter Fortuny should be seen in this context, as he developed an interest in the Islamic remains in Spain and visited Granada to paint the Alhambra only after having been in Africa, where he painted various pictures relating to the war and other more popular and ethnographic subjects. On the other hand, the reformer and intellectual Joaquin Costa directly linked Spanish expansion in Africa to the obligation to carry out archaeological excavations there (see for example Costa 1887). The cultural societies, academies and commissions for monuments were the principal channels for the discovery o f new archaeological remains in the nineteenth century, and they did not discriminate against Islamic sites. The first known excavation o f Islamic remains took place in Granada on the site o f Madinat Ilbira. This was carried out by members o f the city’s Artistic and Literary Liceum following initial finds in 1842 (Gomez Moreno 1888: 5—6). The distribution o f the remains from this site between the M A N in Madrid and the Archaeological Museum o f Granada, founded in 1867 and 1877 respectively, provides eloquent testimony to the significance attached to these finds and to the way they were incorporated into accounts o f national history. So too does the fact that, after the initial renovation, the first hall to be visited in the M A N was precisely that dedicated to Islamic and Mudejar antiquities —Mudejars were Christians who had moved from the Muslim to the Christian territory and, therefore, were greatly influenced in their output by Islamic art (Marcos Pous 1993: 64). As the Islamic past began to be considered o f some relevance, intellectuals began to attribute as much importance to Arab archaeology as they did to

75

ISLAM IC A RC H AEOLO GY AND THE SPANISH NATIO N

that o f the Visigoths. The first scientific excavation o f Arab remains was the work o f historian Pedro de Madrazo y Gayangos (1855) on Madinat al-Zahra. The position o f this city had been the subject o f controversy until Pascual de Gayangos translated M aqquari’s text into English in 1840-43. From the information contained in this work, de Madrazo and Gayangos identified the ruins found in the site o f Cordoba La Vieja with those o f M adi nat al-Zahra (de Madrazo y Gayangos 1855: 407-26). In 1853 they asked the moderate government for permission to excavate there, and the following year the Minister o f Public Works (Ministro de Fomento) appointed com ­ missions in Madrid and in Cordoba to carry out the project. If in Spanish nineteenth-century nationalism this conflict existed be­ tween the Arab and the Christian, the peripheral nationalist movements that emerged at the end o f the century —in Catalonia and the Basque Country — stressed the meagre or non-existent presence o f Arabs in their regions. Thus, Catalan historiography began to vaunt Catalonia’s superiority over the rest o f Spain in terms o f the few years o f Islamic rule it had experienced. M ost early histories o f Catalonia began in the Middle Ages (see for example Balari i Jovany 1899) and, despite the later work o f the Catalan prehistorian Bosch Gimpera, this still remains true o f textbooks o f varying merit published more recently (Ferret 1980, Puigjaner 1989). In contrast to the Catalan case, Andalusia’s Islamic past came to be seen as a certain source o f pride in the region. Jose M oreno Nieto, who had been the first Professor o f Arabic in the University o f Granada, considered that some medieval monuments belonged to Andalusian history (Moreno N ieto 1864: 27). These ideas found their greatest expression in Bias Infante, the leader o f Andalusian nationalism during the first third o f the twentieth cen­ tury. H e claimed that the Andalusians had summoned the Arabs in order to end feudal Germanic rule and that the Islamic period had been one o f liberty and cultural splendour during which Andalusia had dominated the rest o f Spain. According to this author, the Christian reconquest had been a catas­ trophe that had led to the enslavement o f the region’s inhabitants (Infante 1 9 3 1 :7 4 -5 ).

Islam ic versus V isigothic The loss o f Spain’s last remaining overseas territories (Cuba and the Philip­ pines) in 1898 provoked a profound identity crisis that prompted, in response, a far-reaching reformation o f academic structures and the renewal o f the debate over the idea o f the Spanish nation. A critical consciousness o f Spanish

76

ISLAMIC VERSUS V ISIGOTHIC

nationality emerged, which can be traced back to the regenerationist move­ ment, o f which Joaquin Costa was one o f the most influential figures. One means o f recovering lost national pride was by seizing power in North Africa. Already in the nineteenth century, two major expeditions had been launched (1859-60 and 1893-4), but with little long-term colonial significance. At the Algeciras Conference in 1906, the European powers drew up an agreement that enabled France and Spain to establish protection and legal control over M orocco, whereas Germany, Great Britain and Italy gained commercial and financial power. However, only in 1912 was the Spanish protectorate in M orocco, which would end in 1956, effectively established. The failed attempt to create a Centre o f Arab Studies in 1908 should be seen in this light. Inspired by the ideas of Julian Ribera y Tarrago, this centre was intended to be an institution for the study o f both classical and spoken Arabic, and the history not only o f Al-Andalus but also o f M orocco, in order to train professionals for work in North Africa. Although the Spanish government issued a decree creating and financing the institu­ tion, “ the political see-saw wrecked [it] before its birth” (Asm Palacios & Garcia Gomez 1933: 4-5). Study o f the Islamic past o f Spain would have been o f primary importance in this centre. Its principal promoter, Ribera, Professor o f Arabic at the University o f Zaragoza from 1887, and at the U ni­ versity o f Madrid after 1905, stressed its importance “ for a real examination o f our national consciousness” . This was a consequence o f his conviction that “ the part o f the Spanish people which converted to Islam (those who stood out politically, socially, scientifically and artistically in Andalusia were Spaniards) allowed itself to be influenced by that Islamic civilization and acquired its own personality within this . . . . For, and I repeat (as I will do over and over again, given that justice requires me to do so), the Muslims o f the Peninsula were Spanish: Spanish by race, Spanish by language, Spanish by character, taste, tendencies and temperament” (Ribera 1928: 461, 463, 468, quoted in Marin 1992: 388). Thus, in contrast to what occurred in other European countries, intellectuals in Spain did not distinguish between colonial action and their own historical past, as both were united by their common significance in the nationalist construction. The nationalist protest provoked by the sale o f one o f the most represent­ ative pieces o f Spanish prehistoric art, the Lady o f Elche, to the Louvre led in the long term to the enactment o f a law that banned the export o f archae­ ological treasures and objects and regulated archaeological excavations (Bosch Gimpera 1980). It was no coincidence that the best-financed excavations dur­ ing the 1920s and 1930s were at the Celtiberian site o f Numantia (for its con­ nections to the historical construction o f Spanish nationalism see DiazAndreu, forthcoming a,b), the Rom an remains o f Italica and Merida and,

77

ISLAM IC A R C H A EO LO G Y AND THE SPA N ISH N A TIO N

most significantly for what concerns us here, the Muslim site o f Madinat al-Zahra (Relation . . . 1915—23). The first site report reflected the thinking behind the excavation. Here the site’s importance in the European context was emphasized, as at the time o f the Caliphate o f Cordoba this city had not only been the metropolis o f the entire Muslim Empire in Spain and the great­ est cultural centre o f the century, but it had also witnessed the first renaissance o f art in the medieval W est. The European dimension was further highlighted by comparing its artistic importance to that which Greece and R o m e repre­ sented in the eras o f Pericles and Augustus (Hernandez 1923: 3, 6). That is, there was an attempt to “ classicize” and “ Europeanize” the Islamic world so that it could be easily assimilated into the construction o f Spain’s national past. This Europeanization o f the Islamic indicated a more positive climate than that which had previously existed and permitted the creation in 1915 o f the first chair o f Arab Archaeology at the University o f Madrid. This was occupied by Manuel Gomez M oreno y Martinez (1870-1970) who exem ­ plified both the legacy o f all the negative connotations surrounding the study o f the Arab world and the change o f mentality in Spanish nationalism during the first third o f the century. At first, while he was still young and heavily influenced by the provincial background from which he came (Granada), Gom ez M oreno voiced an anti-European ideology. In 1911, for example, he ended his doctoral thesis by affirming that the art related to religion in Spain was “ an allegory o f the struggle which has been waged between absorbent Europe and a reserve o f Spanish rebelliousness opposed to all that comes from the Pyrenees. O ur race, in spite o f the many acts o f surrender which colour its history, is not European.” (Gomez M oreno y Martinez 1911: 28). Like his father before him, he considered the Arab invasion o f the Iberian Peninsula to have been a disaster that had led to the oppression o f the Christian people (Gomez M oreno 1928: 270, 322). This explains his great interest in the study o f Mozarabic culture, the most closely related to Chris­ tianity within the Muslim world. However, his Spanish nationalism changed over the years and he would later accept that Muslim culture was fully Span­ ish. Describing the exceptional personality o f Arab architecture in Spain, he affirmed that “ the peculiarly Spanish culture developed from its own partic­ ular heritage: from the Rom an, the Gothic, with a little o f Byzantium, which came from ancient times; but all this had to be orientalized to serve Islamic society” (Gomez M oreno 1932: 66-7). He considered, moreover, that “ between the Christian and Islamic elements there did not exist that antagonistic divergence which separates the vanquished from the victors, but rather relations o f coexistence which enabled them to be mutually creative” (ibid. 1932: 65). Probably not unconnected to the consolidation o f the Spanish protector-

78

ISLAM IC VERSUS V ISIGOTHIC

ate in M orocco after 1925, in 1932 Escuelas de Estudios Arabes (Schools o f Arab Studies) were created in Madrid and Granada along the lines o f the 1908 project. Once again this decision was justified by reference to the past, to: Spain s unavoidable duty to study in depth and adequately value the cultural legacy which Islamic civilization passed on to us during the Middle Ages and the profound influence which the Muslim people had on our economic and political history during eight centuries o f domination and co-existence . . . Spanish Arabism, unlike that o f many other European nations, is not for us mere scientific curiosity, unre­ lated to our environment and uprooted from all human interest, nor does it combine spiritual fervour with commercial or imperial inter­ ests. For us, Arab studies are an intrinsic and beloved necessity for, as we said to begin with, they link many pages o f our history, reveal esti­ mable characteristics o f our literature, our thought, our art, penetrate deep into our language and, maybe, even to a greater or lesser extent into our life. (Asm Palacios & Garcia Gomez 1933: 1, 3) Although the Schools were established in the spirit o f the 1908 project and, consequently, a department o f Moroccan studies was planned, most o f the studies remained restricted to the history o f Muslim Spain (Marin 1992: 386-7). Their collective voice was the journal Al-Andalus, which was first published in 1933 and included “ an archaeological report on Muslim Spain” , largely compiled (until his death in 1960) by the architect Leopoldo Torres Baibas. However, the first third o f the twentieth century also saw the consolida­ tion o f a new field o f research that placed particular emphasis on the Visig­ othic period. This was mainly undertaken by a group o f politically conservative researchers who, in accordance with their interpretations, con­ stituted two distinct tendencies (Olmo Enciso 1991). One o f those tenden­ cies was openly pro-Germanic, connected to German research initiatives and formed by archaeologists who had close contact with that country. These included Julio Martinez Santa-Olalla, who spoke with admiration o f the “ Germanic invaders” and o f the “ Germanization o f Spain” . This group was joined by some German researchers working in Spain, such as Zeiss, who sought to establish the “ national” dispersion area o f the Visigoths. The second group was centred on the University o f Valladolid and was more influenced by French archaeology and hence emphasized the Rom an and Mediterranean substratum in the Visigothic world (ibid. 1991). The Ger­ man connections that inspired much o f the writing on Visigothic archaeol­

79

ISLAM IC ARCH AEOLO G Y AND THE SPANISH N ATIO N

ogy nevertheless had a beneficial effect. For researchers working on this period adopted the innovative excavating methods and the influential theo­ ries that dominated that country, whereas those working in the field o f Islamic archaeology fell behind in both respects. This was to a great extent a consequence o f the predominance in the field o f architects cut off from archaeological debate, such as Ricardo Velazquez Bosco and Felix Hernan­ dez Gimenez in Madinat al-Zahra or Leopoldo Torres Baibas in the Alham­ bra. M ention should be made o f two exceptions, archaeologists who sporadically worked on Muslim remains. One did so by accident, because he thought that he had begun work on a Celtiberian settlement and found him­ self with an Arab one (Melida 1926); the other because in his attempt to study Christian medieval remains he came to excavate a Mozarabic artificial cave church (de Mergelina 1927).

P ro-G erm anic fervour (1939-50) The result o f the Spanish Civil War (1936-9), with the dictator Francisco Franco's arrival in power, brought the previous liberal tradition to a dramatic end. As many intellectuals chose, or were forced, to leave the country, the scientific debate o f the pre-war years continued in exile, led from Argentina and the U SA by the historians Claudio Sanchez Albornoz (President o f the Spanish Republic in exile from 1959 to 1970) and Americo Castro. Although the former defended a Castilianized vision o f Spain, stressing the importance o f Germanic elements rather than the Jewish or Muslim communities, Am erico Castro (1948) saw Spains origins as the fruit o f the coexistence o f Jews, Arabs and Christians during the Middle Ages. In his Espaha, un enigma historico (Spain, an historical enigma) published in 1956, Sanchez Albornoz wrote: N o; the essentially Hispanic character could not be affected by Arabi­ zation. The obstacles to this are well documented. The vital structures o f the inhabitants o f the peninsula were firmly established before the Tariqs Berbers set foot in Gibraltar in 711. The Arabic-Islamic world was still fluid and undefined. Many human groups came to Spain who had only recently converted to Islam and were still not Arabized. The pre-Muslim Hispanic world retained its vitality. The cultural Arabiza­ tion o f the Spaniards subject to the domination o f Islam proceeded very slowly and their integral Arabization only came much later or did not come at all. (Sanchez Albornoz 1956: 189)

80

PRO -G ERM A N IC FERVOUR (1939-50)

Ignoring what was taking place among the many intellectuals in exile, Franco’s Spain took up the most conservative strand o f Spanish nationalism and grounded its legitimacy on the religious and territorial unity established under the Catholic monarchs after 1492. It should not, therefore, come as a surprise to learn that the Arab past was once again relegated to the status o f the non-Spanish. A good example o f this attitude can be found in the intro­ duction to Menendez Pidal’s Historia de Espaha (History of Spain). Although it was made clear that in the past Spain had been in close contact with Africa and that this should be seen as positive, for “ Africanism was then [in the first centuries o f our era] the equivalent o f later Europeanism, that is, a tendency to break out from cultural isolation” (Menendez Pidal 1947: L X X IV ), the Arab invasion was said to have signified “ a serious imbalance in the life o f the entire Western Mediterranean, and in particular for Spain. The splendorous Latin, deeply Christian Africa . . . had become Islamic Africa, had been torn from the Western world to have its future tied to the Asiatic O ri­ ent” (ibid.: L X X V ). Asturias, where the Christian reconquest had started, was thus “ the sole representative o f free Spain” , that Christian Spain which had inherited the Greco-Latin cultural legacy (ibid.: L X X V l). The text went on to define the adoption o f morisco customs as an affront to national senti­ ments (ibid.: L X X V IIl). Isabella I o f Castile was labelled the “ Princess o f Astu­ rias” (ibid.: L X X IX ). Finally, it was stated that subsequently the Spanish State “ was based on the unity o f the Catholic faith” (1947: L X X IX ). Given this ideological climate, the dismantling o f all the institutions ded­ icated to Oriental studies might have been expected. However, this was not to be the case. Their survival was perhaps related to the fact that the military rising that led to the Civil War had started in Spain’s African colonies, where many o f the ferociously conservative elements in the military were based, or to the major role that Moroccan troops had played in Franco’s victory. H ow ­ ever, another factor should also be borne in mind. For in a period in which the great power o f the Spanish empire was emphasized, it is hardly surprising that it was considered necessary to highlight the role o f the little that remained o f this, namely the Spanish protectorate in M orocco and colonies in the Sahara and Guinea. Soon after the end o f the Civil War, the Instituto General Franco de Estudios e Investigaciones Hispano—Arabe (General Franco Insti­ tute for Hispano-Arab Study and Research) was set up under the auspices o f the Ministry o f Foreign Affairs to finance research on the Arab world. The Escuelas de Estudios Arabes (Schools o f Arab Studies), which had been opened in Madrid and Granada in 1932, managed to survive as offshoots o f the Instituto Benito Arias Montano o f the Consejo Superior de Investiga­ ciones Cientificas (C SIC ) (Higher Council for Scientific Research). Although also in the C S IC , Manuel Gomez Moreno joined the Instituto Diego

81

ISLAM IC A RC H A EO LO G Y AND TH E SPA NISH N A TIO N

Velazquez de Arte y Arqueologia (Diego Velazquez Institute o f Art and Archaeology). As a result, archaeology was marginalized within the Escuelas de Estudios Arabes and interest in the field was only maintained through the publication in the journal Al-Andalus o f the “ archaeological reports” , which were almost exclusively the work o f Leopoldo Torres Baibas. In the universities, however, there was a radical break in the study o f Islamic architecture. This was largely the consequence o f an incident that had occurred shortly before the outbreak o f the Civil War, namely the deci­ sion taken by Manuel Gomez M oreno y Martinez around 1934 to leave the university. H e was not replaced, and his chair was never again occupied as such. For when Gomez M oreno reached the age o f retirement in 1940, it seems that his chair was made one o f “ History o f Medieval Art” , filled in 1942 by Jose Cam on Aznar. In the opinion o f specialists in the field, this should have been occupied by Juan Antonio Gaya N uno, imprisoned until 1943 on political grounds. Apparently in accordance with the nationalist sentiments o f the time, there seems to have been no intention o f continuing the teaching o f Arabic archaeology in the university. As the Second W orld War progressed and events began to favour the Allies, certain changes were introduced in an attempt to counter the isola­ tion felt by Francoist Spain. The Instituto General Franco de Estudios e Investigacion Hispano—Arabe disappeared. The Instituto Hispano—Arabe de Cultura (Hispanic—Arab Institute o f Culture) was created. Within the C S IC , where the Instituto Benito Arias Montano had previously been responsible for both Arab and Hebrew studies, the former were transferred to the Insti­ tuto M iguel Asm established in 1944. This change in attitude was also reflected in the fifth volume o f the Historia de Espafia edited by Menendez Pidal, which was devoted to Muslim Spain. Published a decade after the “ Introduction” quoted above, it offered a substantially different interpretation o f the subject. Part o f the work was entrusted to Leopoldo Torres Baibas, who had been retired from official research after the war (Rossello Bordoy 1985: 9). Torres Baibas challenged the interpretation put forward by Menendez Pidal, contrasting the ephem­ eral world o f the Visigoths “ which did not have time to establish deep roots in Iberian territory” with “ the greatness o f the Andalusian Caliphate and its refined civilization . . . . If the Visigoths were not able to lead any movement o f importance in the Peninsula, the oriental Islamic current gave new life to an environment favourable to its development” (Torres Baibas 1957: 333—4). M edieval archaeology reflected all these changes. In contrast to the depressed state o f Islamic archaeology (hardly any excavations were carried out in this period (Rossello Bordoy 1985)), interest in the Visigoths rose again after the Civil War. Lauro Olmo Enciso (1991) has revealed the

82

TH E REVIVAL OF ISLAM IC A R C H A E O L O G Y

evident political implications o f this development, distinguishing between two groups o f specialists in the field. The first, based in Madrid and identified with the most conservative ideologies, defended the idea o f the exclusively Germanic origins o f the Visigothic people (ibid.: 159). The archaeologists linked to the University o f Barcelona who formed the second, more liberal, group stressed the Mediterranean and Byzantine connections in the Visig­ othic world. Although they recognized the existence o f a Germanic “ ethno­ graphic group” , some o f these researchers, such as Palol, spoke o f the need to classify those previously labelled “ Visigoths” as “ Hispano-Visigoths” , so diluting their Germanic character (ibid.: 158). Visigothic archaeology, how­ ever, could not remain immune to the consequences o f the National Social­ ist defeat in the Second World War and the ideological advance o f more moderate Catholic groups within the Francoist regime. On the one hand, the momentum o f activity in the field was reduced and, on the other, the more pro-Germanic positions disappeared from it (ibid.: 160). During the 1960s, the study o f medieval archaeology as a whole declined. Visigothic archaeology still suffered the effects o f its previously open identi­ fication with National Socialist Germany. As for Islamic archaeology, its position also worsened. Following the deaths o f Leopoldo Torres Baibas in 1960 and Manuel Gomez Moreno a decade later, the necessary renewal in the ranks o f researchers in the field scarcely took place, and those that did embark on work faced a lack o f support. During the first two decades o f the Francoist regime, the refusal to incorporate the Islamic period into accounts o f the national past, and hence its exclusion from (or non-reincorporation into) the university syllabus, meant that these studies were expelled from Spanish academia’s patronage system. In 1960, Guillem Rossello was refused permission to present a paper on Andalusi archaeology (i.e. Islamic archae­ ology) in the National Congress o f Archaeology, and this rejection o f works on medieval archaeology persisted until 1971 (despite exceptions, such as the acceptance in 1968 o f a paper by the then young Islamic archaeologist Zozaya, a paper that defended the study o f the Middle Ages on the grounds that this was “ an absolutely fundamental period in the history o f Spain” (Zozaya 1968: 849)).

The revival o f Islam ic archaeology At the end o f the 1960s and during the 1970s, cultural nationalism appeared to be in decline worldwide. It did not seem that such idealism had a place in a world that optimistically saw itself immersed in technological progress and

83

ISLAM IC A RC H A EOLO G Y AND THE SPA NISH N A TIO N

which accepted its growing mastery o f human life. This enthusiasm also infected “ new archaeology” in the English-speaking world and the never defined “ new archaeology” in continental Europe. Archaeology s apparent abandonment o f nationalist ideology enabled other types o f archaeology that had previously enjoyed little support, as was the case o f Islamic archaeology in Spain, to achieve greater recognition. Since then it has no longer been nec­ essary to have any explicit nationalist justification for doing history, as this was now considered an empty book full o f tables that should be filled with all the data (including, in the case o f Spain, that from the Islamic period). It was in this context that a new professional ethic emerged which no longer saw the function o f the historian to be that o f the patriot. It is in this context that one should understand the revival o f Islamic archaeology. This displayed novel characteristics. Firstly, it at last began to distance itself from art history and to embrace archaeological methods and techniques. This move was facilitated by the training in prehistoric archae­ ology received by new researchers who joined the field in this period, am ong the first o f whom were Guillem Rossello Bordoy and Juan Zozaya Stabel-Hansen, and by the important entrance o f the French School into Iberian Andalusi studies (Guichard 1990). Secondly, reflecting the new sit­ uation and in common with those o f other archaeological specialities, pub­ lications espoused an apparent neutrality based on the presentation o f precise data and supposedly objective descriptions. Publications discussed excava­ tions, ceramic and other objects found, and references to national history were almost totally dropped (although see Pavon 1975 and the polemic between Barcelo, Guichard and Rossello on the one hand and Rubiera M ata and Epalza on the other (Epalza 1985, Rossello Bordoy 1987)). M ore­ over, as in the case o f Oriental studies (Marin 1992: 388-9), Arab names were no longer given in their European or Spanish form. Since then, use o f the terms “ Islamic Spain” or “ H ispano-M uslim ” and the like has been avoided (only partially so in this article in accordance with its historiograph­ ical content) and replaced by others, such as “ Al-Andalus” , “Andalusi Archaeology” , and so on. Castilianized names such as “ Medina Azahara” have been substituted by their Arabic equivalents such as “ Madinat al-Zahra ” . This tendency (although incomplete, since we still write Granada and not Garnata) is in complete harmony with the transformation or eclipse o f nationalist sentiments and historical perspectives. The reintroduction o f democracy into the Spanish political system in 1978 resulted in modifications in Oriental studies. On the one hand, the names and objectives o f some o f the institutions devoted to studying the Arab world were altered in accordance with the new political situation. Thus, the Insti­ tuto Hispano-Arabe de Cultura became the Insituto de Cooperacion con el

84

T H E REVIVAL OF ISLA M IC A R C H A E O L O G Y

M undo Arabe (Institute for Cooperation with the Arab World). The title o f the journal Al-Andalus was changed in 1980 to that o f Al-Qanfara, although this was largely the result o f a personal, as opposed to an institutional, initi­ ative (Marin, pers. comm.). Through this tide the journal’s editor sought to symbolize a bridge - called Al-Qanfara in Arabic - between the old and the new period. The archaeological section was maintained in its existing form, albeit only in a subsidiary role, until it was finally deleted in 1988. The continuation o f the tendency already visible in the 1970s ensured that medieval archaeology would continue to thrive. N ew journals were published, Acta Historica et Archaeologica in Barcelona in 1980, and a year later Estudios de Historia y Arqueologia Medievales in Cadiz. The Asociacion Espariola de Arqueologia Medieval (Spanish Association o f Medieval Archaeology) was created in 1982, held its first congress in 1985 and the following year began to produce its journal, the Boletin de Arqueologia Medieval. In all these, Andalusi archaeology has its own space, which compares favourably with that occupied by other branches such as Visigothic archaeology. In this panorama o f technical, methodological and even linguistic inno­ vation, in which references to national history are absent, it might be assumed that archaeology (at least that o f the Islamic world) no longer serves as a support for nationalist ideology. There is much to suggest that this is indeed the case. However, on closer examination the situation can be seen to be more complex, as the present power o f nationalism lies in the fact that it has become so natural and implicit to Western thought that it is exceed­ ingly difficult to discern the real influence that it continues to exercise. T o give just one example: the statutes o f the Spanish Association o f Medieval Archaeology define the organization’s aims as “ the development o f the study o f medieval archaeology in Spain, without ignoring its relations with West­ ern or Oriental cultures” (Asociacion . . . 1986: 5). That is to say, the object o f study is clearly the existing Spanish nation-state, so that, consciously or not, the work o f the association contributes to the construction o f the national past. Yet the text was specifically intended to be anti-nationalist, as this wording was adopted as an alternative to the original and openly nation­ alist one (Zozaya, pers. comm.). On a different level, it would be necessary to discern the personal intentions o f those who choose to specialize in Anda­ lusi archaeology. T o give just two examples, it is quite possible that more than one Andalusian has been influenced in this respect by nationalist/ regionalist sympathies and a rejection o f Castilian Spanish nationalism, or that a Valencian or Balearic Islander has reacted in this way to Pan-Catalan nationalism. This is not to suggest that all intentions can be reduced to nationalist sentiments, for there are evident advantages to be gained by new members o f the profession who specialize in a field as virgin as that o f medi-

85

ISLAM IC A R C H A EO LO G Y AND TH E SPA NISH N A TIO N

eval archaeology. Finally, at a more official level, it would be interesting to consider whether what we are really witnessing is a process o f myth sub­ stitution, for today the most prevalent one is that o f the Spain o f the three cultures (Marin 1992: 380), that fictitious medieval Spain in which Arabs, Jew s and Christians lived in peaceful coexistence. The 1978 Constitution reflected the re-emergence o f peripheral nation­ alism in Spain - in Catalonia, the Basque Country and Galicia - and the first stirring o f similar movements in other regions, for example in Andalusia. Spain was divided into 17 Autonomous Communities to which central gov­ ernment transferred, among other things, responsibility for cultural affairs, including archaeology. At first, this new situation led to a reaffirmation o f the need for studies o f the past as the basis for the construction o f the history o f each o f the Autonomous Communities (these may be considered national or regional historiography depending on the success o f nationalism in each). The Andalusian government exemplified this attitude, promoting a revival o f Andalusi archaeology when it was made responsible for cultural affairs in 1984. The excavation o f Madinat al-Zahra was restarted in 1985, a new journal, Cuadernos de Madinat al-Zahra , was published, and in 1989 the C onjunto Arqueologico (Archaeological Complex) de Madinat al-Zahra was established as a cultural institution o f Andalusian Historical Heritage (Vallejo Triano 1988-90: 183). The Islamic past is now part o f popular mythology, as can be seen from the decision o f an Andalusian pop band whose music has a certain Arab air to it, to call itself Medina Azahara (but note the use o f the Castilianized name o f Madinat al-Zahra). This outline o f the way in which medieval Andalusi archaeology has been treated in Spain seems to indicate the important influence that nationalism has had on its development. It is a good illustration o f the difficulties facing the development o f the archaeology o f a period that was not contemplated in nationalist discourse, and o f the way in which the discipline has reflected modifications in nationalism, its complexity and discourse. Islamic archaeol­ ogy has also been influenced by the image o f Spain which Rom antic travellers in the nineteenth-century cultivated beyond the country’s borders, for this has clearly influenced the Spaniards’ own perceptions. Finally, it reveals the clash o f opposing nationalisms within the Spanish state: Andalusian nation­ alism, still in its formative stages and struggling against the great importance o f Andalusia in the Spanish nationalist construction; Balearic and Valencian nationalism, whose pride in their Islamic past expresses their opposition to Catalan nationalist pretensions, which aim to include the Balearic Islands and Valencia in Catalonia; and lastly, among or above all o f these, Spanish nation­ alism, which, despite being the oldest o f them all, can be seen to be still prob­ lematic and weak. T oo many nationalisms for just one archaeology.

86

ACKNOW LEDGEMENTS

Acknowledgements This article has benefited enormously from conversations with Juan Zozaya Stabel-Hansen, Georges Bazzana, Patrice Cressier, Manuela Marin, Basilio Pavon and Maria Elena Gomez Moreno. I would also like to thank Juan Zozaya Stabel-Hansen and Eduardo Manzano for their comments on the text. The translation is by Justin Byrne.

Bibliography Alm agro Cardenas, A. 1879. Estudio sobre las inscripciones arabes de Granada. Madrid. A m ador de los R ios, R . 1875. Inscripciones arabes de Sevilla. Madrid. — 1880. Inscripciones arabes de Cordoba. Madrid. Aparisi y Guijarro, A. 1843. Del prinicipio cristiano de Espaha com o elemento de su nacionalidad. La Restauracion, 8 Agosto. Asm Palacios, M. & E. Garcia G om ez 1933. N ota preliminar. Al-Andalus I, 1-5. Asociacion Espanola de Arqueologia Medieval 1986. Boletin de Arqueologia Medieval. Balari yjovany, J. 1899. Origenes historicos de Catalufia. Barcelona. de Bias Guerrero, A. 1984. Nacionalisiuo e ideologias politicas contetupordneas. M adrid: EspasaCalpe. Bosch Gimpera, P. 1980. Memories. Barcelona: Edicions 62. Callahan, W. J. 1984. Church, politics and society in Spain, 1750-1874. Cam bridge: Harvard University Press. Canfora, L. 1980. Ideologie del classicistno. Turin: Einaudi. Caro Baroja, J. 1957. Sobre ideas raciales en Espaha. Razas, pueblos y linajes, 141-54. Madrid: Revista de Occidente. Castro, A. 1983 [1948]. Espaha en su historia: Cristianos, tuoros y judios. Barcelona: Critica. C irujano Marin, P., T. Elorriaga Planes, J. S. Perez Garzon 1985. Historiografia y nacionalistno espahol 1834—1868. M adrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas. Conde, J. A. 1982 [1817 |. Memoria sobre la moneda arabiga, en especial la acuhada en Espaha por los principes musultnanes, leida en la Real Academia de la Historia en junta de 21 de julio de 1804 [facsimile]. M adrid: Mayrit. [Madrid: M em orias de la R eal Academia de la Historia V ]. C o d e ra y Zaidin, E 1879. Tratado de nutnismdtica arabigo-espahola. Madrid. — 1903. Estudios criticos de historia arabe espanola. Zaragoza: Coleccion de Estudios Arabes V II. Costa, J. 1887. Proyecto de expedicion arqueologica en el Garb marroqui. Revista de Geografia Comercial ll(33) (15 March), 153. Diaz-Andreu, M . forthcom ing, a. Nationalism and archaeology: Spanish archaeology in the Europe o f nationalities. In Nationalism, politics, and the practice of archaeology; P. Kohl & C. Fawcett (eds). Cam bridge: Cam bridge University Press. — forthcom ing b. The Past in the Present: the Search for R o o ts in Cultural Nationalisms. T h e Spanish Case. In Os Nacionalistnos en Europa: pasado e presente, J. G. Beramendi, R . M aiz and X . M . N unez (eds). Santiago de Com postela: Servicio de Publiaciones de la Universidade de Santiago. D iez, J. L (ed.) 1992. La pintura de historia del siglo XIX en Espaha. Madrid: M useo del Prado, M inisterio de Cultura.

87

ISLAM IC A RC H AEO LO GY AND TH E SPANISH N A TIO N Enciclopedia Universal Ilustrada Europeo-American a 1930. M adrid: Espasa-Calpe. de Epalza, M . 1985. Historia arab-balear: un congres polemic. L/w c(Noviem bre-Diciem bre), 240-1. Espadas Burgos, M . 6c J. R . de U rquijo Goitia 1990. Guerra de la Independencia y epoca Constitucional (1808-1898). In Historia de Espaha (vol. 11), A. M ontenegro D uque (ed.). M adrid: Gredos. Ferret, A. 1980. Cotupendi d’historia de Catalunya. Barcelona: Claret. Fouillee, A. 1903. Equissepsychologique des peuples europeens. Paris. G om ez M oreno [Gonzalez], M . 1888. Medina Elvira. Granada. — 1890. Monumentos romanos y visigoticos de Granada. Granada. — 1892. Guxa de Granada. Granada. — 1911. De arqueologia tuozarabe. M adrid. — 1928. La novela de Espaha. M adrid. — 1932. El arte islamico en Espaha y en el Magreb. In Arte del islatn, H. G luck & E. D iez (eds), 63-90. M adrid: Labor. Guichard, P. 1990. “ D epuis Valence et en allant vers l’O u e s t . . . ” Bilan et propositions pour une equipe. Melanges de la Casa de Velazquez 31, 163-94. H ernandez, F. 1923. Excavaciones en Medina Azahara. M em orias 54, Junta Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas, M adrid. Infante, B. 1931. L a verdad sobr el complot de tablada y el estado libre de Andalucia. Sevilla: Juntas Liberalistas. Jover, J. M . 1994. La idea de Espaha en la epoca de la Restauracion. Seminars given at the R esidencia de Estudiantes (Madrid) in January and February 1994. Kedourie, E. (ed.), 1970. Nationalism in Asia an Africa. N ew York: N ew Am erican Library. Lafuente, M . 1850. Historia general de Espaha, vol. III. M adrid. Lafuente Alcantara, M. 1859. Inscripciones arabes de Granada. Madrid. Lanon, F. 1987. Privilege, persecution, and prophecy: the Catholic Church in Spain 1875—1975. O xford: O xford University Press. Lopez Garcia, B. 1975. Cartas ineditas de Francisco Codera a Pascual de Gayangos (reivindicacion de una figura del arabismo). Misceldnea de Estudios Arabes y Hebraicos 24, 29—39. — 1979. O rigenes del arabismo espanol. La figura de Francisco Fernandez y Gonzalez y su correspondencia con Pascual de Gayangos. Cuadernos de la Biblioteca Espanola de Tetuan 1 9 20, 277-91. de M adrazo y Gayangos, P. 1855. Recuerdos y bellezas de Espaha. VIII Cordoba. M adrid. — 1858. Prologo. In Leyendas historicas arabes, F. J. Simonet, I- X V . M adrid: J. J. Martinez. Maravall, J. A. 1991 [1957]. El sentimiento de nacion en el siglo X V III: la obra de Forncr. In Estudios de la historia del pensamiento espahol siglo XVIII. M adrid: Biblioteca M onadori. M arcos Pous, A. 1993. O rigen y desarrollo del M useo A rqueologico Nacional. In Degabinete a museo: tres siglos de historia, A. M arcos Pous (ed.), 21-100. M adrid: M inisterio de Cultura. M arin, M . 1992. Arabistas en Espaha. Al-Qan{ara XIII, 379-93. Memoria de Secretaria 1923. M adrid: Junta Superior de Excavaciones y Antiguedades.

M elida, J. R . 1926. Ocilis (Medinaceli). Memoria de las excavaciones practicadas en 1924—25. M em orias de la Junta Superior de Excavaciones Arqueologicas 82, Junta Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas, M adrid. M enendez Pidal, R . 1947. Los espanoles en la historia. Cim as y dcpresiones en la curva de su vida politica. In Historia de Espaha (vol. 1), R . M enendez Pidal (ed.), ix-ciii. M adrid: Espasa Calpe. de M ergelina, C. 1927. Bobastro. Memoria de las excavaciones realizadas en las Mesas de Villaverde. E l Chorro (Malaga). M em orias de la Junta Superior de Excavaciones Arqueologicas 89.

88

BIBLIO GRAPHY M adrid: Junta Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas. Monumentos arquitectonicos de Espafia 1859. Madrid: Imprenta y Calcografia Nacional. M oreno Alonso, M. 1979. Historiografia rotnantica espanola. Introduccion al estudio de la historia en el siglo XIX. Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla. M oreno N ieto, J. 1864. Discursos leidos ante la Real Academia de la Historia en la recepcion publica de Don Jose Moreno Nieto. Madrid. M unoz R om ero, T. 1860. La Edad Media y la necesidad de fomentar su estudio. M adrid: R eal Academia de la Historia. Murphy, J. C. 1815. Arabian antiquities of Spain. London. N ieto Gallo, G. 1985. W ithout title [inauguration]. Actas del I Congreso de Arqueologia Medieval Espanola I, 9-11 [Coleccion Actas 7]. Zaragoza: D iputacion General de Aragon. O lm o Enciso, L. 1991. Ideologia y arqueologia. Los estudios sobre el periodo visigodo en la prim era mitad del siglo X X . In Historiografia de la arqueologia y de la historia antigua en Espaha (siglos XVIII—XX), J. Arce & R . Olm os (eds), 157-60. Madrid: M inisterio de Cultura. Pavon, B. 1975. E l arte hispano-musulman en su decoracion geometrica. Una teoria para un estilo. M adrid. Pons Boigues, F. 1952 [1888]. Apuntes de un viaje por Argelia y Tunez. In Estudios breves, 6 7 158. Tetuan: Instituto General Franco de Estudios e Investigacion Hispano-Arabe. Puigjaner, J. M. 1989. Catalunya: un pais tnillenari. Barcelona: Generalitat de Catalunya. de la R ad a y Delgado, J. de D. 1892. Catalogo de tnonedas arabigas espaholas que se conservan en el Museo Arqueologico Nacional. Madrid. Relacion de las excavaciones autorizadas y de las subvencionadas por el Estado 1915. M adrid: Junta Superior de Excavaciones y Antigiiedades. R ibera, J. 1928 [1910J. El arabista espanol. Disertaciones y opusculos I, 457-88. R ossello Bordoy, G. 1985. Islam andalusi e investigacion arqucologica. Estado de la cuestion. Actas del I Congreso de Arqueologia Medieval Espanola (vol. Ill), 7 -2 4 [Coleccion Actas 9]. Zaragoza: D iputacion General de Aragon. — 1986. Les jornades d’estudis histories locals: una versio diferent. L/wr 727, 83-9. Salvatierra Cuenca, V. 1990. Cien ahos de arqueologia medieval: perspectivas desde laperiferia: Jaen. M onografica Arte y Arqueologia 7, Universidad de Granada. Sanchez-Albornoz, C. 1956. Espaha, un enigma historico. Buenos Aires: Sudamericana. Sim onet, F. J. 1867. Discursos leidos ante el claustro de la Universidad literaria de Granadaen el acto solemne de la recepcion del Ldo. D. Francisco Javier Simonet cotno catedratico nutnerario de lengua arabe en la Facultad de Filosfia y Letras el dia 15 de Setiembre de 1862. Granada. — 1897-1903. Historia de los mozarabes de Espaha. Madrid. Torres Baibas, L. 1957. Arte hispanomusulman hasta la caida del califato de Cordoba. In Historia de Espaha (vol. V ), R . M enendez Pidal (ed.), 331-788. Vallejo Triano, A. 1987. “ Madinat al-Zahra” : pasado, presente y futuro. II Congreso de Arque­ ologia Medieval Espanola (vol. I), 205-17. — 1988-90. Cronica anos 1988-1990. Cuadernos de Madinat al-Zahra 2, 183-222. Vives y Escudero, A. 1893. Monedas de las dinastias arabigo-espaholas. Madrid. Zozaya, J. 1968. Arqueologia posterior al siglo V III en Espaha. Congreso Nacional de Arqueologia X I , 846-9.

89

C H A P T E R FIVE

Archaeology and nationalism: the Portuguese case Carlos Fabiao

Introduction The topic o f archaeology and nationalism is one that demands a clear distinc­ tion between what I call “ the authors speech” , the specific opinions and beliefs o f an author, and the “ regime speech” , the official appropriation o f an author s speech for ideological purposes. The former should embrace all archaeological writings, including this one, given the involvement o f any author with his or her beliefs and with the time when he or she lives and writes. Obviously, whenever “ archaeology and nationalism” is concerned, attention is drawn to the “ regime speech” , despite the difficulties o f defining the limits between the two areas o f speech. Generally speaking, there have been no remarkable cases in Portugal o f a nationalistic appropriation o f archaeological interpretations or o f uses o f archaeological monuments as national symbols. Portugal was a kingdom with stable boundaries from the thirteenth century onwards, and lost her political autonomy for only a short period, from 1580 to 1640, when com ­ bined with other kingdoms under the Castilian crown. Thus, centralized power has a long tradition in Portugal, despite the lack o f a geographical unity to the country. In Portuguese nationalistic speech, some issues received special attention, such as the foundation o f the country and its defence against both the other peninsular Christian kingdoms and chiefly the M us­ lim power, the several conflicts with Castile and, o f course, the overseas exploration in the “ Age o f Discoveries” . Such a context helps to explain the small role o f prehistoric, Rom an and Muslim issues (the latter intentionally banned from the Portuguese historical heritage, especially by the authoritar­ ian regimes from 1926 to 1974) in the making o f any nationalistic “ regime speech” , since they refer to a political geography and to a time when Portu­ gal did not exist as an historical subject. On the contrary, all those “ glorious

90

A RC H A EO LO G Y AND N A TIO N A L ID E N T IT Y

moments” were used by different regimes, despite some obviously ideolog­ ical variations —for example, the “ diffusion o f Christian faith and empire” during the “ Age o f Discoveries” claimed by the authoritarian regimes o f the first half o f twentieth the century, becomes, today, “ a pioneer action o f the N orth/South dialogue” . . . Nevertheless, there are enough examples o f authors writing in a tone o f nationalistic speech, most o f the time emphasizing their own archaeological researches, or even the archaeological evidence itself, as something socially relevant in the face o f a supposed public and official indifference. So, the present text will be confined to cases that give good examples o f “ author s speech” with a nationalistic tone. D uring the nineteenth century, as in other European countries, three main “ schools” might be identified in Portuguese archaeology: the most important and innovative o f all was the naturalist school, mainly related to the Geological Commission created in 1857, which carried out important fieldwork on sites such as caves, shell middens and hill forts, but not in a nationalistically oriented manner; secondly, the antiquarian school, repre­ sented by educated gentlemen or clergy concerned with antiquities, partic­ ularly those related to the classical period, collecting them for personal purposes, or to create local museums; and thirdly, the palaeo-ethnological school, not so different from the antiquarian one in its procedures, but espe­ cially concerned with ethno-historical subjects. Naturally, the authors that one may ascribe to the last o f these scientific purposes provide the most interesting picture o f nationalistic approaches. There are also examples o f explanations and accounts ascribing to some monuments an emblematic or symbolic function, which lacks archaeologi­ cal or any other empirical support. In such cases, Portuguese scholars have by their silence contributed to the survival o f those legends. They represent a few examples o f the fragility o f Portuguese archaeological research as well as its inability to reach a wide public.

Archaeology and national identity The widespread idea o f Portugal as a country caring about her past is the greatest paradox o f contemporary Portuguese culture. This idea, shared by foreign observers, by the public and even by many Portuguese writers, is dramatically contradicted by historians and archaeologists. As a matter o f fact, monuments, archives and historical or archaeological research have not attracted real attention in Portugal, despite the systematic use o f some histor­ ical periods, as cited above, for political goals. So, the “ use and abuse o f

91

A RCH AEO LO GY AND N A TIO N ALISM : THE PO R TU G U E SE CASE

history” has been a common practice from the absolute monarchy o f the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries to the new democratic republic o f today, a long period o f Portuguese history filled with different political regimes: constitutional monarchy during the nineteenth century, dem o­ cratic republic in the early twentieth, military dictatorship from 1926 to 1933 and an authoritarian regime called Estado N ow (New State) from 1933 to 1974. Some o f these political regimes appeared to have a genuine interest in protecting the cultural heritage, even promoting innovative ideas by promulgating important laws. However, the lack o f effectiveness and o f con­ sistent implementation have inhibited the development o f research and o f a coherent cultural policy. The R eal Academia de Historia (Royal Academy o f History) was created by royal initiative in 1720, in a peculiar cultural context, with an absolutist king, Joao v, with strong Catholic beliefs; it was the first institution with an important role in the making o f a national identity. The writing o f the eccle­ siastical and secular history o f the kingdom was its aim, having collected and registered both prehistoric and historic archaeological data. Within the scope o f its activities, the first national record o f the cultural heritage was promoted and the earliest law for the defence o f the archaeological heritage was enacted on 20 August 1721 (Almeida 1965; Fabiao 1989: 16-18). A few aspects o f the law deserve some comment. First, it was stipulated that the protection o f ancient monuments that go back to the time o f “ Phoenicians, Greeks, Rom ans, Goths, Muslims” was an interesting matter for the “ glory o f the Portuguese N ation” ; secondly, it was established that all the remains from those times until the reign o f King Sebastiao —the last Portuguese king before the Castilian annexation —should be protected too. So, for the first time, all the remains o f ancient civilizations were assumed to be a subject o f cultural interest for the nation and, on the other hand, all the issues that could be seen as memorials o f a past, which could enshroud the glory o f the nation, were rejected. Am ong the Academy’s publications there were several papers dealing with ancient history, including works on prehistoric evidence, namely megalithic tombs. These were thought to be important ecclesiastical structures, since they were seen as the most ancient Catholic altars. Nevertheless, the Acad­ em y’s activities did not go any further in the study o f ancient history, since its main goals were in fact to establish the historical legitimacy o f the ruling dynasty as well as to glorify the very ancient Catholic tradition o f the king­ dom. Here lies the reason for the special interest in the megalithic tombs. In the context o f eighteenth-century Europe, the King o f Portugal wanted to proclaim his true devotion to the Catholicism and the very old Catholic tradition o f his people.

92

A RCH AE O LO G Y AND N A TIO N A L ID E N T IT Y

But, o f course, the most important intellectual movement for the histor­ ical construction o f national identity emerged in Portugal with the R om an ­ tic liberals in the first decades o f the nineteenth century. Breaking up the humanist paradigm, the Middle Ages were promoted as the real era o f the foundation o f the nation. Alexandre Herculano (1810-77), the first Portu­ guese historian in a modern sense, defined the birth o f the nation as an act o f political will, thus denying any relationship between the Portuguese peo­ ple and any other preceding populations on Portuguese territory (Herculano 1868: 46-8). Herculano s civic and pedagogic attitude extended to a theory o f cultural heritage, claiming special protection for the truly Portuguese monuments rather than for the relics o f remoter ages. As happened elsewhere, in Portugal the humanists had also been the first to have regard for the “ antiquities” , especially for the Rom an heritage. Though some intellectuals, such as Fr Bernardo de Brito (1569-1617), had directed their attention to more ancient times as a topic o f research, attrib­ uting biblical origins to the populations o f the Portuguese territory - some­ thing quite common among European intellectuals at that time - others such as Andre de Resende (1500—73) regarded these concepts as useless, given the absence o f empirical evidence. Resende, following the trend o f his time, looked at the R om an archaeological remains o f Evora as convincing proofs o f the nobility o f his home town. The linkage o f the ancient Lusitania with Portugal is due to the work o f these authors, but rather on the basis o f erudite rhetoric than any historical foundation. Resende was the creator o f the word “ Lusiadas” as a neologism o f “ Lusitanians” (i.e. the Portuguese), a word that became the title o f the great epic poem by Luiz Vaz de Camoes, first published in 1572, the greatest nationalistic symbol o f Portuguese culture. However, as will be shown below, such an identification met different goals, not always just rhetorical ones. Herculano s thesis on the medieval origins o f the Portuguese state was reinforced by Oliveira Martins (1845—94) in his two very popular syntheses, both published in 1879, one dealing with the general history o f Portugal and the other with the general history o f the Iberian civilizations. The author not only elaborated the thesis o f the political foundation o f Portugal in the medi­ eval period but also stated the existence o f a cultural background with com­ mon features shared with other regions o f the Spanish territory. So, to Herculano and Martins, the origins o f the Portuguese nation were medieval, with no connections with other ancient political or cultural features. Ever since, all Portuguese archaeological work with nationalistic purposes has been trying, without great success, to integrate the ancient heritage into a concept o f historical identity contrary to the thesis o f Herculano and Martins. Jose Leite de Vasconcellos (1858—1941), the first director o f the

93

A R CH AEO LO G Y AND N A TIO N ALISM : THE PO R TU G U E SE CASE

National M useum o f Archaeology and Professor o f Archaeology in the University o f Lisbon, was the first to contradict the eminent historians. His arguments were not very consistent. Using linguistics, he claimed Portugal as the continuation o f the ancient Lusitania, since the Portuguese language is the natural development o f the Luso-Rom an language. This was certainly a circular argument, valid for any Latin nation, from Rom ania to Italy. R ein ­ forcing this idea, he asserted that there were many modern toponyms with a pre-Rom an origin, as a matter o f fact all known from Latin epigraphy or from references in classical authors. Last but not least, he believed that many popular traditions, o f certain pre-Christian origin (pagan, in his words), could go back to pre-Rom an times (Vasconcellos 1897: xxv-xxvii). Francisco Martins Sarmento (1833-99), a wealthy gentleman from north­ western Portugal and another pioneer o f Portuguese archaeology, had already made an important contribution to the Lusitanian question. In his historical—philological studies he argued for a pre-Celtic origin o f Lusita­ nian. That pre-Celtic character gave to the Lusitanians a kind o f certification o f ethnic purity, not affected by later contaminations, attributable to their peripheral geographic setting (Sarmento 1933: 129-52; first published in 1884). Denying any ethnic linkage with the Celts and ascribing Lusitanian origins backwards, Martins Sarmento was asserting the origin o f the Portu­ guese in the context o f the Iberian Peninsula, given the assumption o f a com m on Celtic background in a great part o f that geographical area. The same author, studying two hill forts in northwestern Portugal - Briteiros and Sabroso —which he thought to be Lusitanian settlements, believed that a well preserved cultural identity linked to a first wave o f pre-Celtic Aryan peoples had survived untouched until the Rom an conquest (Sarmento 1933: 41—60, 100-28, 338-415; the articles were first published in 1880, 1882 and 1890). Sarmento was also the first author to connect megalithic tombs to hill forts (1933: 290-5), a thesis that was later used to “ prove” the character o f the “ ancient Portuguese” . Nevertheless, the main difficulty for the Portuguese archaeologists o f the late nineteenth century was, obviously, the lack o f empirical data to present as convincing arguments, as very few archaeologi­ cal sites had been excavated and studied. In the early twentieth century, Antonio Augusto Mendes Correia (1888— 1960), in an important work that was for many years the only synthesis o f Portuguese prehistory and protohistory, presented one o f the most genuine examples o f a nationalistic interpretation o f the “ remote Portugal” . The title o f the work was sufficiently clear: “ Pre-Rom an Lusitania” (Correia 1928a). Such a title took Lusitania and Portugal as synonymous and, since it dealt with prehistoric archaeological remains o f the entire country, assumed that a pre-figuration o f the Portuguese nation should be found in prehistoric times.

94

A RC H A EO LO G Y AND N A TIO N A L ID E N T IT Y

Mendes Correia, inspired by the first works o f the Spanish archaeologist Bosch-Gimpera, intended to contradict Herculano s point o f view in the light o f new archaeological evidence, taking into account the large number o f megalithic tombs in Portuguese territory. He focused his attention on megaliths and on the Lusitanians and Viriatus as symbols o f the Portuguese nation. Megalithic Portugal

There were several attempts to use megalithic tombs as a convincing proof o f an historical process that would lay the foundations for the emergence o f the Portuguese nation as well as its imperial endowment. Those ideas were particularly important as the Portuguese seaborne empire was threatened, in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, by the expansionism o f the great European powers, England and Germany, and the defence o f the empire and its legitimation became a very popular subject among the Portu­ guese elites. Antonio Augusto Mendes Correia, falling into an anachronistic analysis, thought that the megalithic monuments could be the remains o f a great western European empire, which had spread eastwards from Portuguese territory (Correia 1928a: 156, 172). On this particular point, he diverged from Martins Sarmento, who thought that the megalithic tombs were a demonstration o f the first Aryan migration, coming to Portugal from the east (Sarmento 1933: 290-5; first published in 1885). This curious thesis o f Mendes Correia was based on some fake evidence provided by the megalithic tombs o f Carrazedo de Alvao (northeast Portu­ gal), comprising some stones with alphabetic symbols and engraved animals —naturally, the best parallels for those stones are those from Glozel, France (Correia 1928b), also faked artifacts. The artifacts from Alvao provide a supposed “ p ro o f’ for a western (Portuguese) invention o f the alphabet and so for the high cultural level o f the megalith builders o f the Portuguese area. As a matter o f fact, this peculiar thesis o f the “ Portuguese” invention o f the alphabet is recurrent in Portugal, but o f course nowadays is expressed only by amateurs. But the idea o f Portugal as a particularly rich area o f megalithic monu­ ments was also attributable to the lack o f information about similar structures on Spanish territory. This idea o f a peculiar Portuguese megalithism would survive in Portuguese archaeology. Some years later, a new approach was developed in the work o f Manuel Heleno (1894-1970), Professor o f Archaeology and Director o f the Faculty o f Arts in the University o f Lisbon, keeper in the National M useum o f Archaeology and ultimately Vasconcellos s successor as its director. For 30

95

ARCH AEO LO G Y AND N A TIO N ALISM : THE P O R T U G U E SE CASE

years he was the official face o f Portuguese archaeology and he carried out many excavations but published little. He claimed, on the basis o f data col­ lected from many megalithic tombs he had excavated, that the Portuguese nation dated back to Neolithic times. In a press interview, he argued that, from the time o f Herculano and Oliveira Martins, a confusion had been made between state and nation. Thus, Heleno agreed with the theory o f the medieval foundation o f the Portuguese state. The Portuguese nation, how­ ever, was already a fact a long time before that, in the light o f the “ megalithic culture” o f the westernmost part o f the Iberian Peninsula (Heleno 1932). Despite the place where it was published, a press interview rather than an academic publication, or just because o f it, Manuel H eleno’s thesis had a powerful impact. It was printed, or at least implicitly expressed, in schoolbooks and in a footnote o f the Portuguese translation o f the general pre­ history edited by Varagnac (1963: 385-6). While a teacher, Heleno had promoted his point o f view to more than a generation o f future school­ teachers. So, even today, many well educated middle-aged Portuguese are still convinced that Portugal had a special role in a “ megalithic era” . However, this theory did not receive official endorsement. The Estado Novo (New State, the authoritarian regime from 1933 to 1974) did not care about megaliths or Heleno s thesis. Political rhetoric made no use o f this sup­ posed remote forerunner o f the Portuguese nation, and the megalithic tombs did not receive any special protection during all those years. Some megalithic tombs were classified as “ national monuments” by the law o f 1910, but since then it has only been in the last 20 years many o f them have received similar recognition (Moreira 1989: 95—122; Patrimonio 1993; see also below). D ur­ ing all the years o f the popularity o f the “ megalithic Portugal” thesis, few megalithic tombs were classified as national monuments or “ monuments with public interest” (the new legal formula), despite the large amount o f new data. Lusitanians, Viriatus and the Portuguese

The synthesis o f Mendes Correia followed on the heels o f Martins Sarmento in relating the remains o f a supposed “ megalithic empire” to the Iron Age hill forts o f northwest Portugal. Since the work o f Martins Sarmento, the northwestern hill forts had became one o f the best known Portuguese archaeological site types. As hand-made pottery and stone axes had been found in them, Mendes Correia thought that the first inhabitants o f those hill forts had been the megalith builders, and claimed that the people met by the R om an soldiers were a decadent lineage o f the “ great ancient empire” . But the decadence had not extinguished the character o f that people, “ its vigour, energy and its national aims” , and they thus resisted for 200 years

96

A RC H AEO LO GY AND N A TIO N A L ID E N T IT Y

against the R om an armies (Correia 1928a: 156). The chapter in which these ideas were expressed had the suggestive title: “ The epic o f the castros (hill forts)” . R ecent research has clarified the different archaeological contexts o f the artifacts from those archaeological sites, misunderstood in the past for lack o f careful stratigraphical analysis. Actually, many o f these Iron Age hill forts were first occupied only in the Bronze Age, so they were not related to the Neolithic megaliths. However, these hill forts were used as proof o f the linkage o f the megalithic builders with the historical Lusitanians. The Celtiberian and the Lusitanian wars were the most remarkable epi­ sodes o f the Rom an conquest o f Hispania. The former occurred on a more restricted geographical stage than the latter, and is symbolically connected with the city o f Numantia. The Lusitanian wars, whose geographical limits were much less precise, evoke a hero, Viriatus. As mentioned before, an asso­ ciation between Lusitania and Portugal had been established, the Portuguese state having claimed the Lusitanian wars and Viriatus as its heritage (Guerra & Fabiao 1992). The appropriation o f Viriatus as an individual was based on his brave resistance to Rom e, which was taken as a symbol o f a patriotic struggle for political independence. Such virtues illustrated a particular fea­ ture o f the Portuguese character. The roots o f such an association can be found in the historically and geographically vague definition o f Lusitania. Often, Portuguese authors have wrongly wished to equate pre-Rom an Lusi­ tania (i.e. the territory o f the Lusitani), with all the area o f the so-called Lusi­ tania o f the R om an period, despite the lack o f a complete coincidence between the Portuguese territory and the R om an province that had Augusta Emerita as capital, a town in what is nowadays Spanish territory. These mis­ matches were intentionally played down. Furthermore, the fact that the northwestern region o f Portugal between the rivers Douro and Minho, her historic cradle, had been outside the Rom an province was often forgotten. The first great appropriation o f Viriatus, as an ancient Portuguese, is attributable to Braz Garcia de Mascarenhas, governor o f a Portuguese fron­ tier town, during the war against Castile after the restoration o f Portuguese independence in the seventeenth century. Mascarenhas had composed a long epic poem on Viriatus s struggle against the Rom an army, with obvious par­ allels to the seventeenth-century situation. In the fifteenth part o f the poem, Viriatus saw in a dream the whole history o f Portugal, from Rom an times to the seventeenth century. The poem has a “ popular” simplified version pub­ lished in the twentieth century (ibid.: 1992: 17-18). This “ legend” has some kind o f archaeological “ basis” provided by Portuguese archaeologists. Once again, Martins Sarmento was the first author to assert a general cul­ tural unity embracing the northern part o f the country and central Portugal in pre-Rom an times. In a scientific expedition in 1881 to Serra da Estrela

97

A RCH AEO LO G Y AND N A TIO N ALISM : THE PO R TU G U E SE CASE

(central Portugal), the place where, according to tradition, Viriatus was born, he found the local hill forts to be similar to those he had studied near Guimaraes, in the north ofPortugal (Sarmento 1933:129-52; first published in 1884). In another work he explicitly declared that all Portuguese hill forts were similar (ibid.: 165-72). The argument that Lusitania extended from the River Minho to the R iver Guadiana was in fact rather common, in a clear attempt to force the coincidence between a vague political identity o f the past - although usually it was not explicit that it was the R om an province - and the modern Portu­ guese borders. Curiously, in a posthumously published work, Andre de Resende, the pioneer o f the identification o f Lusitania and Portugal, wrote that there was no absolute coincidence between the ancient R om an prov­ ince and its remote inhabitants and the modern Portuguese kingdom (Car­ doso 1971: 17-18). Such deliberate mistakes and false identifications between ancient Lusitania and Portugal were supposed to have the hill forts o f the northwest as their archaeological proof, and the very typical warrior statues o f the region were supposed to be the representation o f the Lusitanian warrior (actually, those statues were made after the Rom an conquest, thus showing the cultural attributes o f the local warriors). Such confusion which can still be found in recent works, certainly by mistake (Ferreira Sc Ferreira 1969; Alarcao 1988: 5) - compels us to ignore the other northern ethnic identities that are also mentioned by the classical authors. Thus, M ar­ tins Sarmento proclaimed the Lusitanian character o f the warrior statues, in opposition to Aemilius Hiibner and other authors who called them “ Calaic warriors” , as they were found in the area o f the Calaic people, according to the classical authors, since all their attributes accord with the description o f the Lusitanian warrior provided by Strabo (ill.6) (Sarmento 1933: 36-40; first published in 1896). Since Sarmento s work one can notice some hesita­ tion: Leite de Vasconcellos related them to the Lusitanians, despite the sys­ tematic use o f the word “ statue” without an adjective (Vasconcellos 1913: 43-62), and Mendes Correia designated them as “ Calaico-Lusitanian stat­ ues” (Correia 1928a: 180, 184, 191). On the other hand, though the Douro and the Tagus rivers are the geographical limits o f Lusitania, an archaeolog­ ical research programme for this region is still lacking and the Iron Age is far from being studied. Nevertheless, correct references to the Lusitanian area are frequently illustrated with archaeological artifacts from the northwest region as if they were good material examples (Ferreira Sc Ferreira 1969). As I have written elsewhere, every twentieth-century nationalistic speech about Viriatus is essentially indebted to Adolf Schulten, the German scholar who had studied Numantia (Guerra Sc Fabiao 1992: 19-21). His biography o f Viriatus, in fact a secondary work, was translated into Portuguese after its

98

T H E P A I N F U L B IR T H OF A N A T I O N A L H E R I T A G E L I S T

Spanish version in 1925. Such a delay in the publication o f a Portuguese version was regretted by Mendes Correia (1940), in the prologue o f the Portuguese translation, as the work provides a powerful “ independent” argument for the Portuguese origin o f Viriatus, and it was already published in Spain. The question o f Viriatus’s “ nationality” - Spanish or Portuguese is one o f the most curious o f the nationalistic appropriations o f the past, but it is mostly confined to secondary authors, as the most important specialists preferred silence on the subject. Traditionally, the Portuguese claim Viriatus to be the earliest hero o f their independence, a legend divulged in school books until the end o f the 1960s (Guerra & Fabiao 1992: 21-2); but there are also examples o f a similar appropriation in Spain, denying his Portuguese origin (Arenas Lopez 1900; see also Diaz-Andreu forthcoming). The last episode in the Portuguese nationalistic defence o f the ancient “ hero” was the name chosen for the volunteer brigade that fought on the nationalist side in the Spanish Civil War o f 1936-9, called “ Viriatos” . The idea o f a remote sense o f Portuguese independence foreshadowed by the Lusitanians in the west o f the Iberian Peninsula has been recurrently glossed over by conservative secondary authors and it suited well the ideol­ ogy o f the totalitarian regime o f the time. But even an historian such as Jaime Cortesao, unsuspected o f co-operation with the authoritarian regime since he was a leading democratic member o f the opposition, adopted this thesis (Cortesao 1974: 34-7). If one can understand the survival o f these creeds under an authoritarian regime, given its peculiar relation to the past, it is surprising how Viriatus and the Lusitani are still topics o f research waiting for a scientific approach not committed to nationalistic perspectives. O f course, nowadays a great part o f the Portuguese people is proud o f such brave Lusitanian ancestors, and a modern romance on the subject, The voice of the gods: memoirs of one of Viriatus’s warriors (Aguiar 1984), was a best seller with 17 editions in 10 years and a comic strip version recently published.

The painful birth o f a national heritage list Despite the very ancient and firm legislation on the protection o f the national heritage, indifference towards historical monuments also has a long and sad tradition in Portugal. The laws dating back to the eighteenth cen­ tury, and later reiterated in the first decade o f the nineteenth century, were too generic and were, in fact, not firmly applied. The royal law o f 1721 determined the preservation o f all kinds o f artefacts and monuments from the Phoenicians until the reign o f Sebastian, the last king before the Spanish

99

A R C H A E O LO G Y AND N A TIO N A L ISM : THE P O R T U G U E SE CASE

annexation in 1580. The Royal Academy o f History had the responsibility for applying this law and o f making the first national inventory, which was finished in 1721 and revised in 1758, after the great earthquake o f 1755, with the co-operation o f the local royal officials and priests (Fabiao 1989: 16-18). However, the law was not really applied, as we can learn from many cases o f destruction in the process o f rebuilding Lisbon after the 1755 disaster (Silva 1944: 10—30; Fabiao 1994: 149—51). The Royal Academy o f History was dissolved in 1760 and for many years nobody was in charge o f protecting the national heritage. In 1802 such responsibility was taken up by the Royal Library o f Lisbon (Fabiao 1989: 25; Custodio 1993: 38-49). As happened in other European countries (Chastel 1986), it was only after the liberal revolution (1820), political instability and the civil war (1832-4) - when the ecclesiastical properties were secularized - that the national her­ itage question became a matter o f concern (Custodio 1993). The Rom antic nationalistic feelings o f the Portuguese intellectuals were indeed an impor­ tant factor, as all the cultural heritage that was the property o f the church became a secular national heritage. In view o f this situation, Mouzinho de Albuquerque (1792-1846), Alex­ andre Herculano (1810-77) or Almeida Garrett (1799-1854), just to cite the most remarkable individuals, argued against the lack o f protection for the national heritage and its consequent destruction, but without great success. Special attention was devoted to the ancient monasteries and their contents, many o f which were sold by public auction (Patrimonio 1993: xiv—xvi). Herculano, besides his political and historiographic activity, was particularly concerned with the national heritage, claiming a special protection for the real Portuguese monuments (i.e. the medieval ones), rather than for the relics o f remote ages or for the nasty baroque palaces and churches (Custodio 1993: 36—43). As we will see, his ideas would be taken into consideration by the authoritarian regime established in Portugal in 1933. In 1863 Joaquim Possidonio da Silva (1806-96), an architect who had had a French training, created with other colleagues the Associa^ao dos Architectos Civis Portugueses (Portuguese Association o f Civil Architects), later (1867) called R eal Associa^ao dos Arquitectos Civis e Arqueologos Portu­ gueses (Royal Portuguese Association o f Civil Architects and Archaeolo­ gists), which had a specific concern for the cultural heritage. Despite its existence and its location in the heart o f Lisbon, the association had no offi­ cial role until 1880 (Santos 1909: 5—6; Patrimonio 1933: xvi—xvii). From 1870 onwards, several commissions were nominated to set up a record o f the national monuments, but none was in fact made and some specific protection activities, such as those undertaken by Ferdinand SaxeC oburg Gotha (1816-85), a German prince and the consort o f Q ueen

100

T H E P A IN FU L BIRTH OF A N A T IO N A L H E R IT A G E L I S T

Maria, were mere exceptions (Franca 1974: 486-7). Later, in 1880 Possidonio da Silva s society was officially invited to prepare the national list o f monuments and he was personally nominated in 1882 as president o f the new commission for the national monuments (Custodio 1993: 49—50). However, in 1889, at the International Congress for the Protection o f National Cultural Heritage in Case o f War between European Nations, held in Paris, Portugal presented a very poor and deficient list, due to the Royal Portuguese Association o f Civil Architects and Archaeologists (Veiga 1891: 5—6, 19—20). Nevertheless, new laws were published in 1894 (Custodio 1993: 51), at about the same time that other nations were enacting their own, and in 1884 the Museu R eal de Bellas Artes e Archeologia (Royal M useum o f Fine Arts and Archaeology) was founded in Lisbon. It received paintings, statues and other artifacts from the extinct monasteries previously kept at the Fine Arts Academy since 1836 (Moreira 1989: 54). Once again, the law and its cultural environment seemed to be different realities. N ew commissions were established in 1890, 1893, 1897 and 1901 and, finally, the 1904 commission set up a national heritage monuments list. It covered a wide-ranging list o f archaeological remains, including Latin inscriptions, hill forts, and megalithic tombs. The list was published by royal decree on 16 July 1910, a few months before the republican revolution. As far as the development o f archaeology is concerned, one could mention several important features, such as the activity o f the Geological Commission, mentioned before, and the work o f many researchers, such as Martins Sarmento, Estacio da Veiga (1828-91) and Santos R ocha (1853— 1910) among others. But the most relevant fact was the foundation o f the M useu Ethnographico Portugues (Portuguese Ethnographic Museum) in 1893. The museum owes its creation to a proposal by Leite de Vasconcellos, supported by the minister, Bernardino Machado, who was the professor o f the first archaeological course held in a Portuguese university. In fact, the foundation o f the museum was attributable solely to the personal will o f these men. The museum had explicit nationalistic aims, and its exhibitions o f its archaeological and ethnographic collections had specific patriotic pur­ poses. Leite de Vasconcellos wrote that the museum was important for show­ ing the national identity to an urban population divorced from its own cultural roots and for educating the artists in genuine Portuguese values (Vasconcellos 1915: 14). Such initiatives were lacking in the official cultural policy, and the growth o f the museum’s collections and its development were the result o f Vasconcellos s interest (Machado 1965). Thus, national heritage was not a vital question for the state during the period o f liberal monarchy. Neither was it for the new republican regime, despite the reorganization o f the national heritage commission in 1911 and

101

A RC H AEO LO G Y AND N A TIO N ALISM : THE P O R TU G U E SE CASE

in 1915 (Custodio 1993: 54; Patrimonio 1993: xvii-xviii), and the creation o f several local museums (Nabais 1985: 20), particularly due to individuals and local associations in a context o f political decentralization. Portugal in fact reached the second quarter o f the twentieth century with its historical and archaeological monuments in a general state o f decay. The task o f pres­ ervation was firmly proclaimed and undertaken by the authoritarian regime. In 1929 a new official organization, the Direc^ao-Geral dos Edifcios e M onum entos Nacionais (General Direction for National Buildings and Monuments) was created, with its powers later reinforced by the 1932 law (Rule for Excavations and for the Defence and Classification o f Sites, M on­ uments and Artifacts o f Archaeological Interest to the Nation). This organ­ ization was in charge o f the restoration o f monuments and indeed it performed all over the country. One could say that for the first time in Por­ tugal a national heritage policy was established with true nationalistic per­ spectives, besides the historicist speech glorifying the nation and its imperial destiny. It is not easy to explain why the first Portuguese democratic republic was not so interested in a policy for cultural heritage, but the great political instability o f those 16 years (1910—26) - 41 governments, many revolutions and insurrections, the First World War - and the economic crisis were cer­ tainly strong reasons. The goals o f the General Direction for National Buildings and M onu­ ments were clearly defined by its director Henrique Gomes da Silva, an engi­ neer, who presented a paper in 1933 at the first congress o f the Uniao Nacional (National Union), a sort o f political party and the only one allowed by the regime. In his thesis he stated that “ for the highest cult o f religion, nation and art” (in this order in his text), the organization promoted the restoration o f national monuments (i.e. medieval buildings, especially religious and military structures) in order to recover their original purity (which meant removing seventeenth- and eighteenth-century features), the former related to the so-called traditional religiousness o f the Portuguese people, despised by the secular democratic republic, the latter taken as symbols o f Portuguese defence against the Spanish (Silva 1935: 19-20). For many decades, churches, monasteries and castles, which formed the greater part o f the classified monuments (Moreira 1989: 111; Patrimonio 1933), were restored by a large team o f engineers and architects with no feeling for archaeological problems, destroying all the remains o f ancient uses and struc­ tures (Custodio 1993 and, for the Lisbon case, Fabiao 1994: 151-2). In this way, many years after its formulation, Herculano s thesis on the true nature o f Portuguese monuments had found its defenders and, despite the new gen­ eral law o f 1932, which considered the possibility o f a new classification o f many archaeological features, such as palaeolithic sites, no decisions were

102

WHAT H IST O R Y FOR TH E N A TIO N ?

made for the defence o f the archaeological heritage. For instance, the first palaeolithic site classified was Casal do Monte, by decree o f 1971 (Patrimo­ nio 1993). The texts o f Manuel Heleno make clear the conflict between archaeologists and architects and engineers inside the commissions for cultural heritage (Heleno 1966). Only in the past 20 years has the list o f clas­ sified archaeological remains been significantly increased (Patrimonio 1993). The task o f restoration and protection o f the cultural heritage was actually an ideological weapon o f the totalitarian regime (Lemos 1992: 62). In a series o f propaganda posters entitled “ the lesson o f Salazar” one may see on the top o f a hill a restored castle with a Portuguese flag fluttering; in another one, from the same series, two pictures are side by side: one, evoking the democratic republic, shows a ruined village; the other, representing the Estado Novo s regime, figures a prosperous village with its restored church and castle. Those posters gave, as a matter o f fact, a correct idea o f the regime’s goals: to produce scenic images, rather than to promote scientific research on monuments, sites and conservation. R estoring the monuments was “ for the highest cult o f religion, nation and art” : the castle to remind the people how high was the price o f inde­ pendence and the absolute need to watch out for the enemies o f the nation; and the church to evoke the catholic tradition o f the Portuguese, once men­ aced by the liberals and agnostic democratic republicans.

What history for the nation? In the late 1930s a great monument restoration campaign was developed, to prepare all the country for the great celebration in 1940 o f the double cen­ tenary (foundation o f the Portuguese state and restoration o f independence after the Castilian domination). While Europe was lacerated by the Second World War and neighbouring Spain had been ruined by the Spanish Civil War, Salazar’s regime undertook a magnificent celebration, “ the great feast o f the Portuguese family” (Anais 1956: 115). The double centenary celebra­ tion programme included a presidential grand tour around the symbolic monuments, previously restored, and places o f the country, an historical procession in Lisbon (beginning with an evocation o f Lusitania), a great historical-ethnographic exhibition, and an international congress, among other features, everything personally directed by Salazar (ibid.: 116-50). It was obviously one o f the highest peaks o f the nationalistic historical construction o f identity. But it is important to stress that the Estado Novo regime was not particularly concerned with historical research. After Peres’s

103

A R CH AEO LO G Y AND N A TIO N ALISM : THE P O R T U G U E SE CASE

history o f Portugal o f 1928, no synthesis worthy o f note was published until the 1970s (Godinho 1971, Gonsalves 1993, Torgal & R oqu e 1993). Actu­ ally, in the 1940 Historical Congress o f the Portuguese World, very few relevant papers were presented and in the huge volume dealing with the pre­ history and protohistory o f Portugal the papers were actually very poor (Congresso 1940). The regime had its own version o f Portuguese history and was very suspicious o f new research or fresh data, perhaps because some o f the leading Portuguese historians o f the time were notorious members o f the democratic opposition. Even Salazar, despite the so-called personal direction o f the double centenary celebration, was not really interested in historical or archaeological subjects and, for instance, H eleno’s proposal for the renewal o f the Museu Etnologico (Ethnological Museum, today The National Archaeological Museum) was not considered (Heleno 1965). In Salazar s large personal archive, with thousands o f papers, letters and reports, one can hardly find anything related to cultural themes (Garcia 1992). This peculiar relationship with the past, calling it up just whenever it suited the regim es political goals, may be clarified by an interesting episode related to archaeological research: the archaeology o f “ The Battle” . O n 14 August 1385 a remarkable battle between the Portuguese and the Spanish took place in Aljubarrota (central Portugal). Such a fundamental epi­ sode in the history o f national independence is ordinarily referred to simply as “ The Battle” and it is attributed to the infantry o f the Portuguese army. Known from different chronicles, whose details are not always coincident, “ The Battle” has been an important subject for military historical research. In 1950 the Portuguese Ministry o f Defence created a Commission to estab­ lish “ an official version o f what might have happened during the battle after removing all doubts and having all the different and opposed opinions clari­ fied” . Afterwards an archaeologist was linked to the Commission, but in fact he was a military man: Afonso do Pago (1959, 1965). Taking into account every chronicle version, an area was delimited and several budgets were presented from 1951 to 1957 in order to start the exca­ vations. These were vain efforts, however, since none o f the funds required were available. In 1957 the M ocidade Portuguesa (Portuguese Youth, the official semi-military organization o f the regime) and the Direcgao-Geral dos Edifcios e Monumentos Nacionais (the official institution for preserva­ tion and restoration o f historical heritage) raised a platform for military parades on the site o f “ The Battle” to commemorate the historic event. The military historical Commission tried to interfere, changing the position o f the platform, as it was expected that in situ remains o f the Battle would be found. One year later on his own behalf Afonso do Pago visited the place where the platform was being raised and he found signs o f moats, disclosing

104

WHAT H IST O R Y FOR THE NA TIO N ?

doubtless the marks o f a defensive structure, probably specially planned for the battle. Only then did the Ministry o f Defence supply the money for the excavations that began in that year (Pago 1959, 1965). Many defensive structures were found on the left side o f what could have been the position o f the Portuguese forces. Afonso do Pago argued, without success unfortunately, for excavations on the opposite side before a road would destroy any evidence (Pago 1965: 8). On the other hand, the archae­ ological record o f “ The Battle” site, actually very relevant for the military history o f the late Middle Ages, stirred up some surprising reactions. Some scholars and military men wanted to believe that the moats were more recent, having nothing to do with the battle (Pago 1965). Apparently, to the most passionate nationalists the existence o f defensive structures diminished the nobility o f the great Portuguese victory. Such an anecdote is a good clue to help us understand the official indifference towards new archaeological data taken from a place with high symbolic relevance. It seems that there is a general fear o f confronting established ideas with new evidence that eventu­ ally will corroborate them. It seems easier to repeat what is already known than to submit it to empirical confrontation. N o wonder that the place o f “ The Battle” and its archaeological remains have never been classified as a “ national monument” or even a “ site o f public interest” . In a country such as Portugal, with a very long history, located in a geo­ graphic space (the Iberian Peninsula) where no reasons besides the political ones could justify its independence, it seems quite normal that nationalistic speech has always preferred historical periods other than prehistory, classical antiquity or the early Middle Ages. Even so, Portuguese archaeologists with nationalistic aims have tried, with little success as we have seen, to relocate the roots o f the nation deeper in history, chiefly as an attempt to achieve social relevance in the eyes o f both political power and public opinion. But, in a country with so many national “ glorious events” to celebrate, who needs some poor and controversial archaeological remains from remote ages? It is clear that the idea o f the need to defend the “ truly Portuguese” mon­ uments, already expressed by the nineteenth-century liberal authors, became a powerful trend in Portuguese cultural heritage policy, under both democratic and authoritarian regimes, with apparently little real concern for archaeological subjects. So, the Portuguese case could be considered as a good example o f what one may call the neglect o f archaeology for national­ istic reasons.

105

ARCH AEO LO G Y AND N A TIO N A LISM : THE PO R T U G U E SE CASE

Bibliography Aguiar, J. 1984. A Voz dos Deuses. Memorias de um compatdieiro de artuas de Viriato. Lisbon: Perspectivas Sc Realidades. Alarcao, J. 1988. Roman Portugal Warminster: Aris & Philips. Alm eida, L. Ferrand 1965. Alguns docum entos para a historia da arqueologia em Portugal. Conimbriga 4, 103-5. Anais 1956. A m is da revolugdo nacional VPeriodo —o mundo emguerra, Portugal empaz. Barcelos: C om p. Ed. do Minho. Arenas Lopez, A. 1900. Viriato no fue portugues si no celtibero. Su biograjia. Guadalajara: Establecim iento Tipografico a Cargo de V. Pedromingo. Cardoso, M . T. A. A. 1971. Antiguidades da Lusitdnia de Andre de Resende (tradugao e notas). Thesis, Universidade Classica de Lisboa. Chastel, A. 1986. La notion de patrimoine. In Les lieux de memoire, II; la nation, P. N ora (ed.), 405—50. Paris: Gallimard. Congresso 1940. Congresso do Mundo Portugues. Publicagoes: vol 1: Memorias e Comunicagoes apresentadas ao Congresso de Pre e Proto-Historia de Portugal Lisbon: Com issao Executiva dos Centenarios, Sec^ao de Congressos. Correia, A. A. M endes 1928a. A Lusitania pre-R om ana. In Historia de Portugal, D. Peres (ed.), 79—214. Barcelos: Portucalense Editora. — 1928b. L’authenticite d’Alvao: reponse a M . Dussaud. Trabalhos da Sociedade Portuguesa de Antropologia e Etnologia 4. — 1940. Prefacio. In Viriato (2nd edn), A. Schulten (ed.). O porto: Livraria Civiliza^ao. Cortesao, J. 1974 [1930]. Os factores democrdticos na formagao de Portugal Lisbon: Livros H o ri­ zonte. C ustodio, J. 1993. Salvaguarda do patrim nio —antecedentes historicos. D e Alexandre H ercu­ lano a Carta de Veneza (1837-1964). D ar Futuro ao Passado, 33-71. Lisbon: SEC. D iaz-A ndreu, M . forthcom ing. Archaeology and nationalism in Spain. In Nationalism, politics and the practice of archaeology, P. Kohl & C. Fawcett (eds). Cam bridge: C am bridge University Press. Fabiao, C. 1989. Para a historia da arqueologia em Portugal. Penelope — Fazer e Desfazer a Historia 2, 9-26. — 1994. Ler as cidades antigas: arqueologia urbana em Lisboa. Penelope —Fazer e Desfazer a Historia 13, 147-62. Ferreira, O. V. Sc S. V. Ferreira 1969. A Vida quotidiana dos Lusitanos no tempo de Viriato. Lisbon: Polis. Franca, J. A. 1974. O Romantistno em Portugal Lisbon: Livros Horizonte. Garcia, M . M . 1992. Arquivo Salazar. Inventario e indices. Lisbon: Estampa. G odinho, V. M . 1971. Ensaios III. Sobre teoria da historia e historiografia. Lisbon: Sa da Costa. Gonsalves, V. S. (ed.) 1993. Historia de Portugal, v o l.l: Portugal na pre-historia. Am adora: Ediclube. Guerra, A. Sc C. Fabiao 1992. Viriato: genealogia de um mito. Penelope - Fazer e Desfazer a Historia 8, 9-23. H eleno, M . 1932. T h e Portuguese nation is already defined in the neolithic age. Didrio de Nodcias, 28 M arch 1932, 1. — 1965. Programa para a instala^ao do M useu Etnologico do D r Leite de Vasconcellos na cidade universitaria. Ethnos 4, 63-74. — 1966. E m defesa do patrim onio arqueologico da Na^ao. Alguns pareceres apresentados a

106

BIBLIO GRAPHY Junta N acional da Educagao. Ethnos 5, 540-57. Herculano, A. 1868. Historia de Portugal desde o comego da tnonarchia ate ao Jim do reinadode Affbnso III, 3rd edn. Lisbon: Viuva Bertrand & Filhos. Lem os, F. Sande 1992. Arqueologia Portuguesa: proxim o futuro. Previsoes para a ultima dccada do II milenio. Forum 11, 53-64. M achado, J. L. Saavedra 1965. Subsidios para a historia do M useu Etnologico do D r Leite de Vasconcellos. O Arqueologo Portugues 5, 51-448. Martins, O. 1879a. Historia da Civilisagao Iberica. Lisbon: Carvalho. — 1879b. Historia de Portugal. Lisbon: Livraria Bertrand. M oreira, I. M . Martins 1989. Museus e monumentos em Portugal (1772-1974). Lisbon: Universidade Aberta. Nabais, A. 1985. Museus. In Dicionario ilustrado de historia de Portugal, vol. 2, 18-21. Lisbon: Alfa. Pago, A. do 1959. N ovos documentos sobre a batalha de Aljubarrota. Infantaria, 151-2. — 1965. Escava^ocs de caracter historico realizadas no campo de batalha de Aljubarrota. Bracara Augusta 41 -2 , 83-92. Patrimonio 1993. Patrimonio arquitectonico e arqueologico classificado. Lisbon: IPPAR. Peres, D. 1928. Historia de Portugal. Barcelos: Portucalense Editora. Santos, A. E. 1909. Projecto de reforma dos estatutos da Real Associacfio dos Architectos Civis e Archeologos Portuguezes. Braga: Imprensa Bracarense. Sarmento, F. M[artins| 1933. Dispersos. Colectanea de artigos publicados desde 1867 a 1899, sobre arqueologia, etnologia, mitologia, epigrafia e arte prehistrica. Coim bra: Imprensa da Universidade. Silva, A. Vieira 1944. Epigrafia de Olisipo (subsidios para a historia da Lisboa romana). Lisbon: Cam ara Municipal. Silva, H. G. 1935. Boletim da Direcgao-Geral dos edifcios e Monumentos Nacionais, 5-20. Torgal, L. R . & J. L. R o q u e (eds) 1993. Historia de Portugal, vol. 5: O liberalismo (1807—1890). Lisbon: Circulo de Leitores. Varagnac, A. (ed.) 1963. O homem antes da Escrita. Lisbon: Cosm os. Vasconcellos, J. Leite de 1897-1913. Religioes da Lusitdnia |3 volumes]. Lisbon: Imprensa N acional. — 1915. Historia do Museu Ethnologico Portugues (1839-1914). Lisbon: Imprensa Nacional. Veiga, S. P. M. E. 1891. Paleoethnologia: antiguidades tuonumentaes do Algarve, tempos pre-historicos, vol. 4. Lisbon: Imprensa Nacional.

107

C H A P T E R SIX

Nationalism without a nation: the Italian case Alessandro Guidi

Introduction Nationalism has been, and in some places unfortunately still is, the source o f the worst tragedies in the past two centuries o f European history. It has been a powerful tool to mask ideologically the bourgeois elites’ need for legitima­ tion and, at the same time, for a climate o f social peace and cohesion. At the same time, nationalism can reflect a real desire among men and women born in one country, in spite o f social differences, to share ideas, customs, ways o f behaviour typical o f that country. The consequent forms o f “ national pride” , humanly understandable when not too extreme, are very comm on in many European countries, save, perhaps in Italy, whose present-day inhabitants (to the scandal o f foreign observers) are actively engaged in a recurring critique o f their country, often from a provincial viewpoint, reserving occasional bursts o f nationalism for insignificant questions, such as sport or food. From this point o f view, any attempt to outline the history o f the relationships between archaeology and nationalism in Italy cannot leave out o f consideration a preliminary reflection upon the differences between Italy and other European countries. In many parts o f the continent, as a matter o f historical fact, the existence o f a connective tissue, o f a centralized economy and bureaucracy —in other words o f a unitary state - has been a long-lasting acquisition, in some cases for fully half a millennium. Italian history, on the contrary, was characterized until 1860 by a puzzle o f little states, often true foreign colonies, and fre­ quently having ancient traditions o f cultural, political and economic richness and vivacity, whose roots are easily detectable in the splendid season o f the Renaissance dominions. Another persistent factor o f disruption, in this sense, is form ed by the power o f the Catholic Church, a sort o f “ anti-state” that our contemporary politicians still have to take into account.

108

A GENERAL OUTLINE

The famous definition o f Italy used at the Vienna Congress by Metternich as “ a mere geographical expression” , although quoted with anger in our history textbooks, alas, contains a great deal o f truth. It is not a coincidence that the elites responsible for the unification o f Italy (a term for the political event that conceals a true “ annexation” o f the country to the little kingdom o f Piedmont) had to work very hard to build a unifying ideology o f the new state; notwithstanding these efforts, the local traditions, like an always present live wire, remained active, survived into the period o f fascism, and are re-emerging today even in the form o f open secessionism in the north, the richest part o f the country.

A general outline After the achievement o f political unification, between 1860 and 1870, the choice o f a strongly centralized state structure provoked, as a consequence, the creation o f a centralized agency for the conservation o f cultural heritage, the General Direction o f Fine Arts and Antiquities; strangely enough, in a country where the monuments o f classical antiquity are so relevant, the most active man in this agency was a prehistorian, Luigi Pigorini. As a matter o f fact, just as in other European countries, our classical archaeology derives from an antiquarian tradition o f Renaissance origin. Its birth as a scientific discipline (above all as the history o f ancient art) can be dated between the second half o f the eighteenth and the beginning o f the nineteenth century, and was largely fostered by the contribution o f foreign scholars (this is the second, fundamental anomaly in the Italian case). A visit to the antiquities o f Italy was, in this period, an indispensable stage o f the “ grand tour” performed by the European elites; many leading intel­ lectuals, among them Byron, Goethe and Stendhal, dedicated some o f their best pages to the Rom an monuments, and it was in Pompeii that Winckelmann conceived an aesthetic theory that today is considered the foundation o f the history o f ancient art. The creation in R om e in 1828 o f a real international, centralized agency for classical antiquities, the Istituto di Corrispondenza Archeologica (later trans­ form ed into the Istituto Archeologico Germanico) was the work o f German scholars; nor was it by chance that the first chair o f classical archaeology in R o m e University was given, at the beginning o f twentieth century, to an Austrian scholar, Emanuel Loewy (Bianchi Bandinelli 1976). O n the other hand, prehistory was born in the middle o f the nineteenth century, precisely in the years o f political unification. Fatally, Italian prehis­

109

N A T IO N A L ISM W ITH OUT A NATION: THE ITALIAN CASE

toric archaeology lent itself, as we will see below, in a more adaptable fashion to “ political” uses in the first, difficult years o f the young nation; later on, with the emergence o f an idealist tradition o f studies and, above all, with the advent o f the fascist regime, the situation changed, laying the foundations for the effective supremacy, on the academic level too, o f classical archaeology. In the past 50 years, a traumatic civil war between fascists and partisans and the strong hegemony o f the Left, especially o f the Communist Party, in the cultural milieu o f the new-born Republic brought about the end o f any serious relationship between nationalism and Italian archaeology, with some isolated and insignificant individual exceptions. Just as in other European countries, in the age o f the presumed political unification o f the continent, the 1980s were characterized by a progressive disaggregation o f society and by the emergence o f new forms o f egoism; in our discipline, these trends allowed the formation o f a sort o f “ pluriverse” , irreducible to a methodological unity (Guidi 1992), often linked to a strong “ localism” , representing the up-to-date and perhaps most dangerous version o f nationalism. Notwithstanding the Italian “ anomalies” mentioned here, the history o f archaeology in our country seems to reflect, just like everywhere else, the social, cultural and economic developments o f the ruling elites; a crucial topic such as the relationship between archaeology and nationalism can be, in this perspective, one o f the best verifications o f the hypothesis proposed by Thomas Patterson, in an important paper on the history o f American archaeology, o f the developments and transformations o f the discipline as substantial reflections o f the struggles between different fractions o f the dominant power bloc (Patterson 1986).

The m aking o f a nation The birth o f prehistoric archaeology is closely linked to the successes o f the industrial bourgeoisie in the nineteenth century. The effects o f economic expansion, such as the building o f factories, roads and railways, were the “ prime movers” o f an enormous increase in the discovery o f archaeological sites in this period (Guidi 1988). In a manner contrary to what happens in classical studies, a traditional preserve o f the aristocracy, the “ pioneers” o f Italian prehistoric archaeology were professional men (above all geologists, naturalists and engineers) from northern Italy. They were all members o f the same social class that was responsible for the peculiar form o f unification o f the country, brought about

110

T H E M A K I N G OF A N A T I O N

between 1860 and 1870, the date o f R o m e s conquest, which was in reality an “ annexation” o f the central and southern regions, seen as promising mar­ kets for the emerging northern bourgeoisie. Luigi Pigorini (1884-1925) is probably a paradigmatic example o f the members o f this class. After some years in which he tried to synthesize all the discoveries and the early studies o f the prehistoric lake-dwellings and the “ terremare” (a form o f prehistoric settlement defended by ditches and banks) o f northern Italy, and to create the first local museums, in 1865 Pigorini perceived the importance o f entering into the bureaucracy o f the new state, and took his degree in political and administrative science. Thanks to political friendships and to an active programme o f “lobbying” , in 1871 he was together with other scholars able to organize in Bologna an interna­ tional congress o f prehistoric archaeology and anthropology and, at the same time, entered the General Direction o f Fine Arts and Antiquities, then directed by the excavator o f Pompeii, Giuseppe Fiorelli. In the following years, Pigorini quickly achieved some fundamental objectives: the birth o f a specialist periodical, the Bullettino di Paletnologia Italiana, created in 1875 together with two other “ pioneers” , Strobel and Chierici; the institution by royal decree, the same year, o f the National Prehistoric and Ethnographic Museum at R om e; his consequent installation in the first chair in Palaeoethnology (the academic name, in Italy, for prehis­ toric archaeology), again at Rom e, in 1877. At the age o f 34, this man was probably the most eminent figure in Italian archaeology, thanks also to his rigidly centralizing viewpoint, strictly attuned to the functional needs o f the bureaucracy o f the young Italian state. In the direction o f the Bullettino we have a clear example o f his cultural policy; after the first numbers, characterized by the collaboration o f local “ informants” from all the Italian regions, the creation o f a circle o f scholars, linked to Pigorini, progressively determined a strong centralization in the editorial organization o f the journal. In the same years, scholars born in northern Italy, such as Paolo Orsi and Alberto Taramelli, descended to the south and to the islands, organizing field research, and at the same time the administrative structure o f archaeological heritage preservation in those regions. But the most impressive analogy between the political unification o f the peninsula performed by the little Piedmont state and the development o f prehistoric studies is provided by the formulation (attributable to Chierici and Helbig) and the later development o f the so-called “ teoria pigoriniana” (Peroni 1992). In an original synthesis, the development o f prehistoric Italy was explained by the spread southwards, during the Bronze Age, o f various waves o f northern populations who, superimposing themselves on the

111

N A TIO N A LISM W ITHOUT A NATION: THE ITALIAN CASE

natives o f Neolithic origin, invented new forms o f settlements, such as lakedwellings and terremare. At the end o f the Bronze Age, their descendants crossed the Apennines, creating the Villanovan and Latin civilizations and giving rise to a unitary cultural aspect throughout the peninsula. Despite substantial theoretical weaknesses, and though later disproved by many archaeological discoveries, this hypothesis agreed extraordinarily well with the “ civilizing” and unifying aims for the peninsula proposed by the new northern bourgeoisie, a prime requisite for its long-lasting academic success. Although Pigorini never explicitly emphasized this aspect o f his theory, it is easy to understand how the ruling elite o f the young nation was interested in a cultural legitimation o f the new state. This was a very difficult task to perform in the field o f classical archaeology, whose best monuments are in fact concentrated in the central and southern parts o f Italy; from this point o f view, prehistory, with its mosaic o f Italic “ peoples” (an aspect stressed also in the term “ Palaeoethnology” ) was a much better candidate. This fact can explain the interest in prehistory among politicians in the years o f unifica­ tion; it is not a coincidence, on the other hand, that contemporary debates in the late twentieth century about the historical “ legitimation” o f a unified Europe seek to exclude the R om an period, preferring the more reassuring prehistoric or post-Classical periods (note the success o f recent exhibitions on various “ ancient” European peoples such as the Phoenicians and the Celts). O n a more general level, despite the creation o f various chairs o f archae­ ology and classical topography, the first 50 years o f Italian archaeology were characterized by the dominance o f the Superintendances (State Antiquity Offices), directly responsible to the General Direction o f Fine Arts and Antiquities, whose members were also the best trained and most experi­ enced scholars. Some o f them, like Orsi, Colini and Boni, worked with methods o f study and analysis o f stratigraphy, ancient monuments and material culture so advanced as to give rise to our admiration, even today.

Fascist archaeology The main characteristics o f Italian archaeology at the turn o f the century were a careful critique o f historical and archaeological sources, a good stand­ ard o f fieldwork, close collaboration with naturalists, the development o f the analysis o f ancient monuments and topographical surveys. All these achieve­ ments were to be greatly affected by the general reaction throughout Europe

112

FASCIST ARCHAEOLOGY

against positivist methods and, more generally, against evolutionism, typical o f the human sciences in the first decades o f the twentieth century In Italy, the champion o f these idealist trends, which have dominated our intellectual culture until recent years (D ’Agostino 1991), was Benedetto Croce. The divorce between humanistic and scientific culture, a true horror o f the use o f experimental methods in the human sciences, a belief in the supremacy o f spiritual categories in ancient societies and a consequent con­ tempt for the study o f material culture were the preferred features o f idealist historiography and, at the same time, the preconditions for the frightening decline in the work and research methods o f historians and archaeologists in the fascist period (Canfora 1980, 1989, Manacorda 1982a, Peroni 1992). Fascism was not a sudden form o f madness among our people, but the precise answer o f the majority o f the financial and industrial elites to the dan­ gers o f social turmoil and, at the same time, to the aggressive international markets. In this perspective, the glorification o f the Rom an as the national past was a dreadful weapon o f propaganda. Luciano Canfora has rightly observed that the obsessive idea o f a continu­ ity between Rom an and fascist Italy represents the only original contribu­ tion o f the regime to the cultural policy o f our country (Canfora 1989). In an impressive analogy to what happened in Germany, where Nazism allowed the creation o f more than 25 chairs o f prehistoric archaeology, in Italy it was classical archaeology, above all in the universities, that benefited from close (often slavish) submission to political directives. In exchange for the ideology created by historians and classical archaeologists, these scholars had a kind o f cultural control and an effective position o f academic power in the field o f studies on the ancient world, which they still retain today. Besides some good initiatives, like the creation o f a large exhibition on ancient R om e, later transformed into the Museum o f Rom an Civilization, or the recovery o f two well preserved R om an ships from Lake N em i (unfor­ tunately destroyed in the last days o f the Second World War), the most con­ troversial, if also the most impressive, intervention o f the regime was, in this perspective, the long-lasting programme o f works carried out between 1928 and 1939 in the area o f the R om an Forum and o f the Coliseum (Manacorda 1985). An enormous financial effort allowed much excavation and restora­ tion but, at the same time, Mussolini s desire to celebrate the fascist city in the heart o f the ancient one, and his supervision, to this aim, o f the architects who effectively designed the actual physiognomy o f the central archaeolog­ ical area, allowed a criminal division o f the Forum into two parts, with the building o f the Via delTImpero, as well as the destruction o f some “ minor” monuments, some houses and quarters o f ancient and medieval origin, and even o f the Velia, one o f the hills on which rose the core o f the archaic city.

113

NA TIO N A LISM W ITHOUT A NATION: THE ITALIAN CASE

Figure 6.1

Mussolini m aking his personal contribution to the Forum excavations (Archeo,

February 19S9).

The “ D uce” himself participated in the inauguration o f this enterprise, delivering the first blow o f the pick-axe (Fig. 6.1); the ideological implica­ tions o f the entire operation are still visible today, thanks to the big marble maps representing the successive stages o f expansion o f the Rom an Empire compared with the boundaries o f the fascist colonial estates. It is sad to observe how, even in the post-war years, this shameful distor­ tion o f one o f the most important archaeological areas in the world was accepted as part o f the modern “ look” o f the city. In the 1970s many intel­ lectuals contributed to a critical reassessment o f the fascist initiative, raising the question whether the separate parts o f the Forum should be reunited, and a modern “ archaeological” park created (Cederna 1979), but there was a vigorous reaction against the proposals, masked behind concern about an increase in car traffic! C om ing back to the fascist years, we must observe that at the beginning o f that period the academic development o f prehistory was still strongly con­ ditioned by the centralizing personality o f Pigorini, who did not want any other chair to be created in Italy, and who died in 1927, six years after the advent o f the regime. Although fascism displayed only a minor interest in prehistory, idealist and nationalist concepts produced irreparable damage in this field too. Like their German colleagues, who speculated upon the

114

L O C A L I S M AS P O S T - N A T I O N A L I S M

supremacy o f the Aryan race, some o f our prehistorians proclaimed the importance o f the “ mediterranean” race, while the Neanderthal skull dis­ covered in the Guattari cave, in 1939, was (almost incorrectly) defined as the “ first Italian” . Another aspect o f fascist archaeology was the effort devoted to the organ­ ization o f excavation and research in the recently conquered colonies (vari­ ous authors 1986); the leadership o f such a mission could mean, in this field, a wonderful “ spring-board” for a future academic career (Manacorda 1982b). The short historical picture outlined here can be completed by observing that the 1930s were characterized by the first “ academic” exploitation o f the mass-media (radio and documentaries), a further development that can help us to understand how deep was the fascist mark on Italian archaeology.

Localism as post-nationalism The dramatic fall o f the fascist regime notwithstanding, many leading Italian archaeologists succeeded in retaining their positions o f power in the disci­ pline; on the other hand, the climate o f strong ideological and political ten­ sion and the substantial hegemony o f the Left in the cultural field prevented Italian archaeology from undergoing any further substantial “ pollution” by nationalistic elements. Last, but not least, we must not forget that the post­ war (and Cold War) period is an age o f general re-orientation and inter­ nationalization in the market strategies o f the Western elites. The birth o f the European Com m on Market must be seen in this light. It is not a coincidence that, as a symbolic verification o f this new political and intellectual climate, the 1960s were characterized by an impressive develop­ ment o f exhibitions, congresses and books on the richly decorated buckets o f the Early Iron Age Hallstatt period from northeastern Italy and the neigh­ bouring Alpine region (Situla art), organized primarily by a leading scholar such as Massimo Pallottino and involving Italian, Austrian and (then) Yugo­ slav colleagues. The choice o f this archaeological theme proved a big success; as a matter o f fact, two o f the countries involved (Italy and Austria), although defeated in the recent war, were active participants in the “ Western world” , while Yugoslavia was considered the most reliable “ partner” in the Socialist bloc. The dominant trend o f the post-war period after 20 years o f centralizing dictatorship has been, understandably, the development o f local (sometimes openly secessionist) initiatives, systematically controlled, at the political level,

115

N A TIO N A LISM W ITHOUT A NATION: THE ITALIAN CASE

by the new central Christian-Democrat power, concerned not to allow the emergence o f powerful forces in those regions (for example Tuscany, Emilia and Umbria) where the political influence o f the Italian Communist Party was greatest. In the archaeological field this situation gave rise to a multiplication o f academic chairs and a considerable increase in the number o f scholars engaged in the State Antiquities Office, today known as the Ministry o f Cultural and Environmental Affairs. Another characteristic o f the recent decades, often again in opposition to the pervasive role o f the state, is the emergence o f several groups o f amateur archaeologists, a phenomenon closely linked to an increasing interest in archaeology in the media. Almost inevitably, in this situation, any attempt to unify the different methodological “ souls” o f Italian archaeology has met quite insuperable bar­ riers. The most important initiative was the creation in the 1960s o f the leftwing oriented group o f scholars behind the journal Dialoghi di Archeologia, under the patronage o f the famous historian o f ancient art, Ranuccio Bianchi Bandinelli. Although they produced the best Italian periodical in the discipline, and several well organized seminars and congresses, the demise o f this group was heralded several times in the 1980s. In the field o f prehistory, a brief and interesting season o f debate, coinciding with an often not very critical assimilation o f the theories o f the N ew Archaeology (Cuom o di Caprio 1986), was soon compromised by the differences in the level o f study in various parts o f the peninsula and by the successful initiative o f the more conservative circles o f scholars who pretended to “ guide” the changes and tried, in this way, to avoid the loss o f academic power, which the establish­ ment o f new approaches to prehistoric studies would have inevitably brought (Guidi 1987, Peroni 1990). As a matter o f fact, the only recent successful attempt to unify the methods o f study in Italian archaeology has been the introduction by Andrea Carandini, a classical scholar who, most untypically, proclaims a “ diachronic” approach to archaeology, o f the Harris matrix, which was rapidly accepted as the official standard for any excavation by the Ministry for Cultural and Environmental Affairs. The dominant trend o f “ regionalization” in Italian archaeology can be seen very clearly, for example, in Sicily and in Sardinia, where the majority o f scholars are o f local origin and, at the same time, there is a strong mistrust (suitably mixed with a sort o f academic “ self-sufficiency”) expressed towards archaeologists coming from outside. The situation in northern Italy, espe­ cially in the prehistoric field, seems to be more complex. Here, a tradition­ ally high academic standard has produced, despite some differences o f approach, a “ mainstream” school o f research (Guidi 1992), which is aware o f modern excavation methods and in some cases also o f “ middle range

116

PO STSCRIPT

theory” , and attuned to the possibilities o f close collaboration with natural scientists, but apparently more interested in the study o f material culture than in explanation o f the archaeological data. The traumatic events in Italian politics in the early 1990s show that Italy is at a crucial point o f its history, daily announced by the newspapers (which are owned, not by chance, by a few influential fractions o f the dominant power bloc) as the “ birth o f the second R epublic” . In this situation, the emergence o f a strong localism (which in the north takes on the appearance o f a true secessionist movement, arguing for the creation o f a “ federal state” ) is not a good sign. The long-lasting tradition o f centralization in the first decades o f the unified state, during fascism and in the “ first” Republic, has on the other hand proved to be a severe restraint on positive and often cul­ turally flourishing local traditions. In the course o f this important historical transition, Italian archaeology also lives in a peculiar, schizophrenic condition, fluctuating between the temptation o f a decisive atomization into different local schools and o f a regionalization o f the former unitary State Antiquities administration, and the demand for a desired but difficult methodological unity. As a supreme irony o f history, the “ unity in difference” o f a famous slogan o f the most influential leader o f the Italian Communist Party, Palmiro Togliatti, seems to be, more than ever, realized in today’s post-Communist age.

Postscript The first draft o f this chapter was written three months before Italy’s political elections in April 1994; their dramatic results, with the advent o f a rightwing government for the first time in 50 years o f Republican history, pose new and complex questions. As it is, the members o f the Northern League, advocates o f a federal, not a centralized state, work together in the political majority with the so-called “ post-fascists” ; last, but not least, the main polit­ ical party o f the alliance is significantly called Forza Italia. For many o f these leaders, the building o f a new cultural hegemony (still retained, with some difficulty, from the Left) has become a “ must” ; in this sense we can probably expect a renewed flourishing o f nationalism, possibly strengthened by the (understandable) opposition expressed in the European Parliament to the nomination o f “ post-fascist” ministers in our government. If this proves (as I hope it will not) to be a true “ regime” , archaeology will hardly escape the demands o f obedience to the principles o f the “ new” ideology. . .

117

N A T IO N A L ISM W ITHOUT A NATION: TH E ITALIAN CASE

Bibliography Bianchi Bandinelli, R . 1976. Introduzione alVarcheologia. R om e: Laterza. Canfora, L. 1980. Ideologie del classicismo. Turin: Einaudi. — 1989. Le vie del classidstno. R o m e : Laterza. Cederna, A. 1979. Mussolini urbanista. R o m e : Laterza. C u o m o di Caprio, N . 1986. O nde di propagazione della N ew Archaeology in Italia. Rivista di Archeologia 10, 59-71. D ’Agostino, B. 1991. T h e Italian perspective on theoretical archaeology. In Archaeological theory in Europe; the last, three decades, I. H odder (ed.), 52-64. London: R outledge. Guidi, A. 1987. T h e development o f prehistoric archaeology in Italy: a short review. Acta Archaeologica 58, 237-47. — 1988. Storia della paletnologia. R o m e: Laterza. — 1992. T h e Italian pluriverse. Different approaches to prehistoric archaeology. Paper pre­ sented at the Theoretical Archaeology Group Annual M eeting, Southam pton, England. M anacorda, D. 1982a. C ento anni di ricerche archeologiche italiane: il dibattito sul metodo. Quaderni di Storia 16, 85-119. — 1982b. Per un’indagine sull’archeologia italiana durante il vcntennio fascista. Archeologia Medievale 9, 443-70. — 1985. II piccone del regime. R o m e: Curcio. Patterson, T. 1986. T h e last sixty years: towards a social history o f Am erican archaeology in the U nited States. American Anthropologist 88, 7-26. Peroni, R . 1990. “ D ottrina e m etodologia della ricerca preistorica” : contributo alia lettura critica di un ’operazione culturale. In GedenkschriftfurJurgen Driehaus, F. M . Andraschko Sc W -R . Teegen (eds), 1-14. M ainz am Rhein: Philipp von Zabern. — 1992. Preistoria e protostoria: la vicenda degli studi in Italia. In Le vie dellapreistoria, 7—70. R o m e : Manifestolibri. Various authors, 1986. Larcheologia italiana nel Mediterraneo fwo alia Seconda Guerra mondiale. Catania: Centro di Studi per l’Archeologia del CNR.

118

C H A P T E R SEVEN

Three nations or one? Britain and the national use of the past Timothy Champion

Great Britain presents a pattern o f national identities that, even in the tangled history o f European nationalisms, is uniquely complex. Even if we exclude Ireland, which has been in whole or in part a constituent element o f the United Kingdom since 1801, and which is considered separately in Chapter 8 o f this volume, we have to deal with the idea o f Britain as a whole as well as with the three separate countries ofEngland, Wales and Scotland. Each has its own distinctive national identity, and their archaeology and history offer very different possibilities for exploitation in the cause o f constructing a national past. The three parts o f Britain each have a different set o f peoples in their pasts who have to be accommodated. In England it is a question o f the pre-Rom an population, and then successively the Romans, Anglo-Saxons, Vikings and Normans; all o f these groups can be portrayed as leaving some legacy to the landscape, economy, language, culture or society ofEngland. In Wales, it is the pre-Rom an Celts and the Romans and Anglo-Normans; both the latter played a smaller part in the development o f Welsh culture than in England, and can therefore be more readily cast as invaders and outsiders than as ances­ tors. In Scotland there is an even more complex picture: pre-Rom an Celts and Piets, followed by Romans and Saxons and then in turn by Gaelic and Norse settlers, have all contributed significantly to Scottish cultural and his­ torical consciousness. The subsequent history o f the relationship between the three distinctive cultural groups and the structures o f political power within which they were ruled also shows a very varied pattern. A unified kingdom o f England had been created by the tenth century A D , and despite Viking and N orm an inva­ sions and internal dynastic disputes, it has maintained a high degree o f polit­ ical continuity as an independent state, with a consciousness o f its own cultural and national identity, however that has been defined from time to

119

BR IT A IN AND TH E N A T IO N A L U SE OF T H E P A ST

time. It has seldom been seriously threatened by external forces, and its boundaries have mostly been set by the sea. It has, therefore, not been exposed to many o f the problems that have faced other nations in Europe, o f political domination or territorial pressure. Scotland also had a history as a powerful, independent kingdom from the ninth century A D , unifying the whole o f the country by the eleventh cen­ tury; it successfully resisted English attempts at conquest and developed an individual cultural and political identity with its own capital, laws, constitu­ tion, academic tradition and sense o f nationhood, before it was finally united with England and Wales in the Act o f Union o f 1707. Although econom i­ cally and politically the inferior partner in this union, Scodand at least had a history o f independent statehood to look back on. Wales, on the other hand, never existed as a modern state before its ultimate subjection to the AngloN orm an conquest in the thirteenth century and political incorporation into a joint kingdom by Acts o f 1536 and 1543. Its history was one o f resistance and defeat, which left the brief centuries o f post-Rom an independence as the one period o f the past to be valued positively, apart from the more remote millennia o f prehistory. Britain, as a political rather than a cultural or national entity, had only existed for a century, from the time o f the unification o f Scotland with Eng­ land and Wales in 1707 to the formation o f the United Kingdom o f Great Britain and Ireland in 1801. That century also saw the “ forging o f a nation” (Colley 1992), as the idea o f Britain took hold, encouraged internally by political unification but also externally by the long confrontation with France, the growth o f overseas trade and the expansion o f the empire. The figure o f Britannia became a popular symbol for this new nation from the end o f the seventeenth century (Warner 1985: 45—9). England, Scotland and Wales thus offered very different pasts to be used for the construction o f national myths, and some o f these pasts could be very profitably explored by the researches o f the antiquarians and the developing techniques o f the archaeologists. As we will see below, much archaeological research was carried out in a national context, to further the understanding o f a national past, but these pasts have seldom been exploited for overtly political ends. Even when politics has taken a nationalistic turn, the archae­ ological past has seldom been invoked.

120

F R O M A N T I Q U A R IA N S TO A R C H A E O L O G I S T S

From antiquarians to archaeologists The medieval vision o f the past revolved around a concept o f Britain peopled by the descendants o f the Trojans, occasionally accompanied by giants (MacDougall 1982; Piggott 1989: 132-53). It was a fanciful, mythological past, drawing distantly on classical and biblical scholarship for appropriate ances­ tors, but owing nothing to an understanding o f the physical evidence o f the past in the form o f objects and monuments. It was, however, the past o f Brit­ ain, descended from an allegedly eponymous ancestor, Brutus. The classical authors spoke only o f Britannia and Britanni, thus prescribing Britain and the Ancient Britons as appropriate categories o f thought, but they had more subtle connotations. The emphasis on the larger idea o f Britain, rather than simply on England, was useful during the extension o f the Norm an con­ quest through England and Wales, in stressing the unity o f the new polity. It played a similar role for Henry VII, the first king (reigned 1485-1509) o f the Tudor dynasty which had its origin in Wales, who named his eldest son after the British hero Arthur. This mythological past was largely discredited by the sixteenth century, although it still found ardent supporters. The first steps towards a new for­ mulation were taken by antiquarian topographers who combined documen­ tary research with primary observation in the field. John Leland (c. 1506-52) was commissioned by Henry VIII to record the antiquities o f his realm. Per­ haps the greatest scholar o f this new humanist learning was William Camden (1551-1623), whose Britannia was published in 1586 and became the form­ ative work for later generations o f antiquarians. Once again the scale o f these works embraced Britain as a whole, emphasizing the unity o f England and Wales. This scholarly tradition flourished in the later seventeenth and early eight­ eenth centuries, with the work o f such antiquaries as John Aubrey (1626— 1697), Edward Lhuyd (1660-1709) and William Stukeley (1687-1765) (Daniel 1975: 16—25). Lhuyds work on the language o f the Welsh (Piggott 1976: 55—86) was matched by the research o f the French scholar Paul-Yves Pezron, who established the connection between the pre-Rom an languages o f the classical Celts and the surviving languages o f the western European fringe (1699). This not only allowed the Ancient Britons to be brought to life as Celts, and to have their monuments associated with the classical evidence for Celtic culture, especially with bards and Druids (Smiles 1994: 46-112), but also gave a new value to the history and antiquities o f the west, especially o f Wales, which could be represented as the last stronghold o f an ancient European cultural tradition.

121

B R IT A IN AND TH E N A T IO N A L U SE OF T H E P A ST

England

The work o f antiquaries such as Aubrey and Stukeley laid the foundations for the scientific knowledge o f the prehistory and early history o f England. B y the early decades o f the nineteenth century a growing body o f evidence had been recorded, but the theory and the techniques necessary to order it into a systematic account o f the past were still lacking. It did nevertheless provide some foundation for the story o f the past, and it was still a story com ­ posed within a framework, not narrowly ofEngland, but o f Britain, albeit now a Celtic Britain. The eighteenth century enthusiasm for the Celts helped to promote the idea o f a British nation (Colley 1992) by showing the com m on ancestry o f the English, Welsh and Scots, and the Celts were even regarded as the origin o f the national traditions o f liberty which would later be thought o f as specifically English and assigned to the Anglo-Saxons (Smiles 1994: 124-6). Until the beginning o f the nineteenth century the efforts o f the antiquar­ ians were mostly unco-ordinated. Although they corresponded with each other, there was no national institution to act as a focus. The Society o f Anti­ quaries o f London (Evans 1956), which had existed since 1717, had preten­ sions to play such a pivotal role, but its influence was minimal, especially since transport and communication were so slow. Such a lack o f central structure would have worked against the emergence o f a programme o f national archaeology, if such an effort had been initiated on ideological grounds. The 1840s saw the foundation o f a cluster o f societies, at both the national and county levels, which would provide the main focus for much archaeo­ logical activity for the rest o f the nineteenth century. The British Archaeo­ logical Association was founded in late 1843, but within two years it was beset by quarrels between its leading members, and in 1845 split into two separate associations, which still survive: the British Archaeological Associ­ ation and the (Royal from 1866) Archaeological Institute o f Great Britain and Ireland (Weatherall 1994). The Institute was the larger and more active society, and its opening statement gives an indication o f its attitude to archae­ ology: to preserve from demolition or decay works from ancient times which still exist, is an object that should merit the attention o f the Govern­ ment, not merely on account o f their interest as specimens o f art, but respect for the great Institutions o f the country, sacred and secular, and a lively interest in their maintenance, must, as it is apprehended, be increased in proportion to the advance o f an intelligent appreciation o f monuments, which are tangible evidences o f the gradual establishment o f these Institutions. (Way 1845: 2)

122

F R O M A N T I Q U A R IA N S TO A R C H A E O L O G I S T S

The aim was not just conservation, but conservation with a strong polit­ ical message o f support for the traditional institutions o f Church, aristocracy and state: a loyal and patriotic feeling was inseparable from the growing interest in conservation o f all National Monuments, in the keen search after Historic truth, or in tracing the establishment o f National Institutions (ArchaeologicalJournal 12 , 1855, 399). The concept o f “ national monuments” seems to have been invoked with particular regularity, if not actually invented, in the 1840s, at a time o f grow­ ing political pressure for reform and o f fears o f revolution. There had been a parliamentary select Committee to consider legislation for national monu­ ments in 1841 (see below), and the phrase appears frequently in the pages o f the early volumes o f the Institute’s publication, the Archaeological Journal. The Institute’s title laid claim to the archaeology o f Great Britain and Ireland, and the references to national monuments, although never defined, presumably mean a British nation. Although the journal included coverage o f the antiquities o f areas o f the United Kingdom outside England, in prac­ tice, however, the Institute was predominantly English; it seldom held its annual meetings outside England, and membership was heavily skewed to the South East. Scotland and Ireland provided only a tiny percentage o f the members, but their own national organizations —the Society o f Antiquaries o f Scotland and the Royal Irish Academy, both o f which were active and had museums that would be adopted by the state as national museums in the nineteenth century — offered an alternative focus for these nationalisms. Wales, however, lacking a major national centre for the study o f its past, despite the formation o f the Cambrian Archaeological Association in 1846, throughout the nineteenth century regularly provided from a much smaller population a higher percentage o f the membership than Scotland and Ireland together; however, this declined markedly in the early twentieth century, coinciding with the foundation by the state o f major cultural insti­ tutions devoted to Welsh history (see below) (Ebbatson 1994: table 2). The concern for the “ great Institutions o f the country, sacred and secular” was reflected in the membership o f the Institute, which was an exclusive one, overwhelmingly comprising those with wealth and status, especially the aris­ tocracy, clergy and newly expanding professional classes (ibid. 1994: table 1). The main event o f their calendar was a meeting, held in a different city each year, but with very much the same menu o f lectures and visits to cathedrals, churches, castles and large country houses, reinforcing the importance o f the “ great Institutions” by the promotion o f their “ tangible evidences” .

123

BR IT A IN AND T H E N A T IO N A L USE OF T H E P A ST

The foundation o f the national institute was mirrored on a regional scale by the foundation o f county societies, o f which around 50 appeared in the 1840s and 1850s (Piggott 1974). These county societies were a microcosm o f the Institute in the narrow sector o f the population from which their membership was drawn, in the range o f their interests, and in the social nature o f their activities. Piggott (1974) has emphasized the importance in the growth o f these societies o f such factors as the development o f geology, the rise o f romanticism and the religious revival o f the Tractarian Movement, but the narrow range o f their membership and the particular concern for the monuments and the archaeology o f the medieval period suggest a significant concern for the maintenance o f the bastions o f the political order. These societies, whether national or regional, offered a congenially exclu­ sive forum for the members o f the newly emerging middle classes to mingle with the traditional power blocks, the landed aristocracy and the Church, and to emphasize a particular vision o f the nation, and the values o f the great institutions which had upheld its historic structures o f power. The main period o f their foundation was in the 1840s and 1850s; thereafter the social and political need had been satisfied, but many o f the societies continued to exist and they formed a network for the promotion o f an interest in and a knowledge o f the past o f their particular region. In contrast to the mainly medieval interests o f these societies, there was another strand to the development o f archaeology in the middle o f the nine­ teenth century in England, allied much more closely to the emerging disci­ plines o f anthropology and ethnography. This was primarily devoted to the study o f human origins, where research in the river gravels o f southern Eng­ land and northern France had by 1860 laid the foundations for our knowl­ edge o f the lower palaeolithic. This demonstration o f the condition o f the earliest human society was an integral part o f the intellectual support for the nineteenth century belief in progress and social evolution, which in turn underpinned the European programme o f imperial expansion and the dom ­ ination o f non-European societies (Trigger 1989: 110-47). It is no coinci­ dence that the archaeological evidence for such an evolutionary ideology was provided in the long established and increasingly imperialistic nations o f Britain and France, whereas the techniques to extend history backwards on the basis o f a material culture history began in Scandinavia, and especially the beleaguered kingdom o f Denmark. Far from stressing national identities, this anthropological archaeology was more concerned with the superiority o f European society as a whole than with the past orp resent o f any individual nation, although: by creating a shared ideology o f evolutionary superiority it contributed to a phase o f competitive emulation between the European nations as they sought to fulfil their impe­

124

F R O M A N T I Q U A R IA N S TO A R C H A E O L O G I S T S

rial destinies. The archaeology o f the earliest humans did, therefore, indirectly contribute to an alternative vision o f the nation in its global context, and the concern for the evolution o f civilization from savagery could be brought to bear upon the contemporary political climate. General Pitt Rivers (1827— 1900) was an anthropologist and archaeologist whose own work lay mostly in the later prehistoric fields, but who shared a lasting desire to demonstrate the reality o f human evolution and progress (Bowden 1991). In 1882, the same year as the first legislation for the protection o f ancient monuments was successfully promoted by Sir John Lubbock (who was Pitt-Rivers son), the General, who was himself to become the first Inspector o f Ancient M onu­ ments under the terms o f this act, commented on the practical utility o f anthropology thus (1882: 507): Nothing, indeed, can be more foreign to our subject than party poli­ tics, but for this very reason, if for no other, we should endeavour to give a practical turn to our science. The moment also is auspicious for such an attempt. Party politics run so high, that measures are rarely considered upon their merits; representative institutions have been car­ ried so far that ignorance is better represented than knowledge, and knowledge is swamped by ignorance; the fundamental laws o f society are disregarded in favour o f a time-serving policy, and we run the risk o f a relapse o f civilisation. Clearly, archaeology and anthropology had a role to play, not only in justifying empire but also in maintaining the traditional patterns o f a hierar­ chical and aristocratic society. By the end o f the nineteenth century, however, the old imperial certain­ ties and the confidence in progress and the benefits o f industrial civilization were beginning to wane (Wiener 1981). In their place emerged a new vision, not o f Empire or o f Britain so much as o f England, and in particular a cosy, rural, pre-industrial England; the industrial enterprise that had previ­ ously been the key to progress and prosperity became a threat to the true nature o f the nation, which was in danger o f extinction. Projects were begun to recover and preserve this fading past, its history, its music, its folklore (Colls & D odd 1986). The landscape o f England came to stand for the nation itself, and the growing concern for the preservation o f the countryside gave rise to environmental and ecological movements, sometimes tinged with obsessions about the origins o f the nation and national purity (Bramwell 1989: 104-60). Although the England that was now invoked was mostly a medieval or post-medieval one, and in particular the golden ages o f the Eliz­ abethan and Georgian periods, there was a certain timelessness to it; the

125

BR IT A IN AND TH E N A T IO N A L USE OF TH E PA ST

presence o f archaeological monuments in the landscape was a sign o f conti­ nuity and solidity. Archaeology too was thus affected by this change o f mood, and an archaeology o f landscape developed, mostly in the hands o f amateurs working on a very limited regional scale (Piggott 1963). The Prehistoric Society o f East Anglia, founded in 1908, was typical o f this new concern (Chapman 1985, Clark 1985). By the 1920s, archaeology was once again in process o f transformation. The growth o f a professional discipline and the increasing involvement o f the state (see below) represented a significant landmark in the evolution o f the amateur antiquarianism o f the early nineteenth century into a recognizably modern archaeology. Scotland

As in England, there was an antiquarian tradition in Scotland dating back to the start o f the eighteenth century (Piggott 1976: 133-59). The foundations for the scholarly study o f Scotland’s past were laid, with a solid foundation o f fieldwork and observation. In 1780 the Society o f Antiquaries o f Scotland was founded (Cant 1981), and this became the most important body for the collection o f evidence, the dissemination o f knowledge and the organization o f research into Scotland’s past (Stevenson 1981a,b). The Society promoted the study o f antiquities on a regional scale throughout Scotland, and in that sense it was promoting a national archaeology. But even so soon after the pacification o f Scotland in the wake o f the rebellion o f 1745, this cultural nationalism was not a political threat. Scotland’s attitudes to its past were ambivalent. Although its more remote prehistoric past presented a complex picture, the previously autonomous kingdom would have provided a powerful focus for nationalist claims. But Scotland also had a strong academic tradition, and the philosophers o f the Scottish Enlightenment o f the eighteenth century were expounding a belief in the progress o f human society. These philosophical arguments and the undoubted economic and political success o f many Scots in the newly uni­ fied kingdom (Colley 1992: 117-31) induced a belief in Scotland as a m od­ ern and progressive country. The most valued element o f its past was the Rom ans, the prototypes o f the successful and civilized nation they aspired to be. Despite the romantic enthusiasm for the ancient Celtic poetry o f Ossian as “ rediscovered” by James Macpherson, much less attention was given to the Celtic opponents o f R om e; though the highland clans o f the eighteenth century were recognized as the descendants o f the Celts, pride in their ancient culture and their military valour in opposition to both R om ans and English could exist, not quite incompatibly, alongside a rejection o f their backward clannishness (Smiles 1994: 42-3). It was not until well into the

126

F R O M A N T I Q U A R IA N S TO A R C H A E O L O G I S T S

nineteenth century that attitudes to the landscape and people o f the H igh­ lands changed; along with romantic appreciation o f mountain scenery, the Highlanders were claimed as the true archetypes o f Scotland, and endowed with the appropriate trappings o f invented tradition (Trevor-Roper 1983). Even so, Scottish nationalism still found its expression within an acceptance o f the advantages o f the union, and lacked the political antagonism that char­ acterized nationalism in many other European countries in the nineteenth century (Harvie 1994). D uring the nineteenth century the privileged position previously given to the Rom ans declined, and Scottish archaeology expanded to include its prehistoric and medieval monuments as well. The growing collections o f the Society o f Antiquaries o f Scotland formed a focus for research, and the Soci­ ety was also an active promoter o f systematic excavation, especially after the state assumed financial responsibility for the museum in 1851. Scottish archaeology was heavily influenced by developments in Scandinavia. This was partly attributable to the interest in the Norse component in the Scots past, but also to the similarity in status between Scotland and Denmark as small but historic nations in danger o f being eclipsed by more powerful neighbours. Daniel Wilson (1816-92; Secretary o f the Society o f Antiquaries o f Scotland 1847—53) was particularly impressed with the works o f the Dan­ ish archaeologists Thomsen and Worsaae, although he did not accept the Three Age System uncritically. His arrangement o f the Society’s museum and his published catalogue owed much to the work in Copenhagen (Wilson 1849) and his synthesis o f Scottish archaeology, The archaeology and prehistoric annals of Scotland (Wilson 1851), recalls the Primeval antiquities of Denmark by Worsaae (1849), who had visited Edinburgh in 1846. It was a work o f sys­ tematic synthesis o f national archaeology o f a type that was not matched for Wales until 1925, and has never been attempted for England (Stevenson 1981a: 100-13). The archaeology fostered by the Society o f Antiquaries o f Scotland was a national one, but it was very different from that practised by the national and county societies in England. There were few county societies in Scotland, where the Antiquaries remained the main focus for archaeological work; their comparative lack o f popularity was attributable to the very different structure o f society in Scotland, where the established Church and the landed aristocracy played much lesser roles, and to a different perception o f the nation (Clarke 1981:116). The supporters o f archaeology were also different: In Dublin . . . as in Copenhagen, a keen spirit o f nationality and patri­ otic sympathy has been enlisted in the cause o f archaeological science [but in Scotland] our native nobility have stood aloof from us . . . [and]

127

B R IT A IN AND TH E N A T IO N A L U SE OF TH E PA ST

we mourn the decay o f the old generous spirit o f nationality, which is evinced by the array o f names o f our nobility, members o f Parliament, and Scottish gentry, figuring in the lists o f the more fashionable Socie­ ties o f London. (Wilson, quoted by Stevenson 1981a: 4) Scotland’s archaeology was still a national one, even if it lacked the more fervent support and the sharper political edge that it attracted in Ireland and Denmark, or represented a national ideal very different from that which one strand o f English archaeology sought to promote and preserve. A similar cultural nationalism coloured the work o f the later nineteenth century, particularly that o f the dominant figure o f Joseph Anderson (18321916, Keeper o f the National M useum 1863-1913) (Graham 1975-6; Clarke 1981: 136-9; Stevenson 1981b: 154-83). H e continued along the path marked out by Wilson, providing a thorough synthesis o f Scottish archaeol­ ogy and collating the results o f an increasingly scientific programme o f field research. By the beginning o f the twentieth century, archaeology in Scotland was better endowed than in either England or Wales. It had a national museum, an active national society, a major national journal publishing the results o f systematic field projects, and recently published authoritative accounts o f its national past. The emergence o f a new professional archaeology, centred on the universities and government bodies (see below), therefore represented a much less dramatic transformation than south o f the border. Wales

The work o f Pezron and Lhuyd on the Celtic languages had a particular significance for Wales, and offered the opportunity for establishing a new and positive attitude towards the cultural tradition which had survived so long in the west, but which was under increasing threat from the economic and cultural dominance ofEngland. The eighteenth century was a period o f cul­ tural renaissance (Morgan 1981, 1983) and it saw a rebirth o f scholarly inter­ est in the history, literature, music and poetry o f early Wales. In some cases it was more than scholarly interest; Welsh traditions o f music and poetry were revived in the eisteddfod, and even the practices o f the Druids were re­ invented (Piggott 1975:123-82). N or were the monuments, the most visible evidence o f this Celtic past, ignored. Antiquarians had been at work since the sixteenth century, as in England, and there was renewed interest espe­ cially in the major stone monuments (Moore 1976). But, unlike Scotland, Wales lacked any national institutions to serve as a focus for this work: no national museum, no national association, no univer­ sity, not even a capital. Some o f the most important eighteenth century

128

T H E I N T E R V E N T I O N OF T H E S T A T E

accounts o f Welsh antiquities were written by travellers from England rather than by indigenous Welsh scholars. The major societies established to pro­ mote the knowledge o f Welsh culture, such as the Honourable Society o f Cym m rodorion (“ aboriginal people” , founded 1751), were based in Lon­ don (Smiles 1994: 40). The Cambrian Archaeological Association was eventually founded in 1846, at the peak time o f the foundation o f national and county societies in England (Nash-Williams 1949). Its cultural background was, however, very different; by the 1840s Wales was undergoing rapid transformation through the growth o f industry, and a new concept o f Welsh nationalism had emerged, rooted in religious non-conformity and political radicalism. The more remote Welsh past played only a minor role in this new debate. It is also noticeable that Wales had no equivalent to the English county societies; the role o f the established Church and the landed gentry was very different there, and the equivalent social and political needs did not arise. By comparison to England and Scotland, Welsh archaeology was languish­ ing backwardly by the end o f the nineteenth century. Despite the existence o f the Cambrian Association, much o f the work published was in an increas­ ingly archaic romantic and antiquarian vein (Daniel 1965). The progress towards a more professional archaeology, already well under way in England and Scotland by 1900, was not even begun in Wales until 1907. When Welsh nationalism and separatism did become a significant political force in the twentieth century, its main cultural focus was the restoration o f the Welsh language, rather than archaeology.

The intervention o f the state Active intervention in archaeology by the state was a remarkably late inno­ vation in Britain in comparison to most other European countries. Even when it did happen it was a minimal and fragmented response to the needs and opportunities o f the discipline. There is even today no integrated state archaeological service; there are separate administrative structures in each o f the four countries that make up the United Kingdom, and the legal and practical arrangements differ; there is no institute or academy, comparable to those that exist in other European countries or to the British Schools o f Archaeology that exist abroad, with a prime responsibility for pursuing research on the archaeology o f Britain.

129

BR IT A IN AND T H E N A T IO N A L U SE OF TH E PA ST

National museums

The earliest assumption by the state o f responsibility for archaeology was in the field o f museums. The British M useum was founded in 1753, but from the very start it has been more than a national museum. Its origin is rooted in the intellectual ideals o f the eighteenth-century enlightenment, and its encyclopaedic quest for knowledge (Wilson 1989: 13-22). Until the 1860s it had a single Department o f Antiquities for all countries. In 1866, a new Department o f British and Medieval Antiquities and Ethnography was estab­ lished; Ethnography was hived off in 1921, and in 1969 the residual British and Medieval Antiquities was divided into two separate departments, o f Prehistoric and Rom ano-British Antiquities and Medieval and Later Antiq­ uities (Bruce-M itford 1971: 12). There has thus never been a department with responsibility solely for the archaeology o f Britain, let alone England; despite the presence o f “British” in the titles o f the various departments, their interests and their collections have always spanned a much wider geograph­ ical and cultural range. We must remember that we collect beyond the confines o f “ the national heritage” . The British M useum is not a museum o f British antiquities. The M useum does o f course have a responsibility for the collection o f objects and works o f art produced in this country, but this must not lead it along narrow insular lines o f acquisition. The M useum collects for the whole world and forms a heritage which is not chauvinistic. (Wilson 1989: 28) Such a policy clearly raises questions about the notion o f a universal her­ itage, and o f the role o f the developed countries, especially the former colo­ nial powers o f Europe, in establishing the content o f such a heritage and in collecting it and making it available, but by rejecting a narrowly national or nationalistic role for the M useum, it has ensured that it did not develop as a national museum o f antiquities comparable to those founded in other Euro­ pean countries, especially in the middle o f the nineteenth century. Indeed, there was at that time some pressure on the British M useum to exercise greater care for the antiquities o f Britain (Kendrick 1951), which was reflected in the reorganization o f the 1860s. In 1866 the word British in the title o f the newly formed Department under Franks was all-important, for it had been in response to powerful outside criticism o f neglect by the National M useum o f our national antiquities that the Department had come into being. Criticism had begun to be vocal about 1845 . . . ; in 1866, “ British” in British and

130

T H E I N T E R V E N T I O N OF T H E S T A T E

Medieval was included not so as to give a true idea o f the scope o f the extraordinary omnium gatherum to which the name was applied. . ., but

to satisfy an outraged public that the National Museum did value and cater for our national antiquities. It made a nationalistic point. The dropping o f “ British” now allows titles to be devised which reflect the scopes o f the Departments more accurately and more rationally. It also recognises that the need to stress the nationalistic point no longer applies. (Bruce-Mitford 1971: 14-5) The British Museum felt it necessary in the middle o f the nineteenth cen­ tury to respond to pressure from Parliament and some highly placed individ­ uals by reorganizing and renaming departments; this reorganization did indeed produce better arrangements for prehistoric, Rom an and medieval antiquities, but not only from Britain since the Department continued to collect widely from Europe. The Museum has never set out to be a National M useum o f Britain or England, and indeed no such archaeological museum has ever existed. Things are organized very differently, however, in Scotland and Wales. In Scotland, the state took over responsibility for the museum o f the Society o f Antiquaries o f Scotland in 1851; after some doubts about the proper title o f the new institution, it eventually became known officially as the National M useum o f Antiquities o f Scotland (Stevenson 1981b). For the Society it was a solution to their long-standing financial problems and to the lack o f a per­ manent home for the growing collections, and for the state the new museum represented one o f a set o f museums and galleries in Edinburgh comparable to those being developed in London for public education. The museum has continued since then to exercise its role as the premier archaeological museum in Scotland and as the repository o f all the most significant archae­ ological material. In Wales, where the National Museum was not established until as late as 1907, it was part o f a programme to endow Wales with the cultural institu­ tions appropriate to a modern nation. Wales had been radically transformed by the growth o f industry in the nineteenth century, and the influence ofEnglish language and culture. The movement to seek national progress through modernization and education was combined with a desire to preserve the his­ tory o f the nation, which was seen to be under threat o f obliteration. In 1893 a federal University o f Wales was established to unite the existing colleges founded in the 1880s, secondary education was reformed in 1896, and in 1907 the National Library and National Museum were founded (Williams 1985: 231—2). Wales was thus provided with the cultural institutions for progress, and the resulting torrent o f trained scholars transformed the study

131

B R I T A I N A ND T H E N A T I O N A L U S E OF T H E P A S T

o f Welsh life and history. Two o f the archaeologists on the staff o f the National M useum in its early days, although not themselves Welsh, were representative o f a new breed o f professional specialist - M ortimer Wheeler (1890-1976; Keeper o f Archaeology, 1920-24; Director, 1924-26) and Cyril Fox (18821967; Keeper o f Archaeology, 1924-26; Director, 1926-48) - and their influ­ ence was to spread far beyond the borders o f Wales. Wheeler s Prehistoric and Roman Wales (1925) represented a major break with the romantic antiquarian approach to Welsh antiquity that had dominated the previous century; it was an account o f the archaeology o f a national territory, but its rigorous, scien­ tific concern for the evidence made no concessions to national mythology or nationalist pretensions. The M useum has continued to provide evidence for the remote past o f a national region, rather than for a nationalist past. Protecting the monuments

Great Britain had no legislation in respect o f its ancient monuments until the Ancient Monuments Protection Act o f 1882 (Saunders 1983). What was eventually passed into law then was a very emasculated version o f the original Bill that Sir John Lubbock (1834-1913; later Lord Avebury) had been trying to put through Parliament since 1872 (Murray 1989). Proposals had been made as early as 1841 by a Parliamentary Select Committee on National M onuments and Works o f Art for the protection o f some buildings and m on­ uments, but nothing had come o f it (Saunders 1983: 11). Lubbock met with strong opposition, not only because such legislation was seen to be an infringement o f the rights o f landowners, but also because o f jealousy over the growing importance o f an increasingly professional archaeological lobby, and even over the question o f the value o f ancient monuments to our national identity. The sites proposed for protection were all prehistoric, and some criticisms questioned whether such primitive structures should be celebrated and protected; they did not fit easily into a vision o f Britain as pro­ gressive and forward-looking, nor as an essentially Anglo-Saxon nation, to which the Celtic past had contributed little. Lubbocks Act did no more than provide for a schedule o f monuments which owners could transfer to the states guardianship, and establish the Inspectorate o f Ancient Monuments, but these provisions formed the basis for the successive modifications and strengthenings o f the Act until the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979, which is still in force and contains provision for the legal protection o f sites and monuments as well as actual management through guardianship. The Inspectorate was the beginning o f an important field o f professional employment by the state, and the ultimate origin o f the present-day state agencies, English Heritage, Historic Scotland and Cadw; its activity expanded considerably after 1910,

132

T H E I N T E R V E N T I O N OF T H E S T A T E

and responsibility for Scotland and Wales was transferred to the Scottish and Welsh Offices in the 1930s. The concept o f legal protection afforded to a schedule o f sites o f national importance is still in place, but the phrase “ national importance” was not defined in the original act. The question o f importance has now been addressed by the publication o f non-statutory criteria (see, for example, Wainwright 1984 for those in force in England), but the question o f the nation has never been defined. To Lubbock himself the phrase would have caused little difficulty; it was clearly the British nation as a whole whose past was to be protected in this way, although selection o f the sites to be included in the original schedule was devolved to local bodies: in Scotland to the Society o f Antiquaries o f Scotland, and in Ireland (for it should be noted that the original schedule also included sites in Ireland) to the Royal Irish Acad­ emy, but in England and Wales, where no such national organizations existed, to a single committee o f archaeologists. But the question remains open. It has been avoided largely because the definition o f importance has placed greater weight on stricdy archaeological measures o f significance, such as the rarity or state o f preservation o f the monument, rather than on its symbolic significance for the construction o f a story o f the national past. The question has, therefore, seldom arisen, and conflicts over the protection o f monuments have for the most part involved questions o f economic advan­ tage to be gained by development or destruction against arguments for the archaeological importance o f a site, rather than questions o f national identity. The direct management o f sites through guardianship raised similar ques­ tions o f national importance, but the selection o f sites for such care was always somewhat random. The guardianship holdings grew steadily (now over 400 in England, 300 in Scotland and 100 in Wales), but always included some oddities. Recording the past

The sites selected for protection by inclusion in the original schedule o f the 1882 Act had been chosen on an informal basis and included some o f the best known prehistoric monuments, as well as some strange choices (Saun­ ders 1983: 12). A systematic inventory o f the country’s monuments simply did not exist to provide the basis for a more rational selection. By the begin­ ning o f the twentieth century, the need for such a list was more acutely appreciated. A growing sense o f the loss o f the past stimulated a response that aimed to record and preserve it before it finally disappeared. In addition to historical and photographic enterprises, there was an important archaeolog­ ical initiative; the government established three Royal Commissions to com­ pile inventories o f the monuments o f England, Wales and Scotland, although

133

BR IT A IN AND T H E N A T IO N A L USE OF TH E P A ST

no similar organization was set up for Ireland. The body for England was given the title o f Royal Commission for the Historical Monuments o f England; those for Wales and Scotland were called Royal Commissions for the Ancient and Historical Monuments. Despite the difference in title, the Commissions had similar tasks: “ to make an inventory o f the Ancient M on ­ uments and Constructions connected with or illustrative o f the contem­ porary culture, civilization and conditions o f life o f the people ofEngland, excluding Monmouthshire, from the earliest times to the year 1700, and to specify those which seem most worthy o f preservation” . Although their tasks have subsequently been modified, especially by the extension o f the cut-off date o f 1700 to include more recent periods, these Commissions remain in place and are still the primary agencies for the recording o f the buildings and monuments o f the archaeological past o f the three countries. The setting up o f three separate Commissions, each with a specific remit for the monuments “ connected with or illustrative o f ’ their countries, gives explicit recognition to the distinctive national pasts o f the three countries. It is thus in marked contrast to the concepts that lie behind Lubbock’s Act, with its implicit idea o f a unified nation, including Ireland. The university sector

Archaeology had been recognized in some form in the universities since the establishment o f the Disney Chair o f Archaeology in Cambridge in 1852. However, this post had been a part-time sinecure, and its holders had had little impact on the subject. Posts were subsequently created at other univer­ sities, such as London and Liverpool, but they were in classical or N ear East­ ern fields rather than European or prehistoric, which meant that the archae­ ology o f Britain was excluded from university study. A major sign o f change was the restructuring o f archaeology at Cambridge in 1926-7, which resulted in a full-time, and prestigious, chair and the co-ordination o f other appointments (Clark 1989: 1—58) W heelers appointment in 1920 to the National M useum o f Wales was to be held jointly with a lectureship at the University College in Cardiff, thus initiating the teaching o f archaeology in Wales. Shortly afterwards, the Abercromby Chair o f Prehistoric Archaeology was founded at the University o f Edinburgh, and Gordon Childe was appointed as its first holder (Trigger 1980: 60-61). The post was created under the terms o f the will o f John Abercromby, who specified that the person appointed should be proficient in the prehistory o f Europe and the Near East and in various European lan­ guages. It seems likely that this was designed to exclude certain potential applicants, since Abercromby had quarrelled with the Society o f Antiquaries o f Scotland over the standards o f archaeology in Scotland, and saw the chair

134

TH E IN T E R V E N T I O N OF TH E S T A T E

as a road to improvement (Stevenson 1981b: 179). From the outset, there­ fore, the post was intended to be much more than narrowly regional, and though both Childe and his successor, Stuart Piggott, carried out research in Scotland, the breadth o f their international interests admirably fulfilled the intentions. The fact that the senior academic post in Scottish archaeology has had such a non-national remit, however, seems more the result o f the per­ sonal disposition o f the founder than o f ideological objections to national­ ism. The attempts in the 1930s to found an Institute o f Archaeology in London, now part o f University College London, represented another step towards professionalism, since the Institute was seen as the training ground for a new generation o f specialists. Archaeology was expanding slowly in other univer­ sities, mostly as an offshoot o f history or classics, and it was not until the major growth o f British universities in the 1960s and 1970s that many new depart­ ments devoted solely to archaeology were founded. Although the expansion o f universities was a direct result o f government policy, the foundation o f sev­ eral major departments at that time in universities such as Southampton, Shef­ field and Reading was determined not by government, but by the perceived importatice o f the subject in the eyes o f the academic profession itself. Although there are very few appointments held by specialists in areas outside Europe and the Near East, the academic commitment to a broader field o f study has meant that the approach to archaeology generated by the univer­ sities has not been narrowly nationalistic. The consequences of state intervention

State involvement in archaeology came very late in European terms, and this lack o f earlier intervention clearly indicates a lack o f concern for the physical vestiges o f the more remote past o f the country, either for their own sake or as a source o f ideological support. This tardy involvement in the discipline did, however, have important consequences. By the time the major state bodies became significantly active, archaeol­ ogy was beginning to develop into its recognizably modern form o f a pro­ fessional and academic discipline and field o f employment. The creation o f the Royal Commissions, and especially their growth after the First World War, and the expansion o f the Inspectorate o f Ancient Monuments after 1910 (Saunders 1983:16) were indeed themselves critical parts o f the process by which archaeology became a possible career for professional employment, but the roles o f the universities and o f provincial museums were also impor­ tant. But professionalism was also growing in the sense o f a more detailed body o f specialist knowledge and o f higher standards o f work, changing archaeology into a much more technical field o f practice and expertise. The

135

BR IT A IN AND TH E N A T IO N A L U SE OF T H E PA ST

publication o f works such as Burkitts Prehistory (1921), Fox’s The archaeology of the Cambridge region (1923), Childe s The dawn of European civilisation (1925) or W heelers Prehistoric and Roman Wales (1925) represented a categorical transformation in the nature o f archaeological scholarship, while excavators such as Wheeler were about to transform the nature o f fieldwork in a similar manner. O ne consequence o f this increasingly complex body o f knowledge, and the development o f an interpretive framework to encompass it, was that it became progressively more difficult to use the archaeological evidence to give any particular desired account o f the past. The greater the body o f evidence, and the more trustworthy the foundations on which its ordering rested, the more resistant it became to fanciful interpretation. Another consequence o f increasing professionalism was that the exponents o f archaeology became more committed to the standards o f professional practice, which emphasized technical competence, scientific neutrality and responsibility to the disci­ pline, and therefore less prone to the temptations o f alternative ideologies. It was also important that these new government bodies - the Inspector­ ate and the Commissions in particular, but also the staff o f the national muse­ ums - were either civil servants or employed on a similar basis. They were, therefore, imbued with the traditions o f the civil service, which included, am ong other things, a commitment to political neutrality. It should also be noted that in the Inspectorate and the Commissions the professional archae­ ologists were specialists subject to the higher authority o f administrators. All in all, both the growth o f professionalism and the specific nature o f the career opportunities served to isolate archaeologists increasingly from the political arena. The expansion o f the university sector, also from the 1920s and more spec­ tacularly from the 1960s, represented a similar growth o f a new area o f employment with its own specific orientation. Childe s appointment to the chair o f the new department at Edinburgh, together with the restructuring o f the arrangements at Cambridge, clearly mirrored the growth o f the new technical scholarship and its emphasis on empirical data collection, whereas the foundation o f the Institute o f Archaeology in London was intended to improve the technical standards o f the profession. The expansion o f the 1960s also coincided with a period o f theoretical ferment in the discipline, known then as the “ N ew Archaeology” , which sought to establish archaeology as a science and put particular emphasis on its potential for producing generali­ zations about human society rather than specific accounts o f particular soci­ eties or places. British universities have a praiseworthy record o f contributing to the archaeology o f their own regions, and for practical and financial reasons much o f their work has been carried out in Britain, but none o f them has

136

H E R IT A G E AND T H E D E M O C R A T IZ A T IO N OF T H E PA ST

ever seen its primary research responsibility to lie in the archaeology o f its own country. N o university has devoted itself to the archaeology o f England, and in particular the departments in Wales and Scotland, although some have remained small and in practice have extended themselves little beyond Britain, have never restricted themselves narrowly to the study o f Wales or Scotland. British universities, perhaps more so than those o f other European countries, also have a history o f research activity abroad, not just in the traditional classical areas such as Italy, Greece and the Near East, but also else­ where in Europe and even further afield. Though the scientific and generalizing claims o f the “ New Archaeology” have now receded somewhat, to be replaced by a variety o f theoretical approaches, one o f the ideas that has grown up in its place is a greater degree o f critical self-awareness about the practice o f archaeology, and the role o f the archaeologist in shaping the interpretation o f the past (Champion 1991). Although this o f itself does not make it less likely that an archaeologist would adopt any specific interpretation o f the past, or a nationalist one in particular, it does mean that such an interpretation should be more self-evident to its exponent and to other archaeologists and therefore less liable to uncritical use in the wider political field. These new areas o f employment, especially in the government service and in universities, have characteristically been ones in which applications for posts have been open to anyone and appointments have been made on merit. English, Welsh and Scots archaeologists have been appointed to such posts indiscriminately, but the numerical preponderance o f the English has inevi­ tably meant that the majority o f posts have gone to them. In consequence, the majority o f the staff o f the government agencies and the universities in Wales and Scotland have been English, and this has in turn reinforced the tendencies described above, which have inhibited a nationalistic interpre­ tation o f the archaeology o f these countries. It would not be true to say that such tensions have never existed; one Director o f the National Museum o f Antiquities o f Scotland had “ a general dislike o f anything English” , which extended to the Society o f Antiquaries o f London and Gordon Childe, but this may have been attributable to personal foibles as much as to committed nationalism (Graham 1981: 221).

H eritage and the dem ocratization o f the past Perhaps the most important recent development in the public appreciation o f the past, and its incorporation into public consciousness and debate, has

137

BR IT A IN AND TH E N A T IO N A L USE OF TH E P A ST

been the rise o f the “ heritage industry” (Hewison 1987). This newly coined term combines several different processes, and perhaps masks them by unit­ ing them in a single name. The word “ heritage” , scarcely used in this context before the 1980s, denotes a new way o f relating to the past, distinct from the formal disciplines o f history and archaeology, with their own traditional modes o f attracting a public, whereas “ industry” signifies the transition from a formerly professional, public service to a commercialized environment. But the factors involved are very complex. The policy towards the heritage adopted by the Conservative government in power since 1979 has been to emphasize the necessity for it to generate income, to lessen the reliance on public subvention and to promote the role o f private enterprise. This move towards increased commercialism has coin­ cided with the global transformation o f the tourist industry; its rapid growth and organizational development, coupled with a relative decline in the cost o f travel, has meant that individual countries increasingly specialize in some particular branch o f tourist attractions. Britain, unable to compete with other countries for sun and sand, or for winter snow, has specialized in her­ itage tourism; though the past is important to the tourist industry o f other European countries, such as Greece, Britain more than most other countries has come to rely on its historical and archaeological attractions to generate tourist income. The rise o f the tourist industry has coincided for Britain with the decline o f many o f its traditional manufacturing and commercial centres, and the dwindling importance o f the military and naval establish­ ments that were the backbone o f the economy for many regions. Many towns that had formerly relied on manufacturing industry, maritime trade or the armed forces had little alternative when faced with the loss o f their livelihood except the tourist industry, and also few tourist assets except the physical remains o f their redundant past. But there were other forces at work, too. There has been a greater will­ ingness to question the established idea o f nationhood, to reassess the rele­ vance o f an aristocratic, military and imperial past and to re-evaluate the role o f industry and the working class, and o f other excluded groups such as women and ethnic minorities. This has been combined with a renewed enthusiasm for alternative sources o f evidence about the past, including oral testimony, old photographs and the material culture o f the past, to give voice to a “ history from below” (Samuel 1995). The effect o f these processes on archaeology and on the perception o f the national identity has been equally complex. Although academic archaeology has been left largely unscathed to bemoan the commercialization o f the past and the loss o f authenticity as education gives way to entertainment, the public presentation o f the past has been transformed in many ways. The

138

H E R IT A G E AND TH E D E M O C R A T IZ A T IO N OF TH E PA ST

drive to create profit from the tourist and leisure market has meant a concen­ tration on a narrow range o f monuments that have a ready appeal to a public, whether from Britain or from abroad. These have tended to be the more spectacular monuments and those around which an interesting story can be told, which allows the monument to be allocated to its appropriate place in the national history. Inevitably, therefore, royal palaces and medieval castles, ruined abbeys and country houses have played the major role in this com­ mercialized vision o f our national past, although augmented by military and industrial museums. A triumphalist past has thus been generated, securely based on the traditional institutions o f crown, Church and aristocracy, mili­ tary and imperial, untroubled by any internal conflict or self-doubt. It has drawn mostly on the archaeology o f the medieval and post-medieval periods, and in particular on its major standing buildings. But this vision o f the nation has not gone uncontested, and in some muse­ ums deliberate attempts have been made to suggest ways o f questioning it. While much o f the region around the naval base at Portsmouth, for example, has been establishing itself as a museum o f the “ Defence o f the R ealm ” , with historic naval buildings and surviving ships, the National Museums o f M er­ seyside have organized an exhibition investigating the role o f Liverpool in the slave trade and the place o f the black communities in Britain in the past four centuries (Tibbies 1994). Similarly, the Museum o f London organized an exhibition on the peopling o f London, to celebrate the constant influx o f people and the many ethnic minority groups who over the millennia have contributed to the culture and economy o f the city (Merriman 1993). In this way the dominant conception o f a British nation, or more correctly in these examples an English nation, has been challenged, and an alternative vision o f a multi-ethnic and multicultural nation has been suggested. In Wales the most dramatic monuments, and the most attractive to tour­ ists, are associated with outsiders and invaders, whether the Rom an remains at Caerleon or the Edwardian castles o f the north such as Conway and Caer­ narvon. Alongside these alien monuments another picture o f Wales has been generated, a folksy mixture o f the rural and the industrial (Jenkins 1992). Some displays o f the past are celebrating the role o f ordinary working people. Some museums, such as the People s Palace in Glasgow, have been using the traditional display techniques o f the museum to portray social history, including working-class life, for some time. More recently, new exhibits, whether in the form o f traditional museums or o f the newer theme parks built around redundant mines and factories, have been opened to cel­ ebrate the now vanishing crafts o f industrial Britain. Many o f these exhibits have focused attention not just on the economic success o f these industries, which underlay Britain’s former status in the world, but also to the hardship

139

BR IT A IN AND TH E N A T IO N A L USE OF TH E P A ST

and suffering o f the workers with which that success was bought, suggesting a less clearly triumphant attitude to our past. Until the recent adoption o f the term “ heritage” the English language has had no word in common use even approximately equivalent to the French patrimoine or its other European cognates. Heritage represents a different sort o f engagement with our national pasts: a wider appeal shared by more than the traditional museum-going minority, new elements in the past valued for different reasons, new modes o f experiencing the past, and new sources o f value and authority based on memory and experience as much as on the assertions o f academic specialists. Archaeology can play a significant role in meeting this popular demand for access to the past, but the episodes o f our history that have particularly attracted attention in this way have been the more recent ones. Few prehistoric monuments have the same capacity to inspire the public imagination as those o f the medieval and later periods, and the more remote prehistoric past is relegated to a minor role.

Towards the new Europe One o f the most important themes o f political debate in western Europe since the Second World War has been the movement towards a more unified structure, symbolized by the original signing o f the Treaty o f R o m e in 1957. In Britain, attitudes towards the emerging European Com m on Market, now the European Union, have polarised debate both within and between polit­ ical parties; throughout the 1980s and early 1990s the Conservative govern­ ment was divided between enthusiasts and opponents o f the European ideal. Government policy was therefore a compromise; it was committed to mem ­ bership, critical o f petty Brussels bureaucracy, eager for reforms, but opposed to greater integration which would further erode the powers o f the member nation-states, most especially at the level o f increased federalization. Within certain continental countries, however, especially the most economically, politically and culturally important ones such as France, Italy and Germany, there was powerful support for a programme o f increased integration, even ultimately leading to a federal Europe in which the identities o f the individ­ ual nations would be submerged. The United Kingdom has therefore been cast as the opponent o f federalism and the defender o f nations. The remote past has emerged as a battleground for the protagonists in the struggle to legitimate the concept o f a unified Europe in the face o f an his­ torical tradition which has grown up in a Europe o f nation-states, and has at least to some extent provided its ideological underpinning. There is no

140

TOW ARDS T H E NEW EUROPE

period in the written history o f Europe that can, with reasonable respect for the truth, be presented as an archetype o f the political unification and result­ ant peace and prosperity o f the longed-for Europe o f the future, and so its advocates have necessarily had to appeal to a more remote past, and the later prehistory o f the Bronze and Iron Ages have served well. The plentiful sup­ ply o f archaeological objects from throughout the continent, many o f them o f high artistic or technological quality, and showing a measure o f cultural homogeneity, has allowed the desired picture to be presented. The most obvious examples o f this trend are to be found in conferences, exhibitions and associated publications that have the stamp o f authenticity conveyed by detailed archaeological scholarship but which are aimed also at a wider audience. An exhibition o f the material o f the Hallstatt period, the first phase o f the Iron Age, held at Steyr in Austria, was subtitled “ Friihform der europaischen Einheit” (“ An early form o f European unity”). N or is it any coincidence that the Council o f Europe announced the Year o f the Bronze Age in 1994-5 as part o f its programme for the celebration o f Euro­ pean cultural achievement. The advance publicity for a conference held in Dublin in April 1995 as part o f this celebration hailed the Bronze Age as “ Europe's first golden age” , playing on the technical and artistic achievement o f the Bronze Age goldsmiths in Ireland and elsewhere as well as the idea o f a lost period o f European peace and harmony. But perhaps the most blatant example o f the rewriting o f prehistory in the interests o f European unity has been the treatment afforded to the Celts (Dietler 1994). As a people with an historically recorded presence in many parts o f western Europe, they have been very useful, and the torrent o f books published about them from the 1970s onwards must be related to the con­ temporary debate about Europe’s future. This interest in the Celts reached its peak in the huge exhibition held at the Palazzo Grassi in Venice during 1991 under the title “ I Celti —la prima Europa” (“ The Celts —the origins o f Europe”). The introductory sections to the catalogue made the political context quite clear: An essential part o f the exhibition is its subtitle . . . It was conceived with a mind to the great impending process o f the unification o f west­ ern Europe, a process that pointed eloquently to the truly unique aspect o f Celtic civilization, namely its being the first historically doc­ umented civilization on a European scale. In fact, how else could a people who fanned out from the central-eastern regions o f Europe all the way to the Atlantic Ocean and the North Sea, and even as far as the Black Sea, be described except in terms o f their common European denominator? We felt, and still feel, that linking the past to this present

141

BR IT A IN AND TH E N A T IO N A L USE OF TH E PA ST

was in no way forced, but indeed essential, and could very effectively call us back to our common roots. (Kruta et al. 1991: 14) In emphasizing this theme o f common roots, particular attention was paid to the similarity o f certain types o f artefact over long distances, and no ques­ tions were asked about the definition o f the concept o f Celts or about the relationship o f material culture to ethnic identity. Extravagant claims were made about the unity and ubiquity o f the Celts: the claim that “ it is com ­ monly agreed that all European cultures can trace their roots to Celtic ori­ gins” (Kruta et al. 1991: 11) embodies a distorted vision ofboth archaeology and modern Europe. In Britain, archaeological response to this misrepresentation o f the past has been limited; apart from some critical book reviews, there has been no systematic exposure o f the wrong or inappropriate interpretations being placed on the archaeological evidence. The argument has, however, entered a wider field o f public and political debate, in which archaeological and his­ torical exactitude takes second place to political purpose. The case against political unification is made on the grounds o f a similar appeal to the past, as when Margaret Thatcher, asked about the advantages o f future British m em ­ bership o f the European union, chose to extol the role o f Europe in the pro­ motion o f civilized values and human rights, and in particular the role o f Britain, but asserted that “ o f course Europe was never united . . . one o f the reasons why all this spirit o f enterprise, o f liberty and choice developed in Europe . . . was because we were not a total unity” (Sunday Correspondent, 5 Novem ber 1989). This is one o f the rare occasions on which political debate in Britain in the twentieth century has turned to the more remote past, but the appeal to a Europe o f nations, and to a British nationalism, or perhaps more correctly a narrower English nationalism, has once again been stimu­ lated by an external threat, not now a military threat o f conquest, but a polit­ ical threat o f federal incorporation.

Bibliography Bow den, M . 1991. Pitt Rivers: the life and archaeological work of Lieutenant-General Augustus Henry Lane Fox Pitt Rivers, DCL, FRS, FSA. Cam bridge: Cam bridge University Press. Bramwell, A. 1989. Ecology in the twentieth century: a history. London: Yale University Press. Bruce-M itford, R . 1971. Envoi. British Museum Quarterly 35, 8-15. Burkitt, M. C. 1921. Prehistory: a study of the early cultures in Europe and the Mediterranean basin. Cam bridge: Cam bridge University Press. Cam den, W. 1586. Britannia.

142

BIBLIO GRAPHY Cant, R . G. 1981. D onald Steuart Erskine, 11th Earl o f Buchan: founder o f the Society o f Antiquaries o f Scotland. In The Scottish antiquarian tradition, A. S. Bell (ed.), 1-30. Edin­ burgh: John Donald. Cham pion, T. C. 1991. Theoretical archaeology in Britain. In Archaeological theory in Europe: the last three decades, I. H odder (ed.), 129-60. London: Routledge. Chapm an, R . W. 1985. The Prehistoric Society, prehistory and society. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 51, 15-29. Childe, V. G. 1925. The dawn of European civilization. London: Kegan Paul. Clark, J. G. D. 1985. The Prehistoric Society: from East Anglia to the world. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 51, 1-13. — 1989. Prehistory at Cambridge and beyond. Cam bridge: Cam bridge University Press. Clarke, D. V. 1981. Scottish archaeology in the second half o f the nineteenth century. In The Scottish antiquarian tradition, A. S. Bell (ed.), 114-41. Edinburgh: John Donald. Colley, L. 1992. Britons: forging the nation 1707-1837. London: Yale University Press. Colls, R . & P. D odd (eds) 1986. Englishness: politics and culture 1880-1920. Beckenham: C room Helm. Daniel, G. E. 1965. Introduction. In Prehistoric and early Wales, I. L. Foster (ed.), 1-15. London: R outledge and Kegan Paul. — 1975. 150 years of archaeology. London: Duckworth. Dietler, M . 1994. “ O u r ancestors the Gauls” : archaeology, ethnic nationalism and the m anip­ ulation o f Celtic identity in m odern Europe. American Anthropologist 96, 584-605. Ebbatson, L. 1994. C ontext and discourse: Royal Archaeological Institute membership 1845-1942. In Building on the past: papers celebrating 150 years of the Royal Archaeological Institute, B. Vyner (ed.), 22-74. London: Royal Archaeological Institute. Evans, J. 1956. A history of the Society of Antiquaries. London: Society o f Antiquaries. Fox, C. 1923. The archaeology of the Cambridge region. Cam bridge: Cam bridge University Press. Graham, A. 1975-6. T h e archaeology o f Joseph Anderson. Proceedings of the Society of Anti­ quaries of Scotland 107, 279-98. — 1981. In piam veterum m cmoriam. In The Scottish antiquarian tradition, A. S. Bell (ed.), 2 12-26. Edinburgh: John Donald. Harvie, C. 1994. Scotland and nationalism: Scottish society and politics 1707—1994, 2nd edn. Lon­ don: Routledge. Hewison, R . 1987. The heritage industry: Britain in a climate of decline. London: Methuen. Jenkins, J. G. 1992. Getting yesterday right: interpreting the heritage of Wales. Cardiff: University o f Wales Press. Kendrick, T. D. 1951. The British M useum and British antiquities. Museums Journal 51, 13949. Kruta, V., O. H. Frey, B. Raftery, M. Szabo (eds) 1991. The Celts. London: Tham es & Hudson. M acD ougall, H. A. 1982. Racial myth in English history: Trojans, Teutons, and Anglo-Saxons. Montreal, Hanover and London: Harvest House and University Press o f N ew England. M errim an, N. (ed.) 1993. The peopling of London: fifteen thousand years of settlementfrom overseas. London: M useum o f London. M oore, D. 1976. Cam brian antiquity. In Welsh antiquity: essays mainly on prehistoric topics presented to H. N. Savory upon his retirement as keeper of archaeology, G. C. B oon & J. M. Lewis (eds), 193-221. C ardiff National M useum o f Wales. M organ, P. 1981. The eighteenth-century renaissance. Llandybie: Christopher Davies. — 1983. From a death to a view: the hunt for the Welsh past in the romantic period. In The

143

B R IT A IN AND TH E N A T IO N A L U SE OF TH E PA ST invention of tradition, E. Hobsbsawm & T. R anger (eds), 43-100. Cam bridge: C am bridge University Press. Murray, T. 1989. T h e history, philosophy and sociology o f archaeology: the case o f the Ancient M onum ents Protection Act (1882). In Critical traditions in contemporary archaeology: essays in the philosophy, history and socio-politics of archaeology, V. Pinsky & A. Wylie (eds), 5 5 67. C am bridge: C am bridge University Press. N ash-W illiam s, V. E. (ed.) 1949. A hundred years of Welsh archaeology. Cardiff: Cam brian Archaeological Association. Pezron, P. Y. 1699. Antiquite de la nation et de la langue des Celtes, autretnent appelez Gaulois. Paris: Marchand. Piggott, S. 1963. Archaeology and prehistory: presidential address. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 29, 1-16. — 1974. The origins o f the English county archaeological societies. Transactions of the Birmingham and Warunckshire Archaeological Society 86, 1-16. — 1975. The Druids, 2nd edn. London: Tham es & Hudson. — 1976. Ruins in a landscape: essays in antiquarianism. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. — 1989. Ancient Britons and the antiquarian imagination: ideasfrom the Renaissance to the Regency. London: Tham es & Hudson. Pitt-Rivers, A. 1882. Anniversary address to the Anthropological Institute o f Great Britain and Ireland. Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 11, 488-509. Samuel, R . 1995. Theatres of memory. London: Verso. Saunders, A. D. 1983. A century o f ancient m onuments legislation. Antiquaries journal 63, 11— 33. Smiles, S. 1994. The image of antiquity: ancient Britain and the romantic imagination. London: Yale University Press. Stevenson, R . B. K. 1981a. The museum, its beginnings and its development, Part 1: to 1858. In The Scottish antiquarian tradition, A. S. Bell (ed.), 31-85. Edinburgh: John Donald. — 1981b. The museum, its beginnings and its development, Part 2: the National M useum to 1954. In The Scottish antiquarian tradition, A. S. Bell (ed.), 142-211. Edinburgh: John D onald. Tibbies, A. (ed.) 1994. Transatlantic slavery: against human dignity. London: HM SO. T revor-R oper, H. 1983. The invention o f tradition: the highland tradition o f Scotland. In The invention of tradition, E. Hobsbaw m & T. R anger (eds), 15-41. Cam bridge: Cam bridge University Press. Trigger, B. G. 1980. Gordon Childe: revolutions in archaeology. London: Tham es & Hudson. — 1989. A history of archaeological thought. Cam bridge: Cam bridge University Press. Wainwright, G. J. 1984. The pressure o f the past: presidential address. Proceedings of the Prehis­ toric Society 50, 1-22. Warner, M . 1985. Monuments and maidens: the allegory of thefemale form. London: Wcidcnfeld & N icholson. Way, A. 1845. Introduction. Archaeological Journal 1, 1-6. Weatherall, D. 1994. From Canterbury to Winchester: the foundation o f the Institute. In Building on the past: papers celebrating 150 years of the Royal Archaeological Institute, B. Vyner (ed.), 8-21. London: R oyal Archaeological Institute. W heeler, R . E. M . 1925. Prehistoric and Roman Wales. O xford: O xford University Press. Wiener, M . 1981. English culture and the decline of the industrial spirit, 1850-1980. C am bridge: Cam bridge University Press. W illiams, G. A. 1985. When was Wales? A history of the Welsh. London: Black Raven.

144

BIBLIOGRAPHY Wilson, D. 1849. Synopsis of the museum of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland. Edinburgh: Society o f Antiquaries o f Scotland. — 1851. The archaeology and prehistoric annals of Scotland. Edinburgh: W ilson, D. M . 1989. The British Museum: purpose and politics. London: British M useum Publications. Worsaae 1849. Primeval antiquities of Denmark. London and Oxford: Parker.

145

CHAPTER EIGHT

Building the future on the past: archaeology and the construction of national identity in Ireland Gabriel Cooney

Introduction The role o f nationalism in Irish archaeology has only very recently been explicitly recognized as important or as a relevant topic o f research and debate. O n the other hand, it is clear that nationalism has had a major influ­ ence on the way in which antiquarianism and archaeology have developed in Ireland. Hence, in Triggers (1984) terms, Irish archaeology can be classi­ fied as belonging within the nationalistic tradition. The reasons why it is pos­ sible and indeed necessary to begin with these two apparently contradictory statements are discussed below. However, it is relevant to mention here three general points about the nature o f the relationship in Ireland between nation­ alism as a political ideology and archaeology. First, because o f the character o f modern Irish archaeology, which can be categorized as predominantly pragmatic and non-theoretical (Woodman 1992, Cooney 1993), issues such as nationalism and the political dimensions o f archaeological practice are not in general seen as particularly relevant by archaeologists. Secondly, it is clear that nationalism has not had an influence on Irish archaeology in isolation; it has had an impact on ideas and research within the broader framework o f contemporary thought, and this intellectual framework changed over time, as exemplified by the changing perception o f the relationship between the past and the present during the Victorian period (Bowler 1989), as also did the concept o f Irish nationalism itself (Hutchinson 1987). Thirdly, one should o f course speak in a contemporary context o f two nationalisms in Ire­ land: on the one hand, the better-known Gaelic-Irish nationalism and, on the other, the Unionist nationalism that is more often referred to in other terms, such as tradition, but which in Anderson’s term (1991) forms an imag­

146

N A T I O N A L I S M A N D T H E P A S T IN I R E L A N D

ined community, with as much authenticity and supporting symbolism as that o f the more widely recognized Irish nationalism. In this context, although the establishment o f an Irish state independent from Britain has been the driving force o f Irish political nationalism, Unionists have seen par­ tition and the foundation o f Northern Ireland in the 1920s as a legitimate demonstration o f their right to self-determination and to a political entity within the island o f Ireland (e.g. Todd 1990).

N ationalism and the past in Ireland The importance o f nationalism in Irish political and social life is well known (e.g. Boyce 1991, Garvin 1981), particularly because o f the open conflict between the two opposed nationalisms in Northern Ireland since the late 1960s. National identity depends on a feeling o f belonging and solidarity based on a shared past and present, which gives a sense o f internal collectivity and external differentiation from others. The writing o f the past takes on a very important role in giving and defining a sense o f nationalism. In Andersons (1991) view it was the rise o f print capitalism in Europe alongside other events in the late eighteenth century, with the consequent commodified and mechanized production o f newspapers, pamphlets and books, that had a deci­ sive role in the production o f the concept o f a national consciousness. Foster (1983) has argued in the context o f Ireland that it was from the late eighteenth century that the writing o f Irish history began to have an effective political function in public life. Currently a central issue in modern Irish historical research is the extent to which the writing o f history has been, or should be, influenced by the need to create a sense o f national identity and to provide an origin-myth for the twentieth century nation-state (e.g. Foster 1988, Bradshaw 1989, N iD honnchadha& D organ 1991, Brady 1994). In historical geography, attention is now being paid to the way in which a particular image o f the Irish landscape has developed that was greatly influenced by the Gaelic historiography developed in the nineteenth century as an underpinning o f the demand for Flome R ule and then independence from Britain (Graham & Proudfoot 1993: 5). In archaeological research, however, this critical reappraisal o f the roots o f modern scholarship is only just beginning, and the discussion o f the devel­ opment o f archaeology in Ireland has largely tended to emphasize an histor­ ical narrative rather than a critical consideration o f the contemporary social and political context (e.g. Flerity & Eogan 1977: 4-15; Harbison 1988: 10— 14; but see Mitchell’s (1985) discussion o f the antiquarian and archaeological

147

A R C H A E O L O G Y A ND I D E N T I T Y IN IR E L A N D

aspects o f the R oyal Irish Academy from its foundation in 1785). O n the other hand, it is clear that antiquarian and archaeological research has been freely used by historians, geographers and others in their constructions o f the Irish past. An additional irony is the perception o f Irish archaeology by both Irish (Butler 1990, Myers 1992) and international commentators as a highly politicized profession (Clark 1957: 256-7; Trigger 1989: 185). The relation­ ship then between archaeology and nationalism in Ireland is a complex issue, in a sense mirroring the diverse ways in which the past has been used in Ireland over the past two hundred years. It is important to draw a distinction between cultural and political nation­ alism and to link archaeology specifically with cultural nationalism. What antiquarians and archaeologists in Ireland have been concerned with is the rediscovery o f Ireland’s past as the basis o f a sense o f national identity. This identity was articulated by political nationalists to a variety o f ends as their goals centred less on past civilization as the foundation for present-day com ­ munity than on the concept o f a specific territorial homeland and securing a representative political state for their people (Hutchinson 1987: 12-19; Eriksen 1993: 98—120). These goals did not necessarily reflect the political tendencies o f those engaged in building a national cultural identity (e.g. see William W ilde’s (1849: v-xiv) book preface in which he combines a wel­ com e for the growth o f a spirit o f Irish nationality with a statement o f loyalty to Q ueen Victoria); but, on the other hand, these individuals were some­ times also heavily involved in political activity.

Archaeology and the construction o f identity Trigger has defined the primary function o f nationalistic archaeology as the bolstering o f the pride and morale o f nations or ethnic groups. It draws atten­ tion to the achievements o f past societies who are assumed to be national ancestors (Trigger 1984: 60). Artifacts and monuments, particularly those o f a sacred or religious nature, become icons, visual and ever-present reminders to reinforce or invent links with the past, which is o f such importance in sustaining a sense o f national identity. Discussing the National Monuments Bill 1993 in the Oireachtas (the Irish parliament) in 1994, the government minister promoting the bill, Michael D. Higgins, Minister o f Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht said: For many people it is the artefact or monument itself that symbolises the identity o f a people. The images such as those printed on the front

148

A R C H A E O L O G Y AND T H E C O N S T R U C T I O N OF I D E N T I T Y

cover o f every school child’s homework copy as a daily reminder o f the physical manifestation o f our heritage are part o f what we are - the Ardagh Chalice, the Tara Brooch, the Monasterboice High Cross and the Borrisnoe Collar. There is more. To have visited an historic site such as Clonmacnois or Newgrange leaves one with the knowledge — and responsibility - o f knowing that we are but the latest inheritors o f a long, proud and inspiring past. This statement encapsulates the importance o f artefacts and sites as sym­ bols in expressing the strength o f the link between past and present. Goldring (1993: 27-34) has commented that it is the openness and vague­ ness o f these symbols when they are used in nationalistic imagery that gives them a continuing relevance, despite the changing character o f the nation­ alistic ideology they are being used to buttress, and that makes them a vital link between cultural and political nationalism. As one o f the characters in Brian Friel’s play Translations (1981: 66) puts it: It is not the literal past, the facts o f history that shape us but images o f the past embodied in language. . . we must never cease renewing those images. There are two different views about when this symbolic use o f the past became linked to nationalism in Ireland. One view mentioned above is to see this development as part o f the naissance o f nationalism as an ideology in Europe from the late eighteenth century, the other view argues that as part o f a national consciousness that recurred from the early medieval period onwards the past was used to symbolize a national identity, as in the legend o f the “ island o f saints and scholars” (Bradshaw 1989). What we are seeing here is a debate about the nature o f Irish nationalism itself, but what is inter­ esting is that there is a very long tradition in Ireland o f intellectual elites writ­ ing and rewriting history in response to contemporary conditions. This was the case in the early seventeenth century, when the N ew English colonists who were in the ascendent wrote histories o f Ireland to justify state policy, and the Old English (Anglo-Norman setders from the twelfth century onwards) and the Old Irish historians saw the past as important in justifying their position in the changing social and political order (Cunningham 1986). Against this background a more specific interest in monuments and arti­ facts can be traced to the mid-eighteenth century (Herity & Eogan 1977: 5 7). Hutchinson (1987) has suggested that this period marked the beginning o f three distinct phases o f cultural nationalism (mid- to late eighteenth cen­ tury, mid-nineteenth century and late nineteenth century), culminating in

149

A R C H A E O L O G Y A N D I D E N T I T Y IN I R E L A N D

the movements o f the 1890s that led ultimately to the establishment o f an independent Irish state in 1921. Hutchinson (ibid.: 49) comments that the individuals and groups involved in cultural nationalism saw as their task the recreation o f an authentic national identity by which to transform Irish soci­ ety. During the three phases, different aspects o f the past were highlighted and different constituencies o f people were affected. In the eighteenth cen­ tury the image o f ancient Ireland created by antiquarians was influenced by the R om antic movement and the Enlightenment. This was a period o f heightened interest in the investigation o f the past and other forms o f schol­ arship, reflected in the formation o f bodies such as the R oyal Irish Academy in 1785 (McDowell 1985, Mitchell 1985). Monuments and the Irish lan­ guage were seen as reflecting links with sacred cultures o f the east, artifacts were interpreted as reflecting the prowess o f the ancient Irish at war and their artistic abilities at times o f peace. Ancient pre-Christian Ireland was seen as having an integrated and self-governing Celtic culture in contrast to the religious divisions and colonial status that beset contemporary Ireland. These ideas were promoted by antiquarians and others who were predomi­ nantly drawn from the Protestant (Church o f England) Ascendancy elite, but they were taken up to justify two very different political movements that grew from increasing resentment in Ireland to changes in the British colonial and commercial system. These were the Volunteer movement dominated by the Protestant middle classes, which eventually secured legislative inde­ pendence for the Irish parliament in 1782, and the radical, multi-denomina­ tional Society o f United Irishmen, influenced by the French Revolution, which was responsible for the rebellion o f 1798. Although the rebellion was unsuccessful, the locations o f skirmishes and actions provided symbolically charged landscapes that would be reactivated by later nationalist movements. Following on the political and economic integration o f Ireland into the United Kingdom through the Act o f Union in 1800 and the decline in status o f Dublin as a cultural and political centre, there was something o f a fall-off in antiquarian activity, but the period between the 1830s and the 1860s was a formative one for Irish archaeology. In the earlier part o f this period there was a very potent link between developments and individuals in this area and the articulation o f a distinctive Irish national identity. As part o f the largescale mapping o f the country by the Irish Ordnance Survey a Place-names and Antiquities Section was established in the late 1820s (Andrews 1975; Boyne 1987: 8—50). This brought together several scholars whose purpose was to record place-names, folklore and antiquities as a complement to the mapping programme all over the country. On the basic map o f the Survey at a scale o f six inches to the mile (1:10,560) all the archaeological sites noted by the surveyors were marked and this was accompanied by namebooks and

150

A R C H A E O L O G Y AND T H E C O N S T R U C T I O N OF I D E N T I T Y

letters. On the one hand it could be argued that this was a colonial enterprise, resulting in the translation o f knowledge about the landscape from the Irish into the English language: the ultimate transformation o f the Irish landscape from an oral commemoration to a cartographic description (Cooney 1994: 32) for land valuation purposes. On the other hand, however, the Placenames and Antiquities Section was a focus for the study o f Ireland’s past. This study was based on achieving a better understanding, but also on the assump­ tion o f a need to recover the past as a basis for Irish identity and to recreate it as a reality for the present. George Petrie, who was head o f the Placenames and Antiquities Section from 1835 to 1842, was a critical and leading figure in these developments and in forming a link between continuing research into Ireland’s past and its dissemination to a wider audience (de Paor 1993, Dillon 1967). His primary aim was “ to rescue the antiquities o f my native country from unmerited oblivion and give them their just place among those o f the old Christian nations o f Europe” (Petrie 1845: v). As well as being regarded as the father o f Irish archaeology (Raftery 1972), because o f his approach and his published volumes on the royal com ­ plex at Tara (1837), round towers and early Irish ecclesiastical architecture (1845) and military architecture (1972), Petrie was a topographical and land­ scape artist, a collector o f antiquities and Irish music, and a journalist. He made many contributions to and co-edited the Dublin Penny Journal (1832— 3) and edited its successor, the Irish Penny Journal (1840-41). He served as President o f the Royal Hibernian Academy and was a very active member o f the R oyal Irish Academy, which acted as a research centre because o f its manuscript collection and its role as a meeting place for scholars. He also, along with several other antiquarian artists, provided illustrations for the tourist guidebooks that had started to appear from the late eighteenth cen­ tury (de Paor 1993: 129—30). The Irish identity that Petrie and others focused on was what came to be known as the Golden Age o f Early Chris­ tian Ireland, when in the early medieval period after the establishment o f Christianity there had been a fusion o f the pagan Celtic traditions with the influence o f monastic life, seen in the illuminated manuscripts, the compila­ tion o f historical records and the religious monuments and contemporary metalwork. This was brought to an end by the twelfth century AngloN orm an invaders and their successors, and the old traditions survived only in rural communities in the west. This sense o f cultural loss is visualized in Petrie’s watercolour depiction o f “ The last circuit o f pilgrims at Clonmacnois” , Co. Offaly (see Sheehy 1980: 22). It could be argued that it was in visualizing this perception o f Ireland that Petrie and other artists and antiquarians such as William Wakeman and George Victor D u Noyer had the widest influence. The image o f Ireland

151

A R C H A E O L O G Y A N D I D E N T I T Y IN I R E L A N D

they presented as a picturesque, unspoilt landscape with people who were steeped in old traditions and ways o f life is still the dominant one in tourist images o f Ireland today. It was also the image o f Ireland that formed among the diaspora o f emigrants who left Ireland particularly after the Famine o f 1845-9, and in that sense was a very important component in the perception o f national identity that emerged among Irish emigrant communities, for example in N orth America (see O ’Connor 1993: 70-71). The vision o f a glorious Christian past was used by national movements o f different hues in the 1830s and 1840s as the basis o f an identity that was separate from and the equal (at least) o f Britain. Archaeological objects such as those in the R oyal Irish Academy’s collection were used as part o f the panoply o f nationalist symbols employed on the membership cards o f Daniel O ’Connell’s movement to repeal the Act o f Union. Monster meetings to demonstrate support for this Repeal movement were held in the summers o f 1843 and 1845, often at places deliberately chosen because o f their histor­ ical or symbolic importance, such as the ancient royal complex on the Hill o f Tara (which had also been a scene o f action in the 1798 rebellion). At these meetings the repeal membership cards were displayed by their owners as a sign o f empowerment and as personal political banners when it was ille­ gal to display flags or banners (Owens 1994). The most important polemicist for R epeal was Thomas Davis through his essays in The Nation (1842-5), the paper o f the Y oung Ireland movement. Although initially supportive o f O ’Connell, Davis and Y oung Ireland saw R epeal as a means to the ultimate end o f an independent and integrated Irish society inspired by Ireland’s iden­ tity and greatness in the past: This island has been for centuries either in part or altogether a province. . . Reckoning back from Clontarf [battle near Dublin in 1014 in which the Irish defeated the N orse], our history grows ennobled (like that o f a decayed house) and we see Lismore and Armagh [important early Christian ecclesiastical sites] centres o f European learning; we see our missionaries taming the conquerors o f Europe and farther still, rises the wizard pomp o f Eman, and Tara, the palace o f the Irish Pentarchy [Eman (Navan, C o Armagh) and Tara, Co. Meath were two famous royal centres in early Irish mythology, identified with important archae­ ological sites]. And are we, the people to whom the English (whose fathers were painted savages, when Tyre and Sidon traded with this land) can address reproaches for our rudeness and irreverence? So it seems. (Davis, in Duffy 1845: 48) Against the background o f this strong feeling o f national identity among

152

A R C H A E O L O G Y AND TH E C O N S T R U C T I O N OF I D E N T I T Y

the intellectual elite in mid-nineteenth century, it is not surprising that nationalism can be seen to have influenced archaeology, as well as being in itself a formative factor in developing a national identity. The most obvious example o f this recursive relationship has been seen in William W ilde’s organization and publication o f the collection o f the R oyal Irish Academy (1857, 1861, 1862). It has been suggested that W ilde’s decision to reject Thom sen’s three-age system (Trigger 1989: 73—81) in organizing the collec­ tion was influenced by an insular climate o f opinion in Ireland (Herity & Eogan 1977: 11; Mitchell 1985: 119-20). But this event illustrates also that there were competing versions o f Ireland’s past current in archaeological cir­ cles and that pragmatism and personalities also had a major role in the devel­ opment o f archaeology in Ireland. The R oyal Irish Academy had heard Worsaae in 1847 extolling the advantages o f the three-age system. It is true that Wilde had a romantic view o f Irish prehistory based on the mythologi­ cal series o f invaders devised by medieval scribes as a national origin-myth in the Leabar Gabhala (Book of invasions), but he was also under severe time restrictions to have the collection and catalogue ready for a visit o f the British Association for the Advancement o f Science in 1857, and this may have been the prime reason for the retention o f what was the existing layout o f the Academy museum (see Kavanagh 1992). The catalogue had been under discussion since 1850 with Petrie as editor and he had begun to organize his own collection according to the three-age system. He had a reputation for being a slow worker, and resigned, or was removed from, the editorship in 1852; little had happened by early 1857 when Wilde stepped in (Mitchell 1985: 114—9). It is in the early to mid-nineteenth century that we can also detect a grow­ ing public awareness o f archaeology that would have made the significance o f sites and artifacts more easily and widely understood and communicated in illustration, prose and verse, as part o f what Liam de Paor (1986: 236) has described as “ the apparatus o f antiquarian symbolism” . A major factor that would have contributed to this growth in interest would have included the availability o f printed material: books, pamphlets, weekly newspapers. Fos­ ter (1988: 311) suggests that the readership o f The Nation may have been 250,000 by 1843. As for archaeological objects, the expansion o f population from the eight­ eenth century led to previously marginal land being taken into agricultural production, and this along with land improvement and drainage was respon­ sible for an increase in the discovery rate o f antiquities, which in turn fed the demand o f collectors. Mitchell (1985: 107) has pointed out how fashionable and easy it was for gentlemen to build up a cabinet o f antiquities from the abundance o f artifacts being uncovered (the symbolic value o f sites with a

153

A R C H A E O L O G Y A N D I D E N T I T Y IN IR E L A N D

high historical profile was appreciated by dealers, who tended to shift or invent suitable provenances that would make objects more symbolically (and for them more financially) valuable). In turn the private and institu­ tional collections were publicly displayed. The R oyal Irish Academy and the Belfast Natural History and Philosophical Society had museums, and private collections were seen on occasions such as the major exhibitions in Cork and Belfast in 1852 and Dublin in 1853 (see discussion in W oodman 1994). R ecent finds were increasingly one o f the subjects o f discussion and publi­ cation among the members o f local historical and archaeological societies. Although the links between archaeology and nationalism in the mid­ nineteenth century period are apparent, at first glance archaeology might seem to have had a less obvious role in the rise o f nationalist sentiment in the last two decades o f that century. On the other hand, the imagery o f m onu­ ments, landscapes and artifacts from a glorious past that had informed and transfused Irish nationalism since the late eighteenth century continued to be employed. The use o f Celtic motifs derived from early manuscripts and other sources formed the artistic underpinning o f the Celtic Revival. The Gaelic Athletic Association, for example, came to use a replica o f an ornate eighth or ninth century AD chalice from Ardagh in C o. Limerick, which had been found as part o f a hoard in 1868, as the prize for the All-Ireland Gaelic football championship. Discoveries such as the Broighter Iron Age gold hoard in 1896 and newspaper coverage o f the long-running legal case to decide whether it was the property o f the British M useum (which had bought the objects) or constituted treasure trove and hence was the property o f the R oyal Irish Academy (which had the franchise from the Crown to handle treasure trove in Ireland) (Neill 1993), might have helped to maintain a link between archaeology and national sentiment. Public attention would similarly have been drawn to coverage o f the controversial exploration by the British Israelites o f a site on the hill o f Tara, in a quest for the Ark o f the Covenant. Specific links between archaeology and nationalism can be seen, for exam­ ple, in the person o f George Coffey, who was appointed in 1897 as curator o f the R oyal Irish Academy’s collections in the M useum o f Science and Art (the National M useum o f Ireland), which had been opened by the govern­ ment in 1890. H e could be regarded as the first professional archaeologist to be appointed in Ireland. He was politically active in support o f H om e R ule and as an accomplished artist he exhibited at the R oyal Hibernian Academy where he had the tide o f Professor o f Archaeology (Mitchell 1985: 147—8). Archaeologically he was a scholar o f international repute, in the vanguard o f typological studies and concerned with looking at the archaeology o f Ireland in its wider European context (Herity Sc Eogan 1977: 12—13). Eoin M acNeill, a noted historian and a leader in the Gaelic revival, used

154

TH E IN S T I T U T I O N A L IZ A T I O N OF A R C H A E O L O G Y

archaeological and other data to provide a detailed and influential history o f early Ireland. He recognized the Celts as a late prehistoric people who had introduced the Irish language, conquered the pre-Celts and established a rural decentralized society that was given the spirit o f nationality by the introduction o f Christianity, which united the Irish people, prepared the ground for a national monarchy and brought about a situation where Ireland became a European centre for religious and secular learning (MacNeill 1919: 160, 222-4). This model, which M acNeill had been formulating since the late nineteenth century, gave academic authority to the Golden Age view o f the early medieval period as one when the Irish nation was formed, and it was to continue to be very influential in public perceptions o f the late pre­ historic and early historic periods. With the crystallization o f this Irish-Gaelic-Catholic nationalism o f the late nineteenth century and the prospect o f Hom e R ule for Ireland, Protes­ tant opinion, particularly in Ulster began to unite within a Unionist nation­ alism (Foster 1988: 419—21; Jackson 1994), in contrast to the more diverse political allegiance o f members o f different Protestant denominations in the eighteenth and earlier part o f the nineteenth century. In the same way as Irish nationalism thrived on symbols from the past, the needs o f Unionism for a similar iconography can be seen in the market for glassware and ceram­ ics depicting the victory o f King William III and his protestant army over King James II at the Battle o f the Boyne in 1690 (Healy 1994). As the Battle o f Clontarf in 1014 (in which a force o f Irish and Scots under Brian Boru defeated a mixed army o f Norse and Irish) had been simplified and recast by Irish national ideology as a victory o f the Irish nation against the Norse, the Battle o f the Boyne and the defeat o f Jam es’s campaign o f Catholicization became a central commemorative event in the Unionist tradition.

The institutionalization o f archaeology There are several elements that one can point to as illustrating the institution­ alization o f archaeology in nineteenth century Ireland. In the field o f educa­ tion, there was some provision for teaching archaeology in the Q ueens Colleges established in 1845 in Belfast, Cork and Galway. In 1854 Eugene O ’Curry (who had been on the staff o f the Ordnance Survey Place-names and Antiquities Section) was appointed Professor o f Irish History and Archae­ ology at Cardinal New m an’s Catholic University in Dublin, a post that he held for eight years. Under the Irish University Act o f 1908, chairs in archae­ ology were established in what were now known as University Colleges in

155

A R C H A E O L O G Y A N D I D E N T I T Y IN I R E L A N D

Cork, Dublin and Galway within the National University o f Ireland. With regard to monument preservation and protection, the first step was an indirect but important one. Under the Church Disestablishment Act o f 1869, over 100 historic church buildings were vested in the Commissioners o f Public W orks in the 1870s. The 1882 Ancient Monuments Protection Act, prom oted by Sir John Lubbock, was the first attempt to legislate for the protection o f monuments in Britain and Ireland, and one o f the commis­ sioners provided for by the Act was to be from Ireland. Under a separate Irish act, provision was made for owners to place monuments in the guardianship o f the Commissioners. Showing the growing awareness o f the concept o f protection, the Irish Land Act o f 1903 made provision for monuments to be exempted from land distribution schemes and to be placed under the pro­ tection o f the Commissioners o f Public Works. As regards museums, as mentioned above, the M useum o f Science and Art (the National M useum o f Ireland) was opened in 1890 and the Royal Irish Academy’s collections were transferred to it from the Academy’s own museum. These developments illustrate a growing state involvement that can be seen as being influenced by several factors. The university interest in archae­ ology can be seen as a direct reflection o f concern with understanding Ireland’s past. Back in the 1840s, Thomas Davis, the leader o f the Y oung Ireland movement, had decried the state o f some o f Ireland’s most famous monuments and the problem o f damage to archaeological sites. This was a theme that was taken up by the historical and archaeological societies that burgeoned in the mid-nineteenth century and by the R oyal Irish Academy. But this has to be seen not only in the context o f the growth o f nationalism and its concern with the past, but also more widely in the Victorian fascina­ tion with the past (Bowler 1989; Lowenthal 1985: 96—105). One could also argue that the establishment o f the National M useum should be seen more in the context o f the Victorian passion for exhibitions and interest in muse­ ums as showing the advances o f modern times (Briggs 1990), as well as items from the past, or from other parts o f the (British imperial) world, with which antiquities were often compared. Indeed one o f the continuing concerns o f the R oyal Irish Academy about the National M useum as a museum o f science and art was that its collection and Irish antiquities more generally were not given adequate attention (Mitchell 1985: 134-5). In this sense one could argue that, apart from the university chairs, nationalism itself was only partially responsible for the beginnings o f the institutionalization o f archae­ ology. Indeed this development owes more to the very different view o f the relationship between past and present espoused by historians to explain the rise o f Victorian Britain to the status o f a global power: “ Rather than praising the past at the expense o f the present, they respected but were not confined

156

A R C H A E O LO G Y AND N A TIO N A L ID E N T IT Y NO RTH AND SO U T H

by their heritage, cherished the past while denying it any binding force; they married belief in continuity with faith in progress” (Lowenthal 1985: 102).

Archaeology and national identity north and south It is not surprising that following independence there was a concern in the Irish Free State with protecting the archaeological heritage that had provided much o f the symbolic underpinning o f nationalist ideology. As Raftery put it (1951: 22): “ The Irish Government, striving to re-establish the Gaelic cul­ ture o f the country, did not neglect its antiquities” . The Lithberg report was commissioned into the state o f the National Museum, and a Keeper o f Irish Antiquities was reappointed in 1926 after a gap o f several years from the early 1920s. Following representations from the Royal Irish Academy, the National Monuments Act was passed into law in 1930. Parallel developments took place in Northern Ireland, where in 1929 a municipal museum (to become the Ulster Museum in 1961) was built in Belfast, which now had become an administrative centre, and the Northern Ireland Ministry o f Finance was placed in charge o f the care o f monuments. Protective legislation was enacted in the form o f the Ancient Monuments Acts (Nl) o f 1926 and 1937. It can be suggested that in this sense the archaeological heritage o f Ulster was used to support the new political structure o f Northern Ireland, and indeed the Ulster M useum has been referred to as a national museum (Evans 1968: 3). Referring to the Irish Free State, Clark (1957: 256-7) commented that the period o f intense archaeological activity that followed the establishment o f independence was not sustained at the same tempo, and that this suggests that some o f the initial enthusiasm was politically inspired and waned with the achievement o f political objectives. As is widely recognized and as I have outlined elsewhere (Cooney forthcoming), the 1930s were in fact a period o f intense archaeological activity, both north (Northern Ireland) and south (the Irish Free State). N ot only that, but I would suggest that from this time the relationship between archaeology and national identity changed. Ideo­ logically the value o f archaeology has continued to be appreciated and drawn upon by politicians, but the translation o f this into visible financial support has depended to some extent on personal interest and the continual lobbying by archaeological bodies. Thus, initiatives by Taosigh (Prime Ministers) Eamon de Valera in the period from the 1930s to the 1950s, and Charles Haughey in the 1980s and early 1990s, are conspicuous against a general background o f institutional inertia. For example, a National Archaeological Survey that had been long promoted only got off the ground in the 1960s

157

A R C H A E O L O G Y A ND I D E N T I T Y IN I R E L A N D

and only gained real momentum in the 1980s. (A preliminary survey for Northern Ireland was published in 1940 and an Archaeological Survey established in 1950.) M ore importantly, it is from the early 1930s that we can trace also the growing professionalization o f archaeological practice. With an emphasis on excavation, scientific techniques and objective recording, and a desire to deny the suggestion that archaeology was a speculative enter­ prise (see Binchy 1954: 52), the deliberate presentation o f archaeology as a study o f the past unconnected with the present (see Cooney forthcoming) uncoupled the explicit links there had been between archaeology and vari­ ous nationalist agendas since the late eighteenth century. Undoubtedly, however, in both the Republic o f Ireland and Northern Ireland, archaeologists were influenced by the contemporary social and political milieu and it is partially in this context that we can see, for example, the debate across the modern political border about the relative extent and importance o f influence from Britain and Continental Europe at different periods in the past (e.g. Avery 1990: 2; Evans 1968: 7). Also, Bradley (forth­ coming), in discussing urbanization in early medieval Ireland, suggests that the long-lived perception o f early medieval Ireland as rural and pastoral with dispersed settlement was attributable to an unconscious rather than deliber­ ate idealization by scholars o f a past in terms o f the present (its background can be seen in the Golden Age formulation o f this period explored above). This view o f Ireland’s past has also been influential, for example in attitudes to urban and later medieval archaeology. Because o f a perception that urbanism and the developments o f the medieval period represented cultural traditions that were the result o f activities o f foreign invaders (Viking, Norm an, English), these themes have come to the forefront in archaeologi­ cal activities only since the 1970s (e.g. Bradley 1992: 81; Barry 1987: 1). There has on the other hand been continued contact between archae­ ologists working in the south and north, going back to the 1930s, and since the 1970s the profession has been organized on an all-Ireland basis. In terms o f current protective legislation the provision in Northern Ireland is the Historic Monuments Act (N l) 1971, whereas in the Republic the National M onuments Act o f 1930 was amended in 1954, 1987 and 1994 (see C ooney 1992 for a recent discussion o f the state and structure o f Irish archaeology). Although these provisions have features in common, such as the require­ ment o f a licence to carry out archaeological excavation, which makes the Northern Ireland framework distinct from that operating in the rest o f the U nited Kingdom, it is true to say that the National Monuments legislation in the Republic, particularly following the latest two amending acts, is much more stringent and all-embracing than either the Northern Irish or British legislation. This does appear to reflect a different political attitude to the past,

158

A R C H A E O L O G Y AND TH E IRISH PUBLIC

and protection o f the archaeological heritage in Ireland is seen as preserving a fundamental aspect o f national identity.

Archaeology and the Irish public It is recognized by Irish academic historians o f very different hues that there has been a failure on their part to displace the simplified mytho-history that serves as the public view o f the past (Brady 1994: 26-31; Bradshaw 1989; Foster 1983). This is a problem that is even more acute in Irish archaeology. As the concern within the discipline in Ireland, both north and south, has become focused, to use W oodmans (1992: 38) phrase, on sorting the raw data, the relevance o f the increasing range and quality o f archaeological data that is being produced by an expanding profession has been largely irrelevant to public understanding o f the archaeological heritage. Despite the domi­ nance o f a culture—historical narrative emphasizing a period-based view o f the past, many people see archaeological sites and museum exhibitions as belonging to a distant and undifferentiated past, but one that at the same time forms a very important part o f peoples sense o f place and belonging (Wood­ man 1991: 104). There is an echo in this o f the sense o f timelessness in Irish culture, where the past is always alive to serve as support for a sense o f identity (see Glassie 1982 and M acDonagh 1983 for different perspectives on this). Archaeologists by and large have tended not to debate or speculate on the problem o f how and why interpretation o f the Irish past is so complex and have instead emphasized a view that it can be understood in terms o f an his­ torical narrative (see discussion in Mallory & M cNeill 1991 and Cooney & Grogan 1994). In this sense it could be argued that Irish archaeology, while removing itself from a concern with present-day society, has implicitly sup­ ported nationalist ideologies by letting a one-dimensional perception o f the past (a myth) invert the multidimensional readings to which the archaeolog­ ical evidence is open (the reality) (Gellner 1983: 148). For example, the reli­ ance on colonization and migration as processes to explain social and cultural changes (see discussion in Waddell 1978, 1991) in Irish prehistory has led to an oversimplified view o f what is after all a 7,000 year period o f human set­ tlement. This has led to its reproduction by scholars in other disciplines, using archaeological data, as a period o f foragers followed by shifting cultivators in a forested landscape, ending only with the introduction o f iron, the crystal­ lization o f a Celtic conquest and culture and Christianity (Smyth 1993: 404). Again using prehistory as an example in terms o f broad public perceptions o f the past, archaeological explanations have managed neither to displace

159

A R C H A E O L O G Y A N D I D E N T I T Y IN I R E L A N D

traditional myths, whereby everything is visualized through a misty Celticized filter (see Chapman 1992), nor to challenge oversimplified and over­ quantified views o f the past that are in effect a reflection o f a present-day fascination with astronomy and a continuing search for a sense o f identity in an increasingly anonymous world (e.g. O ’Brien 1992). For example, the alignment o f the major megalithic structure at Newgrange on the sunrise at winter solstice, with the sunlight penetrating along the passage into the chamber area, is now photographically reproduced each year in newspaper coverage and has become detached from its human, cultural and social con­ text (e.g. O ’Kelly 1982). In this sense it could be suggested that by default we as archaeologists are allowing the selection and manipulation o f elements from the past to be used for the dictates o f the present, for example in the heritage and more broadly in the tourism industry, which is so central in the projection o f a modern Irish identity (Gibbons 1988). The development o f archaeology in Ireland has also been cast as an his­ torical and logical narrative that can be compared with the way in which the subject developed elsewhere in Europe (e.g. Daniel 1975); the extremes o f the romantic phase o f Irish antiquarianism in the late eighteenth century giv­ ing way to the more logical and scientific spirit o f the nineteenth century and the establishment o f the subject on a modern footing in the 1930s (Herity & Eogan 1977: 4-14). Against this historical projection, it is a sobering thought that the fascinations o f the individual who has been seen as the most imagi­ native o f the eighteenth-century romantic antiquarians, General Charles Vallancey (who was also a very accurate surveyor o f monuments (see Andrews 1966, Stout 1993)) —including a tendency for Celtomania and an astronomical interpretation o f megalithic art and the structures on which it occurs —are still central to the public view o f Irish prehistory today. The ques­ tion could be asked as to why archaeological interpretations have not had a wider impact, particularly since the 1930s. Perhaps the biggest challenge fac­ ing archaeology in Ireland today is not the admittedly critical issue o f man­ aging the archaeological resource but in using it to present a more critical appreciation o f our past for an Ireland that is rapidly changing in the present.

Bibliography Anderson, B. 1991. Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. London: Verso. Andrews, J. H. 1966. Charles Vallancey and the map o f Ireland. Geographical Journal 132, 48— 61. — 1975. A paper landscape: the Ordnance Survey in nineteenth century Ireland. O xford: O xford University Press.

160

BIBLIOGRAPHY Avery, M . 1990. Ulster archaeology in 1989. UlsterJournal of Archaeology 53, 1-2. Barry, T. B. 1987. The archaeology of medieval Ireland. London: M ethuen. Binchy, D. A. 1954. Secular institutions. In Early Irish society; M. Dillon (ed.), 52—65. Dublin: Three Candles Press. Bowler, P. J. 1989. The invention of progress: the Victorians and the past. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Boyce, D. G. 1991. Nationalism in Ireland, 2nd edn. London: Routledge. Boyne, P. 1987. John O ’Donovan (1806-1861): a biography. Kilkenny: Boethius. Bradley, J. 1992. Archaeology and development in Irelands medieval cities and towns. In Environment and development in Ireland, J. Feehan (ed.), 81-6. Dublin: Environmental Insti­ tute, University College Dublin. — forthcom ing. Urbanization in early medieval Ireland. Bradshaw, B. 1989. N ationalism and historical scholarship in modern Ireland. Irish Historical Studies 24, 329-51. Brady, C. (ed.) 1994. Interpreting Irish history: the debate on historical revisionism. Dublin: Irish Academic Press. Briggs, A. 1990. Victorian things. London: Penguin. Butler, H. 1990. Lament for archaeology. In The sub-prefect should have held his tongue, and other essays, H. Butler, 170-79. London: Penguin. Clark, G. 1957. Archaeology and society, 3rd edn. London: Methuen. Chapm an, M. 1992. The Celts: the construction of a myth. N ew York: St M artin’s Press. Cooney, G. 1992. The archaeological endowment. In Environment and development in Ireland, J. Feehan (ed.), 70-80. Dublin: Environmental Institute, University College Dublin. — 1993. A sense o f place in Irish prehistory. Antiquity 67, 632-41. — 1994. Sacred and secular neolithic landscapes in Ireland. In Sacred sites, sacred places, D. L. Carmichael, J. Hubert, B. Reeves & A. Schanche (eds), 32-43. London: Routledge. — forthcom ing. Theory and practice in Irish archaeology. Cooney, G. & E. Grogan 1994. Irish prehistory, a social perspective. Dublin: Wordwell. Cunningham , B. 1986. Seventeenth-century interpretations o f the past: the case o f Geoffrey Keating. Irish Historical Studies 25, 116-28. Daniel, G. 1975.150 years of archaeology, 2nd edn. London: Duckworth. de Paor, L. 1986. The peoples of Ireland: from prehistory to modern times. London: Hutchinson. de Paor, M . 1993. Irish antiquarian artists. In Visualizing Ireland: national identity and the picto­ rial tradition, A. M . Dalsimer (ed.), 119-32. London: Faber Sc Faber. D illon, M . 1967. George Petrie (1789-1866). Studies 56, 266-76. Duffy, C. G. (ed.) 1845. Literary and historical essays by Thomas Davis. Dublin: Duffy. Eriksen, T. H. 1993. Ethnicity and nationalism: anthropological perspectives. London: Pluto. Evans, E. E. 1968. Archaeology in Ulster since 1920. UlsterJournal of Archaeology 31, 3-8. Foster, R . F. 1983. History and the Irish question. Transactions of the Royal Historical Society (5th series) 33, 169-92. — 1988. Modern Ireland 1600-1972. London: Penguin. Friel, B. 1981. Translations. London: Faber Sc Faber. Garvin, T. 1981. The evolution of Irish nationalistic politics. Dublin: Gill & Macmillan. Gellner, E. 1983. Nations and nationalism. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Gibbons, L. 1988. C om ing out o f Hibernation? The myth o f modernity in Irish culture. In Across thefrontiers: Ireland in the 1990s, R . Kearney (ed.), 205-18. Dublin: Wolfhound. Glassie, H. 1982. Passing the time: folklore and history of an Ulster community. Dublin: O ’Brien Press. G oldring, M . 1993. Pleasant the scholar's life: Irish intellectuals and the construction of the nation state. London: Serif.

161

A R C H A E O L O G Y A ND I D E N T I T Y IN I R E L A N D Graham, B. J. & L. J. Proudfoot 1993. A perspective on the nature o f Irish historical geogra­ phy. In An historical geography of Ireland, B. J. Graham & L. J. Proudfoot (eds), 1-18. London: Academ ic Press. Harbison, P. 1988. Pre-Christian Ireland. London: Tham es & Hudson. Healy, Y. 1994. An Irishwom an’s Diary, The Irish Times (12 July), 11. Herity, M . & G. Eogan 1977. Ireland in Prehistory. London: R outledge & Kegan Paul. H utchinson, J. 1987. The dynamics of cultural nationalism: the Gaelic revival and the creation of the Irish nation state. London: Allen & Unwin. Jackson, A. 1994. Unionist history. In Interpreting Irish history; the debate on historical revisionism, C . Brady (ed.), 253-68. Dublin: Irish Academic Press. Kavanagh, R . M . 1992. Sir W illiam W ilde: his contribution to Irish archaeology. Co. Roscom­ mon Historical and Archaeological Society Journal 4, 1-12. Lowenthal, D. 1985. The past is a foreign country. Cam bridge: Cam bridge University Press. M acD onagh, O. 1983. States of mind: a study of Anglo-Irish relations, 1 780-1920. London: Allen & U nw in. M cD ow ell, R . B. 1985. T h e main narrative. In The Royal Irish Academy, a bicentennial history 1785—1985, T. O Raifeartaigh (ed.), 1-92. Dublin: Royal Irish Academy. M acN eill, E. 1919. Phases of Irish history. Dublin: Gill. Mallory, J. P. & T. M cN eill 1991. The archaeology of Ulster. Belfast:Institute o f Irish Studies, Q u een s’s University Belfast. M itchell, G. E 1985. Antiquities. In The Royal Irish Academy, a bicentennial history 1785 -1 9 8 5 , T. O Raifeartaigh (ed.), 93-165. Dublin: Royal Irish Academy. M yers, K. 1992. Pat’s ark. The Irish Times (21 March). N eill, K. 1993. T h e Broighter hoard. Archaeology Ireland 24, 24-6. N i D honnchadha, M . & T. D organ (eds) 1991. Revising the rising.Derry: Field Day. O ’Brien, T. 1992. Light years ago. Dublin: Black Cat Press. O ’C onnor, B. 1993. Myths and mirrors: tourist images and national identity. In Tourism in Ireland: a critical analysis, B. O ’C onn or & M . Cronin (eds), 68-85. Cork: C ork University Press. O ’Kelly, M . J. 1982. Newgrange: archaeology, art and legend. London: Tham es & Hudson. Ow ens, G. 1994. H edge schools o f politics, O ’Connell’s monster meetings. History Ireland 2(1), 35-4 0 . Petrie, G. 1837. O n the history and antiquities o f Tara Hill. Transactions of the Royal Irish Acad­ emy 18, 25-232. — 1845. The ecclesiastical architecture of Ireland, anterior to the Anglo-Norman invasion. Dublin: H odges & Smith. — 1972. An essay on military architecture previous to the English invasion. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 72C , 219-65. R aftery,J. 1951. Prehistoric Ireland. London: Batsford. — 1972. G eorge Petrie: a reassessment. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 72C , 153—7. Sheehy,J. 1980. The rediscovery of Ireland's past: the Celtic revival 1830-1930. London: Tham es & Hudson. Smyth, W. J. 1993. The making o f Ireland: agendas and perspectives in cultural geography. In An historical geography of Ireland, B. J. Graham & L. J. Proudfoot (eds), 399-438. London: Academ ic Press. Stout, G. 1993. T h e Vallancey triangle. Archaeology Ireland 25, 8-9. Todd, J. 1990. The conflict in N orthern Ireland: institutional and constitutional dimensions. In Aspects of Irish studies, M . Hill & S. Barber (eds), 3-8. Belfast: Institute o f Irish Studies, Q u een ’s University Belfast.

162

BIBLIO GRAPHY Trigger, B. 1984. Alternative archaeologies: nationalist, colonialist, imperialist. Man 19, 3 5 5 70. — 1989. A history of archaeological thought. Cam bridge: Cam bridge University Press. Waddell, J. 1978 The invasion hypothesis in Irish prehistory. Antiquity 52, 121-8. — 1991. T h e Irish Sea in prehistory. Journal of Irish Archaeology 6, 29-40. Wilde, W. R . 1849. The beauties of the Boyne, and its tributary, the Blackwater. Dublin: McGlashan. — 1857. A descriptive catalogue of the antiquities of stone, earthen and vegetable materials in the museum of the Royal Irish Academy: Dublin: H odges & Smith. — 1861. A descriptive catalogue of the antiquities of animal materials and bronze in the museum of the Royal Irish Academy. Dublin: Hodges & Smith. — 1862. A descriptive catalogue of the antiquities of gold in the museum of the Royal Irish Academy. Dublin: Hodges & Smith. W oodman, P. C. 1991. Archaeology and the Journal: concern for a disappearing past. Journal of the Cork Historical and Archaeological Society 96, 103-16. — 1992. Irish archaeology today: a poverty amongst riches. The Irish Review 12, 34-9. — 1994. T h e prehistory o f south-west Ireland - an archaeological region or a state o f mind? In Past perceptions: the prehistoric archaeology of south-west Ireland, E. Shee Twohig & M . Ronayne (eds), 6-15. Cork: C ork University Press.

163

CHAPTER NINE

German archaeology and its relation to nationalism and racism Ingo Wiwjorra

Introduction German archaeology has basically two roots that are related to the develop­ ment o f nationalistic and even racist ideology: on the one hand, nationalromantic Vaterlandische Altertumskunde (patriotic antiquarianism) had devel­ oped out o f German philology by extending its focus from written sources to antiquities, whereas prehistoric anthropology on the other hand was influ­ enced by race ideology. Before looking at individual aspects o f these roots, I will make some remarks on the sources o f this chapter. For the present account o f archaeology as it was then, carried by national pathos and with its background o f continuing institutionalization, not only scientific, but also popular and pseudo-scientific publications were exam­ ined. The (mostly underestimated) public interest in the discipline is, after all, created not only by professional archaeologists, but mainly by amateurs and pseudo-scientists. The term pseudo-scientific is not clearly defined. It is applied here to publications that put greater emphasis on an ideological commitment than on hard facts. Often irrational ideas are promoted while keeping up a scientific appearance. All three groups o f authors played a part in the definition and creation o f a national understanding o f archaeology. This does not mean, o f course, that there were not many researchers who did acknowledge and respect the limits and possibilities o f the evolving discipline and were against exploiting archaeology in the interest o f politics. Views o f history and mankind that are likely to support national feelings are found in widely varied publications and are not homogeneous and un­ equivocal throughout the eras. Even though nationalistically influenced research was as a matter o f fact fixed on the ancient Germans — Celtic or Slavonic influences hardly played a role in the German national self-image — there were competing concepts o f prehistoric ancestry even during the

164

v a t e r l

An d i s c h e a l t e r t u m s k u n d e

National Socialist (N S) period. Views on history that magnify nation or race always depend on the author’s education and intention and not least on the particular archaeological topic or era the research or report is based on. It is the aim o f this chapter to point out some fundamental aspects o f archaeology in its relation to nationalism and racism and the scientific histor­ ical framework. It tries to achieve that mainly by portraying several person­ alities, their work and their reception by their contemporaries.

Vaterldndische Altertumskunde Interest in the Germanic past has been influenced by patriotism since the seventeenth century (Kirchner 1938: 112-31). This tendency became stronger in the early nineteenth century when the idea o f the unification o f the German nation (defined by language and culture) under one state was supported by idealized views o f Germanic prehistory. Arminius (German­ ized as Hermann; approximately 19 B C to AD 21) became a symbol o f this idea o f national unification, as he had saved Germania libera from Rom an conquest in AD 9. It has remained a major subject for nationally motivated, popular-scientific prehistorians to determine the place where the destinymaking battle took place (Volker 1984). In order to glorify this battle, the Hermannsdenkmal (Hermann’s monument) was inaugurated near Detmold on 16 August 1875, four years after the unification o f Germany. On the sword the giant is pointing upwards, the words “ German unity [is] my strength. M y strength [is] Germany’s power” are engraved. The sculptor Ernst von Bandel (1800—76) had been working towards the realization o f his idea to erect this national monument since 1830. His life’s work is an expres­ sion o f national pride relating to the prehistoric Germans. The interpretation o f three early written sources that were considered an authoritative insight into Germanic prehistory was o f crucial importance for the evolving German archaeology: they were the Edda , a compendium o f proverbs and mythological traditions that had been written down in Iceland in the twelfth century; then the Nibelungenlied about the dragon-slayer Sieg­ fried, also stemming from the twelfth century; and Tacitus’s (approximately AD 55-113) Germania dating to around AD 100. Those sources, which had been rediscovered in the fifteenth, eighteenth and seventeenth centuries respectively, served to magnify the German national self-esteem and became leading motifs for research into national prehistory from the age o f R om an ­ ticism (von See 1970). In the nineteenth century they were used as a back­ ground for almost every popular description o f Germanic or German early

165

GERM AN A RC H A EO LO G Y , N A T IO N A L ISM AND RA CISM

history, and it was based on them that excavated finds (which were gradually becom ing more important) were interpreted. Complementary to that, archaeological finds were seen as a p roof o f the assumption that these sources gave a correct view o f prehistoric life in Germany, even in details. Source criticisms o f the Germania, to the effect that it had been written to criticize R om an decadency, were hardly ever acknowledged. As late as 1921 the pre­ historian Georg Wilke (1859-1938) came to the same conclusion, saying material finds “ were an addition to rather than a correction o f the Germa­ nia” and thus could serve the purpose o f magnifying national self-esteem (Wilke 1921: 82). Gustaf Friedrich Klemm (1802-67), a librarian and collector o f ethno­ graphic and archaeological finds, gave similar reasons for his interest in pre­ history. The preface o f his Handbuch der Germanischen Alterthumskunde (Handbook of Germanic antiquarianism) states that “ it is necessary to spread the knowledge o f prehistory among the people and to create respect for it as the safest way to patriotism” (Klemm 1836: X X V ). This prejudiced view o f national history and prehistory was also influ­ enced by a romantic attitude. In his paintings o f megalithic burial m onu­ ments, the painter Caspar David Friedrich (1774-1840) gives a feeling for the originality o f ancient prehistory. A thorough enthusiasm for “ the remains o f our pagan past” found its expression in countless historical socie­ ties that were founded from the beginning o f the nineteenth century onwards. The more stable among these often fairly short-lived formations were joined under the roof o f the Gesamtverein der deutschen Geschichtsund Altertumsvereine (Association o f German Historical and Antiquarian Societies) in 1852. From here a campaign was undertaken for the foundation o f the Germanic National Museum in Nuremberg, where examples o f Ger­ man art from prehistory up to the present time were collected, with the aim o f strengthening the feeling o f national identity by demonstrating historical development and continuity. The concept o f national heritage and conser­ vation was a by-product o f the societies’ enthusiasm for the remote past, expressing their “ monument consciousness” . “ Monument, heritage and conservation turned out to be central forms o f collective identification, that are operating up to present times” (Lipp 1987: cover).

The N orth: hom e o f barbarians or heroes? Until far into the nineteenth century the theory was widely spread that the Germ ans’ ancestors had come down the slopes o f the Caucasus in ancient

166

T H E N O R T H : H O M E OF B A R B A R I A N S OR H E R O E S ?

times and migrated into their later home areas. There is a frieze o f this migra­ tion scene in the national monument o f Walhalla near Regensburg, built in imitation o f a Greek temple and inaugurated in 1842. This theory is based on biblical chronology and it corresponds to early theories about the IndoGermans that assumed an Indian or generally Asiatic origin. It also fits the anthropologist Johann Friedrich Blumenbachs (1752-1840) term “ Cauca­ sian race” . Thus, the assumption o f an ancient Asiatic origin was in those days an obvious part o f views on national history. Internationally renowned archaeologists such as Oscar Montelius (1843-1921) were by their interpre­ tations o f finds forced to consider the immigration theory (Montelius 1888), before it was modernized into a thesis o f a chronological cultural depend­ ency o f the N orth on the South (Montelius 1899). This theory went under the title o f ex oriente lux and was advocated by classical archaeologists and his­ torians such as H ugo Winckler (1863-1913), Victor Hehn (1813-90) or Eduard Meyer (1855-1930). The idea became a contradiction to national pride when cultural dependency was taken as a hint that the historical Ger­ mans had lived as barbarians before their conversion to Christianity. This was put into fairly drastic words by the architect Gottfried Semper (1803—79), who had a strong interest in archaeology. He called the Germans “ a pack without national unity or a common language” (Semper 1860: 4). Nationally motivated researchers and publishers took this statement as a sign o f arrogance and ignorance, characteristic o f conceited scholars who were alienated from the people (Wilser 1899a: 6; Pastor 1906: 1; Pastor 1922: V; B ie d e r l9 2 5 :116; Gummel 1938:182). They were calling for more publicity for new archaeological and palaeo-anthropological finds from the North, which were undermining traditional, Bible-orientated dates and evaluations. Resistance to the thesis o f the cultural backwardness o f the North dates back to the beginning o f the nineteenth century at least. Friedrich August W agner (1792-1859), who never saw the dream o f his youth fulfilled to visit “ the monuments o f the old ages in Egypt, Greece and Italy and see them with [his] own eyes” (Wagner 1828: III), was looking for similar temples and pyramids closer to his Saxonian home area and at a later point even believed he had found something like “ Egypt in Germany” (Wagner 1833). His interpretations were driven by patriotic enthusiasm and suggested that instead o f the usually assumed cultural dependency o f the N orth on the South there had been an independent cultural development. He thought it was correct to compare burial mounds to pyramids and that local monu­ ments should be “ more interesting for us than products o f foreign art and labour” , as they were not “ boastful” , but “ hidden away, decent and m od­ est” . Wagner saw reasons to take “ a different view from that o f our ancestors up to now ” and came to the conclusion that “ even in the old times there had

167

GERM AN A RCH AEOLO GY, N A TIO N A LISM AND RACISM

been arts and cultivation and cattle-herding, and people had not just been nomads, living by robbery and hunting as R om an authors like Caesar have claimed” (Wagner 1828: iv-v). Although these clumsy interpretations, which do not deny his admiration for southern civilizations, were meant to strengthen national pride, they were still far from the aggressive undertones o f nationalist authors from the 1880s onwards. The research that went into the remains o f the Rom an conquest in the south and west o f Germany followed the tradition o f classical archaeology. The background o f this historical interest was not so much the yearning for national identity, but admiration for the achievements o f classical antiq­ uity that had been reflected upon the North. The investigation o f the R om an inheritance in Germany was manifest in institutions such as the Rom isch-Germ anisches Zentralmuseum (Rom ano-Germ anic Central Museum) in Mainz (founded in 1852) and the Reichslimeskomission (Imperial Commission on the R om an Frontier, 1892), which was renamed R om isch—Germanische Kommission (Rom ano—Germanic Commission) in 1907. “ Programmatic concentration on antiquity” characterized the Verein von Altertumsfreunden im Rheinlande (Society o f Friends o f Antiquity in the Rhineland), and there were many institutions with similar aims (John 1991: VIl). This so-called “ West German research” , which commemorated Johann Joachim Winckelmann (1717-68), the founder o f classical archaeol­ ogy, in annual “ Winckelmann celebrations” , was influenced by the ideals o f humanism, which could go with a conservative national attitude, but never with an ethnic one.1 The preference for R om an cultural achievements over pre-R om an ones was more and more opposed by the national demand for the glorification o f the Germanic ancestors. Towards the end o f the nine­ teenth century, voices were getting stronger that were expressing a general feeling o f being fed up with research results that indicated the influence o f “ foreign” cultures. This protest became an almost natural part o f introduc­ tions to publications on German prehistory. Those archaeologists who were researching the influence o f R om an civilization were later discredited as R om linge (Romelings) (Eggers 1986: 234). In this context, Emperor W il­ helm II (1859-1941) was asking for a “ national base” for German (school) education in 1890, even though he personally was an admirer o f the oriental and classical Greek civilizations: “ We must take everything German for a foundation; we should educate national young Germans and not young Greeks or R om ans” (Penzler 1897: 156). 1 .The Germ an term “ volkisch” is in the follow ing translated by the English “ ethnic” , which is som ew hat inadequate. “ Volkisch” not only refers to Volk (people), but also has the con n o­ tation o f nation, defined by racial origin.

168

T H E “ N O R D I C R A C E ” : AN A N T H R O P O L O G I C A L I D E A L

Besides the discussions about the evaluation o f the relationship between R om ans and Germans, interest in the fundamental question o f the origin o f the Indo-Germans was growing, as the theory ex oriente lux was seen against an ideological background. Matthaus Much (1832-1909) had initially cre­ ated the expression “ oriental fata morgana” in order to bring the possibility o f an autochthonous cultural development in the North into the discussion (Much 1906). The idea was taken up by ethnic authors, who then identified the Indo-Germans as a Nordic race and saw them as carriers o f a Northern superiority over the South from the origins o f time (Rom er 1989).

The “ N ordic race” : an anthropological ideal The other major direction in archaeology was prehistoric anthropology. W ithout an understanding o f how it developed, one cannot evaluate those parts o f the archaeological literature that are fixed on the Nordic or Ger­ manic race. The institutionalization o f anthropology had been quickened up all over Europe and Germany by the foundation o f many anthropological societies from the middle o f the nineteenth century. From the earliest beginnings, their research interest had been strongly influenced by ethnic concepts, although that was not recognized as a moral or scientific problem. With regard to the question o f when and where humankind originated, scientists and theologians alike were forced to find a new point o f view by spectacular finds o f early human bones. Besides, different anthropological types were characterized and their prehistoric descent and cultural level speculated upon. In Germany particular interest was devoted to the blond and blue­ eyed type, according to the description in Tacitus’s Germania. The Rom an author shared the common belief that the Germans were a pure-blooded people and attributed “ fierce blue eyes, red hair, tall frames” to them (Taci­ tus, Germania 4).2 Annotated German translations interpreted this descrip­ tion as a proof o f the existence o f a prehistoric Germanic type. This general identification was also undertaken by prehistorians and anthropologists and played a big role in replacing the concept o f Germans as an historical people (which can be used from 200 B C to AD 600 at most) by a race—anthropolog­ ical definition. There was a public argument, which had been induced by politics, that exemplifies how strongly stereotypes were rooted in the anthropological 2 .G erm an editions o f Germania translate rutilae comae as reddish, red-blond or blond hair.

169

GERM AN ARCH AEOLO GY, N A TIO N A LISM AND RACISM

thinking o f the nineteenth century. The German victory over France in 1870/71 seems to have hit the national pride o f the French anthropologist Armand de Quatrefages (1810-92) so hard, that he assumed an ancient Finn­ ish population to be part o f the “ Prussian race” that could still be singled out in present times and was o f a bad character. Francois Bernier (1620-88) had been the first to characterize the Lapplanders as a race in a negative way, and his assessment remained popular (Conze & Sommer 1984: 142). R u d o lf Virchow (1821—1902) accepted stereotype characterizations as such, as he himself had claimed that the Lapps (who are related to the Finns) were a “ pathological race” . When his own national feelings were hurt by the use o f stereotypes, however, he rejected Quatrefages’s national insinuations as politically motivated misuse o f anthropology (Virchow 1872). The incident became one o f Virchow’s reasons for initiating a general examination o f eye, hair and skin colours o f German schoolchildren (Ackerknecht 1957: 172-7). The results were taken as a proof o f the assumption that a major part o f the German population fitted the Germanic stereotype. Besides a great body length, blond hair and blue eyes, long skulls were taken as an additional char­ acteristic o f the Germanic type. Alexander Ecker (1816-87) was among the first to take the latter as a Germanic characteristic when he found it among the skeletons o f the so-called South German Reihengrabertypus (anthropo­ logical type represented in the post-Rom an cemeteries o f southern Ger­ many) and thus extended the use o f this characteristic to prehistory (Ecker 1865). Although Ecker himself did not undertake any generalizations, other authors did not hesitate to take “ long skulls” in central European prehistoric skeletons as a sign o f their Germanic identity. “ Short skulls” , on the other hand, were associated with a dark-haired, brown-eyed type. The general identification o f whole archaeological cultures with long or short skulls, as well as attempts by prehistoric anthropologists to solve the “ race questions” o f prehistory in that way, express an almost naive belief in the young discipline o f anthropology (Schliz 1915/16). The ideological motivation is clear: the physician Ludwig Wilser (1850-1923), who was assisting the anthropologist Otto Ammon (1842-1916) with mass anthropo­ logical examinations, had apparently noted down higher values when meas­ uring the height and length o f recruits’ skulls in order to confirm the Germanic stereotype (Schmidt 1899). Initially, professional archaeologists did not presume a Germanic popula­ tion continuity since prehistoric times, as they were dealing with archaeo­ logical cultures that were defined by a combination o f characteristic pieces o f material culture and find circumstances. Still, race—anthropological and archaeological arguments were mixed together in countless publications, especially from the 1880s onwards. The anthropological concept o f Ger-

170

T H E P O L IT IC IZ A T IO N OF P R E H IS T O R Y

mans finally became so strong that people would without second thoughts speak o f Bronze Age or Stone Age Germans. Besides, such accounts o f Ger­ manic prehistory were rarely limited to the German area alone. Prehistoric cultural remains, preferably from northern and western Europe, served just as well to demonstrate the cultural achievements o f Germans. The only con­ dition was that the prehistoric cultures in question had to be associated with the Nordic or Germanic race, even if the link was rather doubtful. The anthropological concept was even more generalized, when Germans were characterized as the original Indo-German type. Placing the IndoGerman origin in the North (i.e. Scandinavia or even Germany) implied the global mission o f the Nordic race and supported German nationalism in so far as it made modern Germans the core people not only o f the Germanic but also o f the Indo-German race. The ethnic prehistorian Karl Felix W olff (1879-1966) wrote in 1918: “ The next bimillennium will be the age o f the Germans, for German history is just repeating Indo-German history and the world is about to become German in the way it once became IndoGerman” (W olff 1918: 425).

The politicization o f prehistory The institutionalization o f professional archaeology was not and is not related to its popular understanding. The published view o f Germanic pre­ history was determined far more by the zealous enthusiasm o f amateurs than by the often tiresome research results o f institutionalized archaeologists. Towards the end o f the nineteenth century there was an unprecedented increase in popular and pseudo-scientific literature. The authors were ama­ teurs with an interest in prehistory, who often had the educational back­ ground o f teachers or physicians. Originally there were no animosities between the renowned professionals - o f whom there were not too many, as prehistory as a science was just about to be established - and the dilettantes. First, this is indicated by membership lists o f anthropological and archaeo­ logical societies. Secondly, even renowned archaeologists did not hesitate to quote the authors o f highly disputable theses in their own publications. A m ong those are such writers as Ludwig Wilser, Karl Penka (1847-1912), Georg Biedenkapp (1868-1924), Carus Sterne [alias o f Ernst Krause] (1839-1903), Heinrich Driesmans (1863-1927) and Willy Pastor (18671933). The work and ideas o f two o f these will be summarized in the follow­ ing. The physician Ludwig Wilser was a very active member o f several

171

G ERM AN ARCH AEOLO GY, N A TIO N A LISM AND RACISM

anthropological societies, and was the author o f hundreds o f articles and book reviews, and a handful o f books. Quoting his mentor Alexander Ecker, he called “ anthropology the most noble auxiliary science o f history” (Wilser 1899b: 34). Besides his scientific ideas, Ecker had also expressed his socialDarwinist attitude in a lecture on Der K am pf urn’s Dasein in der Natur und im Volkerleben (The fight for survival in nature and in the life o fpeoples) when claim­ ing “ decisive influence over Europe’s destiny for the Germanic race” (Ecker 1871:29). Thus, most o f Wilser’s many contributions on prehistory start from pre­ historic anthropology and end with unequivocal political convictions. In his book Die Herkunft der Deutschen (The origin of the Germans) he placed in Scan­ dinavia not only the German but also the Indo-German origin. Later, Wilser was even speaking o f a “ Nordic centre o f creation” and he claimed that for millions o f years higher and higher forms o f life had emerged from an Arctic evolution centre (Wilser 1909). According to him, the Homo europaus dolichocephalus flavus had been subjected to the Nordic selection conditions for the longest time and consequendy was the highest race, destined to rule the world, and one look into history and present times should be enough to see that. H e saw modern Germans as “ the descendants o f those Germans who have stayed pure and unmixed for the longest time” (Wilser 1904: 180). T w o o f the lectures he gave at the Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte (German Society for Anthropology, Eth­ nology and Prehistory) on the origin o f the Germans and on stone-age races were strongly rejected by his audience. Virchow himself did assume the exist­ ence o f anthropological types, but strongly rejected Wilser’s simplifications, which declared the Germans “ the people o f all the peoples out o f pure patri­ otism ” (Virchow 1885). Hermann Klaatsch (1863-1916) protested as a spokesman for several colleagues against “ a sort o f anthropology that lessens the dignity o f science” (Klaatsch 1903). That was also the reason why the Zeitschriftfur Ethnologie (Journalfor Ethnology) linked him to “ Germanomanes, race fanatics and chauvinists” (Ehrenreich 1904: 706). Still, this criticism did not prevent Wilser from publishing his ideas with considerable success and getting praise not only from such right-wing extremistj ournals as the PolitischAnthropologische Revue (Political-Anthropological Review). Ethnic researchers later declared him a “ rightful fighter for our case” (W olff 1916). The amateur Willy Pastor’s motto was “ All historical research is without value if it does not arouse enthusiasm” (Pastor 1906: 81). Like Wilser, and also an active member o f the Berliner Gesellschaft fur Anthropologie, Eth­ nologie und Urgeschichte (Berlin Society for Anthropology, Ethnology and Prehistory), Pastor believed in an everlasting move from the North. In order to bring the “ truth o f the Germanocentric idea” to the public, Pastor in 1905

172

G U ST A F KO SSINNA: C O N TIN U IN G NATIONAL PREH ISTO RY

suggested the building o f a “ Nordic park” as an open-air museum (Pastor 1906: 85). Here mainly megaliths were to be displayed, as he rated them as impressive witnesses o f the expansion o f the Germanic peoples all over Europe. His own enthusiasm for these monuments stemmed from his jo u r­ ney to England in 1902, when he visited Stonehenge together with the archaeologist Carl Schuchhardt (1859-1944) (Weber 1933). The prehisto­ rian Leonhard Franz (1895—1974) called Pastor’s ideas “ mostly pseudo­ scientific” , but he recognized his ability “ to unveil the mysteries o f prehis­ tory in a popular way in a strange mixture o f objective science and subjective mysticism” . At the same time he regretted that “ proper scientists do not have the necessary creativity” (Franz 1924). Pastors death in 1933 was announced in several ethnic periodicals. He was appreciated as a “ reliable and meritorious fighter for the Germanic-German revival” (Weber 1933).

G u staf Kossinna: continuing national prehistory When, at a meeting o f his Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Vorgeschichte (German society for prehistory) on 4 August 1911, GustafKossinna (1858-1931) pro­ claimed German prehistory as an “ eminently national discipline” (Kossinna 1912), discussions about the leading role o f Germans since prehistoric times had been going on in popular-scientific contributions for about 30 years. In the process both the historical and the linguistic concept o f Germans had been absorbed into a race—anthropological one. In the scientific discussion o f those three decades, however, the fusing o f concepts and the stringent instrumentalization o f stereotyped anthropological characteristics into a nationalistic view o f history had often been criticized as unscientific. Initially GustafKossinna, too, had been a strong critic o f Ludwig Wilser, who was a committed advocate o f those ideas. In his review o f Wilser s collected papers on Die Germanen (The Germans) he expressed his disgust with the fact that Wilser, instead o f being a dilettante, had been able to form a group o f sup­ porters with his countless propagandist articles and speeches (Kossinna 1904: 781). This protest, however, does not indicate a totally contrary point o f view, but is partly based on scientific reasons, and is partly typical o f the rude way in which Kossinna would often treat dissidents. The linguist Kossinna initially stood in his teacher Karl MiillenhofFs (1818-84) tradition o f Germanic antiquarianism, which used mainly written sources for research into German prehistory. However, Kossinna saw the future o f the discipline in developing and establishing archaeological meth­ ods, while race-anthropological positions were not yet a feature. His motto

173

GERM AN ARCH AEO LO GY, N A TIO N A LISM AND RACISM

“ Away from R o m e and away from anthropology and ethnography” (StampfuB 1935: 34) emphasizes not only his archaeological claim to prehis­ tory but also a clearly national motivation. His call for a new chair for Ger­ manic prehistory sprang (apart from scientific motives) from the idea o f “ stimulating, clarifying and consolidating national feelings” (Kossinna 1896: 605). As Kossinna considered only Germans as representatives o f national prehistory, his first question in archaeological research in Germany was “ where are we dealing with Germans, where with non-Germans?” (Koss­ inna 1895: 109). For exactly that purpose he had developed his settlementarchaeological method (siedlungsarch'aologische Methode), according to which “ sharply defined archaeological provinces coincide with certain peo­ ples or tribes o f peoples throughout the ages” (Kossinna 1911: 3). His endeavour to attribute archaeological finds to certain peoples according to their characteristics and geographical distribution corresponds to the research aim o f other archaeologists o f the time and is not unique in the tra­ dition o f patriotic antiquarianism. The only thing new was his emphasis on everything Germanic. During a time o f strong nationalism and chauvinism just before, during and after the First W orld War, Kossinna’s view was radicalized as he supple­ mented his method o f settlement archaeology with race—historical assess­ ments. When he presented his thesis o f “ old Germanic cultural achievement” during a “ wartime lecture” in 1917, archaeological argumentation took second place behind purely politically motivated, ethnic considerations. H e was then speaking o f “ our racial, cultural superiority over other peoples” (Kossinna 1918). In Germany the discussion about the continuity o f race as an historical principle was made popular by Houston Stewart Chamberlain (1855-1927). The idea itself is very much rooted in the traditions o f prehistoric anthropol­ ogy from which Kossinna originally intended to keep away. It is a fact that there had been thinkers before him and a public ready for a nationalistic and racist view o f prehistory when Kossinna changed his guidelines from those o f scientific research to those o f ethnic ideology. There are many renowned scientists with an ambivalent attitude towards a national view o f race history. O ne o f them was Moritz Hornes (1852-1917), the influential founder o f Austrian prehistory, who on the one hand saw “ the danger o f forging the picture o f old European culture and listening to subjective views rather than the objective truth o f finds” , and on the other hand felt “ inclined to ascribe the greatest influence on culture to race” (Hornes 1905: 71, 73). It is certainly not correct to call Kossinna the initiator o f a “ new para­ digm ” in prehistoric research (Smolla 1991: 12). Nevertheless, he was o f major importance for the development o f the subject in Germany, as his

174

T H E J U S T I F I C A T I O N OF G E R M A N B O R D E R S

extraordinary professorship o f German archaeology in Berlin (1902) institu­ tionalized prehistory as an archaeological discipline. His title as professor gave considerable weight to national and ethnic tendencies, and he formed some o f the following generation o f archaeologists at a time when the assumption o f “ ancient Germanic cultural achievement” seemed the right thing to compensate for the lost war o f 1918 (Kossinna 1918).

The justification o f G erm an borders Justifying German borders with prehistoric arguments was hardly an issue in the north, south and west o f Germany, as the ancestors o f neighbouring peo­ ples there were members o f the Germanic language family, which was a point in favour o f pan-Germanism rather than anything else. References to a Germanic- or Nordic-dominated Europe in prehistoric times were meant principally to put into question the structure o f states and distribution o f power in present-day Europe. Border conflicts with Denmark were basically rooted in an historical lan­ guage conflict that could hardly be traced back to prehistoric times if a close relationship between Germany and Scandinavia was postulated. German claims on French territory (particularly Alsace-Lorraine), too, were far more often based on historical or economic arguments than on prehistoric ones. The reference to Franconian and Norman influences in Gallic France and to Germanic advances across the Rhine was more often made to state a general German dominance than to make concrete regional claims. Besides, the location o f a core Celtic area in southern Germany was never used to justify land claims. The historian Albrecht Wirth’s (1866-1936) remark that France was inhabited by the descendants o f a “ grim-looking, strong-boned ancient race with a likeness to criminals, reminiscent o f Cro-M agnon man” (Wirth 1918) was induced by wartime polemics and does not have a tradition in prehistory. Contrary to that, the German/Polish border became a case o f dispute between German and Polish archaeologists, especially after the First W orld War when the claim on Upper Silesian and Western Prussian areas had to be legitimated not only historically but also archaeologically. A similar situation evolved after the Second World War in respect o f the East German areas beyond the Oder and the Neisse. The discussion about a “ fair” borderline between Germany and Poland had been dominated by stereotype opinions since the early nineteenth cen­ tury (see also R^zkowski in this volume). The ideologically motivated slogan

175

GERM AN A RCH AEOLO GY, N A TIO N A L ISM AND RACISM

o f the “ German push towards the east” is opposed by the claim o f a German cultural mission, which was justified by the assumption o f a constant w esteast cultural slope (Wippermann 1981). In archaeology the theory o f a cul­ tural mission found its expression in a tacit agreement, according to which excavated finds that were attributed to Germans were described as aestheti­ cally attractive and progressive, whereas Slavic culture was disparaged. Thus, Kossinna characterized Slavic pottery as “ dirty grey” and being o f “ shocking crudeness” , whereas he assumed that the potter’s wheel had reached the W ends with German help. He further underlined the cultural gap between the Germans and the Slavs semantically by describing the Slavs’ area o f ori­ gin, the “ Eastern European ancient hom e” , as “ Slavic half-Asia” (Kossinna 1919: 7). The stigmatizing o f Slavic culture as utterly foreign was also used by Carl Schuchhardt when stating that the Slavs “ had crept into Eastern Ger­ many with a completely foreign culture” (Schuchhardt 1926: 270). Another argument for the German right to the land was the assumption o f a more or less complete German settlement continuity, in comparison to which the “ 500 years o f Slavic rule” had played only the “ role o f an inter­ lude” (Vorzeit 1919). It is interesting to see that not only the German settle­ ment o f the areas between the Oder and the Vistula up to AD 400 was being referred to, but also an assumed Indo-German one, dating as far back as 9000 B C . Thus, the idea o f the Slavs belonging to the Indo-Germans was indi­ rectly denied. During the Third R eich this view o f history was transferred to the whole “ Eastern area” . There was a series o f lectures at the Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Vorgeschichtsforschung (German Society for Prehistoric Research) on the “ German cultural mission in the east from the IndoGerman, the East German and mediaeval German ‘way east’ up to the present front against Russian Bolshevism” (Gesellschaft 1937). The legitimacy o f the German/Polish border remained a topic for archae­ ological interpretation even after the Second W orld War. The Silesian-born prehistorian Boiko Freiherr von Richthofen (1899-1983), as a supporter o f exiles’ organizations, was one o f those who defended the theory o f cultural carriers and the thesis o f only marginally interrupted Germanic-German settlement continuity. According to his description, the Slavs had “ trickled” into Silesia at the end o f the sixth century A D before the area was “ germanized” in the twelfth century (Richthofen 1967: 34). As early as 1929, R ich ­ thofen had asked “ D oes eastern Germany form a part o f the ancient Polish homeland?” in order to counter the respective “ ancient Slav theories” o f Polish archaeologists (Richthofen 1929). Walther Steller (1895-1971) went even further when, after the Second W orld War, he completely denied the Slavic settlement by re-interpreting the Wends between the Elbe and the Vistula as unchristianized East Germans (Steller 1959, Fritze 1961).

176

TH E TH IRD REICH - E X E C U T IN G GERM ANIC C O N T IN U IT Y ?

The German-Polish discussion o f land claims that has been lead by histo­ rians and prehistorians is characterized by a mutual bias continuing on into present times. This is exemplified by publications on the excavations at W olin, which has been identified as the legendary Vineta by both German and Polish archaeologists. The result o f systematic German excavations that had been carried out since 1934 was - complying with the traditional theory o f cultural carriers - that the settlement had been a “ planned foundation by the North Germans” (Wilde 1939: 89). The eighth-century Slavic settle­ ment had been turned into an important town only by the Germanic “ founders o f culture” . However, Polish archaeologists have stressed the sig­ nificance o f Slavic settlement continuity before German times. One o f the latest popular publications even states that the present-day inhabitants o f W olin are “ once more” speaking a language resembling the one that had been used in Vineta a thousand years ago (Filipowiak Sc Gundlach 1992:15).

The Third R eich - executing G erm anic continuity? A dolf Hitler (1889-1945) called the Aryans the truly original type o f humankind (Hitler 1937: 317). According to him they were, as “ founders o f culture” , superior to the “ carriers o f culture” , that is, all those peoples who were only handing down cultural achievements without being able to create anything themselves. Lowest in rank were the Jews, to whom he gave the attribute “ destroyers o f culture” . Hitlers attitudes were based on and further perverted the race—historical ideas o f Arthur de Gobineau and Houston Stewart Chamberlain, and those o f anti-semitic race mystics such as Lanz von Liebenfels (1874—1954) and Guido von List (1848—1919). Although this sort o f anti-semitism was hardly supported by national-thinking or even ethnic prehistorians, German archaeology, too, was “ aryanized” after the Nurem berg race laws had been enacted. In 1938 Carl Schuchhardt as chair­ man o f the Berliner Gesellschaft fur Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte signed a note indicating to “ non-Aryan members” that they were not wanted any more (Andree 1969: 129-30). Gerhard Bersu (1889-1964) was one o f the archaeologists who had to leave the country after the National Socialists had gained power. Herbert Kuhn (1898-1980) was dismissed from his office, because he had a Jewish wife. Even today there has still not been proper research into how many archaeologists became victims o f the N S race policy (Mode 1992). From 1933 onwards a process o f popularizing “ archaeology into all areas o f life” (HaBmann, forthcoming) was started, together with a noticeable

177

GERM A N A RC H A EO LO G Y , N A T IO N A L ISM AND RA CISM

increase in the number o f prehistoric institutions. The first ordinary chair o f prehistory ever at a German university had only been set up in 1927 in M ar­ burg. The promotion o f prehistoric research in N S times is attributable to its role as a Weltanschauungswissenschaft (ideological science). The populist use o f supposedly ancient Germanic symbols such as the swastika and the SS runes alone expresses - besides their meaning as political symbols for the German political right wing - a Germanomane understanding o f prehistory, which has been described by popular and pseudo-scientists (Hunger 1982, WeiBmann 1991a). Germanic or Nordic superiority since prehistoric times even in remote parts o f the world was one o f the basic assumptions o f polit­ ically motivated archaeological research. Archaeological finds were degraded to witnesses o f race—historical assumptions. Under the heading Die Nordrasse eroberte die Welt (The northern race was conquering the world), this view o f prehistoric developments was explained in Das Schwarze Korps, a weekly periodical published by the SS (Herrmann 1935). This article referred to a study by Wilhelm Sieglin (1855-1935, professor o f historical geography in Berlin), who had searched classical sources for references to blond hair in order to prove the great influence o f the Nordic race (Sieglin 1935). The work o f probably the best-known anthropologist o f the N S period, Hans Friedrich Karl Gunther (1891-1968), was going in the same direction. After measuring pictures o f early man, he believed he had found the “ Nordic race with the Indo-Germans o f Asia” (Gunther 1934). This race—historical aspect formed the core o f the popularized view o f prehistory, which could be extended to any era: “ From the middle o f the 5th millennium onwards, i.e. from the beginning o f the late neolithic, the home o f all Aryan peoples sent innumerable colonizing peoples out into the world, who had a vocation to spread their home culture all over the world” . The interchangeability o f eras was justified by the unchangingness o f race: “ W e are amazed to see that a hundred generations could change the material o f the daily tool, but not the spirit and the blood” (Schilling 1935). O f course, this sort o f speculation does not have much to do with archaeology proper. Nevertheless, such views should be taken seriously, as they were not only widespread in the daily press but were also uttered by prehistorians. Gustav Schwantes (1881— 1960), who was certainly a respected representative o f his discipline, went back to the “ Nordic palaeolithic” in order to describe the “ Nordic race, toughened by a merciless environment” as the distant ancestors o f those who have been deciding “ the world politics o f Europe up to our day” (Schwantes 1939: 144). These ideas were shared by leading National Socialists. This does not so much apply to Hitler, who was not as interested in the Germanic prehistory o f Germany as is often assumed. H e was more o f an admirer o f classical

178

THE TH IRD REICH - E X E C U T IN G GERMANIC C O N T IN U IT Y ?

antiquity, which he saw as a creation o f blond Aryans. It was more such ideologists as Heinrich Himmler (1900-45) and Alfred Rosenberg (1893— 1946) who got involved in fantasies o f Nordic pre-worlds, and both did their best to make progress with the institutionalization o f prehistory according to their own ideas, seizing existing institutions (universities, con­ servation offices, societies) and bringing them into line. The so-called Amt R osenberg (Rosenberg office) (Bollmus 1970) and the SS-dominated foun­ dation Ahnenerbe (Forefathers’ Heritage) (Kater 1974) were two party insti­ tutions that organized German research into prehistory in competition with each other. Organizing and bringing into line German prehistorians in the planned Reichsinstitut fur deutsche Vorgeschichte (Reich’s Institute for German Prehistory) was one o f the aims o f the Amt Rosenberg. The insti­ tute was to be built up and managed by the prehistorian and dedicated National Socialist Hans Reinerth (1900-90), who was respected only by some o f the German prehistorians and who was becoming increasingly unpopular because o f his careerist behaviour and his professional incompe­ tence. The main reason for the institute’s failure was that it was often pow ­ erless when confronted with the activities o f Himmler, who made the organization o f German prehistoric research the main operational area o f the SS Ahnenerbe and who had acknowledged scientists working under his pro­ tection. In the end, the course o f the war prevented the decision over whether Amt Rosenberg or Ahnenerbe would make their ideas on the organization o f science and research work. It is a fact, though, that because o f this competitive situation the discipline was never completely brought into line. Thus, a fairly wide ideological range was preserved among archae­ ologists, from the politically unmotivated to nominal party members and the fanatically involved (Arnold 1990). Still, researchers such as Hans Reinerth, who kept strictly to the party line, and such pronounced pseudo-scientists as Herman Wirth (1885-1981), Wilhelm Teudt (1860-1942), Karl Theodor W eigel (1892—1953) and others were promoted in a way that seems unlikely under normal circumstances. A fairly revealing insight into the ideological involvement o f German prehistory can be obtained from the longstanding discussion around the scientific value o f the research o f Herman Wirth, who had been the spiritual father o f the Ahnenerbe, founded in 1935 (Wiwjorra forthcoming).

179

GERM AN A RC H AEO LO GY , N A TIO N A L ISM AND RACISM

The controversy surrounding W irth’s research As a Germanist with a PhD and a titular professorship (without the venia legendi) the Dutch-G erm an Herman Wirth had been working towards the establishment o f an ethnic youth movement in the early 1920s. For him this meant the revitalization o f supposedly ancient, doomed or perished culture. As early as 1919 he had called himself in a letter to GustafKossinna a “ Germanic outpost” who could be “ absolutely counted on” (Schwerin von Krosigk 1982: 162). This indicates that his interest in prehistory was based on clearly ideological premises. The main sources o f his research were prehistoric symbols in cave and rock paintings, as well as symbolic decorations on pottery and other materials throughout almost all ages and over nearly all the world. Since he interpreted prehistoric signs and symbols not as decorative, but as a sort o f primeval writ­ ing, he hoped to understand the primordial history o f the human mind by decoding them. The result o f his several years o f collecting and interpreting was the identification o f a worldwide “ Atlanto-N ordic” prehistoric prime­ val culture, which he published in 1928 in his first big work, DerAufgang der Menschheit ( The dawn of mankind) (Wirth 1928). In this book Wirth inter­ preted prehistoric symbols as an expression o f the primeval religious thinking and feeling o f an “ Atlan to—Nordic race” with an arctic origin. After climatic changes this race had migrated south in several waves on both sides o f the Atlantic and, due to their “ metaphysical—transcendental” gift, had created m ixed cultures all over the world, and thus fulfilled “ their world-historical mission as spiritual leaven” (Wirth 1928: 20). The cultural characteristic o f this race was their matriarchal social struc­ ture. Only from the end o f the Megalithic Culture onwards had “ male power-political thinking” made its appearance and started the “ descent o f the Germans” (Wirth 1933: 270). Wirth saw the task o f modern times to lie in overcoming the present “ cultureless, techno-materialistic civilization” that he, as a vegetarian, associated with the consumption o f alcohol, nicotine and meat and generally with a bourgeois life-style. H e was calling for a return to his “ scientifically” deduced values o f the former “ A tlanto-N ordic” primeval culture, a retreat to the “ freedom o f poverty” (Wirth 1928: 23). The complexity o f his ideas on the verge o f science can only be hinted at here. Wirth presented them in many apparently fascinating public lectures all over the country and thus reached a considerable degree o f popularity with an audience interested in prehistory, which he expressly addressed in his books. Specialists in several areas o f the humanities felt compelled to declare their opinions on his scientific language, on his use o f insufficiently published material and not least on his sudden popularity. It is quite remark­

180

T H E C O N T R O V E R S Y S U R R O U N D I N G W I R T H ’S R E S E A R C H

able that hundreds o f critical articles, book reviews and major contributions published by prehistorians, ethnographers, anthropologists and the like did not diminish the attraction ofW irth ’s comprehensive myth o f prehistory. Additionally, Wirth was encouraged by some Germanophile but renowned scientists, such as Eugen Fehrle (1880-1957), Gustav Neckel (1878-1940) and Jo se f Strzygowski (1862-1941) (Baumler 1932). Indeed, the whole dis­ cussion was not just about an outsider’s fantasies, but about the ideological standpoint o f the humanities in general. The art historian Jo sef Strzygowski saw all this as “ the crisis o f the humanities” and called for a stronger consid­ eration o f the “ Northern point o f view” (Strzygowski 1932: 81). Wirth received most o f his approval (although not unanimous) from journals such as Die Sonne (The Sun), Nordische Welt (Nordic World), Nordische Stimmen (Nordic Voices) and Germanien (Germania). These periodicals were in the fashion o f “ Nordic thoughts” and often treated prehistoric topics under the aspect o f their usefulness for the ideas o f the ethnic-religious movement. This movement had started out from a expressively Germanomane under­ standing o f prehistory in its attempts to define a specifically “ German b elief’. Wirth himself was criticized by some agents o f this school, as he related the primeval religion o f the “ Atlanto-Nordic race” to primeval monotheism and even to the beginnings o f Christianity. That was contradictory to the decidedly anti-Christian tendencies o f most ethnic ideologists. In spite o f all the favourable responses from scientists and the public, Wirth did not get any closer to his aim o f establishing Urgeistesgeschichte (primeval history o f the human mind) as a discipline o f its own. His position was radically changed in 1935, when he was offered funding by Heinrich Himmler, who had a well known interest in speculative prehistoric research. N ow Wirth felt close to realizing his longstanding plans for an open-air museum. Simultaneously, he was hoping for appreciation o f his understand­ ing o f the Nordic primeval culture as the humane background o f National Socialism (Wirth 1931). Initially he received generous funding and managed to establish his Pflegestatte fur Schrift-und Sinnbildkunde (Institute for Writing and Sym­ bols) and even went on journeys through Scandinavia, where he made casts from rock engravings for his planned open-air museum. After a while he was promoted to the meaningless position o f honorary president (1937) and in 1938 finally asked to resign his membership. The reasons for his dismissal may partly be o f a scientific nature: he had received mostly devastating criticism for his second main work, Die heilige Urschrift der Menschheit (The primeval sacred writing of mankind), and for his committed support o f the gen­ uineness o f the so-called Ura Linda Chronicle, a faked Frisian chronicle, which included reports o f the destruction o f Atlantis in 2193 B C . His dubi­

181

G ERM A N A RC H A EO LO G Y , N A T IO N A L ISM AND RA CISM

ous reputation as visionary and founder o f religion was blocking Him m ler’s ambition o f establishing the Ahnenerbe as a respected scientific institution. In addition to that, his personal understanding o f National Socialism was contrary to that o f leading party ideologists. There was no way his ideas o f prehistoric North-Atlantic Man could be brought to any political use in the N S State. The research results o f Hans Reinerth had a better chance o f being used in cultural political propaganda: he interpreted actual or supposed Ger­ manic cultural remains as the expression o f a “ Nordic—Germanic mission” (Reinerth 1936: 207). For him, prehistory was a political weapon to justify the German policy o f conquest (Reinerth 1937).

The repression o f “ national” prehistory after 1945 The year o f 1945 marks a major hiatus in German prehistoric research. While the existing institutions have been expanding and new ones have been established, research has been mainly centred around problems o f typology and fine chronology, leaving aside national or local patriotic interpretations and the design o f a new view o f history. Professional archaeologists hardly ever present their results in a popular way and, if they do, it is only the spec­ tacular finds. For that reason, the public view o f prehistory is in a way tradi­ tionally form ed by popular scientists. For many years most German prehistorians have preferred to assume that the ideological incrimination o f the subject under the N S regime had existed only in the form o f a few negative cases, while the general development o f the discipline had not been affected. Thus, a critical discussion has not started until fairly recently, although Ernst Wahle (1889—1981) had stated as early as 1932 that prehistoric research itself had for the previous few decades given rise to the wishful image o f a northern origin o f culture (Wahle 1932: 2 4 5). Those rare critical analyses by East and West German prehistorians that do exist mostly concentrate on Gustaf Kossinna’s fatal influence on German research. Even the statement that Kossinna was “ quite a normal scholar” o f his time did not lead to any deeper discussion o f nationally motivated pre­ historic research before, contemporary with and after Kossinna (Smolla 1979/ 80). By characterizing Kossinna as a singular symptom, as a “ syndrome” , the influence o f equally national- or ethnic-thinking scholars has hardly ever been looked into, so that Kossinna’s role as “ bogy and demon” was confirmed. The impact o f prehistoric anthropology on the discipline as a whole has mostly been ignored. Even the joint responsibility o f the subject for popular images has been neglected until today. Nevertheless, it will have to be

182

T H E R E P R E S S I O N O F “ N A T I O N A L ” P R E H I S T O R Y A F T E R 194 5

acknowledged, if this complex mixture o f ideology and science is not to run out o f control. It has been remarked quite rightly “ that the general reader, presented with these dotty books in bookstores, has no obvious way o f distinguishing between fact and fantasy, fair assessment o f the available evidence and folly” (Daniel 1981: 193). Traditional views on Germans still live on in parts o f the popular and pseudo-scientific archaeological literature, although this sort o f publication is systematically ignored by scientific archaeologists. This is apparently for two reasons: first, they do not expect to find anything o f scientific value in it. Secondly, and bearing the experience o f N S times in mind, they want to prevent a public discussion o f ideological concepts that would only increase the popularity o f right-wing authors and publishers. However, this attitude could not stop the vicar and amateur archaeologist Jurgen Spanuth (born in 1907), who has located a Germanic Atlantis in Northern Frisia, from reach­ ing a considerable degree o f popularity among those with an interest in prehistory in the 1950s. Spanuth was aiming at a remake o f the ethnic view o f history based on the assumption o f a Germanic mission as carriers o f culture. The reprint o f Hans Friedrich Karl Giinther’s publication on The Nordic race and the Indo-Germans of Asia is prefaced by Spanuth’s article on Indo-Germans in the Middle East (Spanuth 1982). Here the Philistines as descendants o f the Sea Peoples are declared North Sea Peoples, who in turn are identified as Bronze Age Germans. The instrumentalization and mystification o f German prehistory after the Second W orld War happened and is still going on mainly in politically rightwing circles. Many authors, publishing houses and societies are continuing the tradition o f the nationalist and ethnic spectrum o f Weimar and N S times, and they form a subculture in present-day Germany. One facet o f this widely varied, yet interconnected spectrum is the Gesellschaft fur Vor- und Friihgeschichte (Society for Pre- and Protohistory), which considers itself a direct follower o f the organization founded by Gustaf Kossinna in 1909. Boiko Freiherr von Richthofen held the presidency for some years. In the name o f the acting president Dieter Korell (born in 1927) a confession to their spir­ itual father Gustaf Kossinna was published (Korell 1984). The definition o f such central terms as race, people and Germans that is given there makes clear that this confession mainly refers to the unaltered conviction o f a racially determined cultural superiority o f the North in prehistoric times. While the research conducted by this society is more or less tendentious and on the verge o f science, a more distinctly nationalist or ethnic view o f pre­ history is found in publications by neo-pagan groups (WeiBmann 1991b).

183

GERM AN ARCHAEOLOGY, N A TIO N ALISM AND RACISM

R easons for the developm ent o f national prehistory in G erm any There are two main reasons for the nationalist and racist tendencies described above, which both supported the idea o f a German national state. In the first place, views on history and mankind that had previously been dominated by theological beliefs and traditional ideas were revolutionized in the second half o f the nineteenth century by some important prehistoric discoveries that promoted the establishment o f scientific thinking. This thinking was characterized by the idea o f Darwinism (Baumunk & RieB 1994). Although the terms “ people” and “ race” remained nebulous, they became seemingly scientific criteria in an age o f growing belief in science. Secondly, as the process o f German industrialization and mechanization developed in a particularly abrupt fashion and in dimensions undreamt o f before, it caused fears o f modernity that could not be easily handled. These fears ended in a cultural pessimism that threatened to become a political dan­ ger (Stern 1986). A simplified understanding o f the young disciplines o f anthropology and archaeology opened up an intellectual escape from modernity for the educated classes who were particularly interested in prehistory. The escape route led into an imaginary, supposedly intact, pre­ historic world. The idea o f belonging to a superior race made it easier for individuals to live with their own insecure social status. After nationalistic and racist concepts had become immensely popular after the turn o f the cen­ tury, a romantic view o f national prehistory soothed the human desire for identity, community and nature that was threatened by modern develop­ ments (Gugenberger & Schweidlenka 1993: 40—7). The myth o f prehistory is still alive in present-day ideologies and will probably always be. Because o f its partly speculative character, archaeology offers the opportunity to project visionary ideas onto prehistory: those who create social utopias often fall back on supposedly real images o f the past.

Acknowledgem ents I would like to thank Birgit Uenze for her ready assistance with the transla­ tion into English.

184

BIBLIO GRAPHY

Bibliography Ackerknecht, E. 1957. Rudolf Virchow. Arzt. Politiker. Anthropologe. Stuttgart: Enke. Andree, C. 1969. Geschichte der Berliner Gesellschaft fur Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte 1869—1969. In Festschrift zutn hundertjahrigen Bestehen der Berlitier Gesellschaft fur Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte 1869-1969, vol. I, H. Pohle & G. M ahr (eds), 9 -142. Berlin: Bruno HeBling. Arnold, B. 1990. The past as propaganda: totalitarian archaeology in Nazi Germany. Antiquity 64, 464-78. Baum unk, B -M . & J. R ieB (eds) 1994. Darwin und Darwinistnus. Eine Ausstellung zur Kulturund Naturgeschichte. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. Baumler, A. (ed.) 1932. Was bedeutet Herman Wirth fur die Wissenschaft. Leipzig: Koehler & Amelang. Bieder, T. 1925. Geschichte der Germanenforschung, vol. III. Leipzig: T h eodor Weicher. Bollm us, R . 1970. Das Amt Rosenberg und seine Gegner. Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt. Chamberlain, H. S. 1899. Die Grundlageti des neunzehntenJahrhunderts. Munich: Bruckmann. C onze, W. & Somm er, A. 1984. Rasse. In Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe, vol. V, 135-78. Daniel, G. 1981. A short history of archaeology. London: Thames & Hudson. Ecker, A. 1865. Crania Gertnaniae meridionalis occidentalis. Freiburg: Fr. Wagner. — 1871. Der Kam pf utn’s Dasein in der Natur und im Volkerleben, Konstanz: O tto Am mon. Eggers, H .J. 1986. Einfuhrungin die Vorgeschichte. Munich: Piper. Ehrenreich, P. 1904. R eview o f Wilser, L. 1904 D ie Germ anen, Zeitschrift fur Ethnologie 36, 706-8. Filipowiak, W. & H. Gundlach 1992. Wolin-Vineta. R ostock: Hinstorff. Franz, L. 1924. R eview o f Pastor, W. 1922. Deutsche Urzeit. Wiener Prdhistorische Zeitschrift 1 1 ,9 0 -9 1 . Fritze, W. H. 1961. Slawomanie oder Germ anomanie? Bem erkungen zu W. Stellers neuer Lehre von der alteren Bevolkerungsgeschichte Ostdeutschlands. Jahrbuchfur die Geschichte Mittel- und Ostdeutschlands 9 /1 0 , 293—304. Gesellschaft 1937. D ie Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Vorgeschichtsforschung. Jomsburg 1, 532. Gugenberger, E. & R . Schweidlenka 1993. Die Faden der Nornen. Zur Macht der Mythen in politischen Bewegungen. Vienna: Verlag fur Gesellschaftskritik. G um m el, H. 1938. Forschungsgeschichte in Deutschland. Berlin: de Gruytcr. Gunther, H. F. K. 1934. Die Nordische Rasse bei den Indogermanen Asiens. Munich: Lehmann. HaBmann, H. forthcoming. Archaeology in the Third Reich. In Archaeology, ideology and society: the German experience, H. Harke (ed.). Cam bridge: Cam bridge University Press. H errm ann, A. 1935. D ie Nordrasse eroberte die Welt. Das Schwarze Korps 1(11), 10. Hitler, A. 1937. Mein Kam pf 244-58th edn. Munich: Ehcr. H ornes, M . 1905. D ie jiingere Steinzeit und die Rassenfrage. Politisch—Anthropologische Revue 4, 65-75. Hunger, U. 1982. Die Runenkunde im Dritten Reich. Gottingen: Lang. John , G. 1991.150Jahre Verein von Altertutnsfreunden itn Rheinlande. Cologne: Rheinland. Kater, M . 1974. D as ‘Ahnenerbe” der SS 1935-1945. Ein Beitrag zur Kulturpolitik des Dritten Reiches. Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt. Kirchner, H. 1938. Dasgermanische Altertum in der deutschen Geschichtsschreibung des achtzehnten Jahrhunderts. Berlin: Em il Ebering. Klaatsch, H. 1903. N ote on L. W ilsers lecture “ D ie Rassen der Steinzeit” . Correspondenz— Blatt der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte 34, 187.

185

G ERM AN A RC H A EO LO G Y , N A T IO N A L ISM AND RA CISM Klem m , G. E 1836. Handbuch dergermanischen Alterthumskunde. Dresden: Walther. Korell, D. 1984. Bekenntnis zu GustafKossinna. Mannus 50, 161-87. Kossinna, G. 1895. U ber die vorgeschichtliche Ausbreitung der Germ anen in Deutschland. Correspondenz—Blatt der deutschen Gesellschaftfur Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte 26, 109-12. — 1896. Professuren fur deutsches Altertum. Die Grenzboten 55, 600-605. — 1904. R eview o f Wilser, L. 1904. D ie Germ anen. Archiv fur Rassen- und Gesellschaftsbiologie 1, 780-805. — 1911. Die Herkunft der Germanen. Leipzig: Kabitzsch. — 1912. D ie deutsche Vorgeschichte eine hervorragend nationale Wissenschaft. Mannus 4, 17-19. — 1918. Altgermanische Kulturhohe. Ein Kriegsvortrag. Jena: N ornen. — 1919. Das Weichselland, ein uralter Heimatboden der Germanen. Danzig: Kafemann. Lipp, W. 1987. Natur. Geschichte. Denkmal. Zur Entstehung des Denkmalbewuftseins derburgerlichen Gesellschaft. Frankfurt: Cam pus. M ode, M . 1992. Altertumswissenschaften und Altertumswissenschaftler unter dem N S R egim e. Gedanken zum N iedergang deutscher Wissenschaften. In Wissenschaft unter dem NS—Regime, B. Brentjes (ed.), 156-69. Berlin: Lang.

M ontelius, O. 1888. U ber die Einw anderung unserer Vorfahren in den N orden. Archiv fu r Anthropologie 17, 151-60. — 1899. Der Orient und Europa. Stockholm : Kungl. Hofboktryckcriet. M uch, M . 1906. D ie Trugspiegelung orientalischer Kultur in den vorgeschichtlichen Zeitaltern N ord - und M itteleuropas. Mitteilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien 36, 5 7 91. Pastor, W. 1906. Der Zug vom Norden. Jena: Diederichs. — 1922. Deutsche Urzeit. Leipzig: H. Haessel. Penzler,J. (ed.) 1897. Die Reden Kaiser Wilhelm II. in denJahren 1888-1895. Leipzig: R cclam . R einerth, H . 1936. Siiddeutschlands nordisch-germanische Sendung. Gertnanenerbe 1, 2 0 3 209. — 1937. Aufgaben der D eutschen Vorgeschichtsforschung. Volk und Heimat 13, 89-90. R ichthofen, B. Freiherr von 1929. Gehort Ostdeutschland zur Urheimat der Polen? Kritik der vorgeschichtlichen Forschungsmethode an der Universitdt Posen. Danzig: W. F. Burau. — 1967. Schlesien und die Schlesier, vol. II. Wolfenbiittel: Grenzland-Verlag. R om er, R . 1989. SprachuAssenschaft und Rassenideologie in Deutschland, 2nd edn. M unich: W ilhelm Fink. Schilling, H. 1935. Was bedeutet “ Stcinzcit” ? Das Schwarze Korps 1(41), 13. Schliz, A. 1915/16. Rassenfragen. In Reallexikon dergermanischen Altertumskunde, vol. I ll, 4 3 9 59. Schm idt, E. 1899. D ie Anthropologie derBadener. Die Umschau 3, 950-03. Schuchhardt, C. 1926. Alteuropa. Berlin and Leipzig: de Gruyter. Schwantes, G. 1939. D er EinfluB der Vorgeschichte au f das Geschichtsbild unserer Zeit. Kieler B latter!, 131-45. Schw erin von Krosigk, H. Grafm 1982. GustafKossinna. Der Nachlaf - Versuch einer Analyse. N eum iinster: Wachholtz. See, K. von 1970. Deutsche Germanen—Ideologie. Vom Humanismus bis zur Gegenumt. Frankfurt: Athenaum. Sem per, G. 1860. Der Stil in den technischen und tektonischen Kunsten, vol. I. Frankfurt: Verlag fur Kunst und Wissenschaft.

186

BIBLIO GRAPHY Sieglin, W. 1935. Die blonden Haare der indogermanischen Volker des Altertums. Munich: Lehmann. Smolla, G. 1979/80. Das Kossinna-Syndrom. Fundberichte aus Hessen 1 9 /2 0 , 1-9. — 1991. Archaologie und NationalbewuBtsein. In Zwischen Walhall und Paradies. Deutsches Historisches M useum (ed.), 11-15. Berlin: D H M . Spanuth, J. 1982. Indogermanen im Vorderen Orient. In Die Nordische Rasse bei den Indogermanen Asiens (reprint), H. F K. Gunther, i-xxxii. Pahl: H ohe Warte. StampfuB, R . 1935. Gustaf Kossinna ein Leben fur die Deutsche Vorgeschichte. Leipzig: Kabitzsch. Steller, W. 1959. Name und Begriffder Wenden (Slcavi). Eine wortgeschichtliche Untersuchung. Kiel: Selbstverlag. Stern, F. 1986. Kulturpessimismus als politische Gefahr. Eine Analyse nationaler Ideologie in Deutsch­ land. M unich: DTV. Strzygowski, J. 1932. Herman Wirths vergleichendes Verfahren. In Was bedeutet Herman Wirth fur die Wissenschaft, A. Baum ler (ed.), 67-81. Leipzig: Koehler & Amclang. Tacitus 1975. Germania [translated by W. Peterson|. Cam bridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Virchow, R . 1872. Prof. Virchow spricht iiber die R ace prussicnne. In Die dritte AUgetueine Versammlung der deutschen Gesellschaft fur Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte zu Stuttgart am 8. bis 11. August 1872. Addition to Correspondenz—Blatt der deutschen Gesellschaft fur Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte, 49-57. — 1885. N ote on L. W ilser’s lecture “ Die Herkunft der G erm anen” . Correspondenz—Blatt der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte 16, 122-4. Volker, W. 1984. Als die Rotner frech gewordenn . . . Die Schlacht im Teutoburger Wald. Berlin: Wagenbach. Vorzeit 1919. D eutsch-polnische Vorzeit. Alldeutsche Blatter 29(21), 163-4. Wagner, F. A. 1828. Die Tempel und Pyramiden der Urbewohner auf dem rechten Elbufer, unweit detn Ausjluss der schwarzen Elster. Leipzig: Hartmann. — 1833. Aegypten in Deutschland oder die germanisch-slavischen wo nicht rein germanischen Alterthumer an der schwarzen Elster. Leipzig: Hartmann. Wahlc, E. 1932. Deutsche Vorzeit. Leipzig: Kabitzsch. Weber, E. 1933. Willy Pastor. Nordische Stimmen 3, 105-106. WeiBmann, K. 1991a. Schwarze Fahnen, Runenzeichen. Die Entwicklung derpolitischen Symbolik der deutschen Rechten zunschen 1890 und 1945. D iisscldorf Drostc. — 1991b. Druiden, Goden, Weise Frauen. Zuruck zu Europas alten Gottern. Freiburg: Herder. Wilde, K. A. 1939. Die Bedeutung der Grabung Wollin 1934. Stettin: Hermann Saran. Wilke, G. 1921. Archaologische Erlauterungen zur Germania des Tacitus. Leipzig: Kabitzsch. Wilser, L. 1899a. Germanischer Stil und deutsche Kunst. Heidelberg: Adolph Emmcrling. — 1899b. Herkunft und Urgeschichte der Arier. Heidelberg: J. Horning. — 1904. Menschenrassen und Weltgeschichte. Iduna 6, 113-9 and 173-81. — 1909. D er nordische Schopfungsherd. Zeitschrift fur den Ausbau der Entuncklungslehre 3, 121-38. W ippermann, W. 1981. Der ‘Deutsche Drang nach Osten” . Ideologie und Wirklichkeit eines poli­ tischen Schlagwortes. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. Wirth, A. 1918. Dunkle Urzeiteinfliisse bei unseren Feinden. Alldeutsche Blatter 28(48), 386. Wirth, H. 1928. Der A u f gang der Men schheit.}£nx. Diederichs. — 1931. Was heifit deutsch? Jena: Diederichs. — 1933. Ura Linda Chronik. Leipzig: Koehler & Amelang. W iw jorra, I. forthcom ing. Herm an Wirth. Ein gescheiterter Ideologe zwischen “ Ahnenerbe” und Atlantis. In Historische Rassistnusforschung. Ideologen, Tater, Opfer, B. Danckwortt,

187

GERM AN ARCH AEOLO GY, N A TIO N ALISM AND RACISM C. Schoningh, T. Q uerg (eds). Berlin: Argum ent Verlag. Wolff, K. F. 1916. Z um Streitfall Dr. W ilser gegen Karl Felix Wolff. Alldeutsche Blatter 26(29), 276. — 1918. Indogerm anen und Deutsche. Politisch-Anthropologische Monatsschrift 17, 419-26.

188

CHAPTER TEN

“Drang nach Westen”?: Polish archaeology and national identity W lodzim ierz Rqczkowski

For Polish people the title o f this article is provocative and difficult to acknowledge, since in Poland the German phrase “ Drang nach Osten” is commonly understood as the German expansion to the east, a permanent element o f the eastern policy o f the German countries (for example the Brandenburg Margravate, Prussia or the Third Reich; Labuda 1974). According to the commonly accepted stereotype, the state o f Poland or the Polish people have always taken a defensive approach in the Polish/German conflict resulting from such a German eastern policy. The phrase “ Drang nach Westen” , however, implies an offensive policy o f Poland towards its western neighbour. Analyzing the nation-creative processes in the territory o f Poland, the political views connected with them and the contribution o f archaeologists, one can also perceive a distinct anti-German tendency apart from the defensive aspects. Such an approach resulted from the centuries-old Polish/German proximity and convictions shaped by history. It is the historical tradition that plays a vital role in the process o f forming historical consciousness. Conceptions, myths, and stereotypes about the past created by historians, focusing on the differences between “ ours” and “ theirs” , influenced the feeling o f separateness in attitude towards neigh­ bouring societies, peoples and nations. Archaeologists also participated in the process to a certain extent. They presented phenomena from pre-state and early-state periods in a different fight. Considering the role o f archaeol­ ogy in the process o f raising the national identity o f the Polish people (and vice versa), one can observe the influence o f ideology and politics on the way questions are formed in archaeology, on the choice o f research prob­ lems and also on attempts to interpret the prehistoric phenomena. The dom­ inant positivist research paradigm in the nineteenth and early twentieth century assumed cognitive objectivity. Therefore, it is hard to say to what extent archaeologists were under the influence o f their surrounding reality

189

POLISH A RCH AEO LO GY AND N A TIO N A L ID E N T IT Y

and people’s expectations in the process o f forming conceptions about the past. The fact that archaeologists seldom expressed their patriotic intentions and stressed the objectivity o f their knowledge made the case even more dif­ ficult. Their attitude and standpoints were certainly determined by many factors. The cultural environment from which they originated, in which they lived and worked, must have been o f remarkable importance. There­ fore, considering the impact o f archaeology and archaeologists on the proc­ ess o f creating national identity, one should examine both the objective, social and political conditions, and the subjective way in which archaeolo­ gists perceived them. Am ong the subjects taken up by Polish archaeology, the problems o f the Slavs and their relationships with the Germanic tribes, together with the ori­ gin and development o f the state o f Poland under the reign o f the Piast Dynasty, were o f the utmost importance in the process o f creating national identity. Depending on the changes in the political situation and on cultural and social demand, the function o f the issues mentioned above differed and phenomena from the remote past were differently emphasized and inter­ preted.

Before archaeology, before the nation Reflection upon the artifacts o f the past had been forming long before the Polish nation, as it is understood today, appeared (e.g. Gellner 1991). This long-lasting process had been started in the Middle Ages (Abramowicz 1983). At that time the first intuitive attempts at interpretation o f archaeo­ logical finds had already appeared. Although they did not have a national character then, they were used in the nineteenth century in the process o f form ing national identity. Hence, it is worth considering them briefly. The first reference to pots dug out o f the soil can be found in Jan D lugosz’s Chronicle from the fifteenth century. The information concerns discoveries in the area o f two villages: N ochow o near Srem and Kozielsko near Lekno (both in the region o f Wielkopolska). Dlugosz wrote (1985: 62) that in these areas: . Nature itself, with no human help, makes the soil give birth to the pots . . .” . Therefore, the first pots to be discovered were described as if they were not related to any human activity whatsoever. N o t only in Poland have such interpretations appeared (Abramowicz 1983: 30— 52). Although it was suggested in the middle o f the sixteenth century that such discoveries should be interpreted as the remains o f pagan graves, at the beginning o f the eighteenth century there were still comments about

190

BEFORE ARCHAEOLOGY, BEFORE THE NATION

“ naturally growing pots” . However, such opinions were more and more criticized and such pots started to be interpreted as pagan urns, a view that slowly became generally accepted. The first reference to the pots being interpreted as the remains o f pagan graves dates back to 1544 and it relates to the discoveries in the village o f M aslowo near Trzebnica (Silesia) (Abramowicz 1979: 38). At the same time a question was posed as to the identity o f the pagans buried in such graves. In 1546 Georg Agricola, the German humanist, wrote that the pots discov­ ered in Saxony and in Lusatia were the graves o f the early Germanic people (Abramowicz 1983: 36). In the second half o f the seventeenth century, attempts to identify the remains appeared more and more frequently. Krzysztof Jan Hartknoch, the Polish historian from East Pomerania, writing the history o f the early Prussians (one o f the Baltic tribes on the southeastern coast o f the Baltic Sea, whose name was later taken by one o f the German countries) in 1679, interpreted the urns, found in the area where they had lived, as the graves o f the Prussian tribes. On the other hand, Jakub a Mellen, the German antiquarian, writing in 1679 about the discoveries in the area o f Smigiel (in the region o f Wielkopolska), claimed that they were the graves o f the Veneti and Sarmatians (pre-Slavs and the ancestors o f the Slavs) (Abramowicz 1983: 118, 129). Therefore, a tendency grew to interpret the discovered antiquities as the remains o f the local people: the Germanic peo­ ple in Saxony, the Prussian tribes in Prussia, and the Slavs in the region o f Wielkopolska. Thus, the ethnic affiliation o f the discovered remains (mainly graves) was estimated with reference to the then political situation o f the area. Serious doubts were raised with regard to the cemeteries discovered in Silesia. Some scholars questioned whether the graves had belonged to the Sarmatians, the Quadi or the Romans (Zak 1974: 30). In the interpretation o f the discovered antiquities there were often attempts to relate them to the classical world. The structural similarities between the barrows discovered in Italy and in Poland, the use o f cremation or the discovery o f Rom an coins, proved to be sufficient to promote a search for the ancestors among the Romans. Such interpretations raised the prestige o f the nations living in the former “ Barbaricum” and made them believe in their heroic origin by letting them search for the roots o f their cultures deeper in the known past. The antiquaries collected items originating mostly from the ancient classical world, often disregarding the local antiquities. However, examples o f the latter could be found in their collections, such as clay pots (mainly funerary urns), flint axes, stone axes, silver and gold coins, or bronze ornaments and jewellery. Also, local barrows and burial mounds were o f much interest (e.g. the M ound o f Krak or the M ound o f Wanda) (Abramowicz 1987: 140—60).

191

POLISH ARCH AEOLO GY AND N A TIO N A L ID E N T IT Y

The intellectual trends o f the Enlightenment did not provoke any deeper reflection with regard to the local antiquities. Only Adam Naruszewicz, the historian (1733-96), seems to have appreciated the importance o f archaeo­ logical sources in examining the local past. The truth is, however, that even Naruszewicz did not make use o f the information concerning the cremation graves or the stone tools in his Historia narodu Polskiego (History of the Polish nation). Nevertheless, he appreciated the importance o f antiquities in exam­ ining the past o f the Slavs. H e claimed that the Slavs originated from the Sar­ matians, who occupied the territory from the Vistula to the D on and the Volga (Abramowicz 1987: 189). However, he was not able to point out the antiquities that would make the identification o f the Slavs possible. At the end o f the eighteenth century, major changes in the system o f education took place. These were connected with the establishment o f the Komisja Edukacji Narodowej (National Board ofEducation) in 1773. The cur­ ricula introduced by the Board were relatively innovative and they reflected the scientific views o f the Enlightenment. They highlighted the role o f mind and experience in the cognitive process. Man was treated as a part o f nature and thus taken as a subject o f natural studies. At the same time, education and upbringing were considered a part o f politics as an important element in the process o f the transformation o f society (this was particularly relevant in the process o f reformation o f the country after the first partition in 1772). H is­ tory lessons at school were to be used in the upbringing o f children. For example, the history syllabus comprised lessons on the classical period and so-called natural history, that is, sciences concerned with the Earth, plants, animals, minerals and so on (Maternicki 1974: 26—8). This was probably the reason why didactic collections appeared in some schools including, among minerals and the products o f nature, unique local antiquities (Abramowicz 1987: 150). Antiquities, both classical and local, were also displayed in Cra­ cow University. The final fall o f the state o f Poland in 1795 was a shock for the whole o f society (after the partitions in 1772, 1793 and 1795 Poland had lost all its provinces). U p to that moment the nation-creative process had increased gradually and only the ruling class and the educated groups were involved in it (Chlebowczyk 1975: 8). The Constitution o f the Third o f M ay 1791 had introduced the middle class to politics. The shock resulting from the loss o f the country engendered a sudden interest in the past o f the Polish nation, including the local antiquities. Antiquarianism became one o f the elements supporting the intensified national movement (Zak 1974: 32). A conviction was spread then that only a nation that knows its past and is true to it is capa­ ble o f surviving without the political status o f a state. At the beginning o f the nineteenth century the amount o f information

192

BEFORE ARCHAEOLOGY, BEFORE THE NATION

from the discovery o f archaeological remains grew rapidly (Abramowicz 1987: 268—9). Collections were begun in private museums, schools and learned societies. Such rapid growth o f interest in local antiquities was pos­ sible because o f the former tradition o f collecting classical antiquities. It was also the result o f the innovative kind o f education introduced earlier by the National Board o f Education. Moreover, the curricula and the school hand­ books prepared and introduced by the Board at the end o f the eighteenth century were still in use up to the 1820s and 1830s (Maternicki 1974: 3 8 59). The interpretation was based on the intuitive belief that every item found in the area where, according to the written sources, the Slavs had lived, was a Slavic relic. The problem o f chronology was not taken into consideration (Zak 1974: 33). It enabled Julian Ursyn Niemcewicz (a writer in the era o f the Enlightenment at the very beginning o f the nineteenth century) to draw conclusions about the autochthony o f the Slavs in large areas o f Europe on the basis o f the discovery o f coins, graves, urns, fragments o f weapons, tools and jewellery. Gradually, from the beginning o f the nineteenth century, the finds interpreted as Slavic remains started to be an important element in the process o f creating Polish national identity, o f searching for identity and o f establishing the right to possess a territory, to possess a native soil and to own a country. The final partition o f Poland by Prussia, Russia and Austria in 1795 intro­ duced some differences in the opportunities for collecting, interpreting and popularizing antiquities. Initially, the situation in the Russian sector was the most advantageous for its inhabitants because in this area (the Kingdom o f Poland) certain situations such as the pre-existing system o f education and learned societies were still preserved. It was there that an interest in antiqui­ ties developed most remarkably because o f a quite liberal Russian policy on nationalism. As everywhere in Europe, antiquarian research was more and more influenced by the spirit o f Romanticism. In Poland it took a particular form o f research on the Slavs, who were seen as the ancestors o f the Polish people. Although the historical importance o f the discovered remains was highly appreciated, critical evaluation o f them was still far off (Kostrzewski 1949: 19). The failure o f the Novem ber Uprising (1830-31) in the Kingdom o f Poland entailed abrupt and severe changes in the Russian policy towards Poland and worsened conditions for the development o f antiquarianism. Many learned societies and schools were closed. In this situation, the W ielkopolska region (the Prussian sector) seemed to offer the best condi­ tions for the development o f antiquarianism. Regardless o f the Germanization policy conducted in the Wielkopolska region, the development o f

193

PO LISH A R C H A E O LO G Y AND N A T IO N A L ID E N T IT Y

Polish cultural institutions was still possible there. In 1834, a new journal Przyjaciel Ludu (Friend of the People) started to publish articles about the discovery o f Slavic antiquities and to exhort people to protect them. In this journal, the Polish antiquarians launched a discussion o f German concep­ tions o f the ethnic interpretations o f the finds (Abramowicz 1967: 45-65). Collecting archaeological finds ceased to be an activity o f a few antiquarians. Local Towarzystwa Zbieraczow Starotytnosci Krajowych (Societies o f Collec­ tors o f National Antiquities) appeared, which had many Polish members. Their aim was to record, protect and collect the relics (Slavic antiquities). Such societies were established in tiny towns in the region o f Wielkopolska: Szamotuly, Gostyii, Gniezno, Raszkow and Ostrzeszow (Abramowicz 1991: 19). The greater inflow o f antiquities raised new questions about the cause(s) o f differences between them. It was problematic whether the differences originated from chronological, social or ethnic discrepancies. Ethnic inter­ pretations were emphasized most often. In the territory that, at that time, belonged to Prussia and which, according to written sources, had been occupied by the Slavic tribes, the answer to the question o f what was o f Slavic and what o f Germanic origin was purely intuitive. The answer was based more on emotional commitment than on cognitive possibilities. However, the German researchers quite commonly assigned cremation cemeteries to the Slavs and inhumation burials to the Germanic people. For the German archaeologist Frederick Lisch, the forms o f the graves were the basis for an ethnic interpretation. He claimed that the megalithic graves were the remains o f the pre-Germanic people, the barrows with bronze items were left by the Germanic people, and the flat cremation graves with urns decorated with meanders were the graves o f the Slavs. Such views proposed by German researchers were criticized by the Polish scientists. Franciszek Maksymilian Sobieszczanski, the Polish archaeologist from Warsaw, blamed the Germans for assigning “ more valuable relics” to the Germanic people and the “ poor and common ones” to the Slavs. W ojciech Morawski, the Polish archaeologist from the region o f Wielkopolska, criticized Lisch for treating copper (in reality bronze) socketed axes and various weapons as being exclusively Germanic. According to Morawski such elements con­ firmed the presence o f the primeval Slavic people in the W ielkopolska region (Zak 1974: 34-6).

194

A N A T I O N W I T H O U T A C O U N T R Y OR A R C H A E O L O G Y

A nation without a country or archaeology In the middle o f the nineteenth century, the situation o f the Polish people under Prussia (after the failure o f the uprising in 1848) and in the Russian sector (after that o f the January Uprising 1863-4) worsened. The previously revived Polish cultural and scientific institutions and learned societies were closed and the educational system was restricted. An intensive programme o f Germanization and Russification o f the Polish people was launched. R ela­ tively favourable conditions for the development o f Polish culture and science existed only in the Austrian sector (the universities in Cracow and Lvov), where the policy towards Poland was quite liberal. The fiasco o f the successive national uprisings (in 1830/31, 1846, 1848, 1863/64) proved that social support for national movements in Poland was very weak. A small group o f intellectuals realized that their actions were worthless without widespread support from society. Only “ organic work” could diminish the discrepancy between the aspirations o f independence, the aims o f the intellectuals and the nobility, and the possibilities o f their realization. It implied a long-lasting educational and organizational activity in the whole o f society, which would create the basis for propagating the sense o f national distinctiveness (Chlebowczyk 1975: 219). The influence o f the intellectuals on the process continued to be crucial. They defined both the goals o f the national ideology and the forms o f their realization. They indicated the necessity to create the basis for a conscious social integration rooted in a common glorious past, language and cultural tradition, and a common hostility towards the invader. These views and ideas were trans­ mitted to the public mainly by means o f underground education (Chle­ bowczyk 1980: 142-56; Lepkowski 1967). School syllabuses in the Prussian and in the Russian sectors did not offer any possibility o f creating and devel­ oping national identity. The number o f Polish history and Polish literature lessons gradually declined. M oreover, the lessons were very poorly taught. In this light, the so-called secret or underground education became a neces­ sity and was one o f the forms o f opposing anti-Polish policies as well as a way o f creating national identity. Many self-education groups were established, which developed to meet the needs o f young Poles. At the time, the duality o f teaching history in Polish schools was very distinct. There was official his­ tory that emphasized the vices o f Polish society on one hand (antiquities were not considered), and secret history courses that highlighted the great Polish tradition and culture on the other hand (Maternicki 1974). In this secret education, archaeological relics were used to prove the high level o f civilization o f the Slavs. Exhibitions o f antiquities and works o f art in War­ saw in 1856 and in Cracow in 1858/9 proved the great interest o f Polish

195

POLISH ARCHAEOLOGY AND N ATIO NA L ID E N T IT Y

Riga

Baltic Sea •Vilnus

GMnsk

y ^

¥

in

^

')

•Minsk

s

J yep 5-rv / r Atf s S

4

-

iV li\

V*? v

r / %

^

\p

^Lanqv,Wielkopolskc ' —■s. Vs.

Bye\orO|s

Masov}£— \

•'Poznan

^Warsaw

>

^WrofcW^V ''O OpoteV J

1

Kiev*i\

.^-Mafopolska

^*Xtqcow

/

Ukraine

1■ 2■ 3

0

250 km

Figure 10.1 Changes in the borders of Poland from the eighteenth to twentieth century: 1. Borders in 1772 (before the first partition); 2. borders after the Great War; 3. borders after the Second World War.

society in archaeological relics treated as sources o f knowledge about the prehistory o f the Polish nation (Kowalczyk 1981). The second half o f the nineteenth century also brought different political views on the shape of a future revived Poland. As for the borders, the tra­ ditional view about the necessity of restoring the borders to what they had been before 1772 (that is, before the first partition ofPoland —see Fig. 10.1) was widespread. It implied that Lithuania, Byelorussia, and the Ukraine w ould have been treated as integral parts ofPoland. The fact that Polish cul­ tural traditions (especially among the middle and upper classes) were well established there, as well as the fact that many Polish people lived there (especially in Lithuania; Tomaszewski 1988: 97—101), was very favourable to such a view. The slowly rising national awareness of the Lithuanians, Byelorussians and Ukrainians in the second half o f the nineteenth century

196

A N A T I O N W I T H O U T A C O U N T R Y OR A R C H A E O L O G Y

was treated by Polish politicians in a manner similar to the anti-Polish activ­ ity o f the Russian authorities. Archaeologists were not very much interested in the ethnic interpretation o f archaeological evidence. However, if such evidence appeared, it was defined only as “ Slavic” , without pointing out the differences between the eastern and western Slavs. The differences between the Slavs and the Balts were not taken into consideration either. Some Polish politicians from the Prussian sector, however, did not attach any importance to the eastern border as it had been before 1772. Instead, they focused their attention on the line o f the western border. They consid­ ered the necessity o f defining the western border o f Poland based on the eth­ nic borders (Wrzesiiiski 1988: 125), which implied that not only the region o f Wielkopolska but also Silesia, East Prussia and West Prussia would be included in the territory o f the revived Poland (Labuda 1974: 209). A clear demand appeared for defining the historical ethnic borders between the Slavs and the Germanic people. Archaeology —which was developing as a science at that time, with its methodological and theoretical bases (positivism, evolutionism), its journals ( Wiadomosci Archeologiczne, Przeglqd Archeologiczny) and its institutions (e.g. museum in Poznan or archaeological committees o f learned societies) - was partly involved in the process o f creating national identity and indicating Polish separateness from the adjoining nations. It is worth noticing that the ethnic issues tackled by archaeologists focused on indicating the differences between the Slavs and the Germanic people and accounting for the secular presence o f the Slavs in the Wielkopolska region and Silesia (also in Pomer­ ania but to a smaller extent). The topic o f ethnic differences in the eastern frontier (called Kresy Wschodnie) was actually not taken up. Was it connected with the fear that such studies would provide the arguments for the national aspirations o f the Lithuanians, Byelorussians and Ukrainians? O r maybe it was the sense o f the Slavic community that was prevailing? These questions are not easy to answer. The fact is that the Polish archaeologists from the Russian sector co-operated with the Russian archaeologists in realizing many common interests (Abramowicz 1991: 73). In principle their studies were restricted to the interpretation o f the examined finds as Slavic. The issue o f the possibility o f the archaeological interpretation o f the differences between the western Slavs and the eastern Slavs was not dealt with. It may have been connected with the idea o f pan-Slavism. This idea originated in the period o f Romanticism and it accentuated the unity o f Slavic nations. The idea called for a common fight for freedom and independence (mainly the western and southern Slavs). Furthermore, the common origin and relationship o f all the Slavic nations were stressed. It was expressed by the shared heritage o f languages, tradition, customs and social

197

POLISH A RCH AEOLO GY AND N A TIO N A L ID E N T IT Y

organization. This in turn was thought to be a sufficient basis to create one uniform and independent Slavic country or group o f such countries. The idea o f pan-Slavism was used by various politicians who saw the future o f the Slavs in one country or a federation o f independent countries. Russian politicians were especially fond o f the idea o f pan-Slavism. They imagined Russia as the leader o f all Slavic countries. This may be the reason why Polish politicians did not consider the idea as relevant and worth discussing (they thought that Poland should be the leader). However, this idea was an inspiration for archaeologists who were interested in research on the preChristian (pagan) culture o f the Slavs (Kulczycki 1916, Skowronek 1977). In general, pan-Slavism was o f anti-German character. Therefore, the role o f archaeology in searching for and accounting for the cultural and national peculiarity o f Poland was limited to the problems o f the western region o f the Slavs, and its mode o f interpretation resulted from the necessity to contradict German views. This task was fulfilled mainly by the archaeologists from the region o f Wielkopolska who were occasionally sup­ ported by their friends from Cracow, Lvov and Warsaw. Discussion between the Polish and German archaeologists continued to be focused on ethnic questions. Their views were still clearly related to the tradition o f Romanticism. Polish archaeologists opposed attempts to label whatever was nice and effective, especially bronze items, as Germanic. The Polish archaeologist from Cracow, Jo z e f Lepkowski, blamed the Germans for having assumed a low level o f culture among the Slavs (Zak 1974: 40— 41). “ Scientific” discussion was also devoted to the process o f creating a gen­ eral picture o f the Slavs and the Germanic people. The people o f the two ethnic groups were contrasted by means o f attributing to them some partic­ ular characteristics inspired by the philosophy o f history. The views o f the German philosopher Johann Gottfried Herder, idealizing the Slavs, and the contrasting views o f Georg Hegel, were o f crucial importance in this matter (Zak 1977: 4). Herder’s views were often referred to by the ideologists o f national and independence movements, which influenced the interpre­ tations o f archaeologists. According to Herder, the Germanic people were aggressive plunderers striving after the domination o f the world. The Slavs, on the other hand, were hard-working, “ cherishing peace and housework” , helpful and hospitable (Chlebowczyk 1975: 105-6). Such stereotypes stigmatized the German oppression and approved the liberation efforts. The presence o f the Slavs far west from the region o f Wielkopolska, and the necessity to fight incessantly for the national existence not only in the Prussian sector, were called to mind more and more often. Jo z e f Ignacy Kraszewski, the Polish writer, wrote (1872: 30):

198

A N A T I O N W I T H O U T A C O U N T R Y OR A R C H A E O L O G Y

The Slavic graves in the Rugen (an island in the southwestern part o f the Baltic Sea), Pomerania and Lusatia tell us a lot o f what would hap­ pen if we stopped fighting and the treaty o f peace was signed. Gradually, however, both Polish and German scientists started to turn their attention to the necessity for a much deeper analysis o f the archaeolog­ ical evidence in opposition to the written sources. Evolutionism and diffusionism within the culture-historical approach provided the theoretical bases for such considerations. Only then could conclusions referring to the ethnic issues be regarded as scientific and rational. This way o f conducting scientific research led R u d o lf Virchow, the German archaeologist, to the conclusion that there were two periods o f habitation in the region between the Elbe and the Vistula. The older period was the counterpart o f what is known today as the Lusatian culture (mainly with reference to the cemeter­ ies) and it was taken to represent the pre-Germanic or the Germanic tribes. The younger period that was connected with fortified settlements and pot­ tery decorated with wavy ornament (which is now recognized as dating to the Early Middle Ages) confirmed the Slavic colonization (Zak 1974: 41). Consequently, a powerful argument was raised that it was not the process o f Germanization but the process o f re-Germanization that was being con­ ducted in the former territory o f Poland. Obviously, Virchow’s views and method did not satisfy Polish scientists. They questioned the possibility o f determining the ethnos on the basis o f pottery and they pointed out the possibility o f making use o f the anthropo­ logical data. In 1881 the Polish archaeologist from Cracow, Jan Nepom ucen Sadowski, formulated several principles that, according to him, enabled scientists to consider ethnic problems with reference to the Slavs (Zak 1974: 43): 1. Compare the exact data about the burial ritual and the graves o f the Slavs from the written sources with the archaeological material (the shape o f graves and the fortified settlements), 2. Compare the archaeological materials (especially the pottery) found in the graves and the fortified settlements within the archaeological materials including stratigraphy as the (relative) chronology indicator, 3. Subject the material analyzed in this way to the retrogressive method, starting from the known situation (that is the Early Middle Ages) and go back in time towards the unknown situations. Scientific confirmation o f Slavic expansion on the Oder and the Elbe at the expense o f the Germanic people in the Early Middle Ages (the only

199

POLISH ARC H AEO LO G Y AND N A TIO N A L ID E N T IT Y

question not answered in the discussion was whether it had happened in the fourth to fifth centuries or in the seventh to eighth centuries), and the broader acceptance o f the principles o f evolution in archaeology, gave rise to a further important question. This referred to the ethnogenesis o f the Slavic and the Germanic peoples. N ot only archaeologists, but also histori­ ans, linguists and ethnologists took part in the discussion. The theoretical basis for the discussion about ethnogenesis was created by the German archaeologist Gustaf Kossinna, who in 1895 formulated the principles o f the method o f settlement archaeology (Siedlungsarchdologie). The belief that the archaeological culture and the ethnos were closely related made it possible to interpret every archaeological culture as a record o f a particular ethnos (Zak 1974: 47). This method was widely criticized both by German (e.g. R . Virchow) and by Polish (e.g. E. Majewski) archaeologists. Although crit­ icized, this method was not abandoned (Veit 1989). It had major advantages from the ideological point o f view as it coincided with a nationalistic view­ point. This method allowed for the interpretation o f the same archaeological material in entirely different ways. The fact that an archaeological culture was defined by arbitrarily taken types o f objects or their features made it pos­ sible to consider and emphasize consciously selected features within the same kind o f material. This also made it possible to give an ethnic interpre­ tation to a given object. On the other hand, however, contemporary archae­ ological thought did not provide any alternative ideas. With reference to Kossinna’s method for interpreting the archaeological alongside the linguistic, historical and anthropological data, many hypothe­ ses concerning the ethnogenesis o f the Slavs were formulated. The original settlements o f the Slavs were supposed to have been located in the basin o f the Dnieper and the Vistula, or between the Oder and the Dnieper, or between the O der and the Bug, or only on the Dnieper, or on the Danube (Zak 1974: 58). The advocates o f the autochthony o f the Slavs on the O der and the Vistula recognized the Lusatian culture as the oldest evidence o f the presence o f the (pre-)Slavs in this area. Contrary to the attempts o f some German archaeologists to detect the original Germanic settlements on the O der and the Vistula, some Slavic researchers attempted to argue for the autochthony o f the Slavs even as far west as the Rhine and the Weser (Labuda 1974: 210).

200

T H E N E E D S O F AN I N D E P E N D E N T C O U N T R Y

The needs o f an independent country The conclusion o f the Great War led to the revival o f Poland in 1918. The western Polish borders were approximately similar to those from before 1772. The eastern border, however, was approximately as it had been in 1793 (after the second partition o f Poland). Only in the northeastern part o f the borders was there a major difference. This border was partly affected by the creation o f the independent state o f Lithuania (Fig. 10.1), as a result o f which Poland had suffered a considerable loss o f her eastern provinces as compared to the situation before 1772. Moreover, the new Poland was not nationally homogeneous. Within the new Polish territory there were also Ukrainians, Byelorussians, Lithuanians, Germans and Jews. The eastern border divided provinces that were previously considered Ukrainian, Byelorussian and Lithuanian. The historical capital o f Lithuania, Vilnius, as well as Lvov, a city o f the utmost importance to Ukrainians, were also within the Polish borders. The fact that both Vilnius and Lvov played a substantial role in Polish tradi­ tion and culture only complicated the situation. The retreat from the pre1772 borders became a significant feature o f the Polish eastern policy. There­ fore, there was no need to justify historical Polish rights to the territories taken over by the Soviet Union. The growing national aspirations o f the minorities inhabiting the eastern frontiers o f Poland (the so called Kresy Wschodnie) did not conform to Polish policy. In spite o f the constant changes o f governments and prevalent Polish political opinions, the control o f the provinces in question was based on vio­ lence (Tomaszewski 1988: 106-11). There was also a tendency to Polonize all kinds o f institutions (educational institutions, the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church). Such developments in the political and national situation on the eastern frontiers were not favourable for Poland. It was difficult to take any actions that would justify the ethnic separateness o f the eastern Slavs (Ukrainians, Byelorussians) and Lithuanians. There were two reasons for this: - highlighting the ethnic separateness contradicted the domestic policy o f the state - there was no need to justify the extension o f the eastern borders as caused by the issue o f ethnic separateness. O n the contrary, the emphasis on the close bonds o f these provinces with Polish culture was most relevant in the Polonization policy. However, this aspect dealt rather with history and literature than with archaeology. In this light we can say that the Polish archaeological studies carried out in the east­ ern frontiers lacked any political and ideological aspect. The situation in the west o f Poland was entirely different. The agree­

201

POLISH A RCH AEOLO GY AND N A TIO N A L ID E N T IT Y

ments o f the Versailles Conference did not fulfil the ambitions o f many Polish politicians and journalists. They were also aware o f the menace that could be caused by the frustration o f the German politicians after a consid­ erable loss o f the former eastern German provinces. An article in 1921 by Jakim iak in the daily newspaper Gazeta Warszawska was just an example to show that from the very beginning o f the independence o f the Polish state the western border had not been accepted and a justification to move the border farther to the west should have been sought: The border that we have been presented with in the west does not give us any security. Neither the river Piasnia nor the Obra should be our western border, but the Oder and its left tributaries, like the old Piast border. East Prussia ought to be taken from our back as a constant peril to our territories and included in Poland, and Lithuania should com ­ prise the part with Lithuanian people. (Quotation after Wrzesiriski 1988: 148-9). It was commonly accepted that it was not feasible to change the borders in the then political and international situation. However, that did not mean the abandonment o f actions that, in the long run, could create better condi­ tions for the eventual annexation o f Silesia, East Prussia and Pomerania to Poland. Acting according to international law as far as the minorities were concerned, there were three options to tackle: — to keep in the minds o f Poles living in Germany the conviction that the then existing Polish/German borders were only temporary and they had to change for Poland s benefit — to raise the national consciousness o f Poles in Germany and make them impervious to many actions o f Germanization — to create the pattern o f culture and demography that would consol­ idate the interrelationship between the provinces in Germany and Poland regarded as Polish from historical and ethnic viewpoints (Wrzesinski 1988: 150-1). At first the Germans did not accept their eastern borders agreed in Paris either. They demanded that the borders should be revised and the German minority in Poland protected. They also put great emphasis on the national consciousness o f their countrymen living in the Polish territories. This led to irrevocable conflicts and disagreements. The temperature o f the discussions was increasing or decreasing in tune with current political relations between Poland and Germany. Archaeologists did not miss the opportunity to take part in the discussions, bringing in relevant and substantial evidence.

202

T H E N E E D S OF AN I N D E P E N D E N T C O U N T R Y

After the Great War, Polish archaeologists, for the first time, could work in fully fledged, entirely Polish scientific institutions. Important archaeolog­ ical centres were established in Warsaw, Cracow and Lvov, which were the continuation o f major centres functioning before the Great War. Besides the fact that Poznan played a significant role in the archaeological sphere, it was also the main centre o f Polish western studies (Labuda 1974: 247). This was a simple result o f experience from the partition period and a general antiGerman attitude o f Polish society in the Wielkopolska region. The Polish—German discussion on ethnic issues in prehistory continued what had been begun before the Great War. Shortly after the discussion began, it acquired an emotive and nationalistic character (Zak 1974: 56). Professor Jo z e f Kostrzewski, the Polish archaeologist from Poznan Univer­ sity, was deeply involved in the discussion as a Polish representative. T w o fundamental elements influenced Kostrzewski’s views. He was born and raised in the Wielkopolska region in the Prussian sector and he was brought up in a truly patriotic family. N o wonder then that, while still at comprehensive school, he began his anti-German activity, co-organizing Polish underground education and writing as well as publishing committed articles for the underground press (Kostrzewski 1970). Moreover, he studied archaeology with GustafKossinna as his tutor. We may assume, therefore, that he knew Kossinna’s method and with certain modifications he applied it in his attempts to prove the autochthony o f the Slavs. This view, although not well documented in detail at that time, was enshrined in his first work on Wielkopolska in prehistory (Kostrzewski 1914). His thesis o f the autoch­ thony o f the Slavs in the region o f the tributaries o f the Oder and the Vistula was the leading idea tackled in all Kostrzewski’s scientific, didactic and pop­ ularizing activity. He was emotionally committed to the problems o f the Polish western borders and the situation o f the Poles in Germany. He often published articles in newspapers defending the Polish character o f Silesia and Pomerania. An excerpt from Kostrzewski’s diary concerning the situation in 1928 clearly shows his political attitude: Thus . . . facing the fact that in a short time we will have to fight the decisive battle with the Germans for Pomerania, it is essential to draw attention to the fact that Poland not only does not have to give any­ thing back to the Germans but also has some genuinely Polish prov­ inces to take back. In addition, it was not Germany that lost in the Treaty o f Versailles but Poland which regained only a part o f the prov­ inces plundered from Poland in the partition period, while the rest was given to Germany, seemingly as a bonus for effective Germanization in these provinces. (Kostrzewski 1970: 168).

203

POLISH ARC H A EOLO G Y AND N A TIO N A L ID E N T IT Y

These controversial views provoked a great number o f polemics among the German archaeologists. In spite o f a critical reception, Kossinna’s views and method were still prevalent in German ethnic studies. The firm conviction that the provinces on the O der and the Vistula are o f pre-German or German character was to be the premise for the argument that the western Polish territories should be returned to Germany. Some o f Kossinna’s followers (e.g. Ernst Petersen, Kurt Langenheim) took his method to extremes and, in their work, the archaeological culture was no longer the sole criterion for the determination o f the ethnos. M ore often, a sole isolated set, or even a single item o f the set, made a sufficient argument for the presence o f a given ethnos (the Germanic people in this case) (Zak 1974: 61). The application o f such research pro­ cedure made it plausible to “ prove” any thesis concerning the presence o f the Germanic people around the tributaries o f the Oder and the Vistula. Kostrzewski also used Kossinna’s method in his works against the views o f the German archaeologists, but with certain modifications. H e accepted Kossinna’s view that the archaeological culture was an equivalent to a sepa­ rate ethnic group. However, he did not make this principle universal, as he claimed that subsequent archaeological cultures can reflect various stages in the evolution o f an ethnos, provided they have common features. Thus, not every new archaeological culture is an equivalent to a new ethnos. Accord­ ing to Kostrzewski, particular attention should also be focused on the conti­ nuity, durability and transformation o f archaeological cultures, not only on their appearance and disappearance. Old finds could be considered Slavic on the basis o f the uninterrupted evolutionary course o f change in form, work­ ing backwards from a familiar ethnic situation in the Early Middle Ages with the application o f the retrogressive method. Kostrzewski discerned a cultural continuity in the archaeological materials from the Oder and the Vistula tributaries from the Early Middle Ages back to the third period o f the Bronze Age (Lusatian culture), or even to the second period o f the Bronze Age. As a result, he recognized the Lusatian culture as the equivalent to the pre-Slavs (Zak 1974: 73-4). In his work, many o f his disciples (such as K on ­ rad Jazdzewski, Jo z e f Marciniak and Wladyslaw L$ga) helped him to sub­ stantiate cultural continuity from the third period o f the Bronze Age to the Early Middle Ages. Many specialists in other sciences participated in the dis­ cussion on the ethnogenesis o f the Slavs, for example Jan Czekanowski in anthropology, Kazimierz Moszynski in ethnology and Jan Michal R ozw adowski in linguistics. There were no uniform views on the question o f the ethnogenesis o f the Slavs among either Polish or German archaeologists. For instance, the archaeologist from Warsaw, Wlodzimierz Antoniewicz, tended to accept some moderate German concepts. Such ideas could be

204

T H E N E E D S O F AN I N D E P E N D E N T C O U N T R Y

accepted in Warsaw, whereas it was not likely to happen in the W ielkopol­ ska region. Although there was a wide array o f viewpoints between the con­ cepts that originated from the school o f Kossinna and Kostrzewski, they did not play the most relevant role in the discussion. The scientific polemics were stirred up mainly by Jo z e f Kostrzewski on the Polish side and Boiko von Richthofen on the German side. Violent polemics between Kostrzewski and von Richthofen would not have had any great significance in creating the national identity o f the Poles (Slavs) on the Polish/German border if they had taken place exclusively on a scientific level and in scientific literature. However, the major part o f the discussion was played by articles that were published in newspapers and pop­ ular scientific magazines and brochures. It was this kind o f discussion that influenced the creation o f conceptual stereotypes o f the Germanic people and the Slavs. By publishing articles in German magazines, von Richthofen could only influence the national consciousness o f the Germans. On the contrary, Kostrzewski wrote and published in Polish as well as in German and English. Hence, it would seem that his views could be received more widely and have wider influence on the formation o f public opinion. On top o f that, Kostrzewski was held in much higher scientific authority and esteem. The titles o f some articles by von Richthofen and Kostrzewski will allow us to visualize the “ tone and temperature” o f the discussion: Boiko von Richthofen (selected publications from years 1925-35) — 1st Posen urpolnisches Land? [Is Poznan an ancient Polish land?]

— 1st Oberschlesien urpolnisches Land? [Is Upper Silesia an ancient Polish land?] — Oberschlesiens Urzeit auf Grund der Bodenfunde [Upper Silesia s prehistory on the basis o f its archaeological finds] — Gehort Ostdeutschland zur Urheimat der Polen? Kritik der vorge­ schichtlichen Forschungsmethoden an der Universitat Posen [Is East­ ern Germany a part o f the homeland o f the Poles? Critique o f the research methods in prehistory at the University o f Poznan] — Ministerprasident Kozlowski gegen Professor Kostrzewski [Prime minister Kozlowski against Professor Kostrzewski] — Prof. Kostrzewski sieht Gespenster [Prof. Kostrzewski sees ghosts].

Jo z e f Kostrzewski (selected publications from years 1927-36) — O naszych prawach do Sl^ska w swietle pradziejow tej dzielnicy [O f

our rights to Silesia in the light o f its prehistory]

205

POLISH ARCH AEOLO GY AND N A TIO N A L ID E N T IT Y

— O moraine zdobycie Pomorza w opinii swiata [O f moral conquest o f Pomerania in the opinion o f the world] — Z dzialalnosci Ostlandinstitutu [From the archives o f Ostlandinstitut] — Vorgeschichtsforschung und Politik. Eine Antwort auf die Flugschrift von D r Boiko Frh. von Richthofen: Gehort Ostdeutschland zur Urheimat der Polen [Prehistoric research and politics. A reply to D r Boiko von Richthofen s article: Is Eastern Germany a part o f the homeland o f the Poles?] — Czy wyniki polskich badaii prehistorycznych godz^ w calosc N iemiec? [Do the results o f Polish prehistoric research damage German integrity?] — Czy Sl^sk jest krajem pragermanskim? [Is Silesia a pre-Germanic country?] — Historiozofia hitlerowska a prahistoryczne teorie Kossinny [The N azi philosophy o f history and Kossinna’s theories on prehistory] — Baron Boiko von Richthofen jako apostol porozumienia polsko— niemieckiego [Baron Boiko von Richthofen as the apostle o f the Polish—German agreement] — Badania archeologiczne w Niemczech maj^ przygotowac rewizj^ granic [Archaeological research in Germany gives grounds for the revision o f the borders] — Prehistory o f Polish Pomerania. It is worth noticing that both sides o f the discussion used not only scientific arguments to prove their points. Emotions and personal attacks were also common. At the harshest moment o f the heated discussion, a diplomatic intervention became necessary in order to lower the temperature. It seems that Kostrzewski was entirely aware o f the role that historical tradition played in cultural and national identification. Bearing this in mind, we can pinpoint at least two aspects o f the discussion between Kostrzewski and von Richthofen. The first one was the undermining o f the scientific value o f the works o f some German archaeologists, and the second was the popularization o f knowledge about the common Slavic past among the inhabitants o f the frontier provinces (Wielkopolska, Silesia and Pomerania). M oreover, the popular scientific lectures given outside Poznan, and courses for teachers in Poznan, were yet other method o f spreading Kostrzewski’s views and reaching the whole range o f social classes. The idea o f courses for teachers was introduced in order to propagate knowledge about the preservation o f archaeological finds. In addition, the program o f the courses covered rudimentary knowledge o f Polish prehistory. Kostrzewski took part in such courses as a lecturer and presented his views and opinions on the issue o f the autochthony o f the Slavs (Stolpiak 1984:

206

T H E N E E D S OF AN I N D E P E N D E N T C O U N T R Y

161). The popularization o f the knowledge o f the prehistory o f the Slavs was o f outstanding importance, since school textbooks did not contain any infor­ mation about Polish prehistory. Such accounts as did exist were sporadic and referred to the stereotypical views o f the second part o f the nineteenth cen­ tury, and were based on classical documentary sources. In these sources, the Germanic people were described as warriors, whereas the Slavs were said to be o f a rather peaceful nature. A few excerpts from high school textbooks clearly show how obsolete and outdated the information was: The Germanic people were most o f all warriors. Wars provided them with the majority o f their daily needs; their tribes lived in permanent conflict and fighting; the notion o f violent vengeance was the ruling principle to everybody, that is, the whole clan was obliged to take revenge on the killer o f a member o f their community or on the whole clan o f the killer; thus war was the everyday reality for the Germans. . . . Agriculture, the cultivation o f soils was reluctantly undertaken by the Germans; the young usually left farming to women and the old while they took advantage o f the toil and booty o f wars. The Slavs’ nature was straightforward, sincere; in peace they did not know dirty tricks, larceny or cheating; they were characterized by whole-hearted hospitality which was experienced by all travellers and writers. However, if it came to a war: . . . The Slavs were neither tolerant nor merciful; their cruelty both astounded and appalled their more civilized enemies . . . (G^siorowska 1920: 115-20) The discovery o f a settlement o f the Early Iron Age at Biskupin (in the northeastern part o f the Wielkopolska region) in 1933 was o f immense scientific and propaganda importance. This very well preserved fortified settlement o f the Lusatian culture made a great impression both on archae­ ologists (e.g. at conferences in Brussels in 1935 and in Oslo in 1936) and on ordinary people. Lectures on the inhabitants o f Biskupin stirred up listeners’ imagination. The high level o f civilization o f Biskupin’s occupants was expressed by the very fine arrangement o f the buildings in the settlement and the quality o f craftsmanship. Where could one find a better argument to show everyone that the level o f civilization o f the Slavic people inhabiting the tributaries o f the Oder and Vistula was no lower than the general level o f development in central and northern Europe? Owing to Kostrzewski and

207

POLISH ARCH AEO LO G Y AND N A TIO N A L ID E N T IT Y

his colleagues’ popularized scientific activity, this interpretation o f Biskupin became a well known symbol o f the prehistoric culture o f Poland’s ancestors (Piotrowski 1991: 81—92). Nevertheless, Biskupin did not began to play this important role in full before the Second W orld War.

In the service o f state policy As a result o f the Second World War, Poland lost about half o f its territories in the east (about 180,000km 2) and gained about 100,000km 2 in the west (Fig. 10.1). Such radical changes to its borders were brought about entirely by political decisions made in Yalta and Potsdam. Ethnic aspects or the socalled historical rights to certain territories were o f no importance. Conse­ quently, Poland came under the influence o f the Soviet Union and lost its democratic character. This new political situation determined both the tasks and the possibilities for the historical sciences, including archaeology (Marciniak & R^czkowski 1991). The changes to the borders o f Poland created two potential possibilities for the utilization o f scientific research in politics: - to highlight the Polish cultural tradition and the indisputable historical rights to Polish territories in the east for the purpose o f a possible revi­ sion o f the borders or to cultivate the national consciousness o f the Poles who stayed in the Soviet Union — to justify the Polish character of, and historical rights to, the so-called R egained Territories and the necessity to defend the Slavic ancestors still living in Germany (Lusatia). The experience o f the following years showed that only the question o f the Polish nature o f the R egained Territories was fully accepted by the polit­ ical elites. The problem o f the lost territories in the east became taboo for political reasons. It was by no means allowed to undermine “ the always right decisions taken by the great friend o f Poland” , Jo ze f Stalin. All kinds o f pub­ lications, even the scientific ones, were subject to preventive censorship at that time. Historical and contemporary ethnic and cultural discrepancies between Poland, Byelorussia and the Ukraine were not allowed to be emphasized. W e may presume that the Soviet Union in creating the block o f socialist countries in Central Europe referred back to (or rather drew inspirations from) pan-Slavic ideas o f the second half o f the nineteenth century. And thus, should the differences between the Slavs (Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Byelorussians, Ukrainians and Russians) have been pointed out? A great Slavic community was becoming a reality now.

208

IN T H E S E R V I C E OF S T A T E P O L I C Y

On the other hand, archaeology and history had a major task to justify the right to the Regained Territories. The point was to prove to the world that Poland had just historical rights to the possession o f Silesia and the Lubusz Land, Pomerania, Warmia and Masuria. It also became necessary to con­ vince the Polish people that the new territory o f Poland was permanent and final, as it was the result o f historic justice. At the meeting at Psie Pole near W roclaw (Silesia) a year after the end o f the Second World War, the leader o f the communist party, Wladyslaw Gomulka, said: Great historic events have let our generation return to the soil o f our ancestors, the soil o f our fathers. Com ing to this place, be it from the Ukrainian or Byelorussian territories or moving away from the overpopulated and tiny peasant holdings o f the central provinces o f Poland, you have not come here as those who are looking for a place for your­ selves in the sun. Com ing here you have returned to the soil that is yours, as hard-working landlords o f this soil. You have accepted it as your patrimony. The Germans could have Germanized those provinces by means o f violence and oppression, a longstanding policy o f dena­ tionalization and colonization, but there is no way o f Germanizing his­ tory. N othing and nobody can deny the fact that Polish Slavic Piast tribes lived here many ages ago. Nothing and nobody can deny the fact that our ancestors, the landlords o f this soil, defended it against bellig­ erent German invaders at the battle o f Glogow or Wroclaw. After many years o f occupation these provinces became free. . . . Therefore, we do have the right to speak up and claim in the eyes o f the whole world that we have returned to our soil as its only rightful owners. (1964: 135—6) Some archaeologists took up studies related to problems o f the beginnings o f the Polish state, for example, in the Regained Territories. Some o f these archaeologists worked under the influence o f Polish political leaders and consciously realized the needs propagated by the government. For many o f them, such activities were in accordance with the needs o f society or were an expression o f their patriotic attitude. Nevertheless, they all supplied “ evidence” o f the high level o f civilization in the Piast country and the Polish nature o f the provinces upon the Oder and the Baltic Sea. These activities were carried out at both popular and scientific levels (publications and field survey). Many exhibitions were organized to present the cultural continuity and the Slavic nature o f the Regained Territories (e.g. Jamka 1950). The priority in archaeological studies at that time was to show the role o f native elements in creating the culture and the statehood o f Poland in Wielkopolska, Silesia and Pomerania. The authorities readily allowed money

209

POLISH A RCHAEOL OGY AND N A TIO N AL ID E N T I T Y

for research projects that were to confirm the Polish character o f towns from the ninth to eleventh century (e.g. Kocka 1949: 142). The intensification o f studies on the history o f Poland in the Early Middle Ages was related to the approaching millennium o f the Polish state. An archaeologist, W itold H ensel, put forward a proposition for concentrating studies on the beginnings o f Poland: In seventeen years we shall celebrate the millennium o f Poland s first appearance on the map, in twenty or nineteen years we shall celebrate the thousandth anniversary o f the Christianization o f Poland. Both anniversaries are also the dates o f significant steps in the Polish-German struggle. Poland, by accepting the R om an Catholic denomination, denied the Germans’ moral right to invade our country. This deed saved us from the fate that has been experienced by our western “ brothers” who were almost entirely exterminated by the Germans. O ur duty is to arrange such historic and important anniversaries in a very neat and solid way. (1946: 3) The informal preparations and arrangements that began in 1946 led to the establishment o f Kierownictwo Badan nad Poczqtkami Panstwa Polskiego (Man­ agement o f Studies on the Beginnings o f Polish statehood) in 1949 (in 1954 it was converted into The Institute o f the History o f Material Culture o f the Polish Academy o f Science). According to the schedule o f this undertaking, many researches were being carried out on tens o f sites, mainly in W ielko­ polska, the Regained Territories and in Malopolska (Zak 1966), where over 200 scientists were employed. This whole gigantic project was fully financed by state funds (Abramowicz 1991: 156-7). Furthermore, within the project the management also undertook research in four clusters o f settlements, in the area o f Grody Czerwienskie (the eastern frontier o f Poland). This research ended in an early publication o f materials from only one site (C zerm noCzerwieri) and with the growth o f fears that the results o f the research could be used to support arguments to correct the eastern borders (Abramowicz 1991: 158-9). The archaeological studies connected with the millennium o f Poland allowed a significant development o f the whole o f archaeology. Although the issues o f the beginnings o f Poland as a state were prevalent in the studies, methodological (e.g. the introduction o f historical materialism) and method­ ical (e.g. studies on stratigraphy in archaeology) reflections were also being developed (Hensel 1959: 85). General scientific publications o f materials obtained during research in the Early Middle Ages sites did not appear too often. However, the high level o f

210

IN T H E S E R V I C E OF S T A T E P O L I C Y

civilization o f the Polish inhabitants o f towns and early municipal centres (especially those in the Regained Territories) was always highlighted. There were several discoveries that were to confirm the level o f civilization, such as houses constructed o f interlaced beams with wooden floors, streets fash­ ioned o f timber logs, leather boots, valuable imported jewellery, and silk and wool fabrics (e.g. Holubowicz 1956: 52). The role o f native elements was strongly emphasized in the academic archaeological and historical literature concerning the process o f state devel­ opment in Poland. It had to be proved that Polish tribes achieved independ­ ent development to a state form o f government. Indeed, there were also arguments that the Germanic tribes were able to create their country only because o f the great influence o f developed state centres such as Italy or France. But Polish tribes carried the process out independently from inter­ national transformations (Labuda 1974: 35-7). One can even get an impres­ sion that the Poles had a certain inferiority complex towards the more developed Germany (West Germany). It had to be shown then that, in the Middle Ages, Poland had been equal in development to all other civilized European countries (Hensel 1958: 229). Hence, there is no reason to find Poland at the same level o f development as the rest o f Europe before the rebuilding o f the country after the Second W orld War. Kostrzewski became involved in the research concerning the beginnings o f the Polish state, yet he did not neglect his studies o f cultural and ethnic continuity in the Polish provinces in the period from the Bronze Age to the Early Middle Ages (Kostrzewski 1961). However, at that time he did not have any opponents on the German side (at least until the 1950s) (Zak 1974: 84). He published scientific and popular works on the pre-Slavs (for example 1946a, 1946b and 1947). In his scientific and popularizing activity he was supported by his disciples: Witold Hensel (1947, 1948), Konrad Ja2d2ewski (1947), Zdzislaw A. Rajew ski (1947), Bohdan Kostrzewski (1948). In order to develop multi-problematic research on the Slavs, the Institute for PreSlavic Studies and the journal Slavia Antiqua were established in Poznan (Abramowicz 1991: 144). The scientific views worked out between the 1940s and the 1960s were clearly reflected in school textbooks. After the Second W orld War, school syllabuses were drawn up in such a way as to make people conform to the socialist state. History textbooks had to present the country’s past according to the assumptions o f socialist ideology. References to the latest research results were used to support the proposed syntheses. Out o f all archaeologi­ cal achievements, only Biskupin, as a pre-Slavic fortified settlement, found a place in school textbooks for history. As far as the views on pre-Slavs are concerned, opinions confirming the presence o f Slavs between the O der and

211

POLISH ARCHAEOLOGY AND NATIONAL ID E N TITY

the B u g (or even the Dnieper) since the second millennium B C were recog­ nized. Such opinions were spread directly after the Second W orld W ar (Gieysztor & Szczechura 1948), and they are still being spread at present (Koczerska & Wipszycka 1993). The account o f the beginnings o f Poland in the Middle Ages to be found in school textbooks was mainly created by historians, not archaeologists. The Polish-Germ an conflict was highlighted and illustrated by excerpts from written sources. The results o f archaeological studies were not as appealing to the public imagination as the descriptions by Gallus Anonymus (a chron­ icler from the twelfth century) or by Thietmar (a German chronicler from the tenth/eleventh centuries). As it turned out, archaeologists failed to go beyond research on material culture. Archaeologists excelled historians only in one instance that was useful to communist party propaganda. It was the statement that the beginnings o f Poland could be sought before 966, a date that did not suit party leaders as it related to the acceptance o f the R om an Catholic religion, one o f the greatest enemies o f communism in Poland. Thus, communists made every effort to diminish the role o f the Church in Poland by pinpointing its groundless ambitions: A part o f the Church’s hierarchy is aiming by its deeds at opposing the Church to the state. Moreover, the Church is trying to turn the anni­ versary o f the Polish state and people into the anniversary o f the activ­ ity o f the Catholic church in Poland. In order to fulfil its ambition to politically represent Polish people, to impose the role o f “ bulwark” on Poland, some church dignitaries would like to replace the proven scientific history o f Poland with a version where the history o f the Church stops being just a part o f the history o f the Polish nation but, on the contrary, the history o f the Polish nation becomes a derivative o f the history o f Catholicism. (Gomulka 1967: 427-8) Yet, owing to archaeological studies it is well known that: . . . The Piast country, which a thousand years ago appeared to be one o f the most important constituents o f the political and economic pic­ ture o f Europe, has a much older and richer past. (Gomulka 1967: 483) The conclusion o f the thousandth anniversary o f Poland in 1966 and the normalization o f Polish—West German political relations in 1970 as well as general political stabilization in Europe (Helsinki Conference in 1975, which confirmed the political division o f Europe after the Second W orld W ar and did not give any hopes for changes to the agreed borders) created a

212

IN T H E S E R V I C E OF S T A T E P O L I C Y

new situation in which archaeology ceased to have any importance for party propaganda. At any rate, the communist party had attained its aims: - it gained full international acceptance o f the western border, and thus there was no need to search for new evidence to confirm Polands his­ torical rights and to emphasize national tradition — the second generation o f Poles living in the Regained Territories did not have any doubts as far as the Polish character o f the Regained Ter­ ritories was concerned. However, a new problem arose. The whole post-war propaganda o f the communist governments, aimed at revisionist opinions in West Germany, had its particular purpose: to establish and determine the real enemy as well as to divert public attention from the discussions about the lost eastern prov­ inces. It seems, however, that the flow o f time, the education o f society (we all knew that one could not act against the Soviet Union) and censorship effectively discouraged people from bringing up the question, even if it dealt with the very remote past. It seems that there was one more way in which archaeology accorded to the state's policy. In September 1965, the First International Congress o f Slavic Archaeology was held in Warsaw. The purpose o f the Congress was the integration o f research on the Slavs (Hensel 1968:11). Undoubtedly, the Congress could have been organized only with the assent o f the Polish authorities. We may assume that the Congress was one o f the elements o f the Soviet U nion’s policy, the purpose o f which was a complete integration o f all the countries o f the Eastern Block (a kind o f pan-Slavism). The inten­ tion o f the Congress was probably to provide the scientific and historic bases for a common Slavic consciousness within the political union. Supposedly, the introduction o f the International Union o f Slavic Archaeology in 1965 was a further move within this policy. At the same time, however, the First International Congress o f Slavic Archaeology symbolized a tendency, already signalled earlier, towards the formation o f a specific scientific discipline for the study o f the past o f the Slavs. It was to become the basis for co-operation o f different specialists (archaeol­ ogists, anthropologists, linguists, ethnologists, historians). The organization o f the Congress and the introduction o f the International Union o f Slavic Archaeology were the attempts to institutionalize this tendency.

213

POLISH ARCH AEOL O G Y AND N A TIO N AL ID E N T I T Y

The Slavs and the Balts: m ore friendship than hatred? So far, this discussion about the process o f creating national identity has had regard only to the Polish-German conflict. Yet, the Polish tribes also had other neighbours such as the Baltic tribes (the Prussians, the Jatvingians or the Lithuanians). Was searching for the differences between the Slavs and the Baltic tribes therefore aimed at raising the consciousness o f cultural and ethnic separateness? It was not, as the archaeological literature shows. The historical Polish—Lithuanian relationships resulting from the recognition o f a com m on enemy (the Teutonic Order) contributed to the fact that the differ­ ences were not stressed. Historical co-existence within one country resulted in a situation in which the presence o f another cultural tradition was consid­ ered obvious. In Poland, which seems to have been the stronger side in this argument, tendencies towards integration predominated. They existed even after the national movement in Lithuania had developed and the independ­ ent state o f Lithuania had been created in 1918. Even bad political relation­ ships between Poland and Lithuania in the interwar period did not change it. This situation was reflected also in archaeology. The political situation did not contribute to any major changes in the ethnic identification o f the archaeological groups and cultures. W e can say that it has been assumed from the very beginning that the Baltic tribes occupied the northeastern provinces o f the today’s Poland. Although the bases and the criteria for distinguishing between the Slavs and the Balts as ethnic groups have changed through time, the effect (which is the ethnic border) has always remained the same (Tyszkiewicz 1974). Comparing the latest works, which, on the one hand, tackle the ethnic issues in traditional manner by referring to the chosen features o f archaeological cultures and the few written sources (e.g. Okulicz 1989) and, on the other, take up the ethnic problems by referring to the latest ideas from the Anglo-Saxon literature (Barford et al. 1991), one can still observe a sig­ nificant convergence in the demarcation o f the settlement areas o f the Baltic tribes and the Slavs. It also seems that the leaders o f the national movements in Lithuania did not oblige archaeologists to emphasize any special separate­ ness o f the Baltic tribes, as there is no evidence o f any conspicuous polemics between the Polish and the Lithuanian archaeologists.

Final rem arks In the 1970s Polish archaeology ceased to play an ideological part in the process o f creating national identity. The achievements o f archaeology were

214

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

very important for the propagandist policy o f Poland, as it was a wonderful opportunity to present the state as a splendid patron. The contents ceased to be important. To some extent it can be seen in the subsequent discussion about the ethnogenesis o f the Slavs. The problem stopped being o f crucial importance in scientific discussion. Furthermore, views about the allochthony o f the Slavs were permissible (e.g. Godlowski 1979, 1989) and even the censorship did not contradict them because o f political stabilization, effective Polonization o f the Regained Territories and the ethnic homoge­ neity o f Poland. Views about Germanic settlement in central and southern Poland at the beginning o f this era provoked, and still provoke, a discussion only among the scientists (Piontek 1991). Specialists have practically stopped arguing that the Lusatian culture was created by the pre-Slavs. In the social consciousness, however, Biskupin is still considered a pre-Slavic fortified settlement. This popular view is con­ firmed by school textbooks and the guidebooks o f Biskupin. Prehistory thus still provides evidence for Poland’s pride in its past.

Acknowledgements I am grateful to Gracjan Remblewski (Poznan) for the translation o f this chapter.

Bibliography Abramowicz, A. 1967. Wiek archeologii: problemy polskiej archeologii dziewiqtnastowiecznej. Warsaw: Paristwowc Wydawnictwo Naukowc. — 1979. Urny i ceraunie. Lodz: Ossolincum. — 1983. Dzieje zainteresowah starozytniczych w Polsce, czqsc I: od sredniounecza po czasy saskie i swit Oswieccnia. W roclaw: Ossolineum. — 1987. Dzieje zainteresowan starozytniczych w Polsce, czpc 11: czasy stanislwoskie i ich poklosie. W roclaw: Ossolincum. — 1991. Historia archeologii polskiej. XIX i XX wiek. Warsaw and Lodz: Instytut Historii Kultury Materialnej PAN. Barford, P., Z. Kobylinski, D. KrasnodfH furl

Vurs}di«i

Hungary

I ^ \ I ’-5m •f,^ V/ % \ 0 tx