society for american archaeology - clas usersusers.clas.ufl.edu/davidson/historical archaeology fall...

Society for American Archaeology is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to American Antiquity.

http://www.jstor.org

Society for American Archaeology

AN ARCHAEOLOGY OF EUROCENTRISM Author(s): Charles E. Orser, Jr. Source: American Antiquity, Vol. 77, No. 4 (October 2012), pp. 737-755Published by: Society for American ArchaeologyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23486487Accessed: 06-10-2015 22:18 UTC

REFERENCESLinked references are available on JSTOR for this article:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/23486487?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents

You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

This content downloaded from 128.227.158.226 on Tue, 06 Oct 2015 22:18:56 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sam

http://www.jstor.org/stable/23486487

http://www.jstor.org/stable/23486487?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp



AN ARCHAEOLOGY OF EUROCENTRISM

Charles E. Orser, Jr.

The role of Europe and Europeans in the archaeology of post-1500 history has recently been critiqued. Some research has

been pejoratively labeled Eurocentrism. This paper addresses the problems with adopting an emotional understanding of Eurocentrism and argues instead for its archaeological examination within the framework of an explicit multiscalar mod

ern-world (historical) archaeology. An example comes from seventeenth-century Dutch settlements located in and around

present-day Albany, New York.

Hace poco se criticó el papel de europa y los europeos en la arqueología después de 1500. Algunas investigaciones han sido

prejudicialmente designado eurocéntricos. Este artículo se dirige a los problemas de adoptar un conocimiento puramente ide

ológico del eurocentrismo y en su lugar argumenta que se examina dentro un marco explícito de escalas múltiples de la arque

ología del mundo histórico y moderno. Se proporciona un ejemplo de los asentamientos holandeses del siglo diecisiete

localizados en los circundantes de Albany, Nueva York, pero también esta perspectiva es importante para los arqueólogos que analizan la época antes del contacto.

What

is the proper role for Europeans in 1994). Most historical archaeologists continued to the archaeology of the recent past? acknowledge their interest in colonialism, if This simple question has become in- sometimes only obliquely, and by the mid-1970s

creasingly relevant at the outset of the twenty-first most practitioners had accepted that their focus of

century. The mid-twentieth-century archaeologists study was "the archaeology of the spread of Eu

who founded American historical archaeology ropean culture throughout the world since the fif

took it for granted that the archaeology of Euro- teenth century and its impact on indigenous peo pean settlements would frame their field and they pies" (Deetz 1977:5).

overtly expressed a nascent global perspective by Today, most practicing historical archaeolo

arguing that "a comparability of artifacts [existed] gists have abandoned the callow understanding between East Africa and Virginia" (Pilling that culture contact is exposed by the quantitative 1968:8). This approach came to be called "a com- ratio of European to indigenous artifacts (e.g., parative international perspective" (Deetz 1991:8). Quimby 1939,1966; Quimby and Spoehr 1951).

Large-scale, truly international comparison Archaeologists who have reframed the intellectual

has yet to be accomplished in historical archae- position of the discipline toward European colo

ology, but post-Columbian, European colonialism nialism no longer perceive European artifacts as

has always been in the consciousnesses of his- historical documents designed by superior people,

torical archaeologists. In fact, as early as 1943 the nor do they believe that indigenous peoples un

archaeology of post-1500 history could be rea- critically and impassively accepted the foreign ar

sonably termed "Colonial-Archaeology" (Setzler tifacts they were offered. Archaeologists no

1943:218). The earliest historical archaeologists longer imagine Europeans as the only effective

envisioned their research as the intellectual coun- cultural performers, agents of superiority who

terpart of precolumbian archaeology, the field in could perfectly enact their colonial plans in per which most of them had been trained (see South feet conformity with their original designs com

Charles E. Orser, Jr. ■ Department of Anthropology, Division of Research and Collections, New York State Museum,

Albany, NY 12230 ([email protected])

American Antiquity 77(4), 2012, pp. 737-755

Copyright ©2012 by the Society for American Archaeology

737



738 AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 77, No. 4,2012

pletely oblivious to the natural environment (e.g., that archaeologists interrogating the most recent

Mrozowski 2010; Rockman 2010) and to the in- centuries have much to offer by unapologetically

digenous peoples whom they encountered (e.g., interrogating the metanarrative of Eurocentrism

Jordan 2008; Lucas 2006; Lydon 2009; Metcalf and thus reproblematizing the colonial European 2010; Middleton 2008). This new wave of re- world, believing that "understanding society often search (after Stoler 1992:319-320) has pro- requires a metanarrative" (Meskell and Preucel

foundly altered the discourse of colonialism by 2004:125). I explore here the critique of Euro

promoting concepts of identity and entanglement, centrism in historical archaeology, explain the

acceptance and rejection, acquiescence and re- rationale behind the creation of an explicit mod sistance. In the process, the archaeological un- ern-world (historical) archaeology rooted in con

derstanding of post-Columbian history has been scientious socio-structural framing, and address

significantly enriched. Eurocentric expression in one part of colonial It would be anachronistic and retrograde to North America, New Netherland.

criticize the achievements realized during the maturation of historical archaeology into a more Eurocentrism culturally sensitive and anthropologically rele vant endeavor. The intellectual achievements At the beginning of the nineteenth century, the

within the realm of culture contact studies alone rulers of eight small countries in Western

have exponentially improved the appositeness Europe—accounting for only 1.6 percent of the and extra-disciplinary authority of the field and world's land surface—controlled huge territories have transformed the archaeology of the colo- and asserted myriad rights over hundreds of mil

nial endeavor into a major intellectual force with lions of colonial "subjects" (Abernethy 2000:6). transdisciplinary relevance. Without seeking to di- The desire of European (and later American) minish these improvements, I do wish, however, rulers to transplant their citizens around the to engage with one facet of the project to trans- globe —based on diverse political, religious, figure the archaeology of colonialism: recent at- philosophic, and economic rationales—was an

tempts to assign Eurocentrism only as a pejorative integral element of the imperialist project, which label rather than to investigate it as a cultural at its root is "the practice, the theory, and the at

product of post-Columbian global history. titudes of a dominating metropolitan center ruling My central thesis is that by adopting an under- a distant territory" (Said 1993:8). By the start of

theorized, purely ideological view of Eurocen- the twentieth century, Europe's role in colonizing, trism in the effort to privilege heretofore silenced conquering, and reshaping what came to be called

non-European cultural histories—even in the the Third World had created acute cultural crises

name of enfranchisement—has profound impli- (Prashad 2007) as it became abundantly clear in cations for archaeological practice. I argue that a retrospect that "no one colonizes innocently" (Cé strict adherence to the silencing of Europe(ans) in saire 2000:39). the name of rejecting Eurocentrism has the unin- At its most basic, Eurocentrism is the percep tended consequence of masking the role of nation- tion that Europe constitutes the center of the uni state imperialism in the post-Renaissance world, verse. Eurocentrism is an internalized intellectual In attempting to rehabilitate indigenous history by space that inculcates biased cultural centering excising Europe(ans), researchers may mistak- (Sayyid 2003:128-129)—albeit in a loosely de

enly present conservative doxa (after Bourdieu fined, relatively disorganized, and contextual 2003:22) and in the process offer deceptively manner—that first grew to prominence during the

rosy images of past daily experience under colo- Renaissance among educated elites who had ac nial domination and oppression. Such acts of in- cess to the most authoritative tracts of primitive tellectual gentrification (after Zizek 1998) do ethnography (see Gerbi 1973;Hodgen 1971; Lam nothing to advance the decolonization of the an- bropoulos 1993; Rabasa 1993; Smith 1999). The

thropological project, but rather have the unin- most renowned polemists advised that Europe and

tended consequence of "trivializing the experi- its peoples were specially endowed to conquer ence of oppression" (Bourgois 1997:112). I argue the world as part of a universalist, evolutionary



Orser] AN ARCHAEOLOGY OF EUROCENTRISM 739

doctrine. This set of tenets—a collective "fallacy continued to struggle for many years "to resolve

of developmentalism" (Dussel 1993:67-68)—was the problems to which Europe has not been able

perfectly consistent with the modernist rationality to find the answers" (Fanon 1963:314), but that that characterized the European Enlightenment Europeans, for the most part, had created or at

(Kanth 2005:91) and the eventual development of least exacerbated.

Social Darwinism (Brantlinger 2003). Eurocen- Individuals who directly experienced the per trism thus developed as a rather incoherent, albeit sonal cost of colonialist domination were not the

generally consistent and "spell-binding" (Peet only opponents to Eurocentric policies. As early 2005:937), set of distorted social theories that sub- as the 1820s, Jeremy Bentham ( 1830:1) had made

jugated indigenous ways of being and knowing to an impassioned challenge to France to surrender those of a collectivized Europe (Amin 1989:90; its colonies, arguing that "justice, consistency, Rabasa 1993:14). The persistence of these social policy, economy, honour, [and] generosity" all

theories—often presented as tropes of liberation— demanded it. More recently, many prominent

has often meant in practical terms that "Europe scholars—largely led by literary critics—have works as a silent referent in historical knowledge" foregrounded the problems inherent in construct

(Chakrabarty 1992:2). ing European cultural assumptions as "the normal,

Widespread critical consciousness about Eu- the natural [and] the universal" (Ashcroft et al.

rocentrism surfaced during the rise of multicul- 1998:90-91). The European, post-Columbian turalism, as community activists, cultural sur- "obsession with self-aggrandizement" (Ephraim vivalists, and politically engaged scholars began 2003:4)—which in history included the coales

to argue that non-Western cultures—including cence of capitalism, patriarchy, racism, colonial

their traditions of art, literature, architecture, ism, anthropocentrism, and Christian ideology dance, and music—have intrinsic value and de- (Kanth 2005:91)—constructed Europe as

serve to be acknowledged on their own terms uniquely progressive and innovative and everyone

(e.g., Hughes 1992). Long before the academic else much less so (Blaut 1993:18). For many, Eu

"discovery" of Eurocentrism, however, a number rope became the quintessential embodiment of

of oppressed groups in colonial and postcolonial cultural exceptionalism (e.g., Landes 1998). territories had voiced their opposition to the view Historians have been especially sensitive to the

that the world revolved solely around charge of European exceptionalism, and many of

Europe(ans). The 1920s was an especially active them have exposed the history of the exception decade for the establishment of coteries of resis- alist discourse and explicitly disavowed its prac tance to European imperialism. Many of these Eu- tice (e.g., Blaut 2000; McGerr 1991; Wilnetz

ropean-based organizations—such as the Ligue 1984). Other historians have written global his

Universelle de Défense de la Race Noire, La tory from a non-Eurocentric perspective (e.g.,

Comité de Défense de la Race Nègre, and the Crossley 2008; Hart 2008; Marks 2002). Perhaps

League Against Imperialism—had avowed Com- the strongest, most concerted effort to demolish

munist affiliations or at least had been influenced the fallacy of Eurocentrism has come from Si

by the emancipatory rhetoric of the Russian Rev- nologists. Their examination of global history

olution (Young 2001). The League specifically has demonstrated that many of the cultural fea

openly advocated the building of revolutionary tures generally attributed to Europe(ans) were ac

forces to fight imperialist oppression in the cause tually first developed in Asia, most notably in

of global freedom and democracy (Jayawardena China (e.g., Frank 1998; Goody 2006; Pomeranz

1974:10; Johns 1975:216). At the same time, 2000; Wong 2000). As Frank (1998:117) has

Marcus Garvey's Universal Negro Improvement noted, "the entire world economic order was—

and Conservation Association and African Com- literally—Sinocentric. Christopher Columbus and

munities League (UNIA)—founded in Jamaica in after him many Europeans up until Adam Smith

1914—found adherents around the globe. Even in knew that." Statements such as these have un

apartheid South Africa, the Communist Party had derstandably occasioned much debate and re

1,600 black members in 1928 (Cobley 1990:195). analysis (e.g., Duchesne 2001-2002). At a mini

Leaders of postcolonial resistance movements mum, they proffer a global perspective on recent




history that is inclusive without being Eurocentric, theories of Eurocentrism (following Asante Historical archaeology in the United States 1999)? And perhaps most basically, is not the

emerged as a profession during the rise of the an- study of Europe(ans) inherently Eurocentric? ticolonial struggles that followed the Second The sharpest critics of allocating a prominent World War, but its practitioners managed to ignore role in historical archaeology to Europe(ans) have them. For the most part, they tended to segment labeled such research as irredeemably Eurocentric

European and indigenous topics even in socio- (Schmidt and Walz 2007a:54,2007b: 129). This se historical situations of direct, face-to-face cul- rious charge carries the implication that "African, tural contact (e.g., Walthall 1991; Walthall and not to mention Asian, Native American, Aus Emerson 1992). As the field matured and began tralian, and Pacific, histories will remain inex to be refashioned as a truly global pursuit in the cusably silenced by archaeologists unwilling to 1990s (Falk 1991; Hall 2000; Orser 1996), some tackle questions that count" (Schmidt and Walz

archaeologists responded to analytical segregation 2007a: 67, emphases in original). Similarly, any ef

by offering stiff critiques of the role that Europe fort to "provincialize" Europe (after Chakrabarty should play in the field. Their intellectual ratio- 2000)—"to escape from European/Western para nale was consistent with the emerging, more nu- digms"— merely serves to "limit the gaze of his

anced understanding of culture contact, as well as torical archaeologists upon other societies and

with the developing interest in ethnogenesis, the their pasts" (Schmidt and Walz 2007a:54). This is construction of history, and the realization that a weighty condemnation of an entire subfield of colonization was not solely the province of post- archaeology that had been explicitly created to

Columbian history (e.g., Cameron 2011; Dietler examine European colonialism.

2010; Dyson 1985; Gosden 2004; Lawrence and An even more pessimistic view of historical ar

Shepherd 2006; Lyons and Papadopoulos 2002). chaeology has recently been offered by Dawdy These works collectively established that the ere- (2010:763), who argues that historical archaeol ation of colonies—dependent territories situated ogists, by attempting to examine the material and within empires (Abernethy 2000:21)—have a spatial characteristics of "modernity," have been much greater time depth and a substantially engaged in a clever "self-deception" that causes

greater geographical breadth than historical ar- them to be "condemned to repeat or simply elab

chaeologists had originally imagined. The broader orate on the grand narratives of the period." Not view of colonialism became archaeological all anthropologists have apparently been "duped canon, even though a number of social theorists— by modernity," but historical archaeologists seek

notably the proponents of world-systems ing to engage with Europe(ans) have most cer

analysis—argued that the creation of a capitalist tainly fallen prey to the trap,

world-system made post-Columbian colonialism Some of the archaeologists who apparently

unique (Wallerstein 2004:23-41 ). have been duped by modernity are those who ac

A more substantive engagement with the role cept that culture contact involves at least two cul

of Europe sought to reach beyond its narrowly tures. In their critique of Stahl et al. (2004), perceived spatial and temporal limits as post- Schmidt and Walz (2007b) oppose the plan of Columbian and western European, with critics "studying the lives of those on 'both sides' of the

subtly questioning whether Europe was even a power divide" and deny that this perspective "re valid research topic within anthropologically in- veals how actors in a variety of positions are mu

spired historical archaeology. They posed nu- tually implicated in the historical processes that merous, trenchant questions, such as: If we are shape present sensibilities and possibilities" (Stahl trained anthropologists practicing archaeology, et al. 2004:96). Rather, they understand (after should we not focus our considerable interpretive Cooper and Staler 1997) that colonialism was

power on the non-European world? Is not one shaped by unilateral indigenous "struggle," and great strength of anthropology—including its ar- propose that "this dynamic relationship is much

chaeological component—the examination of cul- more than simply seeing and understanding both tares with orally transmitted knowledge bases? sides of power interactions" (Schmidt and Walz

Should not all archaeologists reject the distorted 2007b: 136). A more careful reading of the Cooper




and Stoler (1997:ix) quote, however, discloses comitant "silences" substantiate "false separa that Schmidt and Walz downplay the clause tions" (Schmidt and Walz 2007b: 142), and the use

"thinking about empire as much as the daily ef- of "modernity" in "most social sciences and hu forts to manage it." Stoler and Cooper (1997:3) manities" (Dawdy 2010:763)—and certainly in continue in this vein: "Our interest is more in post-Columbian archaeology—encourages an in

how both colonies and métropoles shared in the herently unfair and biased perspective on the past dialectics of inclusion and exclusion, and in what (e.g., Funari et al. 1999:3-5; Little 1994:16). In

ways the colonial domain was distinct from the deed, explicit exegesis about such dichotomies

metropolitan one" (emphasis added). Their inter- leads to more profound introspection about the re est lies in "the contingency of metropolitan-colo- lationships between process and history (e.g., nial connections and its consequences for patterns Kohl 2008), short-term events and long-term

of imperial rule" rather than in subtracting Eu- structures (e.g., Harding 2005), and imposed ar

ropeas) from the equation (Stoler and Cooper tificiality (e.g., Lightfoot 1995; Silliman 2005). 1997:1, emphasis added). The problems posed by the creation of the pre

By adopting the position that indigenous history:history divide as false separation is co

agency is unbounded by sociohistorical context, gently examined in the city of New Orleans by Schmidt and Walz eliminate domination and op- Matthews (2007). In his careful examination of

pression, and consequently reinforce the Euro- "being Indian" in an urban environment suppos

pean power stmcture. By exclusively empowering edly devoid of indigenous involvement, Matthews local narratives, they effectively separate public offers one of the most profound illustrations of the

problems and daily life, a program that ultimately wisdom of eliminating periodization in archaeo

"leads to an acceptance of the status quo, of in- logical reasoning while at the same time refusing

justice and inequality" (Rosenau 1992:84n). In to eliminate the relevant relations of power. Shift

privileging "the agency of the 'colonized,'" ing the focus from Native American individuals—

Schmidt and Walz simultaneously erase history people moving through space-time as subjects— and refute the postcolonial project. By rejecting Matthews concentrates on the trans-temporal the "inequality of knowledge" that existed in the performance of being Indian. This distinction has

suppression of freedoms associated with Euro- two significant implications that defy facile tem

pean colonialism (Balibar 1994:56), they rein- poral segmentation. First, it demands that ar

force the power structures reproduced by domi- chaeologists reflexively confront the creation of

nant elites in colonial sociohistorical spaces. Their "the Indian as native research subject" against

perspective is reminiscent of Lenin's (1970:132) the backdrop of archaeologist-Native American

observation that "Bourgeois scholars and publi- community politics. And second, it permits in cists usually come out in defense of imperialism sight into the sociohistorical contexts in which the

in a somewhat veiled form; they obscure its com- interactions between Indians and non-Indians led

plete domination and its profound roots, strive to to the creation of "the practical meanings of cul

push into the forefront particular and secondary tural difference" in the past (with "the past" lit

details and do their best to distract attention from erally meaning "before today") (Matthews essentials." 2007:274). These implications lead Matthews to

A foundational piece of reasoning for such inspect the role of "being Indian" in New Orleans, critics concerns the establishment of manichean an investigation that purposefully conflates the re

essentialisms. They argue that the creation of du- lationships between political economy, state for

alities in archaeology—most notably history:pre- mation, and essentialism in archaeological prac

history and premodern: modern—has infused tice. He determines that labeling Native

epistemological blindness into the discipline. For Americans "prehistoric"—a historicized and

example, they argue that the employment of racialized stereotype—causes them to disappear

"modernity" as a subject precludes cross-cultural from nineteenth-century life. This act of being ef

analysis and eliminates the close examination of fectively disappeared perpetuates multiscalar vi

cultures not influenced by the colonizing practices olence: to the individuals themselves, to nine

and imperialist designs of Europe(ans). The con- teenth-century New Orleans' society, and to the



742 AMERICAN ANTIQUITY [Vol. 77, No. 4, 2012

present-day conceptualization of past lived real- torical) archaeology—that refuses to ignore Eu

ity. In this respect, Matthews performs an act that rope(ans) has developed out of the dual realization

is intellectually equivalent in plan if not in that the purely methodological definition of his

methodology to the archaeology of desaparecidos torical archaeology has inherent merit, and that

in Latin America (Funari and Vieira de Oliveira the historical-archaeological research of Classical,

2009:28-29) and of mass graves in dictatorial postcontact Mayanist, and pre-Ming-era Chinese

Africa (Haglund et al. 2001). archaeologists provides a different discourse of

Matthews's thoughtful interrogation of the con- knowledge than the archaeology of the post-1500 struction of history using power, authority, strug- world (Orser 2004b:9-14). Using the works of

gle, and visibility—in contradistinction to the view numerous scholars from the same general intel

offered by Schmidt and Walz (2007a, 2007b)— lectual tradition (Braudel 1973,1977; Marx 1967, raises several issues of profound significance to 1970; Marx and Engels 1970; Patterson 1997;

contemporary archaeological practice, not the least Wallerstein 1974,1979,1980; Wolf 1982,1999), in importance being to call into question the premodern-world (historical) archaeology under

historicizing of the past. Matthews (2007:287) ar- stands the post-1500 world as a different place gues, for example, that "even in historical archae- than earlier eras. Accordingly, this archaeology,

ology, our job is to recover for present like "the practices of anthropology remain[s] very

consumption what has been lost or buried—i.e., much embedded in an eschatology of modern made prehistoric—about past human lives." This rupture" (Dawdy 2010:763), and explicitly so. salient point resonates with the critique of false pe- Rather than to accept false periodization, the

riodization, even though Matthews does not di- real intent is to investigate the constituents of the

minish the impact of European domination; the process of modernity. The intellectual tension

very label "prehistoric" cannot be applied without embodied by the murky relationship between his

the purposeful European marginalization of Native tory (past actuality) and its examination (chroni Americans living in New Orleans. With the loss of cle created from selected past actuality) is cele native self-determination, because of the rise of brated rather than condemned. Accordingly, all

non-native power and authority in south modern-world archaeology is historical archae

Louisiana, Native Americans were "essentialized ology by definition, but not all historical archae as persons of different culture whose principle at- ology is modern-world archaeology. The archae tribute was their anachronistic 'other' way of life" ology espoused by Schmidt and Walz is historical

(Matthews 2007:284). archaeology but not modern-world archaeology

Matthews concretely illustrates that indigenous because it denies the myriad relationships of

archaeology of the post-1500 era—regardless of power, dominance, and oppression forced on in

theoretic perspective—cannot be truly informed in digenous peoples by various European nation

the absence of Europe(ans) (also see Liebmann states since about 1500. Their archaeology rightly

and Murphy 2010). His research helps to demon- concentrates on struggle but ignores the reasons

strate that to create a truly new archaeology of behind the need to struggle. Modem-world (his

post-Columbian sociohistory one must not gloss torical) archaeology necessarily relies on research over difference in favor of an Enlightenment-in- in historical archaeology but looks beyond it.

spired "intensive universalisai" (Balibar The archaeology of the modern world —

2004:58-59). Ignoring European global dominance investigated as a process of becoming and being does violence to the telling of the past and harms (Orser 1994,2004a, 2013)—produces unique op the social consciousness that postcolonial archae- portunities but concomitantly creates special bur

ology celebrates (see Lydon and Rizvi 2010). dens. As a research project, modem-world (his torical) archaeology will be forever developing

Modern-World (Historical) Archaeology and because the vcrT word "modem" is itself con

Problematizing Eurocentrism tested and mutable•11 does not disPute the ethno

graphic and historical research that illustrates the The inspiration for a different approach to histor- presence of multiple modernities (e.g., Englund ical archaeology—an explicit modem-world (his- and Leach 2000; Kahn 2001; Tambiah 2000;




Zurndorfer 1997). Rather, modern-world (histor- sociocultural manifestations that are expressed

ical) archaeology perceives modernity as com- on many spatial levels (collectively denoted as

posed of myriad, intertwined spatio-temporal lev- "the capitalist project"); racialization—the els. As such, the simplest definition of "modern" process of inventing biological and social inferi suffices: "late, recent, not ancient, not antique" ority using ideology, pseudo-science, administra

(Johnson 1760:506). This definition relies on a tive power, repressive authority, and other legal flexible temporality and presents a way "to think and extra-legal forms of domination and oppres about the history of power in an age when capi- sion (see Orser 2007); and Eurocentrism—a spe tal and [its] governing institutions [were devel- cialized form of ethnocentrism that elevates to su

oping] a global reach" (Chakrabarty 2002:12). periority an imagined, homogenized "European" Instead of shying away from the complexities in- culture and heritage over all other cultures and herent in the meaning of "modern" or to dispute heritages. These four forces, as they were envi

the simultaneous reproduction of multiple moder- sioned, idealized, and put into practice in the

nities, the practice of modern-world (historical) world after about 1500, are tightly interlinked

archaeology embraces the confusion and cele- and coterminous. For example, "without the

brates the dissonances between globalized, re- power of capitalism, and all the structural inno

gionalized, and localized sociohistorical contexts vations that accompanied it in political, social, in the post-1500 world. and cultural organization, Eurocentrism might

As a process, modernity need not be initialized have been just another ethnocentrism" (Dirlik or periodized. It need only be stressed that mod- 1999:12). Capitalist globalization and racializa

ern-world (historical) archaeology commences tion are similarly linked in the same structural

with the conjunction of forces, beliefs, ideas, and fashion (see e.g., Weiss 2006), as are the other

independent developments that "come together in meta-forces of modernity,

ways that interact with one another, creating a The forces provide the uniqueness of the mod

unique historical moment" (Marks 2002:12). ern world, a universe in which "the towering out

Modern-world (historical) archaeology accepts line of Europe's early modern and modern story

that after about 1500, a history-altering conjucture has been impossible to ignore The magnitude of four forces united to create simultaneously nu- of the effect was the central fact of human expe

merous new worlds. The four forces have coeval rience in the past three centuries" (Crossley

planes of existence and in the broadest sense are 2008:107-108). Archaeologists wishing to in

pan-cultural. Each is enacted in the post-1500 vestigate post-1500 history are "for better or

world through a complex, multilevel series of ac- worse forced into an encounter with both Western

tions, practices, and traditions within structures modernity and Western narratives of moderniza that are generally homologous though none are tion" (Kahn 2001:651). Ignoring these processes

teleological. Their execution in real space-time only creates new silences. While performing the

creates history. These four forces, because they admirable work of foregrounding indigenous lo

are still being enacted, also affect the ways in cal narratives, disregarding the meta-forces sub

which contemporary archaeology is practiced, merges the often-terrible realities of lived history These forces thus hover over archaeological (Eagleton 1996:52). Re-problematizing Eu

practice—the telling of history and the practice of rope(ans) is thus a central task of modern-world

research—regardless of whether or not archaeol- (historical) archaeology. Part of this work of in

ogists wish to acknowledge them. The overarch- tellectual adjustment involves coming to terms

ing, meta-forces are: colonialism—the spatial with the meta-forces of modernity, movement of people from one culture or region Instead of viewing Eurocentrism unidimen

into another culture's territory with the intent of sionally as an intellectual deficiency to be over

creating temporary, intermittent, and permanent come, modern-world (historical) archaeology settlements using enforced relations of power in- seeks both to expose and overthrow the historical

eluding conquest and control (as opposed to col- dangers of Eurocentrism at the same time that it

onization [following Rowlands 1998]); explicitly interrogates its beginnings, manifesta

capitalism—an economic system with significant tions, and continuance. Rather than constituting a




triumphalist view that exploits European excep- This metaphor allows for "socio-structural fram tionalism (Bagchi 2005:10), this interrogation of ing" (the selection of levels of resolution) that, for Eurocentrism is a process of discovery and re- modern-world (historical) archaeology, must nec

covery. Part of this process involves reinvesting in essarily be reflexive. Individual archaeologists must multiscalar analysis. understand that they consciously select specific

Archaeologists ' interest in multiscalar analysis space-time frames, they must ponder and accept the

may have begun for many with the discovery of reasons for selecting the frames of analysis, and

Braudel's (1966) three temporal rhythms (e.g., they must appreciate the role that frame selection Ames 1991; Bintliff 1991; Ferris 2009; Little and plays in interpretation. Unlike the archaeological Shackel 1989; Smith 1992; Voss 2008). Still oth- practice advocated by Schmidt and Walz, modern ers have employed multiscalar analysis without world (historical) archaeology overtly conceptual explicit reference to Braudel (e.g., Crumley and izes the various socio-structural frames, seeking

Marquardt 1987; Lightfoot et al. 1998; Miroff dialectically to engage critically with "entities and and Knapp 2009; Nassaney and Sassaman 1995). the relationships between entities, past, present, One of the inherent strengths of a multiscalar and future" (Marquardt 1992:103).

perspective is that it exploits the tensions in ar- Brief reference to the European-enforced en

chaeology between multifarious scales—the myr- slavement of people of African heritage will suf iad spaces of social practice (after Lefebvre fice to demonstrate the analytical promise of socio

1991)—by opening a space "to grasp the rela- structural framing. Shortly after 1500, the major tionship between the small scale" and the "wider European nation-states all adopted the structure of

processes of transformation" (Johnson 2006:13; African enslavement as a core element of their Eu

also see Hall and Silliman 2006:8; Orser rocentric belief system, arguing that non-Euro

2010:116-120). This practice permits analysts to peans were slaves "by nature" as an element of

perceive the "coherence and collective causal their philosophical doxa (Gerbi 1973:74-76), de

power" (Linebaugh and Rediker 2000:193) of veloped partly as a response to their own en discrete archaeological sites that may appear un- slavement by North Africans (Colley 2004:56-65). linked when viewed exclusively at one scale. Thus, in the largest frame, we may accurately

One way to conceptualize the multiscalar view post-Columbian, European-enforced slav

analysis in archaeology is by adopting the ery as an element of Eurocentrism (which also

metaphor of a photographer adjusting a camera's contains the necessary inclusion of colonialism,

zoom lens: capitalism, and racialization). On the next, more

circumscribed frame, however, the careful analy Imagine a photographer focusing on the broad

outlines of a large object located far away in

order to learn something about the object. The

photographer then twists the zoom lens to

obtain a more detailed, higher-resolution

image of a selected part of the distant object.

As a result something new is observed through

greater attention to the part's details. The zoom

lens may be adjusted further to permit more

precise examination of an even smaller part of

the object. Each adjustment permits a novel

visualization of reality by enabling the

observer to come closer to whatever is being

observed, in a subjective if not literal sense. _ . . ... , „ ... . . , , This hypothetical example dlustrates that no For this reason each twist of the zoom lens can . , . , , ....

, . . ,. .. , need exists to denigrate research conducted within generate a new description of reality and per- , , ... . , ^ , ., , , t me boundaries of any socio-structural frame. On haps new ideas to account for what the lens . _ . , , .

adjustment has revealed [ Abernethy 2000:31 ]. the contrary the reflexive knowledge inherent in

accepting the presence of individual frames —

sis of European nation-state slavery reveals that

not all slavery was the same: Anglocentric, Lu

socentric, Francocentric expressions of African

enslavement appear in various sociohistorical con

texts. Taken deeper, differences appear in the prac

tice of Anglocentric slavery. During the American

Revolution, for example, many slaves decided to flee to the British because they perceived Anglo centric slavery to be milder than Americentric

slavery (Jasanoff 2011:48^19). At the smallest

frame, particular differences might be viewed be tween individual plantations or households within the Anglocentric world.




both in the lived past and in the analytical tural frame because its originators designed it as

present—strengthens the overall interpretive a competitor to the English East India Company,

power of the archaeology. At the same time, chartered in 1600 (Arrighi 2010:143) and as a di

though, we must acknowledge the inherent dan- rect assault on the power of Spain in the New

ger of working within only the smallest frame World (Boxer 1973:54). Many of the features

(i.e., site). By invoking the uniqueness of a spe- common to today's global capitalism were estab cific space-time frame—and concentrating on it to lished by seventeenth-century Dutch entrepre

the exclusion of all else—we run the risk of re- neurs (Dash 1999:101-102; Garber 1989; Irwin

producing the "partitioning strategies" of the colo- 1991 ; Robins 2006; Scammell 1981:403 ; Schama nialist project (Young 1995:165). 1987:347-348).

The commercial success sought by Dutch mer

The Dutch in the Upper Hudson Valley chant-speculators could not be accomplished

as Eurocentrists purely as a powerful European nation-state, be

cause globally they required the collaboration of

To demonstrate what an archaeology of Euro- numerous indigenous peoples. This situation ob

centrism has to offer, I wish to focus upon Dutch tained in the smaller socio-structural frame of the

New Netherland as an example of one small New World. In the still-smaller frame of the Up

frame within colonial North America. I specifi- per Hudson River Valley, the Dutch first staked

cally confine myself to the Upper Hudson River their claim with the construction of Fort Nassau

Valley in the region around present-day Albany, near present-day Albany, New York, in 1614. This

New York, during the years 1624-1664. Detailing small fort, created for mercantile reasons within

the complex specificity of intercultural contact Mahican territory, "provided both a year-round

and conflict in this region—enacted variously be- base for resident traders and a clear destination for

tween Dutch, English, French, Mohawk, Mohi- Native people" (Bradley 2007:35). Dutch traders

can, and numerous smaller native cultures (e.g., inhabited this fort for at least three years (Huey

Bradley 2007; Cantwell 2008; Dunn 1994; Par- 1988:12-13; Jameson 1909:48). The Dutch West

menter 2010; Rothschild 2003)—is far beyond the India Company made a permanent claim to the re

scope of this paper. This brief examination will il- gion in 1624 with the construction of Fort Orange lústrate only that Eurocentrism can be investi- (Huey 1991:30, 2010:143). In 1630, an Amster

gated in various socio-structural frames from the dam diamond merchant named Kiliaen van Rens

largest (the Dutch nation-state as European) to the selaer received authorization to develop a huge

smallest (the space-time of the individual inhab- patroonship—named Rensselaerswijck—in the

ited property). My separation of Eurocentrism is vicinity of Fort Orange, again on Mahican land

purely heuristic because its practice was tightly (Bradley 2007:59; Dunn 1994:100; Jacobs

entwined with and inseparable from the other 2005:116-119; Merwick 1990:7-8; Nissenson

metanarratives of modernity. 1937; Venema 2010:241-267; Wilcoxen 1984:

The seventeenth-century Dutch are especially 9-10). In 1652, the multicultural settlement that

renowned for their expertise in developing "com- had developed north of Fort Orange, technically

mercial pragmatism" (Schama 1987:67). In 1598, within Rensselaerswijck, was delineated and

speculators from five trading companies sent named Beverwijck, to indicate the residents'com

ships to Indonesia to trade for spices and other mitment to commerce based on the beaver rather

valuable commodities. The public rejoiced when than an allegiance to van Rensselaer as landlord

the ships returned the following year loaded with (Venema 2003:53).

cargo and the shareholders realized a 100-percent Eurocentrism can be observed in each of these

profit (Boxer 1973:25). This success led, in 1602, Dutch creations in various socio-structural

to the union of the individual companies into a frames: globally, continentally (the New World

single monopoly, the Dutch East India Company frame), regionally (the Hudson River Valley

(VOC). The creation of the Dutch West India stretching from New Amsterdam to Rensselaer

Company (WIC) followed in 1621. The creation swijck/ Beverwijck-Fort Orange), and territorially of the VOC existed within a global socio-struc- (Rensselaerswijck/Beverwijck-Fort Orange). In




every frame, the Dutch economic designs were ( 1654-1664), Arent van Curler (1643-1660), and

explicit and appeared to be foremost: "Commer- Volkert Jansen Douw (ca. 1652-1685) (Bradley cial rather than political matters, the enhance- 2005; Fisher 2008; Huey 1987, 1996, 1998b; ment of trade rather than the transplantation of a Moody 2002, 2003, 2005; Wilcoxen 1999; 14). Dutch society, became the first order of business The global expression of Dutch Eurocentrism,

for the West India Company in New Netherland" through the mechanism of transoceanic, intercul

(Condon 1968:70). But the Dutch mission in New tural trade, is demonstrated by the presence of

Netherland was not purely economic; they also identical artifacts found at contemporaneous sites

had cultural designs on the region. The earliest in the Netherlands (e.g., Baart 1987; von Dongen Dutch settlers in the region established Dutchness 1995). Their transplantation of European fort de in the Upper Hudson Valley as an element of sign is perfectly homologous with the overall pat

their Eurocentrism. They accomplished this Low tern of their portable material culture, as both

Country version of Europeanization with their overtly express Eurocentrism.

buildings and their portable objects. The co-occurrence of artifacts in and around

Excavations at Fort Orange (Huey 1988,1991, Fort Orange and in the Netherlands is not sur

1998a, 2010) reveal that the Dutch built the for- prising; historical archaeologists take for granted tification in the typical, bastioned style of Euro- the presence of European artifacts at colonial set

pean forts. Dutch military engineers were the first tlements. The unquestioned expectation is that

to follow the Italians in building forts with bas- colonialist settlers sought to recreate tiny pieces tions (Duffy 2006; 10), and like most colonial Eu- of their homelands in their new environments. But

ropean powers, they attempted to construct such why should this be so? Why did European

forts wherever they intended to stay. Thus, they colonists not take just a few objects that would en

built Forte Oranje in Pemambuco, Brazil, in 1631, sure their initial survival—cutting tools and fire to be nearly identical to Fort Orange on the Hud- making equipment, for example—with the ex

son River (Menezes and Rodrigues 1986: pectation that they could live off the land? Why 110-111). Identical European fortifications built did they not expect to learn from the indigenous in disparate colonial territories represent "the vi- inhabitants? Why did the colonial Dutch transport olent beginnings of colonial occupation" (Pels such a vast amount of material culture across the

1997:170) and overtly espouse Eurocentrism. As Atlantic Ocean and then up the Hudson River

imposing, foreign structures they visibly proclaim just to create "Holland on the Hudson" (Rink

the pan-European, global universality of Euro- 1986; see also Huey 1991:50)? centrism by their very presence. The answers to these questions seem so

The artifacts excavated at Fort Orange are patently obvious that perhaps we need not even

equally pan-European in nature. The ceramic as- ask them: as anthropologists we know that peo

semblage, for example, includes majolica and pie take their cultures with them when they em

delft manufactured in the Netherlands, as well as igrate. By not asking such apparently obvious

other earthenwares and stonewares from Italy, questions (even tacitly to ourselves as reflexive

England, the Iberian Peninsula, and Germany, conundrums), however, we ignore them and dis

The presence of porcelain, originally from China miss the reflexivity they inspire. Our expectation but filtered through European networks, indicates that Dutch settlers would bring Dutch materials the expanse of the Dutch trading empire and ref- with them and that they would thus turn up in ar erences their adoption of non-European cultural chaeological excavations is Eurocentrism si traits into their quotidian lives. Their glass drink- multaneously operating in temporally distinct

ing and storage vessels were similarly European socio-structural frames. The importation of Eu

in manufacture, made in workshops throughout ropean objects outside Europe informs a global the Netherlands, Venice, and Germany. These Eurocentrism, just as the differences observed

findings were duplicated at seventeenth-century between patterns of seventeenth-century Dutch

Dutch house sites in the area belonging to various and English importation (see Rye 1865:71) sug settlers: a brickmaker (1631-1653), an indepen- gest nation-state distinctions in the presentation dent trader (ca. 1639-1648), Jurriaen Theunissen of Eurocentrism.




The only true variation we might see in the Orange needed the support of the Native peoples overall affiliations of the artifacts by household around them to survive: they "could not afford to

appears in the presence of Native American ob- offend either the Mahicans, on whose land they jects. Excavations at the brickmaker's house in lived, or the Mohawks, who supplied most of the

Beverwijck, for example, produced a bear effigy furs" (Bradley 2007:58). The Puritans' possible smoking pipe that has an Iroquois affiliation, as goading of the Mahicans exacerbated conflict does another pipe found at Fort Orange (Huey within a regional frame and simultaneously in

1991:57-58; Moody 2005:127). Similarly, the tensified it within a global frame. The Dutch in

mid-seventeenth-century trader's house also in New Netherland were caught in a unique "ambi

Beverwijck yielded numerous pieces of chipped guity of universalism" (after Balibar 2004:15) stone, including bifaces and projectile points because of the legal theory that had outlined their

(Moody 2002:3.21). Nevertheless, indigenous ob- moral authority. jects in Dutch homes constitute the exception The legal basis for Dutch expeditions around rather than the rule; the artifacts found inside the the world was created in response to an inter-Eu

remains of Dutch houses are overwhelmingly Eu- ropean conflict that had occurred within the global

ropean in manufacture. frame. In 1603, the renowned Dutch jurist Hugo Another way to perceive Eurocentrism among Grotius came to the aid of the VOC in a dispute

the Dutch is to interrogate their attitudes to and re- with the Portuguese in Southeast Asia

lations with the indigenous cultures that sur- (Borschberg 1999; Buckle 1991). In arguing rounded them. Their feelings toward and under- against the concept of Portuguese primacy in the

standing of Native Americans were complex region, Grotius maintained that every nation-state

(Rothschild 2003:81). Whereas Henry Hudson had equal rights of navigation, fishing, and trad

was reported to have said that "The natives are a ing everywhere in the world (Hart 2008:102;

very good people," the Reverend Jonas Merwick 2006:52). The resultant "law of nations"

Michaëlius described them as savage, wild, "un- that Grotius helped formulate—which at its core

civil and stupid as garden poles" (Jameson also substantiated an individual's natural rights 1909:49,126). Economic realities rested beneath (Brook 2008:68)—was soon twisted "to justify the intercultural relations between Dutch colonists the assertion of public authority by European and indigenous Native Americans, and these of- states in the extra-European world" (Keene ten translated into bad European behavior: "Em- 2002:62). In other words, Grotius's humanist writ

pires of trade did not simply crank over smoothly, ings about personal freedom, self-preservation, one deal, one trading season, one fleet departure and natural rights meant that some people could

after the next. They required ruthlessness" (Mer- express themselves "in extreme ways [such as]

wick 2006:267) submitting to tyrannical government" (Haakon One of the factors of the sociohistorical land- ssen 1996:28). Though Grotius may not have ap

scape that the Dutch did not appreciate upon their proved of all the ways in which his dense legal ar

arrival in the Upper Hudson was the long-term, guments were used, a close relationship

intercultural rivalry between the Mahicans and the developed between his writings "and the modern

Mohawks (Burke 1991:283). The rivalry had practices of colonialism and imperialism" (Keene

long-standing reasons having nothing to do with 2002:62). This, then, is the legal establishment of

Europeans, but if the Massachusetts Puritans had Eurocentric doctrine, not only for the Dutch, but

indeed encouraged the Mahicans to go to war also for the English and the other European na

with their indigenous neighbors (Jennings tion-states (Haakonssen 1996:30). This pan-Eu

1976:315), then the global intra-European conflict ropean understanding was applicable in all socio

between England and the Netherlands had truly structural frames: globally, regionally, and locally, intermeshed with the regional socio-structure Dutch settlement design helped to reinforce

frame. At the same time, "it is impossible to un- Eurocentrism by transfiguring physical distance

derstand Dutch-Indian relations in New York into cultural distance. Unlike French coureurs de

State independently of French-Indian ones in Zwri, who tended to live within the Native villages, Canada" (Trigger 1971:277). The Dutch at Fort the Dutch were required to have Native traders




come to them (Jacobs 2009:176; Vernon van Rensselaer gave Bastiaen Jansz Crol instruc

1978:206). The prohibition against allowing Dutch tions to purchase land "from the Mahijcan, traders to visit Native villages was surficially Maquaas [Mohawks], or such other nations as

economic—because the WIC wished to limit ille- have any claims to them," with the admonition

gal trade—but it was also inherently Eurocentric, that Crol should treat them "with all courtesy and

The Dutch, realizing that their fragile New World discretion." Further on, van Rensselaer included economic structure was built upon furs acquired an important caveat: "In case he can not purchase

and traded by Native Americans, strove to main- the said lands from one or two nations, that he

tain good relations with the Mahicans and the purchase the same from all who pretend any right Mohawks, but at the same time they could not to them" (van Laer 1908:159, emphasis added), avoid expressing their Eurocentrism. Dutch traders By 1634, it had become clear, at least to van

often allowed visiting Native traders to stay on Rensselaer, that the Mahicans had decided to sell their lots and even sometimes to lodge with them their land because their leader had died and be in their homes (Venema 2003:91-92), but while cause of "the defeat they suffered in 1629" at the

specific Dutch individuals may not have been hands of the Mohawks (van Laer 1908:306). Van

racially biased against Native Americans, Dutch Rensselaer erroneously believed that he had corn culture was Eurocentric. Adriaen van der Donck, pletely disinherited the Mahicans from their land, the law enforcement officer in Renssalaerswijck but by the 1650s, the Mahicans and the Mohawks

explicitly referenced the "Universal Law of Na- were beginning to complain about land purchases tions"—drawing directly from Grotius—even as that "lasted forever" (Dunn 1994:101). Reacting he referred to the indigenous peoples as wilden to the tension, in 1659, the residents of Beverwi

(van der Donck 2008:103). The racialized ratio- jck built a palisade around their village to guard nale present in his use of the term wilden (Dutch "against a sudden incursion of Barbarians" (O' for "savage" or "wild men") is clear: Callaghan 1868:385). This palisade inculcated a

symbolic meaning that was embedded within its function: it "confirmed that Beverwijck was in

creasingly becoming a place with its own

, , , , . identity—for some, perhaps, a true'Dutch'home the recognition of landed property, they devi- ,

r . . .. , base . . . [one m which] arriving new settlers ota en rot" Trnm tho íronoro I oiiío r h it rhoi ; mov u

First, on account of religion, because they have

none or so little as to be virtually in a state of

nature. Second, as regards to marriage and in

[were] now separated from the natives" (Venema

2003:95). The palisade also reinforced attitudes about land use that mirrored those prevalent in the

Netherlands (Merwick 1980:66). The separation enforced by the construction of the palisade was

ate so far from the general laws that they may well be called wilden, because they act in those

matters almost at wil 1. Third, as the Christians,

to set themselves apart, give foreign nations

the names of Turks or Mamelukes or barbar

ians, since the term heathen is too general and . , , , . , , . ... , , , , ... ., entirely homologous with the separation enforced little used abroad, they did not wish to include , . , , , , . . . ... ., by the European ceramics and glass: both rein

the American natives in that term either. Sim- / • , , . ... ... forced the pan-national concept of Eurocentrism

llarly, the terms black and white are custom- . f . , , , . . . , that existed outside and above nation-state pnde.

ary among those who have business overseas, _ ...... , . j* , • So, while historians have generally viewed to distinguish the Negroes from our and sim- , ^ ,

J ,

., . , „ ., . , the Dutch to have been more benevolent than the liar nations, but neither of those names quite _ ,. . . , ,. . , . .

,,,A , , , , .. English in dealing with their Native allies, the fitted the Americans, who tend toward the olive XT . , ... , . . „ ,

, j, , „ Netherlanders did not act altruistically because, colored [van der Donck 2008:75], ... , ^ .. , ,

J

just like the English, they, too, were Eurocentric.

This quote reveals that "by calling the Indians As Eurocentrists, the Dutch required its agents to wild men, the Dutch maintained an ambiguous obtain legal title to the land they occupied so that

description of them which suggested that they they could obtain full legal rights by contract

were not quite human, but neither were they un- (Jennings 1988:14). The continuation of the

questionably animals" (Otto 1995:98). story begun by the embryonic expression of Eu Such views, rooted in Eurocentric attitudes, rocentrism in the New World has been cogently

necessarily created tensions. On January 12,1630, summarized:




Colonization by the Dutch and land sale by the Consciously adopting socio-structural fram

Mahican slowly started after 1630, receiving ing allows archaeologists to conceptualize Euro

impetus only in the last decades of the seven- centrism as one force in modern life that has sub

teenth century. The colonists along the Hud- stantial, dialectically relevant consequences for its

son River appear to have preferred the Indian advocates and its victims. The understanding of

garden lands for their farms. Together with the Eurocentrism by colonizing Europeans united the

quest for furbearers in more distant areas, this disparate programs of the individual nation-states

resulted in the slow removal of the Mahican into an overarching principle of post-Enlighten

away from the Hudson River to more remote ment thought. Despite each nation's jingoistic at

corners of their territory" [Brasser 1978:203, titudes, desires, and plans—and frequent inter

emphasis added], cultural wars—most Europeans simply accepted

their collective supremacy over the world's non

Conclusion European peoples. At the same time, the colonial

agents of the Netherlands, England, Spain, It remains true that one of the most important and France, and all the other superpowers that have

yet challenging tasks of historical archaeology is grown to power since about 1500 enacted their to give voice to the voiceless, to represent ar- nationally specific Eurocentrisms. The originality chaeologically all those people who have been si- of post-Columbian Eurocentrism—unlike the uni lenced by the powerful (Orser 1996:160-182). versality of ethnocentrism—is that it acquired a Historical archaeologists have been adept at terrible power when combined with colonialism,

preparing monographs that outline the ways in capitalism, and racialization. Each force fed off which excavation has illuminated past life in myr- the others and intersected in complex, histori iad sociohistorical settings. A central task of mod- cally significant way s. ern-world (historical) archaeology is to use ar- The Dutch in the Upper Hudson Valley acted

chaeology to listen to the voiceless (as historical like colonial Europeans elsewhere in the world. In

archaeologists), while simultaneously illuminât- stead of constructing permanent settlements that

ing the forces that explain why the voiceless have conformed to the realities of local environments, been silenced in the first place (as modern-world they built structures in villages that were European archaeologists). Modern-world (historical) ar- in design and plan. The similarity between Fort

chaeologists do not simply use Eurocentism as a Orange in New Netherland and Forte Oranje in

pejorative indictment but rather embrace the view Brazil alone substantiates the urge to re-create

that powerlessness in the past must be thoroughly Europe in the non-European world. Further ho

investigated as part of the postcolonial project to mology is indicated in the Dutch desire to import help comprehend powerlessness in the present, heavy, costly objects into their colonial outposts as

Rather than to rehabilitate the telling of history, expressions of Eurocentrism with a Dutch flavor,

ignoring the reasons for the silences ultimately All archaeologists, regardless of area of ex

creates new and perhaps even more dangerous si- pertise, know the terrible toll experienced by in

lences. By failing to acknowledge domination, digenous peoples when foreigners from Europe oppression, and bigotry, archaeologists run the invaded their native territories seeking land and

risk of alienating themselves from the peoples wealth. But it is the commonness of modernity's

whose history they investigate. meta-forces that is most poignant. Eurocentrism,

Modem-world (historical) archaeology openly capitalism, colonialism, and racialization are such

accepts the significance of colonialism, racial- a strong part of the world's collective history that

ization, capitalism, and Eurocentrism as primary, archaeologists may tend to overlook them, caus

powerful meta-forces that operate in the post- ing them to become naturalized and thus beyond

Columbian world. The modem-world (historical) the realm of analysis. A conscientious archaeol

archaeologists' critiques of these forces are de- ogy dedicated to decolonizing anthropology can

signed to destroy the artificiality of the local- not treat Eurocentrism strictly as a contemporary

global dichotomy by overtly employing multi- perspective intellectually extracted from its his

frame analysis. tory. Such an archaeology must completely reject




Eurocentric analysis as it simultaneously argues

that ignoring the histories, effects, and lasting

implications of Eurocentrism naturalizes its ma

terial manifestations and masks its tenacious so

ciocultural consequences, thereby minimizing the

brutality that often accompanied its practice

throughout the world.

Acknowledgments. The ideas expressed in this paper have

evolved over several years and have benefitted from the works

and comments of scholars and friends too numerous to men

tion. The final revisions were completed during a two-month

stay in the Department of Anthropology and Archaeology at

the University of Otago, New Zealand. 1 wish to thank Ian

Smith, Angela Middleton, and everyone in the department who

made my stay productive and memorable. I also wish to ac

knowledge the careful reading and fine suggestions offered by Elizabeth Scott, Janice Orser, and the four reviewers. Rani

Alexander very kindly translated my abstract into Spanish and

I deeply appreciate her assistance. Of course, the responsibil

ity for the final product rests solely with me.

References Cited

Abernethy, David B. 2000 The Dynamics of Global Dominance: European

Overseas Empires, 1415-1980. Yale University Press, New Haven.

Ames, Kenneth M. 1991 The Archaeology of the Longue Durée: Temporal and

Spatial Scale in the Evolution of Social Complexity on the Southern Northwest Coast. Antiquity 65:935-945.

Amin, Samir 1989 Eurocentrism. Translated by Russell Moore. Month

ly Review Press, New York.

Arrighi, Giovanni 2010 The Long Twentieth Century: Money, Power, and the

Origins of Our Times. Verso, London. Asante, Molefi Kete

1999 The Painful Demise of Eurocentrism: An Afrocentric Response to Critics. Africa World Press, Trenton, New Jer

sey. Ashcroft, Bill, Gareth Griffiths, and Helen Tiffin

1998 Key Concepts in Post-Colonial Studies. Routledge, Lon don.

Baart, Jan 1987 Dutch Material Civilization: Daily Life Between

1650-1776, Evidence from Archaeology. In New World Dutch Studies: Dutch Arts and Culture in Colonial Amer

ica, 1609-1776, edited by Roderic H. Blackburn and Nan

cy A. Kelley, pp. 1-11. Albany Institute of History and Art, Albany.

Balibar, Etienne 1994 Masses, Classes, Ideas: Studies on Politics and Phi

losophy Before and After Marx. Translated by James Swen son. Routledge, London.

2004 We, The People of Europe: Reflections on Transnational

Citizenship. Translated by James Swenson. Princeton

University Press, Princeton, New Jersey. Bagchi, Amiya Kumar

2005 Perilous Passage: Mankind and the Global Ascendancy of Capital. Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, Maryland.

Bentham, Jeremy ] 830 Emancipate Your Colonies! Addressed to the Nation

al Convention of France, A" 1793, Shewing the Useless ness and Mischievousness of Distant Dependencies to an

European State. Robert Heward, London.

Bintliff, John (editor) 1991 The Anmles School and Archaeology. New York Uni

versity Press, New York.

Blaut, J.M.

1993 The Colonizer's Model of the World: Geographical Dif

fitsionism and Eurocentric History. Guilford, New York.

2000 Eight Eurocentric Historians. Guilford, New York.

Borschberg, Peter 1999 Hugo Grotius, East India Trade, and the King of Jo

hor. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 30:225-248.

Bourdieu, Pierre 2003 Firing Back: Against the Tyranny of the Market 2. Trans

lated by Loïc Wacquant. New Press, New York.

Bourgois, Phillippe 1997 Confronting the Ethics of Ethnography: Lessons

from Fieldwork in Central America. In Decolonizing An

thropology: Moving Further toward an Anthropology for Liberation, edited by Faye V. Harrison, pp. 111-127. Amer ican Anthropological Association, Washington, DC.

Boxer, C. R. 1973 The Dutch Seaborne Empire, 1600-1800. Penguin, Lon

don.

Bradley, James W. 2005 Visualizing Arent van Curler: A Biographical and Ar

chaeological View, de Halve Maen 77:3-14. 2007 Before Albany: An Archaeology of Native-Dutch Re

lations in the Capital Region, 1600-1664. University of the

State of New York, State Education Department, Albany. Brantlinger, Patrick

2003 Dark Vanishings: Discourse on the Extinction of Prim itive Races, 1800-1930. Cornell University Press, Ithaca.

Brasser, T. J.

1978 Mahican. In Northeast, edited by Bruce G. Trigger, pp. 198-212. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 15, William C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Insti

tution, Washington, D.C.

Braudel, Femand 1966 La Méditerranée et al Monde Méditerranéen a

L'époch de Phillippe 7/(2nd edition). Librairie Armand Col

in, Paris, 1973 Capitalism and Material Life, 1400-1800. Translat

ed by Miriam Kochan. Harper and Row, New York. 1977 Afterthoughts on Material Civilization and Capitalism.

Translated by Patricia M. Ranum. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.

Brook, Timothy 2008 Vermeer i Hat: The Seventeenth Century and the Dawn

of the Global World. Profile, London.

Buckle, Stephen 1991 Natural Law and the Theory of Property: Grotius to

Hume. Clarendon, Oxford.

Burke, Thomas E.

1991 The New Netherland Fur Trade, 1657-1661 : Response to Crisis, in A Beautiful and Fruitful Place: SelectedRens

selaerswijck Seminar Papers, edited by Nancy Anne Mc Clure Zeller, pp. 283-291. New Netherland Project, New York State Library, Albany.

Cameron, Catherine M. 2011 Captives and Culture Change: Implications for Ar

chaeology. Current Anthropology 52:169-209.

Cantwell, Anne-Marie 2008 The Middle Ground that Once Lay "Under the Blue




Canopy of Heaven": The Munsee and the Dutch in the Sev enteenth Century. In From De Halve Maen to KLM: 400 Years of Dutch-American Exchange, edited by Margriet Bruijn Lacy, Charles Gehring, and Jenneke Oosterhoff, pp. 119-133. Nodus, Mlinster.

Césaire, Aimé 2000 Discourse on Colonialism. Monthly Review Press, New

York.

Chakrabarty, Dipesh 1992 Postcoloniality and the Artifice of History: Who

Speaks for "Indian" Pasts? Representations 37:1-26. 2000 Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and His

torical Difference. New ed. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.

2002 Habitations of Modernity: Essays in the Wake of Sub altern Studies. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Cobley.Alan Gregor 1990 Class and Consciousness: The Black Petty Bourgeoisie

in South Africa. 1924 to 1950. Greenwood, New York.

Condon, Thomas J.

1968 New York Beginnings: The Commercial Origins of New Netherland. New York University Press, New York.

Colley, Linda

2004 Captives: Britain, Empire, and the World, 1600-1850.

Anchor, New York.

Cooper, Frederick, and Ann Laura Stoler 1997 Preface. In Tensions of Empire: Colonial Cultures in

a Bourgeois World, edited by Frederick Cooper and Ann Laura Stoler, pp. vii-x. University of California Press, Berke

ley. Crossley, Pamela Kyle

2008 What Is Global History? Polity, Cambridge. Crumley, Carole L., and William H. Marquardt (editors)

1987 Regional Dynamics: Burgundian Landscapes in His

torical Perspective. Academic Press, San Diego. Dash. Mike

1999 Tulipomania: The Story of the World's Most Coveted

Flower and the Extraordinary Passions it Aroused. Three

Rivers Press, New York.

Dawdy, Shannon Lee 2010 Clockpunk Anthropology and the Ruins of Moderni

ty. Current Anthropology 51:761-793.

Deetz, James

1977 In Small Things Forgotten: The Archaeology of Ear

ly American Life. Anchor Press, Garden City, New York. 1991 Introduction: Archaeological Evidence of Sixteenth

and Seventeenth-Century Encounters. In Historical Ar

chaeology in Global Perspective, edited by Lisa Falk, pp. 1-9. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

Dietler, Michael 2010 Archaeologies of Colonialism: Consumption, Entan

glement, and Violence in Ancient Mediterranean France.

University of California Press, Berkeley. Dirlik, Arif

1999 Is There History After Eurocentrism?: Globalism, Post

colonialism, and the Disavowal of History. Cultural Cri

tique 42:1-34.

Duffy, Christopher 2006 Fire and Stone: The Science of Fortress Warfare,

1660-1860. Castle, Edison, NJ.

Duchesne, Ricardo 2001-2002 Between Sinocentrism and Eurocentrism: Debating

Andre Gunder Frank's Re-Orient: Global Economy in the

Asian Age. Science and Society 65:428-463.

Dunn, Shirley W. 1994 The Mohicans and Their Land, 1609-1730. Purple

Mountain Press, Fleischmans, New York.

Dussel, Enrique 1993 Eurocentrism and Modernity. Boundary 2 20:65-76.

Dyson, Stephen L. (editor) 1985 Comparative Studies in the Archaeology of Colonialism.

BAR International Series 233. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford.

Eagleton, Terry 1996 The Illusions of Postmodernism. Blackwell, Oxford.

Englund, Harri, and James Leach 2000 Ethnography and the Meta-Narratives of Modernity.

Current Anthropology 41:225-248.

Ephraim, Charles Wm.

2003 The Pathology of Eurocentrism: The Burden and Re

sponsibilities of Being Black. Africa World Press, Trenton, New Jersey.

Falk, Lisa (editor) 1991 Historical Archaeology in Global Perspective. Smith

sonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

Fanon, Frantz 1963 The Wretched of the Earth. Grove Press, New York.

Ferris, Neal 2009 The Archaeology of Native-Lived Colonialism: Chal

lenging History in the Great Lakes. University of Arizona

Press, Tucson.

Fisher, Charles L. 2008 Archaeological Collections from New Netherland at

the New York State Museum. In From De Halve Maen to KLM: 400 Years of Dutch-American Exchange, edited by

Margriet Bruijn Lacy, Charles Gehring, and Jenneke

Oosterhoff, pp. 11-23. Nodus, Miinster.

Frank, Andre Gunder 1998 ReOrient: Global Economy in the Asian Age. University

of California Press, Berkeley. Funari, Pedro Paulo A., and Nanci Vieira de Oliveira

2009 The Archaeology of Conflict in Brazil. In Memories

from Darkness: Archaeology of Repression and Resistance in Latin America, edited by Pedro Funari, Andrés Zarankin, and Melisa Salerno, pp. 25—31. Springer, New York.

Funari, Pedro Paulo, Siân Jones, and Martin Hall

1999 Introduction: Archaeology in History. In Historical Ar

chaeology: Back from the Edge, edited by Pedro Paulo A.

Funari, Martin Hall, and Siân Jones, pp. 1-20. Routledge, London.

Garber, Peter M. 1989 Tulipmania. Journal of Political Economy 97:535—560.

Gerbi, Antonello 1973 The Dispute of the New World: A History of a

Polemic, 1750-1900. Translated by Jeremy Moyle. Uni

versity of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh.

Goody, Jack 2006 The Theft of History. Cambridge University Press, Cam

bridge. Gosden, Chris

2004 Archaeology and Colonialism: Cultural Context from 5000 BC to the Present. Cambridge University Press, Cam

bridge. Haakonssen, Knud

1996 Natural Law and Moral Philosophy: From Grotius to

the Scottish Enlightenment. Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge. Haglund, William D., Melissa Connor, and Douglas D. Scott

2001 The Archaeology of Contemporary Mass Graves. His

torical Archaeology 35(l):57-69. Hall, Martin

2000 Archaeology and the Modern World: Colonial Tran

scripts in South Africa and the Chesapeake. Routledge, Lon

don.




Hall, Martin, and Stephen W. Silliman 2006 Introduction: Archaeology of the Modern World. In His

torical Archaeology, edited by Martin Hall and Stephen W.

Silliman, pp. 1-19. Blackwell, Maiden, Massachusetts.

Harding. Jan 2005 Rethinking the Great Divide: Long-Term Structural His

tory and the Temporality of Event. Norwegian Archaeo

logical Review 38:88-101.

Hart, Jonathan 2008 Empires and Colonies. Polity, Cambridge.

Hodgen, Margaret T. 1971 Early Anthropology in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth

Centuries. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia. Huey, Paul R.

1987 Archaeological Evidence of Dutch Wooden Cellars and Perishable Wooden Structures at Seventeenth and Eighteenth Century Sites in the Upper Hudson Valley. In New World Dutch Studies: Dutch Arts and Culture in Colonial Amer

ica, 1609-1776, edited by Roderic H. Blackburn and Nan

cy A. Kelley, pp. 13-35. Albany Institute of History and

Art, Albany. 1988 Aspects of Continuity and Change in Colonial Dutch

Material Culture at Fort Orange, 1624-1664. Ph.D. dis sertation , Department of American Civilization, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

1991 The Dutch at Fort Orange. In Historical Archaeolo

gy in Global Perspective, edited by Lisa Falk, pp. 21-67. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.

1996 A Short History of Cuyper Island, Towns of East Green bush and Schodack, New York, and Its Relation to Dutch and Mahican Culture Contact. Journal of Middle Atlantic

Archaeology 12:127-142. 1998a Fort Orange Archaeological Site National Historic

Landmark. New York State Archaeological Association Bul letin 114:12-23.

1998b Schuyler Flatts Archaeological District National Historic Landmark. New York State Archaeological Asso ciation Bulletin 114:24-31.

2010 Dutch Colonial Forts in New Netherland. In First Forts:

Essays on the Archaeology of Proto-Colonial Fortifications, edited by Eric Klingelhofer, pp. 139-165. Brill, Leiden.

Hughes, S. S. 1992 Beyond Eurocentrism: Developing World Women's

Studies. Feminist Studies 18:389-404.

Irwin, Douglas A. 1991 Mercantilism as Strategic Trade Policy: The Anglo

Dutch Rivalry for the East India Trade. Journal of Politi cal Economy 99:1296-1314.

Jacobs,Jaap 2005 New Netherland: A Dutch Colony in Seventeenth-Cen

tury America. Brill, Leiden. 2009 The Colony of New Netherland: A Dutch Settlement in

Seventeenth-Century America. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York.

Jameson, J. Franklin (editor) 1909 Narratives of New Netherland, 1609-1664. Charles

Scribner's Sons, New York.

Jasanoff, Maya 2011 Liberty's Exiles: American Loyalists in the Revolutionary

War. Alfred A. Knopf, New York.

Jayawardena, V. Kumari 1974 Origins of the Left Movement in Sri Lanka. Social Sci

entist 2(6-7):3-28. Jennings, Francis

1976 The Invasion of America: Indians, Colonialism, and the Cant of Conquest. W. W. Norton, New York.

1988 Dutch and Swedish Indian Policies. In History of In

dian-White Relations, edited by Wilcomb E. Washburn, pp. 13-19. Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 4, William C. Sturtevant, general editor, Smithsonian Insti

tution, Washington, DC.

Johns, Sheridan 1975 The Comintern, South Africa, and the Black Diaspo

ra. The Review of Politics 37:200-234.

Johnson, Matthew 2006 The Tide Reversed: Prospects and Potentials for a Post

colonial Archaeology of Europe. In Historical Archaeol

ogy, edited by Martin Hall and Stephen W. Silliman, pp. 313-331. Blackwell, Maiden, Massachusetts.

Johnson, Samuel 1760 A Dictionary of the English Language. 2nd ed. Knap

ton, Hitch, Hawes, Millar,Strahan, Dodsley, and Longman, London.

Jordan, Kurt A. 2008 The Seneca Restoration, 1715-1754: An Iroquois Lo

cal Political Economy. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Kahn, Joel S. 2001 Anthropology and Modernity. Current Anthropology

42:651-680.

Kanth, Rajani Kannepalli 2005 Against Eurocentrism: A Transcendant Critique of Mod

ernist Science, Society, and Morals: A Discursus on Hu man Emancipation. Palgrave Macmillan, New York.

Keene, Edward 2002 Beyond the Anarchical Society: Grotius, Colonialism,

and Order in World Politics. Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge. Kohl, Philip L.

2008 Shared Social Fields: Evolutionary Convergence in

Prehistory and Contemporary Practice. American An

thropologist 110:495-506.

Lambropoulos, Vassilis 1993 The Rise of Eurocentrism: Anatomy of Interpretation.

Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.

Landes, David 1998 The Wealth and Poverty of Nations: Why Some Are So

Rich and Some So Poor. Norton, New York.

Lawrence, Susan, and Nick Shepherd 2006 Historical Archaeology and Colonialism. In The

Cambridge Companion to Historical Archaeology, edited

by Dan Hicks and Mary C. Beaudry, pp. 69-86. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

I-efebvre, Henri 1991 The Production of Space. Translated by Donald

Nicholson-Smith. Blackwell, Oxford.

Lenin, V.I. 1970 Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism: A

Popular Outline. Foreign Language Press, Peking. Liebmann, Matthew, and Melissa S. Murphy (editors)

2010 Enduring Conquests: Rethinking the Archaeology of Resistance to Spanish Colonialism in the Americas. School for Advanced Research Press, Santa Fe.

Lightfoot, Kent G. 1995 Culture Contact Studies: Redifining the Relationship

between Prehistoric and Historical Archaeology. American

Antiquity 60:199-217.

Lightfoot, Kent G., Antoinette Martinez, and Ann M. Schiff 1998 Daily Practice and Material Culture in Pluralistic So

cial Settings: An Archaeological Study of Culture Change and Persistence from Fort Ross, California. American An

tiquity 63:199-222.

Linebaugh, Peter, and Marcus Rediker 2000 The Many-Headed Hydra: Sailors, Slaves, Com




moners, and the Hidden History of the Revolutionary At lantic. Beacon Press, Boston.

Little, Barbara J. 1994 People With History: An Update on Historical Ar

chaeology in the United States. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 1:5^10.

Little, Barbara J., and Paul Shackel 1989 Scales in Historical Archaeology: An Archaeology of

Colonial Anglo-America. Antiquity 63:495-509.

Lucas, Gavin 2006 An Archaeology of Colonial Identity: Power and Ma

terial Culture in the Dwars Valley, South Africa. Springer, New York.

Lydon,Jane 2009 Fantastic Dreaming: The Archaeology of an Aborig

inal Mission. AltaMira, Lanham, Maryland. Lydon, Jane, and Uzma Z. Rizvi (editors)

2010 Handbook of Postcolonial Archaeology. Ixft Coast

Press, Walnut Creek, California.

Lyons, Claire L„ and John K. Papadopoulos (editors) 2002 The Archaeology of Colonialism. Getty, Los Angeles.

McGerr, Michael 1991 The Price of the "New Transnational History." Amer

ican Historical Review 96:1056-1067.

Marks, Robert B. 2002 The Origins of the Modern World: A Global and Eco

logical Narrative. Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham,

Maryland. Marquardt, William H.

1992 Dialectical Archaeology. In Archaeological Method and

Theory, edited by Michael B. Schiffer, Vol. 4,pp. 101-140.

University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

Marx, Karl 1967 Capital: A Critique of Political Economy. Volume 1.

International, New York. 1970 A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy.

Translated by Maurice Dobb. International, New York.

Marx, Karl, and Friedrich Engels 1970 The German Ideology: Part One. Edited by C. J.Arthur.

International. New York.

Matthews, Christopher N. 2007 History to Prehistory: An Archaeology of Being Indian.

Archaeologies 3:271-295.

Menezes, José Luiz Mota, and Maria do Rosário Rosa Rodrigues 1986 Fortificaçôes Portuguesas no Nordeste de Brasil: Sécu

los XVI. XVII e XVIII. Pool Editorial, Recife.

Merwick, Donna 1980 Dutch Townsmen and Land Use: A Spatial Perspec

tive on Seventeenth-Century Albany, New York. William

and Mary Quarterly 37:53-78. 1990 Possessing Albany, 1630-1710: The Dutch and Eng

lish Experiences. Cambridge University Press, Cam

bridge. 2006 The Shame and the Sorrow: Dutch-Amerindian En

counters in New Netherland. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

Meskell, Lynn, and Robert W. Preucel

2004 Identities. In A Companion to Social Archaeology, edit

ed by Lynn Meskell and Robert W. Preucel, pp. 121-141.

Blackwell, Maiden, Massachusetts.

Metcalf, Peter 2010 The Life of the Longhouse: An Archaeology of Ethnicity.

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Middleton, Angela

2008 Te Puna, A New Zealand Mission Station: Historical

Archaeology in New Zealand. Springer, New York.

Miroff, Laurie E., and Timothy D. Knapp (editors) 2009 Iroquoian Archaeology and Analytic Scale. University

of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.

Moody, Kevin L. 2002 Traders or Traitors: Illicit Trade at Fort Orange in the

17th Century. In On the Outside Looking In: Four Centuries

of Change at 625 Broadway, Archaeology at the DEC Head

quarters, 625 Broadway, Albany, New York, pp. 3.1-3.26.

Hartgen Archaeological Associates, Rensselaer, New York.

2003 Traders or Traitors: Illicit Trade at Fort Orange in the Seventeenth Century. In People, Places, and Material

Things: Historical Archaeology of Albany, New York, edit

ed by Charles L. Fisher, pp. 25-38. New York State Mu seum Bulletin 499, New York State Education Department, Albany.

2005 Quackenbush Square House. In Beyond the North

Gate: Archaeology on the Outskirts of Colonial Albany, Archaeological Data Retrieval, Quackenbush Square Parking Facility, Broadway, Albany, New York, pp. 89-160. Hartgen Archaeological Associates, Rensselaer, New York.

Mrozowski, Stephen A. 2010 New and Forgotten Paradigms: The Environment and

Economics in Historical Archaeology. Historical Archae

ology 44(3):177-127.

Nassaney, Michael S., and Kenneth E. Sassaman (editors) 1995 Native American Interactions: Multiscalar Analysis and

Interpretation in the Eastern Woodlands. University of Ten nessee Press, Knoxville.

Nissenson, S. C. 1937 The Patroon's Domain. Columbia University Press,

New York.

O'Callaghan, E. B. 1868 Laws and Ordinances of New Netherland, 1638-1674.

Weed, Parsons, Albany. Orser, Charles E., Jr.

1994 Toward a Global Historical Archaeology: An Exam

ple from Brazil. Historical Archaeology 28(1):1—18. 1996 A Historical Archaeology of the Modern World.

Plenum Press, New York. 2004a The Archaeology of Recent History: Historical,

Post-Medieval, and Modem-World. In A Companion to Ar

chaeology, edited by John Bintliff, pp. 272-290. Blackwell, Maiden, Massachusetts.

2004b Historical Archaeology. Prenctice-Hall, Upper Sad

dle River, New Jersey. 2007 The Archaeology of Race and Racialization in Historic

America. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

2010 Twenty-First Century Historical Archaeology. Jour nal of Archaeological Research 18:111-150.

2013 Modem-World Historical Archaeology. In The Oxford

Companion to Historical Archaeology, edited by James

Symonds, Susan Lawrence, and Laurie Wilkie. Oxford Uni

versity Press, Oxford, in press. Otto, Paul Andrew

1995 New Netherland Frontier: Europeans and Native

Americans along the Lower Hudson River, 1524-1664.

Ph.D. dissertation, Department of History, Indiana Uni

versity, Bloomington. Parmenter, Jon

2010 The Edge of the Woods: Iroquoia, 1534-1701. Michi

gan State University Press, East Lansing. Patterson, Thomas C.

1997 Inventing Western Civilization. Monthly Review

Press, New York.




Peet, Richard 2005 From Eurocentrism to Americentrism. Antipode

37:936-943.

Pels,Peter 1997 The Anthropology of Colonialism: Culture, History,

and the Emergence of Western Governmentality. AnnuaI Review of Anthropology 26:163-183.

Pilling, Arnold R. 1968 Beginnings. Historical Archaeology 1:1-22.

Pomeranz, Kenneth 2000 The Great Divergence: China, Europe, and the Mak

ing of the Modern World Economy. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.

Prashad, Vijay 2007 The Darker Nations: A People's History of the Third

World. New Press, New York.

Quimby, George I. 1939 European Trade Articles as Chronological Indicators

for the Archaeology of the Historic Period in Michigan. Pa

pers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Let

ters 24:25-31. 1966 Indian Culture and European Trade Goods: The Ar

chaeology of the Historic Period in the Western Great Lakes

Region. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison.

Quimby, George, and Alexander Spoehr 1951 Acculturation and Material Culture: I. Fieldiana:An

thropology 36:107-147.

Rabasa, José 1993 Inventing America: Spanish Historiography and the

Formation of Eurocentrism. University of Oklahoma

Press, Norman.

Rink, Oliver A. 1986 Holland on the Hudson: An Economic and Social His

tory of Dutch New York. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York.

Robins, Nick 2006 The Corporation that Changed the World: How the East

India Company Shaped the Modern Multinational. Pluto, London.

Rockman, Marcy 2010 New World with a New Sky: Climatic Variability, En

vironmental Expectations, and the Historical Period Col onization of Eastern North America. Historical Archaeol

ogy 44(3):4-20. Rosenau, Pauline Marie

1992 Post-Modernism and the Social Sciences: Insights, In

roads, and Intrusions. Princeton University Press, Princeton.

Rothschild, Nan A. 2003 Colonial Encounters in a Native American Landscape:

The Spanish and Dutch in North America. Smithsonian In

stitution, Washington, D.C.

Rowlands, Michael 1998 The Archaeology of Colonialism. In Social Trans

formations in Archaeology: Global and Local Perspectives, edited by Kristian Kristiansen and Michael Rowlands, pp. 318-323. Routledge, London.

Rye, William Brenchley (editor) 1865 England as Seen by Foreigners in the Days of Eliza

beth and James the First. John Russell Smith, London.

Said, Edward

1993 Culture and Imperialism. Knopf, New York.

Sayyid, S. 2003 A Fundamental Fear: Eurocentrism and the Emergence

oflslamism. 2nd edition. Zed, London. Scammell, G. V.

1981 The World Encompassed: The First European Mar itime Empires, c. 800-1650. Methuen, London.

Schama, Simon 1987 The Embarrassment of Riches: An Interpretation of

Dutch Culture in the Golden Age. Vintage, New York.

Schmidt, Peter R., and Jonathan R. Walz

2007a Re-Presenting African Pasts through Historical Ar

chaeology. American Antiquity 72:53-70.

2007b Silences and Mentions in History Making. Histori

cal Archaeology 41 (4) : 129-146.

Setzler, Frank M.

1943 Archaeological Explorations in the United States, 1930-1942. Acta Americana 1:206-220.

Silliman, Stephen W. 2005 Culture Contact or Colonialism? Challenges in the Ar

chaeology of Native North America. American Antiquity 70:55-74.

Smith, Linda Tuhiwai 1999 Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous

Peoples. Zed, London.

Smith, Michael E.

1992 Braudel's Temporal Rhythms and Chronology The

ory in Archaeology. In Archaeology, Annales, and Ethno

history, edited by A. Bernard Knapp, pp. 23-34. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

South, Stanley (editor) 1994 Pioneers in Historical Archaeology: Breaking New

Ground. Plenum Press, New York.

Stahl, Ann, Rob Mann, and Diana DiPaolo 2004 Writing for Many: Interdisciplinary Communication,

Constructionism, and the Practices of Writing. Historical

Archaeology 38(2):83—102. Stoler. Ann Laura

1992 Rethinking Colonial Categories: European Commu nities and the Boundaries of Rule. In Colonialism and Cul

ture, edited by Nicholas B. Dirks, pp. 319-352. Universi

ty of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.

Stoler, Ann Laura, and Frederick Cooper 1997 Between Métropole and Colony: Rethinking a Research

Agenda. In Tensions of Empire: Colonial Cultures in a Bour

geois World, edited by Frederick Cooper and Ann Laura

Stoler, pp. 1-56. University of California Press, Berkeley. Tambiah, Stanley J.

2000 Transnational Movements, Diaspora, and Multiple Modernities. Daedalus 129:163-194.

Trigger, Bruce G. 1971 The Mohawk-Mahican War (1624-28): The Establish

ment of a Pattern. Canadian Historical Review 52:276-286. van der Donck, Andiaen

2008 A Description of New Netherland. Edited by Charles T. Gehring and William A. Stama. Translated by Diederik Willem Goedhuys. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.

van Laer, A. J. F. (translator and editor) 1908 Van Rensselaer Bowier Manuscripts: Being the Let

ters ofKiliaen van Rensselaer, 1630-1643, and Other Doc uments Relating to the Colony of Renssalaerswyck. Uni

versity of the State of New York, Albany. Venema, Janny

2003 Beverwijck: A Dutch Village on the American Fron

tier, 1652-1664. State University of New York Press, Al

bany. 2010 Kiliaen van Renssalaer (1586-1643): Designing a New

World. Uitgeverij Verloren, Hilversum. Vernon, Howard

1978 The Dutch, the Indians, and the Fur Trade in the Hud son Valley, 1609-1664. In Neighbors arid Intruders: An Eth nohistorical Exploration of the Indians of Hudson's Riv

er, edited by Laurence M. Hauptman and Jack Campisi, pp. 197-209. National Museums of Canada, Ottawa.




von Dongen, Alexandra (editor) 1995 One Man's Trash in Another Man's Treasure. Muse

um Boymans-van Beuningen, Rotterdam.

Voss, Barbara L.

2008 Gender, Race, and Labor in the Archaeology of the

Spanish Colonial Americas. Current Anthropology 49:861-893.

Wallerstein, Immanuel

1974 The Modem World-System : Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth

Century. Academic Press, New York.

1979 The Capitalist World-Economy. Cambridge Univer

sity Press, Cambridge. 1980 The Modern World-System II: Mercantilism and the

Consolidation of the European World-Economy, 1600-1750.

Academic Press, New York.

2004 World-Systems Analysis: An Introduction. Duke Uni

versity Press, Durham, North Carolina.

Walthall, John A. (editor) 1991 French Colonial Archaeology: The Illinois Country and

the Western Great Lakes. University of Illinois Press, Ur

bana.

Walthall, John A., and Thomas E. Emerson (editors) 1992 Calumet and Fleur-de-Lis: Archaeology of Indian and

French Contact in the Midcontinent. Smithsonian Institu

tion Press, Washington, DC.

Weiss, Anja 2006 The Racism of Globalization. In The Globalization of

Racism, edited by Donaldo Macedo and Panayota Gounari,

pp. 128-147. Paradigm, Boulder, Colorado.

Wilcoxen, Charlotte 1984 Seventeenth-Century Albany: A Dutch Profile. 2nd ed.

Albany Institute of History and Art, Albany.

1999 Seventeenth-Century Portuguese Faiança and Its Presence in Colonial America. Northeast Historical Ar

chaeology 28:1-20.

Wilentz, Sean

1984 Against Exceptionalism: Class Consciousness and the American Labor Movement, 1790-1920. International La bor and Working Class History 26:1-24.

Wolf, Eric R.

1982 Europe and the People without History. University of

California Press, Berkeley. 1999 Envisioning Power: Ideologies of Dominance and Cri

sis. University of California Press, Berkeley.

Wong, Bin

2000 China Transformed: Historical Change and the Lim

its of European Experience. Cornell University Press, Itha

ca, New York.

Young, Robert J. C. 1995 Colonial Desire: Hybridity in Theory, Culture, and

Race. Routledge, London.

2001 Postcolonialism: An Historical Introduction. Black

well, Oxford.

Zizek, Slavoj 1998 A Leftist Plea for "Eurocentrism." Critical Inquiry

24:988-1009.

Zurndofer, Harriet T.

1997 China and "Modernity": The Uses of the Study of Chi

nese History in the Past and the Present. Journal of the Eco

nomic and Social History of the Orient 40:461-485.

Submitted June 3, 2011; Revised October 12, 2011:

Accepted November 1, 2011.



society for american archaeology - clas usersusers.clas.ufl.edu/davidson/historical archaeology fall...

Documents