Toward an Archaeology of the Future

  • LouAnn WurstEmail author
  • Stephen A. Mrozowski


Archaeologists have largely embraced the idea that our discipline is political; that from its inception it has been intimately linked to capitalism and implicated with nationalist, colonialist, imperialist, sexist and racist agendas. Archaeologists have always validated our existence by the social relevance of our work, often with varying success. We believe that the best method may be to study history backward: to begin with the present result and look to the past to consider its preconditions. Bringing these understandings forward again allows us to project this potential into the future and examine the present complete with its ties to the past. This dialectical connection of past, present and future provides an important perspective on the long-term historical study of the social relations of capitalism. In this paper, we provide the larger theoretical context to elucidate these issues that form the foundation for this issue.


Internal relations Social relevance Capitalism 


  1. Baert, P. (2005). Philosophy of the Social Sciences: Toward Pragmatism, Polity Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  2. Beitl, C. M. (2012). Shifting policies, access, and tragedy of enclosures in Ecuadorian mangrove fisheries: towards a political ecology of the commons. Journal of Political Ecology 19: 94–113.Google Scholar
  3. Bennett, J. (2010). Vibrant Matter: The Political Ecology of Things, Duke University Press, Durham.Google Scholar
  4. Collins, T. W. (2008). The political ecology of hazard vulnerability: marginalization, facilitation and the production of differential risk to urban wildfires in Arizona’s White Mountains. Journal of Political Ecology 15: 21–43.Google Scholar
  5. Conkey, M. W. (1991). Original narratives: the politcal economy of gender in archaeology. In di Leonadro, M. (ed.), Gender at the Crossroads of Knowledge: Feminist Anthropology in the Postmodern Era, University of California Press, Berkeley, pp. 102–139.Google Scholar
  6. Crumley, C. L., and Marquardt, W. H. (1987). Regional dynamics in Burgundy. In Crumley, C. L., and Marquardt, W. H. (eds.), Regional dynamics: Burgundian landscapes in historical perspective, Academic, San Diego, pp. 609–623.Google Scholar
  7. Dawdy, S. L. (2009). Millennial archaeology: locating the discipline in the age of insecurity. Archaeological Dialogues 16: 131–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eagleton, T. (2003). After Theory, Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Eagleton, T. (2008). Comrades and colons. In Mitchell, K. (ed.), Practicing Public Scholarship: Experiences and Possibilities Beyond the Academy, Wiley-Blackwell, Malden, pp. 6–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Eagleton, T. (2011). Why Marx was Right, Yale University Press, New Haven.Google Scholar
  11. Ebert, T. L., and Zavarzadeh, M. (2008). Class in Culture, Boulder, CO., Paradigm.Google Scholar
  12. Escobar, A. (1999). After nature: steps to an anti-essentialist political ecology. Current Anthropology 40: 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Escobar, A. (2008). Territories of Difference: Place, Movements, Life, Duke University Press, Durham, Redes.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Friedman, E., and Lee, C. K. (2010). Remaking the world of Chinese labour: a 30-year retrospective. British Journal of Industrial Relations 48: 507–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Greenberg, J. B. (2006). The political ecology of fisheries in the Upper Gulf of California. In Biersack, A., and Greenberg, J. B. (eds.), Reimagining Political Ecology, Duke University Press, Durham, pp. 121–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Harman, C. (2009). Zombie Capitalism, Haymarket Books, Chicago.Google Scholar
  17. Jian, Y. (2012). China’s river pollution “a threat to people’s lives.”People's Daily Online.
  18. Johnson, M. (1996). An Archaeology of Capitalism, Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  19. LaRoche, C. J., and Blakey, M. L. (1997). Seizing intellectual power: the dialogue of the New York African Burial Ground. Historical Archaeology 31: 84–106.Google Scholar
  20. Leone, M. P. (1999). Setting some terms for historical archaeologies of capitalism. In Leone, M. P., and Potter Jr., P. B. (eds.), Historical Archaeologies of Capitalism, Kluwer, New York, pp. 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Leone, M. P., and Potter Jr., P. B. (eds.) (1999). Historical Archaeologies of Capitalism, Kluwer, New York.Google Scholar
  22. Little, B. J. (2007). Historical Archaeology: Why the Past Matters, Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek.Google Scholar
  23. Little, B. J. (2010). Epilogue: changing the world with archaeology. In Stottman, M. J. (ed.), Archaeologists as Activists: Can Archaeology Change the World, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, pp. 154–158.Google Scholar
  24. Little, B. J., and Shackel, P. A. (eds.) (2007). Archaeology as a Tool of Civic Engagement, AltaMira, Lanham.Google Scholar
  25. Marquardt, W. H. (1992). Dialectical archaeology. In Shiffer, M. B. (ed.), Archaeological Method and Theory, vol. 4, University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 101–140.Google Scholar
  26. Marx, K. (1963). The 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte, International Publishers, New York.Google Scholar
  27. Marx, K. (1967). Capital, vol. I, International Publishers, New York.Google Scholar
  28. Marx, K. (1971). Theories of Surplus Value, vol. 3, Progress Publishers, Moscow.Google Scholar
  29. Mark, K. (1991). Capital: Volume III, Penguin, London.Google Scholar
  30. Marx, K., and Engels, F. (1970). The German Ideology, International Publishers, New York.Google Scholar
  31. Matthews, C. N. (2010). The Archaeology of American Capitalism, University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
  32. McChesney, R. W., and Foster, J. B. (2010). Capitalism, the absurd system. Monthly. Review 62(2): 1–16.Google Scholar
  33. McDavid, C. (2002). Archaeologies that hurt: descendants that matter: a pragmatic approach to collaboration in the public interpretation of African-American archaeology. World Archaeology 34: 303–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McDavid, C. (2010). Public archaeology, activism, and racism: rethinking the heritage “product. In Stottman, M. J. (ed.), Archaeologists as Activists: Can Archaeology Change the World? University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, pp. 36–47.Google Scholar
  35. McGuire, R. H. (2008). Archaeology as Political Action, University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  36. McNally, D. (2011). Global Slump, PM Press, Oakland.Google Scholar
  37. Mrozowski, S. A. (2006). The Archaeology of Class in Urban America, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  38. Mrozowski, S. A. (2012). Ethnobiology for a diverse world: spaces and natures: archaeology and the political ecology of modern cities. Journal of Ethnobiology 32: 129–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mrozowski, S. A., Herbster, H., Brown, D., and Priddy, K. L. (2009). Magunkaquog materiality, Federal recognition, and the search for deeper history. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 13: 430–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. O’Donovan, M. (2002). Grasping power: a question of relations and scales. In O’Donoan, M. (ed.), The Dynamics of Power, Center for Archaeological Investigations and Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, pp. 19–34.Google Scholar
  41. Ollman, B. (1993). Dialectical Investigations, Routledge, New York.Google Scholar
  42. Ollman, B. (2003). Dance of the Dialectic: Steps in Marx’s Method, University of Illinois Press, Urbana.Google Scholar
  43. Ollman, B., and Smith, T. (2008). Introduction. In Smith, T. (ed.), Ollman, B, Dialectics for a New Century. Palgrave, New York, pp. 1–7.Google Scholar
  44. Orser, C. E. (1996). A Historical Archaeology of the Modern World, Plenum Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Paynter, R. (1988). Steps to an archaeology of capitalism. In Leone, M. P., and Potter Jr., P. B. (eds.), The Recovery of Meaning: Historical Archaeology inthe Eastern United States, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, pp. 407–433.Google Scholar
  46. Pearce, M. (2011). Have rumours of the “death of theory” been exaggerated. In Bintliff, J., and Pearce, M. (eds.), The Death of Archaeological Theory, Oxbow Books, Oxford, pp. 80–89.Google Scholar
  47. Preucel, R. W., and Bauer, A. A. (2001). Archaeological pragmatics. Norwegian Archaeological Review 34: 85–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Rorty, R. (1998). Achieving Our Country: Leftist Thought in Twentieth-Century America, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  49. Rorty, R. (1999). Philosophy and Social Hope, Penguin, London.Google Scholar
  50. Sabloff, J. A. (2008). Archaeology Matters: Action Archaeology in the Modern World, Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek.Google Scholar
  51. Saitta, D. J. (2007). The Archaeology of Collective Action, University Press of Florida, Gainsville.Google Scholar
  52. Shackel, P. A. (2011). New Philadelphia: An Archaeology of Race in the Heartland, University of Calfornia Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  53. Silliman, S. A. (ed.) (2008). Collaborative Archaeology at the Trowels Edge: Learning and Teaching in Indigenous Archaeology, University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
  54. Silliman, S. A. (2009). Change and continuity, practice and memory: native American persistence in colonial New England. American Antiquity 74: 211–230.Google Scholar
  55. Silliman, S. W., and Ferguson, T. J. (2010). Consultation and collaboration with descendent communities. In Ashmore, W., Lippert, D. T., and Mills, B. J. (eds.), Voices in American Archaeology, SAA Press, Washington, D.C., pp. 48–72.Google Scholar
  56. Stocking, G. W. (1968). On the limits of “presentism” and “historicism” in the historiography of the behavioral sciences. In Stocking, G. W. (ed.), Race, Culture, and Evolution: Essays in the History of Anthropology, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
  57. Stottman, M. J. (ed.) (2010). Archaeologists as Activists: Can Archaeology Change the World, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.Google Scholar
  58. Uggla, Y. (2010). What is this thing called “natural”? the nature-culture divide in climate change and biodiversity policy. Journal of Political Ecology 17: 79–91.Google Scholar
  59. Wood, M. C. (2002). Women’s work and class conflict in a working-class coal-mining community. In O’Donovan, M. (ed.), The Dynamics of Power, Center for Archaeological Investigations and Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, pp. 66–87.Google Scholar
  60. Wylie, A. (1999). Why should historical archaeologists study capitalism? the logic of question and answer and the challenge of system analysis. In Leone, M. P., and Potter Jr., P. B. (eds.), Historical Archaeologies of Capitalism, Kluwer, New York, pp. 23–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of AnthropologyWestern Michigan UniversityKalamazooUSA
  2. 2.Fiske Center for Archaeological ResearchUniversity of MassachusettsBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations