| Abstract: |
Peter Ucko's foreword explains the upheavals before the 1986 World Archaeological Congress that led to the papers in this volume, 'one of the first introspective analyses of the practice of medieval archaeology'. Following the conference itself four further papers were commissioned, making 18 papers in all, and striking 'a real blow for the overdue emancipation of studies in medieval archaeology'. The editors' preface gives further details of the circumstances surrounding the medieval session and point to its strong emphasis on Eastern Europe. Four of the papers are abstracted here as having particular relevance to British archaeology. They come under the heading Objectives of medieval archaeology: David Austin (pp 9-42) leads with 'The "proper study" of medieval archaeology', arguing the necessity for this subject to free itself from documentary history and from anglocentric and evolutionary preoccupations. A higher level of debate should be attempted, and compartmentation and isolation be rejected; nor should we continue to follow in the wake of historians' changing fashions. Two elements of a shared agenda with historians are offered: the study of ethnicity and the role of the nation state in Europe; and the study of the history of landscape as the physical representation of human success or failure in reaching an accommodation with nature, and also as a metaphor for social power relations and structures of belief. The same author with Julian Thomas (43-78) contributes 'The "proper study" of medieval archaeology: a case study', in which it is argued that medieval archaeologists should listen to their material and present it as a parallel to the documentary text. An analysis of Dartmoor longhouses in their landscape illustrates how a deeper understanding can be attained of patterns of discourse of the inhabitants, and of the relationships between households and between farm and land. Such details cannot be learnt from documents, but it will be necessary to convince historians of the worth of this kind of approach. Timothy C Champion (79-95) in 'Medieval archaeology and the tyranny of the historical record' explains how Europe, though not a distinct geographical unit, has long expressed a cultural, social, and political superiority over the rest of the world. The notions of 'progress' and of European domination are still carefully passed on in the teaching of the past in educational institutions including museums; and the emphasis on the classical origins of Europe is strong. The effects of these perspectives on archaeology are demonstrated. The tyranny of the historical record needs to be broken by asserting the equal value of the archaeological evidence and by exploring the differences between European and other societies. Martin Gojda (96-109) provides 'A comparative study of Czech and British medieval rural settlement archaeology: towards whole landscapes'. He explains that Czech settlement history has only recently entered the province of archaeology, but is increasingly seen as part of a wider landscape history, here summarized and compared with the much more developed discipline in Britain (for instance, air photography has only recently begun in Czechslovakia). An objective that is common to both countries is to understand the transition from dispersed to nucleated, and from irregular to planned settlements. Remaining papers deal with Hungary, Scandinavia, Poland, Latvia, SW France, Czechoslovakia, Lübeck, Prague and Kiev. |
