Working with Memory in the Archaeology of Modern Conflict

The aim of this article is to situate archaeological approaches to modern conflicts within a framework of conflict memory and commemoration. A critical appreciation of historical archaeology as a commemorative practice requires a firm grounding in memory theory, specifically the formation and contestation of memory narratives. This article offers a detailed analysis of the relevant theories and demonstrates their applicability in the contested archaeology of the Nazi era in Berlin. On the basis of this critique I argue that archaeological work on contested sites offers a unique and powerful forum for socially engaged interdisciplinary research

Second World War archaeology in schools: a backdoor to the history curriculum?

The absence of a compulsory archaeological element in the English National Curriculum is a systemic weakness, and a problem for archaeological educators. However, historical or post-medieval archaeology offers the opportunity to make connections with the existing history curriculum at various stages, thereby introducing elements of archaeological methods and concepts into classrooms. In this paper I consider the potential for Second World War archaeology in or around the school building itself to involve students in archaeological fieldwork integrated into the National Curriculum, specifically history at Key Stage Two. Drawing on a case study of a school air raid shelter excavation in North London I examine the strengths and weaknesses of this model and discuss the scope for its broader application

Portable antiquities, pragmatism and the ‘precious things’

The metal detecting debate splutters on, its latest iteration framed rather unhelpfully in the context of a discussion of looting. Without wishing to belittle the importance of either of these issues, I would argue that a more constructive discussion should be grounded in less confrontational terms. In my opinion our task is not, as Gill suggests, ‘to bridge the gap between the archaeological community and those involved in metal detecting,’ but to mend the divide within the archaeological community between the minority of archaeologists who use metal detectors as a principal tool of fieldwork, and the majority who do not. It is a measure of this community’s widespread elitism and class snobbery that the most feckless professor of prehistory with a string of unpublished excavations is likely to be afforded a thousand times more respect than the most diligent member of a metal detecting club. I am delighted to see that David Gill has turned his attention to the thorny issues of treasure policy and portable antiquities in England and Wales. Few people can be as well informed of the broader international context and significance of these issues than this terror of the auction houses and scourge of weasel-like art curators. As I would hope and expect, his analysis of these issues is subtle and well informed, drawing on an impressive range of quantitative data. Nonetheless, there are a number of points in his discussion of metal detecting in Britain, and the Portable Antiquities Scheme in particular, that I disagree with or would like to examine in more depth

Reverse engineering and the archaeology of the modern world

This paper explores the practical and conceptual connections between the archaeology of post-industrial societies and the process of reverse engineering. It explores common themes such as industrial decline, the loss of technical expertise, and the growing problem of obsolescence both in technological infrastructure and in the management of digital data. To illuminate the connections between the two fields it considers several examples. These include the implicit applications of reverse engineering in archaeology, such as chemical analyses of Egyptian mummification and alchemical equipment, as well as the use of archaeological concepts and terminologies in reverse engineering. The concept of archaeology as reverse engineering is examined with regard to military aircraft, post-industrial landscapes and so-called ‘non-places’. These illustrate the difficulty in inferring different forms of human activity and knowledge in past technologies, in particular so-called ‘tacit knowledge’. The final part of the paper discusses the potentials and limitations of building links between reverse engineering and the archaeology of the modern world, raising questions for further consideration

“Let's send millions of qualified public archaeology cadres to the new museums and commercial units!”

An obsession with origins is a hallmark of pseudoarchaeology, while the celebration of arbitrary anniversaries is one of the more meaningless conceits of the heritage industry. In that spirit, I would like to wish a happy tenth anniversary to AP: Online Journal in Public Archaeology, and to extend my warmest congratulations to the editorial team