The Discovery of the Past. The Origins of Archaeology [01 ed.] 0714117684, 9780714117683

Citation preview

DISCOVERY OF THE PAST T H E O R I G I N S OF A R C H A E O L O G Y

ALAIN SCHNAPP

hj

Do i f I I ‘i

IN MEMORY AND

OF B O H U M I L

CARL-AXEL

SOUDSKY

MOBERG

© E ditions C arre , Paris, 1993 English ed itio n and translation © 1996 T h e Trustees o f the B ritish M useum

First published in English in 1996 by B ritish M u seu m Press A division o f T h e B ritish M u seu m C o m p a n y Ltd 46 B lo o m sb u ry Street, L o n d o n W C 1 B 3 Q Q

First published in 1993 by Editions C arre, Paris

Translated from th e French by Ian K innes and G illianV arndell T h e publishers th a n k th e C en tre nationale des lettres for th e ir su pport o f th e English translation o f this w ork.

A catalogue reco rd fo r this b o o k is available from the B ritish Library

IS B N 0 -7 1 4 1 -1 7 6 8 -4

P rin te d in Spain by Im ago Publishing Ltd

C O N T E N T S Acknowledgements page 6

Preface to the F rench E d itio n by E m m anuel Le R o y Ladurie page 8 IN T R O D U C T IO N

A rchaeology an d the Presence o f the Past page 11 CHAPTER

ONE

A n tiq u e and M edieval Sources page 39 CHAPTER

TW O

T h e E u ro p e o f th e A ntiquaries page 121 CHAPTER

THREE

F rom A n tiq u ary to A rchaeologist page 179 CHAPTER

FOUR

O n th e R e je c tio n o f the N atu ral H isto ry o f M an page 221 CHAPTER

F IV E

T h e Inven tio n o f A rchaeology page 2 7 5 C O N C T U S IO N

T h e T h re e C o n trad ictio ns o f the A ntiquaries page 3 1 7

A rchaeological A nthology page 3 2 6

B ibliography page 3 7 4

In d ex o f N am es page 381

Photographic Acknowledgements page 3 8 4

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

T

A he idea for this b o o k was sug­

gested by H e n ri de S aint-B lanquat. I began w o rk o n it at C hurchill C ollege, C am bridge, b u t w ith o u t the help o f Irene A ghion, Jean-P aul D em o u le, Francois Lissarrague and K rzysztof Pom ian, it w o u ld never have b e e n w ritte n . V iviane R e g n o t, G u y G ag n o n and Jean -P au l D esroches w ere u n stin tin g in sharing w ith m e th eir know ledge o f the C h in ese w o rld , Sylvie L ack en b acher in th at o f M esopotam ia, and D o m in iq u e Valbelle an d Jean Y oyotte advised m e o n th e E gyptian w orld. Je a n -C la u d e S chm itt and M ichel Pastoureau w ere b o th tireless interlo cu to rs in th e exploration o f the M edieval period. A t th e C ab in et o f M edals, in the various departm ents o f the B iblioth e q u e nationale, at C a m b rid g e U n iv ersity Library, at th e W arburg Institute, I was con tin u o u sly given help and the use o f diverse facilities. It w o u ld be im possible to list all those institutions w h ic h have enabled m e to co m p lete this w o rk , b u t I w o u ld like to record m y debt to the Vatican Library, th e university libraries o f H eid elb erg , M u n ic h and G o ttin g e n , th e lib rary at W olfenbiittel, th e M u se u m fur K u n st u n d G ew erbe in H am b u rg and th e N atio n al Library o f C o p enhagen. I w o u ld like to th a n k th e follow ing individuals for th e ir help: M ichel A m andry, Je a n -P ie rre A niel, D aniel A rnaud, Francois Avril, Ida Baldassare, U rsu la B au rm eister, Laure B ea u m o n t-M a ille t, C laude Berard, L aurence Bobis, M athilde B roustet, M o n iq u e C o h e n , M arieH elen e C o lo m , R ic h a rd C o o p er, M o n iq u e C rick, P ierrette C ro u ze tD au rat, M ich el D h e n in , F rancois D up u ig ren et-D esro u ssilles, Yves D u ro u x , A ndreas F u rtw an g ler, Pascale Galey, Jean -B ap tiste G iard,

6

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

M ich el Gras, P ier-G io v an n i G uzzo, Francois H arto g , Francis Haskell, Jean-L ouis H u o t, Ian Jenkins, Athanasios Kalpaxis, K ristian K ristiansen, M ax K unze, C h ristian Landes, A n n ie-F ran ce Laurens, E m m anuel Le R o y L adurie, K arin L u n d b e c k -C u lo t, Je a n -M ic h e l M assin, C ecile M o rrisso n , T im M urray, L au ren t O livier, R ic a rd o O lm o s, P ierre P in o n , F lorence de Polignac, Francois de Polignac, M artin e Prosper, G iuseppe P u cci, Joselita R asp i-S erra, Francis R ic h a rd , J h o n Scheid, N a th a n Schlanger, Je a n -P ie rre Sodini, A lessandra Them elly, Francois T h ierry , G ustav T rotzig, S ander Van d er Leeuw , Je a n -C la u d e Vaysse, A ndreas W itten b u rg , R ic h a rd W hitaker. T h e English translation o f this b o o k was revised d u rin g m y stay at th e G etty C e n te r for th e H isto ry o f A rt and the H um anities at Santa M onica. I am in d eb ted to Louise H itc h co ck for h er tireless support in reading th e translation and to all the G etty staff for th e ir continuous atten tio n . I also w ish to express m y gratitude to the translators, Gillian V arndell an d Ian K innes, an d to Jo a n n a C ham pness, th e ed ito r at B ritish M u seu m Press.

7

THE

P R E F A C E TO F RE NCH E DI T I ON

T

JL h e discovery o f the past is n o t ju st

th e h isto rian ’s definition o f his o w n territory. Even the te rm discovery invites us to reflect o n th e m otivation w h ich , since the daw n o f h um an consciousness and history, has led m an k in d to recognise, preserve and at tim es study th e traces o f his predecessors. A lain S ch n ap p s b o o k is a lo n g voyage in tim e, a statem ent w h ich on th e surface m ay seem trivial. It is n o t sacrificed to the cult o f discovery, th e e x c ite m e n t o f excavation, o r the ad m iratio n o f m o n u m e n ts; it seeks to u n d erstan d ra th e r th an to reco u n t. In a w o rk w h ic h , in its tim e (1952), was a considerable publishing success, Gods, Graves and Scholars, C.W. C eram (K urt M arek) con q u ered a w ide public in reveal­

in g th e secrets o f archaeological adventure. A lain Schnapp has chosen a different role. H is b o o k is n o t a h isto ry o f discoveries b u t o f th eir reception. T h ro u g h o u t his investigation he seeks to pen etrate the mys­ tery o f th e c o n tin u ity o f m an k in d in its pursuit o f the past. G eorges D u m ezil co in ed th e phrase ‘u ltra -h isto ry ’ for a particular m e th o d (his ow n), w h ic h revealed th e structure o f In d o -E u ro p ea n m yths from the m ost varied Eurasian narratives. In its tu rn the present w ork sees itself as ‘a sort o f u ltra -a rc h ae o lo g y ’. W h a t is the c o n n e c tio n b e tw ee n K haem w aset, son o f R am eses II, N abonidus, king o f B abylon in the sixth c e n tu ry B C , C icero, Saint A ugustine, Petrarch, R abelais and B o u c h e r de Perthes, th e fo u n d er o f prehistory? Each, in his co n cern for th e past, w ish ed at som e p o in t to take a variety o f in fo rm a tio n from th e earth w ith a view to extracting - from the rough results o f digging - a nam e, a date, a sign; in short, the m aterial aspect o f Clio.

8

THE DI SCOVERY

OF T H E P AS T

H istory, such as it is still practised today, is a p ro d u c t (am ongst others) o f th e R enaissance and th e E n lig h ten m en t. Alain Schnapp, as a g o o d archaeologist, rebuilds (or rath er dism antles) th e layers o n e by o n e and reveals so m u ch th e b e tte r th e origins o f archaeology, w h ich are as old as h u m an ity itself. A h u m an ity w h ic h is n o t confined by the lim its o f th e G ra e c o -R o m a n w orld. It em braces, in fact, the Egyptians, th e Assyrians and th e C hinese, those em pires w h ic h had n eed o f the past to ensure th e present. T his b o o k is a sou n d in g -b o ard for debates, ideas an d discoveries d raw n from scholarship an d h isto riography; it tries to reco n stru ct th e often to rtu o u s paths taken by m en towards a b e tte r u n d erstan d in g o f th e infinite space o f ‘tim es gone by’. E ver since antiquity observers, thinkers and philosophers in C hina and in G reece, ju s t as in th e East, have h a d an in tu itio n o f th e very lo n g h isto ry o f th e w o rld an d o f hum anity. F or over a m illen n iu m in E urope (from S aint A u g u stin e u n til D arw in ), specialists, le a rn e d societies and the ru lin g pow ers in particular, refused to allow th at h u m an history ran to h u n d re d s o f th o u san d s o f years, an d th a t it was th e h ete ro g e n e o u s p ro lo n g atio n o f a still older venture: th e history o f nature. A t the heart o f this b o o k th e reader w ill discover th e ‘h a n d fu l’ o f creative m inds w ho, over th e centuries, ch am p io n ed and finally established the idea o f th e great an tiq u ity o f m ankind. So it is th at the history o f archaeology is a p art o f th e history o f h u m a n k in d con fro n ted by nature, or by the ideal w h ic h w e create for ourselves. T h e illustrations in this b o o k ow e m u ch to the collections o f the B ib lio th e q u e n atio n ale in Paris. T h e D e p a rtm e n ts o f P rints, M a n u ­ scripts, C oins, M edals and A ntiquities have b e en draw n on extensively. W h a t co u ld be m ore natural, especially for the C ab in et o f M edals, the ‘K in g ’s C a b in e t’, w h ic h can be taken for the oldest m useum in France? Closely linked to it are th e fam ous figures o f the C o m te de Caylus and th e A bbe Jean-Jacques Barthelem y. B o th (nobility and clergy) played in th e ir tim e a decisive role in ch anging the perspectives o f archaeology. T h e y thus deserve to be cited as illustrious ‘links in the ch ain ’ from the B ib lio th equ e nationale to th e present w ork. E M M A N U E L LE R O Y L A D U K IE

Professor o f the C ollege de France, D ire c to r o f th e B ibliotheque nationale.

9

P iero di C o sim o , Vulcan and Aeolus, the Teachers o f Humanity, c. 1495—1500. T h e in v en tio n o f th e arts w h ic h distinguish hum ans from anim als was o n e o f the fu nd am en tal th em es o f G ra e c o -R o m a n a n th ropology and was strongly ech o e d d u rin g th e R enaissance. P iero di C o sim o , inspired b y his reading o f V itruvius and B occaccio, d ev o ted an en tire cycle o f paintings to these inventions. H ere, V ulcan is show n at his forge as th e ‘arch-craftsm an an d first te a ch e r o f h u m a n civilisation’ (E. Panofsky). P iero di C osim o was an ard en t advocate o f a re tu rn to n atu re and led ‘a life m o re bestial than h u m a n ’, acco rd in g to th e p o rtrait given o f h im by G io rg io Vasari.

10

INTRODUCTION

A R C H A E O L O G Y A N D

T H E

PRES ENCE T H E

OF

P A S T

THE CO LL EC TO R

OF A N T I Q U I T I E S

I n the se d e c a d e n t ti m e s we f a l l in love w i t h a n t i q u i t i e s a n d a l l o w o ur sel ves -

willingly -

t o be d u p e d . W e s p e n d t h o u s a n d s o n m a n u s c r i p t s a n d

p a i n t i n g s a n d h u n d r e d s more on a u t h e n t i c a t i n g t h e m . C h i p p e d ja de in s i g n i a , b r o n z e seals decor ated w i t h tu rtle s a n d dragons, b r o n z e tiles fr o m t h e B i r d - T o w e r m a d e i n t o i u k - s t o n e s , al l d i s p l a y e d on l a c q u e r e d s h e l v e s ; g o l d e n i n c e n s e - b u r n e r s in t h e s h a p e o f a l i o n on i v o r y s t a n d s , a cup, a goblet, any k i n d o f a n tiq u e vessel -

a n d we comb the a n c i e n t te x t s in order

to v e r i f y t h e i n s c r i p t i o n s . A s i f o b s e s s e d w e s ea r ch n e a r a n d f a r , i n t o o u r ol d ag e . B l o o d r e l a t i v e s d r a g e a c h o t h e r i n f r o n t o f t h e c o u r t s , c l o s e f r i e n d s m i s t r u s t e a c h o t h e r . T h e s e t h i n g s ar e b o u g h t f o r a f o r t u n e b y t h e r i c h , b u t a p o o r m a n w o u l d n o t p a r t w i t h a rice c a k e f o r a n y o f t h e m . Z H E N C , X IE , 1693-1 7 6 5 .Y A N G Z H O U , C H IN A .

r> -1—M y w h a t a u th o rity does archae­ ology exist, an d h o w is it justified? W h o benefits from its practice, an d w h a t is its purp o se? H e re are sites, m o n u m en ts, statues, jew els — all kinds o f artefacts — b u t also, w e are to ld , m u c h less spectacular rem ains, from tin y pieces o f flint d o w n to c o n c en tratio n s o f p h o s­ p hates in th e soil, visible o n ly in a laboratory. In a re c e n t an d p rovocative b o o k th e p h ilo so p h e r and h isto ria n K rzy szto f P o m ian (1987) rem ark ed th at archaeology is n o m ore th an a p resu m p tu o u s b ra n c h o f collectin g , and th at collecting, in so far as its h isto ry can be traced, is p a rt o f b e in g h u m an . H u m a n beings, from

11

T H E D I S C O V E R Y OF T H E P AS T

th e m o m e n t o f th e ir em erg en ce as a cu ltural and biological entity, have in o n e w ay o r a n o th e r collected, preserved and h o ard ed item s w h ic h have n o o th e r significance th an as carriers o f messages from a m o re o r less re m o te past. H ow ever, th at w h ic h co nnects archaeology to co llectin g is n o t th e actual o r perceived a n tiq u ity o f th e o b ject, for o n e m ay co llect c o n te m p o ra ry item s, n o r is it th e act o f co llection itself, for archaeology m ay be p u rely descriptive and n eed n o t involve th e physical e x tra c tio n o f an o b ject fro m th e g ro u n d . T h e vital link b e tw e e n th e tw o is th e status accorded to an o b je ct w h ic h has b e e n iso lated, c o n serv ed , displayed, associated w ith o r d istin g u ish e d from o th e rs as a result o f certain traits observed th ro u g h its analysis. W h e n an ob ject is treated as a signifier (P o m ian ’s semiophore), it m ay be col­ le c te d

and

th e n

su b jec ted

to

v ario u s

processes, o f w h ic h archaeological en q u iry is o n ly one. A rchaeology is, in m y view, the little bastard sister o f co llectin g . L ittle, because restricted in th e ways in w h ic h she can p ro c e e d an d deliver; bastard, because since th e n in e te e n th c e n tu ry at least she has b e e n o p e ra tin g fro m a p o sitio n o f d en ial

(an

arch aeo lo g ist,

as

everyone

know s, is n o t a collector, and archaeologists them selves are at pains to p o in t this o ut). Y uri D o m b ro w sk i, an e x p e rt o n th e su b ­ M erlin raises th e stones o f S to nehenge, show n in a fo u rte e n th -c e n tu ry E nglish m anuscript. In this astonishing illustration M erlin erects Stonehenge. H e was regarded by m any m edieval authors as the fo u n d er o f the arts and the suprem e m agician.

j e c t ,1 said th a t th e archaeologist w o u ld ra th er b e taken fo r a p o lic e­ m an th a n for a co lle c to r (despite th e fact th a t th e police d id n o t have a g o o d re p u ta tio n at A lm a-A ta d u rin g th e 1930s!). H o w low th e self­ esteem o f any archaeologist w o u ld be w h o saw h im self o r h e rse lf as a successor to th e to m b -ro b b e rs o f E g y p t, o r to th e traffickers in m ed iev al relics, o r to th e R e n aissan c e

W underkam m er m entality.

H ow ever, w h e n su b jected to scrutiny th e resem blance b eco m es clear: D o m b ro w sk i’s archaeologist h arries th e pillagers o f the to m b s o f an ob scu re C e n tra l A sian k o lk h o z w h ile th e N K V D

[Soviet secret

p o lic e a g en cy w h ic h was la te r a b so rb e d by th e K G B ] lo oks on, k n o w in g th a t b o th th e pillaging and th e h arry in g are less in n o c e n t th a n th ey m ig h t seem . C h a d i A bdessalam in th e film T h e N ig h t o f C ounting the Years2 is m o re accurate in his d ep ic tio n o f th e arch aeo lo ­

gist as th e leg itim ate rival o f th e traffickers in antiquities. O n e can say

12

INTRODUCTION -

A R C H A E O L O G Y A N D T H E P R E S E N C E OF T H E P A S T

th a t th e arch aeo lo g ist is a co llecto r, b u t o f a p artic u la r k in d , m ore m eticu lo u s th a n th e oth ers, and acco u n table to various institutions, to th e state an d th e public.

M E M O R Y

N E E D S

T H E

E A R T H

T h e s a n d s o f L a r s a , th e m o u n d o f X i ’a n , th e s i t e o f R e t o k a

P ie rre N o ra , in his w ritin g s, rem inds us th a t th ere are places w h ere m e m o ry is stored, places w h ic h carry th e m a rk o f tim e ;3 fro m Lascau x to B e a u b o u rg , th ese are th e secretions o f h isto ry itself. T h e m egaliths o f B rita in an d o f B ritta n y alike have sto o d fo r m illennia as living q u e stio n m arks in th e landscape. M e rlin is d e p ic te d b u ild in g S to n e h e n g e in a fo u rte e n th -c e n tu ry m a n u sc rip t;4 J o h a n P ic a rd t show s giants b u ild in g th e ir e n o rm o u s ‘b e d s’,5 an d w itch es appear co m fo rtab ly installed in tu m u li fu rn ish ed w ith w o o d e n staircases and w in d o w s, dispensing blessings. T h ese are strange an d m arvellous things, even in th e eru d ite w o rk o f a scholar such as W illia m Stukeley.6 O th e r m inds o f a m o re ratio n ally a n ti­ q u arian persuasion w ere to d o c u m e n t m egalithic m o n u m e n ts care­ fully. A six te e n th -c e n tu ry e n g rav in g shows an e n tire e x p e d itio n o f le a rn e d m e n carv in g th e ir nam es o n th e pierre levee n ea r P o itie rs,7 and a plate in W illiam C a m d e n ’s Britannia o f 1600 s gives us w h a t is p robably o n e o f th e earliest k n o w n illustrations o f an excavation: tw o figures are d ig g in g in fro n t o f th e rin g o f S to n e h e n g e a n d beside th e m appear a skull and som e fem urs. H o w ev er far b ack w e lo o k , th e m o n u m e n t as an o b ject o f interest has appealed ju s t as m u c h to th e im a g in a tio n as to reason. T h e his­ to ry o f archaeology c a n n o t be d ivorced fro m this d ich o to m y w h ich , in a way, is p a rt and parcel o f th e subject. B u t before atte m p tin g to trace th e lo n g ro u te by w h ic h th e cu rio u s b ecam e first antiquarians, th e n archaeologists, w e m ust stop an d lo o k at w h a t is, in a way, the first h isto rical ev id en ce o f th e p ractice o f archaeology. T his is a b ric k w ith a c u n e ifo rm in sc rip tio n fo u n d at Larsa in Iraq, w h ic h dates to th e sixth c e n tu ry

BC.

It is a difficult d o c u m e n t, since it refers c o n ­

stantly to an histo rical tra d itio n an d to a w o rld far rem oved from o u r ow n. B u t if w e can get past o u r initial alienation and accept this text, w e shall see th a t it dem o n strates th e B abylonians’ desire for historical leg itim acy and fo r dynastic continuity. I am Nabonidus, king o f Babylon, shepherd, nam ed by M arduk, provider

13

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

T h e pierre levee near Poitiers. This six te en th -ce n tu ry engraving from B raun and H o g e n b e rg ’s atlas, Civitates orbis terramm, shows the fam ous Poitiers m egalith, already w e ll-k n o w n from Rabelais. In te rp re te d as a m an m ade post-diluvial c o n stru ctio n , it is here show n covered w ith the carved nam es o f the m ost n o ted geographers o f the p eriod.

Scenes o f prim itive life, engraved by Jo h an P icardt in 1660. Picardt, a D u tch pastor, drew on m edieval superstitions in his dram atised scenes o f ‘prim itiv es’.

fo r Esagil and E zid a , who m ultiplies the offerings, who restores the cities o f the great gods, with providing hands, sum ptuous with the temples, provider o f the sanctuaries, who increases the gifts, unflagging emissary, conqueror o f the high mountains, thoughtful shepherd, leader o f the people, he who the lord o f the gods, M arduk, has firm ly pronounced as the one to provide the cities and restore the sanctuaries [...]. W h en the great lord o f heaven and earth, Sham ash, shepherd o f the Black-headed peo p le 9, lord o f h u m a n ity 11’ — Larsa, his resident town, the E-babbar, his house o f dilection, which had long been a desert and become ruins, beneath dust and rubble, a great heap o f earth, was covered to the p o in t where its setting was no longer recognisable, its p lan no longer visible11 — under the reign o f m y predecessor king N ebuchadnezzar, son o f Nabopolassar, the dust was lifted and the m ound o f earth which covered the town and temple, disclosing the temenos o f the E-babbar o f an old king, Burnaburiash, a predecessor, but the search was made, w ithout discovery, fo r the temenos o f a more ancient king. H e rebuilt the E -babbar on the observed temenos o f Burnaburiash to house the great lord Sham ash [...]. It was thus that in the year 10, on a favourable day for m y reign, during m y eternal royalty beloved by Sham ash, Sham ash remembered his fo rm er dwelling; he happily decided from his chapel on the ziggurat to re-establish, better than before, and it is to me, king N abonidus, his provider, to whom he entrusted the task o f restoring the E -babbar and remaking his house o f dilection. B y order o f the great lord M arduk, the winds o f the four quarters arose,

14

15

T H E D I S C O V E R Y OF T H E P AS T

16

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

great storms: the dust which covered town and tem ple was lifted; the E babbar, the m ighty sanctuary , could be seen [...]. From the seat o f Sham ash and A ya, fro m the raised chapel o f the ziggurat, the eternal holy place, the eternal chamber appeared the temenos; their plan became visible. I read there the inscription o f the ancient king H am m urabi, who had built fo r Sham ash, seven hundred years before Burnaburiash, the E -babbar on the ancient temenos and I understood its meaning. I adored w ith trembling; I worried, I thought, ‘T he wise king Burnaburiash rebuilt the temple and had the great lord, Sham ash, live there. For me, f...J this temple and its restoration’ [...]. I swore m yself to the word o f m y greatest lord M arduk, and to those o f the lords o f the universe, Sham ash and A d a d ; also m y heart exulted, m y liver

T h e site o f S to n eh en g e in an engraving from W illiam C a m d e n ’s Britannia (1600).T his plate, o n e o f the earliest kno w n illustrations o f an excavation, presents a relatively realistic view o f the site, even if the ossa humana u n e arth e d by the diggers in the low er left seem to be the bones o f a giant.

enflam ed; m y tasks became clear and I set about m obilising workers for Sham ash and M arduk, holding the pick, carrying the shovel, m oving the basket. I sent them en masse to rebuild the E-babbar, the m ighty temple, m y exalted sanctuary. Specialists exam ined the setting where the temenos had been fo u n d

to

understand its decoration. In a favourable m onth, on a propitious day, from the E-babbar, the temple o f dilec­ tion o f Sham ash and A y a , the sanctuary, their divine dwelling, the room o f their delights following the ancient decor o f H a m ­ murabi, I placed bricks upon the temenos o f the ancient king H am m urabi. I rebuilt this temple in the ancient style and I decorated its structure. For the link o f heaven and ea rth ,'2 his house o f dilection, I raised the roof beam. I finished the construction o f the E-babbar fo r Sham ash and A ya and built the access j...] . T h a t which was not accorded to any king, m y great lord, S ham ash, accorded to me, fo r me, his devotee, and entrusted it to me. I fin ely rebuilt

F o u n d a tio n tablet o f the tem ple o f Larsa in Iraq, dating to the sixth c e n tu ry B C .T h i s cu n eifo rm in scription is the first w ritte n evidence o f the awareness and practice of archaeological excavation.

the E -babbar properly in the ancient style, for m y lords, Sham ash and A ya , and I restored it. 1 place, on a tablet o f alabaster, the inscription o f the ancient king H am m urabi that I have read there with m y otvn and I replace it th erefo r ever.

T h e sands o f Larsa have given us ail astonishing d o c u m e n t, perhaps th e first w ritte n testam en t to th e aw areness and practice o f archaeol­ ogy. N a b o n id u s (556—539

BC)

was clearly n o t th e first to carry o u t

excavations to recover th e traces o f a distant predecessor — he tells us h im self th at N e b u c h a d n e zz a r II (605—562 B u rn a b u ria sh (1359—1333

BC)

BC)

fo u n d th e tem p le o f

— b u t w h a t is e x tra o rd in a ry in this

17

T H E D I S C O V E R Y OF T H E P AST

a c c o u n t is th a t he is acting consciously and m ethodically. T h e B aby­ lo n ia n k in g show s n o desire sim ply to lo cate a place lo ad e d w ith sym bolic m ean in g , o r to u n co v e r a m o n u m e n t w h ic h dem onstrates th e c o n tin u ity o f pow er. H e explicitly w ishes to establish his place in th e longue duree, and th e expression o f tim e here assumes a m aterial d im en sio n . E xcavation is necessary n o t only to reveal th e abode o f m em ory, b u t also —and above all —to activate it. A rchaeologists k n o w (and N a b o n id u s k n ew b e tte r th a n any) th at all excavation is d estru c­ tio n . T h e e a rth is a b o o k w h o se pages are o b lite ra te d as w e le a f th ro u g h th e m , an d o n ly c o n se rv atio n allow s us to slow d o w n th e ravages o f tim e. N a b o n id u s, his w o rk m e n , scribes an d architects w o u ld n o t have disagreed. To co n clu d e th e ir e n terp rise successfully it was n o t e n o u g h to find and sym bolically co n firm a prestigious place, a sym bol o f pow er; it h ad to be id en tified and restored. In d o in g this, w ritin g played a vital part. T h e scribe w h o d ecip h ered H a m m u ra b i’s (1792—1750 b c ) in sc rip tio n established th e a u th e n tic ity o f th e site and c o n firm e d th e len g th o f th e m onarchy. (N abonidus, u n like N e b ­ uchad n ezzar, was n o t c o n te n t w ith th e B u rn ab u riash inscrip tio n ; he fo u n d an d d e c ip h e re d H a m m u ra b i’s in sc rip tio n w h ic h was seven h u n d re d years older.) In so d o in g th e scribe en d o w ed the reign o f N a b o n id u s w ith hopes o f a lo n g ev ity equal to th at o f his predecessor, and to m ake th e p o in t absolutely clear, he added a n ew in sc rip tio n to th e old, signalling across th e years th at N ab o n id u s was a n e w H a m ­ m urabi. H ow ever, th e excavation and th e in scrip tio n (old and new ) w ere still n o t en o u g h . In re sto rin g th e tem p le th e architects added so m e th in g m ore: th e y installed a tangible sign o f an cien t tim e in th e landscape, w h ic h was to be perceived and iden tified w ith a revisited past, a living past; w e speak today o f a past m useologised. S uch a process m ay seem su rp risin g b ut, as w e shall see, it is n o t to o far rem o v e d fro m w h a t w e today call archaeology. T h e tab let fro m Larsa affirm s ex p licitly th a t th e m a teria l w o rld is n o t ju s t a space for m e n to o ccu p y and use, b u t a te rrito ry to be characterised sym bolically, to be m arked. It is in this m ark in g o f th e earth, how ever fragile and tem porary, th a t th e p o w er o f archaeology lies. W e have to engage w ith th e id ea th a t o th e r h u m a n b eings, m aybe to m o rro w , m aybe in a few h o u rs ’ tim e, m aybe a few years o r c e n tu rie s from now , w ill lo o k u p o n o u r traces. U n d e rsto o d in this way, th e archaeo­ logical consciousness is b o rn m o re o f co n fro n ta tio n w ith th e future th a n w ith th e past. T h e h u n te r-g a th e re rs w h o covered th e ir traces k n e w th at th ey m ust leave as few signs as possible, and in rem oving

18

INTRODUCTION -

ARCHAEOLOGY AND

T H E P R E S E N C E OF T H E PAS T

th e evidence o f th e ir passing show ed th at th ey w ere conscious o f th e possibility o f b e in g lo cated an d identified. S om e nascent awareness o f a relatio n sh ip b e tw e e n space an d tim e w h ic h m ig h t b e te rm e d ‘m in i­ m alist arch aeo lo g y ’ can be seen here. A sig n ifican t b o u n d a ry separates th e slight traces o f th e Palae­ o lith ic h u n te r-g a th e re rs fro m th e su m p tu o u s m o n u m e n ts o f th e E a ste rn em pires, an d this c a n n o t be crossed w ith o u t risk. Yet any m ark left u p o n sand, clay o r w o o d presupposes th e existence of, and th e awareness of, such traces, h ow ever subtle o r faint. T h e rulers o f E g y p t, th e F ertile C re sc e n t o r C h in a k n e w this well: th e ir m o n u ­ m en tal and fu n erary art was a challenge to tim e. T h e y set o u t to leave an im m u ta b le stam p u p o n th e ea rth , o n e w h ic h w o u ld resist the d ep red atio n s o f th e seasons, n atu ral disasters and p o ten tial destroyers. T h e pyram ids d e m o n stra te d th e p o w er o f th e pharaohs and h id from v ie w

(and

fro m

thieves)

th e

w e a lth

w h ic h

ac c o m p a n ie d

th e

deceased. T h e m o n u m e n t is displayed w h ilst th e objects are safely h id d e n w ith in it, b u t th e ir presen ce is evident. W h a t is m ore, they can be described; th e to m b can be read as a scale m ap o f th e entire c o u n try : invisible certainly, b u t in such a p e rfe c t state th at th e acco u n ts co u ld n o t fail to b ear w itness to it. T h e te x t w h ic h follow s was w ritte n by Sim a Q ia n and dates to the en d o f th e second ce n ­ tu ry

BC;

it describes th e to m b o f Q in Shi H u an g d i, th e first em p ero r

o f u n ified C h in a d u rin g th e seco n d h a lf o f th e th ird c e n tu ry

BC:

In the ninth m onth the First Em peror was interred at M t. L i. W hen the emperor f u s t came to the throne he began digging and shaping M t. L i. Later, when he unified the empire, he had over 7 0 0 ,0 0 0 men fro m all over the empire transported to the spot. T h ey dug down to the third layer o f under­ ground springs and poured in bronze to m ake the outer coffin. Replicas o f palaces, scenic towers, and the hundred officials, as well as rare utensils and wonderful objects, were brought to fill up the tomb. Craftsmen were ordered to set up crossbows and arrows, rigged so they would im m ediately shoot down anyone attem pting to break in. M ercury was used to fashion im itations o f the hundred rivers, the Yellow R iver and the Yangtze, and the seas, constructed in such a way that they seemed to flow. A bove were representations o f all the heavenly bodies, below, the features o f the earth. M a n -fis h ’ oil was used for lamps, which were calculated to burn fo r a long time w ithout going o u t.[i The Second Em peror said, ‘O f the wom en in the harem o f the fo rm er ruler, it would be unfitting to have those who bore no sons sent elsewhere.’A ll were accordingly ordered to accompany the dead man, which resulted in the death o f m any women.

19

THE DI SCOVERY

OF T H E P A S T

A fter the interment had been completed, someone pointed out that the arti­ sans and craftsmen who had built the tomb knew what was buried there, and if they should leak word o f the treasures, it would be a serious affair. Therefore, after the articles had been placed in the tomb, the inner gate was dosed o ff and the outer gate lowered, so that all the artisans and craftsmen were shut in the tomb and were unable to g et out. Trees and bushes were planted to give the appearance o f a m ountain . 14

V isitors to X i’an today can still see the m o u n d (w hich rem ains unexcavated) cov­ e rin g th e first em peror. E xcavations at the p e rip h e ry o f th e m o u n d c a rrie d o u t by c o n te m p o ra ry

C h in e se

a rch a eo lo g ists1^

have revealed th e largest te rra c o tta arm y ever fo u n d b e n e a th th e earth, a rm e d w ith G eneral view o f the b urial m o u n d o f E m p ero r Q in Shi H u a n g d i at X i’an in C hina.

bow s and crossbow s. T h e row s o f h o rsem en an d in fan try acco m p a­ n ie d by th e ir officers c o rre sp o n d perfectly to th e sym bolic w o rld in m icro co sm d escrib ed in th e te x t o f Sim a Q ian . A n d w h ile th e C h i­ nese archaeologists have y et to b e g in excavation o f th e im p e rial to m b itself, initial surveys16 in d icate a large co n c e n tra tio n o f m ercu ry in th e area o f th e m o u n d ... In ju s t th e sam e w ay as N ab o n id u s, th e em p ero r and his co u nsel­ lors set o u t to m ark th e ir te rrito ry w ith an indelible sign o f th e ir sovereignty, an d in so d o in g they w e n t even fu rth e r in e x p lo rin g a p a th o u tlin e d tw o th o u sa n d years later by th e A rg e n tin ia n w rite r Jo rg e Luis B orges: th ey drew a m ap o f the em pire, a m ap o f im perial

T h e terracotta arm y o f the E m p ero r Q in Shi H uan g d i, third c en tu ry u c .T h is is one o f the m o st fabulous archaeological discoveries m ade in C hina. B u ried m ore than a k ilo m etre from the im p erial tum ulus, soldiers, officers and cavalrym en w ere arranged in lines as in the plan opposite.

d im ensions w h ic h overlay th e em pire itself.’7 Ju st as th e m ap recre­ ates th e te rrito ry , so th e w o rld o f the dead fossilises th at o f th e living. It is n o t difficult to im ag in e those leaders, engaged to th e p o in t o f obsession w ith such a paradox. To draw atte n tio n to th e to m b they h ad to co llect th e m o st splendid o f m asterpieces and com m ission the m o st so p histicated arch itectu re, w hilst sim ultaneously e n su rin g p ro ­ te c tio n against thieves (w ho m ig h t even be the k in g ’s successors).T he d eath o f lab o u rers an d arch itects was as necessary a p a rt o f th e process as th e d e p th o f th e trenches o r th e strength o f th e walls. T h e B abylonian k in g and the C h in ese em p e ro r did n o t have quite th e same vision o f tim e, because th e n atu re o f th e ir p o w er was differ­ en t. N a b o n id u s was asserting c o n tin u ity o f succession w ith th e m ost au g u st o f his ancestors. Shi H u a n g d i w ish e d to be th e first, th e fo u n d e r, so m u st have n o predecessors b u t o n ly successors: H e

20

INTRODUCTION

-

A R C H A E O L O G Y A N D T H E P R E S E N C E OF T H E PAST

2?

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

d ream ed o f fo u n d in g an im m o rtal dynasty; he decreed th at his heirs sh o u ld be called S eco n d E m peror, T h ird E m peror, F o u rth E m peror, and so o n to in fin ity .18 Yet w h atev er th e ir separate visions, th e king o f B abylon and th e C h in ese ru le r w ere in te n t o n m ark in g th e earth w ith a p e rm a n e n t sym bol o f th e ir sovereignty. B ric k , sto n e, m arb le — are these really th e best bastions o f m em o ry ? In G reece o f th e fifth c e n tu ry BC, o n e voice was raised in d efence o f th e living m e m o ry o f m e n against th e in e rtia and fragility o f m o n u m e n ts. In a fam o u s p o e m P in d a r puts th e case fo r w ords versus m a rb le :19 L isten! It is the field o f A phrodite w ith the fluttering eyes or the Graces we labor now. We approach the templed centerstone o f the thunderous earth. There stands builded for the glory o f E m m en o s’ children and Akragas o f the river, and for Xenokrates, a treasure house o f song fo r victory at Pytho in A p o llo ’s glen, with its burden o f gold. N either rain driven from afar on the storm, not the merciless armies o f the crying cloud, no w ind shall sweep it, caught and stricken w ith the blown debris into the corners o f the sea. T he fro n t shines in the clear air, Thrasyboulos, on your father announcing fo r you and yours the pride o f a chariot victory in the fo ld s o f Krisa — a tale to run on the lips o f m en .2i)

T h e m o n u m e n t w h ic h P in d ar d ed icated to X en o crates o f A g rig e n to (Akragas), c h a m p io n o f th e D elp h ic ch ario t races, is n o t b u ilt in stone. It is a p o e m — fragile stuff, b u t for all th a t m ore e n d u rin g th a n sto n e o r bronze. Intan g ible, incapable o f subversion and so u n d er th a n an in s c rip tio n , th e p o e m is an o rig in a l w o rk , e n tru ste d to m em ory. In th e face o f all th e apparatus o f th e great em pires, th e ir hierarch ies an d th e ir riches, P in d a r proclaim s th e p re -e m in e n c e o f m em o ry ; an d because G reek cu ltu re also em braces th e plastic arts, he sets th e in c o rru p tib le n atu re o f th e p o e m against th e greatest o f these arts. T h e revenge o f th e h u m b le u p o n th e m ighty? O f th e p o o r u p o n

22

INTRODUCTION -

ARCHAEOLOGY AND

T H E P R E S E N C E OF T H E P AS T

th e rich ? D o p o em s an d songs rep resen t an altern ativ e to m o n u ­ m ents? A re th e y able to c o m m e m o ra te h u m a n ity d o w n th e c e n ­ turies? In a w ay P in d a r was rig h t, and th e archaeolgoist Jose G aranger has given us at least som e e v id en ce o f this. L et us follow h im to M elanesia, to th e N e w H eb rid es, w h e re the archaeologist has to play th e e th n o g ra p h e r in o rd e r to lin k th e archaeological rem ains to the u n w r itte n h isto ry o f th e m o d e rn p o p u la tio n . H e d ep en d s on th e te c h n iq u e s

o f stratig rap h y

an d

ra d io c a rb o n

( C l 4) d atin g to fo rm th e bases o f a chronology. In his research in to th e c o lo n isa tio n o f th e N e w H eb rid es, G a ra n g e r21 d rew u p o n th e m ain fo u n d a tio n n arrativ e o f n ative oral tra d itio n . A cco rd in g to this, R o y M ata, th e leg en dary first settler, established a c h ie fd o m o n th e p rin cip al island o f E fate w h ic h q u ic k ly e m b ra c e d th e w h o le gro u p . O n his d eath an im p o rta n t ce re ­ m o n y to o k place o n th e co ral islet o f R e to k a , n o rth -w e s t o f E fate, an d rep resen tativ es o f th e p rin c ip a l clans w ere b u rie d alive at his side. R e to k a was clearly an area o f p o te n tia l archaeo­ log ical im p o rta n c e an d ex cavations th e re soon revealed a m ajo r fu n erary c o m p lex w ith features c o rre s p o n d in g ex actly to th e le g e n d o f R o y M ata. L et us lo o k at G a ra n g e r’s co m p arativ e analysis o f narrative an d excavation: T he information gathered from oral tradition is con­ firm ed and enhanced by the results obtained via the methods o f prehistoric archaeology.

‘R o y M ata lived lo n g b efo re th e days o f T i T ongoa Liseiriki.’22 A date o f A D 1 2 6 5 + 1 4 0 years obtained fro m bone collagen is correct ivithin two or three hundred years.

‘H e was a very im p o rta n t chief.’ H is tomb is by far the grandest o f any studied in the South Pacific, as much for the num ber o f individuals collec­

V iew o f the A thenian T reasury at D elphi. It was to this type o f m o n u m e n t, b uilt to last for centuries, that Pindar (fifth c en tu ry b c ) com pared his poem s, proclaim ing th e ir even m ore e n d u rin g qualities.

tively buried there as fo r the richness o f the grave goods.

‘H e was b u rie d o n R e to k a at th e fo o t o f tw o sta n d in g stones.’ C onfirm ed exactly.

‘R ep resentativ es o f every clan o w in g h im allegiance w ere b u rie d alive.’ Excavation was unable to verify this, apart from the young woman buried at the fe e t o f R o y M ata. Were the men ju s t drugged with kava, or poisoned? Were the wom en stunned or strangled before being buried? A ll we

23

T H E D I S C O V E R Y OF T H E P AS T

know is that live burial was still being practised when the first missionaries arrived

R o y M a ta ’s importance would be sufficient to explain the obser­

vance of this custom at the time of his departure to the land o f the dead /.. ‘Others were sacrificed too.’ T h is is certainly the case with the offering placed in the centre o f the tomb. T he bones o f these individuals are virtually articulated (the limbs were bent in order to j i t them in), and some still wear items o f dance costume. There are also individals, sometimes mutilated, scat­ tered w ithin the northern zone o f the site.

‘M e m b e rs o f R o y M a ta ’s e n to u ra g e w ere b u rie d close to h im .’ These were the young woman, the man and the couple found in the deep grave.2''’

T h e rest o f G aran g er’s excursus is ju s t as fascinating, b u t it is suffi­ c ie n t h ere (and after c o n sid e ra tio n o f a few o f th e e x tra o rd in a ry pieces o f evidence revealed by th e exca­ vation) to observe th a t a very precise fu n era ry ritu a l has reac h ed us in tact fro m a p o in t in tim e seven h u n d re d years distant, n o t ju s t th ro u g h th e testi­ m o n y o f the soil, b u t th ro u g h the m e m o ­ ries o f th e native story tellers, w hose w o rk has n ev er ceased. C o n firm a tio n in d e e d o f P in d a r’s b o ld assertion th at m e m o ry is to u g h e r th an m arble, b u t also a v icto ry o f w ords over m atter. T h e T h e R o v M ata burin discovered by Jose G aran^er in 1964.

co m p an io n s o f R o y M ata w o u ld n o t, like N a b o n id u s, e n tru st th e ir m e m o ry to th e b ricks o f th e palace, o r to th e surfaces o f tablets; they w o u ld n o t, like th e em p e ro r o f C h in a, b u ild a to m b to the d im e n ­ sions o f th e in h a b ite d w o rld. H o w ev er, th ey w o u ld b e q u e a th to fu tu re g enerations th e m e m o ry o f an ex cep tio n al ritu al celebration m ade th e m o re m em o rab le by th e practice o f h u m an sacrifice. N o n e e d for m o n u m e n ta l elabo ration: on th e small island o f R e to k a , ju st tw o stan d in g stones testify to th e tru th o f th e narrative. M e m o ry needs th e earth in ord er to survive. W h e th e r in scrib ed in sto n e, b ric k o r p a rc h m e n t, o r flo w in g in h u m a n m e m o ry by the agency o f bard o r p o et, a fo u n d a tio n narrative m ust ro o t itself in the land, invest itself w ith th at reality w h ic h is sealed w ith in th e soil. It m a tte rs little i f th a t seal is n ev er b ro k e n , as lo n g as th e re is som e c o rn e r o f th e land w h ic h bears w itness to its existence. T his is the essence o f th e th in line w h ic h separates archaeology from collection; for th e archaeologist it is n o t e n o u g h th a t th e objects m ake sense,

24

INTRODUCTION -

A R C H A E O L O G Y A N D T H E P R E S E N C E OF T H E P AS T

th e y m u st b e lin k e d to a place, to an

^ „

area, to practices w h ic h allow th e m to

?

b e v ie w e d as assignable, in te rp re ta b le e n tities.

In

th e

n in e te e n th

c e n tu ry

-

jM -

Jacq u es B o u c h e r de P erth es strove to

p

see th e artificer b e h in d th e a rtefact.24 F ro m th e E gyptians to th e B ab y lo n i-

:

>