Anthropology Times

Trends in the Study of Later European Prehistory
Annual Review of Anthropology
Vol. 16: 365-382 (Volume publication date October 1987)
S J Shennan
In lieu of an abstract, the publisher reproduces the first page of the article. (Link)

Letters to My Tutor…

My dearest Simone,

Reading “Trends in the Study of Later European Prehistory” I felt a poke in the direction of actually getting caught up on current events. And lucky me, I have several great newspapers on my desk at the moment. I tend to prefer thinking in terms of trends and types, but it’s good sometimes to take note of the current particulars.

A comment about the thinking of Gordon Childe seemed to me a commentary on current trends in Western cultures or at least U.S. culture. The comment contrasts cultures of the Near East with then emerging European cultures: “The Near East was the ultimate source of innovations and ideas; but after the growth of civilization, Near Eastern society became stagnant and oppressive; superstition ruled technology and suppressed innovation; society became totalitarian. European society, however, was open. Technological innovation was not subject to social control…” This type of thinking sticks out to me as something to toss around when viewing trends in the interactions between politics and academia in America as well the changing relationship between West and East, but I don’t feel that I have a lot of particulars to which to point

Is there some relationship between bursts of technological advancement and growing desires to turn to superstition and oppression? Will stagnation in one part of the world encourage innovation in another part of the world, and will that encouragement lead to greater freedom in that part of the world? Thinking of the West as a declining power and the East as an emerging power… Are declining powers more suspicious of innovation because they are afraid that new technologies will bring further decline, while emerging powers are more welcoming of innovation because they believe that new technologies will bring further progress? And how does all this work itself out culturally?

The article speaks of applying new approaches (in this case, structuralism, French neo-Marxism and German critical theory) to data and to fields of study (in this case data and archaeology having to do with later European prehistory). The discussion speaks to the fact that it’s so easy to highlight information that fits a certain theoretical framework while ignoring significant information that doesn’t happen to fit. I find sometimes that the purest fun can be had by tossing around ideas within the framework of some debunked theory. There’s no obsession with “rightness” or “truth.” There just the fun of bringing a new perspective to familiar ideas and seeing what new thoughts spring from that.

I’ll end with that.

S.