Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Society for American Archaeology is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
American Antiquity.
http://www.jstor.org
MadonnaL. Moss
Recentpapers by Michelle Hegmon(2003) and Joe Watkins(2003) purport to "mapthe terrain" of NorthAmericanarchae-
ology. Yetthese two metaphoricalmaps present very differentviews of the contours of NorthAmerican archaeology. Taken
together,the two papers highlightproblematic divisions between (1) theory and practice in North American archaeology,
and (2) academic archaeology and cultural resource management.Whatare the roles archaeological theoryplays in the
contemporarypractice of archaeology? Whydo discussions of archaeological theory have so little to offer stakeholders
other than academic archaeologists? Although Hegmon has shown many areas of convergence in archaeological theory,
her depiction of "processual-plus"archaeologies dulls the edge of postprocessual critiques of the processual status quo. I
argue thatfeminist, Marxist, and postcolonial archaeologies cannot be subsumedby this label because some of theirprac-
titioners aspire to contributeto social change beyond the realm of archaeology itself Thesepractitioners realize that the
practice of archaeology always has political consequences, not just for academic archaeologists, butfor a diverse set of
stakeholders.
Los ensayos recientesde Michele Hegmon (2003) y de Joe Watkins(2003) pretenden "trazarel terreno"de la arqueologia
norteamericana.Con todo, estos dos mapas metaforicospresentan vistas muy diversas de los contornos de la arqueologia
norteamericana.Tornados juntos, los dos ensayos destacanlas divisionesproblemdticasentre(1) teoriay prdctica en la arque-
ologia norteamericana,y (2) arqueologiaacademica y el manejode recursosculturales.i Cudles son los roles que la teoria
arqueologicajuegaen la prdctica contempordneade la arqueologia? i?or que las discusionesde la teoria arqueologicatienen
tanpoco para ofrecera los interesadoscon excepcionde arqueologosacademicos? AunqueHegmonha demostradomuchas
areas de convergenciaen las teorias arqueologicas,su descripcion de las arqueologias "processual-plus"amortiguaelfilo
de las criticas "post-processuales"del status quo "processual."Yoargumentoque las arqueologiasfeminista, Marxista,y
post-colonial no puedan ser confinadaspor esta etiqueta,porque algunos de sus practicantesaspiran a contribuiral cambio
social mas alia del dmbitomismode la arqueologia.Estos practicantesse dan cuenta que la prdctica de la arqueologiatiene
siempreconsecuenciaspoliticas, no solamentepara los arqueologosacademicos, sino tambien para una variedadde intere-
sados.
the recent special section of this journal, In the same sectionof thejournal,Joe Watkins
"Mappingthe Terrainof AmericanistArchae- (2003) describessome of the fault lines that still
ology," Michelle Hegmon (2003) presents a separateNativeAmericansandFirstNationsfrom
comprehensibletaxonomyand useful analysisof archaeologists.His perspectiveon the contempo-
recenttheoreticaltrendsandtopicalissuesin North rarypracticeof archaeologyin NorthAmericais
Americanarchaeology.Hegmon'stone is produc- moreguardedandpessimisticthanthatof Hegmon.
tive andoptimistic;she writes, Watkinswrites,
581
is archaeological theory-building and other Professor Phil Young, University of Oregon, translatedthe
approachesthataimto achievebroadersocialgoals. abstractinto Spanishin recordtime with his persistentgood
cheer. I also the work of EditorMike Jochim and
By softeningtheedges of postprocessual,Marxist, his assistant,appreciate
Melissa Lambright, at the University of
feminist, and postcolonialcritiquesof archaeol- California,Santa Barbara,and John Neikirk at SAA head-
ogy, it becomeseasierto claim thatideas deriving quartersfor their help with the revised manuscript.
from these archaeologieshave been incorporated
into the mainstream(Hegmon2003:217). But the
References Cited
insights that most seriously challenge the status
quo of archaeologicalpracticehavenot madetheir Conkey,MargaretW.
2003 Has FeminismChangedArchaeology?Signs: Jour-
full impact. nal of Womenin Cultureand Society28(3):867-880.
As illustratedby Watkins,manyNorthAmeri- Crumley,Carole(editor)
can archaeologistshavenotrecognizedthe gravity 1994 HistoricalEcology,CulturalKnowledge,and Chang-
of NativeAmericancritiquesof archaeology.The ingLandscapes.Schoolof AmericanResearchPress,Santa
Fe, New Mexico.
conceptualgap betweenHegmon'sandWatkins's Dongoske,KurtE., MarkAldenderfer,andKarenDoehner(edi-
assessments of North American archaeology tors)
2000 WorkingTogether:NativeAmericans& Archaeolo-
demonstratesdeep rifts betweentheoryand prac-
gists.SocietyforAmericanArchaeology,Washington, D.C.
tice. Even thoughHegmon(2003:224-225) asks, Duke, Philip,andDean J. Saitta
"WhosePastIs It?"the centralityof this question 1998 An Emancipatory ArchaeologyfortheWorkingClass.
to the day-to-day practice of North American Assemblage4, Universityof SheffieldGraduateStudent
Journal of Archaeology. Electronic document,
archaeologyis lost. If CRMarchaeologyis merely http://www.shef.ac.uk/assem/4/4duk_sai.html, accessed
"processual-plus,"perhapsthat helps explain at September28, 2004.
Jon M.
least partof the problem.The critiquesof practi- Erlandson,
1998 The Makingof ChumashTradition:Repliesto Haley
tionersinsidethe professionandstakeholdersout- andWilcoxon.CurrentAnthropology39:477^-85.
side the professionare not fully acknowledgedin Ferguson,T. J.
1996 NativeAmericansand the Practiceof Archaeology.
Hegmon's typology of contemporaryarchaeolo- AnnualReviewof Anthropology25:63-79.
gies in NorthAmerica. 2003 AnthropologicalArchaeologyConductedby Tribes:
Not all archaeologistsagreethatit is necessary TraditionalCulturalPropertiesandCulturalAffiliation.In
orevendesirableto makearchaeological rel- Archaeologyis Anthropology,edited by Susan D. Gille-
theory spie andDeborahL. Nichols,pp. 137-144. Archeological
evant to stakeholdersoutside of archaeology.Yet Papersof theAmericanAnthropologicalAssociation,No.
archaeologyandheritagepreservation havebecome 13, Arlington,Virginia.
RobertG.
big businessandarchaeologistsnow holdpositions Goodby, 1994 Processualism, Postprocessualism, and Cultural
withpowerto legitimateor authenticate certaincul- Resource Management in New England. In Cultural
turalpracticesandtraditions(Scher2004). Moreis ResourceManagement:ArchaeologicalResearch,Preser-
at stake than ever before. I agree with Hegmon vationPlanning,and Public Educationin the Northeast-
ern United States, edited by JordanKerber,pp. 51-63.
(2003:234) that North American archaeologists Bergin& Garvey,Westport,Connecticut.
shouldpaymoreattentionto generaltheorybecause Gosden,Christopher
it "conditions 1999 Anthropologyand Archaeology:A ChangingRela-
themannerinwhichwe seetheworld."
tionship.Routledge,New York.
Ourhabitof adoptingtheoreticalfashiontrendsfrom Hegmon,Michelle
oursisterdisciplines,however,oftenresultsin a rel- 2003 SettingTheoreticalEgosAside:IssuesandTheoryin
North American Archaeology. American Antiquity
ativelypoorfitbetweentheoryandpractice(as well 68:213-243.
as appearingchronicallyout-of-dateto othersocial Ivy, Don, andR. Scott Byram
scientists).Insteadof "hitandrun"borrowing,we 2001 CoquilleCulturalHeritageandWetlandArchaeology.
In EnduringRecords: The Environmentaland Cultural
mightmoreproductivelyandmoredeeplyacknowl- Heritage of Wetlands, edited by Barbara Purdy, pp.
edge thathow we constructthe past has relevance 120-131. OxbowBooks, Oxford.
to peopleotherthanourselves. King,ThomasF.
1998 CulturalResourceLaws and Practice: an Introduc-
Acknowledgments. I am most grateful to Tim Kohler, tory Guide.AltaMiraPress,WalnutCreek,California.
Michael Schiffer, Larry Zimmerman,and one anonymous Kirk,Ruth,andRichardD. Daugherty
1974 Huntersof the Whale.WilliamMorrow,New York.
reviewer who read the initial version of this paper and pro-
Leone, Mark,ParkerPotter,Jr.,andPaulShackel
vided many constructivecomments.I thankJoe Watkinsand 1987 Towardsa CriticalArchaeology.CurrentAnthropol-
LindaCordell,who gave helpful feedbackon a laterversion. ogy 28:283-302.
Lightfoot,KentG. Spector,JanetD.
1995 CultureContactStudies:RedefiningtheRelationship 1993 WhatThis Awl Means: FeministArchaeologyat a
between Prehistoricand HistoricalArchaeology.Ameri- WahpetonDakota Village.MinnesotaHistoricalSociety
can Antiquity60:199-217. Press,St. Paul.
2005 Indians,Missionaries,andMerchants:theLegacyof 2000 Collaborationat InyanCeyakaAtonwan(Village at
ColonialEncounterson the CaliforniaFrontiers.Univer- the Rapids).In WorkingTogether:Native Americans&
sity of CaliforniaPress,Berkeley. Archaeologists,editedby K. E. Dongoske,M. Aldender-
Lyman,R. Lee andKennethP. Cannon fer, andKarenDoehner,pp. 133-138. Society forAmeri-
2004 Zooarchaeologyand ConservationBiology. Univer- can Archaeology,Washington,D.C.
sity of UtahPress,Salt LakeCity. Sprague,Roderick
McGuire,RandallH. 1974 AmericanIndiansandAmericanArchaeology.Amer-
1992 A MarxistArchaeology. AcademicPress,SanDiego. icanArchaeology39(1):1-2.
Meskell,Lynn Stapp,DarbyC, andMichaelS. Burney
2002 The Intersectionsof Identityand Politics in Archae- 2002 TribalCulturalResourceManagement:the Full Cir-
ology.AnnualReviewof Anthropology3 1:279-30 1. cle to Stewardship.AltaMiraPress,WalnutCreek,Cali-
Mills, BarbaraJ., andT. J. Ferguson fornia.
1998 Preservation andResearchof SacredSitesby theZuni Stein,JulieK., andLauraS. Phillips
Indian Tribe of New Mexico. Human Organization 2002 VashonIslandArchaeology:A ViewfromBurtonAcres
57(l):30-42. ShellMidden.BurkeMuseumof NaturalHistoryandCul-
Moss, MadonnaL., andGeorgeB. Wasson,Jr. tureResearchReportNo. 8. BurkeMuseum,Seattle,Wash-
1998 IntimateRelationswiththePast:the Storyof anAtha- ington.
paskanVillageon the SouthernNorthwestCoastof North VanPool,ChristineS., andToddL.VanPool
America.WorldArchaeology29(3):317-332. 1999 The ScientificNatureof Postprocessualism.Ameri-
NationalParkService can Antiquity64:33-53.
2003 Secretaryof Interior'sStandardsand Guidelinesfor 2003 Introduction: Method,Theory,andEssentialTension.
Archaeologyand HistoricPreservation.Electronicdocu- In EssentialTensionsinArchaeologicalMethodand The-
ment,http://www.cr.nps.gov/local-law/arch_stnds_7.htm ory, editedby T. L. VanPooland C. S. VanPool,pp. \-A.
#guide, accessedJune 13, 2003. Universityof Utah Press,Salt LakeCity.
Neumann,ThomasW., andRobertM. Sanford Watkins,Joe E.
2001 CulturalResourcesArchaeology:An Introduction. 2000 IndigenousArchaeology:AmericanIndianValuesand
AltamiraPress,WalnutCreek,California. ScientificPractice. AltaMiraPress,WalnutCreek,Cali-
Nicholas,GeorgeP., andThomasD. Andrews(editors) fornia.
1997 At a Crossroads:Archaeologyand First Peoples in 2003 BeyondtheMargin:AmericanIndians,FirstNations,
Canada. Simon FraserUniversity,Archaeology Press, andArchaeologyin NorthAmerica.AmericanAntiquity
Burnaby,B.C. 68:273-285.
Patterson,ThomasC. 2004 Archaeology,AboriginalsandthePast:thePoliticsof
1990 Some TheoreticalTensionswithin and between the Representation. AnthropologyNews 45(8):12.
ProcessualandPostprocessualArchaeologies.Journalof Welch,JohnR.
AnthropologicalArchaeology9:189-200. 2000 TheWhiteMountainApacheTribeHeritageProgram:
2000 Archeologistsand HistoriansConfrontCivilization, Origins,Operations,andChallenges.In WorkingTogether:
Relativism,and Poststructuralism in the Late Twentieth NativeAmericans&Archaeologists,editedby K. E. Don-
Century. In History After the Three Worlds: Post- goske, M. Aldenderfer,and KarenDoehner,pp. 67-83.
EurocentricHistoriographies,editedbyArifDirlik,Vinay Society forAmericanArchaeology,Washington,D.C.
Bahl, and PeterGran,pp. 49-64. Rowman& Littlefield, Wylie,Alison
New York. 1992 The Interplayof EvidentialConstraintsandPolitical
Paynter,Robert Interests:Recent Archaeological Research on Gender.
2000 Historical Archaeology and the Post-Columbian AmericanAntiquity57:15-35.
World of North America. Journal of Archaeological Zimmerman,LarryJ.
Research8(3):169-217. 2000 A New andDifferentArchaeology?Witha Postscript
Scher,PhilipW. on the Impactof the KennewickDispute.In Repatriation
2004 ThePoliticsof Preservation: AnAnthropologicalPer- Reader:WhoOwnsAmericanIndianRemains?,editedby
spective.Paperpresentedto the InternationalCommittee DevonA. Mihesuah,pp. 294-306. Universityof Nebraska
for Museumsof EthnographySession of the International Press,Lincoln.
Councilof MuseumsGeneralConference,Seoul, Korea.
Schiffer,MichaelB., andGeorgeJ. Gumerman(editors)
1977 ConservationArchaeology:A Guidefor Cultural ReceivedJune 16, 2003; RevisedDecember 20, 2004;
ResourceManagement Studies.AcademicPress,NewYork. AcceptedJanuary15, 2005.