Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Archaeology in South Asia was a colonial import, superimposed on multiple existing forms of knowledge about and orientations toward the past. Substantive research on prehistory was initiated by colonial scholar-administrators, and the institutions, chronological frameworks, field methods, and dominant approaches to archaeological work all emerged out of British colonial rule. Here, I highlight three orientations toward the past that are especially important for understanding archaeological coloniality: ( a ) the priority of textual evidence; ( b ) the focus on continuity and singular narratives of change, especially progressive or civilizational change; and ( c ) a tendency to use essentialist identity formations such as community, caste, and culture as explanatory. These basic orientations interact with the systematics and practices of archaeology, shaping research questions, field practices, and analysis. Decolonial reorientation will require attention to these broad habits of thought as well as to more concrete issues such as resources and opportunities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kathleen D. Morrison (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: