Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article gives an account of the development of archaeology in South Africa in the period 1870–2003, focusing on key formative ideas and contexts. Taking as its theme a Foucauldian notion of ‘knowledge construction’, it attempts to understand archaeology as a form of social practice rooted in broader political and economic contexts. Two periods were especially important in the emergence of South African archaeology. The first was the period 1923–1948, coinciding with the local career of John Goodwin, which saw the institutionalisation of archaeology and the emergence of a specific, local conception of prehistory under the political patronage of J. C. Smuts. During these years the study of prehistory played a key role in an emergent South African national identity. The second was the period of the late 1960s and early 1970s which saw the re-emergence of the discipline following a time of comparative neglect, as part of the general cultural apparatus of a modernising apartheid state. Finally, a detailed account is given of developments post- 1994, including figures for student enrolments at major teaching institutions, a survey of archaeological curricula and a survey of grants from the National Research Foundation. If (as I argue) the impulse of the discipline in periods of social transformation has been to take shelter behind hard versions of science and culture, then the challenge for a post-apartheid archaeology lies in developing socially engaged and reflexive forms of theory and practice able to speak to the complexity of contemporary circumstances.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nick Shepherd (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: