Module 21: Archaeology as Critique I
Reading: Leone, Mullins et al., "Can an African-American Historical Archaeology. . ."
In addition to discovering the pasts of those normally ignored, what do Leone et al. believe is a worthwhile goal of historical archaeology?
•To provide a critique of our own society.
•To stimulate a dialogue about the interpretation of history and American society.
Why can African American archaeology provide this critique when conventional archaeology and history cannot?
•White people don't want to know these things.
What is the role of African Americans in this project?
•Oral history, and not just to do better archaeology, but also to provide critical commentary of contemporary and past society in Annapolis.
What is the role of artifacts in this project, especially given the fact that most of the artifacts collected could have belonged to anybody (p. 117)?
•To stimulate oral history.
Were the excavations and exhibits successful?
•"We achieved some goals and not others" (p. 124).
What successes? What failures?
Other points of discussion:
Leone et al. show similarities between African Americans and Whites. Do you think that this is as important as showing the differences? Also, they relate differences both to economics and ethnicity, providing a look at local American racism.
Research questions defined by the African American community:
•Do African Americans have archaeology?
•How do free African Americans live?
•Continuities with Africa?
Should Leone et al. have suppressed information about taking food from the Naval Academy during the Depression?
The fact that fish made up 24 percent of the Maynard assembly provides the basis for recognizing another contribution of African Americans to the economy of the Atlantic seaboard: African Americans are specialists in Chesapeake fish and seafood industries, as a result of (1) West African adaptations; (2) close association with Native Americans; and (3) racial discrimination that blocked many occupations for blacks (see Yentish 1992).