ReviewsRoland X'letcher, The Limits of Settlemenl Growlh: Atheoret ical out l ine. Cambridge Universi ty Press,Cambridge, 1995; pp. xxiv + 276,95 figures, hardback.rsBN 0 521 43085 2.

In my more flippant moments I sometimes think thatarchaeologists are oftwo main types: those who do archaeologybut don't actually think about it and those who think about itbut don't actually do it. The weakness of such a dichotomy isthat 'doing archaeology' clearly means different things todifferent people and, furthermore, there are some of us whonaively imagine thatwe can attemptto bth do itardthink aboutit. However, whether archaeological theory repels or attacts usindividually, most ofus would now acknowledge its fundamentalimportance in all that we undertake. It is for this reason that thepresent review has been uritten, although Roland Fletcher's bookwas actually published several years ago. Quite simply, this is amost important book, written by one of Austalia's foremostarchaeological thinkers, and a book that makes a contribution ofworld significance. Historical archaeologists in New Zealandand Aushalia may wonder how it can be relevant to them but, ifthey are to set their own work in the international context that itdeserves, this is a text that they should read and think about.

Arguing that only the archaeological record has sufficienttime-depth for the study of changes in human behaviour, theauthor examines how the number and density of inhabitants andthe size of the settlements that they occupied have been limitedby the level ofhuman interaction that could be tolerated and themeans of communication (in the broadest sense) that have beenavailable. He constructs an 'interaction and communicationstress matrix' on the basis of data &awn from many parts of theworld over the last 15 000 years and examines how the majortansfomrations ofhuman settlement- from mobile to sedentary,from sedentary to agrarian urban, and from agrarian urban toindustrial urban - can be fitted into it. He discusses in detailthe changes that were necessary within societies for them to beable to move from one level to another. In doing this, he stressesthe role of the physical evidence, what we would normally callmaterial culture, as not merely a product of human behaviourbut as an influence upon it. Thus he sees 'material as behaviour',concluding G,. 228) that: 'The material becomes recognisableas an actor without intent, whose operations are played out on avast scale beyond the limited perceptions of daily life'. Forexample, the fonn and makeup of a settlement can be a constainton its development, with the very buildings and transportnetworks that facilitated its previous growth becoming animpediment to firther growth. He also goes on to apply hismodel to the present time and to the likely forms of future urban

growth given the world's exploding population. In a chillingfinale he considers the eventual possibility ofcities of 100-200million people which, if they grew at a rate proportionate toprevious growth rates, 'would see much of New South Wales... ,or all of the UK, covered by buildings within trventy years' (p.226).

The above outline does scant justice to the complexity ofthis book or to its carefully structured and highly detailedargument. It would be difficult for a non-theoretician such asmyself to do much else but it is probably to those of us who arenot theoreticians that the book is 6es1 imFortant. It is not aneasy book to read (although it is well organized and has clearlybeen written with care) but it contains much of interest and muchthat is thought-provoking. There are probably numerous researchprojects that could be developed from some of its propositions,at least some ofthem within the context ofAustalasian historicalarchaeology. In addition, the book is important for challengingthe way that 'we allow the ethnographic present and thehistorically constructed past to exercise tyranny over ourperception of past human behaviour' Gt.212) and for insistingon the use ofthe archaeological record as a basis for testabletheories relevant to both the past and the future. At its beginningthe author claims that the book 'can only be a brief moment in adialogue which will gradually produce a form of archaeologynone ofus can now envisage' (p. xvi). Perhaps so, but it is asigrificant moment.

In appearance this book is a model of the publisher's andprinter's art: a clean, neat productiorl well printed, well designedwell illustrated with black-and-white figures. Althoughtypographic errors usual athact this reviewer's attention likecarrion attracts vulhues in the African savanna- I could findhardly any in this text. Only one detail ofproduction disturbedme (and may annoy some readers) and this was that referencesgiven in the captions of the illustrations had not always beenincluded in the list of references at tle end of the book, althougha note at the beginning ofthat list says that they are availablefrom the author upon request. This does not seem to be a verysatisfactory situation; surely all the references should have beenpublished?

In conclusion, this is an important Australian contributionto the world archaeological scene, and the author is to becongratulated for his success in undertaking what must havebeen a very difficult task. It would be a tragedy if it was nowoverlooked by Australian archaeologists.

Graham ConnahDepartment of Archaeologt and Anthropologt

Aus tralian N ati on al Univers itv

Max Kelly, Anchored in u Small Cove: A history undarchaeologt ofthe Rocks, Sydney. Sydney Cove Authority,Sydney, 1997i pp.l20, i l lustrated, paperback. ISBN0 646 318748

Produced under the auspices of the Sydney Cove Authority,Anchored in a Small Cove was inspired by the inauguralexhibition at the Rocks Visitors Cente when it moved to theSailors Home in 1993. The original exhibition text (which waswritten by the historian Max Kelly) and a number of the artefactsand images exhibited at that time formed the basis of thispublication. Kelly died in 1996 during the preparation of thisbook.

Anchored in a Small Cove was not intended as an academicmonograph; it is rather an exhibition catalogue in format, withthe stated aim of introducing the public to the history andarchaeology ofthe Rocks. Although it is designed for a generalaudience the book is of interest to archaeolosists. who can

94

presumably enjoy generalist books that touch upon their owndiscipline; it also reveals the standard oftext being producedfor the public concerning archaeological research in the Rocks.It is after all through books such as this that the public drawsfirst perceptions of historical archaeology.

Kelly's text is brief and is divided into seven chapters thatoutline the history of the Rocks through addressing particularhistorical themes including shipping, the outbreak of the plaguein 1900. and the later conflicts that surround issues ofconservation or development. The chapters are set in a generalhistorical order so that the book commences with the foundingof the colony of New South Wales and the consequentestablishment of the Rocks, and ends with 'The Battle for theRocks', a chapter which addresses the plans to raze the area inthe 1960s for intemational-style tower blocks and the Green Bansthat were imposed in an attempt to halt the destruction ofheritageand a community. In addition to these 'thematic' chapters Kelly

also utilises 'snapshots' - short sections of text interspersedwith images that address in greater detail particular aspects oflife in the Rocks in the past such as boarding houses and 'TheLarrikin Push'.

The relatively short length of the text sometimes renders thelayout ofthe book confusing. The generous use of images tendsto overwhelm Kelly's history so that the eye is easily distactedfrom his words. Although the chapters are laid out in a linearhistorical sequence, images are not always arranged in an equallyregular historical order. The effect ofthis can be subtly perplexingfor, if careful attention is not paid to captions, it is difficult forthe reader to tell whether an image is a half century or moreremoved from the period of time discussed in an adjacentparagraph of Kelly's text.

The choice of developing the book as a series of thematicchapters allows Kelly to touch upon a number of topics thatwould be of interest to the public, and that have been fairlystandard in the historiography ofthe Rocks. These issues includethe Rocks as working-class 'neighbowhood', the Rocks as slum,the Rocks as maritime community and finally the Rocks asheritage. It is gratifying to see that an entire chapter is providedconceming the history of the Chinese community in the are4although in contrast the Aboriginal heritage of the Rocks is onlydescribed briefly, in a single column on page 30. The onlycontribution of archaeology to this too brief section is aphotograph ofthree ceramic sherds taken from the top layer ofan Aboriginal camp at the Bond Store site in Millers Point.

As a catalogue the book serves its purpose well. It is theimages within the book that are most immediately engaging andthe paintings, maps, historical photographs and documentspresented are beautifully reproduced. The documentary materialpublished is drawn from various collections. The State Archivesof New South Wales are of course well represented, butdocumentary material is sourced from institutions as diverse asthe Museo de America" Madrid (which provided the 1793 picture'Ingleses en laNueva Olanda' [on p.24], an interesting study ofa free woman and a marine) and the collections of the Royal

Greenwich Observatory. In addition there are numerous imagesof archaeological artefacts that were drawn from twelve localexcavations.

Kelly, having written an engaging and accessible history ofthe Rocks, ignores direct mention of archaeology at all in histext, unusual for a publication subtitled 'A History andArchaeologt of the Rocks, Sydney' [my italics]. Although it isfascinating to see objects such as the fourth-cenflrry BC Ushabtifigure excavated from the Lilyvale site, images of artefacts fromthe Rocks' many excavations are the only explicit archaeologicalcontent within the book. The captions provided for thesephotographs of artefacts go some way toward providing contextfor the material culture depicted. Each attempts not only to bedescriptive but to provide some information about the fabric ofthe artefact, conskuction tsshniques, or its use in everyday life.Despite these exemplary efforts the general independence ofKelly's text from the images displayed sometimes makes itappear that archaeologists are perhaps no more than excavatorsof interesting bibelots.

Unfortunately one cannot help but feel that in this casearchaeology has once more been relegated to a subsidiaryposition to history. If this book does represent the standard oftext being written for the public regarding archaeology, it is areminder to the discipline that better efforts need to be made toexplain to the public what archaeologists do andhow archaeolorydiffers from history. Given Sydney Cove Authority's role incommissioning a great deal of archaeological research in thearea under its administation, Anchored in a Small Cove lost anopportunity to disseminate to the public the reasons for, and theresults of archaeological work in the area. It is however difficultto say, given the death of Max Kelly during the preparation ofthis book, what final form it would have taken had the authorseen this work to completion.

Wayne MullenArchaeologt

University of Sydney

Louise Zarmati & Aedeen Cremin, Experience Archaeologt,Cambridge University Press, Melbourne, 1998; pp.206,illustrations, soft cover, $29.95. ISBN 0521 57174,In theory it is possible to measure the health of archaeologicalstudies inNew South Wales schools. ln 1998, for instance, 6140students sat the Ancient History examination for the HigherSchool Certif icate, all of whom completed the topic'Archaeology, History and Science: Investigating the Past' inthe preliminary Ancient History course. Yet, relatively few oftheir teachers possess training in archaeology. It may beunsatisfactory, but it is a fact that teachers are sometimescompelled to teach subjects they have never been tained to teach.It is often difficult. and not because the content is difficult tograsp. One problem is gathering teaching resources andtranslating them for use by adolescents. A second problem isthat one invariably has not had the time nor opportunity to graspthe underlying philosophy or principles of the foreign discipline.Of course, archaeology is only one facet of the Ancient Historyconrse, but Experience Archaeologt provides those teachingarchaeology units in schools with the means to overcome bothof these problems.

There is little doubt that this book will be welcomed byteachers of senior Ancient History in New South Wales. Itscontent comprehensively covers the Preliminary course: theimportance ofartefacts and their context; the characteristics ofsites; methods oflocating and recording sites, stratigraphy andexcavation methods (on land and underwater), various methodsofdating, conservation ofartefacts and sites and ethical issues

in archaeology are all examined. 'What is Archaeology', aquestion briefly defined in many textbooks, is explored in detailwith a survey of the major schools of archaeology, followed bythree chapters outlining the development of archaeology to thetwentieth century. Indeed, there is more than enough to satisfucourse requirements and it would be a rare class that would workthrough this book from cover-to-cover. On the other hand,Experience Archaeologt provides an accessible and conciseintroduction to archaeology for secondary teachers complete withselect chapter bibliographies. Thisjust may have an added effectof stimulating archaeological studies in the junior (Years 7-10)history course, and there is a deal of material in the book whichcould be modified for younger students.

Zumati and Cremin know their readership. As every historyteacher knows, nothing is more fascinating in the classroom thanbodies, burials and death generally, and the section 'TalkingBones: The Study of Human Remains' should prove popular.Nice skulls on the cover too! But 'Talking Bones' is not an exoticindulgence. These chapters provide a good introduction to theevidence to be gained from burials and human remains, and thechapter on forensic archaeology supplied a few answers toquestions concerning the identification of human remainscommonly asked in my classroom. Of particular value for theclassroom are the two case studies contained in this section:What Happened to the Romanovs? and Who was Buried inTomb 55? Such inquiry-based activities are welcomed byteachers as they require some time and expertise to develop.

Experience Archaeologt is not, however, the type oftextbook

95

that aims to replace the teacher. The provision of student activitiesis restrained and summative comprehension-style or essayquestions, haditionally found at the end of each chapter in atext, are few. More emphasis is placed on activities involvingthe use ofarchaeological evidence and on a range ofactivitiesinvolving role-play, debate and empathy. The most interestingexercises suggested are those involving practical activities. Notonly are these invaluable in reinforcing learning, but they assistgreatly in the learning ofless-able students. Ofparticular interostto me was the practical exercise in mummification. I have donea similar exercise in country school and it was extremelysuccessful, but I have been reticent about getting city studentsto work on animal remains (I used a road-killed bird). So Zarrnatiand Cremin's procedure for using a zucchini was a revelation. Ialso found the text's discussion of the scholarly confusionsunounding the nature of natron most interesting, ispecially asI had integrated my practical activity into a wider research taskthat encouraged students to discover Egyptian methods ofmummification themselves. We also got it lvrong. However, theprovision of some documentary material in support of thisdiscussion would have been useful in establishing the need forcarefirl and critical use of primary and secondary written sourcesand in proving the value of experimental archaeologicaltechniques. This exercise, possibly used in conjunction with theTomb 55 and Lahun case studies, has the potential to launch abroader Egyptian case study - perhaps directions should havebeen given to research and model a tomb-complex, completewith inscriptions, wall paintings and grave goods, rather thanjust a coffur.

One pleasing feature ofthis book is the amount ofAustralianmaterial included. Students do, in my experience, gain theimpression that archaeolory is something that happens overseasin countries lucky enough to have pyramids. The authorsintroduce students to the work of Grafton Elliot Smith andGordon Childe in addition to that of the oft-studied HeinrichSchliemann, Arthur Evans and Flinders Petrie. Also welcomeare the biographies of women archaeologists, including theAustralian-born Veronica Seton-Williams. Many of thephotographs in the book show Australian archaeologists at workin Aushalia and overseas. Much of the infonnation dealing with

issues of ownership of the past and heritage management isAustalian. There are the fact files dealing with Australian sites,such as Dawes Point and Jinmium, while others deal with theoverseas work ofAustalian archaeologists, such as the Wrights'work on Holocaust sites. All of which helps to establisharchaeological sites and investigation within the student's worldcircle.

Nevertheless, in one way there could be an even stongerAustralian perspective. The cover notes of ExperienceArchaeologt promise that students are invited to be thearchaeologist without ever having to leave the classroom. In fact,I would suggest that a priority would be to encoruage the studentsto leave the classroom. The principles of archaeology apply asequally in a school playground as in Crete or Athens, and studentsshould be inspired to observe, appreciate and to lend their supportto the conservation of the archaeological heritage around them.The authors do suggest museum and site visits, but greateremphasis is warranted. One avenue would have besa 1s slaminearchaeological surface survey in an Australian context, perhapsalso transforming the 'excavating your household garbage'practical activity into a surface survey ofplayground litter.

This is not really a major criti cism. Experience Archaeologtmust satis$ amarket and the fact is that Australian archaeologyhas a lgwprofile in schools. To an large extent this is institutional- a product ofthe educational background and taining ofteachersand the pressures generated by the Higher School Certificateexamination. Equally, it is influenced by the very patchycommitment of rank-and-file teachers to the teaching ofAboriginal history (especially pre-contact history); and fewteachers would be familiar with developments in Ausfralianhistorical archaeology. Zarmati and Cremin, by including asubstantial body of Austalian material in this book, will greatlyassist change in this area. I might add that the inclusion of Asianmaterial will be equally beneficial. All in dl, it is marvellous tosee an entire volume devoted to secondary studies ofarchaeoloryin Australia.

Michael SmithsonTrinity Catholic College

Sydney

AthollAnderson,The Welcome of Strangers: An elhnohistoryofSouthern MaoriA.D, 1650-1850. University of Otago Press,f998; pp. 249, illustrated, paperback $N239.95, hardback$Nz 65.00. ISBN r 87713 41 8 (pb), 1877133 59 0 (hb).

Angela Ballara, Iwi: The dynamics of Maori lr ibalorganlsation from c. 1769 to c. 1945. Victoria UniversityPress, 1998; pp.400, illustrated, paperback $N239.95, ISBN0 86473 328 3.

As the 'naditional' boundaries between prehistoric and historicarchaeology continue to blur, a fertile meeting ground for thetwo subdisciplines has been in the archaeology ofcontact andcolonialism. This is particularly the case in southem hemispheresettler societies like Aushalia and New Zealand, where theprehistoric era ends barely two hundred years ago, and historicarchaeology has largely been a study of settlement. Coupled withthe increasing growth in what are loosely termed 'post-colonialstudies', it is becoming increasingly clear that colonised cultureswere not the victims of a fatal impact, and that colonised peoplescontinued, within their own cultures, to make their ownaccommodations to rapidly changing circumstances. Indeed thecolonial experience was a fwo-way process, with both colonisersand colonised accommodating each other, though obviously withgreater force on one side than the other.

Central to this realisation has been the view that nativecultures never had a timeless, changeless and remote existencein prehistory. Prehistoric archaeologists, of course, have longstudied cultural change, but in this they have often taken a

96

deterrrinistic lean. Systems interact with other systems, changeinthe ecological system detemrines change inthe cultural system.From this standpoint the insights gained from ethnohistory canbe projectedback into a changeless past, which is interpreted interms of the ethnographic present. However it is clear thatcultures, whether prehistoric or historic, have always beendynamic, changing in response as much to intemal, social stimulias to the external environment. These two insights, dynamicchange in prehistory and dynamic response to colonial processes,are clearly bound together.

These two recent volumes on the ethnohistory of Maoriclearly demonstrate the dynamic nature of change in Maorisociety during the period prior to initial contact with Europeansand during the early colonial period. Anderson's account beginsearlier and ends earlier than Ballara's, indeed he begins with themythical origins ofNgai Tahu, the dominant and inclusive tibalgrouping of most of the South Island. The traditional historiesof Southem Maori form the basis ofthis account and as Andersonpoints out traditions are not a linear narratives like Europeanhistories, but rather 'emphasise descent over incident', that isthey are essentially genealogies to which ancestral stories areattached. However, as taditions were recorded by Europeansfrom the mid-nineteenth century they were rearranged intosomething more resembling the narrative form, and it is theseEuropean renderings that form the basis ofAnderson's account.The recording of Ngai Tahu tradition was 'early andauthoritative', with learned and chiefly men giving theirknowledge to sympathetic Europeans from the 1840s, early in

the colonisation of the South Island.Traditional histories state that beginning around 1650 A.D.

various related but not necessarily all ied groups of thedescendants of Tahu Potiki from the Hawkes Bay region beganto cross Cook Strait and establish themselves in the northernSouth Island. Already present in the South Island were NgatiMamoe who had arrived perhaps two centuries previously, andTe Rapuwai and Waitatr4 two closely related groups who werepossibly the original inhabitants ofthe island. The various groupsof Ngai Tbhu were not initially unified as a single tribal identity.Each group made their own way doum the Kaikoura and NorthCanterbury coasts, defeating Ngati Mamoe in battle andsubsequently intermarrying with them to fonn lasting kin-basedalliances. Not until they were harried out of the northem SouthIsland by musket-armed Ngati Toa in the 1820s did Ngai Tatrufully penetrate the lower half of the island. At this time the termNgai Tahu also came into more general use as previouslyindependent groups were forced to unite in the face of invasion.

Ngai Tahu are an iwi, a term frequently glossed as 'tribe'.The component groups of Ngai Tahu, those that became unitedin the 1820s, are hapu, or 'sub-tribes'. Ballara examines theshanging role ofthese trvo kin-based groupings throughoutNewZealand, particularly in the North Island. As Maori respondedto the changes bought about by increasing contact withEuropeans, so their relations between themselves evolved.Membership of social groups in Maori society was based ondescent (Ngai Tahu, for instance, means the people ordescendants ofTahu). In the eighteenth century the focal socialgrouping was the hapu. Intermarriage between members ofdifferent hapu ensrued that a complex genealogical web existedoutside the local group, but each hapu acted independently,allocating its resources to its members and forming allianceswith or waging war on its neighbours. Hapu would have beennamed for their founding ancestor and other hapu would branchofffrom the original to achieve their own independence. Onlyoutsiders would have considered the related hapu to be a singlepeople, and this is exactly what happened with the arrival ofEuropeans. Early missionaries were slow to gasp the complexityand fluidity ofthe social situation they encountered, and theirsimplistic account was accepted by the colonial government,which was reluctant to deal with Maori at a hapu level. Theypreferred to treat with paramount chiefs rather than a plethoraof small groups, even when such paramountcies lackedlegitimacy and were often, in part, created by government at theexpense ofone hapu over another. This was particularly the casewith the land agents, who would play off one group againstanother, purchasing land from those that often had at best only apartial say in its disposition.

Apart from governmental pressrue on Maori to act withinthe scope of larger groupings, other factors were giving the iwi anew importance. The musket wars of the 1820s and 30s oftenforced larger groups to coalesce in self-defence, as with NgaiTahu, and the migrations that came about as a result of the warsmeant that the original inhabitants of an area often redefinedtheir separate identity in terms of iwi.

To summarise a few salient points in the course of a book

review is to risk missing the complexity of the processesdescribed. The independence ofhapu often meant that responsesto similar situations differed from place to place, and theinterrelationships and shifting alliances of hapu and iw| hapuand government only add to the complexity. Situations ebbedand flowed, hapu have never been entirely subsumed by iwiand have continued to assert their independent status and identity.

Ballara points out the limits to these processes, and the factthat such processes were often reversed when the pressure wasrelieved. Much of her evidence comes from the records of theland courts between 1866 and 1900. The land courts, as an annof government, were also reluctant to deal witl hapu, oftenignoring the evidence ofa group's independence in favour oftheir iwi identification. Maori themselves would have had theirown reasons for giving particular types of evidence, and, asinterested parties, infioduced their own biases into the accounts.This aspect ofthe source material is less rigorously explored byBallara, and the same can be said of Anderson's use of hissowces. Anderson has compiled, from numerous sources, anethnohistoric account of 200 years of Southem Maori history.The book is aimed at a more popular level than Ballara's morescholarly and specialised work, which takes most of its evidencefrom fewer sources, but both works may be read together,complementing each other well, and telling similar stories fromdifferent viewpoints.

Both books are dense with the names of people and places,making them at times quite difficult to follow. This is probablyunavoidable, but could have been improved with a little effort.Anderson, for instance, tends to reinfoduce characters somepages after their fust mention, and leaves it to the reader to makethe connection. Ballara gives numerous genealogies, but thenrather than explain the history of these people, writes aboutdifferent members of the same family who are not illustrated inthe genealogy. These are not minor quibbles, given the oftencomplex and confusing nature ofthe subject matter. Both books,Ballara's in particular, are aimed at a fairly academic audience,assuming a fair knowledge of New Zealandhistory and Maorisociety in the reader. While not a bad thing in itsell this doeshamper the dissemination of this scholarship in the widercommunity, where it deserves to be. Ballara claims her book isaimed primarily at 'Europeans ... and ethnic groups other thanMaori', those 'New Zealanders of all kinds [who] find it hard toexpress their national identity other than through Maori culturalphenomena'. The chocolate box version ofthis national identityis well known, the All Black haka and a good feed of kumarachips. It is to be hoped that these books will reach the audienceBallara aims for, increasing the understanding of Maori cultureand society among all New Zealanders. Academics anywhereinterested in the study of colonialism and contact will be wellrepaid by careful attention to the excellent scholarship in thesebooks. These are important studies and will surely go a longway towards furthering the view of all cultures as active anddynamic rather than the passive recipients of change imposedfrom outside.

Matthew CampbellArchaeologt

University of Sydney

J. Kociumbas (ed.) with essays by R. Glover, P. O'Brien, L.OtConnor and N. Pearson, Maps, Dreams, History. Race andRepresentation in Australia, Sydney Studies in History No.8, Department of History, University of Sydney, 1998; ppvii,434. 1SBN I 8645 | 344

The main value of this book is to allow wider public accessto some important BA Honours theses in the field of Aboriginalhistory by students at the Departrnent of History University ofSydney, written between 1982 and 1992. Since then two of these

former students (Richard Glover and Noel Pearson) have goneon to become well-known public figures. The volume is editedand introduced by Jan Kociumbas who lectures in Australianand Pacific History at the University of Sydney. According toKociumbas, key student research theses held by the Departmentof History are constantly sought out by joumalists, politiciansand interstate researchers. The theses are also important to theresearch needs of staff and other students at the university.Through publication Kociumbas has made four of these worksmore readily accessible to students and outside researchers alike.

Another major stated aim ofthe book is to encourage historysfudents currently enrolled at Sydney University in their ownresearch endeavours by providing published examples oftop-quality undergraduate history research by people who have sincebecome successful in their own fields both inside and outside ofacademia. This is an admirable aim, and as such the book mayeven be ofvalue to some undergtaduate archaeology studentsby providing examples of possible good ways to approach andwrite a top quality BA Honours thesis on a historical topic.However, on the whole this volume is probably only ofmarginalvalue to historical archaeologists and to archaeologists moregenerally, r'nless they have very specific interests in some of thesubjects covered in the theses. The theses are presented withminimal editing. For quite understandable reasons, no attempthas been made to re-write them or bring them up to date, althoughKociumbas' infroductory essay does place the four theses withinthe broader context of the history of, and problems raised by,Aboriginal history and Aboriginal studies more generally,including some discussion of archaeology.

Kociumbas' introduction seeks to provide, by her ownadmission, an 'unashamedly elemental' (p.vD overview of thechanging economic and political context within which Australiahistoriography has been produced, with s1 emFhasis on writingAboriginal history. The overview, like the book, is aimedprimarily at undergraduate history students, in particular atov€rseas students with little or no prior knowledge of this area.Unfortunately her discussion of the history and role of Pre-Historic [sic] Archaeology within Aboriginal studies (pp.33-36and p.37-8) is so over-simplified in places that it misrepresentsarchaeology and archaeologists, which is a bit uofortunate in abook which otherwise aims to selfconsciously examine the ideaof representation (and misrepresentation) of Aboriginal peopleand their history. Kociumbas' overview of archaeology is alscrvery outdated, failing as it does to deal with many developmentsin the theory and practice of our discipline since the 1970s. Thelast twenty years has seen a radical transformation ofAustralianarchaeology and many of the socio-political issues raised byKociumbas in the more general context of Aboriginal historyand Aboriginal studies are well-known to and have been widelydebated by archaeologists and Aboriginal people alike in recentyears, with concomitant changes in the way AustralianAboriginal archaeology is practiced in the 1990s. This is perhapsa minor point in a book which is primarily about writing historybut nevertheless it is very unfortunate to think that overseas andlocal history students, who may know nothing about Australianarchaeology, will gain such an outdated and negative impressionof our discipline from reading this introduction.

Richard Glover is now a successfuljournalist. His 1982 thesis'scientific Racism and the Australian Aboriginal (1865-1915):The Logic of Evolutionary Anthropology' traced the history ofcolonial and racist evolutionary and physical anthropology inrelation to Australia's indigenous people. The work is interestingand well-uritten with many useful references in the bibliography,but it shows its age. In 1982 the thesis may have been sayingsomething new, exciting and challenging, or at least may haveadded further arnmunition to a then growing Aboriginal campaigtfor the return of ancestral human remains from museum anduniversify collections. By 1998 much of the history and most ofthe arguments in Glover's thesis are well-known and largelyaccepted by most Australian museums and universities - whohave since responded to Aboriginal requests and have eitherretumed or are in the process of retuming indigenous ancestralremains to relevant communities - although many overseasinstitutions still refuse to cooperate.

Noel Pearson's 1986 history of Hope Vale Lutheran Mission( I 900- 1 95 0),'Ngamu-Nguadyarr, Munri-Bunggaga and MidhaMini in Gungu Yimidhin History' (which fanslates into Englishas 'Dingoes, Sheep and Mr Muni in Gungu Yimidhin History'),has stood the test of time far better. Noel Pearson is the onlyindigenous contributor to the book and he has since gone on tobecome very well-known in Australia as a campaigner andspokesman for indigenous rights. His thesis presented a historyofthe Hope Vale Mission in north Queensland through the voices,experiences and written accounts of both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people who lived there, including members of hisown extended family. The main aim of Pearson's history was todemonstrate that Gungu Yimidhirr people at Hope Vale Mission,in the face of overwhelming colonial domination, werenevertheless active creators of their own mission culture, andthat mission history was far more than just missionary activityover Aboriginal passivity. Just as important, the theses alsoprovided a critical analysis of the whole notion of writing anacademic English-language indigenous history of colonisedpeoples whose fust language is not English, who have a strongcultural traditional of oral communication, and for whom thewhole notion of 'writing history' in a westem sense is a colonialimposition. Again, while such ideas have since been exploredmany times in many contexts by indigenous and non-indigenouswriters, this is such an outstanding piece of work that its stillmakes fascinating reading.

The theses by Lucy O'Connor (1988) and Patfy O'Brien(1992) were produced more recently and consequently have hadless time to age. They both analysed changing ways in whichindigenous people and their 'Aboriginality' have beenrepresented by non-indigenous writers and artists and the wayin which such representations both reflect and/or perpetuatecolonial attitudes towards indigenous people, includingromanticism and the idea ofthe 'noble savage', racism and relatedgovemment policies of segregation and assimilation. O'Brienexamined, from a feminist perspective, the way Aboriginalwomen were depicted by Europeans in New South Wales andPort Phillip between 1800 and 1850. Her work also included acritical overview of a range of related literature on this topic.O' Coruror faced descriptions and visual depictions of Aboriginesin New South Wales State primary schools befween 1940 and1965 through a crit ical analysis of curricula and relatedpublications produced for staffand pupils, including indigenouspupils. These are both interesting works on topical subjectswhich, considering they were both written by fourth yearstudents, are ofa very high standard and concern topics ofwhichany historical archaeologist working in the freld of contactarchaeology ought to be aware.

Should archaeologists read this book? On balance the answeris 'yes', ifthey can forgive parts ofthe introduction. The bookas a whole is essentially a work of and about Aboriginal history,with almost no reference to material or archaeological evidenceat all. However, many archaeologists are interested in historyand anyone involved in the study of Aboriginal missions andcontact archaeology should find Noel Pearson's thesisparticularly useful. This book certainly should also be read byanyone with a general interest in the socio-politics of AboriginalAustralia, which these days inciudes many archaeologists andcultural heritage managers.

Sarah ColleyArchaeologt

University of Sydney

98

Tom Griffiths & Libby Robin, (eds), Ec ology and Empire:Environmental history of settler societies, MelbourneUniversi ty Press, 19971' pp.248. Paperback ISBN0 522 84793 5Environmental history is currently exciting the historians. Evenhistorical archaeologists have recenfly been called on to abandonthe Swiss Family Robinson model, take up with Russell Drysdaleand engage with the environment. Thus a text with the title of'Ecology and Empire' is of great interest to archaeologists inproviding a background to environmenJal history.

The editors Griffith and Robin. well known inter alia fortheir work in the area of environmental history have broughttogether 14 other contibutors to write on this theme. What adazzlng array of talent they have amassed. Apart from Griffithand Robin themselves there are contributions from DavidLowenthal, Michael Williams, Richard Grove, Eric Rolls, TimFlannsry and Joe Powell. At a glance, it can be seen that thescope is global and interdisciplinary, with historians at long lastfinding the historical geographers.

The book's starting point is the juxtaposition of the conceptsEcology and Empire - inspired by Crosby's EcologicalImperialism.In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the terrns'ecology' and 'empire' were closely related and developedthrough the encounters of the empires with the environment ofthe countries into which they expanded. Griffith and Robin'sview on ecology and empire is from the periphery, from the settlersocieties of North Americ4 South Africa and Australia (whatabout New Zealand?). Griffiths argues for the importance of theAustralian historical experience and of that from other settlersocieties in demanding more complex explanations of thehistorical evidence. With wonderful irony, however,acknowledgments note that the work was initiated while theauthors were living in London at the Sir Robert Gordon MenziesCentre for Australian studies, which suggests that the 'core' hassome use despite their interest in the periphery!

Griffiths' Introduction, one of the more interesting essays,taces the themes of ecology and empire and the concept of settlersocieties. This is followed by a section of three essays onecological invasion with papers on fue by Palne and two on theAustralian environment by Rolls and Flannery. This is possiblythe weakest section with Payne rarely discussing anything butthe European experience offre, Rolls giving a rather superficialhistory of Ausfralia and Flannery covering the same ground,using ecological language but with the same lack of depth.

The second section offour essays look at the relationshipbefween the science of ecology and the development of 'theEmpire'. Robin looks at the development of 'ecology' inAustralia and points to its relationship with industry as an appliedscience. Dunlap looks at connections within the 'Anglo' worldin the development of ecology as a way of explaining its similardevelopment in different countries. Beinart discusses the linksbetween the improvements of stock and pastoral reform thoughthe application of veterinary science. Powell revisits his workon water management, arguing that water management isfi.rndamental to the Australian settler experience but that thisinvolved hitherto unrecognised reciprocities between the imperialcore and the Australian peripheries

Nation building is the theme of the third section of threepapers. Cumrthers ties the establishment of national parks in

South Africa with the development of the South African nationand its attitudes to the occupants of the land made into park.Grove traces the development of a critique of land managementpractices in colonial South Africa back to Scottish Calvinismwith French and German influences. Hains, in a fascinatingchapter on Flynn and Mawson, both folk heroes associated withextraordinary diff icult environments, sees in them theantecedents of the wildemess and conservation movements inAustalia.

A further three chapters attempt to grapple with the trickyissue of Economy and Ecology. Williams haces the history offorests or deforestation in the context of economic demands andecological responses. Melville adds a welcome South Americanperspective arguing, possibly against the theme of the otheressays, that the rise of the capitalist mode of production occurredin the nineteenth century and therefore cannot explainenvironmental change in South America prior to that date. FinallyMilton discusses Transvaal beef in the post-Boer Warreconstruction era.

The last two essays, grouped rather misleadingly as'Comparing Settler Societies' are in fact useful historiographicassessments by MacKenzie and Lowenthal of environmentalhistory and ofthe topics discussed in the book respectively.

Overall the essays are samples of the author's works andreading them had the effect of diverting me to read the moresubstantive texts and articles, making the production of thisreview a slow but enjoyable task. It is for this reason and for itsperspective from the edge ofthe empire that I highly recommendthe book.

However, for all the interest that the book and its essayshave there seems to me a major lack of some form of theoreticalframework to bring all the diverse elements together. The conceptof settler societies is not particularly well developed. Nor is itexplained how all of these aspects were integrated into a singlecomplex system. The parts and the depth of their relationshipscan be seen but there is not a sense ofa whole entity. Clearlythere is a need for some sort of theoretical underpirurine of thiswork, no matter how unfashionable theory might be in tie post-modern world. For all its difficulties, theory is ultimately a wayoftaking something as complex as the empire and ecology dwingthe nineteenth and twentieth centuries and making itunderstandable.

Clearly, Marxist approaches Eue one way of achieving thisintegration; however, the explanations are somewhat unwieldyand can be over-rigid, as E.P. Thompson pointed out, and ofcourse overemphasise economic factors. Certainly, systemstheory has been used to try and integrate natural and humanhistory (in particular the work of Kenneth Boulding). Atthoughthis approach has fallen from favour in history and geography inrecent years it might be worth dusting it off. Systems theory hasproved particularly successful in the area of ecology andecological monitoring as well as biogeography. There is still astrong systems approach in archaeology and perhaps this is onearea where archaeology could contribute to the questions raisedin this important book.

Iain StuartArchaeologt

University of Sydney

99

Ian Hodder, The Archseological Process: An introduction.Blaclrwell, Oxford, 1999; pp.242+xivr24 illustrations' I table'paperback AIJD$45. ISBN 0-631-19885-7.

Archaeological writing cileers often go through several stages.They begin with an early bright ideas phase, when interestingbut often in reffospect rather naiVe prognostications are made.Having got everyone's attention, the scholar often then movesinto an over-achieving phase where too much is published,representing often superficial and undigested ideas. The aimhere is to achieve a measure of job security and rise upmeteorically tluough the pecking order. If this tactic works, amature phase then follows, usually after the scholar has achievedReader or Professor rank. Bigger and well-thought out projectsare often the basis for more mature reflection on where thediscipline is headed. Sometimes, usually attendant uponretirement, a magisterial phase begins, but this comes alwayswith the danger of increasing pomposlty. In some sad cases, theespousal of exfieme right-wing politics at this stage is a clearsign of approashing dementia.

I loved Hodder's early work of the 1970s, drawing heavilyupon the 'new geogtaphy' of Chorley and Haggett et al. Inretrospect, a lot ofthe assumptions ofthe spatial archaeology hehelped pioneer can be seen as naive, but they were stimulatingand liberating ideas in a British archaeology which even at thebeginning of the 1970s was desperately trying to distance itselffrom the more extreme Hempel-worshipping forms ofAmericanist 'New Archaeology'. Something went wrong forHodder about 1982, perhaps around the time of the publicationof Symbols in Action, and he entered a long period of theintellectual doldrums, with too-many and too-smart works oflittle lasting substance. He also spawned some real monsters asstudents and acolytes, and archaeology remains much-vexed bythem to this day. As in our least-favowite CDs by our favouriteartistes, tlere are always solitary passages ofgenius, and suchnuggets can indeed be found in many of Hodder's books of thelater 1980s and early 1990s. His 1992 compilationTheory andPractice in Archaeologt contains a few (but by no means all) ofthem.

The professorship finally came in 1996, and as my modelwould predict, there is considerable evidence of a more matureand measured view of the subject emerging in Hodder's worknow that he doesn't have to prove so much any more. The

Qatalhriyiik project, both in choice of site - it would be veryhard not to find amaztng material there - and in its reflexiveconception as a kind of 'excavation of an excavation' is destinedto become one ofarchaeology's real classics.

The book under review is an introduction to the set ofideaswhich led up to the thinking behind the project. There is a clearlineage of these back to his bright ideas period, but the maincriticism of this book is that there are still a few too many ideasthat didn't work in thel980s and1990s and still don't at allconvince today. When will we be free of Denida, fucoeur,Foucault, Lyotard and these other charlatans? The fact that Britisharchaeological theorists can mention them all in one breath wouldmake any self-respecting French intellectual have a coughingfit over her Gauloises. Abricolage of completely contradictoryth-inkers' ideas half-understood and taken out of context is stillbaloney whatever way you slice it, and whatever the politicalc oul eur of the bric ol eur.

A feature of much of the 'Me-generation' of archaeologicaltheory was that they wrote primarily for each other, not to engagewith the practice of archaeology. Most archaeologists throughoutthe world were disenfranchised from the debates by the deliberateuse of impenetrable jargon, and carried on with surveying anddigging and thinking about the past regardless. The first twochapters of The Archaeological Process,'Crises in GlobalArchaeology' and 'Archaeology - Bridging Humanity andScience', rehearse a lot of ideas most archaeologists managed toabsorb during that era without wide reading in the latest -isms.

100

Readers may well feel vaguely insulted by Hodder's presentationof these ideas as some new revelation he has come up with inorder to get the rest ofus 'Digging outside the shelter' as he putsit in the Preface, an echo ofMerriman's (1991) call for museumsto 'look beyond the glass case'.

The result is a history of recent archaeology that fewpractitioners will recognise. For instance, I too was a student ofDavid Clarke and have always felt that Hodder never understoodor else has forgotten his master's project. Clarke's AnalyticalArchaeologt (1968) was not so much the height ofconfidencein universal methods among new archaeologists as Hodder claimshere (p.2), it was more an attempt to codify a pre-NewArchaeology schema, that of Gordon Childe's hierarchy ofarchaeological entities, so that the subject could move on. Itwas also as much a response to new computer technologies andtheir logics as the book under review here. The more thingschange...

While Hodder was away talking theory with his mates,archaeologists came to realise that much greater reflexivity (= aself-critical approach) was required, that to an extent our theoriesreflect our background and our prejudices, that this does notrequire a relativist position in relation to all theories, and thatthe archaeological evidence can contradict what we think aboutthe past. We also recogttised that there were multiple audiencesand multiple constituencies interested in the past (called here'multivocality'), that in some circumstances indigenous peoplesmight have great difficulty with the practice of archaeology as itaffects their interests, and that their legitimate concerns mustforce a concern with archaeological ethics world-wide.

But this isn't all Hodder is saying, and if you can grit yourteeth for the fust 3l pages, you will be rewarded with chaptersthat don't always repeat the obvious as if it just came downfrom the mountain. Hodder's main point is that archaeologicalfreldwork itself remains relatively untheorised. The productionof knowledge at the trowel's edge often dominates the eventualinterpretation offered by the archaeologist, but is usually invisibleto the reader ofa final excavation report or synthesis ofa region'sarchaeology. In that sense we can never properly evaluate anotherarchaeologist's interpretation of a site. We might find itconvincing or unconvincing but the process by which it wasreached is a trail gone cold. An archaeological report of any siteis a deliberate mystification, a cooking of the books, a premanueclosure ofdebate. The tapes are wiped, the tracks are coveredup. In a sense a conventional archaeological report is a forgery.There are brilliant forgers who are never caught, and some whoare arrested as soon as they try and pass their first still-wethundred dollar bill. But we should not forget that they arecriminals one and all.

So, the question is, can archaeologists ever make themselvesinto honest men and women? Can we give our interpretationsthe context they lack? If our interpretations as presented are acrime, can we provide the evidence of how and why that crimewas committed so our deviant mind can be understood andtreated. The Qatalhciyiik project is aftempting to do just that,carrying reflexivity beyond the comfortable zone we are all nowwell used to into more dangerous areas of self-analysis. Dailydiaries are entered on a web site as well as standard recordingsheets and a wide audience can read these 'true confessions';the archaeologists are themselves under constant surveillance,with use of v ideotape of their excavat ion and a nosyanthropologist asking them why they hold their padicular exoticbeliefs; even the dread white-coats appear every other day on aninspection. No, not prison psychiatrists, but the laboratoryspecialists we usually just send bags of material offto with theassurance that they are all from secure contexts (when they oftenaren't).

Hodder points to the fact that using the web and CD-ROMtechnologies we can produce reports that through links to dailydiaries, record sheets, etc. can reveal much ofthe background to

the final interpretations we author, and can allow the reader tointerrogate a variety ofdata and better evaluate our conclusions.The hidden process ofknowledge generation is, at least to someextent, revealed. Most readers will perhaps not have the time orthe inclination to follow every verdict back to the clues on whichit is based but the archive is there at the click of a mouse. Hodderalso notes that readers can get into a report at different levels.Accounts designed for children, the general reader, first-yearstudents taking a methods course, or specialists in thearchaeology ofthat time or place can all be constructed and cross-referenced.

The equipment to allow this form of publication is all easilyavailable, including cD ,bumers' to produce CDs on demand,so money cannot be used by any serious professionalarchaeologist as an excuse. But time can be, As someone whohas tried to do a similar project on a much smaller scale, thetime spent on data entry and constructing the necessary links isenonnous. But is it any more onerous than producing aconventional archaeological report and properly archiving thedata generated? Probably not, and you are producing more ofanoriginal work of art rather than a forgery.

The book seems to be written for an advanced wrdergraduateaudience and has the feel of a semesterJength course guide.This might explain why a lot of it repeats the obvious, but notwhy so much of the obvious is claimed as new The progressionbetween chapters is quite clear. After the fust two (mentionedabove) it moves on to 'How do Archaeologists Reason?','Interpreting Material Culture', 'Towards a Reflexive Mettrod,,'The Natural Science in Archaeology', 'Using the NewInfonnation Tecbnologies' , 'Windows into Deep Time: Towardsa Multiscalar Approach', 'Archaeology and Globalism', .Canthe New Digital Technologies Deliver a ReflexiveMethodology?' and the Conclusion'Towards Non-DichotomousThinking in Archaeology'.

It is a usef,rl book to check up on where British archaeologicaltheory has reached at the end ofthe 1990s. But perhaps this isthe problem I had with reading it. Because Australianarchaeologists have had to come to terms with many of the issuesseen here as manifestations of a post-modern world, particularlythe relationship between archaeologists and indigenous peoples,they have already sorted through many of the argumentsthemselves, without ever haying read the social theorists quotedhere. To the extent that archaeological social theory is merelyreflective of the times in which we live, this is perhaps notsurprising. If you live a post-modem life, you must haveconstructed your own internalised post-modern theory of it in

order to survive.

Hodder's only references to Australia are to quote RosLangford's (1983) polemical article in Australian Archaeologton the relationship betn een archaeologists and Aboriginal peopleas she saw it at that t ime, and to make a completelyunsubstantiated claim that in the conflicts over Aboriginal landrights, 'archaeological objective science came to be associatedwith vested establishment interests against which localcommunities had to fight'. Although not referenced, thispresumably is from a certain reading of the furore more thantwenty years ago over the f:JmThe Last Tasmanian. Set up asstraw-persons to make a point, we are not allowed to change.

Is the problem that many of the British archaeologicaltheorists have never had much to do with indigenous peoples?The multivocality they seem to have discovered and the post-colonialist theory they espouse may both be more to do with thethreat of break-up of the British state and the increasingassertiveness ofits own internal colonies in Ireland, Scotland,Wales and Comwall, than any real understanding ofthe currentsituation in the third and fourth worlds, and in settler nationssuch as Australia. There is too much talking-the-talk instead ofwalking-the-walk in current British archaeological theory. Thisbook perhaps reveals the isolation ofBritish archaeology fromthe rest of the world, rather than providing the theoreticalleadership it assumes. While British archaeologists may wellneed to 'dig outside their shelters'- it is up to them to sav whethertheir own practice is being caricarured in the book - much of therest of the world is perhaps already out there in the sunshine,reflexive trowels in hand.

CLARKE, D.L. 1968. Analytical Archaeology, Methuen,London.

HODDER, I. 1989. Syrnbols in Action, Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge.

HODDER, L 1992. Theory and Practice in Archaeologl,,,Routledge, London.

LANGFORD, R.F. 1983. 'Our heritage - your playground',Aus tral ian Arc h ae ol o gt, 1 6 : 1 -6.

MERRIMAN, N. 1991. Beyond the Glass Case,LeicesterUniversity Press, Leicester.

Matthew SpriggsArchae ol o gt and Anthropol o g,,Aus tr al i an N ati onal Univ ers ity

101