Archaeology as a political weapon

[MOESAN]

archeology is not political in itself, except maybe some states or high schools policiy for archeology - individuals, even among the scientists, can have political biases; the most biased being not the scientists as a whole, but people who re-interpret scientific conclusions, and politicians evidently -

 

[Johane Derite]

archeology is not political in itself, except maybe some states or high schools policiy for archeology - individuals, even among the scientists, can have political biases; the most biased being not the scientists as a whole, but people who re-interpret scientific conclusions, and politicians evidently -

Archeology is not political itself, yet it must be done within history, not in an abstract realm removed from it.

Which ever territory exists inside of history is controlled by actors that engage in their politics, i.e. nation states.

In the 99' war of Kosovo, Serbian military took 1248 artefacts from museums around Kosovo. They systematically looted
museums for any artefacts dating from all the way back to Vinca culture to late ottoman empire. In their collection are things like
tradition Albanian cradles with symbolic engravings, etc.

This is just what we know about and in 99. God only knows in the last hundred years what they took, and the Turks in the 500 years before that.

LINK: http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/blog/serbia-must-return-kosovo-s-cultural-treasures-12-19-2017

 

[Johane Derite]

This is just 1 artefact that was stolen in 99. It's now in Belgrade museum. It is originally from Glammnik, 5km's from my
fathers village. It is a mosaic of Orpheus from Roman times, before slavs were in South East Europe.

What is also politically interesting is religious politics. Mosques and Churches build their structures
either anew or ontop of older sites.

This Dardanian stele with a Labyrinth was found in the foundation of some small inconsequential
mosque in Kosovo when undergoing renovations:

It is of utmost importance that every church and mosque be examined for older artefacts that may lay underneath,
otherwise a political advantage over the past is held by religious interests, as opposed to the interests of universal truth.

 

[Alcuin]

I can't say I have met them personally, but I've seen their comments and "ideas" in forums and comment boards of videos. However, what you say may be true, especially because it seems to me that the traumatic communist experience also meant that such countries didn't have to make much of an "inner social reflection" about those outdated ideologies related to 19th century-style nationalism, ethnic chauvinism or even downright racism. They were preoccupied with a whole new, revolutionary ideology, and didn't go through the same social/cultural dynamics, questionings and eventually a new moral/cultural synthesis that happened in the "West". However, I'll be honest and say that, in fact, it seems to me that, in proportional terms, the largest number of staunch "nordicisists" (which is actually mostly just a disguise for white supremacism in this case, something much more racial than ethnic/cultural), probably comes from North America

Well I'd take online comments with a pinch of salt. Some people take the cyberworld too seriously, and others recognise that it's often easier to get a rise out of somebody by saying something on a forum or video than it would be in a real-world pub or workplace.

As I said, I've never encountered a person who could be called Nordicist in my personal life. By no means would I consider myself a 'liberal' or 'left-wing' person, if modern interpretations of those words are the barometer. However, I do recognise that wanton bigotry against the unsuspecting is an unattractive trait in a person. What I see in my own country is a generation (or generations) of people who are totally removed from their history and culture, and if they are taught it in schools or encounter it in the form of television or print media, it is rarely presented in a positive light. It's not hard to see why people who have been robbed of their heritage in the name of heinous, if well-intentioned, political/ideological goals might be seduced by fringe ideologies that place them at the very core.

The notion of 'whiteness' as an important form of self-identification seems very much an American one. Myself and the other Britons/Europeans I know might consider ourselves Londoners or Cornishmen, Englishmen or Scotsmen or Britons, Europeans or Westerners. But 'white' doesn't come into it at all, perhaps because to Europeans truly multiracial (as opposed to multinational or multi-ethnic) societies are very much a recent phenomena in comparison to the USA.

 

[Angela]

^^Fwiw I think you're both right.

As to talk about "whiteness" it is an American usage whose definition changed over time. William Penn, an Englishman who did much to settle Pennsylvania, was at times hesitant to let in the Germans of the Palatine area because he thought they were swarthy and not "white" enough.

In later centuries, Lebanese Americans went to court to be categorized as "white". So did some Portuguese and Armenians if I remember correctly.

The thing was not to be classified as "colored, because you had fewer civil rights in that case. Even being part Amer-Indian was preferable. Many Americans who had stories of having a Native American ancestor, which was supposed to explain their "darker" looks, found out through genetic testing that they actually had part black ancestors.

There's sometimes even today a disconnect in how Americans see someone and how that person sees himself, and for Americans it's not about being strictly "European". When pictures of the young Boston Bomber went viral, who is Chechen, the reaction was...but he's "white". Some idiot young teenage girls even formed fan clubs, if you can believe it, because they thought he was "hot". He didn't "feel" white, though. Razib Khan has also commented that in Texas, I think, Sikhs sometimes have derogatory slurs hurled at them for being Arab terrorists, whereas Lebanese or Syrians are left alone.

I guess it's understandable. Nobody in the real world looked at Steve Jobs or at Ralph Nader and thought they're not white.

It's still mad, though.

 

[A. Papadimitriou]

There is nothing rational about the concept of whiteness in US. Benjamin Franklin called Germans and Swedes 'swarthy'.

I know that Greeks weren't considered 'white' in the US before WW2.

In cinemas they had to sit with the 'non-whites'. They weren't accepted even in worker unions, so they had to make worker unions with Turks and Albanians.

The racist groups also targeted Jews and Catholics, of course.

 

[Alcuin]

There is nothing rational about the concept of whiteness in US. Benjamin Franklin called Germans and Swedes 'swarthy'.

I know that Greeks weren't considered 'white' in the US before WW2.

In cinemas they had to sit with the 'non-whites'. They weren't accepted even in worker unions, so they had to make worker unions with Turks and Albanians.

The racist groups also targeted Jews and Catholics, of course

You're probably a reptilian.

 

[Northener]

Archeology is especially misused in and before ww2. People like Ernst Sprockhoff and Gustav Schwantes were prominent archeologist and convinced Nazis.
Partly due to that kind of political misuse we got since ww2 and especially since the sixties a pure orientation on pottery (in stead of people and migration).
Genetics make clear that there was more than pottery and cultural influences but also migration.
I guess some suppose that this could mean that the ghost is again out of the bottle....especially when you are interested in the (North Sea) Germanic culture like me....
But I guess the crossover between archeology, genetics, language sciences etc can be done sincerely without 'supremacy' thoughts.

 

[Angela]

Archeology is especially misused in and before ww2. People like Ernst Sprockhoff and Gustav Schwantes were prominent archeologist and convinced Nazis.
Partly due to that kind of political misuse we got since ww2 and especially since the sixties a pure orientation on pottery (in stead of people and migration).
Genetics make clear that there was more than pottery and cultural influences but also migration.
I guess some suppose that this could mean that the ghost is again out of the bottle....especially when you are interested in the (North Sea) Germanic culture like me....
But I guess the crossover between archeology, genetics, language sciences etc can be done sincerely without 'supremacy' thoughts.

I indeed believe that, and you seem to be one of those people.

Good summary on the swings in archaeology too.