Excavation as Theatre

The aim of this paper is to provide a theoretical and conceptual justification for large-scale rescue excavations. The article begins by challenging a predominant view, in which excavations are regarded as a process of rescuing the traces of the past in order to inhibit their potential destruction. But, it is argued, prevailing practices in archaeology leads to a pathological situation in which the technical instrumentation and the production of descriptive observational statements tends to become the principal goals of the discipline. The author points out that instead of emphasizing the development of conceptual structures which might help us understand how to interpret the past, we tend to accumulate more and more information with which in reality very little is done. This leads to the view that any further excavations remain largely unjustified. However, if excavations are conceived as experiments in interpretative activity, then they may play a central role in the development of a more reflexive and mature archaeological practice. To understand the discourses produced by archaeologists, relationships between the excavation and the site report and between excavations, the archaeological community and the public are explored. Indeed, contrary to the standard informational report, based on the myth of pure objectivity, an analogy to the dramatic performance is suggested. In this approach, the site report is considered as an effect of never ending interpretative activity, displayed in the theatre of excavation. The report is a result of a process of selection, recording, organization, inclusion and exclusion which takes place from the perspectives of different individuals and groups, and the discussions and relationships developed on the site. We might envision a site report which reflects back on excavation and critically interrogates all uncertainties. A reflection on some of these ambiguities and contradictions can help us understand how we may write differently and begin to challenge certain superannuated dominant practices. Therefore large-scale complex excavations and their reports provide unique opportunities for experiments in self-discovery. The exceptional position of an archaeological 'database' creates special responsibilities to society. The currently emerging cult of professionalism drastically reduces the scope of social vision, leaving in archaeologists' hands the decision as to which vision of the past the public should be provided with. If we want to appreciate the past and thus value it, we have to actively involve the public in discussion and interpretation of the past. Here excavation has a unique role to play as a theatre where people may be able to produce their own pasts which are meaningful to them. This approach advocates a socially engaged rather than a scientifically detached practice of excavation.(The paper appeared earlier in English in 'ANTIQUITY' vol.63(1989), pp. 275-280)