Download document

The Wondrous Isles: Ecological Anthropology of Early Archipelagoes
070:404 - Spring 2016
Day/Time
Room Number
Dr. Tom Leppard
Center for Cultural Analysis
Rutgers
Office Hours:
Office:
E-mail: [email protected]
COURSE DESCRIPTION
The social sciences, the natural sciences, and archaeology uncomfortably in-between remain fiercely
interested in islands: variously as testing grounds for theory, as ideal models, or as units of analysis
removed from continental concerns. Yet there has historically been disproportionally little interest on
the part of discrete disciplines to ask what others are doing with their archipelagoes, and how the study
of islands within other subjects has had effects beyond the insular. This class explores: both sides of the
gap; why it has not been bridged; and what benefits might accrue if it were. The goal is less to build a
unified study of islands in and of themselves, but rather to explore how and to what ends islands have
been studied, and how the diversity of this study can enrich discrete fields of investigation. The overall
aim is less an archaeology in archipelagoes, and more an archaeology of archipelagoes, sympathetic to
both the quantitative and the social.
The course begins with introductory and classic readings from the natural science end of the spectrum:
why were early natural scientists so attracted to islands? What was it about islands which lent (and
lends) itself to the study of natural and physical processes? We then move onto early island archaeology
and anthropology. It is now broadly accepted within the hard sciences that islands encourage certain
types of generalization. Is this true to any extent in terms of the human experience of insularity?
Students will be introduced to classics of early island archaeology, especially in the Pacific and
Caribbean, which attempted to explore human culture and how it changes within frameworks borrowed
from the natural sciences. The successes and failures of these approaches – in Hawai’i, Rapa Nui, and
the Lesser Antilles – will be discussed. The course then expands out, in multiple directions. In examples
and case studies ranging from micro-scale reconstruction of herding practices and marriage alliances on
the tiny Greek island of Antikythera to isotope-led studies of burial and movement in pre-Contact
Vanuatu, the symbiosis of human activity and environmental change is considered.
This class aims to build bridges between students interested in islands for different disciplinary reasons,
and to force these students to read and think outside of traditional comfort zones. The aim is not so
much to erode disciplinary boundaries, but enrich how we think about islands and the study of islands,
and to show how cross-fertilization between ecological and anthropological approaches can be of
benefit to both. Readings consequently straddle the ecological and the anthropological; a recurrent
theme is to what extent ecological thinking can be deployed to interrogate anthropological data.
COURSE OBJECTIVES


To introduce students to the study of islands within archaeology, and the diversity of that study.
To foster analytical skills such that students are able to assess and discuss in detail contentious
issues and topics.
1


To allow students to build conceptual bridges between disciplines, and approach critically the
assumptions of these disciplines.
To develop students’ skills in public presentation, extended research-based writing, and
synthesizing various types of data.
FORMAT OF COURSE
The course comprises seminar style discussion. Full participation is vital in rendering this type of format
useful, and is therefore mandatory. To that end, students will come to class having completed all the
required readings for that week, and be willing and able to discuss them in a coherent manner. To
facilitate discussion, per week two (sometimes more) students will come to class prepared to present
orally and informally on a given reading (i.e., content, quality of argumentation), which will be
prescribed at the previous meeting. Such presentation, and constructive participation more generally,
will comprise the participation grade.
READINGS
The readings for each class will be drawn from books and academic journals. Scans of the required
reading will be posted online in advance; consequently, you are not required to purchase any materials
or textbooks for this class. You are, however, responsible for completing the readings in their entirety.
Occasionally, not all members of the class will read all the posted materials; when this is the case, we
will divide up the readings in the previous class. Unless otherwise explicitly stated, you are responsible
for all readings. An inability to refer to these readings during in-class debate and discussion will
adversely affect your participation grade.
For each class, readings are listed in on this syllabus in abbreviated form; this refers back to a master
bibliography, which will be placed online and circulated in paper form.
GRADING and RESPONSIBILITIES



Participation
Final presentation
Paper
40 per cent
20 per cent
40 per cent
In any seminar, constructive discussion (which involves all members of the class) is vital; accordingly,
participation is worth 40 per cent of the total final grade (this includes weekly in-class oral presentations
on readings).
The remainder of the final grade comprises two elements of a final research project. The nature of this
project will be discussed with the instructor and finalized in advance of Spring Break. It is to take the
form of a lengthy research-based paper on a topic germane to material covered in class (or outside class,
at the instructor’s discretion). In the final two weeks of class, students will present formally (i.e., with
slides) the nature and outcomes of their research project (=20 per cent final grade). A final paper
substantive paper (deadline and format TBA) will constitute the remaining 40 per cent of the final grade.
I will circulate guidelines on the style of writing I wish you to adopt. There are no exams in this course.
2
ATTENDANCE POLICY and DEADLINES
Attendance at all meetings is compulsory. I will periodically take attendance, to see if anyone is absent
without a suitable reason. If you miss more than three classes without a suitable reason your
participation grade will be adversely affected. Suitable reasons include, but are not limited to,
documented medical issues, and the definition of ‘suitable reasons’ remains within the discretion of the
instructor. The deadline for the paper and the schedule of formal presentations, when confirmed, are
not subject to negotiation.
FURTHER INFORMATION
The temptation to use laptops for reasons not immediately relevant to the class is often too great;
therefore, please do not use laptops in class unless I require you to do so. If you have a pressing medical
or educational need which means that a laptop is indispensable for taking notes, please contact me prior
to using it.
It goes without saying that you should not be using cellphones, tablets etc. in class. Students often
assume that they cannot be seen using cellphones in a darkened or busy classroom – they are mistaken.
Please do not be late, and do not pack up your belongings prior to the end of class. Disruptive behavior,
or in addition any behavior otherwise damaging to the learning experience of any given student or
students, cannot and will not be tolerated.
I will attempt to respond to emails as quickly as possible. Clearly, emails sent at 10am are likely to
receive a response more quickly than those sent at 2am.
In a course such as this, quality of writing – spelling, syntax, coherence of argumentation and analysis –
are vital, and the quality of your written work will therefore have a profound effect on your grade.
Rutgers has an excellent writing center on campus, located ####. If you are worried about your writing
or are seeking general advice, this is a very useful resource.
The instructor reserves the right to alter or amend the syllabus. By our second meeting (####) you will
have read and understood this syllabus.
ACADEMIC HONESTY
Students should be aware of Rutgers’ policy regarding academic honesty; ####. Academic dishonesty
includes (but is not limited to) plagiarism, deliberately breaching exam conditions, unauthorized
collaboration with other students, and submitting work in more than one course, without the
instructor’s approval, for credit. Students should pay particular attention to the definition of plagiarism
offered in ####, and on the website of ####. Penalties for cheating are at the discretion of the
instructor, and range from an F grade for the piece of work in question to much more serious
consequences, including but not limited to receiving an F grade for the course. Students can often be
unclear on what constitutes plagiarism; if you are unsure as to what constitutes plagiarism contact me
well in advance of submission of the piece of work in question.
3
CLASS SCHEDULE
WEEK 1: 17th-23rd January
INTRODUCTION
First meeting to discuss the content and organization of the class.
WEEK 2: 24th-30th January
DARWIN, WALLACE, AND ISLAND BIOGEOGRAPHY
In this session we will begin with introductory and classic readings from the natural sciences: Darwin’s
formative experiences in the Galapagos, Wallace’s specimen-hunting in the deep jungle of the Moluccas,
through to MacArthur and Wilson’s concept of island biogeography and its revolutionary impact on
ecology and biology. Why were these natural scientists so attracted to islands? What was it about
islands which lent (and lends) itself to the study of natural and physical processes? Might there be any
applicability (either in terms of general theory or method) for the study of the behavior and ecology of
the human animal on islands?
Readings: Quammen 1996 (selections); Darwin 1859 (selections); MacArthur and Wilson 1967 (skim)
WEEK 3: 31st January-6th February
FIRST ISLAND ARCHAEOLOGIES: RAPA NUI AND ESOTERIC EFFLORESCENCE
In the foregoing session we saw that it is now broadly accepted within the hard sciences that islands
encourage certain types of quantitative analysis, and thereby generalization, that is impossible on
mainlands. Is this true to any extent in terms of the human experience of insularity? In this session we
address the first attempts at island archaeology – that is, studies which understood insularity as a
condition factor. This necessarily means our first encounter archaeology of the insular Pacific, and
especially with the work of Vayda, Rappaport, and Sahlins. In particular, we will explore the concept of
insular cultural diversity, and whether it can be interpreted in the same terms as biodiversity.
Readings: Hunt and Lipo 2011 (selections); Fosberg 1963; Vayda and Rappaport 1963; Sahlins 1955
WEEK 4: 7th February-13th February
ISLANDS AS LABORATORIES? A (MOSTLY) MEDITERRANEAN PERSPECTIVE
The Mediterranean has a venerable history of archaeology on islands but, until the 1970s, not
necessarily archaeology of islands. In this session we turn our attention to the archaeology of the
prehistoric Mediterranean, and especially to a series of papers by Evans in which he mooted the concept
of islands as laboratories for the study of cultural process. We consider the extent to which islands can
4
or cannot be understood as closed systems, and the first attempts of Mediterranean archaeologists to
study them as such.
Readings: Evans 1973; Evans 1977; Cherry 1981; Cherry 1982; Keegan and Diamond 1987
WEEK 5: 14th February-20th February
IDEAL MODELS, CLOSED SYSTEMS: HAWAI’I
The Hawai’ian archipelago has been – and in some sense remains – a proving ground for island
archaeology and associated theory, not least by virtue of its extreme isolation and rich ethnohistoric
record. In this session we focus on Hawai’i as perhaps the best hope we have for a ‘closed system’, and
explore its archaeology, demography, and social evolution in the light of biogeographic and ecological
expectations. We also consider the extent to which we can generalize about the Hawai’ian insular
experience.
Readings: Kirch 1990; Kirch 2000 (selections); Dye 2014; Athens et al. 2014
WEEK 6: 21st February-27th February
PACIFIC CONNECTIVITIES: THEORY IN MELANESIA
Thus far, we have considered archaeological approaches to island which tacitly endorse biogeographic
principles; in essence, that isolation is a driving factor in insular social evolution. In this session, we read
the first attempts to challenge this model. Focusing on the archaeology of Melanesia and the work of
Terrell and Gosden (amongst others), we explore whether insularity is in fact a condition of island living,
or whether connectivity has greater explanatory power in understanding island cultural and behavioral
change. We consider the extent to which an emphasis on connectedness is fatal for a comparative and
ecologically-informed island archaeology.
Readings: Terrell 1986 (selections); Terrell et al. 1997 and reactions; Gosden and Pavlides 1994
WEEK 7: 28th February-5th March
THE CHALLENGE OF THE SEASCAPE
In a series of papers and books, Rainbird and others challenged the received model of island
archaeology. Building on the concept of connectivity, they argued that the sea should be interpreted not
as a biogeographic barrier, but as a facilitator of movement and exchange; counterintuitively, we should
understand island societies as intrinsically non-insular. In this session we evaluate this claim against
previous case studies. We also read sections of Broodbank, and look for alternatives to the isolated vs
connected dichotomy.
Readings: Rainbird 1999 and reactions; Rainbird 2007 (selections); Broodbank 2000 (selections); Boomert
and Bright 2007; Fitzpatrick et al. 2007
5
WEEK 8: 6th March-12th March
STATES IN STRANGE PLACES: INSULAR SOCIAL COMPLEXITY
In this question we consider the relationship between island archaeology and one of the Big Three
questions of anthropological archaeology: the emergence of social complexity. How – if at all – should
we attempt to fit islands and island communities into generalizing schema about the emergence of
complex forms like the state? We focus on Sardinia and Crete in the Mediterranean, Puerto Rico in the
Caribbean, and Hawai’i and Tonga in the Pacific, exploring how we can reconcile hierarchical,
centralized, and redistributive forms of social organization with an understanding of islands as
demographically fragile and resource-poor.
Readings: Hamilakis 2015; Blake 2015; Kirch 2010 (selections); Siegel 2010
WEEK 9: 13th March-19th March
NO CLASS – SPRING RECESS
WEEK 10: 20th March-26th March
THICK DESCRIPTION: ANTIKYTHERA AND ST KILDA
This is the first of two sessions in which we explore how ethnohistoric data can be used in better
understanding the insular experience, and especially the extent to which such data can be used to build
more robust interpretations of the archaeological record. We focus on landholding and farming
strategies on two small and remote islands in the Mediterranean and North Atlantic respectively. We
consider just how fragile island living can be, and whether this recognition allows us (or not) to see that
isolation vs connectivity are in fact points on a spectrum of behaviors and strategies.
Readings: Bevan and Conolly 2013 (selections); Harden and Lelong 2011 (selections)
WEEK 11: 27th March-2nd April
PETRI DISHES IN THE OCEAN: TRISTAN DA CUNHA AND PITCAIRN
In this second session with an emphasis on ethnohistoric data, we consider the recent settlement
histories of two small islands: Tristan da Cunha, in the South Atlantic, and Pitcairn, in the East Pacific.
Examining the tribulations of both islands since settlement – in terms of demographic instability, genetic
isolation, and the relative lack of interest taken in both islands by the apparatus of the state – we
explore how lessons from Tristan and Pitcairn can enrich our approach to comparable prehistoric
situations.
Readings: Barrow 1910 (selections); Hosegood 1966 (selections); Marks 2009 (selections); Nicolson 1997
(selections)
6
WEEK 12: 3rd April-9th April
NO CLASS – INSTRUCTOR AT SOCIETY FOR AMERICAN ARCHAEOLOGY ANNUAL MEETING
WEEK 13: 10th April-16th April
ENVIRONMENTAL AND CLIMATE CHANGE, PAST AND PRESENT
Environmental conditions (and human responses to and strategies embedded within them) are not
static, but change at a series of scales. There are good reasons to suppose that this dynamism is
exaggerated in island contexts. In this session we explore types of environmental change, from humanmediated floral and faunal impacts to the glacial-interstadial cycle. We examine varied types of humanisland interaction, and explore how short-term strategies to increase robustness can generate long-term
structural weaknesses. We conclude by roaming broadly over the topic of anthropogenic climate change
and its implications for islanders.
Readings: Cooper and Peros 2010; Mieth and Bork 2010; Rick 2011; Rick et al. 2013;
WEEK 14: 17th April-23rd April
FINAL PRESENTATIONS I
WEEK 15: 24th April-30th April
FINAL PRESENTATIONS II
7