Introduction: The Materiality of Traces and Legacies

0 Kimberly Kasper, Department of Anthropology, Rhodes College , Memphis, TN, USA 1 Robert Paynter and Broughton Anderson, Department of Anthropology, University of Massachusetts Amherst , Massachusetts, USA This Special Issue presents issues in contemporary archaeological theory and practice as influenced by the work of H. Martin Wobst. Wobst came to study in the U.S. nearly 50 years ago and has contributed to many changes in the theory and practice of archaeology since then. Though the papers cover a wide range of topics they share common interests in seeing materiality as constitutive of culture, archaeologists as participants in the present as well as observers of the past, and an interest in transcending traditional definitions of archaeological research. ________________________________________________________________ Re sume : Ce Nume ro Spe cial est consacre a` l'influence de l'oeuvre de H. Martin Wobst sur les proble` mes de la the orie et de la pratique de l'arche ologie contemporaine. Wobst vint e tudier aux Etats-Unis il y a presque 50 ans et son travail a contribue depuis a de nombreux changements dans la the orie et la pratique de l'arche ologie. Bien que les articles couvrent une grande varie te de sujets, ils partagent une conception de la mate rialite comme constitutive de la culture, des arche ologues comme acteurs dans le pre sent et observateurs du passe , et un inte re t pour le de passement des de finitions traditionnelles de la recherche en arche ologie. ________________________________________________________________ - Resumen: Esta Edicio n Especial presenta cuestiones sobre la teora y pra ctica arqueolo gica contempora nea segu n la influencia de la obra de H. Martin Wobst. Wobst vino a estudiar a los Estados Unidos hace casi 50 an os y su obra ha contribuido a muchos cambios en la teora y pra ctica de la arqueologa desde entonces. Aunque los documentos cubren una amplia gama de temas, comparten intereses comunes en ver la materialidad como constitutiva de la cultura, a los arqueo logos como participantes en el presente as como tambie n como observadores del pasado, y un intere s en trascender las definiciones tradicionales de la investigaci on arqueolo gica. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ H. Martin Wobst has steadfastly sought to widen the field of vision of archaeology, in his publications, professional presentations, and in his classrooms. For his students, of whom the contributors within this Special Issue are a very small sample, he sought to foster an expansive and rigorous curiosity. As a result, these papers do not represent an orthodoxy. Instead, they exhibit a wide-ranging curiosity that seeks to redefine the traditional borders of the thought and practice of archaeology, a characteristic that is one of Wobsts most enduring contributions to the field. Despite the range of topics addressed in this Special Issue, the papers do have interconnected themes. Though quite varied on the surface, these papers share deeper premises upon which their archaeology is based. An important tenet is that the material world is constitutive of culture as well as reflective of a way of life. In addition, the authors understand the past, as well as the present, as being made by human beings in particular material circumstances. They warily interrogate how archaeologists, including themselves, are situated in their study. They are productively skeptical about fundamental concepts, such as the valuing of the deep past over archaeologies of the near present, or in the name of objectivity valuing archaeologists collaborations with academics over ones with various publics. And there is a sense in a number of the papers that archaeology should bring joy as well as enlightenment to our lives and those of people around us. As reflected in the pages of Archaeologies, at meetings of the World Archaeological Congress (WAC), and in other professional venues, archaeologists find ourselves at an interesting juncture. An intense focus on culture histories has provided us with much broader and more richly nuanced understandings of the planets many pasts. Accompanying this trend is the bewildering proliferation of theoretical positions, methodological approaches, and professional stances identified as archaeology. The well-established approaches of culture history and processual archaeology are today joined by evolutionary archaeologies, Indigenous archaeologies, Marxist archaeologies, phenomenological archaeologies, feminist archaeologies, neo-ecological archaeologies, landscape archaeologies, historical archaeologies, nationalist archaeologies, colonial archaeologies, post-colonial archaeologies, heritage archaeologies, public archaeologies, CRM archaeologies, and so on. Some of these varieties of archaeology involve as much work on top of the ground as in it. And increasingly, we engage in research that crosses into the terrain of cultural and/or biological anthropologists. These practices have affected how we think, talk, and write about our work. Archaeologists used to understand the field as a grand debate between neatly bundled theory-method-history schools of thought, individual billiard balls, if you will. Today our discussions are much more like a web where projects in one area can be more or less linked with projects in another, because they share some, but by no means all, interests and practices. The nodes in the web are ideas and projects around which people cluster, sometimes physically in the forms of academic departments or contract firms, and increasingly virtually, around websites, listserves, and blogs. Wobst in Archaeology The breadth of thinking in this Special Issue reflects many concerns found throughout the archaeological world. Their focus on some concerns rather than others results in no small measure from the authors shared experiences in one of the nodes on the archaeological net, the Department of Anthropology at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, and especially the authors relations with Martin Wobst. Wobst joined the faculty at the University of Massachusetts Amherst in 1971, and has been an active member shaping the departments pedagogy and research direction for nearly its entire formal history (which began in 1969). The department has become known for research in areas outside the traditional geographical foci of anthropological inquiry, including Europe, the northeastern United States, and Madagascar. Its faculty and students have established reputations for pushing the social and intellectual boundaries of their respective subfields. Its student-centered, rather than canoncentered, graduate program has attracted students with a wide range of academic backgrounds and interests. Wobsts own research interests in the fundamental concepts of archaeology have allowed him to be a distinctive adviser, able to encourage students (...truncated)