‘the practice, theory and the attitudes of a dominating metropolitan centre
ruling a distant territory’ as against colonialism meaning ‘the implanting of
settlements on a distant territory’ (ibid. 8).
Said and other post-colonial studies writers are partly inspired by authors
within cultural studies, mainly by politically engaged thinkers such as
Gramsci and Foucault, whose radical literary theory and criticism analysed
unjust power relationships as manifested in cultural products. In fact post-
colonial studies can be better understood as an umbrella name given to the
work of a group of scholars, who use a wide and even divergent body of
theory. Many of the ideas thatXow into post-colonial discussions are in a state
ofXux. There even seems to be a great deal of uncertainty as to just what the
term ‘post-colonial’ denotes. The key issue here is that postcolonialism has, as
Derek Gregory says, ‘a constitutive interest in colonialism’. This author argues
that it exposes the continuous demands and extortions of colonialism in
order to overcome them (Gregory 2004: 9). Post-colonial studies aspire to
‘resist the seductions ofnostalgichistories of colonialism’ (ibid.). Parts II and
III of this volume can be viewed as within the corpus of post-colonial studies
in that it aims critically to examine the role of archaeology in the interactions
between European (and North American and Japanese) nations and the
societies they colonized either formally or informally in the modern period
in general and during the nineteenth century in particular.
Although colonial and post-colonial theory originated in literary studies,
and this is still theWeld with the largest number of scholars, the debate has
increasingly gained prominence in other research areas, such as media studies,
geography and political science. In archaeology post-colonial studies have just
started to produce critiques that are bringing a completely new perspective to
historiographical accounts. The book edited by Jane Webster and Nick
Cooper onPost-colonial perspectives on Roman imperialism(1996) discusses
some of the issues that will be highlighted in the following paragraphs, as does
Meskell’s edited bookArchaeology under Fire(see particularly Bahrani 1998),
Reid’sWhose Pharaoh? (2002) and Robert Aguirre,Informal Empire. Mexico
and Central America in Victorian Culture(2005).
Post-colonial studies have brought to the scientiWc debate several concepts
that will be employed in the discussion undertaken regarding imperial and
colonial archaeology. Some wereWrst deployed by authors who preceded
post-colonial studies. This is the case with the terms ‘discourse’ and ‘hegem-
ony’. Discourse, a Foucaultian term, will be used to refer to a powerfully
conWned area of social knowledge, a system of statements that produce
socially agreed understandings (Foucault 1972 (2002)). Colonial or imperial
discourse will deWne the way Europeans thought about, advocated and
understood colonialism. The concept of hegemony,Wrst outlined by Gramsci
An Alternative Account 7