The Anthropology Of Genocide - WNLibrary

112 essentializing difference
NOTES
1. To quote V. Gordon Childe, one of the most influential archaeologists of the twentieth
century (Trigger 1980a), who was himself influenced by Kossinna’s “settlement archaeological
method”: “We find certain types of remains...constantly recurring together. Such
a complex of regularly associated traits we shall term a ‘cultural group’ or just a ‘culture.’
We assume that such a complex is the material expression of what would today be called a
‘people’ ” (1929:vi).
2. The metaphor of blood is discussed by Uli Linke in some detail in her study of race
and nation in modern Germany (Linke 1997:559–61).
3. The Christian Democratic Party in Germany, for example, propagates the principle
of jus sanguinis (right of the blood) and views Germans as a “community of destiny and ancestry”
(Pfaff 1996:9, quoted in Sautman 1997:81). This is not a phenomenon unique to the
German nation-state. The nationality laws of the People’s Republic of China also rely on
the concept of race through the “principle of blood lineage” (xuetong zhuyi ); as with so-called
ethnic Germans, individuals of Chinese descent not living in China may apply for PRC passports
by virtue of their blood lineage (Sautman 1997:81).
4. Martin Hall makes this relationship between colonialism and archaeological manipulation
of the past explicit: “In those countries where the archaeology of the colonized is mostly
practised by descendants of the colonizers, the study of the past must have a political dimension.
This has become overt in Australasia, where, as one Aboriginal representative has
put it, the colonizers ‘have tried to destroy our culture, you have built your fortunes upon the
lands and bodies of our people and now, having said sorry, want a share in picking out the
bones of what you regard as a dead past’ ” (Langford 1983:2, quoted in Hall 1984:455).
5. See Abu el-Haj (1998) for additional discussion of Israeli archaeology and nationalism.
REFERENCES CITED
Abu el-Haj, Nadia. 1998. “Translating Truths: Nationalism, the Practice of Archaeology,
and the Remaking of Past and Present in Contemporary Jerusalem.” American Ethnologist
25(2):166–88.
Anderson, Benedict. 1983. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origins and Spread of Nationalism.
London: Verso.
Andreopoulos, George, ed. 1994. Genocide: Conceptual and Historical Dimensions. Philadelphia:
University of Pennsylvania Press.
Anthony, David. 1995. “Nazi and Eco-Feminist Prehistories: Ideology and Empiricism in
Indo-European Archaeology.” In Nationalism, Politics and the Practice of Archaeology. Philip
L. Kohl and Clare Fawcett, eds. Pp. 82–98. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Arnold, Bettina. 1990. “The Past as Propaganda: Totalitarian Archaeology in Nazi Germany.”
Antiquity 64:464–78.
———. 1992. “The Past as Propaganda.” Archaeology ( July/August):30–37.
———. 1998/99. “The Power of the Past: Nationalism and Archaeology in 20th Century
Germany.” Archaelogia Polona (35/36):237–53.
———. 1999. “The Contested Past.” Anthropology Today 15(4):1–4.
———. 2000. “A Transatlantic Perspective on German Archaeology.” In Archaeology, Ideology
and Society: The German Experience. Heinrich Härke, ed. Bern and Frankfurt: Fritz Lang
Verlag.