Richard Hingley richard.hingley@durham.ac.uk
Emeritus Professor
Struggling with a Roman Inheritance. A response to Versluys
Hingley, Richard
Authors
Abstract
I am very grateful to Miguel John Versluys for this paper, which raises several important issues that derive from current debates in Roman archaeology. I am aware of the context of Versluys's arguments as I am a contributor to the forthcoming volume Globalization and the Roman world (which Versluys has jointly edited; Pitts and Versluys 2014). I am pleased to be able to develop some of the themes outlined in my chapter for that volume (Hingley 2014b) through this reflection upon Versluys's contribution to the developing debate. The issues raised by Versluys are particularly timely since a number of younger colleagues have observed that the critical focus provided by what I shall term ‘post-colonial Roman archaeologies’ (PCRAs) is stifling innovative research. PCRA is the term I use to address the body of research and publication characterized by Versluys as ‘Anglo-Saxon Roman archaeology’ (for reasons given below). I did not attend the TRAC session at Frankfurt to which Versluys refers, but I recognize his observation that there is a genuine concern about the form and content of PCRAs arising from Roman archaeologists both in Britain and overseas. PCRAs have focused around two core themes: (1) critiquing the concept of Romanization and (2) the development of new ways of approaching the Roman Empire. Versluys suggests that this discussion has culminated in ‘an uncomfortable ending’ (p. 1) for the Romanization debate and his proposal includes the reintroduction of this concept. Taking a rather different perspective, I shall propose that a dynamic and transformative agenda is spreading across several continents and that PCRAs form an important aspect of this developing perspective.
Citation
Hingley, R. (2014). Struggling with a Roman Inheritance. A response to Versluys. Archaeological Dialogues, 21(1), 20-24. https://doi.org/10.1017/s138020381400004x
Journal Article Type | Article |
---|---|
Publication Date | Jun 1, 2014 |
Deposit Date | May 29, 2014 |
Publicly Available Date | Feb 12, 2015 |
Journal | Archaeological Dialogues |
Print ISSN | 1380-2038 |
Electronic ISSN | 1478-2294 |
Publisher | Cambridge University Press |
Peer Reviewed | Peer Reviewed |
Volume | 21 |
Issue | 1 |
Pages | 20-24 |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.1017/s138020381400004x |
Public URL | https://durham-repository.worktribe.com/output/1463847 |
Files
Accepted Journal Article
(97 Kb)
PDF
Copyright Statement
© Copyright Cambridge University Press 2014. This paper has been published in a revised form subsequent to editorial input by Cambridge University Press in 'Archaeological dialogues' (21: 1 (2014) 20-24) http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=ARD
You might also like
Hadrian’s Wall as Artscape
(2023)
Journal Article
Contextualising Counterfeits: Roman Coin Moulds in Britain and the Channel Islands
(2023)
Journal Article
Hadrian's Wall: an allegory for British disunity
(2020)
Book Chapter
Downloadable Citations
About Durham Research Online (DRO)
Administrator e-mail: dro.admin@durham.ac.uk
This application uses the following open-source libraries:
SheetJS Community Edition
Apache License Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/)
PDF.js
Apache License Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/)
Font Awesome
SIL OFL 1.1 (http://scripts.sil.org/OFL)
MIT License (http://opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.html)
CC BY 3.0 ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
Powered by Worktribe © 2024
Advanced Search