Archaeology Matters: Action Archaeology in the Modern World (review)

Archaeology Matters: Action Archaeology in the Modern World, by Jeremy Sabloff, is a thoughtful, well-written volume. It represents a contribution to "public archaeology" (in the beyond-CRM sense) from a senior scholar, and for that reason alone would be important. Fortunately, the content here is as solid as the scholar's reputation would suggest.

Although Sabloff has written about public issues before (see his 1998 American Archaeologist article "Communication and the Future of Archaeology"), he correctly points out in his first chapter that this volume takes things further. Here he moves past motherhood-and-applepie calls to action (the "archaeologists should/can/must" statements all too common in much writing about the public and archaeology) to sharing concrete examples of how archaeological work can have practical use in contemporary life. By "action archaeology" Sabloff refers to "archaeologists working for living communities, not just in or near them" (17). His goal is to spur us first to think of our work in different ways and then, more important, to act on this to create new modes of archaeological practice.

Sabloff does an excellent job of articulating the rationale for archaeologists to take a proactive role in connecting their scholarly work with real-world concerns and interests. The book is accessibly written with compelling examples from both prehistoric and historical archaeology contexts. He takes pains to acknowledge that both processual and postprocessual theoretical approaches have found a useful place in contemporary archaeology, pointing out that both have created relevant knowledge for the wider world—again with examples. Throughout, he situates the volume effectively within the recent scholarly literature, with useful citations and references to that literature. As a book written for the lay public and student, this small volume is likely to have more wide-ranging influence than much standard academic writing.

Chapter 1 sets up the examples that follow, all of which make it clear that Sabloff's point is not to advocate simple "engagement" but to find ways for archaeologists to help solve contemporary problems. Although he correctly notes that the most "visible" of these efforts have been in historical archaeology, he also discusses many examples from work that has focused on prehistory—he continually crosses this disciplinary divide throughout the volume. In chapters 2 through 6 he examines how archaeological information can tell the modern world how civilizations devolve, how we can develop and maintain sustainability movements, how and why warfare and urbanization develop, and how global, national, and local preservation efforts can be made successful. These are good examples—inspirational even. Some are from his own work with the Maya, but he does not restrict himself temporally or globally.

The book closes with two chapters that attempt to move the agenda forward and an extremely useful appendix listing the primary sources he discusses. The chapter "Future Directions" offers still more examples, and the epilogue confronts some of the realities that archaeologists face if they wish to develop a career in action archaeology. For senior members of the discipline the epilogue could be the most useful chapter of all; Sabloff provides a clear and candid critique of the ways in which the academy devalues "public" or action-type research. He lays the "fault" for much of this at our own feet when he points out that archaeologists typically do not write for popular magazines, consult on movies and television, or otherwise "engage" with people who are producing "archaeological" content in mass media. He correctly points out why we do not do this—that "such activities just don't count, or even worse, count against you" (106) on the typical archaeological career track. His critical comments about how archaeology has become conservative and difficult to change, how institutions do not award public work, how scholars themselves denigrate it, and how some archaeologists remain suspicious of the potential contributions of site descendants are all convincing and on target.

The problem, of course, is that those who are in a...