This paper explores the parallels between archaeology's role in shaping identities during the early twentieth century, and the discipline's predicament in the new era of populist nationalism. Archaeology’s establishment in state institutions such as national museums and universities was achieved through the development of methods for measuring and codifying ancient remains. This ostensibly scientific approach enabled archaeologists to make categorical statements about the past. However, the inherent ambiguity and incompleteness of the archaeological record meant that preconceptions played a disproportionate role in the interpretation of often-meagre evidence. Assumptions were frequently grounded in the glorified and often fictive narratives of folklore and myth. Nationalistic politicians, however, saw value in a discipline with seemingly scientific credentials that could validate stories of ancient greatness. This yielded funding for archaeology and prestige for its leading practitioners, with often limited incentive for critical reflection.
As the twentieth century progressed, and the discipline matured, critical engagement with the assumptions that underpinned archaeological interpretations increased. But in the early twenty-first century, the political cycle has turned, and populist nationalism is a resurgent force in European politics. How is archaeology responding to the new political reality? Is 21st century archaeological science critically engaging with the new politics, or simply finding new ways to reify old stories? Have archaeologists learnt the lessons of the discipline’s past, or are we destined to repeat the same mistakes?
By examining historical and present-day uses (and misuses) of scientific data in archaeology in Ireland and Europe, this paper seeks to highlight the role of disciplinary historiography in identifying the flawed reasoning that continues to underpin many nationalistic and ethnocentric interpretations of cultural identities before modern nations existed.

First Author: Andrew Whitefield

Co-Authors: Anna-Lena Jerg

Keywords:
history of archaeology
archaeological science
archaeological interpretation
nationalism
identity
presentation to the public