What does it take to be an anthropologist?

Cynthia’s last lines in, A memoir of Fieldwork, Survival, and Commitment, hints at the character of what it takes to be an anthropologist.

 ‘But we survivor-anthropologists are not afraid. We believe in the possibilities, find all human beings “of interest,” and will not turn away.’ 

Personally I take from this statement that anthropology fieldwork entails more than just technical knowledge and skill, although these are important, it takes the development of personal characteristics to be an anthropologist. Throughout the journey of this course my views on anthropology have evolved. While I still love anthropology, I now know that the risks and rewards of doing ethnographic work can be high. This course has allowed me to focus on issues that I will have to personally face in my own ethnographic fieldwork. Furthermore, as I wish to emphasize in this essay there are many skills that are required to be an anthropologist that I still have to learn. In this essay I hope to call attention the essential nature of technical skills that are required for good ethnographic work. Moreover, while in the field, anthropological inquiry involves good methods and practice of those skills. This may include working with informants, working out which multi-site or a tradition style should be used. I have also learnt that an anthropologist has to consider the importance of ethics and where our morals should stand. Further, I have learnt that studying anthropology involves personal development such as being honest with yourself and your informants. In this reflected essay I want to give my answer to a question Cynthia raised in her article: ‘What does it take to be an anthropologist?’

Bronislaw Malinowski’s famous work, Method and scope of Anthropological Fieldwork, set the hallmarks of what good anthropological work should be. Long term, on some remote island, with a holistic approach to ethnographic work studying every aspect of a society.

While Evens-Pritchard’s ideas on the ‘Oxford man’ takes this notion even further with in-depth studies of multi-able cultures over a very long periods of time with the aim of conducting a cross cultural study of two whole societies. This anthropologist, and others like them, set the standard of what techniques are needed in order to study a society. However, while this may be the ideal model, today the scope and method of anthropology has grown. Today you may use multi-sited fieldwork over the traditional methods if you want to explore a common theme across cultures. This was certainly the case with Ulf Hannerz, Being There...and There... and There! Reflections on Multi-Site ethnography” whose research in foreign correspondents is perhaps reflective of what it takes to be a modern anthropologist. As in our modern world, unlike the societies Malinowski and Evens-Pritchard stayed, things are in constant flux, people are moving all over the world, things are becoming globalized, and the ‘other’ is not so far away anymore. What all these anthropologists demonstrate is that to be an anthropologist requires knowledge of the methods and the development of skills to carry out research in a systematic way. As Hannerz concludes ethnography is really the art of the possible. 

The works of Nancey Scheper-Hughes and Philip Bourgue highlight two important ethical issues that need to be addressed by anthropologists. Scheper-Hughes, Ire in Ireland, shows that anthropologists have to be aware that their work is part of the voice of a community. And sometimes as researchers we have to be aware that the ‘other’ may now see our work and actively disagree with the image presented, moreover, we anthropologists may be responsible in creating new social categories which may lead to problems for our informants. Meanwhile, in the essay, Confronting the Ethics of Ethnography, Bourgue critiques the traditional ideas of ethics in anthropology demonstrating, through his powerful experience in the field, of the wider implications of fieldwork. Bourgue essay highlights the requirement for persona and sometimes complex judgment when we are conducting ethnographic work. Furthermore, it highlights what anthropologists are, they are more than just researchers but they are also humans and the concerns of humanity should be high priority for any anthropologist. If we can keep this in mind while doing field work we can be more ethical in tough times. The academic reaction to Bourgue work consisted of his work being deemed unethical and his career in anthropology was almost cut short. However, as Bourgue argues the ethics of anthropology are too narrow and rigid. What both Scheper-Hughes and Bourgue works demonstrate is that to be an anthropologist we have to go beyond basic ethical limits. We as anthropologists have to power to give and take a voice for communities that we are studying and because of this we have to be aware that we are not the end point of the moral questions we face as human beings. 

The article, Being Gay and Doing Fieldwork, by Walter L. Williams really touched home for me. As a homosexual myself I never thought about coming out in the field and the problems and advantages that might occur if I had to do this. The article highlights some of the issues with interaction with informants, making clear that honest is perhaps the best course of action. While it is important to fully disclose your reasons for research, I have found that in my anthropological training, up till this course, how to approach fieldwork was to basically give some basic guidelines. However, this approach may miss some of the important personal characteristics we should develop. Honesty, Williams highlights is one of them. By giving insights to his research where he was open about his sexuality, Williams bring to the fore some of the advantages of being ‘out’ in anthropology. In one instance he is talking about getting access to Native American ‘two spirit’ people, and the fear of revealing that his interest stemmed from his own sexuality. When he revealed this to an old Indian man doors opened that allowed him to gain access to informants. This, to me, signifies the importance of the anthropologists as a social gathering tool. If we cannot be honest with those around us in our fieldwork why would they have any reason to open up to us about their culture? 

In sum, Cynthia’s survivor-anthropologists may be a good statement of what it takes to be an anthropologist. When she states that we, the students of anthropology should be asked what it takes to be an anthropologist, we should be able to say more than just the technical aspects. We should say the courage to be honest, the ability to see the ethical concerns as a human being, and we should be able to answer about the character of being an anthropologist. So what does it take to be an anthropologist? It takes, as I have hopefully shown, a good understanding of the methods of fieldwork including gathering data and finding good informants. It takes knowledge of the growing scope of anthropological inquiry considering that now we have different ways and different questions in this globalized world. It takes knowing that we have the power to give and take away the voice of a community and that they now have the ability to comment on that voice as well. It takes personal courage and honesty to open yourself up to informants, even if this means the risk of being vulnerable. It takes finding people ‘of interest’ and not turning away when things can become so bleak.  

In what ways is the expansion of Roman culture detectable archaeologically within the cities and landscape of Etruria and Campania?

By Wayne Marsahall

This essay will examine the ways in which the expansion of Roman culture is detectable archaeologically within the cities and landscapes of Etruria and Campania. This essay will look at the ways the resistance 1to the expansion of Roman Culture can be seen in the Etruria landscape. Archaeological evidence from farms and the burials associated with them demonstrate that the process of acculturation was ongoing, which can be seen in the burial urns and the latinization of tomb inscriptions. In Campania the expansion of Roman culture was aided by the building of aqueducts. These building projects affected the spread of Roman culture in Pompeii. The local élite adopted Roman style architecture, this in turn trickle down into the lower classes spreading Roman culture in the process.  In the city of Paestum the Romans took control of the political life of the city. They built a new Forum which helped strengthen the Roman expansion in the city and landscape of Campania. 

Archaeological evidence shows that the expansion of Roman culture in the landscapes northern and southern Etruria varied possibly because cultural attitudes. Terrenato hypothesizes that cultural homogeneity for the northern Etruscans was a result of their tight community(Terrenato, 1998 p. 109).   However, social anthropologist Eriksen notes that regular contact between two ethnic groups might make them emphasized their own cultural uniqueness (Eriksen, 2010 p. 276). The site San Mario shows evidence for the Etruscans protecting their own cultural identity. The San Mario site is thought to be a typical Etruscan farmstead. Artifacts from the site date to the fourth century BC, right into the Roman period. This Terrenato suggests is evidence for a long occupation by people of the same culture and that these people had some degree of autonomy away from the central influences of Rome (Terrenato, 1998 p. 102, Nicola Terrenato, 1996 pp.101-106). In southern Etruscan settlement patters change dramatically with Roman control. Local settlement population decrees and unlike northern farms local southern farms are abandoned (Potter, 1978 p. 107). This change is settlement patterns may show that the process of Romanization in southern Etruria was far more extensive then the northern people. Terrenato hypothesizes Etruscans held onto their own culture their outward focus and appearance emulated Roman fashions (Terrenato, 1998 p. 102). In south Etruscan resistance to Romanization can be seen in the settlement patterns of smaller farms that seem to avoid major Roman highways sticking to the fringes of valleys (Potter, 1978 p. 109). With increased contact with the Romans the people of Etruria started to emphasized their own culture uniqueness. They resisted Romanization by keeping aspects of their culture intact, but northern Etruscans were better able to resist then southern Etruscans. 

The idea to become Roman, or the process of Romanization, was an ongoing process, because the idea of what being Roman was alway changing. To chart the expansion of Roman culture through the archaeological record dose not represent a change in cultural identify but merely a change in material culture. Language, however, is at the heart of a community changes in language could mean changes in the community as a whole. Language, Cooley says, can be used to resist cultural and political change or integrate one culture into another (Cooley, 2002 p. 77).  There is evidence to support that local Etruscans were successful in keeping important aspects of their cultural alive centuries after the Romans had conquered them, through burial customs and language. Analysis of élite burials associated with villa sites suggests that Etruscans maintained their funerary traditional several centuries after annexation. At the tomb site I1 Puntone an inscribed stone shows etymological evidence of Etruscans origins. The tomb may have belonged to a magistrate with the name Anaenius and his cognomen, Pharianus. Anaenius may have its origins in the Etruscan language. This assertion, as Terrenato indicates, is hard to establish, as the etymological evidence also point to a romanization of Etruscan language. Terrenato suggests that inscribed names could be the latinized version of the original Etruscan. A sarcophagus inscribed with name Pestinia Apricula shows evidence of latinization. The name Pestinia may be the latinized version of the Etruscan pestiu (Terrenato, 1998 pp. 101-102).  

In the city of Volaterrae, one of the oldest and most important Etruria cities, public life became essentially a Roman affair. The expansion of Roman culture was fueled by the building of great urban works The locals went to great length to convoy a level of Roman sophistication. The local élite's adopted Roman architectural, the domus was popular of house build in this style. The Romans would expand their culture through the construction of urban development. One such development in Volaterrae is the Great urban reservoirs, built to ease water supply problems (Terrenato, 1998 p. 105). Such works show the spread of Roman culture in public life, through the spread of Roman urban developments. The city of Volaterrae was not the only city where the Romans used urban works to expand their culture.

Romans were known for their urban infrastructure, it’s a lasting image of Roman culture. Aqueducts  were build to serve many large cities and had important affect on the development of culture in these cities. The building of an aqueduct to relive the water problems of Pompeian would also serve to expand Roman culture in the city.  According to Jones, social competition within the city was fierce. The building of an aqueduct led to the elite redesigning their houses to take advantage of the water, often adopting roman styles, to gain prestige (Jones, 2005 p. 696). In this way the architectural features of Pompeian houses emulate the ideas of what it means to be Roman. The competition among the Pompeian élite’s, to gain prestige, speeded up the process of acculturation. The Pompeiian élite emulated the Roman style, so much so, that they became the visual symbols of what it meant to be Roman (Graham, 1998 pp. 172-173).  The site, house of the Vestals show that it went through several redesigns to take advantage of the access to water (Jones, 2005 p. 697).

While competition among the élite's to emulate the Romans style raged the trickle down effects of romanization can also be seen in the architectural features of everyday houses. The lower class tried to emulated the élite class thereby expanding the cultural fabric to include Roman culture (Graham, 1998 p. 165). An archaeological study shows that out of 144 houses from the city region VI that the spatial layout of a Pompeian house became very similar to that of a Roman houses overtime. Although individual houses differ their are many similarities. Evidence of Pompeian houses show that their was a shift from houses with no courtyard spaces to houses with. Of the 144 houses 29.9 per cent had no courtyard and of those with courtyards, the larger the house the more courtyards their were (Graham, 1998 pp. 167-171). The wealthier an individual was the more they could afford to emulate the Romans. In this way the expansion of roman culture may have been accelerated by the locals trying to emulate Roman architecture.

The city of Poseidonia name change when the Romans took control and changed the name to Paestum. At the time the city was occupied by two cultures the Greek and Oscan, who turn it into a thriving city. The Romans set about changing the typology of the city starting with the political spaces. Archaeological evidence of Roman expansion in the city can be seen in the Roman style Forum. Build right in the center of the city it became center of political life and a statement of influence for the spread of Roman culture in Campania. The Forum was build in the third century, AD, moving the political center away from the Greek and Lucanian agora. A small Roman style temple was build on the northern side and may have been the capitolium attributed to Jupiter, Juno and Minerva although the evidence is weak. The three temples that make up the capitolium are the religious cultural heart of the city, ritualistic becoming the foundation of the new city. This step represents an important step in the expansion and dominance of Roman culture (Torelli, 1999 p. 52, Pedley, 1990 p. 118-119) . The evidence for the small northern temple being the Capitolium is weak. For starters their is only one temple not three and it seems that the temple was built after the first phase of Forum construction. Torelli suggests instead that this temple is dedicated to the cult of Bona Mens an important political cult and the capitolium may be located at the eastern non-excavated end of the Forum. This close connection with the forum is not unusual. In Rome itself a temple of Bona Mens was constructed on the capital (Torelli, 1999 p. 65). Such evidence shows that Roman culture was adaptive and trends in Rome quickly expanded into other territories. It is in these ways that the expansion of Roman culture is detectable archaeologically with in the cities and landscape of Etruria and Campania. 

This essay explored the ways in which Roman culture is detectable archaeologically in the cities and landscapes of Etruria and Campania. Examining evidence such as burials site, diachronic change, urns and sites such as San Mara and the architectural features of Volaterrae in Etruria. In Campania the evidence included Roman construction of aqueducts and the effects on social competition within the city of Pompeii, and the changes to political life in Paestum by the construction of the forum.

Bibliography

COOLEY, A. E. 2002. Become Roman, Writing latin? Literacy and Epigraphy in the Roman West. Journal of Roman Archaeology, 77-86.

ERIKSEN, T. H. 2010. Small Places, Large Issúes, New York, Pluto Press.

GRAHAM, M. 1998. Material Culture and Roman Identity: The spatial layout of Pompeian houses and the problem of ethnicity. In: BERRY, R. L. A. J. (ed.) Cultural Identity in the Roman Empire. London: Routledge.

JONES, R. 2005. Water, Wealth, and Social Status at Pompeii: The House  of the Vestals in theFirst Century. American Journal of Archaeology, 109, 695-710.

NICOLA TERRENATO, A. J. A. 1996. Visibility and Site Recovery in The Cecina Valley, Italy. Journal of Field Archaeology, 23, 91-109.

PEDLEY, J. G. 1990. Paestum: Greeks and Romans in Southern Italy, Thames & Hudson.

POTTER, T. W. 1978. Population Hiatus and Continuity: The case of the South Etruria Survey. Papers in Italian Archaeology, i, 99-116.

TERRENATO, N. 1998. Tam Firmun Municipium: The Romanization of Volaterrae and Its Cultural Implications. The Journal of Roman Studies, 88, pp. 94-114.

TORELLI, M. 1999. Tota Italia. Essays in the cultural Formation of Roman Italy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.