Industrial archaeology: a thematic or a period discipline?

Abstract

A thematic or a period discipline?Industrial archaeology has generally been defined as a thematic discipline, concerned with only one aspect of man’s past activity. Although the term ‘archaeology of industry’ was used in the 19th century, it was Michael Rix who used the phrase ‘industrial archaeology’ in print for the first time (Rix 1955). He later defined industrial archaeology as ‘recording, preserving in selected cases and interpreting the sites and structures of early industrial activity, particularly the monuments of the Industrial Revolution’ (Rix 1967: 5). The emphasis on the term ‘industrial monument’ followed a need to define an industrial class of Ancient Monument so that some examples would be scheduled. Industrial archaeology, then, grew from the need to record and preserve standing structures threatened with demolition rather than an inherent desire to understand more about the historical period of the monuments. It was perhaps felt that understanding of the industrial revolution period was more readily arrived at by other means, particularly written historical evidence. During the ‘rescue’ years of the 1960s and 1970s, archaeology was one of the two areas of fastest university expansion and very popular in extra-mural teaching. But none of the archaeology departments took up industrial archaeology, although many of the extra-mural departments did; it is largely as a part-time, amateur interest that industrial archaeology has flourished ever since. The author’s post as an industrial archaeologist in the Leicester archaeology department is one of the first occasions on which the specialism has been given a place in full-time undergraduate archaeology courses.

Representations of Post-Industrial Shanghai

“…From the 1960s to the end of the 1980s, the Western industrial landscape was changing. This reconfiguration process emptied the city of industries and caused a subsequent industrial restructuring and conversion of old properties (Palmer 1990). The disappearing cultural memory of the industrial city proved that the manufacturing landscape was awakening and succumbing to the new productive paradigms (Lynch 1960).…”

La Educación Patrimonial en Los Museos Industriales Españoles: Estado De La Cuestión Y Propuestas Para Su Desarrollo Y Evaluación

“…Inicialmente fueron actos aislados de inventariado y catalogación de piezas realizados por grupos de entusiastas de la tecnología y trabajadores industriales (Hudson, 1976). Después se pensó su conservación como fuente para conocer la sociedad industrial a través de la arqueología (Palmer, 1990(Palmer, , 2005. Y más recientemente se ha considerado su protección en museos y centros de interpretación con diferentes intereses, conservar la memoria local, entender el presente y fomentar el turismo en zonas económicamente deprimidas tras el cierre de la actividad industrial (Hidalgo Giralt, 2010;Lopes-Cordeiro, 2001).…”

Towards an archaeology of navvy huts and settlements of the industrial revolution

“…Until relatively recently the archaeology of the industrial revolution in Britain concentrated on the technology of industrialization (e.g. Buchanan 1972), but since the 1980s there has been increasing pressure to bring this area of study into the mainstream of British archaeological research, with an agenda focusing on broader changes in economy, landscape and society (Clark 1987: 169-71;Crossley 1990: 1-6;Palmer 1990). This note seeks to contribute towards this trend by highlighting the importance of a largely neglected class of site and its potential for gaining further insight into changing social conditions during this crucial period of British and world history.…”