OriginallypublishedinHistoricalArchaeology50(3):144164(2016)

ArchaeologyandtheTimeofModernity
AlfredoGonzlezRuibal

Abstract
Inthisarticleanarchaeologicalcritiqueofthetimeofmodernityisproposed.Thiscritiqueis
developedthroughthreemainthemes:materiality,multitemporalityandethics.Materialityis
keytoproducerelevantarchaeologicalaccountsofthetimeofmodernity:ourdisciplinehasto
followthetimeofthings,ratherthanthetemporalframeworksinheritedfromhistoryand
otherfields.Multitemporalityisattheheartofmodernity,whichhastobeunderstoodasa
heterogeneousphenomenoninwhichmultiple,oftenincompatible,temporalitiescoalesce
andclash,ratherthanasahomogeneoustimeofchangeandacceleration.Finally,theblurring
ofthepast/presentdividewhichismanifestedthroughuniversaljustice,politicaltemporalities
andindigenousmemorypracticesposeanimportantchallengetoarchaeology,butatthe
sametimeprovideauniqueopportunitytomakethedisciplinesociallyrelevant.

Introduction
Thetimeofmodernityisadifficulttimetostudyforarchaeologists.Infact,itcanbeargued
thatitcanbemoresothandeeptimeordeephistory(ShryockandSmail2011;Schmidtand
Mrozwoski2013).Thereareatleastthreereasonsforthecomplexityofmoderntime,but
thesethreesourcesofcomplexityarealsoopportunitiestoturnarchaeologyintoadiscipline
thatmattersbeyonditsacademicboundaries.
First,thereistheepistemologicalquestionofhowtoproducerelevantarchaeological
knowledgeofrecentperiods,wherethereisanoverabundanceofwritten,visual,andoral
testimonies.WhenIrefertoproducingrelevantknowledge,myconcernisnotwithbuttressing
theacademicstatusofasubdiscipline,historicalarchaeology,thatiswellestablished
(especiallyinNorthAmerica),buttoproduceknowledgethatisactuallyusefulbeyondour
field(GonzlezRuibal2013).InthisarticleIwouldarguethatthemainwayinwhichhistorical
andcontemporaryarchaeologycanbemadeepistemologicallyrelevantbeyonditsboundaries
isbyfollowingthetimeofthings.AsIwilltrytoprove,producingnarrativesthatfollowthe
timeofthingsmayhaveimplicationsnotrestrictedtotherealmofscience:thetimeofthings
hasalsopoliticalconsequences.
Secondly,thetimeofmodernityisdifficultbecauseofitsmultilayeredand
heterogeneousnature:increasingsocialcomplexity,technology,andglobalizationbringa
proliferationandsuperimpositionoftemporalities,whichareatoddswithhistoricist
perspectivesthathaveoftenprevailedinthediscipline(seecritiqueinOlivier2008;Olsen
2010;Witmore2013).Multipletemporalitiesare,ofcourse,notexclusiveofthelastfive
hundredyears,butthecollapseoftheworldbroughtaboutbytheexpansionoftheWestfrom
themid15thcenturyonwardscreatedacollisionofdiversetemporalregimesthathadnever
beenexperiencedbefore.ThissituationreacheditsapexduringtheAgeofEmpire,inthelate
19thandearly20thcenturies(Hobsbawm1994).Despitetheimpositionofthehegemonic
2

timeofWesternmodernity,withitsacceleratedpace,westillliveinaworldthatisfarfrom
homogeneousandarchaeologyshouldpayattentiontoother,slowerecologiesand
materialities.
Finally,thetimeofmodernity,asgeographers,sociologistsandphilosophershaveabundantly
demonstrated,hasradicalethicalandpoliticalimplications(e.g.,Bauman2000).Itisatimeout
ofjoint,asDerrida(2006)putit,anunjusttimeofviolenceanddestructionthatultimately
tendstoannihilateitself(Olivier2013).Intheeraofsupermodernity,wehavewitnessed
differentattemptsatshatteringthetimeoftheenemynotonlythepresentandthefuture,
butalsothepastaswiththeNazigenocide,ethniccleansingintheBalkans,orreligious
intoleranceintheMiddleEast.Atthesametime,thepastresistsbeingannihilatedor
cleansed.Itkeepsbreakingintothepresentinavarietyofways:massgraves,religious
artifactsandrelics,ancientruins.Theseinterruptthetimeofmodernity,challengeunilinear
conceptsoftime,andforcearchaeologiststotakeanethicalstancethatinvolvesnotonlythe
livingorthenotyetborn,andcertainlynotjustinertobjects,butalsospectres(Derrida2006).
Inthisarticle,Iassumethatmodernity,andparticularlyhighmodernityor
supermodernity(Aug1995),impliesasubstantialbreakwiththepast,abreakthatcanbe
examinedarchaeologicallythroughitsmaterialeffects.Iunderstandmodernityasthe
historicaleracharacterized,amongotherthings,byWesterncapitalistexpansionandprofound
changesinsubjectivityandrationalitythatdevelopedfromthe15thcenturyonwards.
Supermodernityisunderstoodhereasanevolvedandextremeversionofthemodernthat
beganintheearly20thcentury(GonzlezRuibal2014).Thisconceptfitsbetterthe
archaeologicalrecordthanthatofalatemodernitystartinginthe1960s(e.g.Aug1995;
Bauman2000).Iwillexaminedifferentexamplestoillustratethewayinwhicharchaeology
cantacklethethreechallengesthatIhaveidentifiedabove:thetimeofthings,thetimeof
supermodernity,andthetimeofethics.Althoughmostofmyexamplescomefromthat
extremeformofmodernitythatisthecontemporaryworld,Iarguethatthearchaeologyofthe
3

contemporarypastmightbeinagoodpositiontoprovideelementsofreflectionusefulfor
historicalarchaeologyasthearchaeologyofmodernity(Orser1996;Hall2000).
TheTimeofThings
AnargumentthatisoftenraisedintheOldWorld(muchlesssointheAmericas)againstthe
scientificrelevanceofhistoricalarchaeologyandevenmoreagainstthearchaeologyofthe
contemporarypasthasalottodowithtime.Simplyput,theideaisthatthemoreonegoes
backintime,thelessinformationwehaveandthemorerelevantarchaeologyisi.e.,the
studyofmaterialdocuments.Theoverabundanceofinformationavailableformorerecent
periodswouldrendertheworkofarchaeologyrathertrivial.Thisisaperspectivesharedby
somearchaeologistsandmanyhistorians.Awaytoavertthiscriticismistoeschewthetimeof
wordsandexplorethetimeofthings.Iwouldarguethatfocusingonthingsisusefulnotjustto
buttressarchaeologyasanacademicdisciplinewhereitsstatusisattacked,butalsoinplaces,
suchasNorthAmerica,wherehistoricalarchaeologyandthearchaeologyoftherecentpast
restonasolidacademicreputation.Infact,followingthetimeofthingsisataskthatdoesnot
falltoarchaeologistsalone,butarchaeologistscancertainlycontributemuchtoit.Indeed,it
washistoriansthatfirstrebelledagainstthetemporalframeworkimposedbyahistoricist
readingoftexts.Bychallengingconventionalperiodizations,historianscameclosertothetime
ofthingsand,thus,tothetimeofarchaeology.
Thus,JacquesLeGoff(2014)wonderedifitisreallynecessarytocuthistoryinslices,at
leastinthoseproposedbyunilinearhistoricalregimes.Henotedthatmanyofthetraitsthat
weidentifywiththeMiddleAgesinEuropewerestillpresentanddefiningsocietyaslateas
the18thcentury,ifnotlater.LeRoyLadurie(1974),inturn,hadalreadyconsideredtheyears
between1300and1700asahistoricalperiod(animmobiletime)fromthepointofviewof
demographyandmateriallife,thusshatteringtheusualclassificationsandchronological
conceptualizationsofmodernity.Inturn,ArnoMayer(1981)insistedontakingintoaccount

thepersistenceoftheAncienRgimeinEuropewellaftertheFrenchRevolution.Notethat
thisdoesnotdenyconceptionsofmodernityasadeepbreakwiththepast(theperiod
consideredbyLeRoyLadurieorLeGofflooksverydifferentfromtheAmericas,forinstance),it
ratherproblematizesitasahomogeneous,unilineartimethatcanbeslicedfollowingspecific
politicalevents,eachsliceentirelydissolvingthepreviousone.
Historicalandpostmedievalarchaeology,initsEuropeanversion,havebeengenerally
toosubservienttothegeneralframeworksestablishedbytraditionalhistory.Thus,itis
meaningfulthatwhilehistorianssuchasLeRoyLaduriewerethinkingofalternativehistorical
eras,archaeologistshavebeenstickingtotheoldtimelabels,suchasmedieval/postmedieval
orhistorical/prehistoric,whichinadditionmakelittlesenseinnonEuropeancontexts
(SchmidtandPatterson1995;SchmidtandMrozowski2013).Thesubserviencetotraditional
historysurvivesinspiteofthefactthattheperiodsproposedbyAnnaleshistoriansareusually
definedbymaterialregularitiesandarethuseasiertobeidentifiedinthearchaeological
recordthanconventionalhistorybasedoneventssuchasColumbusarrivaltotheAmericas
(1492)ortheFrenchrevolution(1789),whichleavescantarchaeologicaltraces.
Archaeology,then,hasoftenfailedtokeeptrackofthetimeofthings.Thishappens
notonlyinEurope,wherehistoryasadisciplinehasalwayshadalargeinfluenceon
archaeology,butalsotoalargeextentinNorthAmerica,wherehistoricalarchaeologyis
associatedtoanthropology.Thus,whilehistoricalarchaeologistsaskanthropologicalquestions
thatareusuallydifferentfromthoseposedbyhistorians,theystillrelymuchonwritten
evidenceasthegeneralframeworkofreferencethatorientsarchaeologicalresearch.Likewise,
narrativescombiningthetimeofmodernityanddeeptimearestillrare.Instead,ifwefollow
thetrajectoryofthematerial,wemightbeabletoconstructmoreoriginal,andthusrelevant,
narratives.ChristopherWitmore(2013:138)hasputitbluntly:Wearepresentedwitha
choiceofanarchaeologythatcontinuestofillinthepictureprovidedbyhistory,thatbegins

withanimageofthepastthatwasoranarchaeologythatstartswithitscommon,shared
obligationnamelythings.Asymmetricalapproachisneededwhenweoptforthesecond
choice:thatis,onethatunderstandsthatbothpeopleandthings,humansandnonhumans,
constitutesociety.Thisperspectivedefendsepistemologicalagnosticism.Fromthepointof
viewoftemporality,thismeansthatinsteadofimposingaspecificchronologicalframe,
symmetricalarchaeologyallowsentitiestodefine,toframe,themselves(Witmore
2013:140).Ifweallowentitiesorassemblagestodefinethemselves,wemayfindthatthey
crosscutconventionalchronologicaldividesandclassifications.WemayfindtheNeolithicin
supermodernity.
Derrida(2006:xviii)wroteaboutthenoncontemporaneitywithitselfoftheliving
present.Yet,archaeologistsseemalltoooftenbentintolookingatthesynchronicityofthe
timetheystudyastheyfocusontheartifactsthatareconsideredrepresentativeofacertain
periodandthatusuallyreplaceartifactsandmaterialworldsrepresentativeofother,older
traditions.Whatdoesnotfitisconsideredresidualaconceptthatisredolentofthe19th
centuryideaofsurvival(Lucas2012:2933)orissimplyoverlooked(butseeSilliman2001;
RodrguezAlegra2008).AgoodcaseinpointisDeetzfamousstudyoftheGeorgianhouse
anditsreplacementofpreGeorgiandomesticarchitecture(Deetz1977:156164).The
relevanceofthischangecannotbeunderestimated,butwemayendupbelievingthatpre
GeorgianhousesvanishedfromEarth.Theydidnot,andpeoplekeptusingthem.Acontrary
example,wherethestressisputontemporalresilienceinsteadofchange,isofferedby
LaurentOlivier(2008:246248).Hestudiedacollectionofmininglampsfrom1840to1975and
discoveredthattheirevolutionwasdisconnectedfromtherealtimeofchronology.Inthe
1850smininglampswereaheadofthetechnologicaldevelopmentsofthetime,butafter1910
thetrajectoryoftypologicaltimedefinitelymovesawayfromrealtimeandbecomes
immobilisedinthepast.Olivier(2008:249)remindsusofHenriBergsonscritique:

conventionalhistoricalrepresentationsforgetthathistoryisasmuchabouttransformation
andchangeasaboutdurationandaccumulation.
Thetendencytonarratesynchronousstories,then,producesahomogeneous
historicityinwhichhistoricalphasesarewellboundedandselfcontained.Yet,artifactsarenot
soobedient(Olsen2010).Historicismoffersatimethatdoesnotoverflowitslimitsnordrags
theheavyweightofhistory,atimethatdoesnotpercolate,hasnofoldsorcreases(Witmore
2006).WhatIsuggest,then,istopursuethetimeofthingsinmodernity,regardlessof
conventionalphases,asestablishedbyhistorians.Bywayofexample,Iwouldliketodiscuss
thecaseofvernaculararchitecture.
Ifthereisamaterialelementthatresistsbeingforcedintotimecompartments,itis
vernacularbuildings.Theirtemporalityisverydifferentfromelitearchitecture.Theyfollowa
differentpacebecausetheyarelesssubjectedtothewhimsoffashion(whichdoesnotmean
theyareimpermeabletothem).Theslowtimeofthevernacularhasoftenchallenged
chronologicalclassification.Traditionalhousestendtolooksuspendedintime:achronic
(withouttime,eternal)oranachronistic(ofthewrongtime),dependingonwhetherwelookat
themfromanationalist,ethnic,romanticormodernistperspective.Thelongchronologiesof
vernacularbuildings,whicharerootedintheoriginofthehouseassuch(Bori2006;Hodder
andPels2010)aretimetrespassinganditcomesasnosurprisethattheyhavebeenthetarget
ofmodernistanddictatorialregimesthatwantthepresenttobecontemporarywithitself(or
rather,withthefuture).Ithasbeenarguedthatintraditionalhouses,thepastisnotasmuch
separatefrom,assubsumedin,thepresent(Anderson1999:16).Infact,thepastisalways
subsumedinthepresent.Thedifferencewithvernaculararchitectureisthatmaterialityhere
doesnotdenythetemporalmixture:ithasnotbeensubjectedtotheprocessesofpurification
towhichLatour(1993)referastypicalofmodernity.Thisiswhythelabelofsurvivalisoften

attachedtovernaculartraditionsorbuildings(Prudon1986).Yetthemerenotionofsurvivalis
dependentofahistoricistframe:vernaculartraditionsdonotsurvive,theysimplyexist.
Thisbringsmetoanotherissue:thematerialityofthetwentiethandtwentyfirst
century.Thisisperceivedinaratherhomogenousway.Ifwethinkofsupermodernmateriality,
whatimmediatelycomestomindaremodernmaterials:modernruinsaremadeofiron,glass
andconcrete(PtursdttirandOlsen2014:6).Itistheseruinsthatattractartists(Bruno2011)
andarchaeologistsofmodernity,becausetheyareperfectlysynchronouswiththeera.
However,bylookingatwhatiscoherentwithhegemonictime,weforgettheproliferationof
othermaterialmanifestations.Weforgetthatmud,stone,andwoodhavedominatedthe
historyofthetwentiethcenturybuiltenvironmentandshapedthesocialexperienceand
temporalrhythmsofhundredsofmillionsofhumanbeingsandstilldo(Figure1).PaulOliver
(2003:86)remindsusthatevenattheturnofthetwentyfirstcenturytherewerean
estimated50millionpeoplelivingincaves.Furthermore,insomeregionsoftheworld,wood
andthatchhavesupersededconcreteandiron:inpartsofEthiopia,Sovietstylecollective
farmswereabandonedintheearly1990stobereplacedbytraditionalcompoundsand
agriculturalpractices(GonzlezRuibal2006).Byfocusingonconcretewehelphomogenizethe
timeofsupermodernity,reducingittothatwhichisnewandchanging.Thisisaformof
temporalcleansing,andithaspoliticalconsequences.Archaeologistsdesiretoproduce
coherent,synchronoustimeshasitscorrelateintheevictionofcommunitiesthatliveinor
besideancientmonuments,whosetimeisregardedasoutofsynchwiththatofthe
archaeologicalremains.ThiswasthecasewiththeNubianhousesbuiltamidstPharaonic
templesinQurna.Theyweredestroyedandtheirinhabitantsdisplacedtomakeroomfora
pure,ancienttimethatcouldbeenjoyedbytourists(Witmore2013:132133).Itisthesame
attitudethatisbehindthedestructionormodificationofvernaculararchitecture,which
evincesadesireforkeepingupwiththefuture,equatedwitheconomicandmoralprogress
(GonzlezlvarezandAlonso2014).
8

AsInotedabove,followingthetimeofthingscanalsohavepoliticalimplications.A
goodcaseinpointistheSpanishCivilWar(19361939).Alreadyduringtheconflict,thewould
bevictors(acoalitionofultraconservativesandfascists)startedtodevelopthetheorythatit
wasnotthemwhohadstartedthewar,buttheLeft.Forthat,theyhadtodosome
historiographicalreengineering.Claimingthatthewarhadstartedtwoyearsbeforeitactually
did(withtheirmilitarycoupof18July1936),theysetthebeginningoftheconflictinOctober
1934,whenarevolutionarystriketookplaceinsomeareasofthecountrythatwaspromoted
byLeftistpartiesandunionsorfactionsofthoseparties.Theinsurrectionwasrapidly
suffocated.However,fromaconservativeperspective,theSpanishCivilWarwouldonlybethe
continuationofthatinitialconflict.Understandably,manyrightwinghistoriansprivilegea
periodcomprisedbetween1931(theproclamationoftheSecondSpanishRepublic)and1939
(theendofthewar),with1934asthemomentinwhichtheconflict,buildingupsince1931,
brokeout.
Whatdothingstell?Aquitedifferentstoryindeed.Ifwelookatmaterialevidence
alone,weseethatthemateriallandscapeofSpainhardlychangedbetween1931and1936,
butitwasthenradicallyanddeeplytransformedbetween1936andtheearly1950s.The
transformationwasproducedbyrealwar,anditinvolvedthecreationofasolidWWIstyle
frontline;theconstructionofextensivemilitaryinfrastructuressuchasairfields,military
camps,roads,railways;andtheestablishmentofanarchitectureofrepressionthatdidnot
stopaftertheofficialendofthewarin1939intheformofconcentrationcamps,forcedlabor
camps,militaryheadquarters,andprisonsthatcontinuedtobebuiltthroughoutthe1940s
(Figure2).Thesamecanbesaidofwarmemorialsandmonuments.Ruination,whichstarted
in1936withheavyaerialbombingsandbombardments,characterizedtheSpanishlandscape
intothe1950s.PerhapsmoresignificantisthetypefossiloftheSpanishCivilWar,themass
grave.Massgravesandclandestine,unmarkedburialsappearedonlyafterJuly1936and
continueduntiltheearly1950s,whenthelastguerrillafighterswereunlawfullykilled(Poloet
9

al.2012).Archaeologistscanhelpdefineatimethatismorefaithfultohistorythanthatof
somerevisionisthistorians,andtheycanprovethemwronginaveryempiricalway.Itisclear
fromthearchaeologicalrecordthatthereisanassemblage(DeLanda2006)thatismadeof
specificmaterialandimmaterialelementsandthatdatesfrom19361950,whilethereisno
coherentassemblagethatdatesto19311936.

TheTimeofSupermodernity
Aconcernwithtimeiscentraltotheworkofmostthinkerswhohavetheorizedmodernity.
Thereexistsacommonagreementthatthetimeofsupermodernityisoneofacceleration,
whichprovokesthecollapseofspaceandtime(Harvey1989:284307).PaulVirilio(1986)has
evencoinedaconcepttodescribeanewscienceofvelocity,dromology,thatwould
investigateourexistenceatthespeedoflightandthepoliticaleconomythatliesbehindit.
Whileaccelerationisgenerallyregardedasanegativeoutcomeofsupermoderntechnologies
andrelatedtowarandcapitalism(Connerton2009:109117),mobilityispraisedby
philosophers,artists,andsocialthinkers(Deleuze&Guattari1986,Clifford1997).Yet,
accelerationandmobilityareinseparableinthemodernworld,andtheyarebothfeasible
thankstomoderntechnologiesofrealandvirtualdisplacement.Botharepredicatedona
specificpoliticaleconomythatcreatessocioeconomicinequalities(Friedman2002;Creswell
2006,2010).Freedomofmovementandfastmovementareforthecosmopolitanmiddleand
upperclasses.TheclandestineAfricanemigrantsmaketheirwaytoEuropeacrosstheSahara
desertinajourneythattakesmonths.TheCentralAmericanpoorfollowaslowanddangerous
routetotheUSA.Thetemporalityofthepoorandthetemporalityoftherichdiffer,andsodo
theirtechnologiesofmovement(Cresswell2010:163164).Timeaccelerates,butnotfor
everybodyornotatthesamepace.Fromanarchaeologicalpointofview,slownessof
movementfavorssedimentationandhencearchaeologicalvisibility,So,whilethejourneyof
anexecutiveflyingfromMexicoDFtoSanFranciscoleaveslittleornoarchaeologicaltrace(at
10

leastinsitu),thepresenceofemigrantswalkingacrossthedesertcanbedocumented
archaeologically(GokeeandDeLen2014).Thus,whiletheaccelerationofeventsor
hypereventfulness(Sewell2008)producesmorearchaeologicalremainsfaster,the
accelerationofmovementdoestheopposite.
Thereisanotherkindofacceleration,however,thatismoredemocratic:the
accelerationofdestruction.Specificepisodesoflargeandrapiddestructionofurbanareasdid
occurinAntiquity,suchasthedemolitionofCorinthandCartagebyRome(bothin146B.C.),
buttheywerefarlesscommonthantheyhavebecomeafter1914.Today,thetotal
devastationofcitiesinwar(eveninminorconflicts)istakenforgrantedandinsomecases
theycausethealmostabsoluteannihilationofalltracesofthepast(Figure3).Moreimportant
fromtheperspectiveoftemporalityarethefastcycles(withinageneration)ofdestructionand
reconstructiontowhichwehavegrownaccustomed.TheIsraeliPalestinianconflictisagood
caseinpoint:PalestiniantownsinGazahavebeenregularlybombedandbulldozedinrecent
years,butalargepartoftheinfrastructureisthenreconstructedthroughUNsponsored
effortsonlytobedestroyedagain(Weizman2007:203).Likewise,althoughnaturaldisasters
havealwaysexisted,thetemporalityofthedestructionreconstructioncyclesisagain
characteristicofmodernity.ThefastandplannedreconstructionofLondonafterthe1666fire
orLisbonafterthe1755earthquakeevincethenewspeedthatmodernitywastaking.Thishas
onlybeenexacerbatedinsupermoderntimes,asshownbyHurricaneKatrina(Dawdy2006)or
theFukushimatsunami(Schlangeretal.forthcoming).ShannonDawdyhasusedtheconcept
oftaphonomytorefertotheprocessesaffectingNewOrleansafterKatrina.Shearguesthat
taphonomyisnotjustareflectionofsocialprocesses,butasocialprocessinitself.Inthiscase,
itisnotjustthepostdepositionalphenomena(demolition,displacement,rebuilding)thatare
revealingofthenatureofsupermodernity,butthetemporalityaswell.Itisobviousfromthese
cases,thatthespeedatwhichcomplexlandscapesareassembled,disassembled,and
reassembledisspecificofcontemporarytimes.
11

Thesameaccelerationisclearinthecaseofpurelyanthropicinterventions.Lvi
StraussalreadystressedtheradicalchangeofscaleinlandscapemodificationintheNew
World,ascomparedtotheancientagriculturallandsofEurope.Itwasnotjustthespatial
vastnessofNewWorldagriculturalcolonizationthatstruckhim,butthepace:whatintheOld
Worldhadtakenmillenniatounfold,hadbeenachievedinafewdecadesinBrazilata
terribleecologicalandculturalprice(LviStrauss1955:103104;alsoGordillo2014).Asudden
transformationoflandscape,althoughoftenwithlesslastingconsequencesisthatproduced
bywar.Preindustriallandscapesallovertheworldhavebeentransformedintolargescale
industrialmeatgrindersbythemilitarymachineinjustmonths.ThetrenchesoftheWestern
FrontduringtheFirstWorldWarareusuallyofferedasthebestexampleofthesudden
industrializationofpastorallandscapes(Saunders2002).Thetrenchesconstructedduringthe
SpanishCivilWaroffersperhapsabetterexamplefortworeasons:thecountryslandscape
was,mostly,atrulypreindustrialoneofshepherdsandpeasants,andtheextentofthe
trenchesalmosttripledthatoftheWesternFrontinhalftheamountoftime.1750kmof
fortificationswerebuiltinSpainversus650kmduringWWI,andthelargemajoritywere
constructedinjusttwoyears(MartnezReverte2009:301).After1939,thesetrencheswere
totallyabandoned,butrarelybackfilled,unlikeintheWesternFront,andthusleftascarred
landscape,inwhichindustrialmilitaryruinsandtraditionalpeasantscohabited.Although
describedasephemeral(Barrosoetal.2014),SpanishCivilWarmilitarylandscapeswere
ephemeralonlyintermsoftheiruselife.Theirremnantsstillweighheavilyuponthelandand
eventakealifetollasunexplodedordnancestillmaimandkillpeople.This,again,issomething
exclusiveofthetimeofsupermodernity:vestigesthathaveakillingagencydecadesafterthe
eventshavehappened.Shouldapersonwoundedtodaybyanoldgrenadebeconsidereda
casualtyoftheFirstWorldWar?Andtowhichtimebelongsthecancerofapersonwhofallsill
inPripyatorFukushimain2300?Beforethediscoveryofhighexplosiveorthefusionofthe
atomsimilarquestionscouldhavehardlyarisen.
12

Yet,thebestexampleofacceleratedruinationderivesfromoneoftheessential
elementsofcapitalism:economiccyclesofboomandbust.Theireffectsareparticularly
obviousinSouthAmerica,wherepredatorycapitalismoperateswithfewrestrains.InBrazil
andParaguay,differenteconomiccycles(rubber,coffee,soja)haveleftforestsandcities
ruined(Gordillo2014).InChile,itwassaltpeterthatproducedunheardofriches,althoughfor
onlyashorttimefrom18801930.Theexploitationofsaltpeterbroughtabouttheemergence
ofacomplexassemblagethatincludedmineshafts,miningoffices,railwaysandrailway
stations,towns,harbors,dumps,andephemeralminingcamps.Ofcoursetheinustryalso
broughtpeople.ThousandsofimmigrantscametopopulatethedesertsofAtacamaand
Tarapac(Vilchesetal.2014).Therapiditywithwhichthisboomandbustcyclestookplace
andtheirimpactonremoteregionsexplainthatsometimesarchaeologyisthebest,ifnotthe
only,sourcetoexplorethem.Infact,someminingsitesresemblehuntergatherercamps
ratherthansitesofcapitalistexploitations,andtherearenowrittenrecordsmaking
archaeologytheonlysource.Evenwhentheeconomicexploitationcontinued,moreefficient
methodsofextractionledtothereductionoftheworkforceandthephysicalandsymbolic
declineoftownsinafewdecades.AsRodrguezTorrentandMiranda(2008:83)pointout,the
dynamicsoftechnologicalinnovation,productivediversification,andtheconstant
improvementoftheirprocesses,leavesinitswakecemeterytowns,ruins,hollowedoutof
theirsymbolicdensity.Manysettlementsunderwentaprocessofdevolutionshrinkingfrom
townstocamps.Urbanlifevanishedwhenminingcentersthathadbeendesignedasmodel
(evenutopian)townsweretransformed,duetoeconomicimperatives,intoseasonal
residencesforafloatingpopulationofminerscomingfromoutside(RodrguezTorrentand
Miranda2008).ThesituationwassimilarintheWesternUSafewdecadesbefore,withmining
andcompanytownsflourishingandcollapsingfallingthefastcyclesofpredatorycapitalism
(Hardesty1988;Matthews2010).

13

Latemodernityhasbeenoftenportrayedashypereventfulness(Sewell2008).The
problemisthatmanymodernevents(likeancientones)haveleftlittletonotraceinthe
archaeologicalrecord(e.g.,theSovietinvasionofPraguein1968).Thisisbecausetheydidnot
constituteassemblages(DeLanda2006)ororganizations(Lucas2010)inthefirstplace,or
becausetheydidnotstabilize,or,iftheydidstabilize,wereerasedthroughcontinuous
processesofreuseand/ordestruction.Nevertheless,therearehistoricaleventsthatdid
constitutestablematerialassemblagesandwereinterruptedbutnottotallydismantled,due
totheirsheercomplexity.Thesearethekindsofeventsarchaeologistsofmodernitycanstudy.
Examplesareorganizationsorassemblages,whoseexistencewassuddenlyinterruptedfor
politicalreasons.Twoglobalphenomena,Imperialismandsocalledrealsocialism,offergood
illustrationofthiskindofshortlivedsupermodernorganizationthathaveleftaclear
archaeologicalsignature.
IfweconsiderthatmodernimperialismassuchstartedwiththeBerlinconferencein
1885andtheeffectiveoccupationofAfricabyEuropeanpowers,thenitcanbeconsidered
liquidatedasapoliticalphenomenonin75yearsneedlesstosay,theeffectsofimperialism,
however,arestilloverwhelming.EricHobsbawn(1994:79)describedtheAgeofEmpireas
briefevenbythemeasureofasinglehumanlife,butinthisveryshortperiodoftimein
historicalterms,theglobewasdeeplytransformedandwithfarreachingconsequences.The
materialimprintofWesternimperialismismassive.Cities,railways,roads,airports,mines,
fortsinremoteplaceswerebuiltfromscratch.Alargepartoftheimperialinfrastructurenow
liesinruins(Stoler2008:195;Steinmetz2010;Gordillo2014),incontrasttotheinfrastructures
ofotherempires,suchastheRomanorChinesethatlastedhundredsofyears,liketheempires
themselves,andoftenoutlivedthemforsomecenturies.Infact,someofthesettlementsand
infrastructuresdidnotevensurvivetheAgeofEmpiresuchasdoomedrailwaysintheBrazilian
forest(Hardman1988)orremoteimperialoutpostsinNamibia(Steinmetz2010).TheSpanish
capitalintheriverMuniinEquatorialGuineaisanexcellentexampleofimperialdebris.Itwas
14

establishedin1885andabandonedin1926(Figure4).Itsruinsarebothatestimonyofafailed
colonialenterpriseandofthefastpaceofsupermodernity(GonzlezRuibaletal.2015).
Inthecaseofcommunism,theshortperiodcomprisesthetimebetween1917and
1991.Thescaleofmaterialtransformationwascolossal,includingthedisappearanceofentire
geographicalfeatures,suchastheAralSea.Theruinationofcommunism,withitsverypeculiar
materialstyle(Andreassenetal.2010)isredolentoftheruinationofancientempiresand
civilizations,withthedifferencethatitexistedforamuchbrieferperiodandcrumbledmuch
faster.Thespeedofthecommunisteventisperhapsmoreevidentinplaceswheremodernism
andrealsocialismappeared(anddisappeared)atthesametime,asinEthiopia(Gonzlez
Ruibal2006),becausethecommunistepisodeenteredthearchaeologicalrecordinamore
thoroughwaywhentheinfrastructureofcollectivefarming,factories,andanindustrialarmy
collapsed.Relatedtothecommunistexperiment,ofcourse,aretheubiquitousremainsofthe
ColdWar(SchofieldandCocroft2009).Hereanentireconstellationofartifactsandsiteswas
maderedundantafteranextremelybriefperiodoftimeandwithouteverhavingbeenused.
Itwouldbewrong,however,toreducethetemporalityofsupermodernitytothetrope
ofacceleration,becauseourpresentisactuallyoneofheterogeneoustemporalities.Despite
itscurrentsuccess(Hamilakis2011),theideaofheterochronydatesbacktothe1930s(Leduc
1999:18).Thisisanideathatarchaeologistsshouldbewillingtoappropriate(seeearly
examplesinMcGlade1999;Lucas2004:4143,96),becauseitisperhapsinthematerialworld
wheremultipletemporalitiesareeasiertograsp(asnotedintheprevioussection).
Theheterogeneityofthetimeofmodernityhasatleasttwospecificreasons.First,the
hypereventfulnessofmodernityleavesatrailofothertemporalitiesbehind(thoseof
communismandpeasantcommunities,forexample),whichfailedtodisappearandstill
determinethepresentinmanyways.Second,modernitysexpansionwassofastthatitcould
notleveloutthetemporaldisparitiesitfoundinitsway.Rather,theyweresimplyabsorbed
15

andmarginalizedwithintheglobaltemporalityofcapitallikeindigenoustemporalities
(Verdesio2013).Despitethisheterogeneity,someofthetemporalitiesthatcoexistwith
modernityarenegatedordisplaced.Thisiswhathappenswithanythingthatisdeemed
primitivetime.ChristopherMatthews(2007),forinstance,remindsusthatIndiansinNorth
Americawerefirstintegralineverydaycoloniallife(thatis,thetimeofmodernity),butlater
removedaspartoftheprogramsofAmericanstateformationandexpansion(thatis,displaced
tothetimedefinedasPrehistory).AcontinuingIndianpresence,writesMatthews
(2007:274)wasnegotiatedinpoliticaltermsthatmadeIndiansknowableonlyas
anachronismsunsuitedforthemodernworld.Thedividebetweenhistoricalarchaeologyand
prehistory(towhichwenowhavetoaddcontemporaryarchaeology)hasunwittingly
reproducedtheideaofIndiansasanachronisticor,rather,allochronic,thatisbelongingto
anothertime(Fabian1983).Thisisfarfroma19thcenturyproblemasSchmidtandMrozowski
(2013:23,9haveshown.Forinstance,thenewsubdisciplineofthearchaeologyofthe
contemporarypastseemstohavesometroublewiththosetemporalitiesthatdonotfit
comfortablyinthetimeofWesternmodernity.Itisinterestingthatthisfield,firstdescribedas
thearchaeologyofus(GouldandSchiffer1981),hasdefinedanusthat,inpractice,tends
toexcludenonmoderncommunities(asinHarrisonandSchofield2011),whicharethus
implicitlyconsideredprimitiveorprehistoricandbelongingtoanothertime.
Thetimeofsupermodernitydoesnotonlymarginalizethepeoplesthatdonotfitthe
ethosofaccelerationofchange.Thesamehappenswiththings.Sloworstaticthingsareoften
forgotten.Thishasalottodowiththemodernistethos,whichrevelsintransformation,
contrarytotraditionalidentitiesthatfoundontologicalsecurityinimmobility(Hernando
2002).History,whichhasbecomeanessentialpartofmodernidentity,isassociatedwith
changeandopposedtotradition(Matthews2002:).Thus,historicalarchaeologyhaspaid
moreattentiontothishigherorderofhistoricitythatisexpressedincontinuous
transformation.
16

Fromthepointofviewofmaterialculture,thisexplainsthatourattentionis
continuouslydrawntoeverythingthatevolvesfast(cellphonesandcomputers,forexample)
andnottothethingsthatremainandresistchangesuchaswoodengrapepressesandstone
breadovens(Edgerton2007:207).Eventhingsthatarenotoriouslyreluctantto
transformation(andrightlyso),tendtobecastinthelanguageofaccelerationor
transformation.Thiscanbefoundalsoinsomeresearchinhistoricalarchaeologythatlooksat
ancienttechnologiesinmoderncontexts.Forexample,bothSilliman(2001)andHarrison
(2006)stressthenoveltyintheuseoflithicartifactsinthe19thand20thcenturies.Itisnot
thatfarreachingchangesinthesocialcontextoftechnologyaretobedisregarded,buttoo
muchfocusontransformationmayleadustoforgetaboutcontinuity,whichisatleastas
importantdoubtlessforthepeoplethatusetraditionaltechnologies.
Itwouldbemisleading,however,tothinkthatonlysimplethings(suchasmechanical
tools,crockeryorfoodstuffs)defysupermodernacceleration.Considerthreeelementsthatwe
immediatelyassociatewithunrelentingchangeduetotheirsophistication:airplanes,carsand
weapons(Edgerton2007).Despitecontinuousinnovation,thetruthisthatcommercialjets,in
essence,havechangedlittlesincetheappearanceoftheBoeing707in1957andsomemodels
fromthe1960sstillcrosstheskies,includingtheBoeing737(designed1967),whichisthe
mostcommonlyusedairplanetoday.Theperformanceofautomobileshasnotchanged
drasticallyeithersincethelate1940s.Thebasictechnologyitself(theinternalcombustion
engine)wasdesignedin1878andtheexternaldesignofautomobileshasnotchanged
dramaticallysinceatleastthe1960s.ItisworthrememberingthattheToyotaCorolla,whichis
stillproduced,wasfirstmarketedin1966.Whenitcomestoweapons,whileourattentionis
focusedondronesandthecyborglikeaspectofmodernwarriors,weforgetthatassaultrifles
datetothe1950sandthebulletsthattheyshoothavechangedlittlesince1885(Cornish2013:
11):archaeologically,a2014battlefielddoesnotdiffermuchfroma1914one.

17

Timedoesnotonlyslowinthingsandtechnologies,itdoesalsoinplaces.Material
cultureisessentialinthisprocess.TheconcreteworldoftheSovietregime,forinstance,with
itsheavyinfrastructureshasbeenessentialingrindingtoahalthypereventfultime(Eliassenet
al.2010)(Figure5).WritingaboutaremoteminingtowninnorthernSiberia,MartinHerbert
notes:ForthepeopleofNorilsk,totalitarianismisnotentirelyvanished.Itbuilttheminethey
workinandthebuildingstheylivein...TheSovietsystemisonlyhalfgonehere...(Herbert
2011:191).
TheTimeofEthics
Thetimeofmodernityaccelerates,slowsdown,andpercolates.Butmodernityalsoannihilates
timeindifferentways.Perhapswhereobliterationismostclearlyseenisintheworkof
totalitarianpolitics.Totalitarianisminauguratesanewtemporality,whichisorientedtowards
anindefinitefuture(Arendt2004:430431,503),resetshistoricalchronometersatzero
(Zerubavel2003:91),andseekstoradicallydestroythetimeofitsenemiesbynegatingthem
theirpresent,theirfuture,andeventheirpast.Withgaschambersandcrematoria,theNazi
regimeusedtechnologytoattempttoerasepeoplewithoutleavinganytrace,asiftheyhad
neverexisted(Arendt2004:528).Thesamelogicoftemporalannihilationisbehindstrategies
ofethniccleansingthathavebeenseenintheformerYugoslavia,andthattargetedpeople,
things,anddocuments(Chapman1994).Thedestructionoflibraries,atrueannihilationof
historicaltime,canbeconsideredmorethanthecleansingofaspecificculturalhistory
(Riedlmayer1995)(Figure6).TheproductionofdesaparecidosinArgentinahadthesame
overallpurposeastheNazigenocides(Companyetal.2011;ZarankinandSalerno2011;
Rosignoli2015).Politicaldissidentswereassassinatedbythedictatorshipandtheirbodies
blownup,thrownintothehighseas,burnedorburiedinunmarkedgraves(Calveiro
2008:164).AsCalveiro(2008:163)aptlyputsittheymadethedisappeareddisappear.

18

Thedoubleannihilationthatimpliesthedestructionofgraveshasbeenattestedin
manyotherplaces,includingwiththeNazisintheEasternFront(Neitzel&Weltzer2012:127,
135,153),Spain(Chavesetal.2014),Uruguay(LpezMazz2015)andYugoslavia(Skinneretal.
2002).Fortunately,archaeologyhasthemethodologicaltoolsnotonlytoexposethe
annihilationofthepresentandthefuture(ashumanremainsinsidemassgraves),butalsothe
annihilationofthepastthatistheerasureofthetracesofannihilationthroughtaphonomic
andstratigraphicanalyses(Skinneretal.2002).Thesamecanbesaidofthesystematic
dismantlingofconcentrationandexterminationcampsasarchaeologicalsurveysand
excavationshaveretrievedevidenceoftheprocessofgenocidalkillingseveninthoseplaces
whereevidencecleansingwascarriedoutinalargescale(Gileadetal.2010;SturdyColls
2012).IntheSpanishconcentrationcampofCastuera(19391940),myteamandIwereableto
documentarchaeologicallytheprocessofdismantling.Fewthingscanbeerasedforever
(Figure7).Againstthislogicofannihilation,archaeologyhasanewethicalcommitment:to
recoverevidenceoftheexistenceofthevictimsnotjustfortherapeuticandjuridicalreasons,
butforhistoricalreasonsaswell.Wecannotreturnthemtolife,butwecanreintegratethem
tothetimeofhistoryfromwhichtheywereexpelled.
Archaeologycanalsorecoverthelosttimeofthesubaltern,asithasbeenshowingfor
severaldecades(Hall1999).Whereourdisciplinecanhelprectifyunjusttimeinamore
powerfulwayispreciselyinthecaseofpeoplethathavebeentakenoutofhistorythrough
straightforwardextermination(e.g.Haglundetal.2001;Steele2008;Renshaw2011).Inthat,
archaeologyalignsitselfwithWalterBenjaminsideaofMessianictime,whichexpandsthe
compromiseoflivinggenerationstothevictimsofthepast(Benjamin1968).Thisisanidea
thatwasreiteratedinapowerfulwaybyJacquesDerrida(2006,seealsoInnerarity2001;Mate
2003).

19

Thetimeofarchaeologyalignsitselfalsowiththecurrenttimeofjurisdiction
(Bevernage2008)inthecaseofcrimesagainsthumanityajuridicalinnovationofthemid
twentiethcentury.Byassertingthatcrimesagainsthumanityarenotsubjecttoanystatuteof
limitations,internationallawclaimsthattheyareneverreallypast,neverdistantenough
(Mate2003),inthesamewaythatarchaeologydeniesthepastitsradicalabsenceand
distancebyremindingthatisstillpresentthroughitsvestiges(Shanks1992;Olivier2008;
Olsen2010).Theconventiononthenonapplicabilityofstatutorylimitationstowarcrimesand
crimesagainsthumanityhasanallembracingtemporalsweepinthatitappliestoallwar
crimesandcrimesagainsthumanity,past,present,andfuture(Miller1971:481).Inthissense,
botharchaeologyandjurisdictionworkinaregimeofspectrality,thatis,oneinwhichthe
hauntingpresenceofthepastdisturbsthepresent.Thisregimeinvalidateshistoricistnotions
oftimebyproblematizingsimpledichotomiesbetweenpresentandpast,presenceand
absence(Domanska2006;Bevernage2008).Bothjurisdictionandarchaeologycoincideinthat
thepastisnotabsentinthecaseoftraumaticepisodes,itcanonlybenonabsent(Domanska
2006).
Assuch,bothjurisdictionandarchaeologydissolveconventionaltemporalities.Inthe
caseofjurisdiction,atemporallimitfortheprosecutionofcrimeshasbeenbrokenwiththe
notionofcrimesagainsthumanity.Inthecaseofarchaeology,historicisttimeisexplodedfirst,
throughtherealizationthatthepastishereinthepresent,and,second,throughtheabolition
ofthetimelimitofarchaeology.Thiswasdonenotbyremovingtheboundarythatismost
temporallydistant(asinjurisdiction),but,onthecontrary,bydissolvingthemostrecent,the
presenttoo,isthebusinessofarchaeology(BuchliandLucas2001;Harrison2011;Olivier
2013).
Bevernage(2008)arguesthatthetimeofhistoryandthetimeofjurisdictionare
approachingeachother,astheycometotermswithatemporalregimeofspectrality.

20

However,whereashistoryeffectsatheoreticalandethicalchange,thetransformationof
juridicalandarchaeologicaltimeisalsoatransformationofpractice.Tribunalscandeliver
justiceforgenocideshundredsofyearsold;archaeologistscanuncoverthedeadwhohave
beenhiddenintheirgraves.Bothfieldscoproducetheregimeofspectralitybeyondmere
discoursesincetheyeachinvokethedead,literally.Archaeologistsrecovertheghostly
presenceofthevictimsthroughtheirdeadbodiesandtheirobjects;andtheghostlypresence
ofthedeadarelikewisesummonedbythelaw.AspartofalawsuitagainsttheFranco
dictatorshipinSpain,forexample,thedictatorand35highofficersoftheregimewerecalled
totestify...eveniftheyallhadbeendeadfordecades(GarcaYeregui2010).Inthiscase,
however,itwasthejudgethatwaseventuallyprosecutedandexpelledfromthejudiciary.The
politicalmotivationsareclear.ThejudicialsystemislargelyrightwinginSpainandagainst
meddlingwithadifficultpast,butthejustificationforexpellingtherebelliousjudgeis
interestingsinceSpanishcriminalprocedurelawonlyallowsinvestigationswhenthereisa
physicalpersonthatcanbeaccusedofthecrimes.Whenthereisnoonealivetoprosecute,it
isthetimeofhistorians,notofjustice(Barrero2012:391).ThismeansthattheSpanish
judiciaryisoutoftheregimeofspectralitythatIhavebeendescribingand,inconsequence,
outoftherealmoftimelessresponsibility.
Irrespectiveofthegeneralizationofthevaluesofuniversaljurisdictionandthe
progressiveacceptanceofnonlineartimeinarcheology,theideathatourpoliticalandethical
compromisesfadeawaywhenaparticularpastbecomesmoredistantisstillwidespread.The
conceptionisthat,astimepasses,historyisblurredbytheprogressivedeclineof
documentation.Perhapsthebestexampleofthistemporalperceptionemergesagainfrom
thedead.ThebodyofasoldierfallenintheVietnamWarreceivesatreatmentafter
exhumationthathasnothingtodowiththeremainsofaRomansoldierexcavatedinafirst
centuryADbattlefield.Butthingsarenotalwayssoclearcut,andtimeisseldomasimple
vector.
21

Tostartwith,itisnotnecessarilytruethattimecoolsdowngrievancesandpolitical
emotions.EviatarZerubavel(2003:38)mentionsseveralcasesthatprovetheideawrong,such
asthepersistentIrishhatredforCromwell(dead1658)ortherejectionofmonumentsto
conquistadorsbyNativeAmericans.Therefusalofthepasttovanishfromourlivesisnot
arbitrary.Aslongaspeopleconsiderthatanunjustsituationisreproducedinthepresent(as
withthecontinuousmarginalizationofNativeAmericans),thepastwillneverberegardedas
such,butalwaysascontemporary.Itdoesnotmatteriftheeventshappened30yearsorthree
millenniaago.Fromthispointofview,itdoesnotmakemuchsensetospeakofprehistoric,
historical,orcontemporaryarchaeology,asanartifactorsitefromanyperiodcanbreakinto
thepresent(andinterruptit)atanytime(SchmidtandMrozowski2013).Thisisparticularly
thecasewithethnic,national,religiousandancestraltemporalities,whichdonotapplybythe
rulesofhistoricistconceptionsoftime.AsBernbeckandPollock(1996:140)remindus,since
mythstressesthecontinuityofpastandpresent,thepastisconsideredalwaystobejust
yesterday.Thesameoccurswithconceptsoftimethatarenotstrictlymythical,but
emotionallychargednonetheless.Thus,theruinsofElBorninBarcelonahavebeentheground
forimportantcontroversies.Excavationsofthissitebroughttolighttheremainsofthetown
destroyedbytheSpanisharmyduringtheWarofSuccession(17011714),widelyregardedasa
warofconquestbyCatalonians.FormanyCataloniannationalists,theremainsofElBornare
notadistantpast,butsomethingthattouches(orcollideswith)thepresent.Theydefinea
topologicalspace,whereunilineartimedoesnotwork(Witmore2007).Asimilarthing
happenswithreligioustime,asdemonstratedbytheinfamouscaseoftheBabrimosquein
Ayodhya,destroyedbyHindufundamentaliststorecovertheallegedruinsofatempleto
Ramaburiedunderitsfoundations(BernbeckandPollock1996).Notallreligioustimeadopts,
ofcourse,thefaceoffundamentalism(seeByrne2014).Finally,ancestraltimealsointerrupts
thetimeofmodernityandposesimportantethicalandpoliticalchallenges,ashasbeen
abundantlyexperiencedinNorthandSouthAmerica(Watkins2001;MrozowskiandSchmidt
22

2013).AsVerdesio(2013;alsoAtalayetal.2014)hasargued,theancestraltimeofindigeneity
shouldbeusednotjustasanichetimeonlyrelevanttospecificcommunities,butinsteadto
rethinkarchaeologicaltime,whichismoderninorigin(Thomas2004)andthusconstitutedby
specificnotionsofchange,evolution,directionality,andlinearity.
Itwouldbemisleadingtoconsiderthatonlywhatwecouldcallemotionaltimes
(ancestral,religious,orethnicnational)disturbtheCartesiantemporalityofmodernityand
createethicalchallengestoarchaeologists.Secular,politicaltimecanalsobecomeMessianic,
andthisisactuallythetimeinwhichBenjaminwasthinkingwhenhewrotehisthesesonthe
philosophyofhistory.Agoodexampleofthisinterruptionisthephenomenonofmassgrave
exhumationsfromtheSpanishCivilWarinSpain,whichstartedin2000andisstillongoing.
Theprocessseekstoretrievethebodiesofthosekilledbyfascistandrightistmilitiamenand
armedforcesduringandafterthewar(seeFerrndiz2013;Renshaw2011).Mostofthe
killingstookplacein1936,butthishasnotdetractedfromitscontemporaryrelevance.Infact,
itcanbearguedthatthepresentdiscreditoftheoncepraisedasmodeltransitionto
democracy(duringthelate1970s)hasmuchtodowiththistopologicalpleat(Witmore2007)
thathasconnectedthe1930sandthe2000s.Inthisway,responsibilitytowardthedeadends
uphavinganeffectonthelivingandeveninthenotyetlivingornotyetborn,asDerrida
(2006:121)wouldputit.
Thatthetimeofpoliticalresponsibilityisexpandingismadeclearbytheclaimsof
indigenousgroupsordescendantsofslaves(Mate2003:106;LpezMazz2015),whichcast
theirrequestsinthelanguageofthelaw,not(ornotonly)ofhistory,becausetheirrequests
areofajuridicalnature,andnotjustsymbolic.Itisnotenoughforarchaeologiststo
acknowledgethesymbolicrighttonarratefortheindigenouspeoplesorslavedescendants.It
isnecessarytoaccepttheirrighttoinserttheirclaimsinaframeworkofsecularjustice.Now
thisissomethingthatismoreeasilydoneifwedeconstructhistoricismandapproach

23

historical/archaeologicaltimetotheunboundedtimeofjurisdiction.Ifwebreakhistorical
boundariesandacceptthatthetimeofcolonialismorslaveryisalsothetimeof
supermodernityandthatcurrentgrievancesthatnobodydoubtscanbeexpressedinthe
languageoflawarepartofacontinuumofoppressionthatcannotbecompartmentalizedas
belongingtoanothertime(Mate2003:108;LpezMazz2015).Ghosts,writesDaniel
Innerarity(2001:6465),arewhatpreventsthepresenttobeclosedwithinitself.Thetimeof
archaeology,then,hastomakeroomforghosts.
ConclusionsandFutureDirections
InthisarticleIhavearguedthatarchaeologists,andhistoricalarchaeologistsinparticular,
shouldbereadytoengagewithmorecomplexconceptualizationsoftime.Thishas
implicationsatseverallevels.First,itchallengespresentacademicdividesthatseparate
prehistoric,historical,andcontemporaryarchaeology.Thereisagrowingdiscomfortwiththis
division,butitisstilldeeplyentrenchedininstitutionalorganizations(universities,museums,
conferences,associations,journals).Whileitisdifficulttotransformcollectivesthathavebeen
successfullystabilized(Latour1990),wecanatleastworkacrossdividesinourdailypractice.
Thismeansthatwehavetothinklessashistoricalarchaeologistsorprehistoriansandmoreas
archaeologists,period.Therefore,wehavetoaddressquestionsthatarenotlimitedtopre
establishedorborrowedtemporalframeworks.Amorecomplexconceptualizationoftime
mightbeuncomfortableforacademicreasons,butitcanmakearchaeologymorerelevant
beyonditsdisciplinaryboundaries.Ihavearguedinthisarticlethatwehavetofindourown
temporalitiesandforthatwehavetofollowthetimeofthings.Perhapshistoricaland
contemporaryarchaeologistsshouldthinkattimesmorelikeprehistoriansandworkasifthey
hadnotextsandtheonlyevidencetheyhadtobuildtheirstoriesweremuteobjects.Oneof
thepotentialadvantagesoflookingatthingsfirstisthepossibilityofdiscoveringalternative
temporalitiesthatarecrossedoutfromanthropologicalandhistoricalaccountsuchasthe
persistenceoftheoldinthenewandthepresenceofmarginalizedexperiencesoftime.Inthis
24

way,archaeologywillbeinagoodpositiontoofferaccountsthataremorecomplexandrich,
becausetheytacklebettertheheterochronyofmodernity.
Acceptingacomplexmultitemporalityisnecessaryforethicalandpoliticalreasons,as
well.Insomecontexts,aswithmassgraveexhumations,archaeologyhasaveryrealcapacity
toredressoppressivepoliticsoftimethatseektheabsoluteannihilationofhumanbeings
(theirpresent,past,andfuture).Inthecaseofsupermodernity,exploringtemporalcomplexity
meansscrutinizingthematerialeffectsoftemporalitiesthaterasethepastandendangerthe
future,butalsounderstandingthatthetimeoftheancestorscoexistswiththehegemonictime
ofsupermodernity.Thechallengeofancestraltimeaffectsarchaeologistsirrespectiveoftheir
timenicheandtheeruptionofthenonmoderntimeofindigenouscommunitiesinthe
hegemonictimeofmodernitycreatesnewethicalresponsibilitiesandatthesametimeoffers
theopportunitytomakeabetter,morerelevantarchaeology.Onethatisnowreadytodo
awaywithlabels.
Acknowledgments
IwouldliketothankEleanorCasella,ChristopherMatthews,StephenMorzowskiandPaul
Mullinswhoseperceptivecommentshavehelpedtoimprovethispaper.
References
Anderson,Stanford
1999 MemorywithoutMonuments:VernacularArchitecture.TraditionalDwellingsand
SettlementsReview11(1):1322.
Andreassen,Elin,HeinBjerckandBjornarOlsen.
2010 PersistentMemories:PyramidenaSovietMiningTownintheHighArctic.Tapir
AcademicPress,Bergen.
Atalay,Sonia.LeeR.Clauss,R.H.McGuire,JohnR.Welch(eds.)
25

2014 Transformingarchaeology.Activistpracticesandprospects.LeftCoastPress,Walnut
Creek,CA.
Aug,Marc
1995 NonPlaces:AnIntroductiontoSupermodernity,translatedbyJohnHowe.Verso,
London.
Barrero,A.
2012 Garzn:unjuezanteelsupremo.CuestionesConstitucionales.RevistaMexicanade
DerechoConstitucional27:385396.
Barroso,Rafael,JosCarrobles,JorgeMorndePablos,JosRamos,AntonioMalalana,Jos
LuisIsabelyLuisA.RuizCasero
2014 LosCigarralesdeToledoenlaGuerraCivil:Unpaisajeefmero.InLospaisajes
culturalesdelaciudaddeToledo:Loscigarrales.Dehesas,espaciosirrigados,torres,cigarrales
ytrincheras,JosCarrobles&JorgenMorndePablos,editors,pp.383434.BARInternational
Series2638.Archaeopress,Oxford.
Bauman,Zygmunt
2000 Liquidmodernity.Blackwell,Oxford.
Benjamin,Walter
1968 Thesesonthephilosophyofhistory.InIlluminations,translatedbyHarryZohn,pp.
253264.Schocken,NewYork.
Bernbeck,Reinhard&SuePollock
1996 Ayodhya,archaeology,andidentity.CurrentAnthropology37(1):138142.

26

Bevernage,Berber
2008 Time,presence,andhistoricalinjustice.HistoryandTheory47(2):149167.
Bori,Dusan
2003 DeeptimemetaphorMnemonicandapotropaicpracticesatLepenskiVir.Journalof
SocialArchaeology3(1):4674.
Bruno,Giuliana
2003 Modernistruins,filmicarchaeologies.Ruins,BrianDillon,editor,pp.7681.MITPress,
Boston.
Buchli,Victor&GavinLucas(eds.)
2002 Archaeologiesofthecontemporarypast.Routledge,London.
Byrne,Denis
2014 Counterheritage:CriticalPerspectivesonHeritageConservationinAsia.Routledge,
London.
Calveiro,Pilar
2008[1998]Poderydesaparicin:loscamposdeconcentracinenArgentina.Colihue,Buenos
Aires.
Chapman,John
1994 Destructionofacommonheritage:thearchaeologyofwarinCroatia,Bosniaand
Hercegovina.Antiquity68(258):120126.
Chaves,Julin,CandelaChaves,CayetanoIbarra,JavierMartnBastos&LauraMuozEncinar

27

2014 ProyectoRecuperacindelaMemoriaHistricaenExtremadura.Balancedeuna
dcada(20032013).InvestigacindelaGuerraCivilyelFranquismo.Reyego,Zafra.
Clifford,James
1997 Routes:Travelandtranslationinthelatetwentiethcentury.HarvardUniversityPress,
Cambridge,MA.
Compay,Gonzalo,GabrielaGonzlez,LeonardoOvando&DavidRossetto
2011 APoliticalArchaeologyofLatinAmericasRecentPast:ABridgeTowardsourHistory.In
GabrielMoshenska.InArchaeologiesofInternment,AdrianMyersandGabrielMoshenska,
editors,pp.229244.Springer,NewYork.
Connerton,Paul
2009 Howmodernityforgets.CambridgeUniversityPress,Cambridge.
Cresswell,Tim
2006 Onthemove.Mobilityinthemodernworld.Routledge,London.
Cresswell,Tim
2010 Towardsapoliticsofmobility.Environmentandplanning.D,SocietyandSpace28(1):
1731.
Dawdy,ShannonL.
2006 Thetaphonomyofdisasterandthe(re)formationofNewOrleans.American
Anthropologist108(4):719730.
DeLanda,Manuel

28

2006 Anewphilosophyofsociety.Assemblagetheoryandsocialcomplexity.Continuum,
London.
Deetz,James
1977 Insmallthingsforgotten.AnarchaeologyofearlyAmericanlife.NewYork:Anchor.
Deleuze,Gilles&FelixGuattari,F.
1986 Nomadology.Thewarmachine.Semiotext(e),NewYork.
Derrida,Jacques
2006[1993]

Specters of Marx: The state of the debt, the work of mourning, and the new

international.Routledge,London.
Domanska,Ewa
2006 Thematerialpresenceofthepast.Historyandtheory45(3):337348.
Edgerton,David
2007 TheShockoftheOld:TechnologyandGlobalHistorysince1900.OxfordUniversity
Press,Oxford.
Fabian,Johannes
1983 Timeandtheother:Howanthropologymakesitsobject.ColumbiaUniversityPress,
NewYork.
Ferrndiz,Francisco
2013 Exhumingthedefeated:CivilWarmassgravesin21stcenturySpain.American
Ethnologist40(1):3854.

29

Friedman,Jonathan
2002 Fromrootstoroutes.Tropesfortrippers.AnthropologicalTheory2(1):2136.
GarcaYeregui,Mara
2010 Ausenciadejusticiafrentealarepresinfranquista.Elintentodejudicializacinde
BaltasarGarzn.IIISeminarioInternacionalPolticasdelaMemoria.CentroInternacionaldela
MemoriaHaroldoConti.BuenosAires.http://conti.derhuman.jus.gov.ar/2010/10/mesa
12/garcia_yeregui_mesa_12.pdf
Gilead,Isaac,YoramHaimi&WojciechMazurek
2010 ExcavatingNaziexterminationcentres.PresentPasts1.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/pp.12
Gokee,Cameron&JasonDeLen
2014 Sitesofcontention:ArchaeologicalclassificationandpoliticaldiscourseintheUS
Mexicoborderlands.JournalofContemporaryArchaeology1(1):133164.
Gonzlezlvarez,David&PabloAlonso
2014 Delarepresentacinculturaldelaotredadalamaterializacindeladiferencia:
Arqueologacontemporneadeladomesticidadentrelosvaqueirosd'alzadaylosmaragatos
(Espaa).Chungar46(4):607623.
GonzlezRuibal,Alfredo
2006 Thedreamofreason.AnarchaeologyofthefailuresofmodernityinEthiopia.Journal
ofSocialArchaeology6(2):175201.
GonzlezRuibal,Alfredo

30

2013.ReclaimingArchaeology.InReclaimingarchaeology:Beyondthetropesofmodernity,
AlfredoGonzlezRuibal,editor,pp.131.Routledge,London.
2014.Supermodernityandarchaeology.InEncyclopaediaofGlobalArchaeology,ClaireSmith,
editor,pp.71257134.Springer,NewYork.
GonzlezRuibal,Alfredo,LlorenPicornell,L.&ManuelSnchezElipe
2015 ColonialencountersinSpanishEquatorialAfrica(18th20thcenturies).In
ArchaeologiesofEarlyModernSpanishColonialism.ContributionstoGlobalHistorical
Archaeology,SandraMontn,MaraCruzyApenRuiz,editors.Springer,NewYork.
Gordillo,Gastn
2014 Rubble:TheAfterlifeofDestruction.DukeUniversityPress,Durham,NC.
Gould,RichardandMichaelB.Schiffer(Eds.)
1981 ModernMaterialCulture:TheArchaeologyofUs.AcademicPress,NewYork.
Haglund,WilliamD.,MelissaConnor&DougScott
2001 Thearchaeologyofcontemporarymassgraves.HistoricalArchaeology35(1):5769.
Hall,Martin
1999 Subalternvoices?Findingthespacesbetweenthingsandwords.InHistorical
Archaeology:BackfromtheEdge,PedroPauloA.Funari,MartinHall&SianJones,editors,pp.
193203.Routledge,London.
2000 ArchaeologyandtheModernWorld:ColonialTranscriptsinSouthAfricaandthe
Chesapeake.Routledge,London.
Hamilakis,Y.

31

2011 Archaeologicalethnography:amultitemporalmeetinggroundforarchaeologyand
anthropology.AnnualReviewofAnthropology,40:399414.
Hardesty,Donald.
1988 Thearchaeologyofminingandminers:AviewfromtheSilverState.Societyfor
HistoricalArchaeology,PleasantHill,CA.
Harrison,Rodney
2006 Anartefactofcolonialdesire?Kimberleypointsandthetechnologiesof
enchantment.CurrentAnthropology47(1):6388.
Harrison,Rodney
2011 SurfaceAssemblages:TowardsanArchaeologyinandofthepresent.Archaeological
Dialogues18(2):141161.
Harrison,Rodney&Schofield,John
2010 Aftermodernity:Archaeologicalapproachestothecontemporarypast.Oxford
UniversityPress,Oxford.
Harvey,David
1989 The condition of postmodernity: An enquiry into the origins of cultural change.
Blackwell,Oxford.
Herbert,Martin
2011 Thedeadtown.InRuins,BrianDillon,editor,pp.198191.Boston:MITPress.
Hernando,Almudena
2002 ArqueologadelaIdentidad.Akal,Madrid.
32

Hodder,Ian,&PeterJ.Pels
2010 Historyhouses:anewinterpretationofarchitecturalelaborationatatalhyk.In
Religionintheemergenceofcivilization:atalhykasacasestudy,IanHodder,editor,pp.
163186.CambridgeUniversityPress,Cambridge.
Hardman,FranciscoF.
1988 Tremfantasma:amodernidadenaselva.CompanhiadasLetras,SoPaulo.
Hobsbawm,Eric
1994[1987]

TheAgeofEmpire.18751914.Abacus,London

Innerarity,Daniel
2001 ticadelahospitalidad.Pennsula,Madrid.
Latour,Bruno
1990 Technologyissocietymadedurable.TheSociologicalReview38(1):103131.
1993 Wehaveneverbeenmodern.HarvardUniversityPress,Cambridge,MA.
Leduc,Jean
1999Leshistoriensetletemps.Seuil,Paris.
LeGoff,Jacques
2014 Fautilvraimentdcouperl'histoireentranches?Seuil,Paris.
LeRoyLadurie,Emmanuel
1974 L'histoireimmobile.Annales.Economies,Socits,Civilisations29(3):673692.
LviStrauss,Claude
33

1955 Tristestropiques.Plon,Paris.
LpezMazz,Jos
2015 ArchaeologyofHistoricalConflicts,ColonialOppression,andPoliticalViolencein
Uruguay.InEthicsandtheArchaeologyofViolence,AlfredoGonzlezRuibal&Gabriel
Moshenska,editors,pp.7187.NewYork:Springer.
Lucas,Gavin
2004 TheArchaeologyofTime.Routledge,London.
Lucas,Gavin

2010 Timeandthearchaeologicalarchive.Rethinkinghistory14(3):343359.
2012 Understandingthearchaeologicalrecord.CambridgeUnivresityPress,Cambridge.
McGlade,James
1999 Thetimesofhistory:archaeology,narrativeandnonlinearcausality.InTimeand
archaeology,TimMurray,editor,pp.139163.Routledge,London.
Matthews,ChristopherN.
2007 Historytoprehistory:AnarchaeologyofbeingIndian.Archaeologies3(3):271295.
2010 ThearchaeologyofAmericancapitalism.UniversityofFloridaPress,Gainesville.
Martnez Reverte,JorgeM.
2009 Elartedematar:CmosehizolaGuerraCivilEspaola.RBA,Barcelona.
Mate,ManuelReyes.

34

2003 Entornoalajusticiaanamntica.InLaticaantelasvctimas,JosManuelMardones
&ManuelReyesMate,editors,pp.100125.Anthropos,Barcelona.
Mayer,A.J.
1981.Thepersistenceoftheoldregime:EuropetotheGreatWar.PantheonBooks,NewYork.
Miller,RobertH.
1971 TheConventionontheNonApplicabilityofStatutoryLimitationstoWarCrimesand
CrimesagainstHumanity.AmericanJournalofInternationalLaw65(3):476501.
Neitzel,Snke&Welzer,Harald
2012 Soldaten.OnFighting,KillingandDying.TheSecretSecondWorldWarTapesof
GermanPOWs.SimonandSchuster,London.
Oliver,Paul
2003 Dwellings.Thevernacularhouseworldwide.Phaidon,NewYork.
Olivier,Laurent
2008 LeSombreAbmedutempsMmoireetarchologie.Paris:Seuil.
Olivier,Laurent
2013a Noussommeslgedeladvastation.InDestruction.Archaeological,philologicaland
historicalperspectives,JanDriessen,editor,pp.2736.PressesUniversitairesdeLouvain,
Leuven.
2013b Thebusinessofarchaeologyisthepresent.InReclaimingArchaeology:Beyondthe
TropesofModernity,AlfredoGonzlezRuibal,editor,pp.117129.Routledge,London.
Olsen,Bjornar
35

2010 InDefenseofThings:ArchaeologyandtheOntologyofObjects.Altamira,Lanham,MD.
Orser,C.E.
1996 AHistoricalArchaeologyoftheModernWorld.Springer,NewYork.
Ptursdttir,Thora&BjornarOlsen
2014 Anarchaeologyofruins.InRuinmemories.Materialities,aestheticsandthe
archaeologyoftherecentpast,BjornarOlsenandoraPtursdttir,pp.331.London:
Routledge.
PoloCerd,Manuel,EvaGarcaPrsper,ElisaCruzRico,ElenaRuizConde
2012 FosascomunesexhumadasenelterritoriodelaagrupacinguerrilleradeLevantey
Aragn(20052011).BoletnGalegodeMedicinaLegaleForense18:99116.
Prudon,TheodoreH.M.
1986 TheDutchbarninAmerica:SurvivalofaMedievalstructure.InCommonplaces:
readingsinAmericanvernaculararchitecture,DellUpton&JohnM.Vlach,editors,pp.204
216,Athens,UniversityofGeorgiaPress.
Renshaw,Layla
2011 Exhumingloss:memory,materialityandmassgravesoftheSpanishCivilWar.
LeftCoastPress,WalnutCreek,CA.
RodrguezAlegra,Enrique
2008 NarrativesofConquest,Colonialism,andCuttingEdgeTechnology.American
Anthropologist110(1):3343.
RodrguezTorrent,JuanCarlos&PabloA.MirandaBrown

36

2008 TiempoindustrialytiempossocialesenMaraElena,laltimaciudaddel
salitre.Chungar40(1):8197.
Rosignoli,B.
2015 ArchaeologyofStateTerrorism:ExploringtheTerritorialStrategiesofClandestine
RepressioninArgentina(19761983).Archaeologies11(2):144168.
Saunders,N.J.
2002 Excavatingmemories:archaeologyandtheGreatWar,19142001.Antiquity76(291):
101108.
Schlanger,Nathan,Nespoulous,Laurent,JeanPaulDemoule
Forthcoming

Year4atFukushima.A'disasterled'archaeologyofthecontemporaryfuture.

Schmidt,Peter&Patterson,ThomasC.,editors.
1995 Makingalternativehistories:ThepracticeofarchaeologyandhistoryinnonWestern
settings.SchoolofAmericanResearchPress,SantaFe.
Schmidt,PeterR.,&StephenA.Mrozowski
2013 TheDeathofPrehistory:ReformingthePast,LookingtotheFuture.TheDeathof
Prehistory,128.OxfordUniversityPress,Oxford.
Schofield,J.,&Cocroft,W.
2009 Afearsomeheritage:diverselegaciesoftheColdWar.LeftCoastPress,WalnutCreeck,
CA.
Shanks,Michael
1992 Experiencingthepast:Onthecharacterofarchaeology.London:Routledge.
37

Sewell,WilliamH.
2008 Thetemporalitiesofcapitalism.SocioEconomicReview6:517537.
Shryock,Andrew&DanielL.Smail
2011 Deephistory:Thearchitectureofpastandpresent.UniversityofCaliforniaPress,
Berkeley.
Silliman,Stephen
2001 Agency,practicalpoliticsandthearchaeologyofculturecontact.JournalofSocial
Archaeology1(2):190209.
Skinner,Mark,HeatherYork&MelissaA.Connor
2002 PostburialdisturbanceofgravesinBosniaHerzegovina.InW.D.Haglund&M.H.Sorg
(eds.):AdvancesinForensicTaphonomy:Method,Theory,andArchaeologicalPerspectives,pp.
293308.CRC,BocaRaton,FL.
Steele,Carol
2008 Archaeologyandtheforensicinvestigationofrecentmassgraves:ethicalissuesfora
newpracticeofarchaeology.Archaeologies4(3):414428.
Steinmetz,Georg
2010 ColonialmelancholyandFordistnostalgia:TheruinscapesofNamibiaandDetroit.In
RuinsofModernity,JuliaHellandAndreasSchnle,editors,pp.294320.DukeUniversity
Press,Durham,NC.
Stoler,LauraA.

38

2008 Imperialdebris:reflectionsonruinsandruination.CulturalAnthropology23(2):191
219.
SturdyColls,Caroline
2012 Holocaustarchaeology:ArchaeologicalapproachestolandscapesofNazigenocideand
persecution.JournalofConflictArchaeology7(2):70104.
Thomas,Julian
2004 Archaeologyandmodernity.Routledge,London.
Verdesio,Gustavo
2013 Indigeneityandtime.InReclaimingArchaeology:BeyondtheTropesofModernity,
AlfredoGonzlezRuibal,editors,168180.Routledge,London.
Vilches,Flora,LorenaSanhueza,CristinaGarrido,CeciliaSanhueza&UlisesCrdenas
2014 LamineradelasalduranteelsigloXXenSanPedrodeAtacama,Chile(IIRegin):
entrelaexplotacinartesanalylaindustrializacin.EstudiosAtacameos48:209228.
Virilio,Paul
1986 Speedandpolitics:Anessayondromology,translatedbyMarkPolizzotti.Semiotext(e),
NewYork.
Watkins,Joe2001.Indigenousarchaeology:AmericanIndianvaluesandscientificpractice.
AltaMiraPress,Lanham,MD.
Weizman,Eyal.
2007 Hollowland.Israelsarchitectureofoccupation.Verso,London.
Witmore,Christopher
39

2006 Vision,Media,NoiseandthePercolationofTimeSymmetricalApproachestothe
MediationoftheMaterialWorld.JournalofMaterialCulture11(3):267292.
Witmore,Christopher
2007 Landscape,time,topology.AnarchaeologicalaccountofthesouthernArgolid,
Greece.InD.Hicks,L.McAtackney&G.Fairclough(Eds.):Envisioninglandscape.Situationsand
standpointsinarchaeologyandheritage,pp.194225.LeftCoastPress,WalnutCreek,CA.
Witmore,Christopher
2013.Whicharchaeology?:aquestionofchronopolitics.InReclaimingarchaeology:Beyond
thetropesofmodernity,AlfredoGonzlezRuibal,editor,pp.130144.Routledge,London.
Zarankin,Andrs&Salerno,Melissa
2011 Theengineeringofgenocide:AnarchaeologyofdictatorshipinArgentina.
InArchaeologiesofInternment,AdrianMyersandGabrielMoshenska,editors,pp.207227.
Springer,NewYork.
Zerubavel,Eviatar
2012 Timemaps:Collectivememoryandthesocialshapeofthepast.UniversityofChicago
Press,Chicago.

Captions
FIGURE1.AvernacularhouseinuseinBrazilinthe21stcentury.Thatchandmudinsteadof
steelandconcrete.
FIGURE2.Alandscapeofwar:ruinsofBelchite,Spain.

40

FIGURE3.RuinsofHargeisa(Somaliland):thelargemajorityofthecitydisappearedduringthe
civilwarinthe1980s.Onlyafewbuildingsoftheprewarperiodsurvive.
FIGURE4.RuinsofElobeyChico(18851926)inEquatorialGuinea.
FIGURE5.Nikkel:ASoviettowninnortheastRussia.
FIGURE6.ThebombedoutlibraryofSarajevo(BosniaHerzegovina).
FIGURE7.TracesofthedismantlingoftheconcentrationcampofCastuera(Spain).

41