Table Of ContentMAKING TIME
Making Time grapples with a range of issues that have crystallized in the wake of
15 years of discussion on time in archaeology, since the author’s seminal volume
The Archaeology of Time, synthesizing them for a new generation of scholars.
The general understanding of time held by both archaeologists and non-
archaeologists is often very simple: a linear notion where time flows along a single
pathfromthepastintothefuture.Thisbooksetsouttocomplicatethisimage,to
draw out the key problems and issues with time that impact archaeological
interpretation. Using concrete examples drawn from different periods and places,
the book challenges the reader to think again. Ultimately, the book will suggest
that if we want to understand what archaeological time is, then we need to
accept that things do not exist in time, they make time. The crucial question
then becomes: what kinds of time do archaeological materialities produce?
Written for upper level undergraduates and researchers in archaeology, the book
is also accessible to non-academics with an interest in the topic. The book is rele-
vant for cognate disciplines, especially history, heritage studies and philosophy.
Gavin Lucas is Professor of Archaeology at the University of Iceland. His main
interests lie in archaeological method and theory as well as the archaeology of the
modern world, with a special focus on the North Atlantic.
MAKING TIME
The Archaeology of Time Revisited
Gavin Lucas
Firstpublished2021
byRoutledge
2ParkSquare,MiltonPark,Abingdon,OxonOX144RN
andbyRoutledge
52VanderbiltAvenue,NewYork,NY10017
RoutledgeisanimprintoftheTaylor&FrancisGroup,aninformabusiness
©2021GavinLucas
TherightofGavinLucastobeidentifiedasauthorofthisworkhasbeenasserted
byhiminaccordancewithsections77and78oftheCopyright,Designsand
PatentsAct1988.
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthisbookmaybereprintedorreproducedor
utilisedinanyformorbyanyelectronic,mechanical,orothermeans,now
knownorhereafterinvented,includingphotocopyingandrecording,orinany
informationstorageorretrievalsystem,withoutpermissioninwritingfromthe
publishers.
Trademarknotice:Productorcorporatenamesmaybetrademarksorregistered
trademarks,andareusedonlyforidentificationandexplanationwithoutintentto
infringe.
BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData
AcataloguerecordforthisbookisavailablefromtheBritishLibrary
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
Names:Lucas,Gavin,1965-author.
Title:Makingtime:thearchaeologyoftimerevisited/GavinLucas.
Description:Firstedition.|NewYork:Routledge,2021.|
Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.|
Contents:Prologue:Timeaftertime—Timematters—Thearchaeological
clock—Timescales—Theshapeoftime—Thesametime—Another
time—Thearchaeologicaltimemachine—Epilogue:makinghistory.
Identifiers:LCCN2020048588(print)|LCCN2020048589(ebook)|
ISBN9780367544775(hardback)|ISBN9780367544379(paperback)|
ISBN9781003089445(ebook)
Subjects:LCSH:Archaeology—Methodology.|Archaeology—Philosophy.|
Time.|Time—Philosophy.
Classification:LCCCC75.7.L8362021(print)|LCCCC75.7(ebook)|
DDC930.1—dc23
LCrecordavailableathttps://lccn.loc.gov/2020048588
LCebookrecordavailableathttps://lccn.loc.gov/2020048589
ISBN:978-0-367-54477-5(hbk)
ISBN:978-0-367-54437-9(pbk)
ISBN:978-1-003-08944-5(ebk)
TypesetinBembo
byTaylor&FrancisBooks
CONTENTS
List of figures vi
Acknowledgements vii
Prologue: Time after time 1
1 Time matters 13
2 The archaeological clock 28
3 Time scales 45
4 The shape of time 64
5 The same time 84
6 Another time 103
7 The archaeological time machine 120
Epilogue: Making history 139
Index 144
FIGURES
2.1 Extract from the Annals of St Gall 35
2.2 The singularization of time: extendability and scalability 40
3.1 Optical and digital resolution of time 50
4.1 The temporal layers of clock design 69
4.2 The disparity between chronological and typological time;
a gradient vector analysis of 19th- and early 20th-century
miners’ lamps 70
4.3 Longevity of different structures at the post-medieval site of
Skálholt, Iceland 72
5.1 The main temporal relationships under Allen’s temporal logic;
six of them can be inverted, resulting in a total of 13 possible
relations 86
5.2 The multi-temporal dimensions of the Hochdorf grave 88
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The book had its origins in a series of four lectures I gave as part of the University
of Glasgow’s Dalrymple Lectures series for 2019. I would like to thank the orga-
nizers of that series for the invitation, especially Stephen Driscoll at the department
of Archaeology, University of Glasgow and Dorothy Gormlie, President of the
Glasgow Archaeological Society. For this book, the lectures have been radically
transformed and extended and my deepest gratitude goes to Ágústa Edwald and
LaurentOlivierwhokindlyreadthroughafirst draftofthewholebook,providing
much needed feedback. They made me clarify my arguments, improve the flow
of the work and without a doubt, made this book a much better one; it goes
without saying however, I bear full responsibility for all its remaining short-
comings. I would also like to thank Amare Adebe, Professor of Physics at NWU
(North-West University), South Africa for reading over Chapter 1 and making
sure my limited understanding of time in physics was not horribly wrong. Finally
I would like to thank my copy editor Pamela Bertram for her excellent work on
the manuscript and Matt Gibbons at Routledge for supporting the publication of
this work and to several anonymous reviewers who gave critical comments on
the original proposal.
Most of the figures in this book I drafted, but I would like to thank Laurent
Olivier for kindly letting me reproduce two of his, one relating to a vector analysis
ofminers’ lampsfromChapter4 and the other tothe Hochdorf grave inChapter 5.
PROLOGUE
Time after time
Once upon a time …
Fifteen yearsagoIpublishedabookcalledtheArchaeologyofTime.1Itwas,inpart,
aspin-offfrommydoctoralstudiestenyearsearlierwhichgrappledwiththeconcept
oftimeinarchaeologybutthroughadetailedcasestudyonthelaterprehistoryofan
area of northern England.2 Truth be told, I did not plan to do my doctoral research
onthetopicoftimebutratheronethnographicanalogy;itwasatopicthathadreally
grabbed my attention as an undergraduate but in my first meeting with my doctoral
supervisor,agentlesuggestionwasmadethatmaybeanalogywasnolongerahottopic
(this was 1991 after all), whereas the concept of time was ripe for exploration. No
doubtthiswassageadviceandasaresult,timeseemstohavestucktome–orIhave
stuck with it. It helped that the environment in which I was working during my
doctoralstudieswasinmanywaysideal;atCambridgeintheearly1990s,Sandervan
derLeeuwwasworkingontimeand complexitytheoryalongwithhisPhDstudent
JamesMcGlade,whileanotherofhisdoctoralstudents,LaurentOlivierdevelopedhis
ownuniqueapproachtotime.Myownsupervisor,IanHodder,wasexploringtimein
averydifferentway,inrelationtonarrative,whilemyadvisorwasGeoffBaileywho
pioneered the theory of time perspectivism. Michael Shanks was also around com-
pleting his PhD in my first years there and later, Tim Murray was regularly coming
throughCambridge.HowcouldIfailinsuchexcellentcompany?
And yet, ironically, with the exception of my supervisor, my paths only crossed
occasionallywiththeseotherarchaeologistsandIcannotsayIreallytookfulladvan-
tageoftheirpresenceormysituation.Inlargepart–andIonlyblamemyselfforthis–
thiswasduetothefactthatIsawmyowninterestintime beingmuchclosertoIan
Hodder’spost-processualismthanGeoffBailey’stimeperspectivismorSandervander
Leeuw’s complexity theory. At a time when theoretical pigeon-holing was almost
obligatoryandbeingyoungandfullofambitiontoberadical,itseemedcleartomeat
