BOOK REVIEWS
opinions clearly in the first chapter, using them to
AND ARC- pose a question about Pitt Rivers's status as an
OF
archaeologist which he attempts to answer in the
GENERAL AUGUSTUS HENRY LANE FOX
'ITT
DCL FRS
Mark
One possible source of confusion in any work on
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (l99 1) Pitt Rivers is
name change that occurred in midxvi'182 pages* ISBN 0 S2l 400775 (hardcover). c a ~ e r .Throughout most of his life his surname was
Price $85.00.
Lane Fox, under which his early archaeological reports
are published. In 1880 he had to adopt the Pitt Rivers
Ron Lampert
name on inheriting from Lord Rivers an estate of
For many people the name Pitt Rivers will evoke a more than 32,000 acres in Cranbome Chase (Dorsetmuseum - a 'magmficently eccentric museum' in the Wiltshire). It is to the biographer's credit that he
words of the author - at Oxford University. Archae- manages to use both names, in accordance with the
ologists however will also associate the name with a time each was valid, without confusing the reader
great nineteenth century originator of archaeological unduly. Uncertain of my own skills however I will use
method, though their reasons for holding this opinion the name Pitt Rivers throughout this rcview even
are more likely to stem from reading the views of a where obviously anachronistic.
few archaeological historians than from a first-hand
Pitt Rivers' early career was as a soldier, a role in
assessment of the work of Pitt Rivers.
which he seems to have enjoyed success, rising to the
Before reading Bowden's excellent biography my rank of lieutenant-general and being responsible for
ideas on Pitt Rivers had been shaped to a large extent training the army in new techniques in musketry
by such views. Like those of Wheeler (1956:13) who around the time of the Crimean War. This background
followed and developed Pitt Rivers's methods and prin- was to serve him well as an archaeologist, providing
ciples, seeing him as the 'greatest of all archaeological organisational skills, the ability to read topography
excavators'; Piggott (1966:45) who notes that he:
and draw maps and plans, and a sense of judgement in
suddenly, and entirely on his own, began to
the interpretation of the many defensive earthworks k
conduct large-scale excavations in what we
was to excavate.
would consider a wholly modem manner ... he
He moved in a remarkable intellectual group that
published his results with extraordinary speed;
included Charles Darwin, Thomas Henry Huxley,
and Daniel (1967: 291) who saw Pitt Rivers as one of Herbert Spencer, Edward Bumett Tylor and John
'the great discoverers and innovators of thc last quarter Lubbock. Small wonder then that he had a broad
of the nineteenth century.' Impressive though these range of research interests, as can be deduced by
views were to me, when I first read them twenty-five merely scanning his bibliography. Among more than
or so years ago, I was swayed more by examining Pitt 40 scientific publications are works not only on
Rivers' Excavations in Cranborne Chase (4 Vols, archaeology but also on ethnology, anthropometry,
1887-98) with its magnificent leathcr bound volumes, taxonomy, military history and museology. Although
its photographs showing trenches cut precisely through excavation reports are most numerous, other topics
gigantic earthworks and page after page of bcautifully include the Egyptian boomerang, Andarnanese and
drawn flints, skulls and pottery. With these images in Nicobarese artefacts, early locks and keys, Benin
mind it was of particular interest to me to read the works of art, early navigation and primitive warfare.
broader and more fully argued assessment of Pitt The title of one paper, 'On measurements taken on
Rivers that this new book provides.
officers and men of the 2nd Royal Surrey Militia'
Sketchier appraisals by recent cornmenLators givc a indicates that he was not averse to using his position in
more varied range of views on Pitt Rivers than those the army to obtain anthropometric data.
Despite his wide interests and an ability to develop
expressed above, perhaps not surprising given Ihe
current vogue for the writing of revisionist histories. new archaeological methods, Pitt Rivers' views on
While to some he remains among the grcatcst of human culture were very much in the evolutionist
archaeologists, even 'the father of scientific archae- mould of his times. Cultural change was seen as
ology', others see him as little more than 'an amusing analogous to natural evolution, a system in which
eccentric with a private band and a menagerie of socially and intellectually inferior cultures would
exotic animals'. Mark Bowden sets out these varied eventually fade away through processes of natural
'ITT
64
THE
Australian Archaeology, Number 38,1994
Book Reviews
selection. To illustrate this, he collected ethnographica
and displayed it in his museums largely to instruct the
public on how societies could be seen as ranging from
'primitive' at one end of the scale to 'civilised' at the
other, the motivation for which according to Bowden
being a desire to reinforce the 'existing social ordd
even though it also 'supported a dangerous form of
racism'.
Pitt Rivers excavated sites throughout Britain and
on leaving the army through ill health was appointed
the first Inspector of Ancient Monuments. In later
years however, after acquiring the Pitt Rivers inheritance, he focused his research on the numerous
archaeological sites that lay within the bounds of his
estate in Cranbome Chase. Bowden provides a useful
precis of all of Pitt Rivers' major excavations. These
descriptions are used to underpin the main arguments
in the final chapter where the question of the status of
Pitt Rivers as an archaeologist is addressed.
I was surprised to learn that Pitt Rivcrs' excavation
technique, the mainstay of his reputation, left much
to be desired. A major failing was a lack of any real
understanding of stratigraphy: strata clearly visible in
photographs taken during excavation often escaped
mention in the text; many finds were not assigned to
strata; and he excavated in deep horizontal spits
irrespective of the direction of the stratigraphy - a
photograph republished by Bowdcn (Fig. 42) shows
the removal of the infilling of a dltch with spits
cutting across the strata. His digging methods were
rough and ready, teams of labourers being employed
to Literally shovel out the deposits. As a result many
small finds were missed, somethmg on which Bowden
can speak with particular authority having re-excavated several of Pitt Rivers' sites and examined his
spoil heaps.
Pitt kvers' claim to fame rests on other attributes.
His attention to the small finds he did recover was
exemplary. They are often exquisitely illustrated in
his reports. While not all readers might agree with
his biographer's assertion that 'curation is bctter than
publication', the preservation of excavated finds of all
classes in his museum collections certainly allows
the better reinterpretation of his sites in more Rcent
times. Moreover he viewed archaeology as an extension of anthropology and, as a consequence, built up
matching collections of both archaeological and ethnographic objects to show longer dcvclopmental scquences - albeit to support his idcas of cultural evolution.
In the classification of such objects he became an
expert and is even credited with the invention of the
word 'typology'. But a more Ucly explanation is that
he was the first to apply the word to material culture
gwen that my OMord English Dictionary suggests
a somewhat different coinage.
Australian Archaeology, Number 38, 1 994
He was without doubt a brilliant interpreter of excavated evidence as not only Bowden, but also Daniel
has noted. Also of importance was his development of
experimental techniques to pursue specific questions.
Among these were the building up of type collections
of contemporary animal skeletons for comparison with
archaeological bones and the conducting of field
experiments in ditch siltation.
It was the wide range of Pitt Rivers' achievements
that in the author's view justifies the title 'father of
scientific archaeology'. I must confess to being a little
less convinced about the merit of such an all
embracing title. Certainly Pitt Rivers made an outstanding contribution to archaeology. Although not
without shortcomings he established a range of
methods and put forward ideas on which later progress
towards modem archaeology was based. Mortimer
Wheeler for example was able to further this process
by adding his own special skills as a stratigrapher.
For those with an interest in the history of archaeology this is a book not to be missed. It is wellresearched and, even if some of the author's conclusions are open to dispute, the evidence is at least
laid out in a manner that allows reappraisal. It provides a balanced account of the work of a leader in the
development of archaeology whose reputation had
previously been known mainly from brief comments by
other archaeologists.
References
Daniel, G. 1967 The Origins and Growth of Archaeology.
London: Penguin
Piggott,S. 1966 Approach to Archaeology. London: Penguin.
Wheeler, R.E.M. 1956 Archaeology from the Earth. Landan:
Penguin.
INVITATION TO ARCHAEOLOGY by Philip
Rahtz. Oxford: Basil Blackwell (1991) Second
Edition, 192 pages. ISBN 0 631 18067 2 (paperback).
Price $29.95.
Simon Holdaway
Invitation to Archaeology is part of a series of
books that introduce subjects like philosophy, industrial relations and law to the general reader. That
Rahtz's volume has now appeared as the only second
edition in this series must attest to its popularity.
Written 'to show that archaeology is important to
people and to society' @M) the book begins by
defining the scope of archaeology in relation to other
fields of study and outlining the nature of archaeological interpretation. Chapter 2 reviews how archaeologists finance their activities and then lists the reasons why archaeological work is undertaken These
range from intellectual curiosity, through promotion of
tourism to the aggrandisement of the archaeologist's