Multiply Situated Strategies? Multi-Sited Ethnography and Archeology

Abstract

Recent literature hails George Marcus’ multi-sited ethnographic strategy as a potentially useful approach for juxtaposing relations that transcend conventional spatiotemporal boundaries of archeological sites. Emerging from these discussions is what has been labeled multi-sited archeology, adapted from multi-sited ethnography to serve archeologists’ interests in comparing locales, multi-scalar connections, and local–global relations. Following a brief overview of multi-sited ethnographic principles, a review of the archeological literature exposes how archeologists are increasingly engaged with parts of multi-sited ethnography in practice, but in ways that remain, in our critical discussions, largely disengaged with the genealogy and idiosyncrasies of the approach’s foundational elements. Convergences and disjunctures between multi-sited strategies in ethnographic and in archeological practice are explored; these provide the basis for suggesting what might be a multi-sited archeology, illustrated here by a case study about the early New England iron industry. While multi-sited ethnography clearly cannot be a copy-and-paste application in archeology, its distinctiveness and usefulness in archeological comparisons is open to debate.