Social Archaeology in Latin America?: Comments to T. C. Patterson

Abstract

The published paper by Patterson (1994) gives the impression that Latin American archaeology has a significant orientation toward social archaeology. We present evidence, however, that indicates the restricted nature of social archaeology in time (1970s and early 1980s) and space (Cuba, Mexico, Peru, and Venezuela). Social archaeology developed only in a political context where the model pursued by the state was sympathetic to marxist ideology during a specific historical period. Further, at the academic level, social archaeology gradually lost appeal to students in those countries where it developed because of the politicization of the archaeological discourse at universities and the lack of a relationship between practice and theory (epistemological theory). The practical aspects of social archaeology have never passed beyond those of cultural history produced under the schema of a national state archaeology. Consideration of the realities under which archaeology developed in each Latin American country leads to a broader understanding of the context in which social archaeology exists in Latin America today.