Archeology as a Metaphor in

Contemporary Culture
Jacek Woźny
Kazimierz Wielki University, Poland

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.17.1.3

Keywords: Abstract: The scientific discipline of archeology has gone through various stages of its development
Archeology; History and improvement of research methods. First, it was combined with ancient history and the history of art.
of Science; Metaphor; In the mid-nineteenth century, the base of its chronology was on biblical events. Modernist archeology
Research Methods; of the twentieth century focused on classifying monuments and reconstructing cultural processes. In
Contemporary Culture the second half of the twentieth century, archeology inspired other disciplines of culture and science to
“stratigraphically” look at their own history. In this way, the stratification of scientific thought (archeolo-
gy of knowledge), the history of photography (archeology of photography), and the media (archeology
of media) began to be analyzed. Archeology has become a cognitive metaphor in contemporary culture.
Lack of knowledge of the theoretical and methodological achievements worked out by archaeologists
may, after some time, lead to the trivialization and petrification of the archaeological metaphor, altho-
ugh today it still seems fresh and innovative for “archeology of media,” “archeology of photography,” or
“archeology of modernism.”

Jacek Woźny is a Professor of Humanities in the disci- znych międzymorza bałtycko-pontyjskiego (Red Ocher and Grains
pline of archaeology. His research interests concern the ar- of Cereals. The Symbolism of the Revival of the Dead in the Funeral
cheology of prehistoric beliefs and religions, the theory and Rites of Archaic Cultures of the Baltic-Pontic Intermarium [2005]),
methodology of archaeology, and the archaeology of the Pol- and Archeologia kamieni symbolicznych. Od skały macierzystej
ish lands. He is the author and editor of 20 monographs and do dziedzictwa przodków (The Archeology of Symbolic Stones.
180 scientific articles. For example, he published the books: From Bedrock to Ancestral Heritage [2014]). Jacek Woźny is the
Symbolika wody w pradziejach Polski (Symbolism of Water in the Rector of the Kazimierz Wielki University in Bydgoszcz for
Prehistory of Poland [1996]), Symbolika przestrzeni miejsc grze- the second time (2016-2020, 2020-2024). He is the head of the
balnych w czasach ciałopalenia zwłok na ziemiach polskich (Sym- Department of Ancient Archaeology and Ancient History of
bolism of the Space of Burial Sites in the Times of Burning Corps- the University of Kazimierz Wielki in Bydgoszcz.
es in Poland [2000]), Czerwona ochra i ziarna zbóż: Symbolika
odrodzenia zmarłych w obrzędach pogrzebowych kultur archaic- email address: [email protected]

28 ©2021 QSR Volume XVII Issue 1

 Archeology as a Metaphor in Contemporary Culture

A
gainst the background of the study metaphor. In traditional rhetoric, the metaphor is
of the condition of contemporary ar- classified as a clue, that is, as one of the figures dis-
cheology, the words of Bjørnar Olsen tinguished according to the criterion of a specific
(2013:9 [trans. JW]) sound original, modification of meaning in the use of words. In Ar-
who in 2010 stated that “Archeology, as a term, has istotle’s Poetics, we read that the metaphor consists
become a popular and even abused phrase among of the transfer of a foreign meaning to the name. Ci-
philosophers, psychologists, sociologists, and lit- cero and Quintilian wrote that the metaphor is sim-
erary scholars. However, few of them, fascinated ply a shortened comparison that does not add new
by the metaphorical bearing capacity of the word, information about reality to the discourse (Ricoeur
bothered to seriously consider what contribution ar- 1989:126-127). The rationale of classical rhetoric has
cheology could have in solving their problems.” It is been questioned by contemporary semantic analy-
worth attempting to explain why culture studies and sis of metaphors, represented in the works of such
representatives of other humanistic and social disci- authors as I. A. Richards, Max Black, Monroe Beard-
plines do not notice the theoretical achievements of sley, and Philip Wheelwright. Gilbert Ryle said the
contemporary archeology, while archaeologists are metaphorical expression is about revealing the asso-
not interested in using the name of their discipline ciation where there is no relationship from the col-
in contemporary humanities (Minta-Tworzowska loquial point of view. Through this apparent mis-
2015:21-37). understanding, a new, previously unrecognized,
semantic relation between the terms is established
Edmund Husserl formulated the thesis that the so that the current classification system is ignored
view of prehistory opens our own present. The or which it did not allow. Two classes of meanings,
cognitive subject is not only determined by history, so far distant, are suddenly put together: the action
but they determine it themselves. The past in this of similarity, in this case, consists in grasping the
sense permeates the present, is subject to ordering closeness of what was previously not compared
and evaluation according to our own criteria, and (Ricoeur 1989:131).
not the principles used by the societies and cultures
constituting the subject of our study. An analogi- The description of the role of similarity in meta-
cal specificity of looking at artifacts from the past phorical expressions results in a further reservation
characterized all previous generations and cultural in relation to the rhetorical concept of a metaphor.
traditions (Mamzer 1997:38-41). A reflection on this In classical terms, it was based on simply replacing
issue creates an opportunity to explain the presence one word with another. On the other hand, the con-
of archeology as a metaphor for studying the past, temporary theory explaining the metaphor through
used in contemporary culture (Olsen 2013:8-9). the semantic tension reveals the emergence of a new
sense that embraces the whole sentence. A metaphor
The Transformation of the Cognitive is more like a solution to the puzzle than a simple as-
Status of the Metaphor sociation based on similarity (Ricoeur 1989:132-133).
At least two basic points, therefore, discern the con-
The introduction to this, however, is to determine temporary approach to metaphor from the one culti-
the transformation of the cognitive status of the vated by classical rhetoric. First of all, the metaphor

Qualitative Sociology Review • www.qualitativesociologyreview.org 29

Jacek Woźny

is no longer a clue based on a word or name, so it is periodization (Hensel 1983:48-49). At that time, the
not just a denominational operation. Secondly, the genetic metaphor predominated, proving that all
contemporary approach does not support the con- observed phenomena in the world of nature and
cept that recognizes the idea of ​​similarity between culture have their sources in the past (Renfrew and
the replaced names as a constitutive property of the Bahn 2002:24-25). The nineteenth-century paradigm
metaphor. A metaphor can be treated as a rhetorical, of ethnogenesis and the related problem of the ori-
literary, and poetical concept, but it can also be per- gin of Slavs and Germans is still the main driving
ceived in a context that makes it an epistemological force of Central European archeology (Mamzer
category. This is how it is qualified by philosophical 1997:41-42).
new rhetorics, logical grammar, and hermeneutics.
In their light, the notion of metaphor assimilates the Modernist archeology shaped in the twentieth centu-
findings of post-positivist epistemologies, first of all, ry created a model of science that seemed a universal
the problems of explaining and modeling, as well paradigm of humanities (Mamzer 1997:14). Accord-
as the problems typical of anti-positivist currents ing to Witold Hensel’s (1983) opinion from 1972,
in reflection on science (Wrzosek 1995:26-29). These
problems are particularly important when human- we will give meaning to archeology most accurate-
istic or social disciplines reach for the “metaphor of ly if we state that it deals with uncovering, mainly
the archaeological site,” but do not declare method- by means of excavation methods, sources of the past
ological sources of their decisions (e.g., Archeology and their scientific registration and evaluation…This
of Transformation: Gender War in an Intersectional character is combined with its function in the field of
Perspective—Museum of Modern Art in Warsaw reconstruction of economic, cultural, social, and po-
[https://artmuseum.pl/pl/wydarzenia/archeolo- litical relations. In other words, archeology is used
gia-transformacji-wojna-o-gender-jako-archeolog- for all branches of science whose aim is to recreate
iczne, retrieved March 25, 2019]). a part or the whole of the historical process...The
scope, research goals of archeology, and its place in
The Paradigms of the Main Trends of the family of other sciences are...clear and qualify it
Archeology as a discipline serving to learn about the past, and at
the same time serving to shape the future...None of
In the mid-nineteenth century, archeology was com- the most interesting theoretical concepts can replace
bined with other humanistic disciplines, accompa- the knowledge resulting from a concrete knowledge
nied by the objectification of the past, because it was of facts. [pp. 13-27 (trans. JW)]
contrasted with the life and times of nineteenth-cen-
tury prehistorians (Mamzer 1997:39). At that time, it While the entire archeology of the first half of the
was believed that prehistory is the source of con- twentieth century was influenced by cultural and
temporaneity. Today’s methodology recognizes our historical archeology, the subsequent decades have
creative role in attributing content to old artifacts resulted in the development of the so-called New
(Olsen 2013:11). The nineteenth-century archeology Archeology, Marxist and Neo-Marxist, and struc-
focused on the visible traits of discovered things tural archeology (Marciniak 2012:32-64). The devel-
and objects, striving for a universal system of their opment of archaeological subdisciplines determined

30 ©2021 QSR Volume XVII Issue 1

 Archeology as a Metaphor in Contemporary Culture

the multiplicity of topics currently considered as model, whose main construction axis was a meta-
“archaeological”: phor of progress, unifying prehistoric reality.

starting with the analysis of the material culture of Post-modernity assumes...a completely different
early hominids, through the reconstruction of the be- structure of the research field than in the case of the
liefs of archaic societies or the formation of the first modernist history of civilizational progress...Thus,
civilizations, and ending with judicial archeology or every examination of past reality means...exclusively
the mechanisms of consumption in modern cities... evocation, that is, the invocation of such a reality as
The attempt to define the thematic scope of archeolo- it is of significance to us today. [Mamzer 1997:15-16
gy is hindered by the fact that the conceptual network (trans. JW)]
is imposed on a cultural reality that is continuous,
flexible, and changing over time. This variability con- According to Dorota Cyngot, in the post-modern
cerns both the analyzed reality itself...and the disci- world, the very concept of “archeology” is becom-
plines dealing with it, usually with overlapping fields ing more and more often a metaphor for various
of research interest. [Cyngot and Zalewska 2012:193- fields of knowledge and everyday life, indicating
194 (trans. JW)] the direction of the search for beginnings, origins,
and roots. Michel Foucault used such comparisons
The paradigms of the main trends of archeology in in his “archeology of knowledge,” as well as “arche-
the second half of the twentieth century often co- ology of medical examination,” and “archeology of
incided with the leading directions of humanistic humanities.” They were followed by other meta-
thought, such as the idea of ​​cultural process, behav- phors built in non-archeological discourses by other
ioralism, cognitivism, antagonistic visions of the authors: “archeology of photography,” “archeology
world, cultural codes structure, and others (Marcin- of music,” up to “spiritual archeology” or “archeolo-
iak 2012:39-64). Researchers have turned to culture, gy of subconscious,” encountered in contemporary
looking for universal content that functions in all essay writing and fiction. Expanding and crossing
communities (Domańska 1997:65). New branches of interdisciplinary boundaries means that in relation
archeology appeared and became active, such as ar- to some phenomena in the field of what is current-
cheology of everyday life, consumption archeology, ly referred to as archeology, one may wonder how
death archeology, symbolic archeology, landscape much this use takes on a metaphoric character and
archeology, and many more. All of them are looking what it actually means (Cyngot 2012:799).
for new, non-classical metaphors for thinking about
the past, getting rid of the burden of the current par- The Perspective of Cultural Memory
adigm of prehistory as a stratigraphically recorded
sequence of events, perceiving it by the similar- A clue that can lead to the explanation of the ten-
ity of overlapping processes and cultural changes dency of using archaeological metaphor outside
(Minta-Tworzowska 2015:32). the primary research domain of this discipline is
the perspective of cultural memory. There are more
The transformation of archeology in the postmod- and more supporters of a thesis about a growing
ern trend led to the abandonment of the modernist bloom of remembrance and memory, which would

Qualitative Sociology Review • www.qualitativesociologyreview.org 31

Jacek Woźny

signal equally important changes in the humanities (Saryusz-Wolska 2009:35). Autobiographical mem-
as earlier, modernist phrases: linguistic, spatial, or ory reaches “without difficulty to the existing ele-
pictorial (Saryusz-Wolska 2009:7). Jan Assmann ments of reality, which—from the perspective of the
(2009:69 [trans. JW]) stated that “thinking is based present—seem to ‘fit’ into their own past” (Welzer
on abstraction, and remembering—on particulars.” 2009:57 [trans. JW]). An interest in memory and the
Ideas must gain material expression to become ob- continuation of the past also increased in archeolo-
jects of memory. From mutual interpenetration of gy as a scientific discipline.
concepts and experiences, the so-called figures of
memory are created. Their specificity is determined Contrary to romantic and modernist ideas, archaeol-
by three characteristics: a specific reference to space ogists do not discover the past, but work within the
and time, a reference to a specific group, and recon- past that is in the present...The archaeological site is
struction (Assmann 2008:53-54). It is easy to see the truly disordered; it consists of a palimpsest of struc-
similarity of memory figures to some research para- tures built in different periods...These are places that
digms of archeology. do not fit into the dreams of modernity or historicism
about the completeness, order, and refined time. [Ol-
On the one hand, as a result of their cognitive activ- sen 2013:197 (trans. JW)]
ity, archaeologists restore (in social/research aware-
ness) what escapes historical consciousness, which is Since the changes in the fate of things in culture re-
often unconscious. On the other hand, recalling the sult from the selective memory of the past, it was
memory of the past, extracting knowledge about it proposed to study biographies of individual arti-
to the light, showing what is invisible or unclear by facts. According to the ideas of Igor Kopytoff and
itself, is done at the expense of physical destruction Bjørnar Olsen, objects have always been associated
or decomposition of the message itself, created in the with society in various ways. Analysis of the biogra-
post-deposition/stratification process. [Cyngot and phies of selected artifacts is also a study of the com-
Zalewska 2012:199 (trans. JW)] munities in which they were used (Iwaniszewski
2012:276).
To indicate the essential features of social-cultural
memory, reference should be made to the charac- In addition to the solidity brought by things in every-
teristic places and artifacts that designate it. Cultur- thing that we have learned to think of as social and
al memory is based not only on written messages, cultural, they allow us to obtain yet another closely
“but also on dances, games, rites, masks, pictures, related result: the gathering or embedding of the past.
rhythms, melodies, decorations, weapons, et cet- The past is not left behind, but patiently gathers and
era, which are...intense forms of self-perception and arranges into what we conveniently call the present.
self-reliance of the social group” (Assmann 2009:92 [Olsen 2013:263 (trans. JW)]
[trans. JW]).
In a novel way, Marta Raczyńska applied these con-
The “contemporary offensive of memory” (Le Goff cepts in contemporary Polish cultural anthropology.
2007:105) is based on many media, among which In her book, Czas uwarstwiony na gąsawskim poddaszu
memories and biographies play an important role [Time Stratified in the Gąsawa Attic], the introduction

32 ©2021 QSR Volume XVII Issue 1

 Archeology as a Metaphor in Contemporary Culture

of the archaeological metaphor of “temporal layers” 2020). The archeology of photography is looking for
and an attempt to look at the attic as a representation manifestations of the existence of this field of cre-
of stratified memory have made this report a pecu- ativity at all stages of its development. It has strong
liar story about the relationship of the inhabitants support in the photography philosophy of Vilem
of Gąsawa with their past: family, home, and also Flusser. According to him,
having a local dimension; a past that can be learned
through memorabilia, as well as ordinary “junk” we have witnessed two fundamental turning points
(Raczyńska 2016). in the history of mankind: the first was associated
with the invention of linear writing, the second with
The Analysis of the Contexts of the Use of the invention of technical images. The first technical
the Archaeological Metaphor picture was a photographic image, therefore attempts
to explain the phenomenon of photography are at the
There are at least a few non-archeological examples same time attempts to understand the basic changes
of the use of “stratigraphic” analysis of the achieve- that are taking place in the modern world. [Flusser
ments of a given field of culture or science inves- 2015:17 (trans. JW)]
tigating the accumulation of its achievements and
concepts, from the beginnings to the present day. Just as the memory recorded in images is import-
One of such projects was created by Jerzy Lew- ant and archived in the project of the Archeology
czyński, an artist distinguished for post-war Polish of Photography Foundation (see: faf.org.pl/strona/
photography. Since the late 1960s, he has achieved gmuranowska144.pdf, retrieved December 20, 2020),
his own individual style, full of references to am- the performative program “Body Archive” has sig-
ateur photography, the world of childhood, found nificant cognitive value, which was termed “arche-
negatives and prints, which in the 1990s included ology of dance.”
in his original concept of “archeology of photogra-
phy.” He called it “activities, the aim of which is to Choreographers become a kind of archaeologists who
discover, study, and comment on events, facts, situa- keep their excavations in the reservoir of cultural
tions happening in the so-called photographic past. memory. Their purpose is to extract from the past “the
Thanks to photography, the continuity of visual products” of the works of their predecessors. However,
contact with the past creates opportunities to broad- their task is slightly more difficult than for historians
en the influence of old cultural and creative layers or real archaeologists, because the specificity of dance
on today’s” (trans. JW [https://culture.pl/pl/wy- and theater is the lack of material products of the activ-
darzenie/jerzy-lewczynski-archeologia-fotografii#, ities of actors/dancers and directors. A void remains in
retrieved December 20, 2020]). On the basis of Jerzy the place of the original...[How to deal with it? There
Lewczyński’s concept, in 2008, the Archaeology of are several ways,] one can search for traces and try to
Photography Foundation was created, protecting reconstruct the works of your predecessors in one’s
the legacy of photographers and disseminating own way. Sometimes original works can be recreated...
knowledge about the history of Polish photography Sometimes it is much more inspiring to experience
in the form of a special archive (see: faf.org.pl/stro- the choreography process itself than to reconstruct it.
na/gmuranowska144.pdf, retrieved December 20, [Juźwik 2014-2015:24 (trans. JW)]

Qualitative Sociology Review • www.qualitativesociologyreview.org 33

Jacek Woźny

In this respect, discovering the historical stratigra- Mirosław Bałka used the same aspect of archeology.
phy of the history of dance corresponds to the con- When creating his works, he emphasizes the role of
cept of archeology of knowledge of Michel Foucault. the memory of things. What is important to him is
He stated that this archeology “does not try to re- private archeology. The artist thus finds “archaeo-
store what could have been thought, wanted, inten- logical sites” in both his own and collective memory
tional, experienced, or desired by people at the mo- (Delikta 2018).
ment when they spoke the discourse...It is nothing
more…than a rewriting...of what has already been “Archeology of photography,” “archeology of dance,”
written” (Foucault 1977:173 [trans. JW]). and other artistic activities help to reveal the layers
of cultural memory and archive achievements with-
A fundamental role in the implementation of the in particular disciplines. Memory constantly adapts
“Body Archive” project plays on the idea of ​​the cul- the retained knowledge to the requirements of mod-
tural memory, present in contemporary humanities ern times. In this way, a balanced relation between
and archeology. memory and forgetfulness is ensured, while the his-
torical build-up of various approaches to media and
It turns out that the human body can also become memory implementation is called “media archeolo-
“a storehouse” of what man has remembered in the gy,” understood as the sum of cultural studies and
entire experience of reality. Social and political events research on media history and ethnology (Butzer
also (in a sense) determine the memory of the body. It 2009:195-199). Siegfried Zielinski recognized that its
is not only the imitative presentation of movement ex- predominant goal is to constantly find the New in
ercises, but also presents the sensual world of a man the Old.
who functions in a given culture...What is happening
in the reality that surrounds us has an impact on how How can an object that is still so new be attributed to
our body reproduces, what our movement memory is. archeology? Media, technically and culturally com-
[Juźwik 2014-2015:29 (trans. JW)] plex systems, have existed...only for half a century...
The individual devices for communication, listening,
Similar concepts are used in artistic multimedia proj- and seeing, in which technical means and instru-
ects that refer to the values ​​of the human body. In the ments were used, are much older...Their origin and
“War on Gender” exhibition at the Museum of Mod- improvement should be connected with times much
ern Art in Warsaw, Ewa Charkiewicz used a met- earlier than the 19th century. In that century, the tele-
aphor of the archaeological site, where the layers graph, telephone, photography, and cinema became
are removed, the heterogeneous elements exposed, objects of general use and industrial production.
and the relationships sought between them, to re- However, the ideas and concepts that inspired these
veal how the darkening and masking of the gender/ communication techniques send us many years back.
power relations were organized in discourses about The research attitude that emerges in this way can
family, equality, and anti-discrimination (see: https:// be called a paleontological attitude. Similarly to the
artmuseum.pl/pl/wydarzenia/archeologia-transfor- most advanced researchers of our planet Earth who,
macji-wojna-o-gender-jako-archeologiczne, retrieved in their tireless search, do not accept any granite lay-
March 25, 2019). In the field of contemporary art, er, through which they would not be able to break

34 ©2021 QSR Volume XVII Issue 1

 Archeology as a Metaphor in Contemporary Culture

through to even older evidence of its existence, also media and cultural phenomena, this word should
we do not stop at the time of the explosion of commu- be understood in a specific way. Media archeology
nication technologies of the industrial era. [Zielinski deals with both text, visual, and audio archives, as
2010:IX-XI (trans. JW)] well as collections of artifacts while stressing the
discursive and material aspects of cultural products.
This attitude is currently gaining new supporters. Its research smoothly passes between disciplinary
“The increasingly popular position of media arche- boundaries, which allows one to move freely in the
ology requires...searching for older works, undis- field of humanities and social sciences, and to look
covered by literary scholars, often carried out by into fine arts. Media archeology is rooted in a deep
visual artists, filmmakers, creators testing various distrust of dominant historical narratives, which
media (from the film, through books, to computers), brings it closer to the practice of new historicism.
or computer geeks operating in Poland in the 1980s According to the creators and representatives of this
and 1990s within a framework of demoscene” (Żuk discipline, archeology, unlike history, refers to what
Piwkowski and Marecki 2014:98). really exists, what remains of the past in the shape
of archaeological layers present in technologies.
Exploratory activities are even carried out on You- Thus, media archaeologists are trying to discover—
Tube. or rather dig out—what is hidden under historical
narratives, revising artifacts to show previously un-
Of course, talking about the archaeological function seen connections and interruptions (Maryl 2014). In
of YouTube is only a metaphor. Recalling archeology this respect, the use of a metaphorical expression
in the context of the website, however, better describes revealed connections where colloquial seeing did
the observable trend, in which specific archival re- not see any relationship. Through this seeming mis-
sources (fragments of films or even little-known vid- understanding, a new, previously unrecognized, se-
eos from many years ago) are discovered and brought mantic relation was established between the terms
back to life after years of oblivion. Just as an archae- that the current classification system of sciences ig-
ologist discovers forgotten artifacts, bringing them to nored, as Paul Ricoeur predicted in his hermeneu-
the surface and transferring them to museums, where tics of metaphor (Ricoeur 1989:124-133).
thousands of people watch them, the YouTube infra-
structure identifies and promotes films from many The currently developing field called media arche-
years ago. [Wilkowski 2009 (trans. JW)] ology seems to follow the path delineated by Michel
Foucault—“the last historian, or the first archaeol-
In this situation, a clear similarity between the ogist” (Maryl 2014:189 as cited in Kittler 1999:5). In
two conceptual strings is created: Archeology-Ar- the concept of Michel Foucault, archeology is a met-
tifacts-Museums-Viewers and Internet-Movies/ aphor for research on the stratigraphy of discourses.
Texts-YouTube-Internet users. This philosopher proposed designating the field,
which he created by the name “archeology of knowl-
Media archeology should not be confused with edge,” as a synonym of discovering something hid-
archeology as a discipline. When media archae- den. Following Gaston Bachelard, he most probably
ologists say they are conducting “excavations” of wanted to express his perspective on the history of

Qualitative Sociology Review • www.qualitativesociologyreview.org 35

Jacek Woźny

science through the prism of “cuts,” “thresholds,” poral layers” (Raczyńska 2016), “archeological sites”
and discontinuation, which accompany classical ar- (Delikta 2018; https://artmuseum.pl/pl/wydarzenia/
cheologists in research. The Foucauldian archaeolo- archeologia-transformacji-wojna-o-gender-jako-ar-
gist should dig into unconscious forms of thinking, cheologiczne, retrieved March 25, 2019), or “forgotten
taking off layers of elementary discourse units, such artifacts” (Wilkowski 2009) are also used.
as statements (Topolski 1977:5-21). Michel Foucault’s
theory is constantly updated. Conclusion

The concept archailogia contains not only the old, the Retrospective studies of Michel Foucault, Siegfried
original (archaios), but also the activities of governance, Zielinski, Wolfgang Ernst, Rudi Visker, and others,
domination (archein), as well as the noun archos, the consisting in the search for the identity of specific
leader...In the discussion of Foucault’s concept of ar- problems, starting from the situation found by the
cheology of knowledge...Rudi Visker used the name researcher, culturally diverse to a uniform, even
An-archeologie to describe a method that could not be culturally homogeneous reality located lowest in
refocused by any reference to the identification poten- prehistory, is “stratigraphic research” for which ar-
tial of a unified object of original experience...Wolfgang cheology is a handy operational metaphor (Mamzer
Ernst used the term Anarchäeologie in another interest- 2004:205). Unfortunately, they are based on the tra-
ing sense: as an opposing movement to excavation and ditional understanding of this discipline and do not
uncovering. [Zielinski 2010:37 (trans. JW)] use the semantic potential contained in the non-clas-
sical concept of metaphor, used by contemporary
An overview of the contexts of the use of the archae- historiography and archaeological theory (Wrzosek
ological metaphor indicates their limited systematics. 1995:29-30). It should also be emphasized that they
We find descriptions of “waste and debris of past his- refer to the classical, banal “stratigraphic” metaphor
toricism in modernism from the beginning of the 20th (Wrzosek 1995:30), while archeology followed the
century as if it cited prehistory” (Rejniak-Majewska modern theory that explains the metaphor through
2017:153 [trans. JW]). The “pre-history of culture 2.0” is the semantic tension between two terms (Ricoeur
mentioned by analysts of new media and digital tech- 1989:132-133). Referring to Shanks’s comparison
nologies (Filiciak and Tarkowski n.d.). In the analyses of the development of archeology with a growing
of the conceptualization of the concept of “text” and tree, culture studies, philosophers, sociologists, me-
the transformation of thinking styles in literary stud- dia experts, and other researchers reached in their
ies, “archaeological or detective investigations serve metaphors for the excavational “roots” of archeol-
to restore the whole and reach the perpetrator. This ogy, but they did not notice a solid “trunk” of data
whole is always concrete and has a specific author” synthesis and processing, “branches” of interpreta-
(Jarnicki 2014:181 [trans. JW]). The literary study of tion, and, above all, the tangled and ever-growing
Bruno Schulz’s forgotten text Lilien is called the “arche- “branches” of new scientific theories and approaches
ology of Polish-Jewish modernism” because, like ar- (Minta-Tworzowska 2015:21-37). The inspiration for
cheology, it discovers something that has disappeared asking questions two decades earlier about the place
from the minds of readers (Underhill 2016:656). In ad- and role of archeology in contemporary humanities
dition to the “excavation” metaphor, concepts of “tem- was an attempt to assess the importance of this dis-

36 ©2021 QSR Volume XVII Issue 1

 Archeology as a Metaphor in Contemporary Culture

cipline against other sciences about the past and the of science in the mid-nineteenth century, through
desire to reflect on the causes of the increasingly wid- subsequent stages of its biography, archeology has
ening gap between archeology and contemporary reached the multitemporal present and has become
humanities (Ostoja-Zagórski 1997:6-9). Since then, a way of thinking about the past in the non-archeo-
many subsequent debates have been conducted, im- logical fields (Kobiałka 2016:6). The limited use of the
portant collective publications have been published “archeological” metaphor in contemporary culture
(e.g., Tabaczyński et al. 2012), and monographic ones may, however, lead to its banalization and petrifica-
(e.g., Mamzer 2004). Among other things, it comes to tion after some time, although it still seems fresh and
the conclusion that since the birth of this discipline innovative today (Wrzosek 1995:29).

References

Assmann, Jan. 2008. Pamięć kulturowa. Pismo, zapamiętywanie Hodder)].” Pp. 65-77 in Jakiej archeologii potrzebuje współczesna hu-
i polityczna tożsamość w cywilizacjach starożytnych [Cultural Mem- manistyka? [What Archeology Does Contemporary Humanities Need?],
ory. Writing, Remembering, and Political Identity in Ancient Civili- edited by J. Ostoja-Zagórski. Poznan: Instytut Historii UAM.
zations]. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.
Filiciak Mirek and Alek Tarkowski. n.d. “Archeologia przyszłości
Assmann, Jan. 2009. “Kultura pamięci [Culture of Memory].” [Archeology of the Future].” Retrieved March 25, 2019 (https://www.
Pp. 59-99 in Pamięć zbiorowa i kulturowa [Collective and Cultural dwutygodnik.com/artykul/1202-archeologia-przyszlosci.html).
Memory], edited by M. Saryusz-Wolska. Warsaw: Universitas.
Flusser, Vilém. 2015. Ku filozofii fotografii [Towards the Philosophy
Butzer, Günter. 2009. “Metaforyka pamięci [Metaphors of Memo- of Photography]. Warsaw: Aletheia.
ry].” Pp. 185-209 in Pamięć zbiorowa i kulturowa [Collective and Cultural
Memory], edited by M. Saryusz-Wolska. Warsaw: Universitas. Foucault, Michel. 1977. Archeologia wiedzy [The Archeology of
Knowledge]. Warsaw: PIW.
Cyngot, Dorota. 2012. “Archeologia a językoznawstwo [Arche-
ology and Linguistics].” Pp. 791-802 in Przeszłość społeczna. Próba Hensel, Witold. 1983. Archeologia żywa [Living Archeology]. War-
konceptualizacji [Social Past. An Attempt at Conceptualization], edit- saw: Wydawnictwo Artystyczne i Filmowe.
ed by S. Tabaczyński et al. Poznan: Wydawnictwo Poznańskie.
Iwaniszewski. Stanisław. 2012. “Archeologia czasu [Archeolo-
Cyngot, Dorota and Anna Zalewska. 2012. “Zmienność i dy- gy of Time].” Pp. 273-283 in Przeszłość społeczna. Próba koncep-
namiczność podziałów tematycznych w archeologii [Change- tualizacji [Social Past. An Attempt at Conceptualization], edited by
ability and Dynamics of Thematic Divisions in Archeology].” S. Tabaczyński et al. Poznan: Wydawnictwo Poznańskie.
Pp. 193-206 in Przeszłość społeczna. Próba konceptualizacji [Social
Past. An Attempt at Conceptualization], edited by S. Tabaczyński Jarnicki, Paweł. 2014. Metaforyczne konceptualizacje pojęcia „tek-
et al. Poznan: Wydawnictwo Poznańskie. stu” a przemiany stylów myślowych w literaturoznawstwie [Meta-
phorical Conceptualizations of the Concept of “Text” and Changes
Delikta, Wojciech. 2018. “Prywatna archeologia [Private Ar- in Thought Styles in Literary Studies]. Wroclaw: Wydawnictwo
cheology].” Retrieved March 25, 2019 (https://www.vogue.pl/a/ Fundacji “Projekt Nauka”.
prywatna-archeologia).
Juźwik, Magdalena. 2014-2015. “Cielesne czy bezcielesne? Pamięć
Domańska, Ewa. 1997. “Tekstualizacja archeologii (od Barthe- ciała w teatrze fizycznym [Corporeal or Incorporeal? Body Mem-
sa do Hoddera) [Textualization of Archeology (from Barthes to ory in Physical Theater].” Literaturoznawstwo 8-9:21-30.

Qualitative Sociology Review • www.qualitativesociologyreview.org 37

Jacek Woźny

Kobiałka, Dawid. 2016. “UrbEx: archeologiczny flaneuryzm a mul- Renfrew, Colin and Paul Bahn. 2002. Archeologia. Teorie, meto-
titemporalność dziedzictwa [UrbEx: Archaeological Flaneurism dy, praktyka [Archaeology. Theories, Methods, Practice]. Warsaw:
and Multitemporality of Heritage].” Biografia Archeologii 2(1):3-12. Prószyński i S-ka.

Le Goff, Jacques. 2007. Historia i pamięć [History and Memory]. Ricoeur, Paul.1989. Język, tekst, interpretacja [Language, Text, In-
Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego. terpretation]. Warsaw: PIW.

Mamzer, Henryk. 1997. “Pytanie o archeologię [Question about Saryusz-Wolska, Magdalena. 2009. “Wprowadzenie [Introduc-
Archeology].” Pp. 13-50 in Jakiej archeologii potrzebuje współczesna hu- tion].” Pp. 7-38 in Pamięć zbiorowa i kulturowa [Collective and Cultural
manistyka? [What Archeology Does Contemporary Humanities Need?], Memory], edited by M. Saryusz-Wolska. Warsaw: Universitas.
edited by J. Ostoja-Zagórski. Poznan: Instytut Historii UAM.
Tabaczyński, Stanisław et al. 2012. Przeszłość społeczna. Próba koncep-
Mamzer, Henryk. 2004. Archeologia i dyskurs [Archeology and tualizacji [Social Past. An Attempt at Conceptualization]. Poznan: Wy-
Discourse]. Poznan: IAE PAN. dawnictwo Poznańskie.

Marciniak, Arkadiusz. 2012. “Paradygmaty badawcze w archeologii Topolski, Jerzy. 1977. “Wstęp [Introduction].” Pp. 5-26 in Archeologia
[Research Paradigms in Archeology].” Pp. 29-83 in Przeszłość społecz- wiedzy [The Archeology of Knowledge], M. Foucault. Warsaw: PIW.
na. Próba konceptualizacji [Social Past. An Attempt at Conceptualization],
edited by S. Tabaczyński et al. Poznan: Wydawnictwo Poznańskie. Underhill, Karen. 2016. “Bruno Schulz, E.M. Lilien i archeologia polsko-
-żydowskiego modernizmu [Bruno Schulz, E.M. Lilien and the Arche-
Maryl, Maciej, 2014. “Fonograf Abrahama – w stronę arche- ology of Polish-Jewish Modernism].” Ruch Literacki LVII(6[339]):656-680.
ologii literatury [Abraham’s Phonograph—Towards the Arche-
ology of Literature].” Teksty Drugie 3(147):179-193. Welzer, Harald. 2009. “Materiał, z którego zbudowane są bi-
ografie [The Material from which the Biographies Are Made].”
Minta-Tworzowska, Danuta. 2015. “Czy współczesna i przyszła Pp. 39-57 in Pamięć zbiorowa i kulturowa [Collective and Cultural
archeologia będzie ‘potrzebowała’ teorii? [Will Contemporary and Memory], edited by M. Saryusz-Wolska. Warsaw: Universitas.
Future Archeology ‘Need’ a Theory?].” Archeologia Polski LX:21-37.
Wilkowski, Marcin. 2009. “YouTube i historia. Artykuł
Olsen, Bjørnar. 2013. W obronie rzeczy. Archeologia i ontologia w ‘Kulturze Popularnej’ [YouTube and History. Article in
przedmiotów [In Defense of Things. Archeology and Ontology of Ob- ‘Kultura Popularna’].” Retrieved March 25, 2019 (histori-
jects]. Warsaw: Instytut Badań Literackich PAN. aimedia.org/2009/09/12/youtube-i-historia-artykul-w-kul-
turze-popularnej/index.html).
Ostoja-Zagórski, Janusz, ed. 1997. Jakiej archeologii potrzebuje
współczesna humanistyka? [What Archeology Does Contemporary Wrzosek, Wojciech. 1995. Historia, kultura, metafora. Powstanie
Humanities Need?]. Poznan: Instytut Historii UAM. nieklasycznej historiografii [History, Culture, Metaphor. The Rise of
Non-Classical Historiography]. Wroclaw: Wydawnictwo Leop-
Raczyńska, Marta. 2016. Czas uwarstwiony na gąsawskim poddaszu. An- oldinum Fundacji dla Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego.
tropologiczny szkic o przestrzeni, przedmiotach i obcowaniu z przeszłością
[Time Stratified in the Gąsawa Attic. An Anthropological Sketch about Space, Zielinski, Siegfried. 2010. Archeologia mediów [Media Archeology].
Objects, and Communing with the Past]. Cracow: Wydawnictwo Libron. Warsaw: Oficyna Naukowa.

Rejniak-Majewska, Agnieszka. 2017. “Wizualne archeologie no- Żuk Piwkowski, Józef and Piotr Marecki. 2014. “Księga Słów
woczesności: Walter Benjamin i Sigfried Giedion [Visual Arche- Wszystkich, czyli archeologia mediów po polsku (wywiad)
ologies of Modernity: Walter Benjamin and Sigfried Giedion].” [The Book of All Words, or Media Archeology in Polish (Inter-
Filo-Sofija 38:149-156. view)].” Przegląd Kulturoznawczy 1(19):98-105.

Citation

Woźny, Jacek. 2021. “Archeology as a Metaphor in Contemporary Culture.” Qualitative Sociology Review 17(1):28-38. Retrieved Month,
Year (http://www.qualitativesociologyreview.org/ENG/archive_eng.php). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.17.1.3

38 ©2021 QSR Volume XVII Issue 1