This week here at Albion
Calling I am very fortunate to have with me an archaeologist whose work on the
study of religion and ritual has long inspired me, Professor Timothy Insoll
of the University of Manchester. Insoll’s regional focus has been on Bahrain
and Western Africa, where he has been involved in excavations in both Mali and
Ghana; more recently he has turned his attentions to the eastern side of the
continent to undertake investigations in Ethiopia. In doing so, he has
investigated not only the “indigenous” pre-Christian and pre-Islamic religious
systems and ritual practices of the continent but also the later archaeology of
Islam, on the subject of which he is a well-known expert. In this interview, we
discuss his career and research, some of his many important publications, and
archaeology’s role in the scholarly investigation and interpretation of ritual
and religion.
EDW: Having attained an
undergraduate degree from the University of Sheffield in 1992, you went on to
complete your doctoral research and then a research fellowship at St. John’s
College, Cambridge, for which you looked at the archaeology of Gao, capital of
the Songhai Empire in West Africa, and wrote The Archaeology of Islam.
In 1998 you were appointed lecturer in archaeology at the University of
Manchester, becoming a senior lecturer and then a reader in 2004; you were
subsequently awarded a personal chair in 2005, and have remained there ever
since. What were the formative influences that led you in the direction of
archaeology and academia, and what inspired you to focus your research on both
the archaeology of Sub-Saharan Africa and the archaeology of ritual and
religion to start with ?
TI:
When I was a small boy I confused dinosaurs and archaeology so that was
probably my formative influence, though I rectified this after writing to the
Young Archaeologists Club and getting a nice encouraging response from Kate
Pretty. Many of my relatives also grew up or served abroad during the time of
the British Empire so this must also have influenced me in the direction of
non-European archaeology, and when I started my undergraduate studies I
realised that sub-Saharan Africa was both one of the least archaeologically
investigated parts of the world, and also the most interesting. So this sealed
it, so to speak, geographically – though I am also interested in Arabia and India.
Why ritual and religion? Because it too is fascinating and again offered
opportunities to explore diverse material encompassing the whole gamut of
archaeology from seeds to landscapes. I was also brought up as a Catholic so
religion was always a part of my life.
EDW: Something that I
have found particularly interesting has been your recent work with the
University of Ghana’s Benjamin Kankpeyeng and Samuel Nkumbaan in studying the
Koma Mounds of Northern Ghana. As part of this, in 2010–11 you excavated a
number of figurines that were interned along with human remains in mounds
dating to 600–1200 CE; these have been identified as serving a religious
function as “ancestral” figurines. Could you give us a bit of background on
this fascinating project, and what do you see as the place of archaeology in
understanding the pre- and non-Islamic indigenous belief systems of Western
Africa?
TI:
Ben Kankpeyeng has run the Koma Land project for a number of years. He invited
me to participate after we had worked together in the Tong Hills on shrines,
sacrifice and ritual practice there from both ethnographic and archaeological
perspectives. The Koma material was in many ways more challenging as it lacked
the ethnographic dimension for the people that made the clay figurines you
referred to have disappeared. So it is strictly ‘archaeological’, there are no
analogies that can be drawn upon in the same way that we could in using Talensi
practices to begin to understand aspects of the Tong Hills archaeology. Because
most indigenous religions were within pre-literate contexts, archaeology is
crucial for understanding their history and development, and change over time.
The latter is particularly significant as there has been a tendency to view
African indigenous religions as timeless, because of the dominance of social
anthropology sources. Whereas, archaeology indicates that there could be both
foundational stability as well as change as past peoples reacted to different
events, circumstances, opportunities, and materiality.
We tried exploring this
in an exhibition on the Koma figurines, “Fragmentary Ancestors”, that was held
in Manchester Museum and which has now transferred to the National Museum in
Accra. Curating this permitted the interrogation of the role of the figurines
and why people made them for several hundred years between c. AD 600 – 1400.
Many were purposefully broken perhaps because they were intimately linked to
personhood of varied forms. The resources of Manchester University are also
allowing us to look inside the figurines through CT scanning and to complete
DNA analysis – work in progress.
EDW: You've also established yourself as one of the world’s foremost specialists in the archaeology of Islam, having written The Archaeology of Islam (Blackwell, 1999) and The Archaeology of Islam in Sub-Saharan Africa (Cambridge University Press, 2003). This is a vast and fascinating area of enquiry, so it would be interesting to hear how you set about embarking on researching this ambitious topic?
TI:
Islamic archaeology was then largely, but not entirely, rooted in Art History
and old-fashioned notions of data collection without interpretation. As an
adjunct research focus was often upon the upper echelons of society, rulers,
urban elites, palaces and cities. Social archaeology was lacking, as was a more
representative Islamic archaeology that acknowledged the diversity of the
Muslim community. Hence I wrote The Archaeology of Islam as a way to
begin to redress this, slightly provocative perhaps, but Ian Hodder’s “Social
Archaeology” series was then blossoming under Blackwell, and I aimed the book
at that. For three years during my Research Fellowship in Cambridge I got to
read on relevant archaeology and anthropology, as well as travel extensively
collecting material. I think archaeology focused on Islam is now changing. New
journals such as the Journal of Islamic Archaeology have appeared that
have a broader more inclusive and theoretically aware focus, and material
routinely analysed elsewhere, such as faunal remains, is now not discarded but
treated, as it should be, as a source of information on past lifeways.
EDW: You’ve also done a
lot of work on the archaeology of Bahrain, having co-authored An
Archaeological Guide to Bahrain with Rachel Maclean (Archaeopress, 2011)
and The Land of Enki in the Islamic Era (Kegal Paul, 2005). You are
currently involved in a project compiling the island’s Islamic funerary
inscriptions, and another studying the Bilad al-Qadim area in anticipation of
the construction of a new visitor centre at the Al-Khamic Mosque. How did you
come to be involved in the archaeology of Bahrain and what is it that so
intrigues you about it?
TI:
Bahrain allowed me to put into practice some of the theoretical points made in The
Archaeology of Islam and to provide a comparison with material I had
collected in Mali and Eritrea, as discussed in The Archaeology of Islam in
sub-Saharan Africa. But it also snowballed, as research has a tendency to
do and Rachel (my wife) and I have had the opportunity to curate a new museum
at the site we worked at in Bahrain. This has given us opportunities to explore
how to present and interpret archaeology in a rapidly changing society that is
composed of both Sunni and Shi’a, as well as non-Muslims, and to involve the
local community in the process. It has been fascinating, and yes the
archaeology of Bahrain is intriguing for there is so much within this small
island sitting in the Arabian Gulf. There are literally layers upon layers of
archaeology around and on which modern life has to sit. Though I do also
sometimes worry at the pace at which the archaeology is being lost as
development proceeds at an astounding pace.
EDW: You’ve just come
back from an excavation in Ethiopia; could you tell us about the project that
you have got going on over there?
TI:
The Ethiopia project is in its early stages. Last year I was collecting with a
former PhD student of mine, Tim Clack, data on how the Mursi ethno-linguistic
group in the southwest physically modify their cattle through branding and horn
shaping. This has helped in interpreting images in Ethiopian rock art of
similarly modified cattle that in the past were either neglected or described
as abstract. The results of this research are published in the next issue of Antiquity.
This summer’s fieldwork was in eastern Ethiopia and involved test-excavation
and survey of abandoned urban sites, burial tumuli, and in the city of Harar to
begin to explore themes such as myth, ethnicity and identity and how it links
to Islamisation, and trade and identity.
EDW: Your book Archaeology,
Ritual, Religion (Routledge, 2004) is the definitive textbook on the
subject of the archaeology of religion and ritual; ten years on from its first
publication it still constitutes an absolute must-read for anyone getting into
the subject. What made you decide to author it and what do you hope that it has
achieved?
TI: Thank you. Archaeology, Ritual, Religion was a book that I had to write and was the easiest so far to do because I just sat down and wrote it. I wish I could say that other books were that enjoyable or easy to write, but I can’t – they have been hard work! I hope that it has shown that we cannot neglect religion and ritual in archaeological contexts – or at least the potential for their former existence. I think again archaeology has changed over the past decade and archaeologists (I won’t name names) who then did not acknowledge ‘religion’ or mis-categorised ‘ritual’ now do address both.
EDW: In 2011 Oxford
University Press brought out a hefty anthology which you had edited titled The
Oxford Handbook of the Archaeology of Ritual and Religion. It’s a really
valuable volume for the sheer scope of contributions contained within it, from
those examining the evidence for ritual behaviour in the Palaeolithic to those
dealing with the cultic practices of the Inca and on to the contemporary Pagan
uses of archaeological monuments in Europe. What brought about this particular
project, and what do you see as the future for endeavours such as this which
bring together archaeologists of religion and ritual whose chronological and
geographical specialisms vary widely?
TI:
Editing that Handbook was a lot of work. I am now editing another, the Oxford
Handbook of Prehistoric Figurines. I think there is value in these projects
if they are comprehensive enough and if the differing perspectives of the
authors are respected and indeed encouraged. No one is ever going to agree and
nor should they in dealing with such complex and elusive subjects based on
archaeological materials. Having all these different regions, periods,
perspectives and specialisms under one cover is valuable for it enables you to
realise human ingenuity over time in materialising and conceptualising
relationships with ritual, religion, spirituality, the divine. We are also
fortunate that OUP is willing to take on such projects and I fear that in a decade
from now publishers might be less willing to do so, certainly in a print form.
EDW: The academic field
of religious studies has for decades been influenced by anthropology,
sociology, and psychology; by comparison, archaeology seems to have exerted
very little influence. Do you think that archaeologists are finally having
their voice heard among scholars of religion? Furthermore, how do you think
that archaeologists of religion and ritual should go about interacting with our
colleagues studying these subjects from other disciplinary perspectives?
TI:
I do think archaeology is now contributing to religious studies in ways that a
few years ago it did not. Journals such as Material Religion actively
encourage archaeological contributions, and based upon changes in my
correspondence again over the past few years scholars of religion are engaging
with archaeologists and realising that we do have something to offer – even if
it is only data that they can reinterpret. How should we interact with these
colleagues? As equals, but also through not exclusively guarding our material
and thinking somehow that because it is archaeology, only archaeologists can
interpret it. Think of how we routinely use other sources such as ethnography.
EDW: Have you got any
projects or publications on the horizon that we should be keeping an eye out
for?
TI:
My new book, Material Explorations in African Archaeology, which is in
press, also with OUP. This provides an examination of materiality in African
archaeology through exploring concepts of material agency and material
engagement and entanglement in relation to how these can be manifest via
persons, animals, objects, substances, and contexts.
EDW: I always like to end
my interviews here at Albion Calling by asking my guest where they think that
their field is headed in the coming years and decades. That being the case, I’d
like to ask you where you see the archaeology of ritual and religion
progressing in future?
TI:
A difficult question to answer but I believe that for varied reasons, good and
bad, ‘religion’ is much more prominent that it was 10 to 20 years ago. Hence
for the archaeology of ritual and religion this could be a good thing in
increasing awareness and research, but we do have to respect the right of
archaeologists to work on all sorts of sites and to recover and interpret
material that can challenge established beliefs and practices.
EDW: Thank you so much,
Professor Insoll, for taking the time to give us an insight into your work and
views on the archaeology of religion and ritual. I wish you all the best in
future.