The Archaeology of Bruce Trigger: Theoretical Empiricism.

John Stanley is a policy advisor at the Ontario Ministry of Colleges and
Universities.

It is difficult to put together a collection of articles, or author an article in such a collection, about the work of a recently deceased great scholar. This can be because, as in this case, the impact was as subtle as it was powerful. Yet it is important to try, as such collections contribute to the knowledge-making process, and they honour those who should be honoured. This collection of articles on the work of Bruce Trigger exemplifies both the strengths and weaknesses of this genre of scholarship.

Bruce Trigger was a giant figure in archaeology, its practice and theorizing, and its relationship to other branches of anthropology and to history. The scope of his work is easily illustrated by the surprise people in one area of study feel when “their expert,” Trigger, has outstanding expertise in very different areas.

The authors of this collection, as did Trigger, engage in a remarkably diverse series of topics, including subdivisions of archaeology—post-processual, comparative, social, indigenous (what Eldown Yellowhorn terms “internalist”), forensic (i.e., regarding land claims)—as well as more multidisciplinary discussions of ethnohistory and historical materialism (including Trigger’s relationship to the works of Karl Marx and V. Gordon Childe).

            Probably for most people familiar with Trigger’s works, the most interesting and accessible article is the one that Trigger wrote: “Retrospective.” It would be a thought-provoking reading in a first-year anthropology or upper-level archaeology course. Invaluable for scholars in his intersecting fields is his impressive bibliography. There are obscure works there, both books and articles, that, hopefully, will become better known and more frequently read.

            The weaknesses are few. First, for this book to be used by students, and to be read by non-archaeologist scholars, a simple glossary would have been useful. Second, a few of the articles strayed a little too far from Trigger’s work and influence (notably the articles on Japanese archaeology and on shamans).