Editorial

Abstract

Almost from its inception, archaeology has been deeply concerned with the human relationship with technology. It has long been recognised that control over technology and the means of production are important in the maintenance of power systems, and that symbolic factors can be significant in the trajectory of technological systems. In the past 20–30 years, agency and technological choice have also been emphasised. Harnessing the potential social powers of technology can be achieved through control over – or restriction of access to – technological knowledge and skill, resources, and infrastructure, and, often implicitly, through the maintenance and performance of social norms. Moments of technological change – a frequent focus of archaeological studies – may expose these structures at the very point at which they are most rapidly changing form, creating interpretive challenges that require robust theorisation. In response, this issue on Technology and Power forefronts a range of papers that explore how recent theoretical and methodological developments in archaeology can shed new light on our understanding of the relationship between technology, and different types of power. The papers in this Special Issue range widely, with consideration of ceramic production nearly 4000 years ago in central Eurasia, to gold-working in China c. 400–300 BCE and hydraulic innovations in Ebro river valley, Catalonia c. 1100 CE. In this way the issue explores technology across time and place and at microand macro-scales. A strong connecting theme across all papers is the relationship between technological and socio-political transformations. Whether authors are exploring ceramic production, precious metal working, or hydraulic technologies, each contribution offers a nuanced understanding of the contingency of power on technological developments and the ways in which different groups harness new technologies to convey status, to manipulate visual grammar or to intensify exploitation. The papers in this issue also deconstruct, in different ways, established notions of relationships between political power and technology in terms of hierarchical, vertical relations. Frieman and James explore the power of peripheries and creolising processes as generators of creativity in terms of technologies, while Dolfini focuses on Copper Age Italy and challenges the normative interpretation that weapon-rich graves, with metal objects, represent the warrior elite. There are gaps of course, the important role of experimental archaeology and replication in discussions of early technology and power is not a strong feature of this issue and authors touch only tangentially on the potential for research on technology to contribute to understanding economic development and advancement. As a collection, however, these papers offer a strong emphasis on the societal and social inter-relationships with technology. Together they demand a fresh consideration of how technologies can themselves drive changes in power relations by offering opportunities for innovation and adaption, while recognising that the human relationship with technology is iterative, flexible and multi-dimensional. In so doing, they acknowledge that technological change is not simply a passive response to social concerns, while avoiding a return to the pitfalls of technological determinism. WORLD ARCHAEOLOGY 2021, VOL. 53, NO. 5, 717–722 https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2021.2071049