Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

Time, agency and the Anthropocene

  • Asa Randall (a1)
Abstract

The Anthropocene is here, but do we need the Anthropocene, and if so, when do we want it to start? My responses are ‘no’ and ‘never’ if the answers to those questions require a discrete definition of the Anthropocene and a specific start date. In that regard, I agree generally with Braje's arguments. Particularly unsettling in Anthropocene discourse (in archaeology or geology) has been the search for discernable origins in the form of golden spikes, and I am suspicious of even setting the Holocene as an Anthropocene equivalent. That stated, archaeology can and should continue to contribute to interdisciplinary Anthropocene dialogues.

Copyright
References
Hide All
GambleC. 2007. Origins and revolutions: human identity in earliest prehistory. New York: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511618598
SassamanK.E. 2012. Futurologists look back. Archaeologies 8: 250–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11759-012-9205-0
ThomasJ. 2015. The future of archaeological theory. Antiquity 89: 1287–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2015.183
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Antiquity
  • ISSN: 0003-598X
  • EISSN: 1745-1744
  • URL: /core/journals/antiquity
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 11
Total number of PDF views: 69 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 184 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 20th October 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.