Paper short abstract:

Archaeological archives preserve many ‘failed’ photographs. Using archival photographs from 1920s and 30s excavations at Dura-Europos, this paper considers how unpublished photographs shaped archaeological knowledge, and what alternate histories of archaeology they might reveal.

Paper long abstract:

Archaeological photographs are often seen as neutral pieces of evidence whose purpose is to preserve or salvage that which was being excavated. Early guides to archaeological photographic practice emphasise this evidentiary quality, yet they also give instructions on how to create these images, carefully grooming the site and staging the scene. Despite attempts to create a specifically archaeological scientific picture, the resulting images never escape aesthetic underpinnings. Decisions made after the processing of the images, for instance in deciding which to include in a publication, or to circulate to colleagues, reveal where archaeological value was placed. Value and the construction of knowledge are also present in those photos that were not chosen - the "un-used" photograph, taken but never published. Archaeological archives preserve access to many such photographs, and those that were considered mistakes or failures, when something unwanted slipped into the frame. Using archival photographs from 1920s and 30s excavations at Dura-Europos in Syria, this paper attempts to consider how the unpublished photographs shaped archaeological knowledge, and what alternate histories of the site and alternate histories of archaeology they might reveal.