Global post-medieval/historical archaeology: what’s happening around the world 2018?

This collection of papers represents our second series highlighting the state of post-medieval archaeology in non-English speaking parts of the world. Our first edition explored how post-medieval/historical archaeology was experienced by archaeologists working in Finland, Spain and the island of Borneo. This year we investigate how our discipline operates in three other parts of the globe: Venezuela, Tanzania and Iran. The purpose of this series is to expand the annual review issue of Post-Medieval Archaeology by presenting our readership with a brief summary of how post-medieval archaeology is practised in parts of the world they may not be familiar with. Archaeologists working in these areas are asked to summarize how post-medieval/historical archaeology is conducted and perceived by local governments, the public and even other archaeologists, while identifying existing government and/or other institutional supports available to them. They are asked to describe the benefits and challenges related to conducting research in these countries. Common themes that became apparent in our first issue persist in this one. This includes the challenge of getting regulating authorities and other archaeologists to recognize the value of archaeology of the recent past and issues related to how we define post-medieval/historical archaeology. Our first paper takes us to South America and a country filled with archaeological potential hindered by the current political situation. Historical archaeology research has grown considerably in Venezuela over the past few decades, with projects highlighting this potential. Challenges do not relate to the traditional historic/prehistoric divides often seen in other places, but to the lack of government support, a currently depressed economic state and a disheartening social situation. It is encouraging to learn that many dedicated researchers continue to publish on the archaeology of the region as the world awaits greater stability to allow for further research. Our second paper discusses Tanzania, where the author reminds us of how the traditional framing of our discipline as archaeologies of ‘post-medieval’ periods or ‘European expansion’ can alienate those wishing to conduct archaeology of the recent past in countries that do not neatly fit these definitions. Discussions on how the discipline is traditionally defined are covered elsewhere, but it is an important reminder of the need for openness and inclusivity if we hope to expand interest in the recent past and begin conducting a truly global discipline. Research opportunities in Tanzania seem endless and local archaeologists are demonstrating this through their work. The third essay focuses on historical archaeology in Iran and mostly points to the dearth of research projects investigating this period of history and the enormous potential for future research in the country. Although a very different political situation, parallels can be drawn to points raised in the first paper regarding access being given to researchers. While laws are in place to protect much of the heritage of the recent past, not all sites are equally protected. As was the case in our first series, these papers point to a need for historical/post-medieval archaeology to be better engaged with on a global scale. While the presence of cultural heritage relating to the