Erina Baci: Uncovering a New Chapter in Albanian Archaeology

Erina Baci (@thealbanianarchaeologist) doing fieldwork in the Balkans.

“A nation that forgets its past has no future,” runs a famous saying.

The Albanians have a complex relationship with history. Deep, long and often a source of pride, it is also made up of unprecedented gaps among Balkan historiography – the first known book in the Albanian language, Gjon Buzuku’s Meshari, was only written in 1555. It is these gaps that make the work of the modern historian and archaeologist that much more important.

I first ran into Erina Baci’s work through her Instagram account, her username having piqued my interest. Two factors stood out in Erina’s presence: her accessible promotion of an important but often insular discipline and the way she centered the Balkans in her archaeological work. Delving deeper, I found the articles on her blog showed a similar introspectiveness.

Of everything I learned from the following conversation, one aspect will stay with me the longest. Those of us who study Albanian or Balkan history in the West have become accustomed to its treatment as tangential; only important in relation to major powers or intellectual centers. Against this backdrop, Erina’s insistence on studying “the history of this land” on its own terms and for its own sake stands out. In my view, it is not only refreshing but also a sterling example for those of us who want to afford Albanian history the place it deserves.

The following conversation took place virtually in early August, as I tuned in from California and Erina from Albania. It has since been lightly edited for length and clarity.

I think it's best to begin with the fundamentals. What were your initial childhood interests and what brought you down the path of archaeology?

Well, that's a great question. I always say that my path in archaeology has been deeply personal. It has a lot to do with my family's heritage and origin. My family is originally from a small town called Selcë e Poshtme in the Korça-Pogradec region, for people who are familiar with the geography. Selcë is known for one of the most famous archaeological sites in Albania, the Royal Tombs of Selcë. Growing up, I would often hear about it from my aunts and uncles, who worked as laborers for the project back in the seventies when they were doing excavations there.

I would hear about this amazing site and I was always intrigued about the stories and wanted to know more. That’s where the interest in archaeology sparked. From a very young age, I remember being five or six, saying that I wanted to be an archaeologist and I never lost that interest. We moved from Albania to Canada in 2000 and I pursued archaeology in my undergrad and then in my master's and now I'm here in my PhD.

The second question is directly related to that background. In looking over your previous work, I was trying to put myself in your shoes. I was wondering whether you consciously chose a career path that would lead you to travel to the Albanian-speaking territories in the Balkans, whether it was sort of a conscious effort to connect at a really deep level with the culture, or just the logical path that your interests led to.

No, it was pretty conscious. I chose to focus on the archaeology of the Balkan region so that it would bring me home every summer. Again, it ties back to archaeology being very personal to me. I come home every summer and because of that, I get to explore the super interesting, rich culture of this region. I have gotten to work with amazing people and reconnect with my family while making amazing friends and memories working here.

It was very important for me, for example, when I was looking for a master's program to find a mentor or an advisor who has worked in the region because I knew that I wanted to write a thesis on Albanian archaeology. Master's work differently in different parts of the world but at least from my understanding at the time, I thought it would be the most beneficial to me to have an advisor who is actively working or has worked in Albania at some point so that they could properly guide me on my research. And that was, again, very intentional, seeking out a program and mentor that would enable me to come back.

This will be a few questions mixed into one: I'm coming at it with the background of having written a paper my sophomore year in an Ancient Greek history seminar on the relations between the Albanian and Greek peoples and their ancestors stretching back to the ancients. A huge aspect of the work explored how the communist regime both discovered and sort of constructed Albania's ancient past. I'm interested in that period of, for example, the exploration of Butrint, which of course began with Italians, and was continued by Albanian archaeologists. What has been your favorite project from the work you’ve inherited from Albanian archaeologists, which you now continue? Relatedly, what's been your favorite project that you've worked on and how does that connect to the work you're doing more broadly?

That's a multipart question so I'll try to answer it in the order you presented it. You might have to remind me of certain parts. I have to start by saying that when I was an undergrad I really struggled to find courses that covered the topics I was interested in. Like you, I would take a lot of ancient history classes in hopes that in those textbooks and readings that I was assigned, I would find some mention of Albania. That was a frustrating thing for me but it also very much drove me to continue pursuing this because I wanted to know more about the archaeology of this region. I wanted to know the actual facts about what people were doing and how they were living and not how they were presented by the Ancient Greeks or Romans, whose portrayals were often incredibly xenophobic.

In terms of archaeology in Albania, 100%, the communist regime painted, or had a very heavy hand, in what people could do at the time. I want to acknowledge that if you read archaeology articles from the time of the regime you will actually see at the beginning of the journal article: “We want to thank our wonderful dictator, etc.” The communist party obviously had a lot of sway over what people were able to say.

So because of this, there was a lot of effort focused on the ‘Illyrian period’ and the Iron Age, on burials, tumuli, settlements and hill forts that fall into this time period. And the goal was to sort of prove this great Illyrian ancestry, all of which falls under the wave of nationalism that inspired this work.

Because of this, people tend to be a little bit critical of the work that was done in the past. Rightfully so, you should be a little bit critical. But I also want to take a moment to acknowledge the hard and amazing work that was done by the archaeologists before us. Just because they had to conform to certain nationalistic ideals doesn't mean that the actual work they did was not good. In fact, it was some of the best archaeology, some might argue. They did good work, it’s just that the interpretations were potentially questionable.

So how does this relate to me? I've inherited this amazing wealth of archaeological knowledge. It's very easy, as somebody working in the 21st century with all the tools, the technology and funding at their disposal to look back on what people did in the past and say, “Well, this wasn't very good.” But for me to be where I am today, they had to build that foundation. They had to build that chronology, for example for pottery types, for me to have a general idea of what I'm looking at, build my knowledge and then maybe critique it.

As far as how my work lines in, in many ways I think it's a continuation and augmentation of what they did. With my research. I'm really interested in that transition between the Late Bronze and Early Iron Age, which some people would argue is the beginning of the Illyrian ethnos. But that's where my nationalistic-themed interests end. I try to stay away from those sorts of arguments because looking at identity in the past has been difficult, especially with the work that I do.

What I try to focus on is really what life looked like in this part of the world for the everyday person before we had sustained contact and influence from the Greeks and the Romans. What does their material culture tell us about that? I don't make any claims of ethnogenesis because identity is very complicated, which we can get into if you'd like. I also stay away from that because the type of research I do doesn't cover those aspects, for example, A-DNA. So it would really be a big stretch for me to make any sort of comment on that.

You told me to remind you: what was your favorite project of the ones you have worked on so far?

I have worked on a few but my favorite one in the Balkans is the Rapid-Kosova Project. It's co-directed by my advisor Michael Galaty from the University of Michigan and run in two phases. We've had phase one where the co-directors were Haxhi Mehmetaj and Sylvia Deskaj along with Mike and we're in phase two right now where our co-director is Premtim Alaj from the Archaeological Institute of Kosova.

It’s my favorite project for a number of reasons. I think it was methodologically unique. It was a Mediterranean survey project, something that wasn't used that much in the region, at least to my knowledge. Through it, we discovered multiple new sites. I would argue that our understanding of the region of Dukagjin where the project was based is going to be improved and clarified.

But also it was such a fun project to be a part of. It was my first time in Kosova and my first time holding a role other than an excavator. I was the GIS database manager, so I had responsibilities and I got to stretch those muscles. I learned so many new skills and made a lot of maps. 

We also just had a blast. The area is beautiful, the food is amazing and the people are so kind. It was just such a well-planned project, so kudos to Mike, Sylvia and Haxhi for making such an amazing and welcoming project. It was a really good time and that matters a lot for archaeological projects.

I had a few thoughts on your previous answer. In the research project I spoke about there was one article that made me a little uneasy. Its title was “The Historico-Philosophical Thought of Comrade Enver Hoxha in the Field of Archaeology” and it was published in 1989 for the 10th anniversary of his visit to Butrint. The idea that these professionals, some of whom as you said were extremely accomplished, had to not only entertain but give pre-eminent value to the thoughts of a man who didn't even graduate from university in France, let alone had no background in archaeology was strange.

This isn't the only example in Balkan history that you can think of the ancient past being utilized for political ends. Maybe the most prominent and destructive example isn't even in Albanian history but probably the Battle of Kosovo, its utilization by the Milośević regime in 1989 and what that led to. I get the sense that you have probably thought about this question: what are practical steps that professionals and scholars like yourself can take to push back against the most detrimental sides of the “us against them, we’ve been here forever” discourse? I feel as if the general populace vaguely knows that this narrative is nonsense but it’s so much stronger than, let's say, the truth.

Yeah, I mean, what is the truth? This is a good question and something my friends and I talk a lot about because it's really important. Archaeology is incredibly political and anybody who says otherwise is greatly mistaken. Even though we study the past, we do so in the present and that has real political and social implications.

Especially if, say, a magazine or a popular outlet takes something we say and publishes it out of context, it can be incredibly dangerous. You mentioned what happened with the idealization of the Battle of Kosovo. Something that people might be more familiar with is what happened under the Third Reich, where Hitler and his accomplices tapped into archaeological data and used that to justify a genocide. There are many cases where archaeology is taken out of context and used for very violent actions in the present. 

As far as what archaeologists can do, I think first comes thinking really critically about their role as creators of knowledge and their role in the country that they work in. Archaeology has a history of being incredibly colonial. It is usually a Western scholar going somewhere “exotic” to discover some long-lost answers, extract knowledge and leave. That's changing, thankfully, but I think archaeologists can think about their role and how they have historically disseminated knowledge. A lot of it is tied up in academic journals, which the average person doesn't have any access to. We discover all these cool things about the past and then nobody ever reads about it other than maybe ten other people in the world who are researching the same thing.

One of the things we can do is start sharing our knowledge in open-facing publications, through podcasts, journals, magazines and interviews. We should make those readily accessible because many people don't quite know what archaeology is. We should share our findings and knowledge in simple words that are accessible to everybody, not in scientific jargon. We should also address, to go back to what you were saying, those “us and them” narratives and emphasize that cultural history and archaeology are shared resources. They're a part of the shared story of what makes us human at the end of the day.

It's a reminder that we're much more similar than we are different. If you look at all these cultures, even geographically, you see the same patterns popping up all over the world around the same time. People have always been people, we've always had the same sort of quirks and patterns from the dawn of our time. I think one of the most powerful things we could do is push people towards that narrative. I know it sounds very idealistic but it's what I think; I could change my mind.

When it comes to the “we’ve been here longer” narrative, it’s important to emphasize that it's all human history, it’s shared history. We all came out of Africa at some point, you know, and what people are really good at is moving, which I emphasize in my research. Those of us who are in the diaspora have lived this in real life. We were born in Albania and are now all over the world. People were just as mobile 5,000 years ago as they are today. Of course, they didn't have airplanes but they had two walking feet.

You reminded me of something with the comment about the colonial history of archaeology, which is undeniable. You seem to occupy this interesting place in modern archaeology where you work in the West and are informed by it in many ways. At the same time, though, you are informed by your family’s long history of work in the region and by that culture very deeply. How does that shape your work and do you see any benefits or disadvantages from it? I'm also curious, what differences have you seen in academic practices between the West and the Balkans?

That's a good question. As an Albanian woman raised in the West and working in archaeology back in Albania, I feel like I'm in a constant liminal space. This ties to what I mentioned about identity earlier, I am a good example of this. What is my identity if you ask me: is it my nationality, which would be my Canadian passport? Is it where I'm living, which is Michigan in the US? Is it based on the language that I speak, which was Albanian originally or where I was born, which was Librazhd?

If you were to ask me where I’m from, my answer would depend on who I'm talking to and why I'm talking to them. As someone who is educated in the West but comes and works in Albania, I feel like I'm an in-betweener. I feel like this in-between identity helps me in some ways and can pose challenges in others. It helps me because I'm able in a lot of ways to seamlessly reintegrate, at least I think, back into the Albanian culture. I'm very familiar with the cultures and the customs and I can code-switch as needed.

But then there are slightly more negative aspects, such as being used to a certain academic system or way of doing things in the West. For example, when I'm planning the field season, things usually need to be booked and organized months in advance for my funding agencies and for my university to give me my permissions. It doesn't always work like that here, where you call someone and it gets organized today for tomorrow. That's something that takes adjusting to.

For the most part, though, I think this in-between identity has helped me a lot. I feel like an insider-outsider. In my opinion, I should always look to and take my cues from my local colleagues because they are Albanians living in Albania and working in archaeology here. They know the system much better than I do and are much more integrated in life here. I always take my cues from them because even with the best intentions, I may not know things and I may make mistakes. So I'm aware that I am still an outsider even though I don't feel like it sometimes.

That's fascinating. Another advantage, I would say, is that being outside of the context and place you are studying allows you a certain freedom, a space that you just can't expect while working exclusively there. At least that's been my experience, that I've been able to challenge handed-down narratives. With this in mind, have you identified any major misconceptions that Albanians have about their ancient past?

One thing that I've encountered over and over again in the field is that people often don’t know what archaeology is. I see this when we are doing surveys, the method that I've used the most, in which you essentially walk over recently plowed fields and see if anything has been churned up by the plow, such as ceramics or other things. When we explain to people that we want to walk their farm fields, they often say: “There's nothing there except for dirt. By all means, knock yourself out, but there's nothing there. We have no gold.”

Or they will see us washing pottery and approach us curiously. They see a bunch of us lined up around pots and basins, scrubbing what look like rocks but are actually pieces of pottery. They ask us, “Why are you playing with rocks? Don't you have better things to do?” And it's around noon, the sun is beaming. It's really hot and we’re dirty.

So the first misconception is of archaeology as treasure hunting, looking for gold and digging up mummies, or doing weird pseudoscience and looking for Atlantis. And it’s an easily fixable misconception, too. All you have to do is talk to people and do a few public archaeology days where you invite them to your site and say: “Here you go, this is what archaeology is.” It's as simple as inviting people and maybe doing a few interviews or free and public-facing publications.

Even to someone with no deep background in archaeology, it seems pretty clear that a huge part of what you're doing includes incorporating newer technologies and techniques. A few that stood out to me were geospatial technology and satellite imagery. What role does technology play in what seems like the study of the exact opposite: the ancient past? I'm wondering if there are any challenges or risks to its application in this field. Can it distort anything?

Oh, this is such a great question. I love that you brought up methods because I'm a methods person. Most archaeologists, at least what I've seen with my friends, tend to specialize in two ways: geographically, in a certain area and then, to make ourselves marketable, we usually specialize in a method. I chose Geographic Information Systems because I like maps and because somebody at some point told me that I would get a job with this, and a job would be nice!

GIS is essentially a combination of software technology that allows you to manipulate spatial data and multiple driven data sets, including the satellite imagery that you mentioned, to answer questions about the past. These questions are often spatial in nature and GIS works really well with archaeology because it is very reliant on spatiality, or space and context.

For example, when we excavate, we try to keep a meticulous record of everything that we're doing because once you dig something up, you can't undig it. What we're really interested in as archaeologists are not the pretty things that come out of the ground but where it came out and in relation to what, because that's what tells us the story. Technology ties in by allowing us to take more precise and meticulous measurements, whether it's in an excavation or by using satellite imagery to look at large swaths of land to see where you might want to survey. You can record tracks that people have walked over in the surveying method I mentioned earlier or make maps showing the distribution of discovered artifacts.

The incorporation of technology has allowed us to expand the type and quantity of information we can collect and work with. If you're doing things by hand, you can imagine that you're limited to what you can handle in one human brain. The downside is that human error is still a thing if you're working with hundreds of data entries, which need to be cleaned. Simply pushing buttons on your laptop doesn't necessarily mean you're going to get good results.

For example, most papers and journals will require you to have some statistical backing to whatever you're arguing but to use any statistical method, you need to understand the math and reasoning behind it. So pressing a few buttons, plugging in your data and getting an answer isn't enough. That's one of the negatives, that people sometimes aren't all that familiar with the tools they're using.

At the end of the day, they are just tools. You need to know how to use them but they're not going to solve everything. For example, LiDAR is very big right now. It’s essentially a laser that people are using to build 3D models and one of the arguments for it is that it will penetrate through dense forest canopies and allow you to see what's under. But it's not that simple. You need to understand what kind of LiDAR puck it is that you have and you need to be able to interpret all that data. Having better technology doesn't necessarily mean we're going to have better answers because you also need to be able to work with and understand that data.

What is the biggest thing you hope to accomplish in your profession?

That's a really good question. I hadn't thought about that before. Large-scale, I would love for more people to know about the archaeology of Albania, Kosova and this part of the world. I would love for people to be more aware of it and to appreciate it on its own terms. For people to read about the archaeology of Dukagjin, for example, because it's interesting and not because it ties into some other question about the Roman Provinces. One of my biggest qualms as an academic is that, at least from my understanding, this part of the world, in a lot of fields, not only archaeology is often presented as a place where people, things, and ideas move through because it's the bridge between the East and the West.

The Romans, for example, went through because they wanted her to go elsewhere. Same with the Greeks and the Ottomans. Everybody goes through the Balkans because they want to go elsewhere. And that doesn't sit well with me because the Balkans is not this empty, uninhabited place where nothing is going on. People have lived here for thousands of years: multiple cultures and peoples. They've lived and died in this part of the world and have moved within the Balkans.

Something I would like to contribute to is challenging that idea of the Balkans as a place where people or ideas simply walk through and establish it as an inhabited place, past and present; a place that people moved within. And I would like people to acknowledge that on its own. Those are my lofty dreams and ambitions.

That’s something I've thought and hoped for myself studying in Western historical departments. It's not pleasant to feel tangential at best. I think the only solution is for people like yourself who take the time to make the history known. I applaud you in that regard.

I have two more personal questions. The first is: what is your favorite and least favorite thing about the Albanians?

Oh, this is an easy one. My favorite thing about the Albanian people is how unbelievably kind and hospitable we are. I have encountered this working and living in this part of the world for the past seven years as an adult – because I'm not counting my time as a kid when I would come into the summer, go to the beach, have fun for two weeks and barely interact with anybody.

These seven years, there have been countless times when I found myself in a sticky situation and people have helped me for no other desire than the goodness of their hearts. I've had flat tires on the side of the road, people have helped me park, which I’m awful at. They’ve helped me find a cake I really needed for a friend's birthday when the bakery was closed. The list goes on and on. The kindness and hospitality are my favorite things.

My least favorite thing is that while kind, we are also so stubborn and tend to have very high and flaring tempers. At least in my own family, I don't know if that's ubiquitous to all of us. Maybe, maybe not. It's one of my least favorite things about me personally, which I'm working on, and I've seen this trend more broadly.

What are three books that have most shaped you? They could be about archaeology, Albania, or far beyond.

The book that has changed my life the most, and it's not on archaeology, is the Tao Te Ching. I became spiritual years back and I still carry it with me everywhere. I read it consistently and return to it many times.

Another one that I read not too long ago was called Black Feminist Thought by Patricia Hill Collins. It was important for me to read not only as an academic but personally. 

Another would be a collection of poems by Mahmoud Darwish. I can't remember the name but I love his poetry, the feeling in his words and the geopolitics of his work. Those are some of the things I've read recently, that are not too distant and that have been important in shaping the way I think.

Erina, thank you so much for your time. It's been a pleasure.

Thank you.