New Books Network: Interview with Daniel J. Sherman

Episode: Sensations: French Archaeology Between Science and Spectacle, 1890-1940
Publication: University of Chicago Press, 2025
Host: Sarah Miles
Date: October 9, 2025
Guest: Daniel J. Sherman, Leinberger Distinguished Professor of Art History and History, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Overview of the Episode

In this episode of the New Books Network’s French Studies series, host Sarah Miles interviews historian Daniel J. Sherman about his new book, Sensations: French Archaeology Between Science and Spectacle, 1890–1940. Sherman’s work explores how modern archaeology in France—and especially in its colonies—emerged from a tension between scientific rigor and the need for media spectacle. Through deep archival research, the book connects professional quarrels, media controversies, issues of authenticity, and questions of performance and embodiment, all set against the backdrop of French colonial ambitions and press proliferation.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Sherman’s Intellectual Trajectory (03:49–05:25)

• Interdisciplinary Approach: Sherman reflects on his career, bridging history and art history. His teaching in art history has made him “more sensitive to the ways works of art function as historical evidence,” leading to an increased emphasis on visual materials in his research.
• Epistemic Roots: Despite his multidisciplinary interests, Sherman notes that his research is “heavily archival,” grounding even his artistic interpretations in documentary evidence.

2. Archaeology's Context: Science, Colonialism, and Media (05:36–08:58)

• Professionalization: Sherman locates the period (1890–1940) as a turning point, when archaeology shifted from “glorified treasure hunts” to systematic, university-backed science.
• Media Proliferation: He describes the Belle Époque and interwar years as the heyday of the French print press, making public controversy and sensationalism both possible and necessary for archaeological work to gain recognition and support.

“As far as the media, the years before World War I really see an enormous flourishing of the French newspaper and magazine press.” — Daniel J. Sherman (07:37)

3. From Cultural Property to Media & Archaeology (09:09–12:53)

• Archival Obstacles: Sherman reveals that his project shifted due to restricted access to colonial archives, especially regarding cultural property and museum acquisitions.
• Convergence: He realized that the common thread linking his cases—Tunisia and Glozel—was the “relationship between science… and the media.”

“It was this relationship between science in the broad French sense and the media.” — Daniel J. Sherman (12:17)

4. The Tunisian Controversy: The Tale of Two Louis (13:34–20:09)

• Opposing Figures:
  • Louis Carton: Military doctor, amateur archaeologist, entrepreneur, and collector prone to bending rules and seeking publicity. Deeply invested in the colonial apparatus.
  • Louis Poissot: Formally trained archaeologist, bureaucratically-minded, rigorous about regulations, wary of publicity and Carton’s “pretentious” approach.

“Poissot has long been suspicious of Carton, knows that he cuts corners, knows that he has a large collection… also just finds him personally unbearable. Pretentious. Publicity seeking.” — Daniel J. Sherman (18:15)

• Colonial Sensitivities: Poissot’s obsession with order stemmed from the legal and social complexities of the protectorate, where public opinion and land rights made archaeological digs politically fraught.

5. Professionalization vs. Amateurism (25:33–28:22)

• Rules and Reputation: There was a strong desire among professional archaeologists to distinguish themselves from “amateurs” and adventurers, partly to secure their own reputations and partly to preserve French scientific prestige.

“They see themselves as scholars… and they're very much part of an international scholarly community. They're concerned with maintaining the reputation of French archaeology and… their own reputations.” — Daniel J. Sherman (25:56)

• Early Publish-or-Perish: The urgency to publish findings and secure recognition was already apparent in the early 20th century, albeit slower than today’s academic climate.

6. Glozel: Media, Controversy, and Scandal (28:41–38:55)

• Role of the Press: The Glozel affair, centering on a supposed archaeological discovery in rural France, played out in the press because established academic outlets quickly dismissed or excluded the site’s excavators.
• Right of Response: French law required newspapers to print rebuttals, escalating quarrels publicly.

“The French press has this very liberal principle of the right of response. So once you print somebody saying, you know, X is completely wrong and a charlatan, well, then you have to allow X to write that, you know, Y is completely wrong and a charlatan. And it kind of escalates from there.” — Daniel J. Sherman (32:20)

• Clipping Obsession: Protagonists on all sides maintained extensive clipping archives, using them both to track public opinion and as “evidence” in ongoing disputes.

7. Embodiment and the Visual Archive (40:04–45:28)

• Materiality and Imagery: Rich photographic and visual records—especially from the Poissot family—allow Sherman to explore how the physical presence, class, and identity of archaeologists (and local workers) were depicted.
• Embodiment: The book examines the physical labor of digging, the bureaucratic “bozogne” (drudgery), and the self-fashioning of archaeologists as both intellectuals and manual laborers.

“They love to get dirty… even though the conditions in the field can be rough and uncomfortable, they rarely complain about that.” — Daniel J. Sherman (47:03)

8. Performativity and Public Spectacle (49:02–55:04)

• Carthage Pageants: Carton staged plays and historical pageants in ancient ruins to demonstrate archaeology’s power to “bring the past to life”—not just for science, but for colonial legitimacy and popular entertainment.

“What they're performing… is the ability of archaeology to make the past come to life… Carton is very concerned with the accuracy of the costumes… the architectural detail on the sets.” — Daniel J. Sherman (49:20)

• Glozel and Consumer Culture: In the Glozel affair, performativity veered into vaudeville, courtroom drama, and media spectacle—all feeding and undermining the scientific claims.

9. Archaeological Production, Archives, and the Imagined Past (57:06–61:15)

• From Find to Narrative: Sherman details the meticulous process from discovery through cataloging and publication, each stage subject to increasing protocols meant to guarantee authenticity.
• Imagination vs. Evidence: Public fascination with visual reconstructions (of cities, temples, and “how things looked”) pressed archaeologists to balance popular demand with scientific caution.

“There is a fascination… with how things looked in the past. And… archaeological drawings, renderings, reconstructions… is a place where archaeologists want to satisfy a public demand while also being cautious about how much they can say.” — Daniel J. Sherman (60:03)

10. Empathy as Scholar and Historian (61:34–65:33)

• Empathy through Research: Sherman emphasizes the importance—and the challenge—of empathetic engagement with both historical figures and archival creators. He sees this as a vital part of scholarly methodology, especially when dealing with privately assembled archives.

“I think that historians are always trying to understand how their subjects were feeling, how they came to their beliefs and actions.” — Daniel J. Sherman (62:38)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Colonial Legal Sensitivity:

  • “Colonial officials always have to be sensitive to public opinion. But in Tunisia, it’s particularly delicate because of the fiction that the French are there to advise, to protect… the indigenous government.” — Daniel J. Sherman (21:45)

• On the Drama of Glozel:

  • “[Glazel] would completely upset scholars’ sense of where alphabetic writing began… thousands of years earlier in central France. Well, that was just a very juicy story.” — Daniel J. Sherman (33:56)

• On Professional Quarrels:

  • “Some of my favorite images in the book are the caricatures and the kind of faux map from the Canard Enchaîné… which clearly already had a nose for the ridiculous.” — Daniel J. Sherman (55:12)

• On Archive Management:

  • “One of the kind of annoying things… if you have to remove a clipping from the envelope with the letter, don't throw it away, you know.” — Daniel J. Sherman (37:28)

Timestamps for Key Segments

• Professional Journeys & Interdisciplinarity: 03:49–05:25
• Archaeology, Colonialism, Media: 05:36–08:58
• Origins of the Project: 09:09–12:53
• The Tunisian Case—Two Louis: 13:34–20:09
• Professionalization & Reputation: 25:33–28:22
• Glozel and the Press: 28:41–38:55
• Embodiment and Visual Culture: 40:04–45:28
• Performativity & Public Spectacle: 49:02–55:04
• Archaeological Narrative & Imagination: 57:06–61:15
• Empathy in Scholarship: 61:34–65:33

Closing and Works-in-Progress

• Sherman is developing two new projects:
  1. Culture on the Move: Examining the cultural politics of provenance and restitution, including media representations and contemporary art dealing with these themes.
  2. Views of the Île de la Cité: Investigating how late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century modernist painters, such as Pissarro, depicted the oldest part of Paris.
• Sherman concludes by highlighting the value of empathy and interdisciplinary curiosity in both research and teaching.

Final Thoughts

This episode provides a window into how archaeology’s public life in France was shaped not just by new methods or discoveries, but by persistent quarrels, scandals, physical labor, and—above all—the desire to be seen and believed, both by peers and by the press. Sherman’s Sensations brings to light the deeply human, messy, and performative sides of scientific knowledge, reminding listeners that history is as much about spectacle as it is about truth.