<i>Searching for the beasts in the archive</i> as methodological praxis

Abstract European colonialism resulted not only in the extraction and movement of humans, parts of human bodies, and material objects but also in the widespread (often violent) movement of non‐human animals and parts of non‐human animal bodies. However, existing archival and theoretical work on colonialism and anticolonialism has paid very little consideration to these “beasts” that reside in the archive. In this article, drawing from material with relationships to Sri Lanka that I encountered in British museums and archives, I propose searching for the beasts in the archive as a methodological tool available to researchers engaging with (post)colonial archives. I first discuss what it might look like, in methodological terms, to account for non‐human animals in the histories and theories of empire. Then, by focusing on three units of reference—categories, histories, and borders—I show how such an approach unsettles some taken‐for‐granted assumptions that surround dominant taxonomic approaches to knowledge production. Searching for beasts in the archive , then, is not only an exercise in identifying non‐human life within the archive. It also requires being attentive to the apportionments of humanity and animality to different kinds of beings: both human and non‐human.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Geographical Research
Published
2026-07-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-5871.70079
Primary Topic
Geographies of human-animal interactions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Searching for the beasts in the archive as methodological praxis

Senel Wanniarachchi
Geographical Research
Geographies of human-animal interactions
article

Searching for the beasts in the archive as methodological praxis

Senel Wanniarachchi
article en

Abstract

Abstract European colonialism resulted not only in the extraction and movement of humans, parts of human bodies, and material objects but also in the widespread (often violent) movement of non‐human animals and parts of non‐human animal bodies. However, existing archival and theoretical work on colonialism and anticolonialism has paid very little consideration to these “beasts” that reside in the archive. In this article, drawing from material with relationships to Sri Lanka that I encountered in British museums and archives, I propose searching for the beasts in the archive as a methodological tool available to researchers engaging with (post)colonial archives. I first discuss what it might look like, in methodological terms, to account for non‐human animals in the histories and theories of empire. Then, by focusing on three units of reference—categories, histories, and borders—I show how such an approach unsettles some taken‐for‐granted assumptions that surround dominant taxonomic approaches to knowledge production. Searching for beasts in the archive , then, is not only an exercise in identifying non‐human life within the archive. It also requires being attentive to the apportionments of humanity and animality to different kinds of beings: both human and non‐human.

Geographical ResearchVol. 64(3)
University of Oxford (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Geographies of human-animal interactions
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.