The Ilisu Dam: WAC protests to the British government

This paper focuses on two trends in the debate over the scope and nature of public archaeology. The first is a growing concern to define and codify its disciplinary boundaries. The second trend, arguably in tension with the first, is the ever-widening exploration of how people engage with their past, and the ramifications for the way archaeology, in its widest sense, is practised. It is argued that an excessive preoccupation with demarcating the disciplinary boundaries of public archaeology may risk obscuring a far more important objective, tied to the second trend referred to above. Debates on the relationship between the public, the past, and archaeological practice have resulted in a sea-change in attitudes to the responsibilities of the archaeologist, in the relationship between scientific knowledge and popular and indigenous knowledge, and in ideas about the relevance and usability of the past. Public archaeology is concerned with all these issues. It is argued that, to fulfil this wider vision, public archaeology cannot afford the strictures of a specialized discipline within archaeology, but must remain a persistent, essential, and foundational ingredient in the competencies and sensibilities of every archaeologist and co-worker in the field.     

Trading Shovels for Controllers: A Brief Exploration of the Portrayal of Archaeology in Video Games

Archaeology has been a persistent theme for video games, from the long-running Indiana Jones and Lara Croft franchises to more recent uses of archaeology in games like Destiny and World of Warcraft. In these games, archaeology is often portrayed as a search for treasure among lost worlds that leads to looting and the destruction of cultural heritage. In this article, we review the current state of archaeological video games, including mainstream and educational games. While this is not an exhaustive discussion, it provides an introduction and overview to the current landscape. We propose that an understanding of current popular archaeological video games is important to archaeologists for three reasons: (1) it is a source of potentially dangerous misconceptions about the discipline that must be addressed; (2) it can be a source of inspiration for funding and a means to recruit new students to the discipline; and (3) games can be leveraged as teaching moments in classrooms and public discussions. It is important that archaeologists recognize the ways the discipline is being portrayed in such public contexts, in order to maximize the potential benefit for archaeology and to prevent further misconceptions about the subject.     

Participatory Augering: A Methodology for Challenging Perceptions of Archaeology and Landscape Change

Public engagement is a significant feature of twenty-first-century archaeological practice. While more diverse audiences are connecting with the discipline in a multitude of ways, public perceptions of archaeology are still marred by stereotypes. Community excavations of ‘sites’ to discover ‘treasures’ which tell us about the ‘past’ overshadow other forms of public research output and hinder the potential of the discipline to contribute to contemporary society more widely. This paper proposes participatory augering as an active public engagement method that challenges assumptions about the nature of archaeological practice by focusing on interpretation at a landscape-scale. Through exploration of recent participatory augering research by the REFIT Project and Environmental Archaeologist Mike Allen, this paper demonstrates how the public can contribute to active archaeological research by exploring narratives of landscape change. Evaluation of the existing case studies reflects the potential of the approach to engage audiences with new archaeological methods and narratives which have the potential to transform perceptions of the discipline and, through knowledge exchange, drive community-led contributions to contemporary landscape management.     

Public Challenges and the Private Ways of State Archaeology: the Case of Greece

Abstract

Since its emergence Greek archaeology has been run exclusively by the state for political and economic reasons. The relevant legislation has always granted the Archaeological Service enough power to establish it as one of the most authoritative services in the public sector. I argue that the conditions under which archaeology is practised in Greece are increasingly changing. Agents operating at an international, national and local level are challenging the exclusive rights of the state in archaeological heritage management and demanding their views on protection are acknowledged. An overview of recently undertaken initiatives and research projects, as reported in the press and on websites, demonstrates an increasing demand for a more inclusive and public approach to the management of archaeological heritage. I also argue that Greek archaeologists are aware of the potential value of a public engagement with the discipline, but for different reasons — such as conservatism, bureaucracy and lack of means — do not act on it to the extent that they should. Finally, the paper confronts Greek state archaeology as an exclusive system of archaeological heritage management, and puts forward the importance of the local rather than the global public (i.e. tourism — where the emphasis of archaeological management in Greece currently lies).     

Alchemy or Science? Compromising Archaeology in the Deep Sea

In the torrid debate between archaeology and treasure hunting, compromise is often suggested as the pragmatic solution, especially for archaeology carried out either in deep water or beyond the constraints that commonly regulate such activities in territorial seas. Both the wisdom and the need for such compromise have even been advocated by some archaeologists, particularly in forums such as the internet and conferences. This paper argues that such a compromise is impossible, not in order to fuel confrontation but simply because of the nature of any academic discipline. We can define what archaeology is in terms of its aims, theories, methods and ethics, so combining it with an activity founded on opposing principles must transform it into something else. The way forward for archaeology in the deep sea does not lie in a contradictory realignment of archaeology’s goals but in collaborative research designed to mesh with emerging national and regional research and management plans.     

Archaeology Unfolding: Diversity and the Loss of Isolation

Summary.   British historical archaeology has seen new theoretical engagement in recent years. A diverse and distinctive body of theory has developed in this increasingly vibrant and international area of study, testing disciplinary boundaries, especially with history, social anthropology and material culture studies.
This paper takes stock of three distinct processes within the new historical archaeology: the birth of material history, the loss of antiquity, and the loss of isolation. The implications of these processes for the wider discipline are explored with reference to landscape archaeology, using the example of the Ironbridge Gorge, Shropshire. In a consideration of future directions, it is argued that historical archaeology provides particular insights to the need across the discipline for archaeology to respond with self-confidence to complexity by drawing out and celebrating diversity in theory and practice.     

中国艺术考古学的奠基

艺术考古学作为一门在考古学与艺术学的边缘地带产生的交叉学科,其形成和确立顺应了考古学与艺术学学科发展的必然趋势;同样,考古学与艺术学理论的发展也为艺术考古学的建立奠定了理论和实践上的坚实基础。     

Consuming the Past: Public Perceptions towards the Discipline of Archaeology in Zimbabwe

This paper discusses the public perceptions of archaeology and the information that archaeologists produce in Zimbabwe. There have been accusations that archaeologists in various parts of the world research for themselves. The products of archaeological research are often presented in academic jargon only accessible to those in the profession. Archaeological research in developing countries has been criticized for having limited involvement, if any, with the local communities in which it is conducted, and fails to address development issues that are important and much more relevant to the concerned societies. The paper discusses the extent to which these accusations are justified in Zimbabwe, focusing on the perceptions that local communities have on archaeology, archaeologists, archaeological remains, archaeological research, and institutions dealing with archaeological cultural heritage in that country. It also discusses why it seems difficult to put into practice some of the suggestions that have been made in the past on how to engage with the public. The paper argues that, although there have been efforts to change the situation, southern African archaeology in general and specifically its practice in Zimbabwe remains largely a preserve of the initiated. It concludes by recommending that writing on archaeological issues be accessible and that research issues should have social relevance. Awareness of local communities in research, outreach activities to schools, and the benefits of archaeological resources for local communities, are crucial means by which the value of the discipline can be appreciated by the public.     

Editorial

Abstract

The Fiestas de Astures y Romanos (The Festival of Astures and Romans) is a thriving historical re-enactment performed in the town of Astorga, in north-west Spain. The objective of our research has been to explore the complex interactions between politics, the public, and heritage management, and to evaluate their impact upon archaeology as a discipline. We draw on a participant ethnography carried out during the 2011 event. The concept of ‘Celtic-Barbarian Assemblage’ enables us to understand how different usages of the pre-Roman past condition identity politics and heritage policies at the local level. Finally, we reflect upon our findings and suggest potential lines of action to tackle what we perceive to be the increasing gap between public and academic archaeology in Spain, whose long-term consequences can be detrimental for the discipline as a whole.     

The current state of post-medieval archaeology in Flanders

Abstract

Post-medieval archaeology in Flanders (Belgium) is a comparatively young archaeological discipline, even in an historically important region with centres such as Antwerp, Bruges and Ghent. Originating in the slipstream of Flemish urban archaeology during the 1970s, the discipline has struggled for recognition ever since. As a result of more than 40 years of fieldwork, the material record of early-modern and modern history has changed drastically. Yet post-medieval archaeology has not reached its apogee. A framework with its own methods, teaching, research questions and theoretical approaches is still under construction. This paper aims not only at historiographical analysis of the field, but chiefly at defining a clear framework for positioning post-medieval archaeology in one of the most important regions in early-modern and modern Europe.     

考古发掘与考古发现

考古发现和考古学理论方法是考古学赖以进步的两条腿。考古发现不断刷新考古学家的视野并为考古学研究的深入提供新的资料,考古学理论方法使考古学的眼睛更加明亮,分析和思考更具有科学的力量。理论方法让考古学家对考古发现有更深入的认识,考古发现同时也推动综合研究和理论方法的进步。此外,考古发现往往会引起社会的关注,考古发现和考古学知识的普及可以为考古学的进步提供良好的社会环境,从而对考古学的发展产生强大的推动力量。考古学的持续发展要求考古学家必须正确处理考古发现、考古学自身理论方法的完善以及考古学与化遗产保护、公众知识状况和社会需求的关系。     

Virtual Representation: the Production of 3D Digital Artifacts

As new digital technologies now pervade the discipline of archaeology, the practice of creating digital 3D representations of artifacts has become widespread. The rapid growth and acceptance of these technologies into the discipline leaves us in a position where we must engage with how these tools fit our epistemologies. I propose that we look to a much older technology, photography, to inform the way that these digital artifacts are dealt with as we move into an increasingly digital field. In doing so, I will argue that the creation of a 3D digital artifact is a productive process, just as any form of media used to document and interpret the archaeological record. Through this production, the digital form is decoupled from the original physical artifact. The creation of a new representation of the artifact (in the form of a photograph or digital model) provides a new dimension to our interactions with these artifacts. The result of the digital movement in archaeology is a more interactive experience with artifacts, allowing researchers and the public alike digital access to archaeological collections. If the current trend continues, digital artifact modeling will become as indispensable to archaeology as traditional photography. It is therefore necessary for archaeologists to be aware of the subjectivities and biases that exist during this productive act as we move into a more integrated field of digital, representational technologies.     

Un-Disciplining Archaeology

We can think of a kind of archaeological colonialism in terms of the exportation of metropolitan theories and/or methodologies to peripheral countries/regions, or in the way metropolitan academic institutions/archaeologists conduct archaeology in peripheral countries/regions. But even if we manage to stop those kinds of colonial bonds, archaeology would remain being an imperial weapon. And, moreover, it can be said that colonialism is not dependant on the overseas provenance of archaeologies and/or theories. Beyond theoretical and methodological variability, it is archaeology itself what happens to recapitulate colonialist relationships; and this seems to happen even when archaeology is openly and deliberately oriented towards indigenous peoples?? empowerment, social justice, and peace. It seems that theoretical and methodological paradigms and political intentions operate at a surface level, while colonialism is equipped with stronger streams operating below the floor where archaeologists stand. What is there below our feet, making us move in one direction even when we walk in the other? Neither being the theories, neither the methods, nor the political intentions and nationality, what is that hidden force that govern the sense of archaeology in the contemporary post-colonial world? My argument is that the hidden force it is not hidden at all, but remains unseen because it is too obvious. The disciplinary framework of archaeology itself -that is, its basic subject matter and method??beyond the theoretical and methodological paradigms and the political orientation in which we aim to proceed, or our nationality or whatever, recapitulates coloniality. Without implying that theoretical and methodological debate within archaeological discipline is in vain, I dedicate this piece to write not within, but about the discipline. In short, this will include talking about disciplining, its recapitulation in post-disciplinary contexts, and the implied proposal of un-disciplining archaeology.     

Cultural Resource Management and American Archaeology

Cultural resource management (CRM) work accounts for most of the archaeology conducted in the United States. A diverse and somewhat fragmented field, CRM has nonetheless achieved a degree of institutional and organizational maturity. CRM archaeology has produced important contributions to archaeological methodology and has established and refined knowledge of regional cultural-historical sequences and settlement and subsistence patterns. The current florescence of historical archaeology is attributable to CRM. Yet the maintenance of high quality in CRM is a pervasive and enduring problem. Academic institutions need to reestablish alliances with the CRM community. The future viability of CRM archaeology depends on factors both internal and external to the discipline: regulatory and statutory “reform,” agency funding levels, looting and other destructive forces, and Native American and other public involvement.     

Places in Interaction: The National Archaeological Park Project as an Integrated Approach to Public Archaeology in China

The aim of this paper is to re-examine how concepts of public archaeology have been established and developed in varying social and political contexts in China, and how the recent national archaeological park project is structured as an important approach for improving public-archaeology relationships and promoting the public uses of archaeology. Since all archaeological activities in China are exclusively regulated by the state, all archaeological resources are administered for the benefit of the public. As such, concepts of public archaeology demonstrate the efforts of Chinese archaeologists to re-evaluate public-archaeology relationships and uses of archaeology through public engagement as well as archaeological communications with the public. The national archaeological park project was launched in 2006 to expand the practice of archaeology with the creation of archaeological communications, public space, and community-driven programmes. The project facilitates multiple perspectives on public archaeology practice through public education, community cohesion, re-creation of public space, and local economic development.     

The Dynamics of Inclusion at the Dynamics of Inclusion in Public Archaeology Workshop Public Event

This paper describes, analyzes and critiques a public archaeology event created to demonstrate the methodologies of a dialogic archaeology. Collaboratively produced by the Wenner-Gren-sponsored Dynamics of Inclusion in Public Archaeology Workshop and the African Burial Ground National Monument, this event drew a capacity crowd representing diverse communities from the New York City region for a program dedicated to exploring public archaeology as it is, and has been, practiced in New York City. The on the ground actions involved in designing the event are explored here for insight into how communities form in, around, and with archaeology, while participant observation data gathered during the event is used to demonstrate the facilitating role archaeology and archaeologists play when a community uses the past for needs in the present. Feedback from several of the audiences attending the event, including the Workshop participants and other archaeological colleagues who were present, provide reflection on the aims and goals of public archaeology.     

初论公众考古学

对20世纪60年代兴起于西方的公众考古学的基本理论作一些简单的介绍,并对如何将兴起于西方的公众考古学与中国的社会现实结合起来,如何建立起中国自己的公众考古学作一些探索和思考。     

Framing the past: situating the archaeological in photographs

Archaeology continually reproduces its own images. Speaking archaeology’s visual language is one way we prove membership in the discipline. Many aspects of this visual language have become so naturalized within archaeological representation as to be almost unquestionable: the cleaning of the site, the use of scale, and particular framings and perspectives. How, then, is the production of particular photographic images of archaeology related to the practice of archaeology? Does archaeology look a certain way (in photographs) or are archaeologists reproducing an archaeology according to the way it is thought it should look? Using examples of early photographs from Latin American archaeological expeditions, this article investigates not only photography as an applied technology for scientific recording, but also its power to situate archaeological knowledge. Drawing on recent reflective and critical developments in both the history of archaeology and visual anthropology, it uses five focal points – trace, objectivity and authenticity, sight/site, still lifes, and still lives – to argue that early-twentieth-century archaeological photographs of Latin America participated in the generation of an ‘authentic’ past rather than simply paid testament to it.     

Bridging the Gap: Classification,Theory and Practice in Public Archaeology

Models and classifications have been a part of thinking about public archaeology since at least the early 2000s, but how are these ideas translated into practice? By looking into the development of such classifications and models and by examining archaeologists’ attitudes to an archaeological education outreach project for schoolchildren in Oslo, Norway, this paper looks at the relationship between classification, theory, and practice in public archaeology.