Who's indigenous? Whose archaeology?

Abstract

The International Labour Organisation, the United Nations and various indigenous Organisations have raised and/or objected to diverse criteria through which indigenous groups have been defined and the rights that should be accorded to them. This paper discusses the implications of these issues in relation to archaeological research and heritage management and uses this to position the other papers in this volume. Specific themes that are addressed include: the impact of colonialism and nation-forming on indigenous groups; the continuing influence of 19th and early 20th century social evolutionary concepts on the representation of indigenous groups and the role of archival material from this period today; the contrasting processes of cultural continuity and assimilation within ‘dominant’ societies in which indigenous communities have participated, and the effects that this has had on more recent claims over land rights; the cultural differences that surround the concepts of individual and community ownership, particularly in relation to copyright; the role of academia, museums and the media in the representation of indigenous people in the past and the present.     

Where is Lowland Maya archaeology headed?

This article isolates three important trends in Lowland Maya archaeology during the last decade: (1) increased use of the conjunctive approach, with renewed appreciation of context and provenience; (2) waning use of the label unique to describe the Maya; and (3) an effort to use the Lowland Maya as a case study in social evolution.     

Marxism in archaeology: Real or spurious?

Spriggs, Matthew, ed. Marxist Perspectives in Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984. viii + 158 pp. including photographs, individual bibliographies, index. $39.50 cloth.

Miller, Daniel, and Christopher Tilley, eds. Ideology, Power and Prehistory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984. viii + 157 pp. including photographs, individual bibiographies, index. $39.50 cloth.     

An International Scottish Historical Archaeology?

This paper serves as an introduction to the special edition of the International Journal of Historical Archaeology on the theme of Scottish historical archaeology in its international context. The introduction aims to provide a context for the individual papers in the collection by briefly outlining some of the main characteristics of Scottish historical archaeology—as it has developed in the past, as it is at present and as it might develop in the future. The paper also discusses the ambiguous relationship between Scottish historical archaeology and wider historical archaeology.     

Historical Archaeology in Africa: An Appropriate Concept?

The term ‘ historical archaeology’ originated in the United States and was subsequently adopted in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa, all places subjected to European colonization during the last few centuries. The idea of historical archaeology has had relatively little application in Europe, birthplace of the antithetical idea of prehistory. In Africa, other than at the southern tip of the continent, the practice of what is called historical archaeology has developed only recently and the relevance of the concept in Africa might be questioned. There are chronological problems in its application: not only are the interfaces between preliterate and literate societies spread over thousands of years in different areas but they can at times be regressive. The matter is further complicated if the term historical archaeology is used for societies whose history is oral not written. However, there is an ambiguity in this concept that also has methodological and other connotations. In these respects the idea of historical archaeology does perhaps have a place in Africa as a whole, but it represents a compartmentalization of our discipline still inadequately defined.     

Postcolonial criticism in one world archaeology: Where is North Africa's place?

áfrica del Norte hace tiempo ha sido considerada una extensión de Europa del sur. Cuando fue claro que los arqueólogos de áfrica del Norte siguieron la dinámica no-europea, ellos fueron excluidos de los actuales debates y recientes rese?as. Este trabajo ofrece una crítica postcolonial derivada de muchos a?os de trabajo en el campo en dos países árabes africanos: Libia y Sudan. Yo comienzo analizando el papel de tema/objeto del arqueólogo, que conlleva hacia una vista engendrada del presente. Después, yo discuto la perspectiva del arqueólogo sobre el desarrollo económico y explotación de recursos. Finalmente, yo sugiero reposicionar al áfrica del Norte en el actual debate arqueológico, igual que en relación a los actuales eventos políticos y sociales.

---

Résumé L'Afrique du Nord a longtemps été considérée comme une extension de l'Europe du Sud. Quand il est devenu évident que les archéologues nord africains suivaient une dynamique non-européenne, ceux-ci ont été exclus des débats courants et des révisions. Ce papier offre une critique postcoloniale consécutive à de nombreuses années de travaux passées sur le terrain dans deux pays arabes d'Afrique du Nord: la Libye et le Soudan. Je commence par déconstruire les r?les sujet/objet de l'archéologue, qui mènent à une vision orientée du passé. Puis, j' examine la perspective des archéologues quant au développement économique et l'exploitation des ressources. Enfin, je suggère de replacer l'Afrique du Nord dans le débat archéologique courant, et de la mettre en relation avec les évènements sociaux et politiques en cours.

     

Is obsidian sourcing about geochemistry or archaeology? A reply to Speakman and Shackley

The response from Speakman and Shackley to my paper highlights a number of important issues currently facing archaeological sourcing research. Many of these issues, however, have little to do with HHpXRF itself and more to do with an artificial crisis triggered by specialists' concerns about a hitherto restricted technique becoming available to a wider community. Despite their mantra of “validity and reliability,” Speakman and Shackley erroneously equate these two concepts with the accuracy of an instrument's measurements. Additionally, they mischaracterise a self-contained test, conducted with specific parameters (i.e., “off-the-shelf” operation), as an endeavour to facilitate or endorse poor-quality data. Paradoxically, their disparagement of experimental internal consistency as “silliness” is incongruous with their own data. Furthermore, a discussion focused on handheld instruments is obfuscated by their inclusion of desktop instruments that are “portable” only in the sense of luggable to an electrical outlet in a laboratory context. Most troubling is that they envision themselves as the arbiters of science vs. “playing scientist.” Contrary to their claims, HHpXRF proliferation will improve reproducibility and archaeological results.     

Amazonian archaeology; searching for paradise? A review of recent literature and fieldwork

Recent research in Amazonia has diverged from the orthodoxy of the last 40 years and provoked a wide-ranging debate over the nature of human ecology and adaptation in this vast region. New evidence stresses both the abundance of the Amazonian environment and the complexity of long-term human adaptation. New frameworks modeling these adaptive processes and reconstructing sociocultural complexity involve the use of both historical and ethnographic data.     

Review article: What’s new in early medieval burial archaeology?

Books reviewed in this article:
John Hines, Karen Høilund Nielsen and Frank Siegmund (eds), The Pace of Change. Studies in Early–Medieval Chronology.
Catherine E. Karkov, Kelley M. Wickham–Crowley and Bailey K. Young (eds), Spaces of the Living and the Dead: An Archaeological Dialogue.
Sam Lucy, The Early Anglo–Saxon Cemeteries of East Yorkshire. An Analysis and Reinterpretation.
Elizabeth O'Brien, Post–Roman Britain to Anglo–Saxon England: Burial Practices Reviewed.
Nick Stoodley, The Spindle and the Spear. A Critical Enquiry into the Construction and Meaning of Gender in the Early Anglo–Saxon Burial Rite.     

Discriminant function analyses in archaeology: are classification rates too good to be true?

The use of discriminant function analyses (DFA) in archaeological and related research is on the increase, however many of the assumptions of this method receive a mixed treatment in the literature. Statisticians frequently use complex statistical models to investigate analytical parameters, but such idealised datasets may be hard to relate to “real-life” examples and the literature difficult to assess. Using two faunal datasets that are more typical of archaeological and related research, one comprised of size-corrected linear measurements of bovid humeri and another of 3D geometric morphometric (GMM) shape data of African monkey skulls, and two simulated datasets, we illustrate some of the most important but often ignored issues of DFA. We specifically show why it is paramount to address “over-fitting” by cross-validation when applying this method and how the probability of correctly classifying cases by chance can be properly and explicitly taken into account.     

Whose world and whose archaeology? The colonial present and the return of the political

El autor identifica un proyecto colonial crecientemente agresivo funcionando en Irak y Afganistán y considera que el fallo catastrófico de la comunidad arqueológica occidental de responder apropiadamente a las condiciones en ambas naciones. La manera de énfasis sobre arqueología está contribuyendo activamente no solamente a la legitimidad de una guerra ilegal y sin ética, sino también a la reproducción del régimen de poder y verdad que la guerra busca establecer. Se llama al WAC a “descentralizar” al mundo como es visto por los centros metropolitanos Occidentales, dejando a la “periferia” tomar la iniciativa, poner la agenda, y promover las medidas arqueológicas alternativas.

---

Résumé L'auteur identifie un projet colonialiste de plus en plus agressif en Irak et en Afghanistan, et considère léchec catastrophique de la communauté des archéologues occidentaux à répondre de fa?on approprée aux conditions dans chacune de ces deux nations. Insister sur l'archéologie contribue activement, non seulement à légitimer une guerre illégale et immorale, mais aussi à reproduire le régime de force et de vérité que la guerre cherche à établir. Il en appelle au WAC pour'dé-centrer'la vision du monde des centres métropolitains occidentaux, afin de permettre à la ‘périphérie’ de prendre l'initiative, de mettre en place un agenda, et de préconiser des épistémologies archéologiques alternatives.