Format: Paper presentations (individual or collective presentations) with discussion
Convenors:
Wilhelm Londono Diaz, University of Magdalena, Colombia, wlondono@unimagdalena.edu.co
Miguel Aguilar, Independent Researcher, Perú
This session is interested in understanding how archaeology constructs and assigns a sense of heritage that prevails over others to produce a heritage hierarchy. The war against the Palestinian people, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the wars in Africa, and the structural violence in Latin America—that is, a state of permanent global war—erases heritage, destroys archaeological and ethnographic landscapes, generates uniformed territories, while establishing that the heritage is what is exhibited in museums in New York, London, Berlin, and other metropolitan cities. In this sense, the session seeks research through which we can understand how these strategies of producing a hierarchy of heritage are made and how local heritages are appropriated as objects of study by metropolitan research centres. We encourage non-metropolitan researchers to investigate how heritage is thought of as a scientific object that exists beyond its current connections with memories, societies, and cultures.
Papers:
The Revitalisation of Community Archaeology and Indigenous Heritage Perspectives in Taiwan: Case Studies of the Development of Designated National Archaeological Sites
Liou Bing-Wun, Hokkaido University, Japan
Chung-chun Wang, Research Assistant, National Museum of Prehistory, Taiwan
Maa-ling Chen, Professor, Dept of Anthropology, National Taiwan University, Taiwan
The development of archaeology in Taiwan began in 1896 when a Japanese scholar discovered the first stone tool, marking the start of Japanese rule over both the Han Chinese and Indigenous populations. Over time, as Taiwan underwent political, economic, and urban transformations, Indigenous communities experienced significant cultural shifts and migration, a process that continues today.
Of Taiwan’s 6,127 designated cultural heritages, only 237 (3.86%) are related to Indigenous peoples. Although it is difficult to attribute specific archaeological sites to particular Indigenous groups, scholars agree these sites are remnants of Taiwan’s Austronesian-speaking ancestors. However, only nine archaeological sites are directly linked to Indigenous groups in cultural heritage interpretations. Due to colonial history and political structures, Han cultural heritage dominates Taiwan’s designated cultural assets. Even within archaeological sites most associated with Indigenous cultures, their heritage remains marginalised.
This paper examines the role of Indigenous communities in the designation of national archaeological sites, with a focus on their growing influence, particularly after the seventh site was designated in 2008.
Power, Politics, and Preservation: Abbé Breuil’s Archaeological Legacy and Archival Tangles
Kgolagano Vena, University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa
Archives are far from being neutral repositories of information. They are contested spaces that reflect and reinforce power structures. The Breuil collection, compiled by the French prehistorian Abbé Henri Breuil during the mid 1940s under the patronage of Jan Smuts’ government, serves as both a scientific and political artefact. It reveals the intersection of archaeology, colonial authority, and heritage management. Beyond its scientific value, the collection also reflects the colonial state’s strategic use of archaeology to reinforce power structures, while simultaneously engaging in western structures of knowledge production and differentiation. The current Breuil Collection in the RARI archive faces substantial challenges in preservation and accessibility. This paper explores how the archival and preservation challenges of the Breuil Collection are deeply intertwined with historical power dynamics, arguing that archiving is not merely a technical pursuit but a political act within implications on how the heritage is/was perceived and managed. Addressing these challenges necessitates critical reflection on around the politics of archiving and the accessibility to historical collection.
Rethinking the ‘Archive’ in Archaeology: Reorganising and Restructuring Memory and Identity
Dr Shweta Sinha Deshpande, Symbiosis School for Liberal Arts, Symbiosis International (Deemed University)
The archive, archaeology and memory intersect as contested yet democratic concepts, simultaneously memorised, interpreted, and innovated to form new and old identities. Both history and archaeology are inherently concerned with the memory of a lived past in the present. Archives, typical to history as repositories of primary source documents, are concerned with preserving evidence to depict and define this past. This consciousness of a preserved heritage is integral to both the ‘archaeological site’ and the ‘archaeological methodology’. Both are forebearers of a memory of lived realities and experiences and, therefore are positioned as an archive. The archaeological process influences the construction of the archaeological archives and the context, hence, archives are not fixed in time but evolve. It is a place where knowledge is both produced and transformed in the ‘structuring’ of memory and performance of heritage for a community.
The archive thus is both the ‘episteme’, or the foundation of knowledge, and the ‘techne’ or the tool, for structuring identities within the contemporary documentation of a nation’s colonial, post-colonial or the multitudes of sub-nationalist pasts. The paper will explore the hundred years of the Harappan Civilisation’s archaeological and archival democratisation, legitimisation and revelation of ‘a forgotten age’.
Decolonising Archaeology in Northern Colombia: A Look at Local Struggles for Memory
Wilhelm Londoño Díaz, University of Magdalena, Colombia
In 1922, the Field Museum mission from Chicago arrived off the coast of the city of Santa Marta with the intention of recording archaeological sites. The mission’s aim was to document archaeological villages or large monuments that would contribute to the collections of the emerging and powerful cities of the northeastern United States. In this way, an entire archaeological nomination was created for the material culture of this part of the world, establishing a hierarchy of heritage. This paper aims to show how these nominations are still in force, forming a field of archaeological heritage that overlaps with the local meanings that communities attach to this material culture. In this sense, local communities are struggling against archaeological nominations as part of a decolonisation of the past and memory.
Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Jerarquización de Bienes Arqueológicos. Notas a Propósito del Conflicto Armado Colombiano FARC-EP y Estado
International Humanitarian Law and the Prioritization of Archaeological Assets. Notes on the Colombian Armed Conflict between the FARC-EP and the State
Christian Hurtado Suarez, Universidad Nacional de Colombia; Integrante grupo de Investigación Antropología e Historia de la Antropología en América Latina (UNAL); Integrante Colaboratorio Arqueología y Conflicto Armado (AyCA)
La Convención para la Protección de los Bienes Culturales en caso de Conflicto Armado y sus dos protocolos definen las medidas en casos de conflicto armado para evitar la destrucción, saqueo y pérdida de BC. Ésta define como Bien Cultural a los yacimientos arqueológicos y edificios que los contengan. La Convención hace parte del Derecho Internacional Humanitario, conjunto de disposiciones que regulan confrontaciones militares con un componente político.
La ponencia propone que, de facto, la Convención jerarquiza los BC. Su consecuencia es la aplicación de desiguales calidades de protección según se trate de bienes ‘generales’, ‘de protección especial’ y ‘de protección reforzada’. Esta jerarquización es problemática ante sitios arqueológicos no visibilizados o no monumentales. Demuestro a partir del caso Colombiano cómo opera esta jerarquización y sus consecuencias.
Abordo el caso del Museo Comunitario La Cristalina, una experiencia de apropiación del patrimonio arqueológico por comunidades campesinas, indígenas, autoridades locales y FARC-EP. El Museo nace en medio del conflicto armado y fue afectado por un allanamiento del Ejército y posterior uso militar en 2005. Ante el DIH el Museo debía ser protegido, pero sus afectaciones quedan en el limbo jurídico de las categorías de bienes culturales, anulando sus efectos protectores.
The Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict and its two protocols define measures in cases of armed conflict to prevent the destruction, looting, and loss of cultural heritage. It defines archaeological sites and buildings containing them as cultural heritage. The Convention is part of International Humanitarian Law, a set of provisions that regulate military confrontations with a political component.
The paper proposes that, de facto, the Convention prioritises cultural heritage. This results in the application of unequal protection levels depending on whether the property is ‘general’, ‘specially protected’, or ‘enhanced protected’. This hierarchiaation is problematic in the case of hidden or non-monumental archaeological sites. Using the Colombian case, I demonstrate how this hierarchisation operates and its consequences.
I address the case of the La Cristalina Community Museum, an experience of appropriation of archaeological heritage by peasant and indigenous communities, local authorities, and the FARC-EP. The Museum was founded in the midst of the armed conflict and was affected by an army raid and subsequent military use in 2005. Under IHL, the Museum should have been protected, but its effects remain in the legal limbo of the categories of cultural property, nullifying its protective effects.
Desigualdades Patrimoniales y Apropiación Local: Un Estudio Sobre Arqueología e Identidad en Supe Puerto y Paramonga, Perú
Heritage Inequalities and Local Appropriation: A Study of Archaeology and Identity in Supe Puerto and Paramonga, Peru
Wilmer Eduardo Postigo Echaiz and Rebeca Mercedes Silvia Timoteo Belling, Universidad Nacional de San Marco
Esta ponencia presenta los resultados de una investigación que analiza cómo las intervenciones arqueológicas influyen en la construcción de la identidad local de estudiantes del nivel secundario en dos distritos de la costa norcentral peruana: Supe Puerto y Paramonga. El estudio parte de una mirada crítica a los enfoques predominantes en la gestión del patrimonio arqueológico, donde las intervenciones suelen estar orientadas principalmente a la producción académica y especializada, lo que limita su impacto en las dinámicas sociales e identitarias de las comunidades locales. Esta perspectiva centrada en la investigación, si bien valiosa, no logra por sí sola generar apropiación significativa del patrimonio por parte de la población. En contraste, se observa que cuando existe una política pública para el patrimonio que articula la investigación con la gestión cultural, la educación y la participación comunitaria —como en el caso del sitio Áspero, gestionado por la Zona Arqueológica Caral—se produce una conexión efectiva entre los saberes arqueológicos y los actores locales.
This paper presents the results of a research project that analyses how archaeological interventions influence the construction of local identity among secondary school students in two districts on Peru’s north-central coast: Supe Puerto and Paramonga. The study begins with a critical look at the prevailing approaches to archaeological heritage management, where interventions tend to focus primarily on academic and specialised production, limiting their impact on the social and identity dynamics of local communities. This research-centred perspective, while valuable, fails to generate significant ownership of heritage by the population. In contrast, it is observed that when a public heritage policy exists that articulates research with cultural management, education, and community participation—as in the case of the Áspero site, managed by the Caral Archaeological Zone—an effective connection is established between archaeological knowledge and local stakeholders.
Decolonising Islamic Narratives in Indonesian Museums: A Critical Analysis of the Trowulan and Sonobudoyo Museums
Muhammad Faizurrahman and Tori Nuariza Sutanto, Sultanate Institute
Archaeological and museum narratives have long been shaped by colonial frameworks, often marginalising or misrepresenting non-Western histories and cultures. In Indonesia, the representation of Islamic history in museums, such as the Trowulan Museum in Mojokerto and the Sonobudoyo Museum in Yogyakarta, reflects these colonial legacies. Historically, Islam has been portrayed as an external force, disconnected from the region’s broader socio-political and economic developments. This fragmented view of Islamic culture has created a hierarchical understanding of heritage, wherein Islam is relegated to a peripheral role in the historical narratives of the Nusantara. This paper seeks to dismantle this hierarchy by critically examining the curatorial processes, artifact displays, and exhibition narratives in these two museums, using a decolonial lens. It challenges the traditional narrative that treats Islam as an ancillary component of Javanese history and instead advocates for the recognition of Islam as an integral and foundational element of the region’s cultural and historical formation. Through this analysis, the paper calls for a shift in museum practices that centres local and indigenous voices, promoting a more inclusive and equitable representation of Islamic heritage. By decolonizing Islamic narratives in Indonesian museums, this research contributes to a broader movement in archaeology and heritage studies.
Decolonising Archaeological Imagination: Graeco-Roman Egypt as Epistemological Intervention
Olga Nikonenko, University College London, UK
This research interrogates the artificial North-South binary in archaeological practice through the lens of Graeco-Roman Egypt, an archaeological context that reveals the power dynamics shaping knowledge production. Situated at the intersection of multiple cultural worlds, Graeco-Roman Egypt essentially highlights contradictions and epistemological violence in global scholarship. While classical antiquity is marketed as “universal” heritage, modern Greeks and Italians—the geographic descendants of these civilisations—have been excluded from shaping mainstream academic narratives. Instead, Northern European and American institutions have monopolised funding, publication platforms, and citation networks, perpetuating what Hamilakis (2013) calls a “double colonisation” that transcends simplistic Global North-South categorisations. Graeco-Roman Egypt is a liminal archaeological space, neither fully classical nor explicitly pharaonic. It is a historical terra incognita that incorporates elements from both Eastern and Western traditions but remains marginalised in global scholarship. As a region defined by its status as a colonised territory, a classical heartland, and a modern nation, it challenges rigid disciplinary boundaries and exposes the biases of traditional archaeological epistemologies. By employing postcolonial and feminist theoretical frameworks, this study critiques the limited perspectives that dominate research on Graeco-Roman Egypt and reveals how “universal” heritage reinforces academic hierarchies and contributes to the broader goal of dismantling structural inequalities.