PFormat: Paper presentations with discussion
Convenors:
Craig Shapiro, The Ohio State University, USA, shapiro.285@buckeyemail.osu.edu
Jonathan Soon Lim, Center for Advanced Spatial Technologies (CAST), University of Arkansas, USA, jonlim@uark.edu
Miranda Lowe, Natural History Museum, London, UK, m.lowe@nhm.ac.uk
A decolonial approach to archaeology reflects on the power archaeologists maintain over historical epistemology, the damage Western archaeologists have caused to indigenous and marginalised communities, and how the continued neglect of Indigenous agency perpetuates injustice. Recognising archaeology as inherently destructive and extractive, and that this methodology was inherited from the colonial era, what is our responsibility to compensate for the archaeologists whom we have inherited the discipline from? How may we navigate forming such an ethical approach which centres the communities being studied? Is equitable knowledge co-creation and exchange feasible, and how might it be achieved? For archaeologists with European ancestry working in the Global South, especially, what does it mean to be an ally to the communities you work with? For archaeologists coming from underrepresented backgrounds in the field, what is the allyship you have seen or still need to see, and how does it manifest itself in decolonial approaches to archaeological methodologies? This proposed session is intended to be more optimistic than daunting, as we have the opportunity to challenge ourselves to consider what is most ethical and inclusive, rather than what is simply possible.
Papers:
Benchmarking as Bias: Expertise, Consultancy Culture, and Technocratic Heritage Making in the Arabian Peninsula
Paul Christians, Cultural Heritage Research Senior Manager, Royal Commission for AlUla
In the Arabian Peninsula, large-scale heritage productions are typically operationalised via an entrenched consultancy culture indebted to foreign expertise and embedded in Gulf Cooperation Council countries’ global political and economic relations. Rhetorics of ‘community’ development, capacity building, institutional partnership, and cultural diplomacy increasingly rationalise this system of cultural production, framed as equitable between nation states. Yet much of the opportunities, results, and value which flow from it skew toward North Atlantic institutions and international experts at the expense of national and local institutions and professionals, purportedly the recipients of ‘sustainable’ development. Reflecting on this widespread system of practice, this paper uses the revitalised anthropological perspective of studying up and 15 years of regional engagement to reexamine how the everyday work of cultural experts continues to produce extractive effects at odds with ethical norms for equity and inclusion. Anthropological attention to processes of technocratic heritage making reinforces benchmarking as a key moment influencing the quality of outcomes and impact as well as their relevance to the societies to which they aim to contribute. Examining critical junctures in archaeological project development provides necessary critique, but also reinforces an agentive perspective necessary to identify and act on loci with potential for transformative change.
Considering Our Future Heritage: Repatriation, Allyship, and Navigating International Legal Frameworks
Craig Shapiro, The Ohio State University, USA
Audrey Andrews: University of Nevada, Reno, USA
Archaeology is fraught with the colonial legacy of perpetuating a status quo of inadequate cultural stewardship in the Global South. To combat the legacy of colonial oppression, archaeologists must engage in work that is pointedly Indigenised and decolonial. As archaeologists, we must support cultural stewardship institutions and Indigenous representation within them. We must be reflexive, centre Indigenous representation, and engage in allyship through facilitating the repatriation of Indigenous ancestors and cultural items. Archaeological allyship requires using our collective access to colonial museums, connections within major research institutions, and public/private partnerships to create ethical frameworks that centre culturally affiliated communities. This includes our familiarization with legislation like the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and Building Our Loss and Damage to advance Indigenous control of Indigenous heritage. We intend to engage the wider discipline in critical thought and consider this responsibility moving forward.
Nalaquq/It is Found: Protecting Heritage and Co-Creating Knowledge With Technology in Southwest Alaska
Jonathan Lim, Centre for Advanced Spatial Technologies, University of Arkansas, USA
Alaska’s Yukon Kuskokwim Delta is the homeland of the Yup’ik people. To survive in this often climatically-harsh environment, pre-contact Yupiit established a set of survival rules and strategies known collectively as Yuuyaraq (trans. ‘The Way We Genuinely Live’), which is still practiced to this day by descendent communities. One such community is Quinhagak, on the Bering Sea. In the face of a rapidly warming climate, they are proactively taking steps to ensure their community continues to survive and thrive, just as their ancestors did at the famed archaeological site of Nunalleq, an ancestral village occupied during the Little Ice Age. In 2021, Quinhagak worked closely with outside researchers to found a for-profit spatial technology company in the village called Nalaquq (trans. “it is found”) LLC, with the goal of carrying out research to protect Yup’ik heritage landscapes, and mitigate the effects of climate change on the village and neighbouring communities.
Through the lens of a proposed project between Nalaquq and the University of Arkansas to model waterway changes and train a scientifically proficient local workforce, the author will discuss the many challenges and incredible benefits of striving towards equitable knowledge co-creation with Indigenous communities like Quinhagak.
The Bones are Speaking
Annelize Kotze, Curator of Culture and Identity, Iziko Museums of South Africa
Museums can influence the present by presenting new narratives, proactively dealing with colonial legacies in order for narratives to be transformed and for fundamental change to take place. Museums need to be bold enough to act accordingly and stay firm in their resolve to right the wrongs of the past by being truthful.
Communities need to know where their people are and justice needs to be restored through having the Sacred Ancestral Remains finally interred and the souls of those who’s ancestral remains continue to be in museums, finally rest in peace and not in pieces.
This paper will focus on the sacred ancestral remains of the South African Indigenous Khoe and San peoples who are currently housed in the Iziko Museums of South Africa, drawing on the field of archaeology, and showing how this extractive science can be used today to reconcile, restore, and bring healing to affected communities.
What is World Archaeology? From World Archaeology to Doing Archaeology with the World
Michael Leadbetter, University of Oxford, UK; University of Sydney, Australia
The history of World Archaeology is fascinating. Often global archaeology is characterised as a totalising enterprise, seeking to extend the colonial project. However, there is another story behind the origins of World Archaeology, this paper explores the activist, anti-colonial, anti-racist, and anti-fascist origins of ‘World Archaeology’. I explore the historical and historiographical origins of the World Archaeology Congress, and work towards developing this further as a method for ‘Doing Archaeology with the World’. I will explore this through a set of key case studies from the Asia-Pacific and around the world. Ultimately, the goal of World Archaeology is not merely to interpret the world, it is to change it!