Convened By
\nSven Ouzman (USA), Gustavo Martinez (Argentina) and Robin Torrence (Australia)<\/p>\n
Theme Details
\nContact Details<\/p>\n
Sven Ouzman,
\nAnthropology Department, 232 Kroeber Hall, University of California at Berkeley, CA 94720-3710, USA.
\nE-mail: ouzman@uclink.berkeley.edu<\/p>\n
Gustavo Martinez
\nCONICET-INCUAPA-FASCO-UNICEN, Departamento de Arqueolog\u00eda, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales de Olavarr\u00eda.UNICEN, Del Valle 5737 (7400). Olavarr\u00eda, Provincia de Buenos Aires-Argentina
\nE-mail: gmartine@soc.unicen.edu.ar<\/p>\n
Robin Torrence
\nAnthropology, Australian Museum, 6 College Street, Sydney, NSW 2010, Australia.
\nE-mail: robint@austmus.gov.au
\nThe theme looks at the nature of both archaeological practice and empirical results. First, archaeologists are concerned that the diversity of inquiry into human culture might be masked by a few dominant voices. Training, trans-national knowledge encounters, colonial legacies, the increasingly public face of the social sciences and the participation of non-social scientists in this knowledge process are all issues that we hope will be constructively debated by sessions in this theme. The theme is intended to be a forum for discussion of new research results, but we also expect that a comparative approach across the southern hemisphere will lead to new ideas relevant to scholars working in other areas of the world. The theme\u2019s aims are thus:<\/p>\n
\u2022 To examine the dynamics of how archaeological knowledge is exchanged. For example, must Africanists communicate with each other via Cambridge University Press?
\n\u2022 To exchange information and the nature of knowledge on the archaeology of the southern hemisphere.
\n\u2022 To blend archaeological and \u2018indigenous voice\u2019 concerns in post-colonial contexts.<\/p>\n
Organized By
\nFiona Hook (Australia) and Bruce Veitch (Australia)<\/p>\n
Session Details
\nStone arrangements have remained a relatively understudied archaeological feature in the Southern Hemisphere. They occur in a very wide range of social settings and time periods. Until recently the literature on the archaeology of stone arrangements in this region has rarely gone beyond the descriptive. New studies of stone arrangements in the Southern Hemisphere include attempts to understand these features in terms of cultural landscapes defined in the broadest sense, comparisons with regional rock art studies, and the use of chronometric techniques such as optically stimulated luminescence to date their construction. This session is designed to explore the function and meanings of stone arrangements in the past and the present in the South and discuss how such studies differ from and inform those conducted in the North.<\/p>\n
Presentations
\nCreated, Transported, Remembered And Forgotten: Pacific Perspectives On Cultural Landscapes
\nRobin Torrence and Jim Specht (Australian Museum, Sydney, Australia) Dating of the Gurdadaguji Stone Arrangements in the Pilbara Region of Western Australia
\nBruce Veitch and Fiona Hook (Archae-aus Pty Ltd, Perth, Australia)
\nStone Arrangements In The Australian Blue Mountains
\nMatthew Kelleher (Consultant, Sydney, Australia) Stone Arrangements near Tibooburra, New South Wales
\nJenny Tulloch (Consultant, Sydney, Australia)
\nDesert-kites Of The Hemma Plateau (Hassake, Syria)
\nPaul-Louis van Berg (Universit\u00e9 Libre de Bruxelles, Facult\u00e9 de Philosophie et Lettres, Avenue F. D. Roosevelt, Bruxelles) Gifts To Gods \u00b4 Gifts To Men: Northern Massim Megaliths in the Context of Pacific History and Sociality
\nFred Damon (Department of Anthropology, University of Virginia) and Simon Bickley (IT and Heritage Project Manager, Auckland, NZ)<\/p>\n
Session Time
\nDay Wednesday Date 25th June
\nTime 9-11AM Room McMahon 200<\/p>\n
Organized By
\nAlejandro Haber (Argentina) and Alejandra Korstanje (Argentina)<\/p>\n
Session Details
\nOrganizers:
\nAlejandro Haber
\nUniversidad Nacional de Catamarca
\nConsejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cient\u00edficas y T\u00e9cnicas
\nArgentina
\nafhaber@ciudad.com.ar<\/p>\n
Alejandra Korstanje
\nInstituto de Arqueolog\u00eda y Museo
\nUniversidad Nacional de Tucum\u00e1n
\nArgentina
\nalek@unt.edu.ar<\/p>\n
In social theory, peasants are considered to be important actors in economic, social and political terms. This is not always the case in archaeology; more akin to frame their studies under subsistence and\/or technology and\/or culture oriented categories (farmers, husbandry, agriculture, Neolithic\/Formative, etc.). Even on those terms, it is frequently the case that productive activities of major contribution -other than agriculture- become regularly obscured. This session intends to gather and discuss diverse perspectives on the archaeology of peasants, from as diverse historical, social, geographical and cultural contexts as possible. Past peasant societies often resist the application of a whole set of concepts of supposedly universal validity, including domestication, complexity, intensification, etc. Is this lack a result of the application of northern anthropological\/archaeological theories and methodologies? If not, why the reduction to those perspectives in southern archaeologies? Focusing on the small scale rural social groups that usually retain \u2013at least partially- the control of their own reproduction within the group unit, can an exploration of such reluctant cases help to think alternative ideas? For example, can a perspective from the peasants themselves, as an alternative to a perspective on peasants from the state, be expanded? We get here through the present limitations of our constructions about the past, and we conjecture if the social and political resonances of the category ‘peasants’ in present third world countries are in some ways obscuring the study of peasants in pre-colonial contexts. Are there any political implications of such a theoretical re-framing for third-world archaeologies? Are there any such implications for peasants, as poor people in non industrial settings of poor countries? From third world’s archeological perspectives -that reserves only a part of the decisions for their academic production, reproduction and change- it becomes relevant to ask if the ongoing northern debate is useful for an understanding of past peasants. Is there any kind of relative archaeological ‘invisibility’ of peasants or is it in some ways related to the relative ‘invisibility’ of southern archaeologies in the theoretical and methodological debates? Or is it connected to the relative poverty of both peasants and third world conditions of academic knowledge of their past? In synthesis, not only the discussion on peasant archaeologies is welcome, but also how do the diverse cultural and social perceptions of society, time, nature, power and craft, permeate into theoretical and methodological categories used in the archaeology of peasants. Possible and partially explored dimensions of the problem are, for example: The role of gathering and hunting activities in peasants economies and its relation with herding, seeding and exchanging performances. Also, familiar-level interaction networks; relationships to land, water, and other resources. Modes of articulation, domination, resistance, struggle, or simple low profile surviving strategies, between peasants and broader social structures (chiefdoms, states, global economies). Other issues to be explored are everyday livelihoods and particular practices that enhance the reproduction of the group or, on the contrary, its failure; accepted and rejected, representations of peasant groups as selves or as others; relationships between peasants and issues of cultural heritage, and the roles of peasants in social and political changes. Also, ethnographically and document-based studies on peasants are welcome, as theoretical, methodological and historical perspectives of the archaeology of peasants.
\nPresentations
\nAncient Peasant Labor In The Andes
\nAlejandra Korstanje (Instituto de Arqueolog\u00eda y Museo, Universidad Nacional de Tucum\u00e1n, Argentina) Conectando Espacios Construidos Y Utilizados En Sociedades Campesinas, A Partir De La Antigua Tecnologia Litica (En Amaicha Del Valle, Argentina)
\nCarolina Somonte (Instituto de Arqueolog\u00eda y Museo,Universidad Nacional de Tucum\u00e1n, Argentina)
\nThe Denial Of Peasant Agency
\nAlejandro F. Haber (Universidad Nacional de Catamarca, Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cient\u00edficas y T\u00e9cnicas, Argentina) Archaeology of Shifting Cultivation : the Case of Rajmahal Hills
\nAjay Pratap
\nCrossing Cultural Borders In The Saharo-Sahelian Zone
\nElena A.A. Garcea (Universita\u2019 di Cassino, Laboratorio di Archeologia,Via Bari, 8, 03043 Cassino, FR, Italy) Prehispanic Societies at the North Eastern Ecuadorian Amazon Region
\nMaria Aguilera
\nArchitectural Evidence Of Inca Occupation In The Provinces Of Oyon And Huaura
\nRoberto Aldo Noriega Guiterrez (Archaeologist, Wiesse Foundation, Av.Leonardo Arrieta 984, Lima 1 Peru) Inka Settlement in Lower Valley of Chillon
\nJos\u00e9 Quinto Palacios
\nArchaeological Sites In Puchca Valley: Specialized Agricultural Production As A New Variant Of The Management Of Ecological Levels In The Northern Highlands Of Peru
\nBebel Ibarra Asencios (Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos) Indigenous Medical Practices Among Muria-Gonds of Bastar, Chhattisgarh, India: An Ethnographic Perspective
\nArun Kumar (Dept. of Anthropology, Ravi Shankar Univ., Raipur, India)
\nThe Inca Road Of Cajatambo
\nJoseph Bernab\u00e9 Romero Archaeological cultures of the Assam Region
\nDilip K. Medhi (Gauhati University, Guwahati, Assam)
\nChalcolithic Culture Of The Gangetic Plain With Special Reference To Recent Excavations At Agiabir, District In Mirzapur (Uttar Pradesh)
\nAshok Kumar Singh (Department of AIHC & Archaeology, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, 221 005, India) Archaeological Evidence from Anuradhapura
\nS. M. Haldhar
\nLandscapes Of Settlement In Ancient Pundranagara, Bangladesh
\nS S Mostafizur Rahman Pre-Hispanic settlements in the River Basin of Cachiyacu (Peruvian Amazon Area)
\nSantiago Rivas Panduro (Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos)
\nIndigenous Communication Systems In The Western Grassfield Of Cameroon
\nCheckadam Kilem Forbah Traditional Farming Methods and Colonial Threats in the Bameda Grassfields of Cameroon: the Need for a Maintenance of Culture Policy
\nFomuny am Sade Fonjweng (Department of History, PO Box 65, Buea, S.W. Province, Cameroon)
\nSession Time
\nDay Monday Date 23rd June
\nTime 9AM-1PM & 4-6PM Room McMahon 318<\/p>\n
Organized By
\nGustavo Martinez (Argentina)<\/p>\n
Session Details
\nOrganizers:
\nGustavo Martinez
\nCONICET-INCUAPA-FACSO-UNICEN
\nDepartamento de Arqueolog\u00eda,
\nFacultad de Ciencias Sociales de Olavarr\u00eda.
\nUNICEN, Del Valle 5737. (7400).
\nOlavarr\u00eda.,
\nProvincia de Buenos Aires-Argentina
\nE-mail: gmartine@soc.unicen.edu.ar
\nPresentations
\nPunpun Tradition And The Kintampo Complex: A New Model For The Origin And Development Of Socio-economic Complexity Of Prehistoric Ghana
\nDerek Watson (Institute of Archaeology, UCL, London, UK) Late Holocene intensification and construction of landscape in Hunter-Gatherers of the Southern Hemisphere
\nGustavo Mart\u00ednez (CONICET-INCUAPA-FACSO-UNICEN, Rep\u00fablica Argentina)
\nTool Stone Selection In The Argentina Pampa: Something More Than Only Good Quality.
\nNora Flegenheimer (CONICET, Area Arq. Antrop, Mun. Necochea) and Cristina Bay\u00f3n (Universidad Nacional del Sur) Mind the gap: technological variations between both sides of the Magellan Strait
\nNora Viviana Franco and Luis Alberto Borrero (IMHICIHU (CONICET) and Universidad de Buenos Aires)
\nHunter-gatherer Home Ranges In The Southern Hemisphere: A Comparative Exploration
\nR. Barberena and L.A. Borrero (Departamento de Investigaciones Prehist\u00f3ricas y Arqueol\u00f3gicas, MHICIHU-CONICET, Rep\u00fablica Argentina) Prehistoric Migration Pattern in the Middle Ganga Valley: An Ethno-archaeological Approach
\nDr. Shahida Ansari (Department of Archaeology, Deccan College, Pune – 411 006, India)<\/p>\n
Session Time
\nDay Sunday Date 22nd June
\nTime 4-6PM Room McMahon 318<\/p>\n
Organized By
\nTim Denham (Australia), Jose Iriarte (USA) and Luc Vrydaghs (Brussels)<\/p>\n
Session Details
\nTim Denham
\nDepartment of Archaeology
\nFlinders University
\nGPO Box 2100
\nAdelaide, SA, 5001.
\nAustralia
\ndenhamtim@yahoo.co.uk<\/p>\n
Jos\u00e9 Iriarte
\nDept. Anthropology,
\nUniversity of Kentucky,
\n211 Lafferty Hall, Lexington, KY 40506, USA.
\njiria@uky.edu<\/p>\n
Luc Vrydaghs
\nDepartment of Geography
\nUniversity of Ghent. Geological Institute
\nKrijgslaan, 282 S8. B – 9000 Ghent. Belgium.
\nLaboratory of Wood biology and Xylarium.
\nRMCA. Ch\u00e9e de Louvain, 13. B – 3080 Tervuren. Belgium.
\nluc_vrydaghs@yahoo.co.uk<\/p>\n
FORMAT:
\nGiven the number of talks, the abstracts are grouped into four mini-sessions. These are numbered\/denoted differently to avoid confusion.<\/p>\n
The central theme to be investigated is whether models of agricultural development and diffusion based on Eurasian and MesoAmerican experiences are universally relevant. Multiple lines of evidence of early and potentially indigenous agriculture are being clarified in areas often considered to be peripheral, including parts of South and Central America, SubSaharan Africa, Indo-Malaysia, Melanesia and other areas. In this session, these lines of evidence are presented and compared against pervasive models of \u201cagricultural origins\u201d in order to widen existing discourses. A wide range of approaches to the definition of agriculture will be considered including alternative conceptions based on various spatial and temporal contexts.<\/p>\n
Core Themes
\n\u2022 Creation of historically contingent and contextual conceptions of agriculture.
\n\u2022 Challenging existing (largely inherited Eurasian) models of agricultural \u2018origins\u2019.
\n\u2022 What is the value of using domestication as a measure of agricultural societies?
\n\u2022 Which agricultural signatures are most relevant?
\n\u2022 Discussing emerging lines of evidence from the tropics and Southern Hemisphere: archaeobotanical remains of former crop plants, palaeoecological records of clearance, signatures of an agricultural \u2018packages\u2019, archaeological evidence of former field systems and cultivated plots.<\/p>\n
Mini-session A: Theorising the origins of agriculture. Chairs: Tim Denham, Jose Iriarte and Luc Vrydaghs<\/p>\n
Introduction to session
\nTim Denham, Jose Iriarte and Luc Vrydaghs
\nSemantics and substance in the search for evidence of \u201cagricultural origins\u201d
\nDavid R. Harris
\nLow-Level Food Production and \u201cDomestication\u201d
\nBruce D. Smith
\nEvolutionary Theory and Agricultural Origins
\nDolores R. Piperno
\nDetecting Agriculture in the Environmental Record: Theoretical and Methodological Issues
\nDeborah M. Pearsall
\nThe Nature of Domestication in Agricultural Formation
\nDoug Yen
\nThe Kuk Site and New Guinea Agricultural History
\nJack Golson<\/p>\n
Mini-session B \u2013 Perspectives on agriculture in Indo-Malaysia, Melanesia and the Pacific. Chair: Tim Denham<\/p>\n
Transitions from Foraging to Farming in Southeast Asia: Inter-Disciplinary Insights from Niah Cave, Sarawak
\nGraeme Barker
\nTubers and Palms and their Role in Rain Forest Occupation in Borneo
\nHuw Barton
\nBananas in Prehistory: Perspectives from Papua New Guinea
\nCarol Lentfer
\nPrehistoric Plant Exploitation in New Guinea: Towards a Contingent Interpretation of Agriculture
\nTim Denham
\nThe Intensification Model as Applied to New Guinea Prehistory: a Re-Examination of Kuk Phases 4, 5 and 6
\nTim Bayliss-Smith
\nThe Concept of \u2018Domestication\u2019 in Pacific Prehistory
\nJ. Peter White
\n\u2018Traditional\u2019 or Spiritual-Driven as Opposed to \u2018Modern\u2019 or Rational-Driven Agricultural Systems on the Island of Rapa Nui (Easter Island, Chili)
\nGeertrui Louwagie and Roger Langohr<\/p>\n
Minisession C \u2013 Perspectives on agriculture in the Americas. Chair: Jos\u00e9 Iriarte<\/p>\n
Investigating the Dispersal of Cultigens into Southern South America
\nJose Iriarte
\nPre-Columbian Indigenous Migrations on South America Inferred by Genetic studies on Archaeological Crops Founded in Calcareous Shelters of Brazil.
\nF\u00e1bio de Oliveira Freitas
\nChronicling Indigenous Accounts of the Rise of Agriculture
\nMatthew P. Sayre
\nAn Exploration in Domesticating Prehistoric Andean Landscapes: The Case Study of Zea mays
\nJohn E. Staller
\nTracing the Origin and Diffusion of Domesticated Maize Through Phytolith Assemblages Recovered from Food Residues
\nRobert G. Thompson
\nRe-Examining the “Typical” Pre-Hispanic Lowland South American Diet: a View from the Middle Orinoco
\nLinda Perry
\nPlant Domestication and Early Village Life in Mesoamerica and the Near East
\nKevin O. Pope and Mary D. Pohl
\nKeepers of Louisiana’s Levees: Early Moundbuilders, Forest Managers, Fisher-Hunters, and Cultivators
\nGayle J. Fritz
\nArchaeobotany, Native Agriculture, and Bridges Between Native and Non-Native People: Upstate New York and Beyond
\nJack Rossen<\/p>\n
Minisession D \u2013 Perspectives on agriculture in India and Africa. Chair: Luc Vrydaghs<\/p>\n
Waxing crescents, non-centres and non-sense: The Local Scale of Agricultural Origins
\nDorian Q. Fuller
\nPalaeo-ethnobotanical finds from excavations in south India with reference to protohistoric Watgal, Karnataka: initial farming practices and possible African crop connections with Deccan peninsula
\nMukund D. Kajale
\nPastoralism in Africa before Village Farming and States: Why Is Acceptance So Slow?
\nDiane Gifford-Gonzalez
\nHuman impact on the environment of two forested central African countries (Gabon and Cameroon) during the Holocene.
\nR. Oslisly and L. White
\nAgriculture in Rwanda during the Early Iron Age
\nMarie-Claude Van Grunderbeek and Emile Roche
\nHuman Created Landscapes: The Archaeology of the Shashe-Limpopo River Basin, Northeastern Botswana
\nSarah Dingalo and Alfred Tsheboeng
\nHolocene Land Use Patterns in Central Africa: a GIS approach
\nDr Philippe Lavachery
\nSpace and Activities Patterns. A proxy of social complexity?
\nL. Vrydaghs and V. Baeke<\/p>\n
Presentations
\nSemantics And Substance In The Search For Evidence Of \u201cagricultural Origins\u201d
\nDavid R. Harris (University College, London) Low-Level Food Production and \u201cDomestication\u201d
\nBruce D. Smith (Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History)
\nDetecting Agriculture In The Environmental Record: Theoretical And Methodological Issues
\nDeborah M. Pearsall (University of Missouri, USA) The intensification model as applied to New Guinea prehistory: a re-examination of Kuk Phases 4, 5 and 6
\nTim Bayliss-Smith (University of Cambridge, UK)
\nThe Concept Of ‘domestication’ In Pacific Prehistory
\nJ. Peter White (University of Sydney, Australia) Plant Domestication and Early Village Life in Mesoamerica and the Near East
\nKevin O. Pope (Geo Eco Arc Research, Aquasco, USA) and Mary D. Pohl (Department of Anthropology, Florida State University, USA)
\nRe-Examining The “Typical” Pre-Hispanic Lowland South American Diet: A View From The Middle Orinoco
\nLinda Perry An Exploration in Domesticating Prehistoric Andean Landscapes: The case study of Zea mays L.
\nJohn E. Staller (The Field Museum, Chicago, USA)
\nTracing The Origin And Diffusion Of Domesticated Maize Through Phytolith Assemblages Recovered From Food Residues
\nRobert G. Thompson (University of Minnesota, USA) Pre-Columbian indigenous migrations on South America inferred by genetics studies on archaeological crops founded in calcareous shelters of Brazil
\nF\u00e1bio de Oliveira Freitas (Embrapa Recursos Gen\u00e9ticos e Biotecnologia, Bras\u00edlia)
\nKeepers Of Louisiana’s Levees: Early Moundbuilders, Forest Managers, Fisher-hunters, And Cultivators
\nGayle J. Fritz (Washington University in St Louis, USA) Archaeobotany, Native Agriculture, and Bridges Between Native and Non-Native People: Upstate New York and Beyond
\nJack Rossen (Ithaca College, USA)
\nWaxing Crescents, Non-centres And Non-sense: The Local Scale Of Agricultural Origins
\nDorian Q. Fuller (University College, London) Palaeo-ethnobotanical finds from excavations in south India with reference to protohistoric Watgal, Karnataka: initial farming practices and possible African crop connections with Deccan peninsula
\nMukund D. Kajale (Archaeology Department: Deccan College, Postgraduate & Research Institute, Pune- 411006, India)
\nPastoralism In Africa Before Village Farming And States: Why Is Acceptance So Slow?
\nDiane Gifford-Gonzalez (University of California at Santa Cruz, USA) Human impact on the environment of two forested central African countries (Gabon and Cameroon) during the Holocene
\nR. Oslisly (Institut de Recherche pour le D\u00e9veloppement, Yaound\u00e9) and L. White
\n(The Wildlife Conservation Society, New York, USA)
\nAgriculture In Rwanda During The Early Iron Age
\nMarie-Claude Van Grunderbeek and Emile Roche (Universit\u00e9 de Li\u00e8ge, Brussels) Human Created Landscapes: The Archaeology of the Shashe-Limpopo River Basin, Northeastern Botswana
\nSarah Dingalo and Alfred Tsheboeng (Archaeology Unit, University of Botswana, Private Bag UB00703, Gaborone, Botswana)
\nHolocene Land Use Patterns In Central Africa: A GIS Approach
\nDr Philippe Lavachery (EMP Department, Douala, Cameroon) Space and Activities Patterns. A proxy of social complexity?
\nL. Vrydaghs (Department of Geography, University of Ghent) and V. Baeke (Museum of Central Africa, Tervuren)
\nInvestigating The Dispersal Of Cultigens Into Southeastern South America
\nJose Iriarte (University of Kentucky, USA) Prehistoric Plant Exploitation in New Guinea: Towards a Contingent Interpretation of Agriculture
\nTim Denham (Flinders University, Australia)
\nBananas In Prehistory: Perspectives From Papua New Guinea
\nCarol Lentfer (Southern Cross University, Lismore, Australia) Chronicling Indigenous Accounts of the Rise of Agriculture
\nMatthew P. Sayre (University of California at Berkeley, USA)
\n\u2018Traditional\u2019 Or Spiritual-Driven As Opposed To \u2018Modern\u2019 Or Rational-Driven Agricultural Systems On The Island Of Rapa Nui (Easter Island, Chili)
\nGeertrui Louwagie and Roger Langohr (Ghent University, Belgium) The Kuk Site and New Guinea Agricultural History
\nJack Golson (Australian National University, Australia)
\nTubers And Palms And Their Role In Rain Forest Occupation In Borneo
\nHuw Barton (University of Leicester, UK) Transitions from Foraging to Farming in Southeast Asia: Inter-Disciplinary Insights from Niah Cave, Sarawak
\nGraeme Barker (University of Leicester, UK)
\nThe Nature Of Domestication In Agricultural Formation
\nDoug Yen Evolutionary Theory and Agricultural Origins
\nDolores R. Piperno (Smithsonian Tropical Research Institutem USA)<\/p>\n
Session Time
\nDay Wednesday & Thursday Date 25th & 26th June
\nTime 11.30-1PM & 4-6PM (W Room McMahon 318<\/p>\n
Organized By
\nNick Shepherd (South Africa)<\/p>\n
Session Details
\n–
\nPresentations
\nTowards A Responsive Archaeology In Sub-Saharan Africa
\nKodzo Gavua Archaeology and Globalisation in Zambia
\nFerdinand William Bekoe Akuffo (The Department of Development Studies, University of Zambia, PO Box 32379, Lusaka, Zambia)
\nHeading South, Looking North. Why We Need A Post-Colonial Archaeology
\nNick Shepherd (Centre for African Studies, University of Cape Town, Private Bag, Rondebosch 7700, South Africa) News from the Rainbow Nation: Archaeology and Identity in post-Apartheid Southern Africa<\/p>\n
Sven Ouzman (Anthropology Department, 232 Kroeber Hall, University of California at Berkeley, CA 94720-3710, USA)
\nThe Place Of Archaeology Development In Contemporary Africa
\nT.O. Koyejo (University of Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria) The Bolivian Archaeology: A Look Towards Diversity and Post-colonialism
\nZ. Dante Angelo (Stanford University, Cultural and Social Anthropology, Bldg 110 Main Quad, Stanford, USA)
\nEmpowerment And Exploitation In Central America 1969 \u2013 Present
\nFrederick W. Lange (Professor of Anthropology, Universidad Tecnologica de El Salvador, Fulbright Scholar (1999-2001), Public Education, For Cultural Heritage Preservation)<\/p>\n
Session Time
\nDay Sunday Date 22nd June
\nTime 9-11AM Room McMahon 318<\/p>\n
Organized By
\nPedro Funari (Brazil) and Nick Shepherd (South Africa)<\/p>\n
Session Details
\nOrganized by:
\nPedro Funari
\nE-mail: pedrofunari@sti.com.br<\/p>\n
Nick Shepherd
\nCentre for African Studies,
\nUniversity of Cape Town,
\nPrivate Bag, Rondebosch, 7700, South Africa
\nE-mail: shepherd@humanities.uct.ac.za<\/p>\n
Does this apply universally? Are southern theories more applicable to local areas and northern theories to grand schemes? What are these theories?<\/p>\n
FORMAT: PANEL DISCUSSION<\/p>\n
Participants:
\nPedro Funari, Martin Hall, Gustavo Martinez, Sven Ouzman, Nick Shepherd, Robin Torrence<\/p>\n
Presentations
\nSession Time
\nDay Sunday Date 22nd June
\nTime 11.30AM-1PM Room McMahon 318<\/p>\n
Organized By
\nPedro Funari (Brazil)<\/p>\n
Session Details
\n–<\/p>\n
Presentations
\nGarden Of The Dead: Colonial Cemetery And Imperial Landscapes
\nAshish Chadha Urban Archaeology of Port Adelaide: the Port Adelaide Historical Archaeology Project, South Australia
\nSusan Briggs (Department of Archaeology, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia)
\nReconstructing The Nineteenth Century Frontier On Federal Lands In Utah
\nNeil Averitt<\/p>\n
Session Time
\nDay Wednesday Date 25th June
\nTime 11.30AM-1PM Room Shahan 201<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Convened By Sven Ouzman (USA), Gustavo Martinez (Argentina) and Robin Torrence (Australia) Theme Details Contact Details Sven Ouzman, Anthropology Department, 232 Kroeber Hall, University of California at Berkeley, CA 94720-3710, USA. E-mail: ouzman@uclink.berkeley.edu Gustavo Martinez CONICET-INCUAPA-FASCO-UNICEN, Departamento de Arqueolog\u00eda, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales de Olavarr\u00eda.UNICEN, Del Valle 5737 (7400). Olavarr\u00eda, Provincia de Buenos Aires-Argentina E-mail: … Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":2159,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","template":"","meta":{"ngg_post_thumbnail":0,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-2176","page","type-page","status-publish"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2176","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2176"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2176\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2775,"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2176\/revisions\/2775"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2159"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worldarchaeologicalcongress.com\/wac5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2176"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}