Introduction: New Perspectives in Global Public Archaeology

Chapter

Abstract

Since its very beginning, archaeology has in many senses always related to a much wider constituency than just archaeologists. Archaeological excavations, for example, have affected and been affected by the lives and activities of people in nearby communities. Archaeological objects have been traded and collected by and displayed to the general public. Archaeological research has produced a broad range of information and knowledge, which has not only contributed to the formation of public understanding of the past, but also has become the basis of people’s collective identities. This relationship between archaeology and the public was, however, for a long time overlooked by the great majority of archaeologists, who considered it irrelevant to the aim of their study: the understanding of the past. The establishment of public archaeology in the 1970s–1980s and its subsequent development in the 1990s and early twenty-first century was an attempt to change this state of the discourse. The advocates of public archaeology have argued that archaeology’s relationship with the broader community should be the subject of debate and scrutiny in its own right (Schadla-Hall 1999, 2004).

Keywords

Europe Income Posit Excavation Peru 

References

  1. Aitchison, K., 2009, Archaeology and the Global Financial Crisis. Antiquity 83(319): online. http://www.antiquity.ac.uk/projgall/aitchison319/, accessed February 1, 2010.
  2. Archibald, R.R., 1999, A Place to Remember: Using History to Build Community. Altamira, Walnut Creek.Google Scholar
  3. Arnold, B., 1990, The Past as Propaganda: Totalitarian Archaeology in Nazi Germany. Antiquity 64(244): 464–478.Google Scholar
  4. Ascherson, N., 2000, Editorial. Public Archaeology 1(1): 1–4.Google Scholar
  5. Ascherson, N., 2006, Archaeological Overthrows: The 1980s Seen Through the Rear Window. In A Future for Archaeology: The Past in the Present, edited by R. Layton, S. Shennan, and P.G. Stone, pp. 47–52. UCL Press, London.Google Scholar
  6. Ascherson, N., 2010, Editorial. Public Archaeology 9(1): 1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barlow, T.E., editor, 1997, Formations of Colonial Modernity in East Asia, Duke University Press, Durham and London.Google Scholar
  8. Bartu, A. 2000. Where is Çatalhöyük? Multiple Sites in the Construction of an Archaeological Site. In Towards Reflexive Method in Archaeology: The Example of Çatalhöyük, edited by I. Hodder, pp. 101–109. McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Oxford.Google Scholar
  9. Bastin, J., and Benda, H.J., 1968, A History of Modern Southeast Asia: Colonialism, Nationalism, and Decolonization, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs.Google Scholar
  10. Bender, B., 1998, Stonehenge: Making Space. Berg, Oxford and New York.Google Scholar
  11. Bonacchi, C., 2009, Archeologia pubblica in Italia. Origini e prospettive di un ‘nuovo’ settore disciplinare. Ricerche Storiche 2–3: 329–350.Google Scholar
  12. Calhoun, C., 1995, Critical Social Theory: Culture, History and Challenge of Difference. Blackwell, Cambridge MA.Google Scholar
  13. Carman, J., 2002, Archaeology and Heritage: An Introduction. Continuum, London and New York.Google Scholar
  14. Cleere, H., editor, 1984, Approaches to the Archaeological Heritage: A Comparative Study of World Cultural Resource Management Systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  15. Cleere, H., editor, 1989, Archaeological Heritage Management in the Modern World. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  16. Derrida, J., 1982, Différance. Margins of Philosophy, translated by A. Bass, pp. 3–28. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  17. Faulkner, N., 2000, Archaeology from Below. Public Archaeology 1(1): 21–33.Google Scholar
  18. Foucault, M., 1980, Truth and Power. In Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972–1977, edited by C. Gordon, pp. 109–113. Harvester Wheatsheaf, New York, London, Toronto, Sydney, Tokyo and Singapore.Google Scholar
  19. Franklin, M., 2001, A Black Feminist-Inspired Archaeology?, Journal of Social Archaeology 1(1): 108–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fredrik, S., and Wahlgren, K.H., 2008, Publik Arkeologi, Nordic Academic Press, Lund.Google Scholar
  21. Funari, P.P.A., 2001, Public Archaeology from a Latin American Perspective, Public Archaeology 1(4): 239–243.Google Scholar
  22. Funari, P.P.A., 2004, Public Archaeology in Brazil. In Public Archaeology, edited by N. Merriman, pp. 202–210. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  23. Gathercole, P., and Lowenthal, D., editors, 1990, The Politics of the Past. Unwin Hyman, London.Google Scholar
  24. Gazin-Schwartz, A., and Holtorf, C., 1999, ‘As long as ever I’ve known it…’: On Folklore and Archaeology. In Archaeology and Folklore, edited by A. Gazin-Schwartz and C. Holtorf, pp. 3–25. Routledge, London and New York.Google Scholar
  25. Gero, J.M., 2006, Here Come the Aliens… Do We Dig Them???, in Program and Abstracts of WAC Osaka Inter-Congress 2006, edited by WAC Osaka Executive Committee, p. 128. WAC Osaka Executive Committee, Osaka.Google Scholar
  26. Green, L.F., Green, D.R., and Neves, E.G., 2001, Indigenous Knowledge and Archaeological Science. Journal of Social Archaeology 3(3): 366–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Grima, R., 2009, A Reply to “What is Public Archaeology?”. Present Pasts 1: 53–54.Google Scholar
  28. Guo, L., and Wei, M., 2006, Chu lun gongzhong kaoguxue [A preliminary discussion on public archaeology]. Dong Nan Wenwu 2006/4:54–60.Google Scholar
  29. Hamilakis, Y., 1999a, From Gramsci’s Cell to ‘Guerrillas’ in Çatalhöyuk: A Response. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 12(1): 99–103.Google Scholar
  30. Hamilakis, Y., 1999b, La trahison des archéologues? Archaeological Practice as Intellectual Activity in Postmodernity. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 12(1): 60–79.Google Scholar
  31. Hodder, I., 1991, Archaeological Theory in Contemporary European Societies: The Emergence of Competing Traditions. In Archaeological Theory in Europe: The Last Three Decades, edited by I. Hodder, pp. 1–24. Routledge, London and New York.Google Scholar
  32. Hodder, I., 1997, “Always Momentary, Fluid and Flexible”: Towards a Reflexive Excavation Methodology. Antiquity 71: 691–700.Google Scholar
  33. Hodder, I., 1998a, The Past as Passion and Play: Çatalhöyük as a Site of Conflict in the Construction of Multiple Pasts. In Archaeology under Fire: Nationalism, Politics and Heritage in the Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East, edited by L. Meskell, pp. 124–139. Routledge, London and New York.Google Scholar
  34. Hodder, I., 1998b, Whose Rationality? A Response to Fekri Hassan. Antiquity 72: 213–217.Google Scholar
  35. Hodder, I., 1999, Archaeological Process: An Introduction. Blackwell, Oxford and Malden.Google Scholar
  36. Hodder, I., 2002, Archaeological Theory. In Archaeology: The Widening Debate, edited by B. Cunliffe, W. Davies, and C. Renfrew, pp. 77–90. British Academy, Oxford and New York.Google Scholar
  37. Holtorf, C.J., 2005a, Beyond Crusades: How (Not) to Engage with Alternative Archaeologies. World Archaeology 37(4): 544–551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Holtorf, C.J., 2005b, From Stonehenge to Las Vegas: Archaeology as Popular Culture. Altamira, Walnut Creek, Lanham, New York, Toronto and Oxford.Google Scholar
  39. Holtorf, C.J. 2007. Archaeology is a Brand: The Meaning of Archaeology in Contemporary Popular Culture. Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek.Google Scholar
  40. Horkheimer, M., 1995 [1937], Traditional and Critical Theory. In Critical Theory: Selected Essays pp. 188–243. Continuum, New York.Google Scholar
  41. Jameson, J.H. Jr, 2004, Public Archaeology in the United States. In Public Archaeology, edited by N. Merriman, pp. 21–58. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  42. Kohl, P.L., and Fawcett, C., editors, 1995, Nationalism, Politics, and the Practice of Archaeology, edited by P.L. Kohl and C. Fawcett. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  43. Kohl, P., Kozelsky, M., and Ben-Yehuda, N., editors, 2007, Selective Remembrance: Archaeology in the Construction, Commemoration, and Consecration of National Pasts. Chicago and London, University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  44. Kuper, A., 2003, The Return of the Native, Current Anthropology, 44(3): 389–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lal, B.B., 2001, A Note on the Excavations at Ayodhya with Reference to the Mandir-Masjid Issue. In Destruction and Conservation of Cultural Property, edited by R. Layton, P.G. Stone and J. Thomas, pp. 117–126. Routledge, London and New York.Google Scholar
  46. Lampeter Archaeology Workshop. 1997, Relativism, Objectivity and the Politics of the Past. Archaeological Dialogues 4: 164–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Layton, R., editor, 1994, Who Needs the Past? Indigenous Values and Archaeology. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  48. Leone, M.P., Potter, P.B. Jr., and Shackel, P.A., 1987, Toward a Critical Archaeology. Current Anthropology 28: 283–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Little, B.J., editor, 2002, Public Benefits of Archaeology, University of Florida Press, Gainsville.Google Scholar
  50. Marshall, Y., 2002, What is community archaeology?, World Archaeology 34(2): 211–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Matsuda, A., 2004, The Concept of ‘the Public’ in Public Archaeology and the Aims of Public Archaeology. Papers from the Institute of Archaeology 15: 66–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Matsuda, A., 2005, Public Archaeology at Archaeological Sites: Case Studies in Britain and Applicability in Japan (in Japanese). Journal of the Japanese Society for Cultural Heritage (Isekigaku Kenkyû) 2: 90–101.Google Scholar
  53. Matsuda, A., 2010a, Public Archaeology in Somma Vesuviana (in Japanese). In Festschrift for Tsuboi Kiyotari on the Occasion of His 90th Birthday, pp. 515–524. Meishinsha, Nara.Google Scholar
  54. Matsuda, A., 2010b, When a Local Legend Is (Mis)Appropriated in the Interpretation of an Archaeological Site. Archaeologies 6(3): 447–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. McDavid, C., 2004, From “Traditional” Archaeology to Public Archaeology to Community Action: The Levi Jordan Plantation Project. In Places in Mind: Public Archaeology as Applied Archaeology, edited by P.A. Shackel and E.J. Chambers, pp. 35–56. Routledge, New York and London.Google Scholar
  56. McDavid, C., and McGhee, F., 2010, Commentary: Cultural Resource Management, Public Archaeology, and Advocacy. In Handbook of Postcolonial Archaeology, edited by J. Lydon and U.Z. Rizvi, pp. 481–494. Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek.Google Scholar
  57. McGimsey, C.R., 1972, Public Archeology. Seminar Press, New York.Google Scholar
  58. McManamon, F.P., 2000, The Protection of Archaeological Resources in the United States: Reconciling Preservation with Contemporary Society. In Cultural Resource Management in Contemporary Society: Perspectives on Managing and Preserving the Past, edited by F.P. McManamon and A. Hatton, pp. 40–54. Routledge, London and New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. McManamon, F.P., and Hatton, A., editors, 2000, Cultural Resource Management in Contemporary Society. Routledge, London and New York.Google Scholar
  60. Merriman, N., 2002, Archaeology, Heritage and Interpretation. In Archaeology: The Widening Debate, edited by B. Cunliffe, W. Davies, and C. Renfrew, pp. 541–566. British Academy, Oxford and New York.Google Scholar
  61. Merriman, N., 2004a, Introduction: Diversity and Dissonance in Public Archaeology. In Public Archaeology, edited by N. Merriman, pp. 1–17. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  62. Merriman, N., editor, 2004b, Public Archaeology. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  63. Messenger, P.M., and Smith, G.S., editors, 2010, Cultural Heritage Management: A Global Perspective, University Press of Florida, Gainsville.Google Scholar
  64. Mizoguchi, K., 2010, The Colonial Experience of the Uncolonized and Colonized: The Case of East Asia as Mainly Seen from Japan. In Handbook of Postcolonial Archaeology, edited by J. Lydon and U.Z. Rizvi, pp. 81–92. Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek.Google Scholar
  65. Moser, S., Glazier, D., Phillips, J.E., el Nemr, L.N., Mousa, M.S., Aiesh, R.N., Richardson, S., Conner, A., and Seymour, M., 2002, Transforming Archaeology Through Practice: Strategies for Collaborative Archaeology and the Community Archaeology Project at Quseir, Egypt. World Archaeology 34(2): 220–248.Google Scholar
  66. Moshenska, G., 2009, What is Public Archaeology? Present Pasts 1: 46–48.Google Scholar
  67. Pai, H-I., 2010, Resurrecting the Ruins of Japan’s Mythical Homelands: Colonial Archaeological Surveys in the Korean Peninsula and Heritage Tourism. In Handbook of Postcolonial Archaeology, edited by J. Lydon and U.Z. Rizvi, pp. 93–112. Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek.Google Scholar
  68. Preucel, R.W., 1995, The Post-processual Condition. Journal of Archaeological Research 3(2), 147–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Public Archaeology (journal), 1(1) 2000.Google Scholar
  70. Rao, N., and Reddy, C.R., 2001, The Ayodhya Issue. In Destruction and Conservation of Cultural Property, edited by R. Layton, P.G. Stone and J. Thomas, pp. 139–156. Routledge, London and New York.Google Scholar
  71. Schadla-Hall, T., 1999, Editorial: Public Archaeology. European Journal of Archaeology 2(2): 147–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Schadla-Hall, T., 2004, The Comforts of Unreason: The Importance and Relevance of Alternative Archaeology. In Public Archaeology, edited by N. Merriman, pp. 255–271. Routldege, London and New York.Google Scholar
  73. Schadla-Hall, T., 2006, Public Archaeology in the Twenty-First Century. In A Future for Archaeology: The Past in the Present, edited by R. Layton, S. Shennan, and P.G. Stone, pp. 75–82. UCL Press, London.Google Scholar
  74. Schlanger, N., and Aitchison, K., editors, 2010, Archaeology and the Global Economic Crisis: Multiple Impacts and Possible Solutions. Culture Lab Editions, Tervuren.Google Scholar
  75. Shackel, P.A., 2004, Working with Communities: Heritage Development and Applied Archaeology. In Places in Mind: Public Archaeology as Applied Archaeology. edited by P.A. Shackel and E.J. and Chambers, pp. 1–16. Routledge, New York and London.Google Scholar
  76. Shackel, P.A., and Chambers, E.J., editors, 2004, Places in Mind: Public Archaeology as Applied Archaeology. Routledge, New York and London.Google Scholar
  77. Shankland, D., 1996, Çatalhöyük: The Anthropology of an Archaeological Presence. In On the Surface: Çatalhöyük 1993–95, edited by I. Hodder, pp. 349–358. McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Oxford.Google Scholar
  78. Shankland, D., 2000, Villagers and the Distant Past: Three Seasons’ Work at Küçükköy, Çatalhöyük. In Towards Reflexive Method in Archaeology: The Example of Çatalhöyük, edited by I. Hodder, pp. 167–176. McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Oxford.Google Scholar
  79. Shanks, M., and Tilley, C., 1987, Re-Constructing Archaeology. Routledge, London and New York.Google Scholar
  80. Sharma, R.S., 2001, The Ayodhya Issue. In Destruction and Conservation of Cultural Property, edited by R. Layton, P.G. Stone and J. Thomas, pp. 127–138. Routledge, London and New York.Google Scholar
  81. Shoocongdej, R., 2006, Can We Be Equal? Working Relationships between Southeast Asian and Foreign Archaeologists, in Program and Abstracts of WAC Osaka Inter-Congress 2006, edited by WAC Osaka Executive Committee, p. 107. WAC Osaka Executive Committee, Osaka.Google Scholar
  82. Shepherd, N., 2005, From “One World Archaeology” to One World, Many Archaeologies. Archaeologies 1(1): 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Smith, C., and Wobst, H.M., editors, 2005, Indigenous Archaeologies: Decolonising Theory and Practice, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  84. Stone, P.G., and Molyneaux, B.L., editors, 1994, The Presented Past: Heritage, Museums and Education. Routledge, London and New York.Google Scholar
  85. Stone, P.G., and Planel, G, editors, 1999, The Constructed Past: Experimental Archaeology, Education and the Public. Routledge, London and New York.Google Scholar
  86. Tarlow, S., 2001, Decoding Ethics. Public Archaeology 1(4): 245–259.Google Scholar
  87. Ucko, P.J., 1990, Foreword. In The Politics of the Past, edited by P. Gathercole and D. Lowenthal, pp. ix-xxi. Unwin Hyman, London.Google Scholar
  88. Ucko, P.J., 1995, Archaeological Interpretation in a World Context. In Theory in Archaeology: A World Perspective, edited by P.J. Ucko, pp. 1–27. Routledge, London and New York.Google Scholar
  89. White, N.M., Weisman, B.R., Tykot, R.H., Wells, E.C., Davis-Salazar, K.L., Arthur, J.W., and Weedman, K., 2004, Academic Archaeology is Public Archaeology. The SAA Archaeological Record 4(2): 26–29.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of World Art Studies and MuseologyUniversity of East AngliaNorwichUK
  2. 2.Osaka City Cultural Properties AssociationOsakaJapan

Personalised recommendations