Introduction to "Being and Becoming Indigenous Archaeologists

American Antiquity 75(2): 228-238. , 2010

Annual Review of Anthropology, 2005

Archaeology has been linked to colonialist attitudes and scientific imperialism. But what are the perspectives of Indigenous groups concerning the practice of archaeology? Numerous organizations recognize the distinctive needs of Indigenous communities throughout the world and have adopted agreements and definitions that govern their relationships with those populations. The specific name by which Indigenous groups are known varies from country to country, as local governments are involved in determining the appropriateness of particular definitions to populations within their borders. This paper begins with an examination of the various aspects that have been used to determine whether or not a group of people might be considered "indigenous" under various definitions, and then uses the history of the relationships between North American archaeologists and Indigenous populations as a background for the examination of some of the political aspects of archaeology that have impacted Indigenous populations. It then proceeds to discuss perspectives on archaeology offered by members of various Indigenous populations throughout the World.

Bridging the Divide: Indigenous Communities and Archaeology into the 21st Century, edited by Caroline Phillips and Harry Allen, Left Coast Press., 2010

The purpose of this chapter is to argue for the end of Indigenous archaeology. The title is intentionally provocative, but it does reflect an important and fundamental set of issues. Here I take what can be termed a bipolar approach. Currently Indigenous archaeology is emerging as a distinct form of the discipline, and some would suggest a very sepa- rate one; certainly, this approach remains at the margins of archaeology. While I strongly encourage the pursuit of community-based, ethnocritical, and reflexive methods and modes of interpretation as much-needed and long-overdue elements in contemporary archaeology, at the same time I suggest that we must also work to eliminate Indigenous archaeology as a creature that resides solely outside of the mainstream. That is, rather than working to develop Indigenous approaches to archaeology separate from others, we should be trying to incorporate them within the discipline. Failing to do so will limit significantly or marginalise the potential contributions of archaeology as a more representative and responsible discipline, and constrain its continued intellectual growth....

Oxford Bibliography of Anthropology, Oxford University Press, 2020

Working as Indigenous Archaeologists explores the often-contentious relationship between Indigenous and other formerly colonized peoples and Archaeology through their own voices. Edited By George Nicholas y Joe Watkins, 2024

The idea of “being Indigenous archaeologist” triggers a correspondence between a professional or disciplinary identity that dictates or establishes modes of being and a collective identity of an ethnic community, people or nation where one is born being from the idea of a primordial origin. As a possibility of being an affirmation, in this case of an identity (being archaeologists, being Indigenous, being Indigenous archaeologists, etc.), it is a denial of that very thing that is affirmed. “The denial then conflicts with what is affirmed and also requires a totalization” (Kusch 2000: 642) that deserves to be explored, problematized, turned into crisis. In this chapter I offer an autobiographical account of my experiences, research and contributions as a Warpe archaeologist, trying to problematize the stabilizations and totalizations that this affirmation of a professional and ethnic identity has entailed to me and the tensions inherent to Indigenous activism on the margins of archaeology.

archaeologies

Abstract The undeveloped world indigenous archaeologist is absolutely the other in his/her own country; such a condition is a result of a long term process, the process of post industrial revolution in the developed countries which changed the universal actions and reactions towards the undeveloped one. An archaeologist in the undeveloped world is the other because his/her discipline is an imported unindigenous one. His/her context is more problematic and he/she is usually an adherent of his/her western discipline pioneers. As will be narrated below, an indigenous archaeologist has to censor himself/herself and distance from their native context, while there is no place in the developed world for them as that is naturally another world. Their education in an undeveloped country has made them apply methods and adopt approaches which are mostly defined by the propaganda and the regional policies of governments based on nationalism. However, archaeology needs anthropological humanistic principles in order to be effective in a world scale. Four social encounters with an indigenous archaeologist have been narrated in this article; in his own society, in a developed country and in a postcolonial context. These narrations depict the status, the individuality and the contextual conditions of an archaeologist’s.

Jangwa Pana, 2011

Defining Indigenous Archaeology is as difficult as defining "Indigenous". In some areas the term "Indigenous" is applied to people who existed in an area prior to colonization ("Geography"); in other areas it is applied to people who are related to those people whose ancestors created the culture being studied ("Descendancy"); in others it is applied to the community of people who live in the area where the archaeology is being conducted ("Proximity"). This paper recognizes that Indigenous Archaeology, however defined, has characteristics that add to the scientific study of the human past; that Indigenous Archaeology is not meant to supplant scientific archaeology but to add to archaeology's interpretative powers. In this paper I will provide an overview of Indigenous Archaeology, examine some of the problems in trying to discuss its many facets as a single disciplinary approach to the interpretation of the past, and then close brought to you by CORE View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk provided by Revistas de la Universidad del Magdalena Who is "Indigenous"? I have elsewhere offered a more pointed discussion of the question of "Who is Indigenous?" (Watkins 2005), and I do not wish to repeat that here, but it is important to understand that the definition of "Indigenous" carries with it economic, political and social implications that reach beyond the practice of archaeology. Therefore, please allow me a short summation of the numerous issues related to the definition of "Indigenous". The International Labor Organization offers a couple of pointed definitions: indigenous people are "peoples in independent countries whose so

Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology, Springer, pp. 3794-3803. , 2014

“Indigenous archaeology” can be conceived of as a response to the legacy of colonialism in archaeology, while also reflecting a broadening and reconstitution of existing theory and practice designed to make the discipline more relevant and satisfying to descendant communities. It is an entity that is also defined by its engagement, often simultaneously, with issues relating to identity and ethnicity, the nature of knowledge, the flow of benefits derived from archaeological research, the indivisibility of tangible and intangible heritage, and different ways of knowing the world. Indigenous archaeology, depending upon who is involved and in what context, may be as much about the recovery of objects and information about past lifeways as it is about the sociopolitics of the endeavor and equally as much about community direction and involvement as it is about the decisions and choices of those individuals involved. It is thus very much a multifaceted and reflexive endeavor in which Indigenous epistemology(ies) intersect with archaeological practice in sometimes controversial, frequently challenging, but ultimately always enlightening ways....

Australian Archaeology 52: 29–40, 2001

Since childhood, I've been drawn to distant times and diverse cultures. This interest provided the impetus, and my parents the encouragement, to pursue a career as an archaeologist. It was a decision that I have never regretted, even though what anthropology is today, and how it is practiced, is very different from that which 1was first exposed to just a few decades ago. As will become apparent, I view archaeology as an inseparable dimension of anthropology (and vice versa), reflecting the Boasian four-field model that is prevalent in North America. One mandate of anthropology, regardless of where it is practiced, is to document and interpret cultural diversity to obtain a deep understanding of what it is to be human—a slightly more sophisticated endeavor than my adolescent forays into National Geographic magazine. In this, we seek not only the "Other," which has come to represent non-Western peoples whose lives and worldviews fall outside the realm of familiar experience, but also ourselves. .As archaeologists, we are also required to seek representativeness, to ensure that our work encompasses, both methodologically and theoretically, the range of past human endeavor....

Indigenous archaeology arose 25 years ago in response to calls from Indigenous peoples to make the discipline more relevant. What emerged is a vibrant, highly nuanced, and often effective coupling of indigenous epistemology, collaborative methodology, and scientific technique. Despite growing recognition and respect, Indigenous archaeology remains on the margins. In “Seeking the End of Indigenous Archaeology” (2003) I proposed both the need for both its continuance as a distinct endeavor and its incorporation into mainstream archaeology to help transform it. In this presentation I re-examine this premise in the context of the changed and charged landscape of British Columbia archaeology. —Presented at the Society for Applied Anthropology Conference, Vancouver, March 2016