DOCSLIB.ORG

Global Archaeological Theory

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Global Archaeological Theory Reviews Ages is one thing; to date their elaboration directly to Peripheral Matters? these periods is another, more problematic, question. Similarly, because of its presence across (nearly) all Global Archaeological Theory: Contextual Voices and the Indo-European cultural universe, they claim that Contemporary Thoughts, edited by Pedro Paulo Funari, the institution of the Divine Twins dates back to the Andrés Zarankin & Emily Stovel, 2005. Corded Ware/Bell Beaker period. Such extreme claims New York (NY): Kluwer/Plenum; are as unrealistic as unnecessary. As acknowledged by ISBN-13 978-030648651-7 paperback, Kristiansen and Larsson themselves in their discussion £36.57 & US$59.95; vii+380 pp., ills. of the cosmological differences between the Bronze and the Iron Ages, oral tradition and their material inscrip- Appropriated Pasts: Indigenous Peoples tion are ever-changing and redefined: continuity can and the Colonial Culture of Archaeology, only be retrieved through an appraisal of the variation by Ian J. McNiven & Lynette Russell, 2005. which makes history. Lanham (MD): Altamira; ISBN-13 978-075910907-0 Lastly, if Kristiansen and Larsson’s enthusiasm paperback, £21.84 & US$29.71; 328 pp., ills. renders their book enthralling and enjoyable to read, sometimes it leads to statements which are difficult to Archaeological Theory and the Politics of Cultural agree with. For instance, on page 90, they declare that: Heritage, by Laurajane Smith, 2004. In many parts of central and southeastern Europe, London: Routledge; ISBN-13 978-041531833-4 the impact of bronze prestige goods on the local paperback, £24.99 & US$43.95; 272 pp. societies, lineages and families had, during the late third millennium bc, accelerated competition, rivalry of the process of social stratification. Indigenous Tim Murray deities were worshipped and the leaders of chiefly families were seen as the holders of the strongest The task of reviewing two of these books (Appropriated bonds to the gods and goddesses through their Pasts and Archaeological Theory and the Politics of Cultural imagined first-hand genealogy leading back to the Heritage; no such issues apply to a consideration of ancestors and deities. Global Archaeological Theory) has posed some interest- If most scholars would largely follow the first sentence, ing challenges, given that my actions (with respect to probably few would blindly agree with Kristiansen events in Tasmania) and my views (with respect to and Larsson’s vivid depiction of the last centuries of the importance of history in accounts of Australian the third millennium bc in the second. indigenous peoples) have been variously described in In conclusion, Kristiansen and Larsson deliver a these books as ‘positivist’, ‘colonialist’, ‘imperialist’, book which is dense, deliciously seductive but by no even ‘theoretically naïve’. Acknowledging that all of means representing a consensus in the field. Neverthe- the authors represented here would likely subscribe less, it is a book which presents the most crucial virtue of to the view that there is no such thing as objectivity, all: it makes one think about material culture and about and that it would be (possibly) ‘positivist’, ‘colonialist’, the kind of past that we, archaeologists, try to describe ‘imperialist’, even ‘theoretically naïve’, to pretend oth- and explain. As they state in their epilogue, ‘the truly erwise, I could take this as a warrant to turn this review historical contribution from past histories lies in our into a personal response. But of course epistemology, ability to learn something new and unexpected from and even archaeology or cultural heritage manage- their otherness’ (p. 371). Let us hope that this book will ment, is always more complicated than this. Even indeed lead to all the reactions it deserves and open an allowing for the warm inner glow that might attend a unforeseen era in the study of later European prehistory. righting of wrongs and a demonstration of the evils of selective quotation, of grotesque misapprehension or Marc Vander Linden misrepresentation, and of totally one-sided discussion Cambridge Archaeological Unit of complex matters, such activities rarely make good Department of Archaeology copy. So, at the risk of damning myself before I begin, University of Cambridge this review will genuinely attempt to consider both Downing Street books on their merits. Cambridge These days everywhere you look there is post- CB2 3DZ colonialism. There are many reasons for this, ranging UK from the purely cynical — here is another academic Email: [email protected] CAJ 17:3, 358–62 © 2007 McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research doi:10.1017/S0959774307000443 Printed in the United Kingdom. 358 Reviews bandwagon for careerists to jump on — to the much indigenous periphery in the Americas, Africa, Australia more positive — the issues raised by societies com- and in the South Pacific. ing to grips with the consequences of colonialism are But what are the advocates of postcoloniality (of real, vital, and enduring. Rightly, archaeologists have either or both of the contexts sketched above) to do not been slow to get involved in postcolonialism, and with this history? It is certainly now entirely ho-hum there is a vast (and growing) literature testifying to the to rehearse the colonial/imperial/nationalist/positivist diversity of contexts within which archaeologists and underpinnings of archaeology. Historians of anthro- archaeological heritage managers have attempted to pology were just as influenced by the first flowerings come to grips with it. This review is hardly the place to of the postcolonial agenda back in the 1960s, as were gloss such an active and diverse field, but it is possible the practitioners of its black arts. While these concerns to single out two contexts of ‘postcoloniality’ that I think took somewhat longer to penetrate into histories of are particularly germane, and which I will focus on in archaeology (they were first really explored by the late the context of this review. Bruce Trigger), there is little doubt that they have been The first flows from a long-standing strategy of on our disciplinary agenda for at least the last 20 years. emphasizing the importance of the periphery with So, why the need to keep banging on about national- respect to the centre, in other words of reversing the ism and colonialism, and to regularly (and somewhat traditional ‘colonial’ flow of influence and virtue. The breathlessly) reveal the awful secrets that lie at the heart second is the more recent trend towards the ‘indigeniza- of archaeology? Certainly there is not much new about tion’ of archaeology, where the authority of archaeology these matters in Appropriated Pasts, a ‘horrible history’ and archaeologists as culturally privileged interpreters of archaeology from the geographical periphery of of the past is countered by an emphasis on the rights Australia, or the other two volumes being reviewed. of indigenous peoples, and where science is a tool of Obviously such histories (and long-running post- colonialism (even when it is acting in a postcolonial colonial critiques) provide a warrant for attacking the environment). authority of the disciplinary practices of archaeology Of course there is absolutely no reason why and anthropology. On that score histories of archae- arguments in favour of ‘indigenization’ cannot also ology can support both contexts of postcoloniality be arguments attacking the theoretical pre-eminence — attacks on the ‘naturalness’ of the domination of the of the ‘centre’ over the ‘periphery’. Indeed, in other centre over the periphery, and moves towards indigeni- cases where dominant readings of the archaeological zation of our discipline. Part and parcel of both contexts perspective have been challenged (such as in the case is an attack on the authority of ‘science’ as a technol- of Marxist, feminist or queer archaeologies), the no- ogy of colonial domination. Postcolonialists can also tion of expanding disciplinary boundaries has been undermine the authority of ‘science’ by arguing that tightly linked with the goal of transforming practice, the history of archaeology demonstrates the reality of wherever archaeologists work. In this reading postco- epistemological relativism even among colonialists and lonial perspectives are not just relevant to the nations imperialists. For example, archaeologists of the twenti- that have sprung up in the wake of colonialism and eth century engaged in the critique of the simple linear imperialism. Significantly they also apply to those na- models of social and cultural evolution so beloved of tions created out of colonialism within contemporary their nineteenth-century forebears. Indeed, histories European nations. of archaeology written in the twentieth century spent At the heart of both contexts is the issue of who much time rehearsing the social and cultural contexts of gets to talk, and what they have to say about the past, archaeological knowledge, and demonstrating how (for the present or indeed the future of societies where ar- example) linear models of social evolution underpinned chaeology occurs and where heritage is managed. The and were in turn themselves validated by, notions of history of archaeology can be very important here, as Anglo-Saxon superiority. But this perception of the the recent spate of books and articles about the complic- importance of context and of historical relativity did not ity of nineteenth-century archaeologists in the creation prevent many of those same
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lynette Russell – 'An Unpicturesque Vagrant': Aboriginal Victorians at The
    Lynette Russell ‘An unpicturesque vagrant’: Aboriginal Victorians at the Melbourne International Exhibition 1880–1881* THE GRAND DAME of Melbourne architecture, the Royal Exhibition Building was the first non-Aboriginal cultural site in Australia awarded UNESCO World Heritage listing. In 2004, in Suzhou China, the UNESCO World Heritage Committee announced that the Royal Exhibition Building and surrounding Carlton Gardens qualified under cultural criterion (ii) of the Operational Guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention. Criterion (ii) lists sites that exhibit ‘an important interchange of human values, over a span of time or within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture or technology, monumental arts, town-planning or landscape design’.1 The Royal Exhibition Building does, however, have links to the Aboriginal community of Melbourne beyond being constructed on Kulin land. Contemporary Kulin connections are intensified by the proximity to the Melbourne Museum and Bunjilaka Aboriginal Cultural Centre. This article considers some evidence of Aboriginal presence at the Exhibition building during the Melbourne International Exhibition of 1880-81. The Exhibition building was famously built to house the Melbourne International Exhibition of 1880-81. Designed by architect Joseph Reed, the building was heralded as a magnificent achievement – indeed it was monumental, with its dome the tallest construction in the city. As Graeme Davison illustrated in his seminal study Marvellous Melbourne, our metropolis was, in the 1880s, a boom city; the International exhibition was to be a celebration of the city’s economic success, its technological and industrial achievements and all that was marvellous.2 The newspapers and magazines carried articles that exulted the enthusiasm and energy of the city along with the incredible optimism that characterised the 1880s boom.
    [Show full text]
  • Designing Trusted Archival Systems for Koorie Communities
    Indigenous Knowledge and the Archives: Designing Trusted Archival Systems for Koorie Communities Fiona Ross, Sue McKemmish and Shannon Faulkhead Fiona Ross has worked in a range of recordkeeping and information management roles over the last fifteen years, including positions at the Public Record Office Victoria, Victoria Police, the University of Melbourne and Monash University. She was a Research Fellow on the Trust and Technology Project in 2004 and 2005, investigating the outcomes of the user needs study and their implications for archival systems and frameworks. Professor Sue McKemmish, PhD, is Chair of Archival Systems, Monash University, and Director of the Monash University Centre for Organisational and Social Informatics. She is engaged in major research and standards initiatives relating to the use of metadata in records and archival systems (Clever Recordkeeping Metadata), information resource discovery (Breast Cancer Knowledge Online and Smart Information Portals), Indigenous archival services (Trust and Technology), and the nexus between memories communities, and technologies. She is particularly interested in working in collaborative teams to develop ICT solutions that genuinely meet the needs of individuals, organisations and society, and empower people in their working and personal lives. Sue McKemmish directs the postgraduate teaching programs in records and archives at Monash, has published extensively on recordkeeping in society, records continuum theory, recordkeeping metadata, and archival systems, and is a Laureate of the ASA. Indigenous Knowledge and the Archives 113 Shannon Faulkhead, a Koorie woman from Mildura, is a postgraduate student attached to the Australian Research Council Linkage Project, Trust and Technology: Building an archival system for Indigenous oral memory' investigating Australian Indigenous oral testimonies and archives.
    [Show full text]
  • David Christian, Macquarie Univers
    Australia’s Deep Human Past in the Context of Global History September 28-30, 2016 Sponsored by The Australian Studies Committee The Initiative for the Science of the Human Past at Harvard University Department of Anthropology Department of History, Harvard and The Australian Centre for Indigenous Studies, Australian National University Aboriginal Australians have lived on the Australian continent for up to 60,000 years. And yet Australia’s place in world history, to judge by the canons of the field, begins with the arrival of the first Europeans in the late eighteenth century. This conference asks a simple question: how can we research and narrate Australia’s deep past as history? To begin to answer this question, we have brought experts in Australian history together with specialists in archaeology and the science of the human past for two days of open-ended discussion. Wednesday, September 28 5-7pm Fong Auditorium, Boyston Hall Speaker: David Christian, Macquarie University Title: Australian History in Deep Time Respondents: Michael McCormick, Harvard University Ann McGrath, Australian National University John Maynard, University of Newcastle Thursday, September 29 Barker Center, Thompson Room Friday, September 30 Barker Center, Thompson Room 9-12 Session 1: Australia in Global History: Frames 9-12 and Cosmologies Session 3: Art, Material Culture, Technology Featuring Christian, Hiscock, Lydon, Liebmann, McGrath, Featuring Davidson, Hiscock, Liebmann, Lydon, McNiven, and Spriggs Paton, Paterson, and Smail 12-2 Lunch 12-2 Lunch 2-5
    [Show full text]
  • The Enactment of Aboriginality in Tasmania
    Building Bodies in the Australian Periphery: The Enactment of Aboriginality in Tasmania Christopher Berk University of Michigan University of Michigan Working Papers in Museum Studies Number 9 (2012) Museum Studies Program Charles H. Sawyer Center for Museum Studies University of Michigan Museum of Art 525 South State Street Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1354 Office phone: 734-936-6678 Fax: 734-786-0064 www.ummsp.lsa.umich.edu [email protected] © 2012 University of Michigan All rights reserved The University of Michigan Museum Studies Program’s series of “Working Papers in Museum Studies” presents emerging research from a variety of disciplinary perspectives, all focused on the multiple concerns of the modern museum and heritage studies field. Contributions from scholars, members of the museum profession and graduate students are represented. Many of these papers have their origins in public presentations made under the auspices of the Museum Studies Program. We gratefully thank the authors published herein for their participation. This paper is an elaboration of a talk presented as part of the University of Michigan Museum Studies Program’s “Issues in Museum Studies” lecture series on November 1, 2011. It is a product of research supported by a U-M Museum Studies Program Fellowship for Doctoral Research in Museums. Christopher Berk is a member of the 2007 cohort in the U-M Museum Studies Program and is a Doctoral Candidate in the Department of Anthropology at the University of Michigan. Christopher can be reached at [email protected]. Building Bodies in the Australian Periphery: Tasmania in Aboriginality of The Enactment Periphery: Australian Bodies in the Building The Enactment of Aboriginality in Tasmania Christopher Berk • the Tasmanians as racially and culturally distinct University of Michigan and different from Aboriginal peoples of mainland Australia Introduction • the Tasmanians as extinct.
    [Show full text]
  • Indigenous Mobilities: Across and Beyond the Antipodes
    Indigenous Mobilities ACROSS AND BEYOND THE ANTIPODES Aboriginal History Incorporated Aboriginal History Inc. is a part of the Australian Centre for Indigenous History, Research School of Social Sciences, The Australian National University, and gratefully acknowledges the support of the School of History and the National Centre for Indigenous Studies, The Australian National University. Aboriginal History Inc. is administered by an Editorial Board which is responsible for all unsigned material. Views and opinions expressed by the author are not necessarily shared by Board members. Contacting Aboriginal History All correspondence should be addressed to the Editors, Aboriginal History Inc., ACIH, School of History, RSSS, 9 Fellows Road (Coombs Building), Acton, ANU, 2601, or [email protected]. WARNING: Readers are notified that this publication may contain names or images of deceased persons. Indigenous Mobilities ACROSS AND BEYOND THE ANTIPODES Edited by Rachel Standfield Published by ANU Press and Aboriginal History Inc. The Australian National University Acton ACT 2601, Australia Email: [email protected] Available to download for free at press.anu.edu.au A catalogue record for this book is available from the National Library of Australia ISBN (print): 9781760462147 ISBN (online): 9781760462154 WorldCat (print): 1038052699 WorldCat (online): 1038052860 DOI: 10.22459/IM.06.2018 This title is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). The full licence terms are available at creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ legalcode Cover design and layout by ANU Press. Cover image: State Library of NSW, Tippahee [Te Pahi], a chief of New Zealand, 1808 / painted by James Finucane, call number SV*/Mao/Port/14, file number FL1601774.
    [Show full text]
  • Connecting Through Records: Narratives of Koorie Victoria*
    Connecting through records: narratives of Koorie Victoria* Shannon Faulkhead Dr Shannon Faulkhead is a Koorie woman from Mildura, who recently completed her PhD research through Monash University, entitled 'Narratives of Koorie Victoria'. Prior to returning to study Shannon worked for nine years at the Koorie Heritage Trust Inc., an Aboriginal cultural centre in Victoria. Shannon's research focuses on the location of Indigenous peoples within the broader Australian society, the location of Indigenous knowledge within Australia's collective knowledge, through the way in which these areas are represented in narratives and records. While Shannon's research is multi-disciplinary in nature, to date it has centred on community and archival collections of records, and has been situated within the dual disciplines of Indigenous studies and archival science. Australia is a society where governance and learning preferences text-based information and knowledge. Preferencing text allows oral knozuledge to be questioned resulting in a dichotomy between text and orality - a dichotomy that can impact upon cultures and communities where oral memory is a major source of knowledge storage and transmission. The effect of this dichotomy within Australia (and more specifically Victoria) is especially obvious and damaging to communities whose governance, learning and knowledge systems co-exist within the same space, such as Indigenous Australians. The aim of * I would like to give thanks to and acknowledge the past and present Ancestors and Elders of this land, who have bestowed to us wonderful records and archives of our Koorie past from which we learn how to live in the present and that guide us into the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Taylor Spence
    TAYLOR SPENCE CURRICULUM VITAE Post-Doctoral Teaching Fellow in Early American History, University of New Mexico Mesa Vista Hall, Room 1111, Albuquerque, NM 87131 Email: [email protected] Tel.: +1 (646) 996-6515 and (646) 217-4199 Website: www.taylorwyoming.com MAJOR AWARDS 2013 and 2014 Dean’s Commendation for Excellence in Teaching, Monash University 2011 Lauréat, Association Internationale des Etudes Québécoises 1994 Fulbright Fellowship EDUCATION 2012 Ph.D., American History, Yale University 2008 M. Phil. with distinction, American History, Yale University Orals Fields: o American History, 1492 – 1872 o American Western History/ Environmental History o Social and Political History of Latin America 2008, MA, American History, Yale University 1998 Masters of Fine Arts, Painting, School of Visual Arts 1990 B.A., cum laude, History, Clark Honors College, University of Oregon SUPPLEMENTAL TRAINING 2012 Certificate of College Teaching Preparation, Graduate Teaching Center, Yale University 2012 Certificate: Teaching Writing in the Humanities and Social Sciences Certification, Graduate Teaching Center, Yale University 2012 Course: “Why the Humanities Matter,” Graduate Teaching Center, Yale University 2012 Summer Seminar on Indigenous Studies, Newberry Library, Chicago, Illinois, 2010-2012 Tutorial: Geographic Information System (GIS), Map Collection, Yale University RESEARCH Settler-Colonial Trilogy I plan three books constructed around the goal of understanding the American settler-colonial mind. My first book, under contract with the University Press of Virginia’s Jeffersonian Taylor Spence 1 America Series and scheduled to be published in 2017, is called Cataraqui: Dominion, Possession, and Land-Rights in the Borderland of North American Empires, 1783-1848. It traces the lineage of settler dominion and conceptions of land-rights to the most important borderland of Early American history, Cataraqui.
    [Show full text]
  • Individual Projects
    History of Anthropology Newsletter Volume 22 Issue 1 June 1995 Article 7 January 1995 Individual Projects Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/han Part of the Anthropology Commons, and the History of Science, Technology, and Medicine Commons Recommended Citation (1995) "Individual Projects," History of Anthropology Newsletter: Vol. 22 : Iss. 1 , Article 7. Available at: https://repository.upenn.edu/han/vol22/iss1/7 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/han/vol22/iss1/7 For more information, please contact [email protected]. The archives will handle by mail (usually within three weeks) inquiries that are well- defined in such terms as tribe, place, person, culture feature, event, and date. Telephone inquiries are discouraged, but inquiries by FAX will be processed along' with other inquiries in the order of their receipt, and generally answered by regular mail. Charges for reproduction must be paid in advance in checks or money orders payable in US dollars; delivery may take as long as two or three months from the initial inquiry. The archives urges anthropologists to make arrangements for the preservation of their professional material, preferably not separated, but kept intact in one repository. Although this would normally be one with which they have institutional ties, the NAA welcomes offers of donations from those without such connection, and may provide assistance in shipping material. Although donations may be made with reasonable restrictions as to use, donors may virtually be guaranteed that their accumulated documents will eventually be used by the thousands of anthropologists, other scholars, American Indians, government officials, artists, and publishers who use the National Anthropological Archives each year.
    [Show full text]
  • Colonialism and Its Narratives: Rethinking the Colonial Archive in Australia 10-11 December, 2018 Old Arts Building, the University of Melbourne
    Australian Centre Colonialism and its Narratives: rethinking the colonial archive in Australia 10-11 December, 2018 Old Arts Building, The University of Melbourne The University of Melbourne 1 CONFERENCE PROGRAM Monday 10 December 8.30 – 9.10am Registration East foyer, Ground Floor, Old Arts 9.10 – 9.30am Welcome to Country/Convenor’s welcome Theatre D, Room 155, Ground Floor, Old Arts 9.30 – 10.30am Keynote 1 Colonial Narratives: Affect and archival subjects Lynette Russell, Monash University Chair: Ken Gelder Theatre D, Room 155, Ground Floor, Old Arts 10.30 – 11.00am Morning Tea Arts Hall, Room 222, Level 1, Old Arts 11.00am – 12.30pm Panels 1, 2 and 3 Panel 1: Colonial Art and Representation. Theatre A, Room 103, Ground Floor, Old Arts Chair: Alison Inglis Violence in the Drawing Room: Frontier Imagery in the Colonial Album Molly Duggins, National Art School Countering Colonial Vision: William Barak’s paintings Nikita Vanderbyl, La Trobe University Peripheral Vision: recurring colonial imagery of Aboriginal Australians as framing devices Liz Conor, La Trobe University Panel 2: Women, Agency, and Colonial Administration. Theatre B, Room 129, Ground Floor, Old Arts Chair: Jodie Boyd Securing a Protector vs. an Expression of Independence: marriage options for immigrant women in colonial Australia Liz Rushen, Monash University, Convicts and their Families as Colonial Settlers Perry McIntyre, Anchor Books Australia ‘Properly and Safely Delivered’: maternity attendance by women in Victoria 1851-1881 Madonna Grehan, University of Melbourne
    [Show full text]
  • Victorian Aboriginal Life and Customs Through Early European Eyes
    Victorian Aboriginal Life and customs Through early european eyes David Frankel Janine Major LA TROBE UNIVERSITY EBUREAU La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC 3086, Australia https://library.latrobe.edu.au/ebureau/ Published in Australia by La Trobe University © La Trobe University 2017 First published 2017 Copyright Information Copyright in this work is vested in La Trobe University. Unless otherwise stated, material within this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Non Derivatives License CC BY-NC-ND http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Victorian Aboriginal life and customs through early European eyes Selected and edited by David Frankel and Janine Major ISBN 978-0-9953727-0-2 DOI https://doi.org/10.26826/1004 Other information Designed by La Trobe eBureau Enquiries: [email protected]) WARNING: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers should be aware that this book contains images and names of people who have since passed away. Cover Image: ‘Aboriginesofvictoria01-315a-Fig99’ from Wikimedia Commons used under CC0 CONTENTS 3 Contents Acknowledgments . 8 About the Editors . 9 General Notes . 10 Language . 11 Organisation . 11 Major sources and reading . 11 Ethno-historical sources . 12 General . 13 Units of Measurement . 14 Introduction . 15 Some Key Figures . 18 Ceremony . 20 Ceremonies and Initiation . 21 Corroborees, Dance and Music . 28 Clothing and Adornment . 39 Cloaks and Rugs . 40 Headdress . 42 Necklaces, Amulets and Other Items . 44 Bags and Belts . 46 Body Painting . 47 Nose Piercing . 47 Scarification . 49 Conflict and Fighting . 51 General Conflict . 52 Weapons . 58 Women . 63 Cooking . 65 Ovens . 66 Mammals . .. 70 Birds and Aquatic Animals .
    [Show full text]
  • Toward a Postcolonial Archaeology of Indigenous Australia Ian J
    C H A P T E R 2 5 Toward a Postcolonial Archaeology of Indigenous Australia Ian J. McNiven and Lynette Russell Over the past three decades, archaeology has been New Zealand, Maori concerns are expressed in the use going through a period of self-reflection, particularly of the Maori name Aotearoa in place of New Zealand, with regard to issues of gender, power relations, and the colonial name expressing that history in the words indigenous control. The best-known and most con- “new” and “Zealand,” the name of a Dutch province on troversial issues in regard to indigenous control are the other side of the world. Differing colonial experi- ownership of the past and the repatriation of cultural ences have led to different outcomes in law and land materials, whether human remains or artifacts, held ownership. The dispossession of Aboriginal Austra- by statutory bodies such as museums and universities. lians was never resolved in any kind of agreed treaty, In many situations, indigenous groups have regained while the dispossession of Maoris was formalized in control over their ancestral remains by recourse to the Treaty of Waitangi (1840). Again these outcomes, legal means. After heated debate and acrimonious liti- and the issues behind them, are paralleled by the U.S. gation, most Australian archaeologists now accept that experience where some indigenous Americans—Treaty indigenous (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander) Indians—came to such an outcome and some did not. control of indigenous archaeological materials in Aus- Seen from Australia, the United States is striking tralia is legitimate and part of the overall reconcilia- for the force with which scientific interest is expressed tion process between indigenous and nonindigenous and the weight it carries.
    [Show full text]
  • Indigenous Mobility and Engagement in Australia's Coastal Industries
    7 Looking Out to Sea: Indigenous Mobility and Engagement in Australia’s Coastal Industries Lynette Russell Aboriginal mobility is—and always has been—highly political, drawing on a history in which mobility was key to racial discourse; that is, Aboriginal people were seen as inappropriately mobile. Consciously or unconsciously, implicitly or explicitly, the concept of mobility has been a key component of historical and contemporary views of Aboriginal people. The much maligned and erroneous legal fiction of terra nullius was not built on the belief that the land was empty, but rather on an idea that the occupants wandered without structure or planning and had no notion of land ownership. Without identifiable social and political hierarchies or laws, they could be dispossessed and their land acquired as part of the imperial project. ‘Wanderer’, ‘nomad’ and ‘walkabout’ are all terms that abound with the idea of movement, fluidity and mobility. Mobility discourse has framed conceptions of Aboriginal authenticity and has been linked to racist themes like ‘walkabout’ and to the perception of the aimless, wandering (starving) nomad. Almost counterintuitively, these concepts have limited our ability to imagine the past and have been both contentious and restrictive for contemporary race-relations debates. Ironically, Aboriginal movements were also seen as extremely local—that is, mobility within a relatively small area. Containing Indigenous people and managing Indigenous mobility was key to the ‘civilising’ mission. 165 INDIGENOUS MOBILITIES It is obvious, with over 220 years of perspective, that this containment was really about access to land. As Martin Thomas revealed in his study of surveyor-turned-ethnographer R.H.
    [Show full text]