Facing different views The effect of legislation on the engagement with indigenous peoples during archaeological heritage management projects in the Andean region of Bolivia from the 1990s onwards Annemiek Dorian Rhebergen Cover figure: Detail of the sunken enclosure at the archaeological site of Tiwanaku, Bolivia (photo taken by author, April 2005). Facing different views The effect of legislation on the engagement with indigenous peoples during archaeological heritage management projects in the Andean region of Bolivia from the early 1990s onwards Annemiek Dorian Rhebergen MA Thesis (course code: 1040X3053Y) Student number: s0979104 Supervisor: Dr. M.H. van den Dries Specialisation 1: Heritage Management in a world context Specialisation 2: Archaeology and Anthropology of Mesoamerica and the Andes University of Leiden, Faculty of Archaeology Arnhem, June 2012 Name: A.D. Rhebergen Address: -------------------- -------------------- The Netherlands E-mail: [email protected] Telephone: -------------------- 2 Table of contents Acknowledgements 7 Chapter 1 Introduction 9 1.1 Research topic 14 1.2 Research question, aims and methodology 18 1.3 The term ‘indigenous peoples’ 21 Chapter 2 Heritage discourses, decolonising practices and 25 community involvement: the theoretical framework 2.1 Dominant heritage discourse 25 2.2 Indigenous heritage discourses 27 2.3 Decolonising and indigenous archaeology 31 2.4 Involving the (indigenous) community 34 Chapter 3 Archaeological heritage management and 39 indigenous peoples in Bolivia: the legal framework 3.1 Archaeological heritage management legislation 41 3.1.1 The foundations of Bolivian archaeological law 41 3.1.2 Nationalistic archaeology and professionalization 43 3.1.3 Recent developments 47 3.1.4 Discussion 50 3.2 Legislation related to indigenous peoples 51 3.2.1 The first recognitions of indigenous peoples’ rights 51 3.2.2 The Morales administration 56 3.3 Discussion 58 3 Chapter 4 Involvement in practice: three case studies 61 4.1 Temple site at Ch’isi, Lake Titicaca Basin (1993-1994) 61 4.1.1 Contemporary local function and use 62 4.1.2 Contemporary legislation and awareness 65 4.1.3 The project 67 4.1.3.1 Participants and initiative 67 4.1.3.2 Goals and aims 68 4.1.3.3 Involvement of the local community 69 4.1.3.4 Results 72 4.1.4 Discussion 74 4.2 Lakaya archaeological site, Southwest Bolivia (1996-2002) 76 4.2.1 Contemporary local function and use 78 4.2.2 Contemporary legislation and awareness 81 4.2.3 The project 83 4.2.3.1 Participants and initiative 83 4.2.3.2 Goals and aims 84 4.2.3.3 Involvement of the local community 84 4.2.3.4 Results 87 4.2.4 Discussion 89 4.3 Lajasmayu rock art site, Southwest Bolivia (2008-2011) 92 4.3.1 Contemporary local function and use 94 4.3.2 Contemporary legislation and awareness 97 4.3.3 The project 99 4.3.3.1 Participants and initiative 99 4.3.3.2 Goals and aims 100 4.3.3.3 Involvement of the local community 100 4.3.3.4 Results 102 4.3.4 Discussion 104 4 Chapter 5 Conclusions 107 5.1 Discussion of the results 107 5.2 Evaluation of the methodology 112 5.3 Suggestions for further research 114 Summary 117 Bibliography 121 List of figures 135 List of tables 137 List of appendices 139 5 6 Acknowledgements I would not have succeeded in writing this thesis without the help and support of a number of people. I would like to thank my supervisor, Monique van den Dries, and Claske Vos for their feedback, advice and motivating comments. Furthermore, I thank Maru and Maartje for their help with the Spanish bits of my thesis, muchas gracias. And Maartje, thank you for being my ‘second supervisor’. I am grateful to my family: to my father, for his support and enthusiasm during my studies and travels, and for convincing me each time I was making the right choices; and to my mother, for being there for me when things did not go as planned or as I would have liked: thanks for answering the many phone calls. Joppe, thank you for being a real big brother. Liset, thank you so much for letting it rain. And finally, Nienke. You not only supported me in the process of writing this thesis, or completing my masters, but you have been there for me the entire journey, since we learned to read and write together, twenty years ago. Thank you so much. 7 8 Chapter 1 Introduction In this thesis, the effect of legislation on the engagement with local indigenous peoples during archaeological heritage management projects in the Andean region of Bolivia will be examined. By examining three case studies, it will be discussed whether and how different perspectives and uses of an archaeological site are considered when decisions are made regarding the management of the site.1 The dominant heritage discourse, based on Western traditions, forms often the basis of heritage legislation, also in former settler societies, such as Bolivia. This discourse focuses on physical conservation and scientific research, valuing materiality primarily. But indigenous peoples, who often have a strong interest in an archaeological site, might have different perspectives on the past, value the site differently and might integrate the site in their cultural traditions. Although the dominant discourse has changed over the last few decades, acknowledging increasingly the religious and cultural significance of material culture, it remains the question whether the discourse present in the legislation is really challenged by integrating local, indigenous perspectives during projects. In this thesis, I will first examine the relevant legislation of Bolivia. Relevant for the subject discussed here, is, firstly, the legislation on archaeological heritage management, to see which discourse is present. Secondly, the legislation on indigenous peoples’ rights is of importance, to study the nature of these rights and their development over the last two decades. I have selected three archaeological heritage management projects as case studies. In all of these three, the local indigenous community was involved in the project in a certain way. These case study projects took place within the last decade of the twentieth century and the first decade of the twenty-first century. I will 1 In this thesis, decisions regarding the management of an archaeological site can refer to all aspects related to how is dealt with archaeological remains. These aspects can include the nature of archaeological research, the knowledge production processes, the presentation of information, the use of and access to the site, among other elements. 9 examine the articles written about these projects, analyse the results from a questionnaire and use additional sources, including ethnographical studies. In this way I will analyse the effect of the Bolivian legislation on the engagement with local indigenous people during archaeological heritage management projects. According to Skeates, “archaeologists generally believe in the ‘conservation ethic’” (2000, 62). These archaeologists see the archaeological heritage as a resource which is limited and threatened and “which should, as far as possible, be managed in such a way that it is protected and preserved for future generations – of scholars in particular” (Skeates 2000, 62-63). The conservation ethic originates from the period of major developments in the 1960s and the environmental protection policies of the 1970s (Cleere 2000, 2-4; Smith and Waterton 2009, 26-27; see Lipe 1974). This particular approach to archaeological heritage places “emphasis (...) upon the material and tangible which are earmarked as crucial markers of heritage and identity” (Smith and Waterton 2009, 27). It has formed the basis of various (inter)national legislation and charters, like the Venice charter2 of the International Committee on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) of 1965 (Skeates 2000, 63; Smith and Waterton 2009, 32). As a result of these international documents, the perspective on material remains as archaeological resource is being applied worldwide, though it developed mainly in Europe (Skeates 2000, 64). From the late 1970s and 1980s on, different perspectives on archaeological heritage were being acknowledged as well. This development, from a focus on archaeological resource, the conservation ethic, and universally shared values to a more inclusive approach, “broadening (...) the meaning of expert” (Jameson 2008, 430) has been linked to the developments in archaeological theory (Endere 2007, 19- 20; Smith 2008). Within processual archaeology it was believed that an objective knowledge of the past could be gained by using scientific methods. From the late 2 International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites. 10 1970s, postprocessual archaeologists expressed their postmodernist critique on that notion. Postprocessualists argued that knowledge about the past is subjective and that multiple perspectives on the past are thus possible. According to Jameson, “[f]or many cultural heritage specialists, “value sets” are changing from traditional definitions for the historic, archaeological, and scientific, to incorporate intangibles such as aesthetic, artistic, spiritual, and other values stemming from introspection” (2008, 430). Also of influence to the development of archaeological heritage management were the increasing claims of indigenous peoples over their cultural heritage (Thomas 2008, 142). During the 1980s and early 1990s, indigenous peoples started to express their dissatisfaction with the existing power relations, caused by the international policies that defined