Archaeological Engagement Research Articles

Archaeology, Conservation, and Public Engagement at Omrit: A Case Study

AbstractThis article tells the story of Omrit in its evolution from a new archaeological site to a place of on-site conservation, the establishment of off-site exhibitions centered around a locus of regional cultural heritage, and future plans for a national park and nature reserve. We believe Omrit may serve as a case study of the stages other archaeological sites may ultimately experience. We discuss the initial stage of excavations, the development of in-situ conservation and stabilization, the decisions to embark on ex-site exhibits, the introduction of digitization of objects and finds, and conclude with a discussion of plans and proposals for the site done in concert with in-country authorities.

From enchantment toagencement: Archaeological engagements with pilgrimage

This commentary springs from insights gleaned from two sources. The first involves my archaeological research into the ancient pilgrimage center of Chaco Canyon, New Mexico; the second includes lessons learned by walking the medieval Camino de Santiago. The four papers in this volume describe enchanting destinations reached by archaeological pilgrims engaged in ambulatory knowing. I frame my discussion of these papers using DeLeuzean concepts of assemblage/ agencement, emphasizing the emergent properties of pilgrimage, and underscoring how archaeologists can study pilgrims in motion.

Articles of Dress, Domestic Utensils, Arms and Other Curiosities: Excavating Early 19th-Century Collections from Southern Africa at the London Missionary Society Museum

The stimulus for this article arises from a comparison between missionary collecting in two of the earliest mission fields established by the London Missionary Society (LMS): the Pacific (1797), and southern Africa (1799). As the location to which a large number of Polynesian ‘idols’ were sent following conversion to Christianity, the LMS museum (1814–1910) has gained an important place in Pacific historiography, but the same cannot be said for southern Africa. This article explores the significance of the LMS museum as a site of deposition for material that originated in missionary encounters and exchanges in southern Africa during the first third of the 19th century. It highlights the museum’s potential to provide a source of material evidence that complements not only the texts associated with the documentary archive, but also the material remains associated with the former mission site, the usual foci for historical and archaeological engagements. Particular attention is given to material associated with John Campbell (1766–1840) and Robert Moffat (1795–1883), who travelled extensively in the region and subsequently published accounts of their journeys. Re-situating particular museum artefacts within the specific circumstances of these missionary encounters enables them to stand, not as exemplars of African cultural practices prior to European contact, but rather as forms of evidence that chart historical transformations in material culture across the southern African contact zone.

For the objects, archaeology and the archaeological

Archaeology turns round its objects as much as it turns them out. This is partially an artefact of its reflection, which is not always linear; it is sometimes cyclic. The cyclic is not a perfect circle. Our objects open themselves in new ways to archaeological engagement, but this new relevance surfaces through creative inspiration triangulated off previous orientations. In revolving around our objects, inevitably we return to a familiar place, even though it is where we have never been (González-Ruibal 2014). The linear orientation, by contrast, is progressive. It fashions its every step anew. Thus its movement is supersessive – it pushes forward by violently casting overboard what is considered to be of less value (often on misconstrued grounds) and assuming its position. Whereas the former oscillates with various degrees of awareness, the latter strikes out with inevitable levels of amnesia. To attain a genuinely novel position one must struggle against forgetting former orientations, for to eliminate is to run the risk of repetition – blind to whether or not one ever truly invents – and even redundancy – with multiple copies the impact of our work is diminished. Still, if true improvement constitutes progress, then archaeology, when properly executed, moves in spirals, and our objects move with us.

Archaeo-propaganda: The History of Political Engagement in Archaeology in Central Europe

Archaeology, a science studying material sources with which mankind shaped their world and social relations in the past, may appear to be an apolitical discipline. In fact, the opposite is true. National and ideological propagandists have long set their eyes on archaeology, since its very beginnings. In this paper I am trying to give a brief overview of the development of ideology in archaeology and its application, as well as its engagement in the formation of political propaganda in the modern history of Central and Eastern Europe. In today’s globalised world, archaeology is confronted on a daily basis with changes in public opinion, with the development of the society in a diverse geopolitical context, but also with a wide range of human rights issues. There is no doubt that archaeology, as a social science, cannot develop in isolation from changes in the society and, quite to the contrary, that it is destined to reflect on major societal issues of our time. Although modern archaeology is profoundly affected by the current intellectual societal demand and ideology, archaeologists openly admit that their science is not apolitical and timeless. This awareness could hopefully help prevent its unfortunate political engagement and use for the propaganda of ideologies and regimes in the future.

Why the Present Matters: The Importance of Community Outreach and Public Engagement in Archaeology

But it is more important — because more humanizing — for us to understand the actors of the past in their full complexity and humanity, just as we would like to be appraised by future historians. S...

Introduction

Introduction

The Expanding Legacy of the Enslaved Potter-Poet David Drake

ABSTRACTThis article focuses on a number of important events in the ongoing legacies of David (Dave) Drake, an African-American potter who lived and worked in Edgefield, South Carolina. Dave’s creativity was expressed in writing poetry and as a conceptual artist. His inspirations have been recognized by efforts today in advancing literacy and improving education. This study examines an array of interactive museum programs, educational initiatives, films, theater and dance productions, poetry readings, and publications for young and old readers alike that have conveyed Dave’s accomplishments to broad audiences and students. Archaeological engagements, scholarly publications, and Dave’s induction into the South Carolina Hall of Fame are also considered. His legacies are discussed in their historical contexts and in regard to their impacts on facets of our contemporary society and culture. From limited recognition decades ago to broad acclaim today, Edgefield alkaline-glazed stoneware is now seen as the genesis of an artisan tradition of Southern stoneware.

Back to the Future? Presenting archaeology at the Green Man Festival

In the summer of 2011, Cardiff Osteoarchaeology Research Group was invited to present a number of archaeological engagement activities at the Green Man music festival as part of the Einstein’s Garden science learning area. The project, called Back to the Future?: Animals and archaeology in Einstein’s Garden comprised a number of activities, designed to cater for a wide range of ages as the festival audience typically includes young people and families. Over four days more than 2000 people visited the stall. This paper will briefly outline the activities presented, and will reflect on the challenges posed by outreach at a music festival, in particular how to hook the main festival demographic, and how to evaluate success.

Digital Co-production in Archaeology. An editorial

This special issue focuses on digitally-enabled co-production in archaeology, by bringing together papers that were presented at the session Communication as Collaboration: Digital Methods, Experiences and Values, organised at the 21st Annual Meeting of the European Association of Archaeologists (University of Glasgow, 2015). The session was part of the Communicating Archaeology thematic cluster, which was partly inspired by the first published volume dedicated specifically to the topic of digital public engagement in archaeology (Bonacchi 2012). In that session and in this collection, we have been exploring communication as the collaborative construction of materials and interpretations rather than the dissemination of content at given stages of the archaeological research process (Bonacchi and Moshenska 2015). We have aimed at building an initial critical mass of literature reflecting on participatory engagement with archaeology, its values, limitations and applicability by different social actors in a range of places and spaces, geo-political, social and cultural situations. By hosting case studies that were spontaneously offered in response to an invited call for papers, the issue allows the examination of the presence, or absence, meanings and outcomes of digital co-production in archaeology at an international level.

Archaeology, climate change and environmental ethics: diachronic perspectives on human:non-human:environment worldviews, activism and care

ABSTRACTThis paper calls for archaeological engagement with the ethical dimension of past:present:future global environmental discourse and Anthropocene studies. In contrast to the recent chronological focus of archaeology’s engagement with Anthropocene studies, and its often rather generalised call for recognising the relevance of historically attested adaptive responses to climate change to current challenges, it highlights the need to examine the individual contributing and resulting factors of climate change and extreme environmental events. It advocates an approach that combines archaeology’s traditional focus on the practical and material elements of disaster management, with one that explores historical epistemologies of human:non-human care and entanglement, and socio-religious and collective ideological movements as driving forces behind historically specific environmental ethics. In relation to the ‘non-human’ element of the human:non-human:environment configuration there is special emphasis not only on non-human animals, but also conceptualisations of divine, ‘supra-human’, and numinous entities and spheres such as gods, spirits, and sacred places which are essential for attaining fully syncretic perspectives on diachronic environmental ethics. A key argument is that recognition of the multi-directional dynamics of human:environment entanglement, drawing on developments within religious studies, the environmental and medical humanities, as well as environmental health discourse, is crutical for achieving more widespread engagement with environmental activism, and movement towards long term behavioural changes that ultimately reduce global suffering and increase environmental, economic and human wellbeing.

Review: Archaeology, Heritage, and Civic Engagement: Working toward the Public Good by Barbara J. Little and Paul A. Shackel

Review: Archaeology, Heritage, and Civic Engagement: Working toward the Public Good by Barbara J. Little and Paul A. Shackel

“Are We There Yet?”

The proposition “We are all archaeologists now”, appears to equate public interest in the past with the practice, theory and method of archaeology. To argue that this is not the case is not to adopt an elitist position but rather to consider the complexities of such a statement. The importance of public involvement in archaeology is acknowledged as both supporting, broadening and democratising the profession and the discussion of past lives and cultures. However, the limitations of generalised archaeological presentations, particularly as often presented in the general media is highlighted, noting that the ethical dimensions of archaeological practice is often ignored in favour of a methodological focus and attached with western bias. The application of an Australian context questions both the applicability and indeed relevance of the proposition to Traditional Owners for whom archaeological approaches may be viewed through the prism of past western cultural treatment and exploitation. Consequently the use of ‘we’ as an inclusive term is debatable within this contested cultural dimension. The limits of a general Australian public engagement and interest in Indigenous archaeology further undermines the proposition, although the potential for archaeology to play a positive ongoing role in promoting and supporting a reconciliation of these issues of understanding in collaboration with Traditional Owners is advocated. We may not all be archaeologists then, but we all have a stake in and role to play for a greater mutual understanding of the past and its effects on the present, with a view to the preservation of our collective cultural heritage.

Co-Creation and Public Archaeology

AbstractThis paper serves a dual purpose. First it is an introduction that aims to frame a set of papers that describe and discuss the process of co-creation in a variety of archaeological projects. We discuss the challenge of community engagement in public archaeology and offer co-creative practice as a method for improving our relationships with descendant communities and the general public. We begin by providing a definition of public archaeology and a brief overview of its evolution over the last few decades. Second, we discuss co-creation’s origins and utilization in the museum and business sectors, where the process is applied to address challenges similar to those archaeologists face. We then demonstrate how co-creation fits into the public/applied archaeological framework. We argue that co-creation must be both co (that is, share power in some way) and creative (that is, not just do the same things better, but do something new). Within this framework, we discuss how co-creation aligns with and informs current trends in public archaeology practice drawing from the case studies included in this issue. We conclude that co-creation has an important place on the collaborative continuum and can help our discipline become more responsive to the needs of our many publics.

Co-Creation’s Role in Digital Public Archaeology

AbstractSimon (2010:187) notes that the purpose of co-creative community projects is “to give voice and be responsive to the needs and interests of local community members; to provide a place for community engagement and dialogue; and to help participants develop skills that will support their own individual and community goals.” This paper explores the role that co-creation currently plays in digital public archaeology and discusses how co-creative methods can inform broader archaeological digital engagement efforts. It begins by placing co-creation in its proper context in order to demonstrate its unique characteristics, its value, and how it complicates approaches used in other types of archaeological engagement projects, such as Open Access initiatives. The discussion then turns to evaluating its impact and the broader need to measure success in digital public engagement projects. A discussion of research from the archaeology and the cultural heritage sectors provides examples of evaluation metrics and methods for assessing digital public archaeology projects. The paper concludes by suggesting that all digital engagement projects can benefit from incorporating some of the principles that are inherently part of co-creative methods but that not all archaeological digital engagement projects should strive to be completely co-creative.

Lessons Learned Along the Way: The Florida Public Archaeology Network after Ten Years

Created by the Florida Legislature in 2004, the Florida Public Archaeology Network (FPAN) has grown into a positive force for preservation, public engagement, and community collaboration in archaeology. This article discusses the genesis of FPAN and how the organization has changed in scope, evolved in mission, and addressed challenges, ideally providing ideas and direction for similar programmes in other locations.

Online Survey Data from Twitter and Archaeology Surveys 2011-2013

These survey results are from annual online surveys of Twitter users who are active volunteers or professional archaeologists worldwide. The data covers a variety of topics related to location of Twitter use, the type of device used, lists and followers, activity relating to archaeological topics, public engagement and archaeological networking online. There is scope for sentiment analysis, and further qualitative and quantitative analysis.

Mapping the Z-Axis: Early Archaeological Engagement with Time and Space in the Ancient Near East

The development of the archaeology of the ancient Near East as an independent discipline in the nineteenth century, with its focus on uncovering the peoples and places of the past, particularly from the biblical world, contributed to a visual tradition that presented the time and space of an idealized historical past often influenced by religious preconceptions. Using the physical materials from excavated sites, and linking these discoveries with literal and uncritical readings of the Bible, European and American scholars in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries created maps for the public showing peoples, places, routes, and events from the past imposed on the contemporary landscape of the present. In so doing, the archaeology of the ancient Near East helped to define and create visual presentations of a particularized view of the past that continues to hold significance for common understandings of history in the present.

“And in Every Hamlet a Poet”: Gaelic Oral Tradition and Postmedieval Archaeology in Scotland

The archaeological study of the postmedieval Scottish Highlands has engaged little with Gaelic oral tradition. The period from 1700 saw the gradual decline of the Gaelic language and the society and culture that supported it. Events and processes such as the Jacobite rebellions (1715 and 1745), 18th-century agricultural improvement, and the 19th-century Highland Clearances made the postmedieval era a turbulent one for both individuals and ways of life. Oral tradition played a key part in Gaelic society throughout this period and is invaluable as a form of evidence for postmedieval society and culture. Previous archaeological approaches are discussed, and the range of available evidence is outlined in order to demonstrate that archaeological engagement with oral sources can greatly enrich the understanding of Scotland’s past.

Community Engagement in Archaeology (Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology)

Community Engagement in Archaeology (Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology)