Posts com a Tag ‘O que o Patrimônio muda (I) / História – Questões & Debates / 2018’

This collection of papers, featured in two issues of História: questões e debates, is the result of discussions held at the 2016 Association for Critical Heritage Studies (ACHS) conference in Montréal, Canada. Over two days, participants from seven countries and four indigenous nations (referred to as First Nations in Canada) presented a diverse array of papers. These meetings were an appropriate venue to bring together these scholars, as the ACHS strives to study heritage as a field of critical inquiry, challenging more conservative views, while encouraging inclusive, participatory practices. The ACHS Manifesto prepared for the 2012 conference suggests “the integration of heritage… with studies of memory, public history, community, tourism, planning and development… while increasing dialogue and debate between researchers, practitioners and communities.” Furthermore, it seeks to democratise “heritage by consciously rejecting elite cultural narratives and embracing the heritage insights of people communities and cultures that have traditionally been marginalised in formulating heritage policy… thereby including diverse non-Western cultural heritage traditions.”[1] Like many archaeologists, we feel that the ACHS Manifesto expresses how we hope archaeology will evolve as a discipline. Since the 2000s, an increasing amount of scholarship is devoted to decolonising the humanities, encouraging training and collaboration with First Nations (ATALAY, 2006; CHALIFOUX and GATES ST-PIERRE, 2017; LYDON and RIZVI, 2010; SAILLANT et al. 2011), as well as creating a more collaborative, or public, archaeology (see the journal Public Archaeology; MATSUDA and OKAMURA, 2011; MOSHENKA, 2017; SKEATES et al., 2012). While most archaeology is robustly multi-disciplinary, a decidedly Western narrative continues to dominate archaeological practice.

In proposing a session that corresponded to the ACHS 2016 theme What does heritage change? and in the spirit of the ACHS 2012 Manifesto, we argued that archaeology, in going above and beyond the traditional goals of research and post-excavation analyses, may indeed contribute to education and to the creation of identities and communities. Our session began with papers on how the practice of archaeology is managed and legislated. Regardless of planned outcomes, the legislation and management of buried heritage is a key part of the archaeological process. Archaeological sites are managed by multiple forms and branches of legislation at the local, regional, provincial / state, and national levels. Competing and at times conflicting interests, poor funding, and weak legislation may hinder the proper integration of archeological heritage in the planning and management of cities, First Nations lands, outlying regions slated for development, and parklands. Four papers and two case studies present some of these shared challenges while also highlighting archaeological success stories.

Desrosiers’ paper outlines how archaeology is legislated and practiced in the Canadian province of Québec, while Moss discusses management at the municipal level in the city of Québec. They discuss the experiences of archaeologists in a legislative setting that is ambiguous about the roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders. Tanaka’s paper focuses on the complex management of archaeology at the site of Patara, Turkey, and explains how a variety of government bodies apply their specific legislations to the site. The perception of what is an archaeological site has evolved since excavations began at Patara, and Tanaka’s paper grapples with these diverging narratives. Treyvaud and her colleagues from the Abenaki Nation in southern Québec explain the Waban-Aki approach to comanaging cultural heritage and natural resources. Incorporating and exploring a variety of research methodologies, they view archaeology as a means to study the Nation’s past as well as to affirm its presence today.

This volume concludes with the presentation of two case studies. Wang and Nakamura discuss the relatively recent classification of Chinese large-scale archaeological sites and presents us with three examples, while Hesham and Baller focus on Luxor, Egypt, and how archaeology has impacted both the local community and the cultural landscape since the nineteenth century. Their papers propose concrete recommendations for improved management and legislation of these sites that, if applied, would improve the lives of local community members, while also respecting the need to maintain and interpret archaeological sites deemed to be significant symbols of national heritage.

Acknowledgments

We wish to thank all participants in our session and for their lively discussions and their contributions to these volumes. Warm thanks also go to Lucie Morrisset, Université de Québec à Montréal, and the Chair of the 2016 ACHS meetings for the invitation to organize our session. The CELAT research centre of Université Laval, Québec, and the Groupe de recherche en archéométrie at Université Laval generously supported this initiative.

Nota

1. Association for Critical Heritage Studies, 2012 Manifesto, www.criticalheritagestudies.org / history /

Referências

ATALAY, Sonya. Indigenous Archaeology as Decolonizing Practice. American Indian Quarterly, n. 30 (3 / 4), pp. 280-310, 2006.

CHALIFOUX, Éric and Christian GATES ST-PIERRE. Décolonisation de l’archéologie : émergence d’une archéologie collective. Salons Érudit, 2017. salons.erudit.org / 2017 / 08 / 01 / decolonisation-de-larcheologie /

LYDON, Jane and Uzma Z. RIZVI (eds.) Handbook of Postcolonial Archaeology. New York: Taylor and Francis, 2010.

MATSUDA, A., and OKAMURA, K. Introduction: New Perspectives in Global Public Archaeology. In: A. Matsuda and K.Okamura, (eds). New Perspectives in Global Public Archaeology. London: Springer, pp. 1–18, 2011.

MOSHENSKA, G. Key Concepts in Public Archaeology. London: UCL Press, 2017.

SAILLANT, Francine, KILANI, Monder and Florence Graezer BIDEAU, (eds.). Le Manifeste de Lausanne : pour une anthropologie non hégémonique. Montréal, Québec : Éditions Liber, 2011.

SKEATES, Robin, MCDAVID, Carol and J. CARMAN (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Public Archaeology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.

Allison Bain – Professors of Archaeology, CELAT, Université Laval, Québec, QC, CANADA, G1V 0A6. E-mail: allison.Bain@hst.ulaval.ca

Réginald Auger

BAIN, Allison; AUGER, Réginald. Introduction.História: Questões e Debates. Curitiba, v.66, n.1, jan. / jun., 2018. Acessar publicação original [DR]

Acessar dossiê