Is the Truth Down There?: Cultural Heritage Conflict and the Politics of Archaeological Authority

Ian Barber

Abstract


The selective pressures and processes of cultural heritage management effectively disinherit some interest groups. Where this occurs in the context of postcolonial or nationalist conflict, the material archaeological record may be referenced to support or reject particular views. The disciplinary assumptions behind the archaeological evidence so produced are not usually contested in judicial contexts. A review of archaeology’s theoretical foundations suggests that this naivety itself may be problematic. A descriptive culture history approach dominated archaeology over the first half of the twentieth century with a strong political appeal to nationalist politics. Subsequently archaeology became concerned with processual explanation and the scientific identification of universal laws of culture, consistent with postwar technological optimism and conformity. A postprocessual archaeology movement from the 1970s has promoted relativism and challenged the singular authority of scientific explanation. Archaeologists caught within this debate disagree over the use of the archaeological record in situations of political conflict. Furthermore, the use of archaeology in the sectarian debate over the Ayodhya birthplace of Rama suggests that the material record of the past can become highly politicized and seemingly irresolvable. Archaeological research is also subject to other blatant and subtle political pressures throughout the world, affecting the nature and interpretation of the record. A system that privileges archaeological information values may be irrelevant also to communities who value and manage their ancestral heritage for customary purposes. Collectively this review of theory and applied knowledge suggests that it is unrealistic to expect that archaeology can authoritatively resolve strident claims and debates about the past. Instead, an important contemporary contribution of archaeology may be its potential to document cultural and historical contradictions and inclusions for the consideration of contemporary groups in conflict.

Keywords


Archaeology; essentialism; relativism; nationalism; politics; Ayodhya

Full Text:

PDF

References


ALLEN, H. 1998. Protecting Historic Places in New Zealand, Research in Anthropology and Linguistics, no 1, Department of Anthropology, University of Auckland.

ARNOLD, B. 1990. The past as propaganda: totalitarian archaeology in Nazi Germany. Antiquity, 64, 464-78. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00078376

ARNOLD, B. & HASSMAN, H. 1995. Archaeology in Nazi Germany: the legacy of the Faustian bargain. In: KOHL, P. L. & FAWCETT, C. (eds.) Nationalism, Politics, and the Practice of Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

BENDER, B. 1998. Stonehenge: Making Space, London, Berg.

BENDER, B. 2001. The politics of the past: Eiman Macha (Navan), Northern Ireland. In: LAYTON, R., STONE, P. G. & THOMAS, J. (eds.) Destruction and Conservation of Cultural Property (OWA 41). London: Routledge.

BINFORD, L. R. 1983. In Pursuit of the Past: Decoding the Archaeological Record, New York, Thames & Hudson.

BINFORD, S. R. & BINFORD, L. R. (eds.) 1968. New Perspectives in Archaeology, Chicago: Aldine Press.

BOND, G. C. & GILLIAM, A. (eds.) 1994. Social Construction of the Past: Representation as Power (OWA 24), London: Routledge.

BROOKS, J. F. 1995. Sing away the Buffalo: Faction and fission on the Northern Plains. In: DUKE, P. & WILSON, M. C. (eds.) Beyond Subsistence: Plains Archaeology and the Postprocessual Critique. Tuscaloosa, Alabama: The University of Alabama Press.

CACHOLA-ABAD, C. K. & AYAU, E. H. 1999. He Pane Ho’omalamalama: Setting the record straight and a second call for partnership. Hawaiian Archaeology, 7, 76.

CHILDE, V. G. 1925. The Dawn of European Civilization, London, Kegan Paul.

CHILDE, V. G. 1926. The Aryans: A Study of Indo-European Origins, London, Kegan Paul.

CHILDE, V. G. 1956. Piecing Together the Past: The Interpretation of Archaeological Data, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul.

FALKENHAUSEN, L. V. 1995. The regionalist paradigm in Chinese archaeology. In: KOHL, P. L. & FAWCETT, C. (eds.) Nationalism, Politics, and the Practice of Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

GOPAL, S. 1993. Anatomy of a Confrontation: Ayodhya and the Rise of Communal Politics in India, London, Zed Books.

GREEN, E. L. 1984. Ethics and Values in Archaeology, New York, The Free Press (Macmillan).

HAMLIN, A. 2000. Archaeological heritage management in Northern Ireland: Challenges and solutions. In: MCMANAMON, F. P. & HATTON, A. (eds.) Cultural Resource Management in Contemporary Society, One World Archaeology (OWA) 33. London: Routledge.

HILL, J. D. 1992. Contested pasts and the practice of archaeology: Overview. American Anthropologist, 94, 809-15. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1992.94.4.02a00020

HODDER, I. 1986. Reading the Past: Current Approaches to Interpretation in Archaeology, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

HODDER, I., SHANKS, M., ALEXANDRI, A., BUCHLI, V., CARMAN, J., LAST, J. & LUCAS, G. (eds.) 1995. Interpreting Archaeology: Finding Meaning in the Past, London: Routledge.

HUBERT, J. & TURNBULL, P. (eds.) 2004. The Dead and their Possessions: Repatriation in Principle, Policy and Practice (OWA 43), London: Routledge.

JOYCE, R. A. 2004. Academic freedom, stewardship and cultural heritage: weighing the interests of stakeholders in crafting repatriation approaches. In: HUBERT, J. & TURNBULL, P. (eds.) The Dead and their Possessions: Repatriation in Principle, Policy and Practice (OWA 43). London: Routledge.

KILLEBREW, A. E. 1999. The presentation of archaeological sites in Israel. Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, 3, 17-32. doi: https://doi.org/10.1179/135050399793138626

KIRCH, P. 1999. Hawaiian archaeology: Past, present and future. Hawaiian Archaeology, 7, 67-68.

KOHL, P. L. & FAWCETT, C. 1995. Archaeology in the service of the state. In: KOHL, P. L. & FAWCETT, C. (eds.) Nationalism, Politics, and the Practice of Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

KOHL, P. L. & FAWCETT, C. (eds.) 1995. Nationalism, Politics, and the Practice of Archaeology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

KOHL, P. L. & TSETSKHADZE, G. R. 1995. Nationalism, politics, and the practice of archaeology in the Caucasus. In: KOHL, P. L. & FAWCETT, C. (eds.) Nationalism, Politics, and the Practice of Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

LAHIRI, N. 2003. Ayodhya – Not a treasure hunt. World Archaeological Bulletin, 18, 73-78.

LAL, B. B. 1981. The two Indian epics vis-à-vis archaeology. Antiquity, 55, 27-34. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00043593

LAYTON, R. (ed.) 1989. Conflict in the Archaeology of Living Traditions (OWA 8), London: Unwin Hyman.

LAYTON, R., STONE, P. G. & THOMAS, J. (eds.) 2001. Destruction and Conservation of Cultural Property (OWA 41), London: Routledge.

LAYTON, R. & THOMAS, J. 2001. Introduction: the destruction and conservation of cultural property. In: LAYTON, R., STONE, P. G. & THOMAS, J. (eds.) Destruction and Conservation of Cultural Property (OWA 41). London: Routledge. doi: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203279489

MCMANAMON, F. P. & HATTON, A. 2000. Introduction: considering cultural management in modern society. In: MCMANAMON, F. P. & HATTON, A. (eds.) Cultural Resource Management in Contemporary Society, One World Archaeology (OWA) 33. London: Routledge. doi: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203208779

NDORO, W. & PWITI, G. 2001. Heritage management in southern Africa: Local, national and international discourse. Public Archaeology, 2, 33. doi: https://doi.org/10.1179/pua.2001.2.1.21

RAO, N. 1994. Interpreting silences: symbol and history in the case of the Ram Janmabhoomi/Babri Masjid. In: BOND, G. C. & GILLIAM, A. (eds.) Social Construction of the Past: Representation as Power (OWA 24). London: Routledge.

RAO, N. & REDDY, C. R. 2001. Ayodhya, the print media and communalism. In: LAYTON, R., STONE, P. G. & THOMAS, J. (eds.) Destruction and Conservation of Cultural Property (OWA 41). London: Routledge.

RATNAGAR, S. 2004. Archaeology at the Heart of a Political Confrontation: The Case of Ayodhya. Current Anthropology, 45, 239-59. doi: https://doi.org/10.1086/381044

ROWLANDS, M. 1989. The politics of identity in archaeology. In: SHENNAN, S. (ed.) Archaeological Approaches to Archaeological Identity (OWA 10). London: London.

SHANKS, M. & TILLEY, C. 1987. Reconstructing Archaeology: Theory and Practice, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

SHARMA, R. S. 2001. The Ayodhya issue. In: LAYTON, R., STONE, P. G. & THOMAS, J. (eds.) Destruction and Conservation of Cultural Property (OWA 41). London: Routledge.

SHNIRELMAN, V. A. 1995. From internationalism to nationalism: forgotten pages of Soviet archaeology in the 1930s and 1940s. In: KOHL, P. L. & FAWCETT, C. (eds.) Nationalism, Politics, and the Practice of Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

SILBERMAN, N. A. 1995. Promised lands and chosen peoples: the politics and poetics of archaeological narrative. In: KOHL, P. L. & FAWCETT, C. (eds.) Nationalism, Politics, and the Practice of Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

TARUVINGA, P. & NDORO, W. 2003. The vandalism of the Domboshava rock painting site, Zimbabwe. Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, 6, 3-10. doi: https://doi.org/10.1179/135050303793137983

TORRE, M. D. L. (ed.) 1997. The Conservation of Archaeological Sites in the Mediterranean Region, LA: The Getty Conservation Institute.

TRIGGER, B. G. 1989. A History of Archaeological Thought, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

TRIGGER, B. G. 1995. Romanticism, nationalism and archaeology. In: KOHL, P. L. & FAWCETT, C. (eds.) Nationalism, Politics, and the Practice of Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

TUNBRIDGE, J. E. & ASHWORTH, G. J. 1996. Dissonant Heritage: The Management of the Past As a Resource in Conflict, Chichester, England, John Wiley & Sons.

VEIT, U. 1989. Ethnic concepts in German prehistory: a cased study on the relationship between cultural identity and archaeological objectivity. In: SHENNAN, S. (ed.) Archaeological Approaches to Archaeological Identity (OWA 10). London: Unwin Hyman.

WILLEY, G. R. & SABLOFF, J. A. 1993. A History of American Archaeology, New York, W. H. Freeman.

ZIMMERMAN, L. J. 1995. We do not need your past! Politics, Indian time, and Plains archaeology. In: DUKE, P. & WILSON, M. C. (eds.) Beyond Subsistence: Plains Archaeology and the Postprocessual Critique. Tuscaloosa, Alabama: The University of Alabama Press.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5130/phrj.v13i0.251