Despite the influence of Thomas Kuhn on critical assessments of anthropology, disciplinary histories written by anthropologists still tend to be self-serving. To this day, it seems evident to look upon the great thinkers of anthropology, those whom we think revolutionized its theories and methods, as the main carriers of the history of anthropology. Our own research projects, concerning localized, contextual histories of ethnographic practices in colonial Tanganyika (Pels) and Vietnam (Salemink), made us consider the history of anthropology from another angle. We feel that the emphasis on the "big men" of anthropology in disciplinary histories obscures the way in which ethnography was linked to the construction of colonial and neo-colonial societies. In the following text we elaborate some theses on the historical relevance of ethnographic practice, understood in relation to the anthropological discipline and to its respective local and historical contexts. These theses are obviously not the definitive outcome of a rewriting of anthropology's history, but we consider them to be necessary steps toward a critical reflection on the relations between ethnography and colonialism.First Thesis: Disciplinary history obscures the way in which academic anthropology was linked to the construction of colonial and neo-colonial societies through ethnographic practice.

No abstract

In 2011, UNESCO inscribed the fourteenth-century Citadel of the Hồ Dynasty in Vietnam's Thanh Hòa Province on the World Heritage List, thereby both recognising and rewarding Vietnam's efforts in conserving the archaeological site, as well as obliging it to meet UNESCO's official conservation standards. In an article titled 'Hồ Citadel the Site of a Modern Conflict' in the English-language newspaper Việt Nam News of 8 June 2014, Deputy Director of the Centre for Conservation of the Hồ Dynasty Citadel World Heritage, Nguyễn Xuân Toán, lamented that local people continued to 'build houses and other civil works' in the area, in violation of conservation regulations, and in spite of awareness-raising meetings. The district authorities do not wish to forbid construction of houses within certain limits, but have a plan for the gradual removal of cultivation fields from the site, and according to journalist Hồng Thúy, local people would be happy to move if they receive adequate compensation. The conflict referred to in the title is, therefore, not just a conflict between the Conservation Centre and local people, but between the centre and the district authorities, with Mr Toán complaining that 'the Centre for Conservation of the Hồ Dynasty Citadel World Heritage does not have the authority to mete out punishments on violators when CONNECTED & DISCONNECTED IN VIET NAM 312 they detect infringement of the site'. Mr Toán is supported by the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism in Hanoi: 'Management and preservation at the site will not improve unless the centre's power is enhanced, said Deputy Director of the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism's Cutural Heritage Department, Nguyễn Quốc Hùng'. 1 The news report construes this as a conflict between two government agencies-district authorities and heritage management authorities-but the conflict is over the power to evict local inhabitants whose livelihood practices are, since 2011, branded 'an infringement of the site'; local people are enemies of conservation. 313 9. DESCRIBED, INSCRIBED, WRITTEN OFF 2 Debord's book contains 221 numbered paragraphs of varying length-from one sentence to half a page-and it is to these paragraphs that I refer. There exist many different English translations of this book, which is notoriously difficult to translate. I use two different translations (Debord 1994, 2002).

This essay focuses on the political dimensions of the Festival Huế, which is claimed to be significant as a celebration of the nation. Although socialist state rituals have lost their relevance in the Đổi Mới era, the revival and re-invention of ritualised tradition create fertile ground for new ritualised events that legitimate and lend significance to the current regime. I argue that despite the unfamiliarity of many spectators with the symbolic contents of these new forms, they are effective because of their aesthetic resemblance to, and association with, familiar rituals.

No abstract