European and world archaeologies

Abstract

Relations between European archaeologies and those elsewhere in the world are manifold and complex. They involve issues in archaeological research, in dealing with archaeological heritage resources, and in the archaeological profession, that are also influenced by the dominant use of English. This paper explores some of those issues that were also presented at a debate during the World Archaeological Congress in Dublin.

Scholarly discussion as engineering the meanings of a European cultural heritage

“…Two articles brought out criticism toward the ‘Eurocentricism’ of heritage. Willem J. H. Willems (2009) suggests that Eurocentricism could be overcome by recognizing new types of heritage such as ‘cultural achievement as expressed in landscape [–] or in industrial and technological monuments’ (p. 655). According to Vecco (2010), ‘immateriality and orality can be interpreted as a step in the direction of overcoming a Eurocentric perspective of heritage’ (p.324).…”

The archaeology of Mauritius

“…between former imperial Europe, modern-day dependencies and newly formed republics (Seetah 2010b). In future we may see archaeological theory and practice applied as the 'direct offspring of European colonial archaeology' (Willems 2009), returning as essentially different entities Figure 11. Chickpea, Cicer arietinum, from Trianon Barracks (photograph: Jacob Morales-Matoes).…”

“…between former imperial Europe, modern-day dependencies and newly formed republics (Seetah 2010b). In future we may see archaeological theory and practice applied as the ‘direct offspring of European colonial archaeology’ (Willems 2009), returning as essentially different entitiesthat have absorbed the ideals and requirements of the local community in new settings: accents of a language that has changed in its native land and that serves to promote novel conversation across pedagogic levels.Mauritian archaeology demonstrates how the discipline may evolve as the ideas of the global archaeological community are expressed, requiring a reflexive assessment of our genuinely universal subject. Why it has taken us so long to foster an ‘archaeology of indenture’ is a question that needs to be considered at a disciplinary level, particularly given the global impact of this diaspora, and the fact that historical, community and heritage archaeologies have become increasingly active fields of engagement for the international archaeological community.…”

The Future of World Heritage and the Emergence of Transnational Heritage Regimes

“…In the same way as natives were ignored in North America, so were for example local villagers ignored in decisions about heritage in Europe. It is quite probable that the conscious involvement of local stakeholders in modern heritage resource management, and also the development of forms of community archaeology, where the local population participates in archaeological work, is to a large extent the result of a change induced by the regard and respect for other peoples' stakes in heritage resources (Willems 2009).…”