“Leveling the playing field” in the contested Territory of the South African past: A “public” versus a “people’s” form of historical archaeology outreach

Jeppson, Patrice L.

doi:10.1007/bf03374231

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…• Using archaeology to create new conversations about class equity in America(Gadsby and Chidester 2007;Saitta 2007). • Developing active roles for archaeology and heritage in 'overcoming structural violence and bridging conflicts' in the occupied Palestinian territories (World Archaeology Congress 2009) and in a changing South Africa(Jeppson 1997). • Using the archaeology of homelessness to persuade local faith-based and governmental service agencies to develop more culturally sensitive programmes and centres for their homeless citizens(Zimmerman and Welch 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Millennial archaeology. Locating the discipline in the age of insecurity

Dawdy¹

2009

Arch. Dial.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This discussion article responds to a forum question posed by the editors of Archaeological dialogues: ‘is archaeology useful?’ My response initially moves backward from the question, considering whether archaeology ought to be useful, how it has been useful in the past, and the millennial overtones of the question in our present climate of crisis. I critique the primary way in which archaeology attempts to be useful, as a dowsing rod for heritage through ‘public archaeology’. While European archaeology has long been aware of the dangers of nationalism, in the Americas this danger is cloaked by a focus on indigenous and minority histories. I then move forward through the question and urge colleagues to embrace an archaeological agenda geared towards the future rather than the past. My hope is that transatlantic dialogue will be politically useful in reorienting archaeological research towards supranational problems such as climate change, hunger and population stress.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Millennial archaeology. Locating the discipline in the age of insecurity

Dawdy¹

2009

Arch. Dial.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One method of assessing diversity in archaeological research uses the names of article authors or grant recipients to assign gender identity, an approach which is useful, but which has been critiqued for its lack of intersectionality or use in multi-issue studies (Heath-Stout, 2020 ). Missing from many of these archaeological studies about data access and management is any detailed discussion about authoritative voice and writing, and how in academia authorship facilitates ownership over the data and narrative presented in a published text (Jeppson, 1997 ; Nakata, 2018 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this paper, we explore data ownership, access, and diversity (gender and author affiliation) by presenting a study that examines the authorship of publications on archaeological lidar use in Latin America. In doing so, this paper takes an academic-centric approach to data ownership: we contend that publications are a way for authors to claim authority over ideas, related digital datasets, and narratives, which can have the unintended effect of silencing the voices of others, particularly local community members (Jeppson, 1997 ). While other forms of data ownership do exist and data are created outside of academic systems, authorship is the primary means by which scholars demonstrate their authoritative voice and data use within an academic environment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the Nature of Authority Over, and Ownership of Data Generated by Archaeological Lidar Projects in Latin America

Cohen

Fernández-Diaz

Meeks

2022

Arch

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Data ownership and accessibility are critical issues across academia, but especially in fields that touch upon digital heritage that relates to pre-colonial/colonial societies. Who can access spatial datasets about pre-colonial landscapes, who is writing about these topics, and who, by extension, is considered an authority on these topics? This paper explores data ownership, gender, and local affiliation by examining publications on archaeological lidar in Latin America between 2011 and 2021. For over 10 years, archaeological remote sensing derived from lidar has transformed research in Latin America and especially in Mesoamerica, yet there are numerous issues related to data ownership and authoritative voice that remain unresolved. This study shows that publication authorship, including first and co-authorship, is dominated by male researchers at US institutions while women and individuals associated with institutions in Latin America are poorly represented. The limited representation of authors with local or community affiliations suggests that local authoritative voices are largely muted in archaeological lidar research in the region. We discuss working toward more collaborative lidar research in Latin America.

show abstract

Politics

Meskell¹,

Preucel²

2007

A Companion to Social Archaeology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“Leveling the playing field” in the contested Territory of the South African past: A “public” versus a “people’s” form of historical archaeology outreach

Cited by 8 publications

References 23 publications

Millennial archaeology. Locating the discipline in the age of insecurity

Millennial archaeology. Locating the discipline in the age of insecurity

Exploring the Nature of Authority Over, and Ownership of Data Generated by Archaeological Lidar Projects in Latin America

Politics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About