The Council for British Archaeology (CBA) has set up new web pages on the developing problems resulting from Climate Change. At present the pages mainly stem from the Adapting Archaeology conference, which took place on 10th July 2007.
A range of guidance on policy and research are also accessible, all via http://www.britarch.ac.uk/conserve/climatehome.html
Monday 29 October 2007
WMF and the Hill of Tara
The World Monuments Fund in Britain is writing to the European Commission and the Irish authorities asking them to seek interim measures at the European Court of Justice to halt the works at Lismullin national monument, as result of the impact from the proposed M3 motorway route.
WMF stated 'Tara Hill, which is the centrepiece of a large archaeological landscape with hundreds of significant sites, is the ceremonial and mythical capital of Ireland. It would be a huge loss to the world if Tara's surrounding landscape, about which we have much to learn, is destroyed for a highway development that will only encourage more rapid and inappropriate development. We are horrified at the prospect of a radical alteration of such an important site and call upon the authorities to reconsider their decision.'
WMF placed the archaeological complex of Tara Hill on its 2008 World Monuments Watch list of 100 most endangered sites. See http://www.wmf.org.uk/wmf_watch_100/highlights/
WMF stated 'Tara Hill, which is the centrepiece of a large archaeological landscape with hundreds of significant sites, is the ceremonial and mythical capital of Ireland. It would be a huge loss to the world if Tara's surrounding landscape, about which we have much to learn, is destroyed for a highway development that will only encourage more rapid and inappropriate development. We are horrified at the prospect of a radical alteration of such an important site and call upon the authorities to reconsider their decision.'
WMF placed the archaeological complex of Tara Hill on its 2008 World Monuments Watch list of 100 most endangered sites. See http://www.wmf.org.uk/wmf_watch_100/highlights/
English Heritage guidance note on piled foundations
A new English Heritage guidance note on piled foundations and their use in preserving archaeology in situ has recently been released. It describes the main piling techniques used to construct foundations, the potential impacts of each pile type on archaeological deposits and how to mitigate the impact of piling, giving a range of options. These focus is on the decisions that need to be considered throughout the design and construction process. Case studies demonstrate some of the mitigation suggestions, and future research priorities are also discussed.
Copies can be downloaded from the HELM website.
Copies can be downloaded from the HELM website.
WAC 6 session: Ethics, conflicts and working in other people’s countries
At the conclusion of the ‘Archaeology in Conflict’ conference last November delegates argued for the introduction of a code of ethical conduct to guide practice in the ‘Heritage sector’. A main concern of the conference was the way in which international agencies and overseas ‘missions’ fail the long-term needs of the communities with which they work. Problems are most acute in situations of conflict and in its aftermath - where the urgency of reconstruction can be at the expense of sustainable and locally based solutions – but are not restricted to such circumstances.
Whilst codes of practice governing professional conduct within particular countries address ethical issues, international conventions and charters are framed by ethical considerations, and there is a growing literature on ethical archaeology, most practicing archaeologists are guided by little more than individual conscience. What are the duties and responsibilities of archaeologists and other heritage professionals when involved in excavating, conserving, managing and interpreting other people’s pasts?
This session will explore some of the problems and propose the adoption of a code of practice supplementary to the draft WAC General Code of Ethics.
Issues addressed will include:
· the conduct of archaeologists in conflict states
· the influence of neo-colonial assumptions
· the roles of international agencies and NGOs: from expert missions to capacity building
· sustainable development: dialogue or dogma?
· universal heritage: supporting economies, places or people?
· participatory planning or manipulating local politics?
· indigenous solutions and/or localising the global.
Session organisers:
Tim Williams (tim.d.williams@ucl.ac.uk), Institute of Archaeology, University College London
Dominic Perring (d.perring@ucl.ac.uk), Institute of Archaeology, University College London
Sjoerd van der Linde (s.j.van.der.linde@umail.leidenuniv.nl), Leiden University
Rene Teijgeler (rene.teijgeler@planet.nl), PRDU, University of York.
Whilst codes of practice governing professional conduct within particular countries address ethical issues, international conventions and charters are framed by ethical considerations, and there is a growing literature on ethical archaeology, most practicing archaeologists are guided by little more than individual conscience. What are the duties and responsibilities of archaeologists and other heritage professionals when involved in excavating, conserving, managing and interpreting other people’s pasts?
This session will explore some of the problems and propose the adoption of a code of practice supplementary to the draft WAC General Code of Ethics.
Issues addressed will include:
· the conduct of archaeologists in conflict states
· the influence of neo-colonial assumptions
· the roles of international agencies and NGOs: from expert missions to capacity building
· sustainable development: dialogue or dogma?
· universal heritage: supporting economies, places or people?
· participatory planning or manipulating local politics?
· indigenous solutions and/or localising the global.
Session organisers:
Tim Williams (tim.d.williams@ucl.ac.uk), Institute of Archaeology, University College London
Dominic Perring (d.perring@ucl.ac.uk), Institute of Archaeology, University College London
Sjoerd van der Linde (s.j.van.der.linde@umail.leidenuniv.nl), Leiden University
Rene Teijgeler (rene.teijgeler@planet.nl), PRDU, University of York.
Thursday 25 October 2007
CALL FOR SESSIONS
WAC-6, Dublin "Archaeologists, War and Conflict: Ethics, Politics, Responsibility."
The "Archaeologists and War" Taskforce, established in the aftermath of the Fifth World Archaeological Congress is charged with investigating the ethical and political role of archaeologists in armed conflicts around the world. Taking as its starting point the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and the subsequent media focus upon the archaeology of 'Mesopotamia', the taskforce was established to "investigate the role of archaeologists in situations of armed conflict around the world, and explore the ethical dilemmas and the social and political consequences and effects arising from that involvement".
Given the perceived increasing involvement of archaeologists with the military in many parts of the world, and other phenomena that appear to testify to the militarization of archaeology (recalling perhaps the distant past in the history of archaeology when archaeologists formed an integral part of military imperialistic campaigns), this theme invites sessions which will confront the ethics and politics of this phenomenon. It also aims to explore possible stances and practices by archaeologists and others who oppose militarization and colonialists/imperialists wars, but find themselves working amidst such situations.
More specifically, we welcome sessions with a thematic, historical, or geographical focus but which address questions such as:
- Can archaeologists use their expertise to foster cultural understanding and thereby work against militarization and military "solutions"?
- Is it possible to reconcile an anti-war stance with an archaeological involvement (advice, contribution with scholarly expertise, scientific investigations) in military conflicts?
- When should archaeologists opposed to the war become involved in 'reconstruction' efforts or forensic investigations?
- Does the desire to "rescue" antiquities justify the collaboration of archaeologists with military structures or the exclusive focus on sites and artefacts as opposed to human lives?
- What is the nature of links between imperial/colonial wars and financial profit through archaeological activity?
- Is there a need for a new code of ethics that takes into account the notion of the 'embedded archaeologist' (that is, the archaeologist who is embedded in military structures, adopting the role of an "objective professional")?
- Can there be, in contexts of armed conflict, a role for an archaeology that is both politically engaged and neutral, in the sense that it takes an ethical stance that is opposed to any and all violence?
- What should the role of forensic archaeologists and anthropologists be when asked to investigate existing or assumed mass graves?
- Should we accept the participation of serving army personnel in archaeological conferences and publications? - How can we resist a further militarization of archaeology?
- How can anti-war archaeologists in opposing camps of a conflict but with similar ethical stances collaborate and bridge the dividing line?
Reinhard Bernbeck (rbernbec@binghamton.edu)
Yannis Hamilakis (y.hamilakis@soton.ac.uk)
Susan Pollock (bg9711@binghamton.edu)
WAC-6, Dublin "Archaeologists, War and Conflict: Ethics, Politics, Responsibility."
The "Archaeologists and War" Taskforce, established in the aftermath of the Fifth World Archaeological Congress is charged with investigating the ethical and political role of archaeologists in armed conflicts around the world. Taking as its starting point the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and the subsequent media focus upon the archaeology of 'Mesopotamia', the taskforce was established to "investigate the role of archaeologists in situations of armed conflict around the world, and explore the ethical dilemmas and the social and political consequences and effects arising from that involvement".
Given the perceived increasing involvement of archaeologists with the military in many parts of the world, and other phenomena that appear to testify to the militarization of archaeology (recalling perhaps the distant past in the history of archaeology when archaeologists formed an integral part of military imperialistic campaigns), this theme invites sessions which will confront the ethics and politics of this phenomenon. It also aims to explore possible stances and practices by archaeologists and others who oppose militarization and colonialists/imperialists wars, but find themselves working amidst such situations.
More specifically, we welcome sessions with a thematic, historical, or geographical focus but which address questions such as:
- Can archaeologists use their expertise to foster cultural understanding and thereby work against militarization and military "solutions"?
- Is it possible to reconcile an anti-war stance with an archaeological involvement (advice, contribution with scholarly expertise, scientific investigations) in military conflicts?
- When should archaeologists opposed to the war become involved in 'reconstruction' efforts or forensic investigations?
- Does the desire to "rescue" antiquities justify the collaboration of archaeologists with military structures or the exclusive focus on sites and artefacts as opposed to human lives?
- What is the nature of links between imperial/colonial wars and financial profit through archaeological activity?
- Is there a need for a new code of ethics that takes into account the notion of the 'embedded archaeologist' (that is, the archaeologist who is embedded in military structures, adopting the role of an "objective professional")?
- Can there be, in contexts of armed conflict, a role for an archaeology that is both politically engaged and neutral, in the sense that it takes an ethical stance that is opposed to any and all violence?
- What should the role of forensic archaeologists and anthropologists be when asked to investigate existing or assumed mass graves?
- Should we accept the participation of serving army personnel in archaeological conferences and publications? - How can we resist a further militarization of archaeology?
- How can anti-war archaeologists in opposing camps of a conflict but with similar ethical stances collaborate and bridge the dividing line?
Reinhard Bernbeck (rbernbec@binghamton.edu)
Yannis Hamilakis (y.hamilakis@soton.ac.uk)
Susan Pollock (bg9711@binghamton.edu)
The 6th World Archaeological Congress, University College Dublin, Ireland, 29thJune to 4th July 2008
Call for papers
Title of session:
"Politics and Archaeology in Various Regions of theWorld"
within the theme of Reflections on Archaeology and Politics
Session Organizers:
Talia Shay (Talia_shay@yahoo.com)
Victor Gonzalez Fernandez
Session abstract:
This session will relate to one or more of the six questions proposed in our general theme"Reflections on Politics andArchaeology/Anthropology".
1-How archaeological knowledge in the world is used or abused for political purposes.
2 -The contextual background of biased attitudes to the past in different parts of the world.
3-Whether archaeologists/anthropologists can prevent the results of scientific work from being used against particular groups or factions in their areas.
4-How biased attitudes to the past influence people'sidentity in different areas of the world.
5-What are the perspectives of indigenous people or different minorities on archaeological inference indefferent areas and how do they live on in the intersection between the prevailing and traditionalvalues?
6 - Whether reciprocal relations are evident between archaeologists/anthropologists and indigenous communities in particular areas and do they point tothe emergence of a new code of ethics.
At the closing of this sesion a sythasis of the entire theme will be presented by the organizers.
Call for papers
Title of session:
"Politics and Archaeology in Various Regions of theWorld"
within the theme of Reflections on Archaeology and Politics
Session Organizers:
Talia Shay (Talia_shay@yahoo.com)
Victor Gonzalez Fernandez
Session abstract:
This session will relate to one or more of the six questions proposed in our general theme"Reflections on Politics andArchaeology/Anthropology".
1-How archaeological knowledge in the world is used or abused for political purposes.
2 -The contextual background of biased attitudes to the past in different parts of the world.
3-Whether archaeologists/anthropologists can prevent the results of scientific work from being used against particular groups or factions in their areas.
4-How biased attitudes to the past influence people'sidentity in different areas of the world.
5-What are the perspectives of indigenous people or different minorities on archaeological inference indefferent areas and how do they live on in the intersection between the prevailing and traditionalvalues?
6 - Whether reciprocal relations are evident between archaeologists/anthropologists and indigenous communities in particular areas and do they point tothe emergence of a new code of ethics.
At the closing of this sesion a sythasis of the entire theme will be presented by the organizers.
Call for sessions and papers in the theme *Archaeology and the Museum*
at the Sixth World Archaeological Congress, University College Dublin, Ireland, 29thJune to 4th July 2008
Theme Organisers:
Sonia Archila(Department of Anthropology, Andes University)
Sally K. May(Department of Archaeology, Flinders University of South Australia)
Theme Abstract:
This theme highlights archaeological research relating to, or coming from within, the museum sphere. The theme will focus on the shifting role ofarchaeology and anthropology museums in our contemporary societies, a societywhich is increasingly multicultural, multivocal and global.
In particular, this theme will explore the changing power relations within the museums sphere of influence and the role of social memory and social history in influencing perceptions of the past. The session organizers may be guided by the following questions:
What role do museums play in the development of the discipline of archaeologyboth in theory and practice?
How are museums of anthropology and archaeology contributing to debates surrounding heritage management?
How have museums of archaeology and anthropology engaged with notions ofdecolonization and the growing recognition of the political implications oftheir activities?
How have/could museums contribute to the debate surrounding the inclusion of social groups that have traditionally been excluded from the museologicaldiscourse?
How have museums of anthropology and archaeology modified their procedures toengage with their increasingly (or increasingly recognised) multiculturalsocieties?
How are museums of anthropology and archaeology contributing to the re-shapingof memory?
at the Sixth World Archaeological Congress, University College Dublin, Ireland, 29thJune to 4th July 2008
Theme Organisers:
Sonia Archila(Department of Anthropology, Andes University)
Sally K. May(Department of Archaeology, Flinders University of South Australia)
Theme Abstract:
This theme highlights archaeological research relating to, or coming from within, the museum sphere. The theme will focus on the shifting role ofarchaeology and anthropology museums in our contemporary societies, a societywhich is increasingly multicultural, multivocal and global.
In particular, this theme will explore the changing power relations within the museums sphere of influence and the role of social memory and social history in influencing perceptions of the past. The session organizers may be guided by the following questions:
What role do museums play in the development of the discipline of archaeologyboth in theory and practice?
How are museums of anthropology and archaeology contributing to debates surrounding heritage management?
How have museums of archaeology and anthropology engaged with notions ofdecolonization and the growing recognition of the political implications oftheir activities?
How have/could museums contribute to the debate surrounding the inclusion of social groups that have traditionally been excluded from the museologicaldiscourse?
How have museums of anthropology and archaeology modified their procedures toengage with their increasingly (or increasingly recognised) multiculturalsocieties?
How are museums of anthropology and archaeology contributing to the re-shapingof memory?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)