Navigation bannerBettina Arnold's Home pageCourses TaughtHeuneburg ProjectGender ConferenceLocal archaeology eventsPublic lecturesCurriculum vitae

Anthropology 641
Who Owns The Past?

Fall 2004

Trojan cartoon
  Instructor: Bettina Arnold
Office Hours: SAB 229 M 12:30-1:30 T 9:00-10:00 or by appointment x4583
Course Reflector: WOP@uwm.edu
e-mail: barnold@uwm.edu

Course Description:
This course examines a number of issues relating to the study, interpretation, presentation and conservation of the past that are becoming more and more important in an increasingly politicized global environment. Why preserve the past, and in what form? Should prehistoric relics be narrowly conceived or treated in the broader context of all cultural relics? How has the past been used and abused for political purposes in different historical and cultural contexts? To what extent have administrative policies and ethnocentric attitudes towards indigenous peoples alienated indigenes from anthropologists? How do museums, collections, the restitution of cultural property and the illicit traffic in relics contribute to this situation? What is being done to encourage communication between opposing interested parties in the ongoing struggle for control of the past? We will be looking at case studies from around the globe during the 19th and 20th centuries.

Readings:
  1. Textbooks (University Bookstore): Feder, Kenneth L. 2001 Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries: Science and Pseudoscience in Archaeology. Mountainview: Mayfield.
    Hurst Thomas, David 2001 Skull Wars: Kennewick Man, Archaeology and the Battle for Native American Identity. New York: Basic Books.
    Renfrew, Colin 2001 Loot, Legitimacy and Ownership. New York: Duckworth.
    Vitelli, Karen 1996 Archaeological Ethics. Walnut Creek: AltaMira.
  2. Course Reader (IKON Copy Center UWM Union) Marked *
  3. Supplementary Reading: On Library Reserve
Download Realaudio Download a free copy of RealPlayer to listen to the RealAudio programs.

Additional required readings: see attached weekly assignment sheets.

Reading Assignments:
There will be up to six articles/chapters (more if the articles are short) assigned each week in addition to reading from the textbooks. Students will be expected to do the reading in order to engage in discussion. Attendance and participation count toward the final grade, so being prepared for class is highly recommended.

Evaluation and Grading:
Undergraduates:
  1. Four short (5-10 page) papers, based on four of the weekly topics (cite at least 3 non-textbook sources!): 60%
  2. Presentation: Sources drawn from the Additional Readings for that topic: 25%
  3. Attendance and participation: 10%
  4. Attendance at three archaeology-related talks (see http://www.uwm.edu/Dept/ArchLab/ for complete list of on-campus lectures this semester): 5%.
Graduate Students:
  1. Four short papers (see above): 40%
  2. Revise/expand one of the four short papers into a 15-20+ page final paper: 40%
  3. Presentation: Sources drawn from the Additional Readings for that topic: 20%
  4. Attendance and participation: Attendance and participation are a given.
  5. Extra Credit: Two points possible for attendance at three archaeology-related talks (see http://www.uwm.edu/Dept/Anthropology/ for complete list of on-campus lectures this semester).

Topics:
September 13-20: Fantastic Archaeology: Life on the Fringe
Text: Feder Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries (whole text)
1ST PAPER DUE: September 27 (in class)
Sept. 27-Oct.11: The Politics of the Past
Text: Vitelli Archaeological Ethics Chapters 9-13
2ND PAPER DUE: October 18 (in class)
Oct. 18-Nov. 8: Bones of Contention: Reburial and Repatriation
Text: Hurst Thomas Skull Wars (whole text)
Vitelli Archaeological Ethics Chapters 14, 16, 18-21
3RD PAPER DUE: November 15 (in class)
November 15-29: Looting, Collecting and Legislation
Text: Renfrew Loot, Legitimacy and Ownership (whole text)
Vitelli Archaeological Ethics Chapters 1-8, 15, 17
4TH PAPER DUE: November 29 (in class)
December 6-13: Presenting the Past: Archaeology and the Public
Text: Vitelli Archaeological Ethics Chapters 21-23
Graduate Students: Final Paper Draft Due: November 29 (in class)
Final Paper Due: December 17 Noon!!

September 13-20: Fantastic Archaeology

ADDITIONAL READINGS: Articles marked * are required and are to be found in the Course Reader. Other articles/chapters are available on Library Reserve. Books can be borrowed from me on request for a two-day loan if the Library does not have a copy.
  1. *Arnold, Bettina. (in press) Pseudoarchaeology and nationalism. In Garrett G. Fagan (ed.), Archaeological Fantasies: How Pseudoarchaeology Misrepresents the Past and Misleads the Public. London: Routledge.

  2. *Chippindale, Christopher. 1986 Stoned Henge: events and issues at the summer solstice, 1985. World Archaeology 18(1):38-58.

  3. Gilman, Rhoda. 1993 Vikings in Minnesota: A Controversial Legacy. Roots 21(2). Minnesota Historical Society.

  4. Radner, Daisie and Michael Radner. 1982 Science and Unreason. Wadsworth. Preface; Chapters I-III.

  5. *Williams, Steven. 1987 Fantastic archaeology: What should we do about it? In Francis B. Harrold and Raymond A. Eve (eds), Cult Archaeology and Creationism: Understanding Pseudoscientific Beliefs about the Past, pp. 124-133. University of Iowa Press.
Paper #1: Choose an example of "fantastic" or "cult" archaeology. What makes this particular case study an example of "pseudo-science"? Discuss the characteristics of "pseudo-archaeology" with reference to this example. How do you think professional archaeologists should respond to "fantastic archaeology"? How is "professional archaeology" different from the approach taken in the example you have chosen? How would you define "professional archaeology" vs. "pseudo-archaeology"?

Presentation: Choose a different example of lunatic fringe archaeology and deconstruct it. Provide a brief description and history of the example you have chosen. Why is it pseudo-science? Do you think this example of "lunatic fringe" archaeology is harmless, harmful, or neither? Why? Bring enough copies of the complete bibliography (10 references minimum, of which no more than 5 should be Web sites) related to your case study to distribute to the class. You are encouraged to find your own sources! Produce a list of discussion questions for class the day of the presentation. You will be responsible for a brief (no more than 15 minute) presentation on your case study, making use of visual aids where appropriate (handouts, overheads, slides, videos all encouraged).

  arrowUniversity of Iowa - Lost Tribes, Sunken Continents and Ancient Astronauts  Links page
arrowThe Society for Interdisciplinary Studies  Links page
arrowFossil Hominids - Refuting Creationist Claims
arrowCarl Sagan on Pseudoscience.  Science Friday - May 3, 1996.  Requires RealAudioDownload Realaudio
 

Sept. 27-Oct.11: The Politics of the Past

Additional Readings: Articles marked * are required and are to be found in the Course Reader. Other articles/chapters are available on Library Reserve. Books can be borrowed from me on request for a two-day loan if the Library does not have a copy.

General
  1. *Arnold, Bettina. 2002 Justifying genocide: archaeology and the construction of difference. In Annihilating Difference: the Anthropology of Genocide, edited by Alexander L. Hinton, pp. 95-116 Berkeley: University of California Press.

  2. Arnold, Bettina. (in press) Dealing with the devil: the Faustian bargain of archaeology under dictatorship. In Archaeology Under Dictatorship, edited by Michael Galaty and Charles Watkinson. New York: Kluwer/Plenum.

  3. Trigger, Bruce. 1984 Alternative archaeologies: Nationalist, colonialist, imperialist. Man N.S. 19: 355-370.

  4. *Ucko, Peter J. 1986 Political uses of archaeology. In C. Dobinson and R. Gilchrist (eds) Archaeology, Politics and the Public, pp. 45-49. Papers given to the Young Archaeologists Conference in York in 1984. York University Archaeological Publications No. 5.
Case Studies
  1. Anthony, David W. 1995 Nazi and eco-feminist prehistories: counter-points in Indo-European archaeology. In P. Kohl and C. Fawcett (eds) Nationalism, Politics, and the Practice of Archaeology, pp. 82-96. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  2. *Arnold, Bettina. 1990 The past as propaganda: totalitarian archaeology in Nazi Germany. Antiquity 64:464-78. (Germany)

  3. Diaz-Andreu, Margarita. 1993 Theory and ideology in archaeology: Spanish archaeology under the Franco regime. Antiquity 67:74-82. (Spain)

  4. *Dietler, Michael 1994 "Our Ancestors the Gauls": Archaeology, ethnic nationalism and the manipulation of Celtic identity in modern Europe. American Anthropologist 96(3):584-605. (France)

  5. Fawcett, Clare. 1995 Nationalism and postwar Japanese archaeology. In P. Kohl and C. Fawcett (eds) Nationalism, Politics and the Practice of Archaeology, pp. 232-246. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Japan)

  6. Any chapter in Gathercole, Peter and David Lowenthal (eds) 1990 The Politics of the Past. One World Archaeology. Unwin Hyman.

  7. *Hamilakis, Yannis and Eleana Yalouri. 1996 Antiquities as symbolic capital in modern Greek society. Antiquity 70:117-129.

  8. *Kelly, John D. 2000 Nature, natives and nations: Glorification and asymmetries in museum representation, Fiji and Hawaii. Ethnos 65(2): 172-194.

  9. Chapters in Lefkowitz, Mary and Guy MacLean Rogers (eds) 1996 Black Athena Revisited. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

  10. Chapters in Meskell, Lynn (ed.) 1998 Archaeology Under Fire. London: Routledge.

  11. Chapters in Miller, Daniel. 1989 Domination and Resistance. One World Archaeology. Unwin Hyman.

  12. Chapters in Reid, Donald Malcolm 2002 Whose Pharaohs? Archaeology, Museums, and Egyptian National Identity from Napoleon to World War I. Berkeley: University of California Press.

  13. *Romey, Kristin. 2004 Flashpoint Ayodhya: Did Hindu hard-liners recruit archaeologists to rewrite history? Archaeology July/August: 49-55.

  14. Scott, Barbara. Archaeology and national identity: The Norwegian example. Scandinavian Studies 68(3)(1996):321-342.

  15. Silberman, Neil A. MS draft. Paper presented at Joint AIA/SAA Conference Baltimore 1989. Petrie's Head: Eugenics and Near Eastern Archaeology.

  16. Chapters in Stone, Peter. 1990 The Excluded Past. One World Archaeology. London: Unwin Hyman.

  17. *Wernick, Robert 2004 In search of William Tell. Smithsonian August 2004:72-78.

Paper #2: Why do you think archaeological research lends itself particularly well to political manipulation? How important a role do you think archaeological research plays and has played in recent political events? Do you think the symbiotic relationship between archaeology and politics is good or bad or both? Cite specific examples from the reading to support your conclusions.

Presentation: If you have been assigned this subject for your presentation, come to class prepared to lead discussion on nationalism and archaeology: is it necessary? desirable? inevitable? How does it tie into recent political developments around the world? Each member of the group will choose a case study from the supplemental readings and present a brief synopsis; prepare discussion questions based on the required readings for class. How is your case study different from the others you have read about? How is it the same? You should bring enough copies of the complete bibliography (10 references minimum, of which no more than 5 should be Web sites) for your case study to distribute to the class. You should also produce a list of discussion questions for class the day of your presentation. You will be responsible for a brief (no more than 15 minute) presentation on your case study, making use of visual aids where appropriate (handouts, overheads, slides, videos all encouraged).

  arrowSocial Research Online.  Nationalism links
arrowThe Atrium - The Rostra, The Commentarium.  Ancient History in the news
 

Oct. 18-Nov. 8: Bones of Contention: Reburial and Repatriation

Additional Readings: Articles marked * are required and are to be found in the Course Reader. Other articles/chapters are available on Library Reserve. Books can be borrowed from me on request for a two-day loan if the Library does not have a copy.

Reburial and Repatriation: U.S.

Note: There is a lot of reading on this topic! Be sure you get a balanced perspective on the subject (i.e. skim articles and choose several that present different views on the subjects of reburial and repatriation). Hang onto this syllabus after the class is over; it is meant to be a working bibliography and will be useful if you go on in archaeology, historic preservation, or museum studies.
  1. *Biolsi, Thomas and Larry J. Zimmerman (eds) 1997 Indians and Anthropologists: Vine Deloria and the Critique of Anthropology. Chapters 4 and 5 (articles by Randall McGuire and Larry Zimmerman). Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

  2. Buffalohead, Roger. 1989 Indians and museums: double standard criticized. Interfaces November 22, 1989:3.

  3. Chatters, James C. 2001 Ancient Encounters: Kennewick Man and the First Americans. New York: Simon and Schuster.

  4. *Deloria, Vine Jr. 1992 Indians, archaeologists and the future. American Antiquity 57(4):595-598.

  5. *Colwell-Chanthaphonh, Chip 2003 Signs in place: Native American perspectives of the past in the San Pedro Valley of southeastern Arizona. Kiva 69(1):5-29.

  6. Deloria, Vine Jr. 1995 Red Earth, White Lies. New York: Scribner.

  7. Dongoske, Kurt E., Michael Aldenderfer and K. Doehner 2000 Working Together: Native Americans and Archaeologists. Washington, D.C.: Society for American Archaeology.

  8. *Echo-Hawk, Roger C. Exploring ancient worlds. SAA Bulletin 11(4):5-6.

  9. Fine-Dare, Kathleen S. 2002 Grave Injustice: The American Indian Repatriation Movement and NAGPRA. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

  10. Goldstein, L. and K. Kintigh 1990 Ethics and the reburial controversy. American Antiquity 55(3):585-591.

  11. Haas, Jonathan. 1991 Policy in practice. Museum News January/February 1991:46-48.

  12. Horse Capture, George P. Survival of Culture. 1991 Museum News January/February 1991:49-51.

  13. *Kintigh, Keith W. 1991 Repatriation we can live with. Society for American Archaeology Bulletin 9(1):2-3. 1991.

  14. Klesert, Anthony L. and Shirley Powell 1993 Perspective on ethics and the reburial controversy. American Antiquity 58(2):348-354.

  15. *Manier, Jeremy. 1997 The clash of fact and faith. 1997. Chicago Tribune Nov. 30, 1997: 1, 10.

  16. McGuire, Randall H. 1992 Archaeology and the first Americans. American Anthropologist 94(4):816-836.

  17. *Meighan, Clement W. 1992 Some scholars' views on reburial. American Antiquity 57(4):704-710.

  18. Any chapter in Mihesuah, Devon A. (ed) 2000 Repatriation Reader: Who Owns American Indian Remains? Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

  19. Monroe, Dan L. and Walter Echo-Hawk. 1991 Deft deliberations. Museum News July/August 1991: 55-58.

  20. *Morell, Virginia 1994 An anthropological culture shift. Science 264 April 1, 1994, pp. 20-22.

  21. *Nicholas, George 2004 What do I really want from a relationship with Native Americans? The SAA Archaeological Record May 2004: 29-33.

  22. Peerman, Dean. 1990 Bare bones imbroglio: Repatriating Indian remains and sacred artifacts. The Christian Century October 17, 1990:935-937.

  23. Preston, Douglas. The Lost Man. 1997. New Yorker June 16, 1997, pp. 70-81. (Essay on Kennewick Man)

  24. Roth, Evan. 1991 Success stories. Museum News January/February 1991:41-45.

  25. Talmage, Valerie. 1982 The violation of sepulture: is it legal to excavate human burials? Archaeology November/December 1982:44-49.

  26. Thompson, Raymond H. 1991 Dealing with the past and looking to the future. Museum News January/February 1991:37-40.

  27. Trigger, Bruce 1980 Archaeology and the image of the American Indian. American Antiquity 45(4):662-676.

  28. Vivian, R. Gwinn and Marilyn Norcini. 1991 Help for the asking. Museum News January/February 1991:52-53.

  29. Woodbury, Nathalie 1992 When my grandmother is your database. American Anthropological Association Anthropology Newsletter 33(3):6, 22.

  30. *Watkins, Joe 2000 Writing unwritten history. Archaeology November/December 2000:36-41.

  31. *Pages 1-22 in Watkins, Joe 2000 Indigenous Archaeology: American Indian Values and Scientific Practice. Walnut Creek: AltaMira.

  32. Chapters in Zimmerman, Larry J., Karen D. Vitelli and Julie Hollowell-Zimmer 2003 Ethical Issues in Archaeology. Walnut Creek: AltaMira.
Reburial and Repatriation: Australia and Israel
  1. Abu el-Haj, Nadia 2001 Facts on the Ground: Archaeological Practice and Territorial Self-Fashioning in Israeli Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  2. Angler, Natalie. 1984 Burying bones of contention. Time September 10, 1984:32.

  3. *Finkel, Elizabeth. 1997 Native claims muddy waters in fight over Australian lake. Science 278:1556-1557.

  4. *Jones, D. Gareth and Robyn J. Harris. 1997 Contending for the dead. Nature 386:15-16. March 6 1997.

  5. *Lewin, Roger. 1984 Extinction threatens Australian anthropology. Science Vol. 225:393-394.

  6. *Mulvaney, D.J. 1991 Past regained, future lost: the Kow Swamp prehistoric burials. Antiquity 65:12-21.

  7. *Mulvaney, D.J. 1990. Bones of contention. The Bulletin October 9, 1990. pp. 104-106.

  8. *Smith, Laurajane 2004 The repatriation of human remains - problem or opportunity? Antiquity 78(300): 404-413.

  9. *Webb, S. Reburying Australian skeletons. 1987 Antiquity 61:292-6. 1987.

  10. *Zimmerman, L.J. 1987 Webb on reburial: a North American perspective. Antiquity 61:462-463.

Paper #3: Discuss the main issues involved in the conflicted relationship between many archaeologists, anthropologists and aboriginal communities in the U.S. and Australia (other examples also possible). Be sure to present the various perspectives on this issue. Address the question of the ethics of excavating burials. What kinds of things do you think could/should be done to resolve some of the conflicts? What could anthropologists do? What could aboriginal peoples or other groups opposed to the excavation, study and display of human remains do? Do you feel the U.S. and Australian (or other examples) conflicts are comparable? How are they different? How are they similar? How do you think people (Native Americans, anthropologists, general public) will view the resolution of the reburial issue fifty years from now?

Presentation: Analyze one example in detail, or compare an example from Australia or the U.S. (or other context) to another from the same or a different context. Present the legal, ethical, and social significance of the case studies chosen. If you opt to compare more than one case study, be sure to give some background information on each one before you present your comparison. Discussion Options: 1. Draw up a list of questions that address issues involved in this section. You can split the class into two groups, one representing Native Americans/Australian aboriginal/ or other communities, the other representing the archaeological establishment in each context. 2. Present two examples of consultation and cooperation between anthropologists/museum professionals/archaeologists and indigenous peoples, one successful, one clearly not. Discuss the reasons for the different outcomes. 3. You may develop your own approach to this subject, but please come to talk to me before you begin to gather material for your presentation; I will likely be able to help with sources. Bring enough copies of your case study bibliography (10 references minimum, of which no more than 5 should be Web sites) to distribute to the class. Produce a list of discussion questions for class the day of your presentation. You will be responsible for a brief (no more than 15 minute) presentation on your case study, making use of visual aids where appropriate (handouts, overheads, slides, videos all encouraged).

  arrowUniversity of Iowa - Repatriation and Reburial Issues  Repatriation and Reburial links
arrowA Line in the Sand  Archaeology and Graves
arrowRepatriation, Looting, and Reburial Information  Bibliographies
arrowTri-City Herald's Coverage of the Kennewick Man Controversy  Index of articles
arrowThe Fight for Kennewick Man  McNeil-Lehrer NewsHour - Jan. 3, 1997.  Requires RealAudioDownload Realaudio
arrowBones of Contention  The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer - June 19, 2001.  Requires RealAudioDownload Realaudio
 

November 15-29: Looting, Collecting and Legislation Additional Readings: Articles marked * are required and are to be found in the Course Reader. Other articles/chapters are available on Library Reserve. Books can be borrowed from me on request for a two-day loan if the Library does not have a copy.
  1. *Arden, Harvey. 1989 Who owns our past? National Geographic 175(3):376-393.

  2. Excerpt from Alva, Walter and Christopher Donnan. 1993 Royal Tombs of Sipan. Los Angeles: UCLA Press.

  3. *Brent, Michel 1996 A view inside the illicit trade in African antiquities. In Plundering Africa's Past, edited by Peter Schmidt and Roderick McIntosh, pp. 63-78. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

  4. *Cowley, Geoffrey, Andrew Murr, Nonny de la Pena and Vicki Quade. 1989 The plunder of the past: A bullish market for Native American artifacts disturbs the peace of the dead and buried. Newsweek June 26, 1989. pp. 58-60.

  5. *French, Howard. Malians, so poor, looting rich past. 1995 New York Times Wednesday, February 15, 1995, p. A4.

  6. *Garen, Micah 2004 The war within the war: In southern Iraq specialized troops pursue looters. Archaeology July/August: 28-31.

  7. *Gill, David. 1997 Sotheby's, sleaze and subterfuge: Inside the antiquities trade. Review of Peter Watson's 1997 Sotheby's: The Inside Story. Antiquity 71(1997):468-71.

  8. Hamilakis, Yannis. 1999 Stories from exile: Fragments from the cultural biography of the Parthenon (or 'Elgin') marbles. World Archaeology 31(2): 303-320.

  9. *Neary, John. Project "Sting". Archaeology September/October 1993: 52-59.

  10. Rose, Mark and Özgen Acar. 1995 Turkey's War on the Illicit Antiquities Trade. Archaeology March/April 1995: 45-56.

  11. Schmidt, Peter and Roderick McIntosh 1996 The African past endangered. In Plundering Africa's Past, edited by Peter Schmidt and Roderick McIntosh, pp. 1-17. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

  12. *Staley, David. The antiquities market. 1993 Journal of Field Archaeology 20(3)(1993):347-355.

  13. White, Robert J. 1993 Illegal traffic in antiquities robs a country's national heritage. Star Tribune Sunday Sept 26, 1993.

  14. John Harvard's Journal: The Art of Ownership. Harvard Alumni Magazine May-June 1998, pp. 69-74.

I have large quantities of additional material on this topic. Please let me know if you would like to have a browse through the stack.

Paper #4: Do you think collecting antiquities is defensible? Would you limit or regulate such collecting in this country? If so, how? Should the U.S. allow antiquities of questionable origin to be brought into the country legally? Do you think collectors "protect" the past? What do you think motivates collecting? What would you do to improve/solve the looting and antiquities trafficking problems in this country? Do you think legal measures in place today are stringent enough? What would you do to change them? What can be done about the looting of archaeological sites in other countries?

Presentation: This topic deals with the demands and agendas of a number of different groups: 1) Museums 2) Looters (within and outside the U.S.) 3) Dealers in antiquities, whether within or outside the U.S. 4) Collectors 5) Indigenous peoples (sometimes also members of groups 1-4). The interests of these groups often conflict. Choose a particular venue (United States, Central America, South America, any other nation or group of nations discussed in the reading or that you are able to identify on your own). Present the problem of looting, dealing and legislating the traffic in antiquities in the context you have chosen. Be sure your topic does not duplicate that of any other presenters.

Discussion: Prepare a list of questions relating to your case study. Elicit possible solutions to the looting problem in your topic area. Bring enough copies of the complete bibliography (10 references minimum, of which no more than 5 should be Web sites) to distribute to the class. Produce a list of discussion questions for class the day of your presentation. You will be responsible for a brief (no more than 15 minute) presentation on your case study, making use of visual aids where appropriate (handouts, overheads, slides, videos all encouraged).

  arrowUNESCO.  Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage
arrowInternational Centre For The Study and Restoration of Cultural Property
arrowLooting matters!, by Christopher Chippindale and David Gill  Articles and Links
arrowArchNet - Cultural Resource Management  Links page
arrowSelling Fossils  Science Friday, Oct. 3, 1997  Requires RealAudioDownload Realaudio
 

December 6-13: Presenting the Past: Archaeology and the Public

Additional Readings: Articles marked * are required and are to be found in the Course Reader. Other articles/chapters are available on Library Reserve. Books can be borrowed from me on request for a two-day loan if the Library does not have a copy.
  1. *Addyman, Peter V. 1990 Reconstruction as interpretation : the example of the Jorvik Viking Center, York. In The Politics of the Past. pp. 255-264.

  2. *Blakey, Michael. 1990 American nationality and ethnicity in the depicted past. In The Politics of the Past. pp. 38-47.

  3. Chapters in Brown, Thomas 2003 Who Owns Native Culture? Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

  4. *Bonyhady, Tim and Tom Griffiths 1996 The making of a public intellectual. In Bonyhady, Tim and Tom Griffiths (eds) Prehistory to Politics: John Mulvaney, the Humanities and the Public Intellectual, pp. 1-19. Victoria: Melbourne University Press.

  5. *Fagan, Brian. Archaeology and the wider audience. 1984. In Ethics and Values in Archaeology. pp. 175-183.

  6. Ferguson, T.J., Chip Colwell-Chanthaphonh, and Roger Anyon 2004 Archaeology Southwest 18(1) Winter 2004. Publication of the Center for Desert Archaeology. Example of how public outreach, indigenous perspectives on the past and archaeology can be productively integrated. Read whole issue (15 pp).

  7. *Ford, Richard I. 1984 Ethics and the museum archaeologist. 1984 In Ethics and Values in Archaeology, edited by Ernestene L. Green, pp. 133-142. New York: Macmillan.

  8. Gero, Joan and Dolores Root. 1990 Public presentations and private concerns: archaeology in the pages of National Geographic. In The Politics of the Past, pp. 19-37.

  9. Greengrass, Mara. 1993 State archaeology weeks: Interpreting archaeology for the public. Federal Archaeology Report Technical Brief No. 15. Oct 1993:1-11.

  10. *Hanson, Allan. 1989 The making of the Maori: Culture invention and its logic. American Anthropologist 91:890-902.

  11. Hoffman, Ellen. 1993 Saving our world's heritage. Omni Dec. 1993: 52-54,58,60-61.

  12. Chapters in Jameson, John H. 1997 Presenting Archaeology to the Public. Walnut Creek: AltaMira.

  13. *Kehoe, Alice (manuscript) Archaeology within marketing capitalism. Paper presented in WAC 2003 Session Ethical Archaeology in a Capitalist World, organized by Philip Duke and Yannis Hamilakis.

  14. Chapters in King, Thomas F. 2003 Places That Count: Traditional Cultural Properties in Cultural Resource Management. Walnut Creek: AltaMira.

  15. *Nicholas, George P. and Kelly P. Bannister 2004 Copyrighting the past? Emerging intellectual property rights issues in archaeology. Current Anthropology 45(3): 327-350.

  16. Price, Nicholas Stanley P. 1990 Conservation and information in the display of prehistoric sites. In The Politics of the Past. pp. 284-289.

  17. Sadek, Hind. 1994 A future for the past. National Parks Jan/Feb 1994:38-42.

  18. Skinner, S. Alan. 1994 Archaeological integrity: Mercenaries, weasel words and privitization. SOPA Newsletter 18(3):1-6.

  19. *Stoddart, Simon and Caroline Malone. Editorial on Archaeology and the Media. Antiquity 75(2001): 459-86.

  20. Stone, Peter 1997 Presenting the past: a framework for discussion. In Presenting Archaeology to the Public: Digging for Truths, edited by John H. Jameson. Jr. pp. 23-34. Walnut Creek: Altamira.

  21. Trigger, Bruce. 1986 Prospects for a world archaeology. World Archaeology 18(1):1-20.

  22. Wilkinson, Todd. 2000 The cultural challenge: making the parks relevant. National Parks January/February 2000 pp. 21-23.

  23. The future of public archeology. 1999. Common Ground Winter 1999 pp. 17-23.

Paper #5: Option 1:If you decide to write one of your short papers on the readings for this section, you might consider going through the last five years of a journal that covers archaeological topics and doing an analysis of the contents of its articles, photographs and presentation along the lines of the Gero and Root article. Some relevant magazines might be: Natural History, Smithsonian, Scientific American, and Nature. Your oral presentation should focus on a presentation of your findings. Option 2: Another option might be to check out a local museum exhibit that deals with archaeological data; try the Milwaukee Public Museum or the Field Museum in Chicago. Again, you should analyze and critique the displays: discuss label copy, choice of material on display (vs. what sorts of things were not chosen), coherence and continuity within the exhibit, and whether you feel the exhibit is effective in getting its message across to the public. Identify the message, if you think there is one, and the target audience. Again, you should present your analysis in your oral presentation. Option 3: Choose an example of "archaeological fiction", in the form of a film or book aimed either at adults or at children. Critique the piece, paying particular attention to the accuracy of the information presented and the effectiveness of the presentation style. You can choose either a particularly good or a particularly bad example (or compare two examples), but be prepared to justify your choice(s). Suggest ways in which such fictional treatment of archaeological data can be both true to its source material and entertaining. Again, you will be presenting your analysis in class as well as in written form for your short paper. Additional Options: Choose a case study to present to class. Consider the following questions for discussion: Do you think it is feasible, desirable or necessary for all professional anthropologists to strive toward promoting and preserving a "global prehistory"? Looking back at what you have read in previous sections this quarter, have you changed your opinion of what archaeologists do, and for whom they do it? Is there, or will there ever be, a "One World Archaeology"? What do you think archaeology's social and political role will be in the decades to come? Insignificant? Vitally important? Controlled by nationalistic regimes? Controlled by profit motives? Can archaeologists afford to abdicate all control over the way in which the past is interpreted and made use of? What do you think the result will be if they do?

Discussion will focus on the required readings. Be ready to explore ideas such as what role museums should play in our society, what audience should be addressed by exhibits, is it possible to please everyone, should museums try to be everything to all people, who should decide what gets displayed and how etc. Bring enough copies of the complete bibliography (10 references minimum, of which no more than 5 should be Web sites) for your case study to distribute to the class. Produce a list of discussion questions for class the day of your presentation. You are responsible for a brief (no more than 15 minute) presentation on your case study, making use of visual aids where appropriate (handouts, overheads, slides, videos all encouraged).

  arrowSociety for American Archaeology.  Educational Resources
arrowArchNet.  Educational Resources for Anthropology and Archaeology
arrowThe Learning Company.  MayaQuest
 
  arrowA Line in the Sand.  Cultural Property
arrowAfrocentrism.  Talk of the Nation - July 7, 1997.  Requires RealAudioDownload Realaudio
arrowEarly People of the Southwest.  Talk of the Nation - Nov. 14, 1996.  Requires RealAudioDownload Realaudio
 


© 2000 Bettina Arnold, Dept. of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Design: Homer Hruby, Last Updated: September 26, 2004