3rd January 2008, 05:34 PM
Iâm not sure BAJR, thereâs a different dynamic at play in Britain. In the case of Australia we are looking at the archaeology of a people who have been on the receiving end of a fair bit of colonial activity, from both Britain and white Australia. My concern was in part that the idea of importing (predominantly white) Britons to work on Aboriginal archaeological sites seemed, well, slightly colonial, and a little arrogant (although I hasten to say I sure none of the Brits working out there perceive it that way â I really mean no offence, this is difficult stuff to write about).
I think what I mean is this;
If I was an Australian Aboriginal, and a bunch of people whose ancestors had essentially conquered and dispossessed my ancestors turned up, and started to claim an in depth knowledge of my culture and heritage, I think Iâd be mildly vexed.
In mainland Britain on the other hand, there is no colonial legacy to worry about, and the majority of the archaeology does not originate with what is currently a disenfranchised minority.
What both countries may have in common is a need to engage more recent arrivals with the archaeology and heritage of their homes. In Britain I feel this involves actively encouraging minority groups to get involved in archaeology of whatever period (and I believe this is starting to happen).
I canât really speak for Australia, Arthusâs call for more engagement in Aboriginal archaeology seems admirable. I just think that, given the particular circumstances and history perhaps importing archaeologists from Britain isnât the way to go.
I do however concede that, in the face of development, the need for archaeologists may override my rather squeamish post-colonial guilt complex.
I think what I mean is this;
If I was an Australian Aboriginal, and a bunch of people whose ancestors had essentially conquered and dispossessed my ancestors turned up, and started to claim an in depth knowledge of my culture and heritage, I think Iâd be mildly vexed.
In mainland Britain on the other hand, there is no colonial legacy to worry about, and the majority of the archaeology does not originate with what is currently a disenfranchised minority.
What both countries may have in common is a need to engage more recent arrivals with the archaeology and heritage of their homes. In Britain I feel this involves actively encouraging minority groups to get involved in archaeology of whatever period (and I believe this is starting to happen).
I canât really speak for Australia, Arthusâs call for more engagement in Aboriginal archaeology seems admirable. I just think that, given the particular circumstances and history perhaps importing archaeologists from Britain isnât the way to go.
I do however concede that, in the face of development, the need for archaeologists may override my rather squeamish post-colonial guilt complex.