Slow, Digital, Immersive, Accessible

A Crip Studies–Centered Framework for Inclusive Archaeological Practice

Dados Bibliográficos

ID24145604
AutoresGabriela Oré Menéndez (0000-0003-4265-8612, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, autor correspondente)
Ano2026
Páginas1-14
Data de publicação2026-09-16
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoAdvances in Archaeological Practice (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 2326-3768 • E-ISSN: 2326-3768
EditoraCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/aap.2026.10180
OpenAlexW7213314709
IdiomaEN
Referências citadas46

Archaeological practice has historically privileged fieldwork-intensive methodologies that systematically exclude practitioners whose bodies, minds, or life circumstances diverge from disciplinary norms. Drawing on crip theory and intersectional disability studies, this article uses the Homo archaeologus archetype—an often idealized archaeologist characterized by able-bodiedness, neurotypicality, cisgender identity, and physical presence in the field—which functions as both professional stereotype and gatekeeping mechanism. I argue that moving beyond accommodation-based approaches toward accessibility-centered design transforms not only who can participate in archaeology but what the discipline can know. This article proposes a four-pillar framework for inclusive archaeological practice: (1) Slow , restructuring temporal rhythms to prioritize deliberation over efficiency; (2) Digital , integrating computational methods as core archaeology rather than post-fieldwork analysis; (3) Immersive , employing technologies such as photogrammetry and virtual reality (VR) to multiply modes of engagement with archaeological contexts; and (4) Accessible , designing projects from the outset for diverse participation rather than retrofitting accommodations afterward. Through case studies from archaeological projects, I show that these pillars, in one form or another, are already operational in contemporary practice and that recognizing marginalized practitioners as methodological innovators—rather than problems requiring accommodation—strengthens archaeological rigor while expanding epistemic possibilities. This framework reframes accessibility not as an optional enhancement but as a fundamental methodology that benefits all practitioners while centering those historically excluded from disciplinary legitimacy.

Archaeological theory · Deliberation · Discipline · Excavation · Gatekeeping · Practice theory · Restructuring · Rubric · Disability Rights and Representation · Historical and Cultural Archaeology Studies · Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology