Archaeology and the Governance of Material Culture

A Case Study from South-Eastern Australia

Dados Bibliográficos

ID6095001
AutoresLaura J Smith (0000-0003-3275-1530, autor correspondente)
Ano2001
Volume34
Fascículo2
Páginas97-105
Data de publicação2001-06-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessNão
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoNorwegian Archaeological Review (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0029-3652 • E-ISSN: 1502-7678
EditoraInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/00293650127470
OpenAlexW1994063609
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas13
Referências citadas20

What are the consequences of using the discourse of archaeological knowledge in cultural heritage management (CHM)? In this article the inter-relationship of archaeological theory and practice, CHM and the politics of identity is analysed, using as a case study the history of archaeological and CHM practice in south-eastern Australia. A critical reading of Foucault's 'govemmentality' thesis illustrates how archaeological knowledge has come to play a role in the regulation and arbitration of Aboriginal cultural identity in south-eastern Australia. In effect, archaeological knowledge becomes mobilized by public policy-makers as a 'technology of government' and becomes implicated in the governance of cultural identity. Further consequences of this process are that material culture, as 'heritage', becomes a resource of power in the politics of identity and archaeological practice, and theory itself, becomes regulated, or 'governed', by its inclusion in CHM

Aesthetics · Archaeological theory · Archaeology · Art · Corporate governance · Ethnology · Geography · Government (linguistics) · Governmentality · Identity (music) · Management · Political science · Politics · Power (physics) · Sociology · Anthropology · Cultural Heritage Management and Preservation · Historical and Cultural Archaeology Studies · History · Law · Mining and Resource Management