Beyond ‘contact’ and shared landscapes in Australian archaeology

IF 1.1 3区 历史学 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY Australian Archaeology Pub Date : 2021-12-07 DOI:10.1080/03122417.2021.2003972
D. Tutchener, D. Claudie
{"title":"Beyond ‘contact’ and shared landscapes in Australian archaeology","authors":"D. Tutchener, D. Claudie","doi":"10.1080/03122417.2021.2003972","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The concept of ‘contact’ in Australian archaeology used to describe early cross-cultural interactions between Indigenous people and Europeans has become outdated and requires revisiting. In the USA, Silliman and Jordan both moved away from the idea of ‘contact’ as it undermines the power disconnect between the colonised and coloniser. Jordan proposes a two-tiered approach to these cross-cultural encounters: cultural entanglement and colonialism. To demonstrate that ‘contact’ does little to highlight the complex power dynamics of these interactions, Jordan's ‘cultural entanglement’ is employed as a metaphor not a model for understanding ‘contact’ before colonialism. This two tiered framework is used here to discuss the European invasion of the Pianamu cultural landscape on the Cape York Peninsula. Furthermore, the model proposed by Lefebvre outlining social spaces and how they are produced is used, rather than that of shared landscapes, to illustrate the complex power relations in cross-cultural relations. These ideas are explored to contextualise the current decolonising project of the Kuuku I’yu people and, through the use of these concepts, to demonstrate how Indigenous people can reclaim and produce their own social spaces which can include Western thinking. Importantly, the use of these ideas rather than ‘contact’ shows that these complex cross-cultural relations happen within a process of cultural entanglement and colonialism that is not unidirectional or mutually exclusive.","PeriodicalId":8648,"journal":{"name":"Australian Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Archaeology","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2021.2003972","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract The concept of ‘contact’ in Australian archaeology used to describe early cross-cultural interactions between Indigenous people and Europeans has become outdated and requires revisiting. In the USA, Silliman and Jordan both moved away from the idea of ‘contact’ as it undermines the power disconnect between the colonised and coloniser. Jordan proposes a two-tiered approach to these cross-cultural encounters: cultural entanglement and colonialism. To demonstrate that ‘contact’ does little to highlight the complex power dynamics of these interactions, Jordan's ‘cultural entanglement’ is employed as a metaphor not a model for understanding ‘contact’ before colonialism. This two tiered framework is used here to discuss the European invasion of the Pianamu cultural landscape on the Cape York Peninsula. Furthermore, the model proposed by Lefebvre outlining social spaces and how they are produced is used, rather than that of shared landscapes, to illustrate the complex power relations in cross-cultural relations. These ideas are explored to contextualise the current decolonising project of the Kuuku I’yu people and, through the use of these concepts, to demonstrate how Indigenous people can reclaim and produce their own social spaces which can include Western thinking. Importantly, the use of these ideas rather than ‘contact’ shows that these complex cross-cultural relations happen within a process of cultural entanglement and colonialism that is not unidirectional or mutually exclusive.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
超越澳大利亚考古学中的“接触”和共享景观
摘要澳大利亚考古学中用来描述土著人和欧洲人之间早期跨文化互动的“接触”概念已经过时,需要重新审视。在美国,Silliman和Jordan都放弃了“接触”的想法,因为它破坏了被殖民者和殖民者之间的权力脱节。约旦建议对这些跨文化遭遇采取两层方法:文化纠缠和殖民主义。为了证明“接触”并没有突出这些互动的复杂权力动态,约旦的“文化纠缠”被用作隐喻,而不是殖民主义之前理解“接触”的模型。这两层框架用于讨论欧洲人入侵约克角半岛的皮亚纳穆文化景观。此外,列斐伏尔提出的概述社会空间及其产生方式的模型,而不是共享景观的模型,被用来说明跨文化关系中复杂的权力关系。探索这些想法是为了将Kuuku I'yu人当前的非殖民化项目置于背景中,并通过使用这些概念,展示土著人如何回收和创造自己的社会空间,其中可以包括西方思想。重要的是,使用这些思想而不是“接触”表明,这些复杂的跨文化关系发生在文化纠缠和殖民主义的过程中,而不是单向的或相互排斥的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
9.10%
发文量
20
期刊最新文献
Solder scavenging from hole-and-cap food cans in the Western Australian goldfields: Identifying site modification processes Garden Range 2: Taungurung rock art rockshelter site reveals 11,000 years of Aboriginal occupation of the Strathbogie Ranges, Central Victoria ‘Reclaiming their stories’: A study of the spiritual content of historical cultural objects through an Indigenous creative inquiry Jack: Professor Jack Golson, AO, 1926–2023 Scratching the surface: Subtractive rock markings from the Cockburn Ranges, eastern Kimberley, Western Australia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1