Pub Date : 2023-05-04DOI: 10.1080/03122417.2023.2238251
R. Skelly, B. David, F. Petchey, M. Leavesley, Jerome Mialanes, Teppsy Beni, Chris Urwin
Abstract Seafaring ceramicists connected widely spaced communities along the expanse of PNG’s south coast for more than 1,500 years following the arrival of people using pots with Lapita decoration c.2,900 cal BP. Archaeological investigations at locations from the Gulf of Papua in the west to Mailu Island in the east suggest a major change occurred to seafaring and social relations after 1,200 cal BP. The following five centuries often referred to as the ‘Ceramic Hiccup’ were characterised by a contraction in the scale of formerly long-distance voyaging. Here we present results of recent archaeological excavations at the ancestral village site of Agila in Hood Bay east of Port Moresby. The decorations on older pot sherds at Agila are akin to those on ancestral Motu pottery known from Motupore Island to the west. The decoration changes on more recent sherds which have more in common with ancestral Mailu pottery from Mailu Island to the east. Details of changing seafaring relations – from west to east – at Agila were published in 2018 after our first field season. However, results from the first field season left questions about site antiquity unresolved. We returned to Agila in 2022 and continued excavations to address those questions. Our excavations revealed that initial settlement at Agila coincided with a reanimation of coastal seafaring after 770 cal BP. Results also show that the major pottery manufacturing and seafaring community of Motupore maintained relations with communities to both the east and west. An analysis of the ceramic assemblage allows us to historicise the emergence of social strategies which entrenched Hood Bay at a nexus between Motu and Mailu specialised trading and seafaring communities.
大约在公元前2900年，随着人们使用带有拉皮塔装饰的陶器，航海陶艺家在巴布亚新几内亚南海岸的广阔地区连接了1500多年来分布广泛的社区。从西部的巴布亚湾到东部的马鲁岛的考古调查表明，在公元前1200年之后，航海和社会关系发生了重大变化。接下来的五个世纪通常被称为“陶瓷打嗝”，其特点是以前长途航行的规模缩小。在这里，我们展示了最近在莫尔兹比港东部胡德湾阿吉拉祖传村庄遗址的考古发掘结果。阿吉拉古老的陶器碎片上的装饰与西部莫图波雷岛的祖先莫图陶器上的装饰相似。最近的碎片上的装饰发生了变化，这些碎片与东部马鲁岛的祖先马鲁陶器有更多的共同之处。在我们的第一个实地季节之后，2018年发布了Agila海上关系变化的细节——从西到东。然而，第一次实地考察的结果使遗址的古代问题没有得到解决。我们于2022年回到阿吉拉，并继续挖掘以解决这些问题。我们的发掘表明，阿吉拉的最初定居与770 cal BP之后沿海航海的复兴相吻合。结果还表明，莫图波雷主要的陶器制造和航海社区与东部和西部社区保持着联系。对陶瓷组合的分析使我们能够将社会战略的出现历史化，这些战略使胡德湾成为Motu和Mailu专业贸易和航海社区之间的纽带。
{"title":"Agila and the reanimation of seafaring on the south coast of Papua New Guinea after 770 cal BP","authors":"R. Skelly, B. David, F. Petchey, M. Leavesley, Jerome Mialanes, Teppsy Beni, Chris Urwin","doi":"10.1080/03122417.2023.2238251","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2023.2238251","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Seafaring ceramicists connected widely spaced communities along the expanse of PNG’s south coast for more than 1,500 years following the arrival of people using pots with Lapita decoration c.2,900 cal BP. Archaeological investigations at locations from the Gulf of Papua in the west to Mailu Island in the east suggest a major change occurred to seafaring and social relations after 1,200 cal BP. The following five centuries often referred to as the ‘Ceramic Hiccup’ were characterised by a contraction in the scale of formerly long-distance voyaging. Here we present results of recent archaeological excavations at the ancestral village site of Agila in Hood Bay east of Port Moresby. The decorations on older pot sherds at Agila are akin to those on ancestral Motu pottery known from Motupore Island to the west. The decoration changes on more recent sherds which have more in common with ancestral Mailu pottery from Mailu Island to the east. Details of changing seafaring relations – from west to east – at Agila were published in 2018 after our first field season. However, results from the first field season left questions about site antiquity unresolved. We returned to Agila in 2022 and continued excavations to address those questions. Our excavations revealed that initial settlement at Agila coincided with a reanimation of coastal seafaring after 770 cal BP. Results also show that the major pottery manufacturing and seafaring community of Motupore maintained relations with communities to both the east and west. An analysis of the ceramic assemblage allows us to historicise the emergence of social strategies which entrenched Hood Bay at a nexus between Motu and Mailu specialised trading and seafaring communities.","PeriodicalId":8648,"journal":{"name":"Australian Archaeology","volume":"89 1","pages":"97 - 114"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47655638","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-04DOI: 10.1080/03122417.2023.2214336
Gaye Sculthorpe, Daniel Simpson
Abstract Aboriginal material culture of the Sydney region has been analysed extensively by Australian archaeologists, notably Vincent Megaw and Val Attenbrow, yet many new insights can be obtained through the examination of hitherto unidentified and unexamined museum objects and dispersed archival documentation in Britain and Ireland. Close engagement with these sources permits a more informed explication of the variety of objects in use in colonial Sydney and its greater affiliated coastal zone. Focussing on the period 1788–1870, this article examines three related object types, termed variously in English ‘swords’, ‘boomerangs’ and ‘clubs’, to investigate their nature, current and former distribution, and histories of collection. Discussions with members of the La Perouse Aboriginal Community in Sydney indicate a great interest in collaborative research to improve understanding of such objects, because few of these collected and removed objects have been documented to a precise place of origin. Stylistic comparison of actual objects with historic images of similar types therefore remains a basic first step. This fundamental work is necessary to engage the appropriate community research partners but raises questions as to methodologies for community engagement with unprovenanced objects, or those known only to be from a large regional area, which may encompass many groups. Ascertaining places of origin is thus critical to ensuring the accuracy and validity of any repatriation or restitution efforts, and in making sure that the ‘right’ objects return to relevant Aboriginal communities.
{"title":"Will my boomerang come back? New insights into Aboriginal material culture of early Sydney and affiliated coastal zone from British collections","authors":"Gaye Sculthorpe, Daniel Simpson","doi":"10.1080/03122417.2023.2214336","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2023.2214336","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Aboriginal material culture of the Sydney region has been analysed extensively by Australian archaeologists, notably Vincent Megaw and Val Attenbrow, yet many new insights can be obtained through the examination of hitherto unidentified and unexamined museum objects and dispersed archival documentation in Britain and Ireland. Close engagement with these sources permits a more informed explication of the variety of objects in use in colonial Sydney and its greater affiliated coastal zone. Focussing on the period 1788–1870, this article examines three related object types, termed variously in English ‘swords’, ‘boomerangs’ and ‘clubs’, to investigate their nature, current and former distribution, and histories of collection. Discussions with members of the La Perouse Aboriginal Community in Sydney indicate a great interest in collaborative research to improve understanding of such objects, because few of these collected and removed objects have been documented to a precise place of origin. Stylistic comparison of actual objects with historic images of similar types therefore remains a basic first step. This fundamental work is necessary to engage the appropriate community research partners but raises questions as to methodologies for community engagement with unprovenanced objects, or those known only to be from a large regional area, which may encompass many groups. Ascertaining places of origin is thus critical to ensuring the accuracy and validity of any repatriation or restitution efforts, and in making sure that the ‘right’ objects return to relevant Aboriginal communities.","PeriodicalId":8648,"journal":{"name":"Australian Archaeology","volume":"89 1","pages":"149 - 171"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44921991","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-04DOI: 10.1080/03122417.2023.2215473
Simon Munt, R. Fullagar
Abstract Aboriginal people in Australia have used stone tools since first arrival about 65,000 years ago. After permanent European colonisation over 200 years ago people continued to use stone, but also incorporated new, introduced tool materials in novel ways. To understand how these introduced materials supplemented or replaced stone, we need new functional analyses and reference databases that compare experimental use-wear patterns on introduced materials with archaeological use-wear patterns. In the Riverland region of South Australia, silcrete and chert are common tool stones recovered from archaeological sites, but there is also evidence of introduced materials including glazed porcelain and bottle glass. Here, we report experimental use-wear patterns on silcrete, bottle glass and glazed porcelain plate tools. Tasks included processing wood, bone, skin or hide, meat and cattail reeds with a variety of tool motions. Results show that striations are more common on glass and glazed porcelain than on silcrete. The glazed porcelain, glass and silcrete experimental tools register distinctive use-wear patterns for some but not all tasks, and supplement previous functional studies of these materials.
{"title":"Experimental use-wear patterns on silcrete, bottle glass and porcelain plate tools","authors":"Simon Munt, R. Fullagar","doi":"10.1080/03122417.2023.2215473","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2023.2215473","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Aboriginal people in Australia have used stone tools since first arrival about 65,000 years ago. After permanent European colonisation over 200 years ago people continued to use stone, but also incorporated new, introduced tool materials in novel ways. To understand how these introduced materials supplemented or replaced stone, we need new functional analyses and reference databases that compare experimental use-wear patterns on introduced materials with archaeological use-wear patterns. In the Riverland region of South Australia, silcrete and chert are common tool stones recovered from archaeological sites, but there is also evidence of introduced materials including glazed porcelain and bottle glass. Here, we report experimental use-wear patterns on silcrete, bottle glass and glazed porcelain plate tools. Tasks included processing wood, bone, skin or hide, meat and cattail reeds with a variety of tool motions. Results show that striations are more common on glass and glazed porcelain than on silcrete. The glazed porcelain, glass and silcrete experimental tools register distinctive use-wear patterns for some but not all tasks, and supplement previous functional studies of these materials.","PeriodicalId":8648,"journal":{"name":"Australian Archaeology","volume":"89 1","pages":"188 - 205"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44116656","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-04DOI: 10.1080/03122417.2023.2208795
Kellie Clayton
Abstract This paper reassesses the maritime Southeast Asian forest and marine commodities trade from the sixteenth century to World War I. The ‘Macassan’ traders who visited northern Australia were primarily from Makassar and southern Sulawesi (including Bugis, or Bajau and Sumbawan immigrants) and the Lesser Sunda Islands (to where these ethnic groups had migrated) but also included the Indigenous Australians who accompanied them on their voyages. Research into other ethnic groups (Chinese, Makassar-Malay, Seram Laut Islanders, Solorese and Timorese mariners) also associated with both northern Australia and the maritime Southeast Asian forest and marine trade suggests that they be included in the ‘Macassan’ group. Analysis of historical sources for the late nineteenth–early twentieth century Macassan trepang (sea cucumber) industry in north Australia demonstrates that perahu spare cargo capacity was filled with additional commodities when the trepang harvest was low, ensuring voyage profitability. Comparison of the maritime Southeast Asian trade with ethnographic, archaeological, historical, and linguistic evidence in northern Australia, suggests that 20 commodities were likely to have been exported from the latter, seven of which have never before been mentioned in the literature. Mapping of the Macassan routes transporting the 20 commodities shows that northern Australia was connected to a vast network of maritime Southeast and East Asian trade with global reach. The importance of these findings for Asian contact archaeology in northern Australia is threefold: (1) archaeologists should look beyond ceramic provenance, metal, and glass to seek material and chronological evidence for the extraction and processing of a wider range of forest and marine commodities; (2) evidence for the extraction of particular commodities might be a proxy for age estimation of a site; and (3) the origins of introduced material culture will reflect its East, South, and Southeast Asian and, ultimately, global connectivity.
{"title":"An historical reassessment of the maritime Southeast Asian forest and marine commodities trade and its implications for archaeological investigations of Asian contact in northern Australia","authors":"Kellie Clayton","doi":"10.1080/03122417.2023.2208795","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2023.2208795","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper reassesses the maritime Southeast Asian forest and marine commodities trade from the sixteenth century to World War I. The ‘Macassan’ traders who visited northern Australia were primarily from Makassar and southern Sulawesi (including Bugis, or Bajau and Sumbawan immigrants) and the Lesser Sunda Islands (to where these ethnic groups had migrated) but also included the Indigenous Australians who accompanied them on their voyages. Research into other ethnic groups (Chinese, Makassar-Malay, Seram Laut Islanders, Solorese and Timorese mariners) also associated with both northern Australia and the maritime Southeast Asian forest and marine trade suggests that they be included in the ‘Macassan’ group. Analysis of historical sources for the late nineteenth–early twentieth century Macassan trepang (sea cucumber) industry in north Australia demonstrates that perahu spare cargo capacity was filled with additional commodities when the trepang harvest was low, ensuring voyage profitability. Comparison of the maritime Southeast Asian trade with ethnographic, archaeological, historical, and linguistic evidence in northern Australia, suggests that 20 commodities were likely to have been exported from the latter, seven of which have never before been mentioned in the literature. Mapping of the Macassan routes transporting the 20 commodities shows that northern Australia was connected to a vast network of maritime Southeast and East Asian trade with global reach. The importance of these findings for Asian contact archaeology in northern Australia is threefold: (1) archaeologists should look beyond ceramic provenance, metal, and glass to seek material and chronological evidence for the extraction and processing of a wider range of forest and marine commodities; (2) evidence for the extraction of particular commodities might be a proxy for age estimation of a site; and (3) the origins of introduced material culture will reflect its East, South, and Southeast Asian and, ultimately, global connectivity.","PeriodicalId":8648,"journal":{"name":"Australian Archaeology","volume":"89 1","pages":"115 - 133"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41760584","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-04DOI: 10.1080/03122417.2023.2213543
T. Thomas
{"title":"Building and Remembering: An Archaeology of Place-Making on Papua New Guinea’s South Coast","authors":"T. Thomas","doi":"10.1080/03122417.2023.2213543","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2023.2213543","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":8648,"journal":{"name":"Australian Archaeology","volume":"89 1","pages":"206 - 207"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43373877","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-05-04DOI: 10.1080/03122417.2023.2218992
S. Munt, B. White, T. Owen
Abstract Backed artefacts are multifunctional tools used by many Australian Aboriginal groups. Most were retouched in order to shape them rather than to create or modify a working edge, which suggests that they may have been made to certain shapes or sizes according to local traditions. This possibility is feasible as backed artefacts were not used for any unique functions. Hiscock (2014) found that variation in backed artefact shape (symmetry) across Australia was underlain by social arrangements and was potentially historically situated. But McDonald et al. (2018) found that backed artefacts from the Western Desert did not conform to the continental trend. We suggest that an important factor missing from these studies is a consideration of the potential for variation at different spatial scales. To investigate this possibility, we conducted morphometric and use-wear analyses on backed artefacts from four environmentally and socially different Aboriginal groups in New South Wales. The backed artefacts were not used for any distinct tasks and none in our study was hafted, but some variations exist in the morphometrics at the intra-regional scale. We infer that backed artefact production included group-specific traditions that potentially embody social information relating to local land-using or descent groups.
{"title":"Social information inherent in backed artefacts from the Illawarra, western, and southwestern Sydney, NSW","authors":"S. Munt, B. White, T. Owen","doi":"10.1080/03122417.2023.2218992","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2023.2218992","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Backed artefacts are multifunctional tools used by many Australian Aboriginal groups. Most were retouched in order to shape them rather than to create or modify a working edge, which suggests that they may have been made to certain shapes or sizes according to local traditions. This possibility is feasible as backed artefacts were not used for any unique functions. Hiscock (2014) found that variation in backed artefact shape (symmetry) across Australia was underlain by social arrangements and was potentially historically situated. But McDonald et al. (2018) found that backed artefacts from the Western Desert did not conform to the continental trend. We suggest that an important factor missing from these studies is a consideration of the potential for variation at different spatial scales. To investigate this possibility, we conducted morphometric and use-wear analyses on backed artefacts from four environmentally and socially different Aboriginal groups in New South Wales. The backed artefacts were not used for any distinct tasks and none in our study was hafted, but some variations exist in the morphometrics at the intra-regional scale. We infer that backed artefact production included group-specific traditions that potentially embody social information relating to local land-using or descent groups.","PeriodicalId":8648,"journal":{"name":"Australian Archaeology","volume":"89 1","pages":"134 - 148"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42182064","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/03122417.2023.2190560
L. Zimmerman
{"title":"Models can be helpful, but common sense may be enough","authors":"L. Zimmerman","doi":"10.1080/03122417.2023.2190560","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2023.2190560","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":8648,"journal":{"name":"Australian Archaeology","volume":"89 1","pages":"84 - 85"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48159082","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/03122417.2023.2175960
B. Barker, L. Lamb, M. Leavesley, T. Manne, Andrew S. Fairbairn, Andrew Coe, Kelsey M. Lowe, Teppsy Beni, Betty Neanda, M. Aubert
Abstract This paper presents preliminary results from the 2019 excavations at Walufeni Cave, at the eastern end of the Great Papuan Plateau (GPP) in western Papua New Guinea. Preliminary dating and analysis of the unfinished excavations at Walufeni Cave span the Holocene and probably continue into the Late Pleistocene, confirming the presence of people on the Plateau from at least the Early Holocene and potentially much earlier. The data presented here offer a site-specific model of early intensive site use from at least 10,000 years ago, then ephemeral use, followed by a sustained Late Holocene occupation. Although there are significant changes in the quantity of material discard over time, there is little evidence for significant change in the subsistence base or technology, reflecting a degree of relative homogeneity until the Late Holocene, when we see the introduction of pig, a change of focus in the plant economy and the presence of marine shell from the southern coast.
{"title":"A Holocene sequence from Walufeni Cave, Southern Highlands Province, and its implications for the settlement of the Great Papuan Plateau, Papua New Guinea","authors":"B. Barker, L. Lamb, M. Leavesley, T. Manne, Andrew S. Fairbairn, Andrew Coe, Kelsey M. Lowe, Teppsy Beni, Betty Neanda, M. Aubert","doi":"10.1080/03122417.2023.2175960","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2023.2175960","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper presents preliminary results from the 2019 excavations at Walufeni Cave, at the eastern end of the Great Papuan Plateau (GPP) in western Papua New Guinea. Preliminary dating and analysis of the unfinished excavations at Walufeni Cave span the Holocene and probably continue into the Late Pleistocene, confirming the presence of people on the Plateau from at least the Early Holocene and potentially much earlier. The data presented here offer a site-specific model of early intensive site use from at least 10,000 years ago, then ephemeral use, followed by a sustained Late Holocene occupation. Although there are significant changes in the quantity of material discard over time, there is little evidence for significant change in the subsistence base or technology, reflecting a degree of relative homogeneity until the Late Holocene, when we see the introduction of pig, a change of focus in the plant economy and the presence of marine shell from the southern coast.","PeriodicalId":8648,"journal":{"name":"Australian Archaeology","volume":"89 1","pages":"47 - 65"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44655294","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/03122417.2023.2190559
Maddison Miller
I thank Ouzman for his contribution, and echo the call for Indigenous partners, communities, and Country to be recognised as authors in research. This recognition of authorship shifts the dynamic from Aboriginal people as subjects to collaborators. It has been often claimed that the sheer volume of research on Aboriginal peoples and our lands and waters have led to us being the most researched peoples on the planet (Martin and Mirraboopa 2003:203). Research has, and continues to, occur about Aboriginal people and Country without fair consultation or invitation. Calls for authorship rights should be welcomed, and this conversation can be enriched through the understanding and application of Indigenous cultural and intellectual property (ICIP) rights within archaeology and related disciplines. Indigenous cultural and intellectual property refers to the intangible and tangible elements of cultural practice, resources and knowledge systems that express cultural identity (Janke 2005). It recognises the living and adaptive nature of Indigenous knowledge and cultural expression and includes contemporary and future expressions. Janke argues that when Indigenous knowledge is separated from Indigenous communities, those communities lose control over how their knowledge, customs, traditions, and beliefs are represented and used. Some sources, particularly earlier colonial records, published information that would be considered restricted within community and were recorded when people could not exercise prior and informed consent. This knowledge is further appropriated through modern literature and educational resources without repatriation to the communities from which it belongs. Indigenous researchers are well versed in navigating the cultural safety minefield that is historical research. We are often confronted with closed practice knowledges written about as a curiosity. Within our communities, lore dictates whether that knowledge be held communally or by particular knowledge holders, and how that knowledge is shared outside of community. Our lore is disrespected and dismissed through the disassociation of our knowledges from the rich social fabric in which they emerge and belong. Concepts of stewardship and guardianship sit outside Western legal systems’ understanding of intellectual property as a thing to be owned (Lai 2014). In a Western worldview, humans and nature can be separated, whereas in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander worldviews we are Country. As Ouzman points out, Western legal processes do not handle well collective authorship, intergenerational knowledge, and more-than-human knowledges. The authorship of Country is one way in which we see researchers trying to recognise the knowledge held and shared by Country. Inter and transdisciplinary practice within archaeology begins to paint a social, environmental, and cultural picture of the past. Our understanding of the past is only enriched through Indigenous knowledge systems, which hol
{"title":"Navigating knowledge and intellectual property","authors":"Maddison Miller","doi":"10.1080/03122417.2023.2190559","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2023.2190559","url":null,"abstract":"I thank Ouzman for his contribution, and echo the call for Indigenous partners, communities, and Country to be recognised as authors in research. This recognition of authorship shifts the dynamic from Aboriginal people as subjects to collaborators. It has been often claimed that the sheer volume of research on Aboriginal peoples and our lands and waters have led to us being the most researched peoples on the planet (Martin and Mirraboopa 2003:203). Research has, and continues to, occur about Aboriginal people and Country without fair consultation or invitation. Calls for authorship rights should be welcomed, and this conversation can be enriched through the understanding and application of Indigenous cultural and intellectual property (ICIP) rights within archaeology and related disciplines. Indigenous cultural and intellectual property refers to the intangible and tangible elements of cultural practice, resources and knowledge systems that express cultural identity (Janke 2005). It recognises the living and adaptive nature of Indigenous knowledge and cultural expression and includes contemporary and future expressions. Janke argues that when Indigenous knowledge is separated from Indigenous communities, those communities lose control over how their knowledge, customs, traditions, and beliefs are represented and used. Some sources, particularly earlier colonial records, published information that would be considered restricted within community and were recorded when people could not exercise prior and informed consent. This knowledge is further appropriated through modern literature and educational resources without repatriation to the communities from which it belongs. Indigenous researchers are well versed in navigating the cultural safety minefield that is historical research. We are often confronted with closed practice knowledges written about as a curiosity. Within our communities, lore dictates whether that knowledge be held communally or by particular knowledge holders, and how that knowledge is shared outside of community. Our lore is disrespected and dismissed through the disassociation of our knowledges from the rich social fabric in which they emerge and belong. Concepts of stewardship and guardianship sit outside Western legal systems’ understanding of intellectual property as a thing to be owned (Lai 2014). In a Western worldview, humans and nature can be separated, whereas in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander worldviews we are Country. As Ouzman points out, Western legal processes do not handle well collective authorship, intergenerational knowledge, and more-than-human knowledges. The authorship of Country is one way in which we see researchers trying to recognise the knowledge held and shared by Country. Inter and transdisciplinary practice within archaeology begins to paint a social, environmental, and cultural picture of the past. Our understanding of the past is only enriched through Indigenous knowledge systems, which hol","PeriodicalId":8648,"journal":{"name":"Australian Archaeology","volume":"89 1","pages":"82 - 83"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43112968","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：