Additional Information

Available Through

ResearchGate

Language

English

Notes

Abstract: What do researchers and heritage practitioners do when their concepts of place do not coincide with those held by local communities? Discussing a case study from Mozambique against its wider southern African backdrop, this article argues that professionals cannot overlook the fact that many rural communities in this part of Africa do their version of ‘archaeology’ by reconstructing the past via their ancestors. The primary focus is to establish a ground for epistemic levelling between ‘scientific’ and ‘other’ knowledges and an ensuing heritage ethics from which to articulate a set of key tenets for future engagements with local communities and public archaeology. In order to develop an approach that is inclusive and within the scope of ‘a truly engaged archaeology’, we explore the potential of encounters between different epistemologies, between those of professional practitioners and those of the public they engage with.

Additional tags: heritage ethics; different epistemologies; public engagement; Mozambique

Taxonomies

RPA Codes & Standards

• Archaeologist's Responsibility to the Public

CIfA Codes

• Principle 5: Recognition of aspirations of employees, colleagues and helpers in all matters of employment

Keywords & Terms

• Accountability
• Consultation/Partnership with Affected Groups
• Consultation/Partnership with Indigenous Peoples
• Impact on Communities - Local, Descendant, etc.
• Integrity of Research Methodology and Field Procedures
• Management of Cultural Resources, Heritage, History
• Public Interest, Collaboration, Education, and Outreach
• Respect for and Responsibility to Affected Groups

Topics & Issues

• Collaboration in Archaeology (i.e. Communities, Non-Archaeologists, etc.)
• Community Archaeology and Participatory Research
• Ethical Dilemmas
• Heritage Management
• Interpreting the Past
• Public Engagement, Outreach, and Education
• Public Memory and Public Space