Archaeological ethnography: Conversations around Kruger National Park

Abstract

SAbstracto: Este articulo esboza las posibilidades para una practica mixta, a la que yo denomino etnografia arqueologica, que enlaza la arqueologia y antropologia sociocultural. Mi trabajo de campo se ha realizado en los limites del Parque Nacional Kruger con individuos de la comunidad de Malatji, y tambi~n con ecologistas sociales, guardas del parque, interpretes y agentes del patrimonio que trabajan en el parque nacional. La investigacion contribuye y evalua criticamente el centralismo del patrimonio arqueologico de Sudafrica y sus multiples papeles en la formulacion de nuevas subjetividades en la nacion cosmopolita y postcolonial. # !.! R~sume:Cet article illustre la possibilite d'utiliser I'ethnographie archeologique comme pratique hybride permettant de faire le pont entre I'archeologie et I'anthropologie socioculturelle. Mon travail de terrain se d~roule ~ la limite du Parc National Kruger avec des individus de la communaute Malatji et aussi des sp~cialistes en ecologie sociale, des agents de la conservation, des guides interpretes et des representants du patrimoine employes du parc national. Cette recherche entend contribuer et faire une evaluation critique de la centralit~ du patrimoine archeologique en Afrique du sud et de ses r61es multiples dans la formation d'une nouvelle subjectivite dans la nation cosmopolite postcoloniale.This short, reflective piece sketches out the possibilities for a hybrid practise I refer to as archaeological ethnography--a traversing of two distinct, but necessarily enmeshed, subfields. Anthropology, particularly in North American contexts, institutionally combines archaeological and ethnographic enterprises; therefore, students can, and often do, migrate across those domains during their doctoral training. It seems then an obvious transition to undertake work that combines the field practises of respective traditions, archaeological and ethnographic, in relevant contexts. In fact, as evidenced in recent publications, conferences, and dissertation topics, many of our students are doing exactly that. u~ 0 0 r~ D "Oh t E E P. Q ,,,,,1 0 81 82 LYNN MESKELLI would argue that there is a difference between a serious ethnographic engagement and the more casual encounters many archaeologists experience in the field when simply talking to various stakeholders or seeking information to aid their research. The latter occurs frequently, and I take this form of conversation to task for a number of reasons. This critique leads to a larger discussion of the notion of"local" or "locals" a trope that has become an easy catchall for the complex and ethically necessary encounters we have with various constituencies in and around archaeological locales. "Locals" and "local communities" are not passive constituencies there for our intellectual mining, nor are they there awaiting our theoretical insights into their situations or histories. They are directly enmeshed in their own critical reformulations, political negotiations, and constitutions of theory and interpretation. I illustrate the...

The ‘Celtic-Barbarian Assemblage’: Archaeology and Cultural Memory in the Fiestas de Astures y Romanos, Astorga, Spain

“…From a twofold anthropological and archaeological perspective, we follow Law (2004) and Smith (2005) in the elaboration of a situated methodology that adapts to the context without a preconceived or rigid scheme. We also assumed Meskell's (2005) proposal to hybridize archaeological and anthropological methods. Semi-structured and free interviews (King & Horrocks, 2010) were employed to gather the necessary data from multiple actors: organizers, re-enactors, visitors, and politicians, among others.…”

The past as a lived space: Heritage places, re-emergent aesthetics, and hopeful practices in NW Argentina

“…Only then can we understand the locations where heritage struggles emerge (and the artefacts around which these may begin), as social, semantic, and physical spaces, where these systems become lived-in-the flesh realities (Castañeda 2010;Meskell 2005).…”

Construyendo el pasado, reproduciendo el presente: identidad y arqueología en las recreaciones históricas de indígenas contra romanos en el Noroeste de España

“…La investigación procura suplir la falta de aproximaciones en las que «se integren situaciones políticas y económicas con análisis contextuales bien documentados de relaciones sociales» (Hall 2007: 14), una situación que se acentúa en el contexto español (Sánchez Carretero y Ortiz García 2008). Así, hemos analizado la construcción de significados y sentidos a partir del estudio materialista de «cómo los cuerpos son inscritos y marcados» (Bogard 1998: 54) (Castañeda 2008;Hamilakis 2011;Meskell 2005). Llevamos a cabo entrevistas semi-estructuradas y libres (King y Horrocks 2010) para recopilar los datos necesarios de múltiples actores: organizadores, visitantes, políticos locales y participantes, entre otros.…”