Related Authors
InterestsView All (45)
Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
Related Authors
CONICET
Universidad de Buenos Aires
Universidad Nacional de Córdoba
Universidad de Buenos Aires
CONICET
Universidad Nacional de Salta
CONICET
Universidad de Buenos Aires
Uploads
Books by Felix Acuto
Papers by Felix Acuto
propuesto por las crónicas históricas (1470 d.C.) y algunos trabajos arqueológicos recientes (1450 d.C.), presenta una clara ocupación por parte de los agentes del Tawantinsuyu desde, al menos, las décadas de 1420 y 1430 d.C.
In the current context throughout Latin America, where power groups and the market are increasingly interested in the natural and cultural resources of indigenous territories, indigenous peoples are once again being denied, and their identities, preexistence in the territories, and rights are being questioned. As archaeologists, we must recognize that our work is not merely about investigating past landscapes but also about conducting archaeology in territories currently intersected by recurring conflicts. This article proposes and discusses the conceptual and theoretical-methodological foundations of a committed and activist archaeology, one that contributes to social justice and the emancipation of historically subordinated minorities, such as indigenous peoples. This archaeology must be based on two fundamental premises: the recognition of indigenous peoples as subjects of rights and the implementation of interculturality. Based on these principles, two lines of work are proposed, each involving specific methods: (1) the development of demand-driven research that produces knowledge serving the projects and struggles of indigenous peoples, and (2) the creation of multivocal products where indigenous voices appear in the first person, contributing to their internal processes and their articulation with various societal and state actors. This article advocates for a transformation of contemporary Latin American archaeology, both in its relationship with the social environment where research is conducted and in the way knowledge is produced, placing the discipline at the service of the projects, causes, and struggles of subjugated minorities.
Heritage has been widely discussed in Latin America in general, and in Argentina in particular, in the last two decades. There have been debates about heritage within academic circles, especially in the social sciences and humanities, it has been a concern of state public administration, linked to tourism development, and it is frequently mentioned in the media. Furthermore, heritage has become an arena of dispute and struggle of subordinate groups who are in the process of regaining their identities and cultural ways, achieving social visibility, and making their voices heard. This paper explores the relationship between heritage and Original Peoples in Argentina from the indigenous point of view. Throughout this article, readers will find different indigenous voices explaining what they consider Indigenous Peoples' main patrimony, what type of relations they establish with it, and how heritage is involved in their current projects, claims, and struggles, especially over their ancestral territories. As shown in this paper, Indigenous Peoples in Argentina seek to recover their heritage to re-establish the order and balance of the territorial forces and to demonstrate their pre-existence: that is, that they were in certain places before the formation of the modern nation-state and, therefore, that they have rights over these lands. In addition, claims and disputes over heritage are favoring the re-emergence and strengthening of indigenous spirituality and cultural practices.
has been achieved and what we originally imagined for this journal. While we think that the number of contributions
with a critical edge that have been published in our journal over the last 10 years is encouraging, and in
many ways innovative, there is still a lot to do in one respect: to advance critical discussions in German archaeology
itself. German scholarship continues to construct its discourses largely along the line of cultural-historical
knowledge, and university teaching is only slowly integrating theoretical or critical perspectives. So we pondered
the question of how the development of more critical approaches in German-speaking archaeology could be supported.
We decided to ask authors – international and German – to write about political issues, specifically an
activist archaeology. The following set of papers is conceptually similar to those in the first volume of our journal,
Forum Kritische Archäologie Special Issue: What is a Critical Archaeology? This time, too, we sent authors a set
of questions that we asked them to reflect upon in short essays:
1) Can activism be reconciled with the scientific claims of archaeology?
2) Where do the boundaries between “traditional” and “activist” archaeology lie?
3) How is activism to be evaluated from within academia in an age that often fundamentally denies the capacity
of science to make truth claims?
4) What might concrete scholarly projects with an activist claim look like?
Abstract: The goal of this paper is to present a program or praxis for South American indigenous archaeology; that is, the archaeology for and with indigenous peoples. Considering the sociopolitical and cultural history of the region, the politics of identity that South American nation-states developed, indigenous movements and organizations’ contemporary demands, and the current context of pressure on and conflicts in indigenous territories, it is necessary to develop an archaeology committed to the projects, claims, and struggles of the original peoples of the region. This program claims that South American indigenous archaeology needs to: 1) know and respect contemporary indigenous rights, recognizing original peoples as subject of rights and political subjects; 2) admit that what we call archaeological heritage belongs to indigenous peoples and communities; 3) make archaeology available for indigenous projects, demands, and struggles, especially when hegemonic groups, who still deny original peoples, seek to appropriate their territories and resources; 4) recognize that indigenous peoples speak for themselves and that archaeology needs to open up academic spaces for native voices, respecting their knowledge and promoting the production of intercultural knowledge.
En el contexto socio-histórico argentino de los últimos años, donde las movilizaciones y las organizaciones territoriales indígenas se han fortalecido y comienzan a realizar activos reclamos sobre lo que se dice de ellos y de su pasado, sobre cómo se los representa, sobre los restos mortuorios de sus ancestros y sobre el control de su patrimonio arqueológico y las intervenciones sobre este, propongo una arqueología que produzca conocimiento intercultural sobre los paisajes arqueológicos, que vincule los paisajes pasados y los presentes y que sirva de herramienta para apoyar las luchas actuales de los Pueblos Originarios.
indígena del valle Calchaquí (provincia de Salta, Argentina) y referentes de pueblos originarios de la Argentina.
El artículo combina la perspectiva crítica y los reclamos de los pueblos sobre la práctica arqueológica con un
acercamiento académico reflexivo. De manera conjunta, ambas perspectivas buscan ir más allá de la crítica
para proponer una praxis específica, entendida esta como una acción política teóricamente informada. A partir
de un contrapunto entre la voz académica y la voz indígena, este artículo propone un trabajo colaborativo y
en diálogo, una forma distinta de producir conocimiento sobre el pasado y una praxis arqueológica que ponga
a disposición herramientas que fortalezcan las demandas y derechos de los pueblos originarios, los procesos
de consolidación identitaria y los reclamos patrimoniales.
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND ARGENTINE ARCHAEOLOGY: BUILDING AN INTERCULTURAL DIALOGUE
AND RECONSTRUCTING ARCHAEOLOGY. This paper is the product of an intercultural dialogue between
an archaeological research team studying the indigenous past of the Calchaquí Valley (Salta, Argentina) and
representatives of Argentine Indigenous people. The paper combines the critical perspective and claims of
Indigenous peoples concerning archaeological practice with a reflexive academic perspective. Together these
perspectives seek to go beyond critique to put forward a specific praxis, understood as theoretically informed
political action. By establishing a counterpoint between the academic voice and the indigenous voice, this article
proposes the following: the development of collaborative and dialogue-based work; a different way of producing
knowledge about the past; and an archaeological praxis oriented towards providing tools to strengthen the claims
and rights of Indigenous peoples, their identity building processes, and their heritage demands.
This article discusses the processes of repatriation of indigenous mortal remains. It develops this discussion from two perspectives. On the one hand, from the institutional and academic experience of two of the authors, who participated in the National Program of Identification and Repatriation of Indigenous Mortal Remains, Office of Assertion of Indigenous Rights, National Institute of Indigenous Affairs, Argentina. On the other hand, the issue of repatriation is explored from the indigenous' point of view, knowledge, and experience. In this second case, the process of the complementary repatriation of the Gama/Longko Pewenche – Günün a künä Inakayal, and the repatriation of his wife and his niece, Margarita Foyel (or Rutukar, her original name), is especially analyzed. Through these intercultural reflections, we seek to construct and offer working tools for the State, academic institutions, and everyone involved in processes of repatriation.
Inkas did not expand their realm for the sole purpose of extracting resources and accumulating wealth. To various degrees, they developed a colonial project that aimed at reshaping the political, economic, cultural and religious institutions and practices of the colonized. There is no
doubt that Inka colonialism involved, among other things, corvée labour, the strategic relocation of people(s) and the exploitation and production of staple crops and luxury goods. Nevertheless, we argue in this paper that, above all, the Inkas expanded into the Andean region to meet and relate to the Sacred. Inka expansionism was a sort of religious quest through which the Inkas built up their authority and legitimized their rule.
propuesto por las crónicas históricas (1470 d.C.) y algunos trabajos arqueológicos recientes (1450 d.C.), presenta una clara ocupación por parte de los agentes del Tawantinsuyu desde, al menos, las décadas de 1420 y 1430 d.C.
In the current context throughout Latin America, where power groups and the market are increasingly interested in the natural and cultural resources of indigenous territories, indigenous peoples are once again being denied, and their identities, preexistence in the territories, and rights are being questioned. As archaeologists, we must recognize that our work is not merely about investigating past landscapes but also about conducting archaeology in territories currently intersected by recurring conflicts. This article proposes and discusses the conceptual and theoretical-methodological foundations of a committed and activist archaeology, one that contributes to social justice and the emancipation of historically subordinated minorities, such as indigenous peoples. This archaeology must be based on two fundamental premises: the recognition of indigenous peoples as subjects of rights and the implementation of interculturality. Based on these principles, two lines of work are proposed, each involving specific methods: (1) the development of demand-driven research that produces knowledge serving the projects and struggles of indigenous peoples, and (2) the creation of multivocal products where indigenous voices appear in the first person, contributing to their internal processes and their articulation with various societal and state actors. This article advocates for a transformation of contemporary Latin American archaeology, both in its relationship with the social environment where research is conducted and in the way knowledge is produced, placing the discipline at the service of the projects, causes, and struggles of subjugated minorities.
Heritage has been widely discussed in Latin America in general, and in Argentina in particular, in the last two decades. There have been debates about heritage within academic circles, especially in the social sciences and humanities, it has been a concern of state public administration, linked to tourism development, and it is frequently mentioned in the media. Furthermore, heritage has become an arena of dispute and struggle of subordinate groups who are in the process of regaining their identities and cultural ways, achieving social visibility, and making their voices heard. This paper explores the relationship between heritage and Original Peoples in Argentina from the indigenous point of view. Throughout this article, readers will find different indigenous voices explaining what they consider Indigenous Peoples' main patrimony, what type of relations they establish with it, and how heritage is involved in their current projects, claims, and struggles, especially over their ancestral territories. As shown in this paper, Indigenous Peoples in Argentina seek to recover their heritage to re-establish the order and balance of the territorial forces and to demonstrate their pre-existence: that is, that they were in certain places before the formation of the modern nation-state and, therefore, that they have rights over these lands. In addition, claims and disputes over heritage are favoring the re-emergence and strengthening of indigenous spirituality and cultural practices.
has been achieved and what we originally imagined for this journal. While we think that the number of contributions
with a critical edge that have been published in our journal over the last 10 years is encouraging, and in
many ways innovative, there is still a lot to do in one respect: to advance critical discussions in German archaeology
itself. German scholarship continues to construct its discourses largely along the line of cultural-historical
knowledge, and university teaching is only slowly integrating theoretical or critical perspectives. So we pondered
the question of how the development of more critical approaches in German-speaking archaeology could be supported.
We decided to ask authors – international and German – to write about political issues, specifically an
activist archaeology. The following set of papers is conceptually similar to those in the first volume of our journal,
Forum Kritische Archäologie Special Issue: What is a Critical Archaeology? This time, too, we sent authors a set
of questions that we asked them to reflect upon in short essays:
1) Can activism be reconciled with the scientific claims of archaeology?
2) Where do the boundaries between “traditional” and “activist” archaeology lie?
3) How is activism to be evaluated from within academia in an age that often fundamentally denies the capacity
of science to make truth claims?
4) What might concrete scholarly projects with an activist claim look like?
Abstract: The goal of this paper is to present a program or praxis for South American indigenous archaeology; that is, the archaeology for and with indigenous peoples. Considering the sociopolitical and cultural history of the region, the politics of identity that South American nation-states developed, indigenous movements and organizations’ contemporary demands, and the current context of pressure on and conflicts in indigenous territories, it is necessary to develop an archaeology committed to the projects, claims, and struggles of the original peoples of the region. This program claims that South American indigenous archaeology needs to: 1) know and respect contemporary indigenous rights, recognizing original peoples as subject of rights and political subjects; 2) admit that what we call archaeological heritage belongs to indigenous peoples and communities; 3) make archaeology available for indigenous projects, demands, and struggles, especially when hegemonic groups, who still deny original peoples, seek to appropriate their territories and resources; 4) recognize that indigenous peoples speak for themselves and that archaeology needs to open up academic spaces for native voices, respecting their knowledge and promoting the production of intercultural knowledge.
En el contexto socio-histórico argentino de los últimos años, donde las movilizaciones y las organizaciones territoriales indígenas se han fortalecido y comienzan a realizar activos reclamos sobre lo que se dice de ellos y de su pasado, sobre cómo se los representa, sobre los restos mortuorios de sus ancestros y sobre el control de su patrimonio arqueológico y las intervenciones sobre este, propongo una arqueología que produzca conocimiento intercultural sobre los paisajes arqueológicos, que vincule los paisajes pasados y los presentes y que sirva de herramienta para apoyar las luchas actuales de los Pueblos Originarios.
indígena del valle Calchaquí (provincia de Salta, Argentina) y referentes de pueblos originarios de la Argentina.
El artículo combina la perspectiva crítica y los reclamos de los pueblos sobre la práctica arqueológica con un
acercamiento académico reflexivo. De manera conjunta, ambas perspectivas buscan ir más allá de la crítica
para proponer una praxis específica, entendida esta como una acción política teóricamente informada. A partir
de un contrapunto entre la voz académica y la voz indígena, este artículo propone un trabajo colaborativo y
en diálogo, una forma distinta de producir conocimiento sobre el pasado y una praxis arqueológica que ponga
a disposición herramientas que fortalezcan las demandas y derechos de los pueblos originarios, los procesos
de consolidación identitaria y los reclamos patrimoniales.
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND ARGENTINE ARCHAEOLOGY: BUILDING AN INTERCULTURAL DIALOGUE
AND RECONSTRUCTING ARCHAEOLOGY. This paper is the product of an intercultural dialogue between
an archaeological research team studying the indigenous past of the Calchaquí Valley (Salta, Argentina) and
representatives of Argentine Indigenous people. The paper combines the critical perspective and claims of
Indigenous peoples concerning archaeological practice with a reflexive academic perspective. Together these
perspectives seek to go beyond critique to put forward a specific praxis, understood as theoretically informed
political action. By establishing a counterpoint between the academic voice and the indigenous voice, this article
proposes the following: the development of collaborative and dialogue-based work; a different way of producing
knowledge about the past; and an archaeological praxis oriented towards providing tools to strengthen the claims
and rights of Indigenous peoples, their identity building processes, and their heritage demands.
This article discusses the processes of repatriation of indigenous mortal remains. It develops this discussion from two perspectives. On the one hand, from the institutional and academic experience of two of the authors, who participated in the National Program of Identification and Repatriation of Indigenous Mortal Remains, Office of Assertion of Indigenous Rights, National Institute of Indigenous Affairs, Argentina. On the other hand, the issue of repatriation is explored from the indigenous' point of view, knowledge, and experience. In this second case, the process of the complementary repatriation of the Gama/Longko Pewenche – Günün a künä Inakayal, and the repatriation of his wife and his niece, Margarita Foyel (or Rutukar, her original name), is especially analyzed. Through these intercultural reflections, we seek to construct and offer working tools for the State, academic institutions, and everyone involved in processes of repatriation.
Inkas did not expand their realm for the sole purpose of extracting resources and accumulating wealth. To various degrees, they developed a colonial project that aimed at reshaping the political, economic, cultural and religious institutions and practices of the colonized. There is no
doubt that Inka colonialism involved, among other things, corvée labour, the strategic relocation of people(s) and the exploitation and production of staple crops and luxury goods. Nevertheless, we argue in this paper that, above all, the Inkas expanded into the Andean region to meet and relate to the Sacred. Inka expansionism was a sort of religious quest through which the Inkas built up their authority and legitimized their rule.
analyzing the politics of space of Inca imperialism. For the indigenous peoples of this
rather large region of the South Andes, this process of colonial encounter entailed their
forced relocation, the imposition of an Inca landscape overlapping the native one, the
intrusion and remodeling of some of their towns and villages, and the seizure of their
sacred places and shrines. Through this strategic intervention and reshaping of the native
landscape, the Incas sought to construct a new socio-spatial order that served them to set
the relationships with their subjects, to spread their ideology, and to redefine the
interaction with supernatural entities.
y laderas de altura, pero hay poca evidencia de copresencia
de representantes imperiales y locales allí, y menos de la
existencia de sitios preinkaicos. Se discuten aquí los resultados
de investigaciones en el sitio de Uña Tambo (X = 4707 msnm),
incluyendo análisis de la arquitectura, de la cerámica y fechados
radiocarbónicos sobre carbones vegetales recuperados en las
excavaciones. Argumentamos que Uña Tambo es el resultado de
una larga historia iniciada al comienzo del Período Intermedio
Tardío y continuada durante la ocupación inka.