Thesis by Jaime Almansa-Sánchez
RESUMEN + ABSTRACT
Gestionar el patrimonio arqueológico es una tarea complicada y burocratizada ... more RESUMEN + ABSTRACT
Gestionar el patrimonio arqueológico es una tarea complicada y burocratizada que bebe de la herencia burguesa del pasado y hoy tenemos que poner en cuestión. Por ello, una disciplina como la arqueología pública nos puede ayudar a entender el modelo que vivimos y, de paso, a articular herramientas de gestión más efectivas para el buen devenir de la arqueología.
Esta tesis doctoral tiene por objetivo analizar el concepto de arqueología pública como herramienta de gestión, dotarlo además de un contenido teórico sustentado en la Teoría Crítica de la Sociedad, analizar el contexto socio-económico y político en el que desarrollamos nuestro trabajo como arqueólogos y proponer nuevos modelos de acción a través de la arqueología pública.
Para ello, la tesis se estructura en cuatro partes, que junto con los anexos afrontarán los objetivos marcados. Entre todos ellos, quedará patente cómo la Teoría Crítica puede ser un marco teórico factible para la arqueología pública, en tanto en cuanto ofrece las herramientas necesarias para cuestionar de forma continua nuestra disciplina. Una de las principales críticas a la arqueología en los últimos años ha sido su desvinculación de la realidad social, económica y política del momento. Si bien esto no es cierto, al haber estado perfectamente articulada con esa realidad, sí ha existido una consciente desligazón de su crítica, enfocando siempre nuestro trabajo al pasado y no al presente. Por eso, las palabras «interacción» y «acción» se refieren a la situación de la arqueología en su lugar histórico como un elemento más del conglomerado social contemporáneo. Así, la arqueología pública nos permitirá definir formas de gestión integradoras y útiles en un contexto como el actual, pero sobre todo, cambiar el paradigma de gestión de la pasividad a la actividad.
En conjunto, esta tesis trata de definir una sociología de la arqueología que analice el sector con un pie fuera, definiendo los límites de la disciplina y sus posibilidades de cara al futuro. Además, aunque está centrada en el caso español, ofrecerá un marco de comparación internacional que analice la posición de nuestros modelos de gestión con respecto a otros modelos internacionales —en cuanto a los factores más destacables para una perspectiva de la gestión desde la arqueología pública.
Managing archaeological heritage is a complicated and bureaucratic task that drinks from past’s bourgeois legacy which must be called into question nowadays. Hence, a discipline such as public archaeology may help us understand the model we live in and articulate more effective management devices to the good evolvement of archaeology.
This PhD dissertation aims at analysing the concept of public archaeology as a management tool, at endowing it with a theoretical content based on the Critical theory of society, at analysing the socio-economic and political context where we develop our work as archaeologists and at proposing new action models through public archaeology.
To do so, this thesis is organised into four sections that, with the annexes, will delve into the proposed aims. Among all of them, it will be clear how the Critical theory of society can be a feasible theoretical framework for public archaeology since it offers the required tools to question our discipline in a continuous way. Recently, one of the main critiques to archaeology has been its disengagement with current social, economic and political reality. Although this is not right, since it has been perfectly articulated with that reality, there has been a conscious mismatch of its critique by always focusing our work on the past, nor the present. Therefore, words such as “interaction” and “action” refer to the situation of archaeology in its historical place as one more element within the contemporary social conglomerate. So, public archaeology will allow us define integrative and useful management ways in a context like the current one. But, above anything else, it will allow us change the management paradigm from passivity to activity.
As a whole, this dissertation tries to delimitate a sociology of archaeology, which analyses the sector from the outside, defining the boundaries of the discipline and its possibilities in terms of future. In addition, although it focuses on the Spanish case, it will offer an international comparative framework to analyse the position of our management models regarding other international ones —with regards to the most prominent factors for a perspective of management from public archaeology.
Arqueología y Sociedad. Interacción y Acción desde la Teoría Crítica
Books by Jaime Almansa-Sánchez
Este primer volumen de la colección ‘Charlas de Café’ trata sobre el estado y el futuro de la Arq... more Este primer volumen de la colección ‘Charlas de Café’ trata sobre el estado y el futuro de la Arqueología en España. A través de las voces de 44 profesionales del sector en distíntos ámbitos y el análisis del editor del volúmen, el lector tendrá la oportunidad de reflexionar y participar en un debate por el futuro de nuestro colectivo.
Participan:
Valentín Álvarez Martínez, Agustín Azkarate Garai-Olaun, Gonzalo Aranda Jiménez, Rafael Azuar Ruiz, David Barreiro Martínez, Cinta S. Bellmunt, Rebeca Blanco-Rotea, Alicia Castillo Mena, Juan Carlos Castro Carrera, Felipe Criado Boado, Beatriz Comendador Rey, Gonzalo Compañy, Rosa Domínguez Alonso, José Antonio Estévez Morales, Riccardo Frigoli, Soledad Gil García, Alfredo González Ruibal, Pablo Guerra García, Sonia Gutiérrez Lloret, Clara Hernando Álvarez, David Javaloyas Molina, Pilar López García, Olalla López Costas, Sandra Lozano Rubio, Beatriz Marín Aguilera, Carlos Marín Suárez, Alba Masclans Latorre, Roberto Ontañón Peredo, Eva Parga Dans, Saúl Pérez-Juana del Casal, Francisco Ramos Martínez, Carme Rissech Badalló, Carmen Rodríguez Santana, Ignacio Rodríguez Temiño, M. Carmen Rojo Ariza, Jorge Rolland Calvo, Arturo Ruiz Rodríguez, María Ruiz del Árbol Moro, Margarita Sánchez Romero, Jesús Sesma Sesma, Ramón Ten Carné, Antonio Valera, Eva Zarco Martínez, Salomé Zurinaga Fernández-Toribio.
During the JIA 2009 I had the opportunity to co-organize (with David García from UAB) a session d... more During the JIA 2009 I had the opportunity to co-organize (with David García from UAB) a session devoted to Memory and Archaeology. Although it was a great success, mostly thanks to the rich discussion we enjoyed after the papers, we could not have all the ones we expected due to different circumstances.
This volume compiles these and other contributions with the scope that the elapsed time has given. The thread of the contributions focuses on two concepts: Memory and Archaeology (as the title points out).
The word “Memory” refers to the past, our individual memories and the collective ones. “Wander around memory” (Recorrer la memoria) is a Spanish phrase that means “to think in order to remember what happened”. Now that retrieving (historical) memory is changing from being a commitment to being a fashion, it is more needed to “wander around memory” to set our position as professionals in archaeology.
All the contributions in this volume share a common idea: the analysis of “memories” generated from conflict. Too frequently, collective memory brews around different traumatic events framed in armed conflicts. Conflict generates memory, but memory generates conflict too, feeding a vicious circle manifested in some of the processes to retrieve historical memory that are still open today.
There is a series of contributions in this volume that analyse the implications between memory and archaeology, mainly focusing on the Spanish experience (Civil War and Franco’s dictatorship), but also on other experiences besides the Second World War.
This route starts in Chile and Argentina. First of all, Carlos Carrasco tries to show us the valuable inputs of archaeology in the process to retrieve the memory lost during the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet in Chile (1973-1990). As one of the most recent events that will be analysed in this volume, the participation of archaeologists in Chile has been fundamental, not only for the families of the repressed, but also for the prosecution of the military dictatorship. Crossing the border to Argentina, Soledad Biasatti and Gonzalo Compañy come with a reflexion about our position as archaeologists from the study of clandestine detention centres in the times of the Junta Militar (1976-1983).
On the other side of the Pacific Ocean, Jin Soo Park takes us to Korea and the building of a new national identity in which the Japanese occupation is ‘forgotten’. The controversy of using archaeology as a tool for identity building faces now the planning of Korean national museums.
Finally we arrive to Europe, were recent conflicts keep open wounds in several countries. Firstly, Kristina Penezić and Jovana Tripković approach ethnic conflict in postwar Balkans with the Serbian example. The emergence of new ethnic identities after a conflict that dismembered completely former Yugoslavia, makes archaeology face the challenge of setting up an identity away from resentment and ultranationalism.
Then, ariving to the Iberian Peninsule, Sergio Gomes anlayzes, from an anthropological point of view, the ideologic indoctrination processes in Italy and Portugal during their respective regimes.
As an introduction to the remembrance process occurred in Spain especially during the last years, Ignacio Fernandez’s contribution analyzes the last decade of events around the retrieving of the historical memory and the new conflict that this has generated in the country due to the reinterpretation of a past lived by most of the population. Laura Muñoz and Francisco Javier García present the case of Llerena (Badajoz, Spain), where archaeology helps to recover more than bodies, the memory of the repressed. But this retrieving of memory does not meet yet some of the basic requirements that have already been got in other countries. Juan Montero analyzes how, besides laws and protocols, exhumations do not complete the restitution process from a legal point of view. As part of the protocols, physical anthropology has become an essential tool for the recovery of the bodies. Alba Aran, David García and Iván Sánchez analyze the contributions of this discipline for the excavation of mass graves while they ponder the situation of archaeologists in a process that, beyond research, has strong social implications.
But the retrieve of memory in Spain is not limited to the exhumation of mass graves of the repressed. It goes beyond. There are several projects currently taking place for the study of historical landscapes of the war and the repression. The last two contributions focus more in this aspect. Firstly, Verónica García and Pascual Ortega analyze the ‘destruction of memory’ form one of the most emblematic places for Francoise repression, Carabanchel prison (Madrid, Spain), which was recently demolished even though the strong social claim for its preservation. And to finish, Beatriz del Mazo brings an analysis of contemporary amateur photography about the war, highlighting that the conflict s still alive and photography is an exceptional resource for the study of collective memory.
The present volume contains an interesting set of contributions that offer a wide scope of ideas and points of view about the concepts of Memory and Archaeology. This is only small sample of all the processes that took, or are taking place, all around the world. However, it is a representative sample, not maybe in quantity but in the variety of approaches to the topic.
Finally, I cannot finish this introduction without thanking everyone involved in this volume for their commitment and support. I am personally satisfied with the result of the present volume and I am sure it will be a major contribution to the subject.
Este pequeño texto cuenta con una licencia de Creative Commons 3.0 BY-NC-ND, así que siempre que ... more Este pequeño texto cuenta con una licencia de Creative Commons 3.0 BY-NC-ND, así que siempre que cites y no te hagas rico, puedes hacer lo que quieras con esto... Incluso quemarlo. Es un producto derivado del ensayo «Indianas Jones sin futuro. La lucha contra el expolio del patrimonio arqueológico» de Ignacio Rodríguez Temiño.
Papers by Jaime Almansa-Sánchez
Actas de la RAM 2019, 2021
#pubarchMED trata de acercarse a las diferentes formas de gestionar el patrimonio arqueológico en... more #pubarchMED trata de acercarse a las diferentes formas de gestionar el patrimonio arqueológico en el Mediterráneo. A través de los ojos de profesionales de diferentes ámbitos dentro de la arqueología y desde los diferentes estados del contexto mediterráneo, el proyecto está recopilando un cuerpo de información ingente sobre buenas y malas prácticas, relaciones, experiencias y sueños que pueden ayudar no sólo a entender mejor lo que pasa en cada lugar, sino también a plantear soluciones prácticas que ayuden a mejorar la forma en la que hacemos las cosas durante nuestro día a día.
Siguiendo con algunas de las propuestas de mi tesis doctoral, apoyadas ahora por la experiencia y los datos del proyecto, este trabajo tratará de dibujar algunas ideas de cara al futuro que nos ayuden a practicar una arqueología mejor en todos los aspectos de la misma.
Advances in Archaeological Practice, 2020
OPEN ACCESS... GO TO DOI FOR MORE
Public Archaeology in the Mediterranean Context (#pubarchMED) i... more OPEN ACCESS... GO TO DOI FOR MORE
Public Archaeology in the Mediterranean Context (#pubarchMED) is a project that focuses on the management of archaeological heritage in the Mediterranean context from the perspective of public archaeology. Ranging from fully public models where preventive archaeology itself is a challenge to mixed models where the outsourcing of this work has been accomplished to a full extent, the variety of solutions is wide and with a common trend: struggle with mitigation and little space for creativity. This article will delve into the range of models that exist in the Mediterranean, exploring the way they approach, first of all, preventive/rescue archaeology, and then, the relationship between archaeology and society in the process. Building on the challenges of an underfunded scheme for an extremely archaeologically rich territory, different solutions have been set in practice-in some cases, under the auspices of competent administrations in the form of public policy-in the endeavor to include public archaeology in the practice, mostly encouraged by professionals as a personal or corporate initiative, and sometimes even consciously avoided. The discussion will offer some ideas for creative mitigation in the different scenarios, built on the comparative study and the broad possibilities to engage stakeholders positively in the process. Arqueología Pública en el Contexto Mediterráneo (#pubarchMED) es un proyecto enfocado al estudio de la gestión del patrimonio arqueológico en el contexto mediterráneo desde la perspectiva de la arqueología pública. Desde modelos puramente públicos en los que la arqueología preventiva es un reto, a otros modelos mixtos en los que la subcontratación de los servicios es ya total, la variedad de soluciones es amplia, siempre con una tendencia común: dificultades para mitigar y poco espacio para la creatividad. Este trabajo profundizará en la variedad de modelos existentes en el Mediterráneo y cómo abordan, primero, la arqueología preventiva o de rescate y, después, la relación arqueología-sociedad en el proceso. Sobre los retos de un esquema mal financiado en un territorio extremadamente rico en patrimonio arqueológico, se han puesto en práctica diferentes soluciones, en algunos casos bajo el auspicio de la administración competente, en vías de incluir la arqueología pública en el proceso, pero en la práctica fomentado por la iniciativa privada de individuos u otras instituciones, o conscientemente evitado. La discusión ofrecerá algunas ideas para la mitigación creativa en los diferentes esce-narios, a través del estudio comparativo y las innumerables posibilidades de involucrar de forma positiva a los diferentes actores que forman parte del proceso. Palabras clave: arqueología pública, arqueología preventiva, mitigación creativa, Mediterráneo Alice: "Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?" The Cheshire Cat: "That depends a good deal on where you want to get to." Alice: "I don't much care where." The Cheshire Cat: "Then it doesn't matter which way you go."-Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland This conversation between Alice and the Cheshire Cat can easily be a mirror of archaeological heritage management in many corners of the world. It is not that we do not know where to go, but we have not invested a lot of thought into creating a creative and holistic practice that is in line with modern needs and ethics. More often, we apply a patch to problems while continuing to rely on old management models. Building on the preliminary results of the #pubarchMED project, this article presents the variety of management models that exist across the Mediterra-nean and reflects on how countries approach preventive and rescue archaeology as well as the relationship between archaeology and society-all in the context of creative mitigation strategies and the way current practices relate to the concept in very different ways.
Nailos, 2020
Una escuela pared con pared. Un millar de niños. Ganas de compartir. Visita. Dibujos. Risas. Este... more Una escuela pared con pared. Un millar de niños. Ganas de compartir. Visita. Dibujos. Risas. Este trabajo ve la luz tras muchos años en un cajón y trata de recupe-rar la memoria de una actividad que aportó mucha frescura y algo de información a nuestro trabajo con las misiones jesuitas en la región del lago Tana, en Etiopía. El programa de trabajo con la comunidad de Azazo, junto a uno de los yacimientos, trajo consigo una programación de visitas educativas con alumnos de primaria de la escuela local. El diseño del estudio en el que se enmarca y el análisis de los datos nos dan algunas pistas sobre el impacto de nuestra presencia y de los discursos ar-queológicos que utilizamos para transmitir la información. El trabajo se desarrolló durante los meses de noviembre y diciembre de 2008 y en total implicó a casi mil quinientos estudiantes de diferentes niveles, desde educación primaria, con quien se enfoca este trabajo, hasta la universidad. Abstract A school right behind the wall. A thousand kids. A will to share. A visit. Drawings. Laughs. This article comes to light after many years in the drawer and aims to recover the memory of an activity that contributed with freshness and some information to our work with the Jesuit missions in Lake Tana region, Ethiopia. The activities planned with the local community in Azezo, next to one of the sites, brought a program of educational visits with children from the local primary school. The design of the study and the analysis of the data provide some clues about the impact of our presence there and the archaeological discourses we use to communicate information. The work was conducted during November and December 2008 and engaged around 1,500 students of different levels, from Primary education, focus of this work, to University.
Arqueologia 3.0 - III. 'RESGATAR MEMÓRIAS' -SÍTIOS, TERRITÓRIOS E COMUNIDADES, 2020
The relationship between archaeology and society defines public archaeology, however, even today ... more The relationship between archaeology and society defines public archaeology, however, even today most of the works within this discipline focus on knowledge of the past and how it is transmitted/represented. Through the experience of the #pubarchMED project, we will explore how the management and socialization of archaeological heritage go much further and make it necessary to keep in mind our impact on the communities, their impact on our work and all the dynamics
that are generated around it. With the focus on our Mediterranean environment, we will deepen the value of understanding the perception of archaeological heritage management and the micropolitics that shape our day to day.
Critical Perspectives on Cultural Heritage and Memory, 2020
Cuadernos de Prehistoria y Arqueología de la Universidad de Granada, 2018
Writing about the future when the present keeps changing at a dramatic pace can be complicated. P... more Writing about the future when the present keeps changing at a dramatic pace can be complicated. Public archaeology is based upon a simple (non)definition that offers infinite possibilities for its development. However, there are a series of themes and practices that have now become standardised and require reexamination. Still, we can continue building new paths, and this paper will try to offer some brief notes on those I consider most pressing.
En Ana Yáñez e Ignacio Rodríguez Temiño (eds.). El expoliar se va a acabar. Uso de detectores de ... more En Ana Yáñez e Ignacio Rodríguez Temiño (eds.). El expoliar se va a acabar. Uso de detectores de metales y arqueología: sanciones administrativas y penales. Valencia: Tirant lo Blanch, pp. 39-58
Desde que fueron introducidos en España, los detectores de metales han estado asociados a la búsqueda de restos arqueológicos. Esto ha llevado a una imagen de la detección metálica más cercana al delito que a la afición. Las causas han sido más que justificadas ante la acción expoliadora de muchos usuarios, lo que ha dificultado la relación con un colectivo arqueológico muy reaccionario al uso de esta tecnología. En los últimos años se han planteado nuevas vías de colaboración que permitan una práctica de la afición a la detección metálica en contextos arqueológicos, sin embargo es necesaria una regulación mucho más efectiva. El presente texto plantea una propuesta de regulación y cohabitación que permita avanzar en la gestión de un conflicto que esperamos cerca de resolverse.
Since they were introduced in Spain, metal detectors have been linked to the search of archaeological remains. This portrayed an image of metal detecting closer to felony than to hobby. The looting action of many users justified this view, complicating the relation between metal detector users and archaeologists, who are reluctant to accept the use of this technology. Some collaboration projects have emerged in the last years, allowing the use of metal detectors in archaeological contexts, however we are in need of a better regulation. This text lays out a regulatory proposal that may help to advance in the management of a conflict that we hope to close to be solved.
Spain has been one of the leading countries in the expansion of commercial archaeology. Seen as t... more Spain has been one of the leading countries in the expansion of commercial archaeology. Seen as the least-bad option at the political moment when it was set, the framing law for heritage was not even close to the reality that was about to happen. After the ratification of the La Valetta Convention in 2011, a group of professionals decided to move forward, towards a new regulatory framework in Madrid. The process has been intense and led to a new law, but nothing close to what was expected. Political interests, corruption, responsibility, contestation and a surprisingly innocuous end mark this “story” about the latest legislative process for archaeological heritage in Madrid. This paper will expose the whole process of the latest heritage law in Madrid from the first consultations to the first full year of application, after the Constitutional Court voided about 20% of it. In the process, this paper will explore in a transversal way some of the topics of the Berlin DGUF conference like the role of institutions and professional associations, the psychology of power within archaeological professions, shifts of power, and the real impact of legislative actions.
Public Archaeology
Within the broader debate to (re)define public archaeology, Grima's (2016) paper calls for an arc... more Within the broader debate to (re)define public archaeology, Grima's (2016) paper calls for an archaeology embedded in public archaeology, thereby focusing on this avenue of expansion instead of its own development as a singular discipline. Not fully rejecting this idea, this short paper aims to situate the debate a step beyond, towards a slightly different approach to the discipline. Employing a historiographical perspective, it is argued that complementary visions about public archaeology help to enrich the discipline. Public Archaeology is all the New Territories, lying into the periphery of direct research into the remains of material culture, into which the tribe has driven its herds in recent years. Some of these are actually Old Territories, a return to familiar pastures (like the origins of mind or community, or the relevance of prehistory to the 'forge of nations'), in which archaeologists used to roam when the climate was warmer and mistier. All of them are about the problems which arise when archaeology moves into the real world of economic conflict and political struggle. In other words, they are about ethics (Ascherson, 2000: 2) This is probably my favourite definition of public archaeology, back in the first editorial of this journal. Its spirit has been present in the work of many professionals that made some of the 'New Territories' of the late 90s a common ground for us. In this sense, the claim for a wider presence of public archaeology in the daily practice of archaeology is reasonable. When Matsuda (2004: 68) posited a public-oriented archaeology, the concept was still in close relation with archaeology itself. After all, if we are doing public archaeology it is because we understand a special value in the past that connects it with the present. The forms these connections take are numerous, and affect the bigger picture. This is maybe why there will always be New Territories to explore. When Richardson and I recently summarised the current state of public archaeology (Richardson & Almansa Sánchez, 2015) this spirit was still in mind. Perhaps our main critique laid in the conformity with the now Old Territories of public archaeology and how they were being populated by new tribes with different objectives to ours. Those new tribes came from archaeology and sometimes posed a conflict. Maybe this is why we erected some fences and resisted, in order to keep exploring the fringe. But many other tribes adapted and settled, reducing the scope of the original exploration. Putting aside the metaphor, while what we now call 'traditional' public archaeology (for/by the public, popular, etc.) is increasingly being practiced, we cannot leave aside the aim to be a real part of everyday practice and continue developing new approaches. In the title to this paper I paraphrase Gustavo Adolfo Bécquer's Rhyme 21 as a response to all archaeologists who question what public archaeology is.1 While my paper supports Grima's recent call for an archaeology embedded in public archaeology,
World Archaeology, 2015
Archaeology is a discipline influenced by emerging cultural trends, especially with regards to th... more Archaeology is a discipline influenced by emerging cultural trends, especially with regards to theoretical approaches to interpretation and practice. Public archaeology is a relatively young one, finding its feet, and its loose definitions have opened the door to multiple perspectives and opportunities . When research agendas include the issue of public engagement, we need to approach our practices critically from the beginning, and consider the consequences of ‘doing’ public archaeology. Moving beyond an understanding of the theoretical backdrop to our work, we first need to situate our work socially, politically and economically. This paper will bring necessary critique to some current trends in public archaeology, proposing that commitment to sustainability, inclusivity, and ethics are the basis for a responsible practice.
Tradicionalmente, el asociacionismo en arqueología se ha desarrollado desde el ámbito cultural y ... more Tradicionalmente, el asociacionismo en arqueología se ha desarrollado desde el ámbito cultural y científico. El desarrollo de la profesión, especialmente en el contexto de lo que se comenzaba a conocer como «arqueología de intervención» dio lugar a los primeros proyectos de asociacionismo profesional. A partir de la asunción competencial de las autonomías y el planteamiento de los nuevos modelos de gestión de la arqueología en los años 80 del siglo XX, el surgimiento de un nuevo sector profesional puso de manifiesto la necesidad de organización colectiva. Desde 1990 comienzan a surgir secciones de arqueología en colegios profesionales de varias provincias hasta configurar un mapa de representación amplio, aunque desigualmente distribuido. Junto a ellos, surgieron otras asociaciones profesionales de carácter «privado» (sin la oficialidad de un colegio profesional) que completaron el mapa, cubriendo necesidades puntuales del sector.
Este articulo abordará el contexto hispano y el ejemplo de la experiencia reciente de las dos principales asociaciones profesionales de la Comunidad de Madrid: AMTTA y el Colegio de Arqueólogos de Madrid.
La mercantilización —económica y académica— de la arqueología
pública avanza a pasos agigantados.... more La mercantilización —económica y académica— de la arqueología
pública avanza a pasos agigantados. Este texto repudia la arqueología
pública como participación. Vuelve a su definición primigenia,
siendo una práctica meramente académica que pone las bases para la
praxis desde la teoría, partiendo de la premisa de que para que haya
participación no es necesaria más que la voluntad y el compromiso
de las partes implicadas, sin que tenga que mediar una arqueología
pública desvirtuada. Este fenómeno se debe en parte a la asimilación
entre muchos profesionales de arqueología pública y arqueología
comunitaria, dos conceptos complementarios pero diferentes donde
el rol participativo reside en el segundo. No obstante, la utilidad de la
arqueología pública en el contexto participativo se pone de manifiesto
como herramienta de análisis, planificación, evaluación y crítica.
Desde el sector de la arqueología nos venimos quejando de la imagen que se ofrece de nuestro trab... more Desde el sector de la arqueología nos venimos quejando de la imagen que se ofrece de nuestro trabajo en los medios de comunicación. Tesoros, política y otros demonios que conducen a una percepción social errónea del pasado y de nuestro trabajo. En un país como España, donde la legislación es tan restrictiva, esto se traduce en un peligro añadido de expolio. El caso del detectorismo es especialmente interesante, en tanto en cuanto representa una mitificación de la búsqueda de tesoros y, en ocasiones, una legitimación del expolio. El presente artículo analizará esta circunstancia en su contexto. Palabras clave: Detectores de metales, arqueología pública, medios de comunicación, legis-lación, educación, patrimonio arqueológico.
ABSTRACT We, the archaeological sector, have been complaining about the image offered by the media about our work. Treasures, politics and other demons lead to a social misconception of the past and our profession. In a country such as Spain, where laws are very restrictive, this increases the danger of looting. The case of metal detectors is especially interesting, as it makes treasure hunting attractive and, sometimes, looting legitimate. This article will explore these circumstances in their contexts.
Uploads
Thesis by Jaime Almansa-Sánchez
Gestionar el patrimonio arqueológico es una tarea complicada y burocratizada que bebe de la herencia burguesa del pasado y hoy tenemos que poner en cuestión. Por ello, una disciplina como la arqueología pública nos puede ayudar a entender el modelo que vivimos y, de paso, a articular herramientas de gestión más efectivas para el buen devenir de la arqueología.
Esta tesis doctoral tiene por objetivo analizar el concepto de arqueología pública como herramienta de gestión, dotarlo además de un contenido teórico sustentado en la Teoría Crítica de la Sociedad, analizar el contexto socio-económico y político en el que desarrollamos nuestro trabajo como arqueólogos y proponer nuevos modelos de acción a través de la arqueología pública.
Para ello, la tesis se estructura en cuatro partes, que junto con los anexos afrontarán los objetivos marcados. Entre todos ellos, quedará patente cómo la Teoría Crítica puede ser un marco teórico factible para la arqueología pública, en tanto en cuanto ofrece las herramientas necesarias para cuestionar de forma continua nuestra disciplina. Una de las principales críticas a la arqueología en los últimos años ha sido su desvinculación de la realidad social, económica y política del momento. Si bien esto no es cierto, al haber estado perfectamente articulada con esa realidad, sí ha existido una consciente desligazón de su crítica, enfocando siempre nuestro trabajo al pasado y no al presente. Por eso, las palabras «interacción» y «acción» se refieren a la situación de la arqueología en su lugar histórico como un elemento más del conglomerado social contemporáneo. Así, la arqueología pública nos permitirá definir formas de gestión integradoras y útiles en un contexto como el actual, pero sobre todo, cambiar el paradigma de gestión de la pasividad a la actividad.
En conjunto, esta tesis trata de definir una sociología de la arqueología que analice el sector con un pie fuera, definiendo los límites de la disciplina y sus posibilidades de cara al futuro. Además, aunque está centrada en el caso español, ofrecerá un marco de comparación internacional que analice la posición de nuestros modelos de gestión con respecto a otros modelos internacionales —en cuanto a los factores más destacables para una perspectiva de la gestión desde la arqueología pública.
Managing archaeological heritage is a complicated and bureaucratic task that drinks from past’s bourgeois legacy which must be called into question nowadays. Hence, a discipline such as public archaeology may help us understand the model we live in and articulate more effective management devices to the good evolvement of archaeology.
This PhD dissertation aims at analysing the concept of public archaeology as a management tool, at endowing it with a theoretical content based on the Critical theory of society, at analysing the socio-economic and political context where we develop our work as archaeologists and at proposing new action models through public archaeology.
To do so, this thesis is organised into four sections that, with the annexes, will delve into the proposed aims. Among all of them, it will be clear how the Critical theory of society can be a feasible theoretical framework for public archaeology since it offers the required tools to question our discipline in a continuous way. Recently, one of the main critiques to archaeology has been its disengagement with current social, economic and political reality. Although this is not right, since it has been perfectly articulated with that reality, there has been a conscious mismatch of its critique by always focusing our work on the past, nor the present. Therefore, words such as “interaction” and “action” refer to the situation of archaeology in its historical place as one more element within the contemporary social conglomerate. So, public archaeology will allow us define integrative and useful management ways in a context like the current one. But, above anything else, it will allow us change the management paradigm from passivity to activity.
As a whole, this dissertation tries to delimitate a sociology of archaeology, which analyses the sector from the outside, defining the boundaries of the discipline and its possibilities in terms of future. In addition, although it focuses on the Spanish case, it will offer an international comparative framework to analyse the position of our management models regarding other international ones —with regards to the most prominent factors for a perspective of management from public archaeology.
Books by Jaime Almansa-Sánchez
Participan:
Valentín Álvarez Martínez, Agustín Azkarate Garai-Olaun, Gonzalo Aranda Jiménez, Rafael Azuar Ruiz, David Barreiro Martínez, Cinta S. Bellmunt, Rebeca Blanco-Rotea, Alicia Castillo Mena, Juan Carlos Castro Carrera, Felipe Criado Boado, Beatriz Comendador Rey, Gonzalo Compañy, Rosa Domínguez Alonso, José Antonio Estévez Morales, Riccardo Frigoli, Soledad Gil García, Alfredo González Ruibal, Pablo Guerra García, Sonia Gutiérrez Lloret, Clara Hernando Álvarez, David Javaloyas Molina, Pilar López García, Olalla López Costas, Sandra Lozano Rubio, Beatriz Marín Aguilera, Carlos Marín Suárez, Alba Masclans Latorre, Roberto Ontañón Peredo, Eva Parga Dans, Saúl Pérez-Juana del Casal, Francisco Ramos Martínez, Carme Rissech Badalló, Carmen Rodríguez Santana, Ignacio Rodríguez Temiño, M. Carmen Rojo Ariza, Jorge Rolland Calvo, Arturo Ruiz Rodríguez, María Ruiz del Árbol Moro, Margarita Sánchez Romero, Jesús Sesma Sesma, Ramón Ten Carné, Antonio Valera, Eva Zarco Martínez, Salomé Zurinaga Fernández-Toribio.
This volume compiles these and other contributions with the scope that the elapsed time has given. The thread of the contributions focuses on two concepts: Memory and Archaeology (as the title points out).
The word “Memory” refers to the past, our individual memories and the collective ones. “Wander around memory” (Recorrer la memoria) is a Spanish phrase that means “to think in order to remember what happened”. Now that retrieving (historical) memory is changing from being a commitment to being a fashion, it is more needed to “wander around memory” to set our position as professionals in archaeology.
All the contributions in this volume share a common idea: the analysis of “memories” generated from conflict. Too frequently, collective memory brews around different traumatic events framed in armed conflicts. Conflict generates memory, but memory generates conflict too, feeding a vicious circle manifested in some of the processes to retrieve historical memory that are still open today.
There is a series of contributions in this volume that analyse the implications between memory and archaeology, mainly focusing on the Spanish experience (Civil War and Franco’s dictatorship), but also on other experiences besides the Second World War.
This route starts in Chile and Argentina. First of all, Carlos Carrasco tries to show us the valuable inputs of archaeology in the process to retrieve the memory lost during the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet in Chile (1973-1990). As one of the most recent events that will be analysed in this volume, the participation of archaeologists in Chile has been fundamental, not only for the families of the repressed, but also for the prosecution of the military dictatorship. Crossing the border to Argentina, Soledad Biasatti and Gonzalo Compañy come with a reflexion about our position as archaeologists from the study of clandestine detention centres in the times of the Junta Militar (1976-1983).
On the other side of the Pacific Ocean, Jin Soo Park takes us to Korea and the building of a new national identity in which the Japanese occupation is ‘forgotten’. The controversy of using archaeology as a tool for identity building faces now the planning of Korean national museums.
Finally we arrive to Europe, were recent conflicts keep open wounds in several countries. Firstly, Kristina Penezić and Jovana Tripković approach ethnic conflict in postwar Balkans with the Serbian example. The emergence of new ethnic identities after a conflict that dismembered completely former Yugoslavia, makes archaeology face the challenge of setting up an identity away from resentment and ultranationalism.
Then, ariving to the Iberian Peninsule, Sergio Gomes anlayzes, from an anthropological point of view, the ideologic indoctrination processes in Italy and Portugal during their respective regimes.
As an introduction to the remembrance process occurred in Spain especially during the last years, Ignacio Fernandez’s contribution analyzes the last decade of events around the retrieving of the historical memory and the new conflict that this has generated in the country due to the reinterpretation of a past lived by most of the population. Laura Muñoz and Francisco Javier García present the case of Llerena (Badajoz, Spain), where archaeology helps to recover more than bodies, the memory of the repressed. But this retrieving of memory does not meet yet some of the basic requirements that have already been got in other countries. Juan Montero analyzes how, besides laws and protocols, exhumations do not complete the restitution process from a legal point of view. As part of the protocols, physical anthropology has become an essential tool for the recovery of the bodies. Alba Aran, David García and Iván Sánchez analyze the contributions of this discipline for the excavation of mass graves while they ponder the situation of archaeologists in a process that, beyond research, has strong social implications.
But the retrieve of memory in Spain is not limited to the exhumation of mass graves of the repressed. It goes beyond. There are several projects currently taking place for the study of historical landscapes of the war and the repression. The last two contributions focus more in this aspect. Firstly, Verónica García and Pascual Ortega analyze the ‘destruction of memory’ form one of the most emblematic places for Francoise repression, Carabanchel prison (Madrid, Spain), which was recently demolished even though the strong social claim for its preservation. And to finish, Beatriz del Mazo brings an analysis of contemporary amateur photography about the war, highlighting that the conflict s still alive and photography is an exceptional resource for the study of collective memory.
The present volume contains an interesting set of contributions that offer a wide scope of ideas and points of view about the concepts of Memory and Archaeology. This is only small sample of all the processes that took, or are taking place, all around the world. However, it is a representative sample, not maybe in quantity but in the variety of approaches to the topic.
Finally, I cannot finish this introduction without thanking everyone involved in this volume for their commitment and support. I am personally satisfied with the result of the present volume and I am sure it will be a major contribution to the subject.
Papers by Jaime Almansa-Sánchez
Siguiendo con algunas de las propuestas de mi tesis doctoral, apoyadas ahora por la experiencia y los datos del proyecto, este trabajo tratará de dibujar algunas ideas de cara al futuro que nos ayuden a practicar una arqueología mejor en todos los aspectos de la misma.
Public Archaeology in the Mediterranean Context (#pubarchMED) is a project that focuses on the management of archaeological heritage in the Mediterranean context from the perspective of public archaeology. Ranging from fully public models where preventive archaeology itself is a challenge to mixed models where the outsourcing of this work has been accomplished to a full extent, the variety of solutions is wide and with a common trend: struggle with mitigation and little space for creativity. This article will delve into the range of models that exist in the Mediterranean, exploring the way they approach, first of all, preventive/rescue archaeology, and then, the relationship between archaeology and society in the process. Building on the challenges of an underfunded scheme for an extremely archaeologically rich territory, different solutions have been set in practice-in some cases, under the auspices of competent administrations in the form of public policy-in the endeavor to include public archaeology in the practice, mostly encouraged by professionals as a personal or corporate initiative, and sometimes even consciously avoided. The discussion will offer some ideas for creative mitigation in the different scenarios, built on the comparative study and the broad possibilities to engage stakeholders positively in the process. Arqueología Pública en el Contexto Mediterráneo (#pubarchMED) es un proyecto enfocado al estudio de la gestión del patrimonio arqueológico en el contexto mediterráneo desde la perspectiva de la arqueología pública. Desde modelos puramente públicos en los que la arqueología preventiva es un reto, a otros modelos mixtos en los que la subcontratación de los servicios es ya total, la variedad de soluciones es amplia, siempre con una tendencia común: dificultades para mitigar y poco espacio para la creatividad. Este trabajo profundizará en la variedad de modelos existentes en el Mediterráneo y cómo abordan, primero, la arqueología preventiva o de rescate y, después, la relación arqueología-sociedad en el proceso. Sobre los retos de un esquema mal financiado en un territorio extremadamente rico en patrimonio arqueológico, se han puesto en práctica diferentes soluciones, en algunos casos bajo el auspicio de la administración competente, en vías de incluir la arqueología pública en el proceso, pero en la práctica fomentado por la iniciativa privada de individuos u otras instituciones, o conscientemente evitado. La discusión ofrecerá algunas ideas para la mitigación creativa en los diferentes esce-narios, a través del estudio comparativo y las innumerables posibilidades de involucrar de forma positiva a los diferentes actores que forman parte del proceso. Palabras clave: arqueología pública, arqueología preventiva, mitigación creativa, Mediterráneo Alice: "Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?" The Cheshire Cat: "That depends a good deal on where you want to get to." Alice: "I don't much care where." The Cheshire Cat: "Then it doesn't matter which way you go."-Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland This conversation between Alice and the Cheshire Cat can easily be a mirror of archaeological heritage management in many corners of the world. It is not that we do not know where to go, but we have not invested a lot of thought into creating a creative and holistic practice that is in line with modern needs and ethics. More often, we apply a patch to problems while continuing to rely on old management models. Building on the preliminary results of the #pubarchMED project, this article presents the variety of management models that exist across the Mediterra-nean and reflects on how countries approach preventive and rescue archaeology as well as the relationship between archaeology and society-all in the context of creative mitigation strategies and the way current practices relate to the concept in very different ways.
that are generated around it. With the focus on our Mediterranean environment, we will deepen the value of understanding the perception of archaeological heritage management and the micropolitics that shape our day to day.
Desde que fueron introducidos en España, los detectores de metales han estado asociados a la búsqueda de restos arqueológicos. Esto ha llevado a una imagen de la detección metálica más cercana al delito que a la afición. Las causas han sido más que justificadas ante la acción expoliadora de muchos usuarios, lo que ha dificultado la relación con un colectivo arqueológico muy reaccionario al uso de esta tecnología. En los últimos años se han planteado nuevas vías de colaboración que permitan una práctica de la afición a la detección metálica en contextos arqueológicos, sin embargo es necesaria una regulación mucho más efectiva. El presente texto plantea una propuesta de regulación y cohabitación que permita avanzar en la gestión de un conflicto que esperamos cerca de resolverse.
Since they were introduced in Spain, metal detectors have been linked to the search of archaeological remains. This portrayed an image of metal detecting closer to felony than to hobby. The looting action of many users justified this view, complicating the relation between metal detector users and archaeologists, who are reluctant to accept the use of this technology. Some collaboration projects have emerged in the last years, allowing the use of metal detectors in archaeological contexts, however we are in need of a better regulation. This text lays out a regulatory proposal that may help to advance in the management of a conflict that we hope to close to be solved.
Este articulo abordará el contexto hispano y el ejemplo de la experiencia reciente de las dos principales asociaciones profesionales de la Comunidad de Madrid: AMTTA y el Colegio de Arqueólogos de Madrid.
pública avanza a pasos agigantados. Este texto repudia la arqueología
pública como participación. Vuelve a su definición primigenia,
siendo una práctica meramente académica que pone las bases para la
praxis desde la teoría, partiendo de la premisa de que para que haya
participación no es necesaria más que la voluntad y el compromiso
de las partes implicadas, sin que tenga que mediar una arqueología
pública desvirtuada. Este fenómeno se debe en parte a la asimilación
entre muchos profesionales de arqueología pública y arqueología
comunitaria, dos conceptos complementarios pero diferentes donde
el rol participativo reside en el segundo. No obstante, la utilidad de la
arqueología pública en el contexto participativo se pone de manifiesto
como herramienta de análisis, planificación, evaluación y crítica.
ABSTRACT We, the archaeological sector, have been complaining about the image offered by the media about our work. Treasures, politics and other demons lead to a social misconception of the past and our profession. In a country such as Spain, where laws are very restrictive, this increases the danger of looting. The case of metal detectors is especially interesting, as it makes treasure hunting attractive and, sometimes, looting legitimate. This article will explore these circumstances in their contexts.
Gestionar el patrimonio arqueológico es una tarea complicada y burocratizada que bebe de la herencia burguesa del pasado y hoy tenemos que poner en cuestión. Por ello, una disciplina como la arqueología pública nos puede ayudar a entender el modelo que vivimos y, de paso, a articular herramientas de gestión más efectivas para el buen devenir de la arqueología.
Esta tesis doctoral tiene por objetivo analizar el concepto de arqueología pública como herramienta de gestión, dotarlo además de un contenido teórico sustentado en la Teoría Crítica de la Sociedad, analizar el contexto socio-económico y político en el que desarrollamos nuestro trabajo como arqueólogos y proponer nuevos modelos de acción a través de la arqueología pública.
Para ello, la tesis se estructura en cuatro partes, que junto con los anexos afrontarán los objetivos marcados. Entre todos ellos, quedará patente cómo la Teoría Crítica puede ser un marco teórico factible para la arqueología pública, en tanto en cuanto ofrece las herramientas necesarias para cuestionar de forma continua nuestra disciplina. Una de las principales críticas a la arqueología en los últimos años ha sido su desvinculación de la realidad social, económica y política del momento. Si bien esto no es cierto, al haber estado perfectamente articulada con esa realidad, sí ha existido una consciente desligazón de su crítica, enfocando siempre nuestro trabajo al pasado y no al presente. Por eso, las palabras «interacción» y «acción» se refieren a la situación de la arqueología en su lugar histórico como un elemento más del conglomerado social contemporáneo. Así, la arqueología pública nos permitirá definir formas de gestión integradoras y útiles en un contexto como el actual, pero sobre todo, cambiar el paradigma de gestión de la pasividad a la actividad.
En conjunto, esta tesis trata de definir una sociología de la arqueología que analice el sector con un pie fuera, definiendo los límites de la disciplina y sus posibilidades de cara al futuro. Además, aunque está centrada en el caso español, ofrecerá un marco de comparación internacional que analice la posición de nuestros modelos de gestión con respecto a otros modelos internacionales —en cuanto a los factores más destacables para una perspectiva de la gestión desde la arqueología pública.
Managing archaeological heritage is a complicated and bureaucratic task that drinks from past’s bourgeois legacy which must be called into question nowadays. Hence, a discipline such as public archaeology may help us understand the model we live in and articulate more effective management devices to the good evolvement of archaeology.
This PhD dissertation aims at analysing the concept of public archaeology as a management tool, at endowing it with a theoretical content based on the Critical theory of society, at analysing the socio-economic and political context where we develop our work as archaeologists and at proposing new action models through public archaeology.
To do so, this thesis is organised into four sections that, with the annexes, will delve into the proposed aims. Among all of them, it will be clear how the Critical theory of society can be a feasible theoretical framework for public archaeology since it offers the required tools to question our discipline in a continuous way. Recently, one of the main critiques to archaeology has been its disengagement with current social, economic and political reality. Although this is not right, since it has been perfectly articulated with that reality, there has been a conscious mismatch of its critique by always focusing our work on the past, nor the present. Therefore, words such as “interaction” and “action” refer to the situation of archaeology in its historical place as one more element within the contemporary social conglomerate. So, public archaeology will allow us define integrative and useful management ways in a context like the current one. But, above anything else, it will allow us change the management paradigm from passivity to activity.
As a whole, this dissertation tries to delimitate a sociology of archaeology, which analyses the sector from the outside, defining the boundaries of the discipline and its possibilities in terms of future. In addition, although it focuses on the Spanish case, it will offer an international comparative framework to analyse the position of our management models regarding other international ones —with regards to the most prominent factors for a perspective of management from public archaeology.
Participan:
Valentín Álvarez Martínez, Agustín Azkarate Garai-Olaun, Gonzalo Aranda Jiménez, Rafael Azuar Ruiz, David Barreiro Martínez, Cinta S. Bellmunt, Rebeca Blanco-Rotea, Alicia Castillo Mena, Juan Carlos Castro Carrera, Felipe Criado Boado, Beatriz Comendador Rey, Gonzalo Compañy, Rosa Domínguez Alonso, José Antonio Estévez Morales, Riccardo Frigoli, Soledad Gil García, Alfredo González Ruibal, Pablo Guerra García, Sonia Gutiérrez Lloret, Clara Hernando Álvarez, David Javaloyas Molina, Pilar López García, Olalla López Costas, Sandra Lozano Rubio, Beatriz Marín Aguilera, Carlos Marín Suárez, Alba Masclans Latorre, Roberto Ontañón Peredo, Eva Parga Dans, Saúl Pérez-Juana del Casal, Francisco Ramos Martínez, Carme Rissech Badalló, Carmen Rodríguez Santana, Ignacio Rodríguez Temiño, M. Carmen Rojo Ariza, Jorge Rolland Calvo, Arturo Ruiz Rodríguez, María Ruiz del Árbol Moro, Margarita Sánchez Romero, Jesús Sesma Sesma, Ramón Ten Carné, Antonio Valera, Eva Zarco Martínez, Salomé Zurinaga Fernández-Toribio.
This volume compiles these and other contributions with the scope that the elapsed time has given. The thread of the contributions focuses on two concepts: Memory and Archaeology (as the title points out).
The word “Memory” refers to the past, our individual memories and the collective ones. “Wander around memory” (Recorrer la memoria) is a Spanish phrase that means “to think in order to remember what happened”. Now that retrieving (historical) memory is changing from being a commitment to being a fashion, it is more needed to “wander around memory” to set our position as professionals in archaeology.
All the contributions in this volume share a common idea: the analysis of “memories” generated from conflict. Too frequently, collective memory brews around different traumatic events framed in armed conflicts. Conflict generates memory, but memory generates conflict too, feeding a vicious circle manifested in some of the processes to retrieve historical memory that are still open today.
There is a series of contributions in this volume that analyse the implications between memory and archaeology, mainly focusing on the Spanish experience (Civil War and Franco’s dictatorship), but also on other experiences besides the Second World War.
This route starts in Chile and Argentina. First of all, Carlos Carrasco tries to show us the valuable inputs of archaeology in the process to retrieve the memory lost during the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet in Chile (1973-1990). As one of the most recent events that will be analysed in this volume, the participation of archaeologists in Chile has been fundamental, not only for the families of the repressed, but also for the prosecution of the military dictatorship. Crossing the border to Argentina, Soledad Biasatti and Gonzalo Compañy come with a reflexion about our position as archaeologists from the study of clandestine detention centres in the times of the Junta Militar (1976-1983).
On the other side of the Pacific Ocean, Jin Soo Park takes us to Korea and the building of a new national identity in which the Japanese occupation is ‘forgotten’. The controversy of using archaeology as a tool for identity building faces now the planning of Korean national museums.
Finally we arrive to Europe, were recent conflicts keep open wounds in several countries. Firstly, Kristina Penezić and Jovana Tripković approach ethnic conflict in postwar Balkans with the Serbian example. The emergence of new ethnic identities after a conflict that dismembered completely former Yugoslavia, makes archaeology face the challenge of setting up an identity away from resentment and ultranationalism.
Then, ariving to the Iberian Peninsule, Sergio Gomes anlayzes, from an anthropological point of view, the ideologic indoctrination processes in Italy and Portugal during their respective regimes.
As an introduction to the remembrance process occurred in Spain especially during the last years, Ignacio Fernandez’s contribution analyzes the last decade of events around the retrieving of the historical memory and the new conflict that this has generated in the country due to the reinterpretation of a past lived by most of the population. Laura Muñoz and Francisco Javier García present the case of Llerena (Badajoz, Spain), where archaeology helps to recover more than bodies, the memory of the repressed. But this retrieving of memory does not meet yet some of the basic requirements that have already been got in other countries. Juan Montero analyzes how, besides laws and protocols, exhumations do not complete the restitution process from a legal point of view. As part of the protocols, physical anthropology has become an essential tool for the recovery of the bodies. Alba Aran, David García and Iván Sánchez analyze the contributions of this discipline for the excavation of mass graves while they ponder the situation of archaeologists in a process that, beyond research, has strong social implications.
But the retrieve of memory in Spain is not limited to the exhumation of mass graves of the repressed. It goes beyond. There are several projects currently taking place for the study of historical landscapes of the war and the repression. The last two contributions focus more in this aspect. Firstly, Verónica García and Pascual Ortega analyze the ‘destruction of memory’ form one of the most emblematic places for Francoise repression, Carabanchel prison (Madrid, Spain), which was recently demolished even though the strong social claim for its preservation. And to finish, Beatriz del Mazo brings an analysis of contemporary amateur photography about the war, highlighting that the conflict s still alive and photography is an exceptional resource for the study of collective memory.
The present volume contains an interesting set of contributions that offer a wide scope of ideas and points of view about the concepts of Memory and Archaeology. This is only small sample of all the processes that took, or are taking place, all around the world. However, it is a representative sample, not maybe in quantity but in the variety of approaches to the topic.
Finally, I cannot finish this introduction without thanking everyone involved in this volume for their commitment and support. I am personally satisfied with the result of the present volume and I am sure it will be a major contribution to the subject.
Siguiendo con algunas de las propuestas de mi tesis doctoral, apoyadas ahora por la experiencia y los datos del proyecto, este trabajo tratará de dibujar algunas ideas de cara al futuro que nos ayuden a practicar una arqueología mejor en todos los aspectos de la misma.
Public Archaeology in the Mediterranean Context (#pubarchMED) is a project that focuses on the management of archaeological heritage in the Mediterranean context from the perspective of public archaeology. Ranging from fully public models where preventive archaeology itself is a challenge to mixed models where the outsourcing of this work has been accomplished to a full extent, the variety of solutions is wide and with a common trend: struggle with mitigation and little space for creativity. This article will delve into the range of models that exist in the Mediterranean, exploring the way they approach, first of all, preventive/rescue archaeology, and then, the relationship between archaeology and society in the process. Building on the challenges of an underfunded scheme for an extremely archaeologically rich territory, different solutions have been set in practice-in some cases, under the auspices of competent administrations in the form of public policy-in the endeavor to include public archaeology in the practice, mostly encouraged by professionals as a personal or corporate initiative, and sometimes even consciously avoided. The discussion will offer some ideas for creative mitigation in the different scenarios, built on the comparative study and the broad possibilities to engage stakeholders positively in the process. Arqueología Pública en el Contexto Mediterráneo (#pubarchMED) es un proyecto enfocado al estudio de la gestión del patrimonio arqueológico en el contexto mediterráneo desde la perspectiva de la arqueología pública. Desde modelos puramente públicos en los que la arqueología preventiva es un reto, a otros modelos mixtos en los que la subcontratación de los servicios es ya total, la variedad de soluciones es amplia, siempre con una tendencia común: dificultades para mitigar y poco espacio para la creatividad. Este trabajo profundizará en la variedad de modelos existentes en el Mediterráneo y cómo abordan, primero, la arqueología preventiva o de rescate y, después, la relación arqueología-sociedad en el proceso. Sobre los retos de un esquema mal financiado en un territorio extremadamente rico en patrimonio arqueológico, se han puesto en práctica diferentes soluciones, en algunos casos bajo el auspicio de la administración competente, en vías de incluir la arqueología pública en el proceso, pero en la práctica fomentado por la iniciativa privada de individuos u otras instituciones, o conscientemente evitado. La discusión ofrecerá algunas ideas para la mitigación creativa en los diferentes esce-narios, a través del estudio comparativo y las innumerables posibilidades de involucrar de forma positiva a los diferentes actores que forman parte del proceso. Palabras clave: arqueología pública, arqueología preventiva, mitigación creativa, Mediterráneo Alice: "Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?" The Cheshire Cat: "That depends a good deal on where you want to get to." Alice: "I don't much care where." The Cheshire Cat: "Then it doesn't matter which way you go."-Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland This conversation between Alice and the Cheshire Cat can easily be a mirror of archaeological heritage management in many corners of the world. It is not that we do not know where to go, but we have not invested a lot of thought into creating a creative and holistic practice that is in line with modern needs and ethics. More often, we apply a patch to problems while continuing to rely on old management models. Building on the preliminary results of the #pubarchMED project, this article presents the variety of management models that exist across the Mediterra-nean and reflects on how countries approach preventive and rescue archaeology as well as the relationship between archaeology and society-all in the context of creative mitigation strategies and the way current practices relate to the concept in very different ways.
that are generated around it. With the focus on our Mediterranean environment, we will deepen the value of understanding the perception of archaeological heritage management and the micropolitics that shape our day to day.
Desde que fueron introducidos en España, los detectores de metales han estado asociados a la búsqueda de restos arqueológicos. Esto ha llevado a una imagen de la detección metálica más cercana al delito que a la afición. Las causas han sido más que justificadas ante la acción expoliadora de muchos usuarios, lo que ha dificultado la relación con un colectivo arqueológico muy reaccionario al uso de esta tecnología. En los últimos años se han planteado nuevas vías de colaboración que permitan una práctica de la afición a la detección metálica en contextos arqueológicos, sin embargo es necesaria una regulación mucho más efectiva. El presente texto plantea una propuesta de regulación y cohabitación que permita avanzar en la gestión de un conflicto que esperamos cerca de resolverse.
Since they were introduced in Spain, metal detectors have been linked to the search of archaeological remains. This portrayed an image of metal detecting closer to felony than to hobby. The looting action of many users justified this view, complicating the relation between metal detector users and archaeologists, who are reluctant to accept the use of this technology. Some collaboration projects have emerged in the last years, allowing the use of metal detectors in archaeological contexts, however we are in need of a better regulation. This text lays out a regulatory proposal that may help to advance in the management of a conflict that we hope to close to be solved.
Este articulo abordará el contexto hispano y el ejemplo de la experiencia reciente de las dos principales asociaciones profesionales de la Comunidad de Madrid: AMTTA y el Colegio de Arqueólogos de Madrid.
pública avanza a pasos agigantados. Este texto repudia la arqueología
pública como participación. Vuelve a su definición primigenia,
siendo una práctica meramente académica que pone las bases para la
praxis desde la teoría, partiendo de la premisa de que para que haya
participación no es necesaria más que la voluntad y el compromiso
de las partes implicadas, sin que tenga que mediar una arqueología
pública desvirtuada. Este fenómeno se debe en parte a la asimilación
entre muchos profesionales de arqueología pública y arqueología
comunitaria, dos conceptos complementarios pero diferentes donde
el rol participativo reside en el segundo. No obstante, la utilidad de la
arqueología pública en el contexto participativo se pone de manifiesto
como herramienta de análisis, planificación, evaluación y crítica.
ABSTRACT We, the archaeological sector, have been complaining about the image offered by the media about our work. Treasures, politics and other demons lead to a social misconception of the past and our profession. In a country such as Spain, where laws are very restrictive, this increases the danger of looting. The case of metal detectors is especially interesting, as it makes treasure hunting attractive and, sometimes, looting legitimate. This article will explore these circumstances in their contexts.
Para ello, se habilitaron cuatro plataformas principales de comunicación como complemento a la página web; Facebook, Twitter, YouTube y Blogger. Mientras Facebook y Twitter servirían para compartir contenidos comunes de información sobre el desarrollo del congreso, la función del equipo era la de generar contenido propio, de tal manera que la atención sobre el congreso fuera creciendo paulatinamente y, además, se pudiera fidelizar una audiencia de cara al mismo. Para ello, se utilizaron Blogger y YouTube, donde además de columnas de opinión y entrevistas con algunos de los protagonistas del congreso, se compartieron videos desde diferentes rincones del mundo animando a participar en el congreso y reflexionando sobre sus temas.
Por otro lado, un bloque fundamental ha sido la colección de noticias sobre Patrimonio Mundial en periódicos de todo el mundo. Dado el esfuerzo que representaba esta compilación, se decidió utilizar estos recursos como herramienta para investigar las tendencias de información sobre Patrimonio Mundial en estos medios desde una perspectiva transnacional.
Tras dos meses de trabajo, se están superando los objetivos originales y esperamos poder presentar una experiencia más de interacción desde el Patrimonio Mundial, además de los resultados del análisis de prensa.
El poster consistirá en un grupo de trabajos específicos, donde se analizarán los diferentes aspectos que han rodeado a este proyecto, por un lado con respecto a la interacción desde las redes y, por el otro, desde la prensa internacional.
arqueólogo. En su novela Come, tell me how you live, describe su experiencia en las excavaciones en Siria, una de las mejores descripciones noveladas de la profesión. Con el tiempo han aparecido otras obras que en ocasiones, enfocan la imagen del
arqueólogo desde un punto de vista metodológico y escasamente divulgativo, plasmando habitualmente los clichés “indianajonistas” que arrastramos desde el siglo XIX. Muchos investigadores de la llamada Arqueología Pública, o Public Archaeology, llevan tiempo postulando un cambio en la imagen de la arqueología y del pasado. Ese cambio, tal vez, no consista en cambiar a la sociedad sino a nosotros mismos, como profesionales pero también, como divulgadores de conocimiento.
¿Alguna vez te has visto coartado a la hora de comunicar tus resultados? ¿Alguna vez piensas que
podrías hacer las cosas de otra manera? Uno de los objetivos fundamentales de la arqueología pública es
la reconversión de la práctica arqueológica hacia un modelo verdaderamente integrado en su contexto
social, sostenible y eficiente. A partir de este artículo se expondrán los objetivos y las líneas de trabajo
principales de la arqueología pública, junto con un análisis de los modelos actuales de gestión y la
necesidad de su integración con otros supuestos.
“What are you selling?” is one of the most frequently asked questions during the quest for project funding. We are selling Knowledge, Identity, Dreams, Pride and, sometimes, even stones. The first ethical issues arise here, in the building of ‘products’ that are usually misused by the public in its different facets. The mix of politics, money and media has created a ‘Culture of Archaeology’ that deeply affects daily issues not directly related to archaeology. Are we responsible for that? Looking at the growth of archaeology in developing countries might answer this question. The imposition of a value for the past/heritage from an occidental point of view has created a tourism-related market, supported by International Organizations that, in some way, are still having a neo-colonial attitude towards archaeology.
Moreover, since the growth of urban archaeology, CRM and commercial archaeology have become a major issue for the profession. Archaeological practice itself has become a commodity for developers who need a new ‘paper’ for their building permission. How ethical is it to sell ourselves for something else than research? Can we call ‘research’ what we do in this framework? Answers should be easy and clear, but this market, which covers more than 90% of all archaeological practice in many countries, has too many shadows. Today, commercial archaeology is growing fast, expanding it activities from outreach to management. Thus, the main ethical concern that arises is this: Can we privately work in archaeology viewing it as a commodity, when it still is a public resource that belongs to all of us?
As well as we imagine the past, humanity has imagined the future in very different ways, but with a common basis and goal; how we want to be, or what will be of us if we do not change. Our imagination of the future portrays a dystopian image of our current selves that can go very well or, usually, very wrong. Most of them already belong to the past. Futures imagined decades ago for realities that we have already lived. Can an archaeological analysis of these futures that never happened help to understand who we are, what we want and, more interestingly for our professional development, how do we think change and time? I will try to sketch out some lines on this issue with different examples from paper and screen.
Ciclo Rastros y Rostres (UB)
Although funding applications are slowly changing the trend in academic research practices, public archaeology can still be considered an emerging discipline within a wide archaeological arena. Wider if we look at the periphery; those regions and countries where archaeology has been a colonial practice, and public archaeology can become a game-changing perspective for the emancipation of local archaeology.
Since the foundation of AP: Online Journal in Public Archaeology in 2010, we have addressed many important topics (e.g. illicit trade of antiquities, education, training, community work, technology, etc.), but overall we try to offer an open resource for sharing best practices in public archaeology with a focus on countries and professionals outside the anglo-saxon mainstream.
This paper, presented at the 3rd International Conference in Heritage Management in Elefsina, Greece, on 2 October 2016, offers some insights into our experience so far. It also describes the challenges we face as well as the solutions we are putting in place, with some examples from the past few years and ideas/plans for the future. Because public archaeology is also a tool to improve archaeology and heritage management practice, and we should not forget this significant part of the public.
This paper will expose the whole process of the latest heritage law in Madrid from the first consultations to the first full year of application, after the Constitutional Court voided a 20% of it. In the process, it will explore in a transversal way some of the topics of this conference like the role of institutions and professional associations, the psychology of power within archaeological professionals, shifts of power, or the real impact of legislative actions.
1. The public as a heterogeneous entity.
2. Entertainment and archaeology.
3. The role of archaeologists as public intellectuals.
4. Research agendas, fashion and need.
Intending to foster debate from a personal point of view about these issues, this session aims to be a dialogue more than a talk.
Los objetivos de estos colectivos no son los mismos que los de otras asociaciones y pasan por la protección de sus asociados y el desarrollo profesional, pero esa línea de trabajo está también íntimamente ligada con la comunicación y la divulgación, que resultan esenciales en este proceso. Analizando las actividades que se han planteado desde su surgimiento, podemos observar cómo compartir las experiencias profesionales tanto dentro, como fuera del colectivo, ha sido una de las principales líneas de trabajo desarrolladas.
Este articulo abordará el contexto hispano y el ejemplo de la experiencia reciente de las dos principales asociaciones profesionales de la Comunidad de Madrid: AMTTA y el Colegio de Arqueólogos de Madrid.
In order to do that, we started four platforms: Facebook, Twitter, Blogger and YouTube.
While Facebook and Twitter worked mainly as tools to share content, the task of the team was to create original content to be added to the common information of the conference, in order to build loyalty in our audience. Blogger and YouTube were the tools for that. Besides opinion pieces and interviews, we uploaded videos of people from all around the world encouraging people to come to the conference and reflecting on its themes.
A fundamental task of the team has been to collect and share news from newspapers from different countries, writing about World heritage. Due to the effort of this duty, we decided to use these resources to research on the information trends about World Heritage from a transnational perspective.
After two months of work, we are getting over every goal set, and we hope to present one more of the experiences of interaction and engagement from World Heritage.
The poster will consist on a cluster of specific works where we will show different aspects about the project, on the one side about engagement in our social networks, and on the other side about the results of our press analysis.