Advertisement

Community-Based and Participatory Praxis as Decolonizing Archaeological Methods and the Betrayal of New Research

  • Uzma Z. RizviEmail author
Chapter
  • 13 Downloads

Abstract

This chapter is about everyday encounters while conducting research in India. It interrogates those moments of feeling like I belonged, like I had a stake, and how that might change through time. It is about intimacy, it is about friendships, and it is about betrayal. Ultimately, it is also about how we do archaeology. There was an everydayness to interactions with my colleagues, research partners, staff members, and people who became friends; this chapter reflects upon how that quotidian interaction became an integral part of the project. It was also that everyday intimacy that allowed for a certain trust to develop that was not one hinged on labor but on living together. In some sense, our social and emotional relationships were constitutive of the community-based and participatory archaeological practice we were engaged within: we were the project and the project was us. Thus, once the project ended, so did our made pathways of relational intimacy. The traces of the project, however, were heavy and long-standing, emerging and revealing feelings of betrayal that now, with over two decades of experiencing such work, I can see as the emotional labor of archaeology.

Keywords

Betrayal Intimacy Everyday interactions Friendships Emotional labor Archaeology 

Notes

Acknowledgments

I want to thank the Heart Collective (Sonya Atalay, Jane Baxter, Natasha Lyons, and Kisha Supernant), for the invitation to be a part of this important conversation and turn toward a more emotionally intelligent archaeological praxis. I would also like to thank “Shanta Bai” for all the care and many hours of company, laughter, and cups of tea. Many thanks to the community-based programs and workshops in Neem ka Thana and Kot Putli, as well as the Panchayat in districts Alwar, Tonk, Sikar, and Jaipur. I would also like to acknowledge the collaborative efforts of my colleagues at the Rajasthan State Department of Archaeology and Museums and the Archaeological Survey of India offices (Jaipur and Delhi).

References

  1. Abu-Khawajah, S. (2014). ‘They are hiding it … Why do they hide it? From Whom, and for Whom?’: Community heritage at work in the post-colonial context of Jordan. In S. Thomas & J. Lea (Eds.), Public participation in archaeology (pp. 149–160). Suffolk: Boydell and Brewer.Google Scholar
  2. Ahmad, S. (2000). Strange encounters: Embodied others in post-Coloniality. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Atalay, S. (2006). Decolonizing archaeology. American Indian Quarterly, 30(3 & 4), 269–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Atalay, S. (2012). Community-based archaeology: Research with, by and for indigenous and local communities. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  5. Chadha, A. (2010). The Archaeological Survey of India and the Science of Postcolonial Archaeology. In J. Lydon & U. Z. Rizvi (Eds.),. Handbook of Postcolonial Archaeology World Archaeological Congress Research Handbooks (pp. 227–233). Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press.Google Scholar
  6. Dave, N. (2012). Queer Activism in India: A Story in the Anthropology of Ethics. Durham and. London: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gullapalli, P. (2008). Heterogeneous encounters: Colonial histories and archaeological experiences. In M. Liebmann & U. Z. Rizvi (Eds.), Archaeology and the postcolonial critique (pp. 35–52). Lanham: Altamira Press.Google Scholar
  8. Haber, A. (2012). Un-disciplining archaeology. Archaeologies, 8(1), 55–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. hooks, b. (1992). Black looks: Race and representation. Boston: South End Press.Google Scholar
  10. Ibrahim, A. (in review). The role of museums, design accessibility and community concerns: A case study of State Bank of Pakistan Museum and Art Gallery. Journal of Community Archaeology and Heritage.Google Scholar
  11. Jamir, T. (2016). Decolonizing Archaeological Practice in Northeastern India: Towards a Community-Based Archaeology at Chungliyimti, Nagaland. Special series on Decolonizing Anthropology, Savage Minds. https://savageminds.org/2016/10/24/decolonizing-archaeological-practice-in-northeast-india-towards-a-community-based-archaeology-at-chungliyimti-nagaland/. Accessed 5 May 2019.
  12. Jamir, T., & Vasa, D. (2008). Archaeology of local cultures: New findings and interpretations in Nagaland. In M. Oppitz, T. Kaiser, A. v. Stockhausen, & M. Wettstein (Eds.), Naga identities: Changing local cultures in the northeast of India (pp. 323–339). Snoeck Publishers: Gent.Google Scholar
  13. Kersel, M., & Chesson, M. (2013). Tomato season in the Ghor es-Safi: A lesson in community archaeology. Near Eastern Archaeology, 76(3), 159–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kuwanwisiwma, L. J. (2008). Collaboration means equality, respect, and reciprocity: A conversation about archaeology and the Hopi tribe. In C. Colwell-Chanthaphonh & T. J. Ferguson (Eds.), Collaboration in archaeological practice: Engaging descendant communities (pp. 151–169). Lanham: AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
  15. Lorenzon, M., & Zermani, I. (2016). Common ground: Community archaeology in Egypt, interaction between population and cultural heritage. Journal of Community Archaeology & Heritage, 3(3), 183–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lyons, N. (2014). Localized critical theory as an expression of community archaeology practice with an example from Inuvialuit Elders of the Canadian Western Arctic. American Antiquity, 79(2), 183–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Marshall, Y. (2002). What is community archaeology? World Archaeology, 34(2), 211–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. McDavid, C. (2007). Beyond strategy and good intentions: Archaeology, race, and white privilege. In B. Little & P. Shackel (Eds.), Archaeology as a tool of civic engagement (pp. 67–88). Lanham, MD: Alta Mira Press.Google Scholar
  19. McDavid, C., Rizvi, U. Z., & Smith, L. (2016). Community archaeology and heritage in Africa: Conversations inspired by a workshop. In P. Schmidt & I. Pikirayi (Eds.), Community archaeology and heritage in Africa (pp. 250–269). London: Routledge Press.Google Scholar
  20. Mehari, A., & Ryano, K. P. (2016). Maasai people and Oldupai (Olduvai) gorge: Looking for sustainable people-centred approaches and practices. In P. Schmidt & I. Pikirayi (Eds.), Community archaeology and heritage in Africa (pp. 21–45). London: Routledge Press.Google Scholar
  21. Mignolo, W. (2002). The geopolitics of knowledge and the colonial difference. The South Atlantic Quarterly, 101(1), 57–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nagar, R. (2014). Muddying the Waters: Coauthoring Feminisms Across Scholarship and Activism. Urbana/Chicago/Springfield: University of Illinois Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nandy, A. (2001). Time warps: The insistent politics of silent and evasive pasts. Delhi: Permanent Blacki.Google Scholar
  24. Piccini, A., & Schaepe, D. M. (2014). The messy business of archaeology as participatory local knowledge: A conversation between the Stó:lō Nation and Knowle West. Canadian Journal of Archaeology/Journal Canadien D’Archéologie, 38(2), 466–495.Google Scholar
  25. Richardson, L.-J., & Almansa-Sánchez, J. (2015). Do you even know what public archaeology is? Trends, theory, practice, ethics. World Archaeology, 47(2), 194–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rizvi, U. Z. (2006). Accounting for multiple desires: Decolonizing methodologies, archaeology and the public interest. India Review, 5(3–4), 394–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rizvi, U. Z. (2008). Decolonizing methodologies as strategies of practice: Operationalizing the postcolonial critique in the archaeology of Rajasthan. In M. Liebmann & U. Z. Rizvi (Eds.), Archaeology and the postcolonial critique (pp. 109–127). Lanham: Altamira Press.Google Scholar
  28. Rizvi, U. Z. (2015). Decolonizing archaeology: On the global heritage of epistemic laziness. In O. Kholeif (Ed.), Two days after forever: A reader on the choreography of time (pp. 154–163). Berlin: Sternberg Press.Google Scholar
  29. Rizvi, U. Z. (2016). Decolonization as care. In C. F. Strauss & A. P. Pais (Eds.), Slow reader: A resource for design thinking and practice (pp. 85–95). Amsterdam: Valiz Publishers.Google Scholar
  30. Ross, A., Ulm, S., & Tobane, B. (2013). Gummingurru: A community archaeology knowledge journey. Australian Archaeology, 76, 62–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Shepherd, N. (2014). Undisciplining archaeological ethics. In A. Haber & N. Shepherd (Eds.), After ethics: Ancestral voices and post-disciplinary worlds in archaeology (pp. 11–26). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  32. Sundberg, J. (2014). Decolonizing Posthumanist geographies. Cultural Geographies, 21(1), 33–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Swarr, A. L., & Nagar, R. (Eds.). (2010). Critical transnational feminist praxis. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Social Science and Cultural StudiesPratt InstituteNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations