Archaeology and the governance of material culture: a case study from south-eastern Australia

Abstract

What are the consequences of using the discourse of archaeological knowledge in cultural heritage management (CHM)? In this article the inter-relationship of archaeological theory and practice, CHM and the politics of identity is analysed, using as a case study the history of archaeological and CHM practice in south-eastern Australia. A critical reading of Foucault's 'govemmentality' thesis illustrates how archaeological knowledge has come to play a role in the regulation and arbitration of Aboriginal cultural identity in south-eastern Australia. In effect, archaeological knowledge becomes mobilized by public policy-makers as a 'technology of government' and becomes implicated in the governance of cultural identity. Further consequences of this process are that material culture, as 'heritage', becomes a resource of power in the politics of identity and archaeological practice, and theory itself, becomes regulated, or 'governed', by its inclusion in CHM

    Similar works

    Full text

    thumbnail-image

    White Rose Research Online

    redirect
    Last time updated on 30/03/2012

    This paper was published in White Rose Research Online.

    Having an issue?

    Is data on this page outdated, violates copyrights or anything else? Report the problem now and we will take corresponding actions after reviewing your request.