{"title":"What is farming, what is archaeology, and who gets to decide?","authors":"Jillian Garvey, John Clarke, D. Perry","doi":"10.1080/03122417.2021.1991409","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2021.1991409","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":8648,"journal":{"name":"Australian Archaeology","volume":"87 1","pages":"309 - 310"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42181903","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Farmers or Hunter-gatherers? The Dark Emu Debate","authors":"P. Veth","doi":"10.1080/03122417.2021.1971373","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2021.1971373","url":null,"abstract":"Sutton and Walshe have succeeded in showing that the underlying premise of Pascoe’s Dark Emu, that First Australians were agriculturalists, is untenable. Its neartotal reliance on a subset of historical records removes insights that could have come from studies of ethnobotany, peoples’ aggregation patterns, and the spiritual basis for regenerating plants and animals. It does not consider widely used methods to establish the age and function of tools at sites. Instead, it offers the reaffirming glow of ‘agricultural supremacy’ which is argued to overshadow the voices of Traditional Owners, social and human scientists. Is this a universal conspiracy or just disciplinary blindness? Pascoe has projected the ingenuity of Aboriginal land and resource use into the public domain, but is it for the first time? It is approximately 20 years since I reviewed a monograph by Rupert Gerritsen on Nhanda Villages of the Victoria District, Western Australia (Veth 2002). I noted at the time ‘If you have ever subscribed to the theory of incipient agriculture in Australia or wanted to believe that (re)planting of yams or domiculture equated with the intensive management of cultigens then this slim research paper is just what you have been waiting for’ (Veth 2002:57). I concluded that the majority of Gerritsen’s conclusions were unsupported by the evidence. In short, I rejected the following claims:","PeriodicalId":8648,"journal":{"name":"Australian Archaeology","volume":"87 1","pages":"333 - 335"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42500987","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The tragedy of Bruce Pascoe’s Dark Emu","authors":"M. Porr, Ella Vivian-Williams","doi":"10.1080/03122417.2021.1991378","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2021.1991378","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In the book Dark Emu, Pascoe argues that Aboriginal Australian societies should not be described as ‘hunter-gatherers’ but as ‘farmers’. In doing this, Pascoe actually places Aboriginal lifeways at the origin of a culture-historical trajectory that he himself has criticised for most of his life. He implicitly supports a historical narrative and a vision of human nature that is at the heart of most current environmental and social problems. The success and enthusiastic reception of Dark Emu by large sections of Australian society is consequently equally unsurprising and deeply problematic. Australian archaeologists have so far largely failed to engage with Dark Emu and its arguments in any substantial form. One of the reasons for this lack of critical interrogation is an agreement with Dark Emu’s key motivation: a genuine interest in growing the knowledge of and appreciation for Indigenous heritage in Australia. However, Australian archaeology is also complicit in the erasure of Aboriginal diversity and alterity that is an effect of Dark Emu’s project and, as such, responsible for the erasure of options to learn from the past and challenge the present. In this paper, we draw attention to a certain tragic dimension of the book and its logic, by placing its arguments in a framework of the modern understanding of society, human history, and humanity’s future.","PeriodicalId":8648,"journal":{"name":"Australian Archaeology","volume":"87 1","pages":"300 - 304"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42835969","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
J. McDonald, K. Mulvaney, Emma Beckett, J. Fairweather, Patrick Morrison, Sarah de Koning, J. Dortch, Peter Jeffries
{"title":"Seeing and managing rock art at Nganjarli: A tourist destination in Murujuga National Park, Western Australia","authors":"J. McDonald, K. Mulvaney, Emma Beckett, J. Fairweather, Patrick Morrison, Sarah de Koning, J. Dortch, Peter Jeffries","doi":"10.1080/03122417.2021.1978915","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2021.1978915","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The Nganjarli site complex, which includes a rich body of rock art, shell middens and artefact scatters, has been identified by the Murujuga Aboriginal Corporation (MAC) as the primary location within Murujuga National Park for tourism and interpretation facilities. Murujuga National Park lies on the north-west coast of Western Australia, and within the Dampier Archipelago (including Burrup Peninsula) National Heritage Place. MAC owns and co-manages the National Park with the Department of Biodiversity Conservation and Attractions. Facilities have been upgraded to accommodate increasing tourist numbers and enhance their cultural experience at Nganjarli. Archaeological evidence was documented ahead of the installation of a boardwalk and concrete walking trails for viewing rock art. The national heritage values of this place are demonstrated, and we outline how existing co-management has mobilised contemporary cultural values and the aspirations of the Murujuga custodians. We document the role of innovative scientific approaches in the interpretive strategy for Nganjarli. New recording techniques and digital imaging demonstrate the diversity of animal motifs in the rock art near the installed boardwalk and identify opportunities for further digital interpretation of this significant landscape. Geochemical testing of surface lithic artefacts using X-ray fluorescence indicates mixed sourcing in the preferred lithics despite this being a tool-stone rich environment. Surface shell derives from targeted harvesting of a single species. The combined archaeological evidence indicates that Nganjarli has functioned as an aggregation locale through time. The rock art assemblage indicates that occupation here began during the earlier phases of art production. All these findings have been incorporated into the interpretative facilities in the tourist area.","PeriodicalId":8648,"journal":{"name":"Australian Archaeology","volume":"87 1","pages":"268 - 293"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45912219","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Editorial","authors":"Sean Ulm, Annie Ross","doi":"10.1080/03122417.2021.2001146","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2021.2001146","url":null,"abstract":"It has been another big year for AA, celebrating the rich diversity and vibrancy of contemporary archaeology across Australia and nearby areas. It has also been two years (and six AA issues) since we began our latest term as Editors. We take this opportunity to reflect on what we set out to do, what we have achieved to date, and where we would like to see the journal head in the future. AA has published articles ranging from meta-analyses to specialist studies of bone points, from advanced rock art recording and analysis to experimental studies of quartz knapping. Indigenous researchers, Traditional Owners and representative bodies authored many articles and we see this as an important trend in partnership approaches to archaeology, especially as the Association works towards dedicated reconciliation actions. International journals have reported a steep reduction in the number of women submitting papers to journals, linked to increased caring responsibilities and job losses disproportionately impacting women during COVID-19 (McCormick 2020; Viglione 2020). For AA over the last two years we have seen a steady reduction in women lead author publications ( 70% to 40%), but a gradual improvement in this authorship trend has been observed across the last two issues of 2021, where there is a balance of women and men lead author publications (5 women lead authors; 6 men lead authors). One of the most important reintroductions in the journal is the Forum section, which we initially introduced when we were last editors. Over the past two years we have hosted two Forums: on the future of Australian archaeology (Wallis 2020) and the topical Dark Emu debate (Porr and Vivian-Williams 2021), with a further Forum on conceptualising ‘contact’ finalised and due to appear in the journal next year. These Forum sections are important vehicles for airing key debates and facilitating a range of voices to be heard on topical and sometimes controversial issues. We are pleased to report that all three issues of AA for 2021 were published on or ahead of schedule, with all copy published immediately online ahead of print publication. We have also worked to improve the turnaround time on decisions on manuscripts submitted to the journal. The average number of days from submission to first decision is now 48 days, largely reflecting the time taken to source three reviews of each paper.","PeriodicalId":8648,"journal":{"name":"Australian Archaeology","volume":"87 1","pages":"227 - 228"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47429672","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Reorganising foraging during the Late Holocene: The archaeology of NEP23, Central Australia","authors":"Mike Smith, J. Ross","doi":"10.1080/03122417.2021.1976899","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2021.1976899","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Increasing populations in Central Australia after 1,500 cal BP led to the development of more closely spaced foraging territories, with a consequent shift towards more intensive exploitation of bush foods. We suggest that such pressure would also lead to concomitant shifts in the use of peripheral areas within individual foraging estates. A small archaeological excavation at NEP23, on Watarrka Plateau in Central Australia, provides a glimpse of this dynamic. Use of this site began around 1,350 cal BP. Given this site’s marginal location, initiation of occupation at NEP23 reflects pressure to extend the exploitation of foraging territory otherwise centred on major springs and rock holes along the base of the Watarrka Plateau.","PeriodicalId":8648,"journal":{"name":"Australian Archaeology","volume":"87 1","pages":"294 - 299"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44448052","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Bandwagons and bathwater","authors":"Ian J. McNiven","doi":"10.1080/03122417.2021.1991436","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2021.1991436","url":null,"abstract":"Porr and Vivian-Williams make the correct observation that few Australian archaeologists have been publicly critical of Dark Emu. I agree that this silence is an attempt to preserve the book’s positive representation of pre-contact Aboriginal society as sophisticated and complex. Yet some archaeologists, including myself and Harry Lourandos, have publicly voiced conditional support for Dark Emu (The Australian – Guilliatt 2019), subsequently becoming targets for repetitious online critique in politically conservative media such as The Spectator Australia and Quadrant (e.g. O’Brien 2019, 2021a, 2021b). It is no secret that many Australian archaeologists have had reservations about Bruce Pascoe’s use of the term ‘agriculture’ to describe Aboriginal Australian plant food production systems. I suggest that part of the problem of a lack of desire to voice such reservations publicly is a lack of alternative words and concepts to better characterise these food production systems. It is not a simple case of stating that Aboriginal people were hunter-gatherers, as this designation is equally as problematic as the term agriculture. Porr and Vivian-Williams rightly point out that the concept of hunter-gatherers was a European intellectual invention based on conjecture and not empirical observation. As McNiven and Russell (2005) pointed out in Appropriated Pasts, the ancient Greeks and Romans invented the idea of foraging peoples as part of a developmental cosmology that saw the first peoples as pure and subsisting on the fruits of nature. Pre-contact Aboriginal Australian food production systems were neither agricultural nor hunting and gathering. Anthropological theorising on these major categories of food production systems has advanced little since the nineteenth century, beyond starting that, in many cases, Aboriginal Australians fell somewhere between agriculture and hunting and gathering. One potential answer to this anthropological conundrum is to move beyond nineteenth century dichotomous thinking and to create a trinodal food resource production matrix comprising foraging, cultivation, and agriculture (Figure 1). In this matrix, foragers use the natural availability of food resources; cultivators undertake a wide range of strategies to artificially enhance/increase the natural availability of resources; and agriculturalists replace naturally available resources, usually with imported and domesticated plants and animals. All pre-contact Aboriginal Australian societies possessed varying elements of foraging and cultivation. In some cases, such as the Gunditjmara of southwest Victoria, cultivation extended to fish aquaculture. It is doubtful that any Aboriginal groups were pure foragers, living passively off the natural bounty of nature, just as it is doubtful that any Aboriginal groups artificially enhanced the availability (i.e. cultivated) of every resource they used. The reality is that all societies are cultivators to some degree. Furthermore, ag","PeriodicalId":8648,"journal":{"name":"Australian Archaeology","volume":"87 1","pages":"316 - 317"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41467329","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Archaeologies of the Heart","authors":"Claire Smith","doi":"10.1080/03122417.2021.1970304","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2021.1970304","url":null,"abstract":"The great kod of Pulu: Mutual historical emergence of ceremonial sites and social groups in Torres Strait. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 19(3):291–317. McNiven, I.J., and R. Feldman 2003 Ritually orchestrated seascapes: Hunting magic and dugong bone mounds in Torres Strait, NE Australia. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 13(2): 169–194. Nakata, M. 2007 Disciplining the Savages: Savaging the Disciplines. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press. Ian J. McNiven Monash Indigenous Studies Centre, ARC Centre of Excellence for Australian Biodiversity & Heritage, Monash University ian.mcniven@monash.edu http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5767-2199","PeriodicalId":8648,"journal":{"name":"Australian Archaeology","volume":"87 1","pages":"339 - 342"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44245635","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
