indigenous archaeology – Theory in Archaeology

In Jude Isabella’s blog entry, The Untold Story of Japan’s First People, she illustrates the archaeological work done by a Japanese archaeologist, Hirofumi Kato. Through Kato’s passionate labor, we are exposed to the truth about Japanese history and the development of their first people. Thorough excavation of the northern Japanese island of Rebun demonstrates the post-processual archaeology that Kato uses to explain the one-sided history of Japan. Kato mentions that throughout most of his life in Japan, he realized that the history of the Ainu people was never taught in Japanese schools. The current education system focuses too much on the main island of Honshu, and their beliefs were that the Japanese people had just always been there. The early archaeology in Japan greatly misrepresented the diversity of Rebun and neighboring islands of Hokkaido. Kato stated that the Japanese government spend great efforts to hide the existence of the Ainu people. The fact derived from Kato’s excavation evidently provides traces of the Ainu culture which had been around since the 1600’s. In a way that is similar in the west, the Japanese government in the 1800’s colonized the islands of Hokkaido thus forcing Ainu populations to assimilate into Japanese culture. This continued until 2006 when the Japanese government was pressured internationally to finally recognize the Ainu people as an indigenous population. To be honest, not many of us have even heard of this story. A group of people that have occupied a large territory for centuries was never documented properly in the archaeological record due to government agenda and biases. The blog describes the recent Japanese excavations as “telephone booth digs” as to illustrate their objectives in salvaging and construction path clearing. To me, it sounds almost too convenient for the Japanese government to get rid of any evidence of the Ainu’s existence. Any artifacts found seemed to be intentionally misinterpreted or ignored if it did not relate to traditional Japanese history. This style of archaeology heavily leans towards processual archaeology. Artifacts were excavated and recorded subjectively. Science today tells us that Japanese people originated from northern Asia, and their descendants spread among the native people of Hokkaido. Before the samurai clans too control of the settlements in southern Hokkaido, the Ainu were prominent traders that supplied goods to Japanese, Korean, Chinese, and Russian merchants. Despite their major contribution to the Asiatic economy, the Japanese government covered up their story to the point where the Ainu were nearly unheard of. Personally, the theme of this story resonates across all ancient history around the world. The victors of war write the story. I do not particularly like the nature of this theme, but I respect its power in shaping culture. This biased processual archaeology that the Japanese government implemented had emphasized their national pride and culture for centuries. However, for the sake of keeping records, and objective perspective is required to gather as much of the truth as possible about the history of our world.

Blog Link
https://www.sapiens.org/archaeology/ainu-prejudice-pride/

https://www.sapiens.org/archaeology/native-american-archaeology/

I found this articles discussion very interesting in its approach towards Native American peoples and their feeling towards the field of archaeology in North America. How instead of assuming opinions of Indigenous people from a general sense the author, Charles Riggs, gives examples from his own personal experiences. When a student asks him “Why do archaeologists think they have the right to tell me about my own history?” (Riggs) he willingly admits that his response was probably inadequate.

In places like Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Greece the history of the area is preserved, artifacts are placed in museums while for the most part still honoring the wishes of the country of origin. Where as the archaeological community and government in America treat Indigenous populations and their history as secondary, “the dominant culture largely viewed Native Americans as subhuman, to be objectified and eradicated.” (Riggs)

I feel like when people begin to question the already uneasy relationship between archaeologists and Native Americans people frequently become more defensive and more likely to close off any discussion on the topic. This in turn stunts the positive aspects that the theory of Indigenous archaeology tries to work towards, such as conservation of Indigenous land, identity and ownership. An example of this in the test was the accusation that he [Riggs] was a grave robber. He admits that he was personally not guilty of this, by doing this he ignores the historical tension between the two groups, shifting the blame.

The article did a good job in bringing up highly publicized issues that covered headlines in international news such as the protests over the Dakota Access pipeline in 2016. The example of the Dakota Access pipeline exemplifies how native groups in the past as well as the present struggle to obtain rights and protect their cultural past. During the development of the field, archaeology for the most part exists outside or separate from the people whom they study. Acting as if the work they do is non-threatening towards less dominant groups. The article acknowledges how we have to listen to indigenous groups opinions regarding their heritages using them as a means to an end of study.

Tag: indigenous archaeology

The Untold Story of Japan’s First People

Response to Confronting Cultural Imperialism in Native American Archaeology by Charles R. Riggs