Search for: All records

ABSTRACT Over the last several decades, scholars have reexamined the importance of spatiality to human life and argued that space produces and is produced by social relationships. This article adopts such a relational understanding of space to examine the production of eco‐archaeological tourist attractions in the eastern Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico and beyond. Specifically, this article considers the common practice of declaring areas encompassing archaeological sites as nature parks or wildernesses. Because so many sites are currently located in areas that have been deemed natural, scholars cannot fully understand the contemporary production of archaeological space without examining the historic production of nature and wilderness. Using the Xcaret Eco‐Archaeological Park and the Otoch Ma'ax Yetel Kooh, this article shows that although the creation of archaeological nature parks frequently harms indigenous peoples through processes of spatial colonization and spatial commodification, the production of such spaces can also enable and empower local, marginalized groups. [wilderness, political authority social inequality, community archaeology, the Maya] 

Photography has been a particularly important though often under-theorized aspect of archaeological research. Although seemingly simple representations, photographs are simultaneously objective and subjective, truthful and creative. This article considers the contradictory nature of photography generally and the specific relationship between photography and archaeology. It then looks at the Yucatan peninsula of Mexico and examines how individuals have photographed ancient Maya sites, architecture and artifacts from the mid nineteenth century to the present. Initially used to support diffusionist theories of Maya origins, photography was later understood as a neutral and scientific way to record the Maya past. More recently, it has been used to share power more equitably with local communities and to make archaeology a more inclusive and relevant endeavour. Indeed, several have demonstrated that photography is a useful tool for engaged archaeology. This article argues that the reverse is also true: insights from engaged archaeology are useful tools for archaeological photography generally. By making photographic choices explicit and by including people and other aspects of the contemporary world in their photographs, scholars can emphasize that archaeology is a decisively human and necessarily political endeavour, and that archaeological sites and artifacts are dynamic and efficacious parts of the contemporary world. 

Las escuelas de posgrado proveen oportunidades para que los estudiantes realicen trabajo de campo y reciban entrenamiento sobre métodos y teoría arqueológica, pero a menudo dejan de lado la instrucción sobre seguridad y bienestar en el campo. Argumentamos que una orientación más explícita sobre cómo llevar a cabo un trabajo de campo más seguro, contribuye al éxito general de los proyectos liderados por estudiantes, a la vez que los prepara como profesionales para dirigir programas de trabajo de campo seguros y exitosos. En este artículo, nos basamos en las experiencias recientes de estudiantes de posgrado, así como de los profesores que han supervisado trabajos de campo de posgrado, para esbozar reflexiones claves que permitan mejorar la seguridad y el bienestar en el campo y ofrecer recomendaciones para capacitaciones específicas y protocolos de seguridad. Al elaborar estos argumentos y recomendaciones, hemos considerado tanto proyectos de campo nacionales como internacionales, así como aquellos que involucran colaboración comunitaria. 

Engaged archaeology, like other forms of research, is replete with contradictions. Over the last several years, members of the Punta Laguna Archaeology Project—a community-based endeavor in Yucatan, Mexico—have encountered and sought to address several paradoxical questions. Do attempts to mitigate certain forms of inequality unintentionally sustain other forms of inequality? Can the production of capital alleviate rather than exacerbate unequal social relationships? And, can Western social theories be marshalled to advocate for and increase Maya and other Indigenous perspectives in archaeology? This article examines these contradictory questions and analyzes them as potential sources of dialectical change. To conclude, the article suggests three new foci for engaged archaeology: intersectionality, control, and authoritative speech. 

It is common to view maps as simple reflections of the world. Maps, however, are more complex and dynamic. They are a potent form of spatial imagination and a powerful means of producing space. This article encourages archaeologists to experiment with, and to produce a multiplicity of, maps and other spatial images. As an example, this article juxtaposes two previously unpublished maps of Punta Laguna, Yucatan, Mexico: a site map created using traditional archaeological conventions and a visual cartographic history created using Indigenous Maya spatial ontologies. Because they depict space relationally, Indigenous Maya maps are arguably more congruous with contemporary social theories about space than are traditional Western maps. Further, the juxtaposition of two radically different maps of the same place highlights those mapping conventions that scholars often take for granted; demonstrates how specifically maps are selective and subjective; and emphasizes that Western worldviews are neither natural nor ubiquitous.