Archaeology of Liberation vs. Political Archaeology: Rethinking the Past for a Just Future

Abstract

Political archaeology and archaeology of liberation are two of several different aspects of the relationshipbetween archaeology and politics. In this note, I will examine political archaeology from the aspect of its negativeeffects, and I will examine archaeology of liberation from the aspect of its positive effects, although each mayhave other benefits and harms. This means I do not intend to praise one and blame the other. Rather, I will expressthe most common methods that can strengthen the negative and positive aspects. For example, just as politicalarchaeology has a negative aspect, it is possible that liberating archaeology may also show negative aspects in caseof inaccuracy. Political archaeology, the intersection of politics and archaeological research, reveals how politicalmotives can shape historical interpretations. By examining the subjective nature of historical understandingand how human perception influences our understanding of the past, we can recognize how archaeology can bemanipulated by various individuals, including politicians, for political gain. Archaeology of liberation, a relatedfield, offers a potential solution to the challenges posed by political archaeology. By centreing the voices andexperiences of marginalized communities, archaeology of liberation can help to counter the biased narrativesoften perpetuated by political agendas. By working collaboratively with these communities, archaeologists candevelop more inclusive and equitable interpretations of the past. By understanding both political archaeologyand archaeology of liberation, we can gain a more comprehensive understanding of how archaeology can beused to both uphold and challenge power structures. Through a critical examination of political archaeology anda commitment to the principles of liberation archaeology, we can work towards a more just and equitable future.