Shaping the future of Australian archaeology: An Indigenous archaeologist’s perspective

The purpose of this comment is to offer an Indigenous archaeologist’s perspective on Australian archaeology and where it could be in the next 50 years. Looking ahead requires us to steer Australian archaeology in a direction that incorporates the origins of the discipline with additional theories, frameworks, and practices that address the Australian context (Hiscock 2008; Murray 1998; Smith 2013; Veth et al. 2005).

It must be said that Australian archaeology has played a significant role in my life over the past two decades. My journey as an archaeologist began when I worked as a scientific assistant in the remote Diamantina River region, surrounded by large open expanses that were once occupied by groups of people now only known by the archaeological remains that they left behind. At the time, I could not help but think, what was the future of these unique sites and landscapes?

My initial fascination lay in understanding the people who lived in these vast landscapes. As a young person living in a remote region, it was difficult to understand what archaeology meant from an Indigenous perspective and how I could make a contribution to the field. It was during this time that my curiosity turned into a reality, which led me to pursue an anthropology/archaeology degree at The University of Queensland.

I entered the field with certain expectations about what archaeology could mean for my people and the many previous generations. However, I soon realised that Australian archaeology is far more nuanced, with its own history and underlying theories and practices shaping its current state.

It is widely accepted that Australian archaeology has its foundations in the antiquity of humanity, the concept of evolution, and the study of hunter-gatherers. While the arrival of modern humans in Australia approximately 65,000 years ago is an important aspect, and rockshelters/caves hold great significance for the interpretation of the broader Indigenous culture, I was concerned that these approaches should not be the sole focus of our research. I was interested in an applied archaeology, utilising frameworks rooted in British and European archaeology, to address questions in all regions of Australia, not just the north where the first people probably arrived.

As a recent PhD graduate of the University of Cambridge specialising in geoarchaeology, I have come to realise that with creativity and a comprehensive understanding of various sciences, including social sciences, we can revolutionise the discipline into an applied science that addresses the needs of contemporary society and extends our research opportunities to learn more about Australia and its past.

Over the years, efforts have been made to delve deeper into these remote regions where I once worked, and other arid regions, to shed some light on the impact of desert occupation and its peoples on Australian archaeology generally (Smith 2013; Veth et al. 2005). Yet, I cannot shake the feeling that something is missing. But how do we meet these challenges and influence the future over the next 50 years?

We must explore other options for research, such as ‘stratified’ open landscape deposits (not surface scatters) to gain a deeper understanding of the past that we encounter through fieldwork and cultural heritage assessments—the latter though are unlikely to exist for any length of time because of the nature of developments and the ensuing ground disturbance activities that go with these types of projects.

I suggest that what is required are new and compelling methodologies that draw on the original processual archaeological framework but are shaped by and for the Australian context. This approach emphasises the consequences of employing scientific methods to test hypotheses and to make inferences about past human behaviour, utilising quantitative and statistical techniques to analyse archaeological data, and acknowledging the role of environmental and ecological factors in shaping human behaviour and cultural practices.

For example, by having a greater understanding of landscape change, we could define occupation across deep time in many regions of Australia. We need stronger baseline data and methodologies to address new questions about site formation processes and improve our understanding of early and more recent archaeological deposits. This would also promote interdisciplinary collaboration between archaeologists and other scientists, including geologists, biologists, and climatologists who unconsciously cross into the archaeological sphere without knowing that they could make a contribution to Australian archaeology.

Furthermore, we must understand the diverse past climate variations across the Australian continent. As climate change continues to be a pressing issue, archaeologists will be called upon to provide valuable insights into how past societies managed environmental change. This will require a greater focus on the interactions between early peoples and their palaeoenvironments, and the use of innovative techniques to obtain the most relevant information for our society more generally.

In the next 50 years, our focus should encompass all parts of the country, and define cultural landscapes based on their environmental and cultural characteristics (and more). The way forward is applied archaeological research that must continue to evolve and transform with the development of more advanced technologies and interdisciplinary approaches. Digital technologies will continue to play a vital role, with the emergence of new tools such as virtual reality, artificial intelligence, and machine learning that will enable archaeologists to capture and analyse data more efficiently and accurately than has been possible to date.

Computational archaeology is an exciting and interdisciplinary field that combines archaeological research with computational methods, techniques, and technologies. This approach will continue to develop in the coming years, providing more comprehensive and sophisticated ways of studying the past. Moreover, collaborations with other fields, such as biology, chemistry, and computer science, will become more important as archaeologists seek to understand the complex interplay between humans, culture, and the environment.

Researchers who engage in these inquiries should be motivated by a desire to make a difference in the world and to see their work have a practical impact on archaeological studies. A proactive approach needs to promote archaeological research (including community archaeology) as an opportunity to collaborate with other disciplines. Future research opportunities could benefit from obtaining funding and resources from a host of private companies or government agencies who value archaeological research and ask archaeologists to solve problems that help others. For example, I now work for the CSIRO, applying archaeology in this way.

Beyond research is the need to communicate the results, to make a difference, and encourage new archaeologists who are motivated by inspiring research outcomes. In my opinion, Australian archaeology has always had the public hovering over its inquiry and its outcomes (Griffiths 2018). The Dark Emu debate and Bruce Pascoe’s (2014) book have brought attention to some important issues, even if they are subject to ongoing debate (Sutton and Walshe 2021). The fact that over 250,000 copies of Dark Emu have been sold indicates a keen public interest in Indigenous Australia. However, it also highlights that we have not provided sufficiently strong evidence to support the enduring presence of Indigenous peoples on this continent; peoples who operated using practices distinct from European methods adopted in Australia today. It is essential that we thoroughly comprehend these practices, potentially through the knowledge held by present-day communities, and the use of archaeology and collaborators who possess insights into events pre-dating 10,000 years ago—a chronological phase in Australia that is plagued by many gaps and limitations.

To effectively communicate research to non-specialists, archaeologists must actively engage with the public, going beyond scientific journals and papers, by utilising various media platforms to communicate findings. We will need to develop new educational materials and public outreach programs that engage this wider audience. We owe this to the Indigenous peoples of Australia, and I am confident that through a gradual shift toward interdisciplinary collaboration and a focus on the sciences, we can contribute significantly to their ongoing recognition and empowerment.

Indigenous peoples continuously challenge research ideas, advocating for a deeper respect and recognition of our knowledge and connection to the land; but where does this fit in the discipline today? I contend that we must demonstrate the enduring presence of Indigenous people and showcase our rich cultural heritage on a global stage.

Therefore, as an Indigenous archaeologist, I strongly believe that if we are to promote a better understanding of Australian archaeology, we need to engage fully and work collaboratively with the wider scientific community. It is hoped that through deeper thinking and the development of new theories and technologies, Australian archaeology will evolve into a leading discipline that helps the emerging archaeologist understand the significance of Australia’s past and of its Indigenous peoples.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).