Community Archaeology as Knowledge Management: Reflections from Uneapa Island, Papua New Guinea

Abstract

Over the last decade the concept of community archaeology has become a worldwide phenomenon; a convenient tagline largely describing the involvement of non-archaeologists in the practice of interacting with, uncovering, interpreting, and presenting the past. A plethora of new definitions and methodologies have been postulated, a marked increase in public funds invested in such initiatives is notable, as is the development of more rigorous evaluation strategies. Using Etienne Wenger’s ideas about ‘communities of practice’ (1998), I argue that community archaeology can be conceived as a form of knowledge management. In doing so, this paper reflects on the interactions between a small research team and local community during six months fieldwork on Uneapa, a remote island in the Bismarck Sea, Papua New Guinea. It considers the sets of relations that emerged whilst fi?eld-walking, surveying, and excavating Uneapa’s monumental landscape, and discusses how local ideas and knowledge influenced and altered the project methodologies and research questions being asked. This paper also highlights the challenges faced when reifying such engagements into research outputs.

Keywords:

• communities of practice
• community archaeology
• experts/expertise
• Papua New Guinea

Warm thanks to the community on Uneapa and all those (too countless to name individually) who were so generous with their time and knowledge. I would like to thank Sue Hamilton, Bill Sillar, and Robin Torrence for assistance with the original research, and Susannah Harris, Gabe Moshenska, and the anonymous reviewers for their comments on an earlier version of this paper.

Notes

1 I employ the terms of expert and non-expert both carefully and deliberately here. I distinctly favour this dichotomy in opposed to drawing a line between professionals and non-professionals. This is because many experts are not professionals, e.g. many local historians, whilst clearly experts in their areas, may not have had any professional training nor do they work directly in the field. In addition, undoubtedly one of the biggest lessons learned from postcolonial archaeology is that expertise manifests itself in a variety of different ways, such as embodied and experiential-based knowledge about places and things and knowledge passed down from previous generations.

2 U refers to local Uneapa terms hereafter.

3 TP refers to Tok Pisin terms hereafter.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Sarah Byrne

Sarah Byrne is a Mellon Postdoctoral Fellow at the UCL Centre for Museums, Heritage & Material Culture Studies. Her work focuses on the late prehistory and colonial history of Island Melanesia, combining approaches from archaeology, anthropology, and museum ethnography.

Correspondence to: Sarah Byrne. Email: [email protected]