Catálogo de publicaciones - libros

This chapter began by noting that Australian maritime archaeologists have engaged in innovative theory and practice, and the review of relevant studies from the last 15 years supports this contention. I have also aimed to show where some critiques of theory in Australian maritime archaeology have probably been somewhat polemical in nature. I conclude that it is only reasonable and timely that supervised and guided postgraduate studies of wreck sites, their assemblages and other underwater and port-related features should be located in tertiary institutions and that these will be the power-houses for theoretical innovation. Effective linkage of tertiary guided research into holding institutions (such as museum collections) has still to be achieved nationally. What is unique to maritime archaeological practice (be it survey, excavation, mitigation or management) is the scale of the logistics and costs associated with these activities and outcomes. To not facilitate or expedite linkage between holding institutions, statutory heritage authorities and tertiary-based research is to potentially compromise a non-renewable resource. I have no doubt that the pace and quality of theoretical innovation will increase over the next decade, given maritime archaeology will be taught and studied in at least three Australian Universities. The remaining challenge is whether or not the “guardians” of the major maritime collections will develop a unified policy to release the “fuel” for such endeavour.

This chapter has considered the analysis of artifacts from shipwreck and other underwater archaeological sites such as jetties. It suggests that maritime archaeologists need to consider the possible meanings of things. It also argues that cargo artifacts can reveal ingrained cultural behaviors and attitudes that demonstrate cultural continuity between the parent culture and the translocated colonial culture, at least in the early years of settlement. Material culture is used by people for individual, psychological reasons such as to reassure themselves about their place in the world, to validate choices and to make themselves happy. Colonial settlements were dependent on supplies of consumer goods carried by sea that allowed newly arrived immigrants to establish themselves within a consumer society. These objects helped immigrants to confirm in their own minds that they had made the right choice when they decided to undergo the difficulties and dislocation associated with nineteenth century migration. Finally artifacts were, and are, actively used in the establishment, maintenance and negotiation of social relations, and insights into the nature of cultural exchange can been seen, for example, in the types, quality and quantity of collected objects found aboard HMS Pandora .

Theme-based research has the advantage of shifting focus from the “site” to the “idea”. For this reason, thematic studies represent an addition to the theoretical toolbox of maritime archaeology, and offer an alternative to the still predominant historical particularism of the discipline in Australia. They are also an important step towards the integration of maritime archaeology into the mainstream of terrestrial archaeology as well as an indication of the originality and innovation of maritime archaeological researchers. Such developments do much to widen the respectability, legitimacy and acceptance of the sub- discipline amongst its parent tradition, and it could be said that the growth and increasing sophistication of thematic studies in this country is a part of this broadening trend. In conclusion the author agrees that: “The time has come for anthropologically oriented archaeologists to approach shipwrecks as a data base for the study of human behavior” (Murphy, 1983:89). Thematic research is just one method contributing to the evolution of archaeology, a development often touted as an unfolding battle between processual and post-processual approaches. As Gibbins and Adams (2001:285) have suggested: “The inclusiveness of post-processualism, a statement of increased theoretical receptiveness rather than a defined methodology, could be seen to encompass much of the third direction identified here”. Although conceivably belonging to a parent philosophy, the thematic approaches represented by the cited works can also be said to represent broad (and often opposing) theoretical perspectives and methodologies that may herald the transformation of the discipline into one reflecting increased diversity and dynamism.

It has not been possible to provide in this chapter either a thorough overview or critical appreciation of maritime archaeology at the land-sea interface. Australian maritime archaeology has always been at the forefront of innovation and has a long history of a “holistic” approach to maritime sites (McCarthy, 2003). The shift towards a broader engagement beyond nautical concerns, however, still poses challenges for how the sub-discipline views itself and engages with other archaeologies, their associated methodologies and theoretical structures. Greater integration of the heritage and university sectors is assisting with some of these changes and making the prospect of investigating the land-sea interface a much more challenging and fruitful enterprise.

Contrary to commonly held perceptions, the study of underwater cultural heritage in Australia is not restricted to historic shipwreck sites. Across the breadth of the country, there is a rich heritage of submerged archaeological sites that represent a range of human interaction with the sea, inland rivers and lakes. These sites vary in age from recent history to those of great antiquity. They are sites of significance to a number of cultural and other community groups including Aboriginal, Torres Strait Islander, European and other migrant communities. Much of the archaeological work on these sites to date has been restricted to those submerged sites that are periodically exposed, either through tides, drought or through the management of artificial water storage facilities. There has been less work on permanently submerged sites. However, archaeologists working at Lake Jasper, on aircraft sites in the Northern Territory and Western Australia and excavations of the seabed associated with wharves and jetties around the country have clearly demonstrated the potential for a wealth of information to be gleaned through the archaeological investigation of these sites. Work to date has been carried out by archaeologists with a variety of specialisations and experience - including Aboriginal, historic and underwater settings. These studies illustrate the need to combine a variety of skills and perspectives in order to gain the best outcomes for future site management, academic research and public information. This opens up new challenges and possibilities for archaeological endeavour and hopefully will lead to new insights and an increasing body of published material that will assist in improving cultural heritage management practices as well as public awareness, enthusiasm and support for their protection.

This chapter has covered in a relatively superficial way the involvement of Australians in some of the work carried out as part of a wider maritime archaeological research program. It is always interesting that the more one examines an archaeological research project, the more questions that appear. From the early work on the Batavia, the research lead into a number of new and exciting fields. We were able to learn more about the vessel and its context as an early vessel involved in the European trade expansion into the Far East. Examining just the European dimension, however, was only part of an attempt to understand the whole complexity of Asiatic trade, that the Europeans were, at that time, only minor players. Understanding of how European ships were built, lead to attempts to understand how Asiatic vessels were built. This is only just the beginning of what will be an ongoing, and probably an everlasting, research programme — to understand our past. Cicero wrote: “Not knowing what happened before you were born means being a child forever. For what is human life unless it is interwoven with the life of our ancestors, by the memory of ancient history? Moreover, recollecting antiquity, and providing examples from it, provides authority and credibility to one’s discourse, as well as enormous pleasure.”

It is from the basic principles of archaeology that an archaeological code of ethics is derived. A code of ethics can be seen as a guide, a system, a set of regulations or laws, which governs the conduct of a profession. The “ ethics” component gives this code a moral undertone signifying perhaps that the profession of archaeology is not just a job but a particular outlook on life. The purpose of such a code is to ensure that effective and principled archaeology is done. The quote at the head of this chapter — “which comes first — the data or the dollar?” — can be taken as an allegory for the difference between good archaeology (data) and bad archaeology (dollar). Money and competence (archaeological training and/or experience), influences how well archaeology is done. The effect of too little money on good archaeology is perhaps the first thing that comes to mind. Consider the consultant who charges expenses for the production of “high end” product but submits a report that barely meets minimum standards and pocketing the balance or conceals findings on the behest of the client. Consider also the government archaeologist who acquiesces to unethical practices for the sake of keeping his or her job or the maritime archaeologist seduced into participating in unethical activities by the promise of substantial remuneration. To practice good archaeology the data has to have primacy over the dollar.