14

Archaeological Legacies of Knowledge

Pamela R. Frese
College of Wooster

ABSTRACT
The scholars in this volume successfully illustrate that state and local governments, archaeologists, museums,
and the tourist industries actively manipulate “truth” about the past in ways that reflect both an “authentic”
heritage and contemporary ethnic, political and economic hegemonic structures. Overall, the volume contributes to
current issues of identity construction; to questions of authenticity and commodification of culture; and, to issues
surrounding tourism in Mesoamerica. Three significant themes are woven throughout the articles: the reliance
on the historical and archaeological past to empower subaltern groups to resist hegemonic structures especially
through forms of expressive culture, museums, and tourist venues; the active and powerful struggle for identity by
individuals relying on their connections to archaeological sites and rich historical traditions; and finally, the promise
of scholarship that incorporates a more holistic archaeological perspective in a four-field anthropology. [holistic
anthropology, advocacy archaeology, patrimony]

A rchaeological sites, and especially the stories told

about them, bridge the past, reflect multiple visions
of the present, and provide knowledge for the future. Clark
and D. S. Anderson frame the papers collected here as ex-
amples of “archaeological legacies,” a useful concept that
traces cultural heritage and patrimony across time and space.
The contributors to this volume address important dimen-
sions of the multilayered and multi-sited narratives that be-
gan with the original builders of archaeological sites and
incorporate the understandings that descendent populations
have about their past, which continue through generations
of archaeologists who rediscover other versions of the past.
These legacies involve multiple stakeholders including not
only archaeologists, but also community members, muse-
ums, local and national governments and other political or-
ganizations, as well as participants in local and global tourist
industries. Moreover, each of these stakeholders engages in
the re-visioning of an “authentic” heritage in the context of
contemporary ethnic, political, economic, and hegemonic
structures.
Three significant themes are woven throughout the arti-
cles: the reliance on the historical and archaeological past to
empower subaltern groups to resist hegemonic structures es-
pecially through forms of expressive culture, museums, and
tourist venues; the active and powerful struggle for identity
by individuals relying on their connections to archaeological
sites and rich historical traditions; and finally, the promise of
scholarship that incorporates a more holistic archaeological
perspective within four-field anthropology. These are impor-
tant issues in contemporary archaeology, issues intellectu-
ally rooted in traditional archaeological and anthropological
perspectives first articulated by Franz Boas and Alfred
Kroeber. The legacies that are discussed by the authors in
this volume help to create a more holistic perspective of im-
portant social and cultural phenomena that requires a more
reflexive archaeological stance in contemporary research.
Hegemony: Nationalist Archaeology and
Anthropology
Contributors to this volume discuss how archaeol-
ogy was initially used during the Porfiriato (1876–1910)
as part of an educational program intimately tied to
the nation-building process. Early professional Mexican

ARCHEOLOGICAL PAPERS OF THE AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION, Vol. 25, pp. 128–132, ISSN 1551-823X,
online ISSN 1551-8248. 
C 2015 by the American Anthropological Association. All rights reserved. DOI: 10.1111/apaa.12055.
Archaeological Legacies of Knowledge
anthropologists, trained under Boas, helped to create the
mestizo as a blend of prehistoric and modern that was spread
through museums and state agencies. The articles explore
the continuing significant intersections of archaeology, mu-
seums, tourism, and migration with the construction of indi-
vidual, local, and national identities in Mexico and beyond.
Several authors include important discussions of the
role of representation through museums and other forms
of expressive culture in the construction and negotiation
of identity within larger political and economic systems.
Fernández illustrates the role that education plays in the
construction of identity for children through what they learn
at home, in a nationalized school curriculum, and from their
relationship to an archaeological site. Peniche describes how
mestizo elites appropriated an Aztec past through the con-
struction of an Aztec palace modeled on archaeological find-
ings at the 1889 Universal Exposition in Paris. Through “na-
tionalist archaeology,” this exhibition was designed to avoid
connections to Mexico’s European past in a crafted national
Mexican identity that also acted to elevate the Aztec over
other ethnic Indian groups in Mexico. Venter and Lyon seek
to understand identity construction through heritage man-
agement and explain that tourists today are still presented
with a glossed over Pre-Hispanic past, one associated with
Aztec and even Olmec themes that remain more popularly
connected to the “global Mexico” displayed in museums.
Both Alonso and Faulseit illustrate how local and national
governments negotiate the conservation of the past to craft
identity at multiple levels. Overall, most of the authors argue
that most contemporary visions of Mexico can be viewed as
multilayered stories rooted in archaeological legacies as sites
are rebuilt for tourism, history texts, and museums where
multiple versions of the past are articulated at national and
local levels.
Subaltern Resistance
Resistance to these hegemonic structures can appear
in museums, in schools, through oral histories, in festival
and ritual performances, through narratives of population
movements and creation myths, and through the creation
of “authentic artifacts” for sale to tourists. Resistance takes
many other forms as subaltern groups act to create their own
identity in resistance to a master narrative especially when
people move across state and national boundaries through
migrations and tourism.
Both Stoll and Xiuhtecutli illustrate that claiming
mythic connections to ancestral homelands and migra-
tion practices validates contemporary migration across bor-
ders today where descendants of Pre-Hispanic peoples are
129
re-visioned as transnational immigrants, where a legacy of
ancestral practices and collective memory can provide the
impetus for resistance to economic projects that threaten
a community. Vargas-Betancourt illustrates how the fig-
ure of Tepozteco is used as a symbol of resistance to the
introduction of a golf club in an indigenous community.
Faulseit illustrates how the Zapotecs of Santa Ana del Valle
act as active agents in preserving their artifacts and in the
stories attached to archaeological sites in a community show
of resistance towards Mexico’s dominant narrative. Mc-
Cafferty’s research exemplifies how data collected by re-
searchers can dispute the oral traditions of ethnic origin and
political identity. His argument highlights the importance
of presenting and publishing for all stakeholders, even if it
counters some narratives.
Two authors follow identity construction and resistance
to hegemonic narratives across time and space. Stoll ex-
plores the Pan Mixtecan and Zapotecan identities rooted in
the pre contact ball games; contests that today take on in-
creased significance as players negotiate different political
spheres across national borders. Xiuhtecutli also reveals how
“reactive ethnic identity” for deterritorialized communities,
based upon roots in common archaeological and historical
traditions, empowers contemporary Mesoamerican peoples
politically and economically.
Ancestral legacies attached to myths, artifacts, and ar-
chaeological sites are interwoven with family heritage as
well. J. H. Anderson shares the local perspectives on patri-
mony that generations of archaeologists at Tula have helped
develop with local workers since the first professional ex-
cavations. Today the local residents inherit the role of care-
takers for archaeological sites and help to restore the ruins
from damage caused by tourists as a vocation. Indeed, one
contributor interviewed by J. H. Anderson used her initial
employment at the archaeological site to expand her cultural
capital as she used the education gained from these wages
to become a project archaeologist on the site.
While many of the scholars in this volume include a
consideration of the role tourism plays in contemporary
Mesoamerican cultures, two articles reveal important di-
mensions of how tourism intersects with political activism
and with local understandings of the past and an indige-
nous identity. Vargas-Betancourt illustrates how the active
ownership of symbolic forms, myths, and festivals can em-
power a community identity that successfully counters out-
side development. And Venter and Lyon discover the how
ecotourism, archaeological tourism, and indigenous spiritu-
ality and religion can be crafted into a social force in the
Tuxtla mountains.
130
A Public, Holistic, Reflexive Archaeology
Contributors to this volume acknowledge that archae-
ology was intimately tied to nation building in the past and
that archaeologists continue to serve as an important dimen-
sion of how artifacts and archaeological sites are understood
today. But this collection speaks to the important and critical
perspectives in contemporary anthropological archaeology.
Eleanor Harrison-Buck (2014:344) identifies the most sig-
nificant lines of research in this field. One of the most impor-
tant dimensions of contemporary archaeology is what she
refers to as “Postcolonial critique and the politics of cultural
heritage management.” Harrison-Buck credits these schol-
ars with a commitment to “confront the tensions and rela-
tionships that exist between our knowledge production and
issues of social justice for underrepresented communities
in the management and protection of their ancestors, land,
resources, and cultural heritage” (2014:344). The authors
in this volume contribute in important ways her framing
of this conversation as these scholars certainly “share simi-
lar concerns with local knowledge production, conservation
and indigeneity, and the impact archaeology can have on the
local community” (Harrison-Buck 2014:345).
While acknowledging archaeologists’ early participa-
tion in nation building in Mexico, the contributors also ex-
plore the role that archaeologists can play in empowering
local residents who have a vested interest in nearby archae-
ological sites through community collaboration, in suggest-
ing ways in which archaeological sites might contribute to
sustainable economic development, and in facilitating the
sharing of knowledge through education in descendant com-
munities. In particular, archaeological heritage tourism can
provide social, cultural and economic capital for local stake-
holders that can contribute to their success in a changing
world. Underlying the empowerment of historically subal-
tern populations is a call for reflexivity and critical reflection
on the part of the researcher’s position in the interpretive pro-
cess as mediators for the future of archaeological heritage
in practice.
Clark and D. S. Anderson invest the volume with notions
of “public archaeology,” “action archaeology,” and “partic-
ipatory action research.” Indeed, “public” or “advocacy” ar-
chaeologists can take an active stance as mediators between
multiple visions of Mexico. These intermediary positions
require a critical stance on the archaeologist’s role within
the community, especially in terms of the knowledge that
emerges from the investigation of an archaeological site and
who controls the use of that knowledge. These articles incor-
porate holistic anthropological perspectives to understand
the complexities of ethnic identity and national politics and
how Mexican legacies appear on the global stage.
Pamela R. Frese
Conclusion
The contributors to this volume look at “legacies” in
several ways: those archaeological sites that serve as spaces
for contesting the past and the present, and the role of ar-
chaeologists in creating and perpetuating social and cultural
meanings related to archaeological materials. This volume
speaks to contemporary issues of power and hegemony,
globalization, indigenous rights, and tourism—all dimen-
sions of archaeological artifacts and tourist sites. These are
exciting contributions to an emerging dialogue that seeks
to understand the role of archaeology and archaeologists
in Latin America (see also Feder 2014; Gnecco and Ay-
ala 2011). New dimensions of the intellectual legacy left
by Boas and Kroeber are woven throughout these chapters,
even if it is likely that researchers in this volume would
argue for a more contemporary “five field” and “multi-
sited” approach to include Public or Advocacy Archaeol-
ogy. The contributors speak to the value of holistic views
of social and cultural phenomena as their research relies
upon ethnographic methods used by other anthropologists
including the use of surveys, interviews, participant obser-
vation, ethnohistory, and document analysis. And like their
socio–cultural colleagues, these researchers learn the lan-
guage they will need in the field. These archaeologists in-
corporate an understanding of myth, ritual, and symbolic
forms, music, games and popular culture, political and eco-
nomic institutions, formal and informal education. Clark
and D. S. Anderson acknowledge that this stretches beyond
traditional archaeological approaches into areas that a socio-
cultural anthropologist might initially be better prepared to
investigate, as J. H. Anderson suggests. But these kinds of
connections to contemporary social and cultural issues in
an inclusive anthropology are an important strength of this
volume. This is a rich offering that promises a dialogue
that Gillespie believes “could constitute the basis for the
revival of an integrated, multifield anthropology” (Gillespie
2003:93).
In the Introduction to this volume, Clark and D. S. An-
derson celebrate UNESCO’s World Heritage sites as im-
portant positions on the world stage as forms of “humanity’s
patrimony” that can be used to help preserve local “archaeol-
ogy legacies” while protecting legacies shared by all peoples
of the world. Websites also “sell” these heritage sites, and
those local residents who are savvier in the ways of the In-
formation Age use their cultural capital to actively redefine
sites and offer a unique tourist experience to world travelers.
Contemporary socio-cultural anthropologists are also very
interested in these issues, especially in debates surrounding
“authenticity” and the impact of tourism on the “toured”
(see Wearing et al. 2010).
Archaeological Legacies of Knowledge
I am especially interested in the relationship of tourism,
narratives about archaeological sites, and spiritual beliefs.
Since this volume explores possibilities for future research
on archaeological legacies, it is appropriate to share an ex-
perience I had on a trip to Yucatan in the summer of 2010 as
part of a group of colleagues from the College of Wooster
(including J. Heath Anderson, archaeologist and contributor
to this volume). Sponsored by the College’s Hale’s Fund,
the objective of the trip was to retrace portions of the route
traveled by John Lloyd Stephens and Frederick Catherwood
as part of their journey across the Yucatan peninsula. The
stories, photographs, and drawings of that journey appeared
in their “travelogue” of Maya archaeological sites published
in London in 1854 (Stephens and Catherwood 1854 [1843]).
One particular event from this trip offers a perspective that
resonates with several of the foci presented in this volume,
especially concerning the legacy of Mesoamerican ances-
tors, their religious and spiritual ties to archaeological sites,
and how these connections can play out for local communi-
ties, archaeologists, and participants in global tourism. This
excerpt is an edited version of one of my blog entries made
during this research trip:
Jorge our tour guide, led us through the Sian Ka’an
bioreserve, a UNESCO World Heritage site. Jorge was
born and raised in the area. His five hour tour features a
boat ride through a variety of environmental habitats, a
hike through an archaeological site, lunch in Maya ruins
at a spot that long ago served as a post to help control
trade through the canal, and finally a leisurely “float”
down the canal. His Maya grandmother still lives in a
village bordering the reserve, and it is through her that
Jorge retains the right to lead tours through the ancient
Maya canal that runs through the bioreserve.
I opted to stay in our boat with Jorge as my compan-
ions floated through the canal. I was interested to hear
more of his explanation for why tourists come to this, and
other Maya sites. I was especially intrigued when Jorge
turned out to be a passionate believer in a syncretized
New Age religion that resonates with many Neo-Pagan
believers in the United States. Relating his beliefs to the
ancient Maya Long Count calendar and the date of De-
cember 21, 2012, Jorge explained that the cycles of the
cosmos are coming to an end. The world will not end, but
enter a new phase when “cosmic power” will come down
and move all people to the next cycle. Those individuals
who vibrate on a higher “frequency” (the “good” more
advanced people who recognize the need to care for the
people and environments of the world) will move on to a
better and special place created for them that is different
from the place that those operating on a “low” frequency
(or bad people who take advantage of others and pollute
the environment) will find after the cycle changes.
His religious and spiritual beliefs connect to the
archaeological legacy he shares with others who live in
this area and the many tourists who come from all over
131
the world to appreciate the Maya sites he describes for
them. Jorge believes that many of these tourists are drawn
to this place, and indeed other Maya sites, for reasons
that they may not completely comprehend. It is possible,
he argues, that those tourists who seek out ancient Maya
sites are actually reincarnated Maya from the past, those
who may have lived here and return to find their legacy;
that these buildings are remnants of a civilization that
appear familiar to the tourists because of their previous
lives here. Jorge urges tourists who share and appreciate
this ancient connection to the land and Maya cultural
heritage to join with him in helping to preserve this
natural, sacred environment, our patrimony, when we
have so much to lose. [Frese 2011]
Archaeological sites can be liminal spaces that bridge
times and connect descendant communities with their an-
cestors to help protect a heritage important to all people
of the world. But Jorge finds himself at the intersection of
processes that include kin ties to local communities, a glob-
alized New Age religion, and local social and economic
conditions that enable/obligate him to work in the tourism
industry, an industry rooted in narratives of the archaeolog-
ical and historical past.
This is a wonderful collection of essays in which the
contributors locate themselves squarely in the best tradi-
tions of the holistic view of anthropology originally articu-
lated and practiced by Boas and his students. Overall, this
volume explores how present-day local populations intersect
with each other, with their past, with tourists, and with the
archaeologists and anthropologists who study it all.
References Cited
Feder, Ken, ed.
2014 Lessons from the Past: Ancient Knowledge, Con-
temporary Issues. San Diego: Cognella.
Frese, Pamela
2011 New Age Religion on a 1000 Year Old Canal.
http://yucatan.scotblogs.wooster.edu/, accessed
February 17, 2015.
Gillespie, Susan D.
2003 Teaching Archaeology as Anthropology. Theme
Issue, “Archaeology is Anthropology,” Archaeo-
logical Papers of the American Anthropological
Association, 13:87–97.
Gnecco, Cristóbal, and Patricia Ayala, eds.
2011 Indigenous Peoples and Archaeology in Latin
America. San Francisco: Left Coast Press.
132 Pamela R. Frese

Harrison-Buck, Eleanor Chiapas, and Yucatan. London: reprinted in 2008

2014 Anthropological Archaeology in 2013: The by Cosimo Classics.
Search for Truth(s). American Anthropologist
116(2):338–351. Wearing, Stephen, Deborah Stevenson, and Tamara
Young, eds.
Stephens, J. L., and F. Catherwood 2010 Tourist Cultures: Identity, Place and the Traveler.
1854 [1843] Incidents of Travel in Central America, Los Angeles: Sage.