Fouseki, K; (2009) “I own, therefore I am”: Conflating archaeology with heritage in Greece: a possessive individualist approach. In: Waterton, E and Smith, L, (eds.) Taking Archaeology out of Heritage. (49 - 65). Cambridge Scholars Publishing: Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK.

Text Fouseki_Taking Archaeology Out of heritage.pdf Access restricted to UCL open access staff Download (219kB)

Abstract

The concept of “possessive individualism”, developed by Macpherson in 1962, stresses that an individual is imbued with a dual and internally contradictory ontology; the ontology of the infinite consumer coupled with the ontology of the individual as developer of his/her own self. The core principle of this theory, “I own, therefore I am”, constitutes a powerful mechanism for understanding a range of power relations within any given society, thereby rendering it an idea that is applicable and adjustable in various historic, political, social, temporal and geographical contexts. I use Macpherson’s theory as a basis for understanding the conflation of archaeology with heritage, and examine this within the particular social and political contexts offered by Greece. I argue that this conflation overwhelmingly derives from—and leads to—“possessive individualist” attitudes inherent in the archaeological profession; a point also made by Lahn (2007) regarding the struggle for disciplinary identity in the field of archaeology. In her work, Lahn suggests that the possession of certain objects, particularly high status objects, becomes a symbolic statement of individual or collective identity. Lahn, in examining the Kow Swamp repatriation case in Australia, argues that possession and control over those things deemed “archaeological” is a significant aspect or statement of disciplinary identity. The need to “own”, control or possess to confirm individual professional and disciplinary identity is thus a significant factor in the conflation of archaeology with heritage in Greece. This conflation reinforces “possessive individualist” attitudes inherent in the archaeological profession and simultaneously reinforces archaeological power and authoritarianism. As a result, archaeologists in Greece play a significant and regulatory role in the management of heritage. This is in part a consequence of the narrowly constructed understanding of heritage that dominates the management process, and links the term with “antiquities” and other “cultural objects”. It is also a consequence of implicit and underlying power structures. It is this dominance of archaeological knowledge and thought over the management of heritage that constitutes one of the main sources of conflict and tension between archaeological authorities and local communities in Greece.

Download activity - last month

Export as XMLCSVJSON

Download activity - last 12 months

Export as CSVXMLJSON

Downloads by country - last 12 months

Export as JSONCSVXML

Archive Staff Only

View Item