Archaeological studies are not part of the school curriculum in Grenada. Thus, students and the larger population have limited knowledge of previous civilisations, and this limited knowledge limits...Show moreArchaeological studies are not part of the school curriculum in Grenada. Thus, students and the larger population have limited knowledge of previous civilisations, and this limited knowledge limits society’s understanding of its history. In many schools, students learn about Grenada’s post-colonial history, while ignoring its pre-Colombian past that includes the island’s indigenous inhabitants. This thesis highlights some significant deficiencies within the present structure of education which continue to effectuate a colonial type education that ignores the pre-Colombian history of Indigenous Peoples. The thesis examines the history and formation of modern Grenadian society and suggests that the role of colonialism in the formation of modern Grenadian society is a contributing factor that creates a situation in which pre-Columbian history is not considered as part of Grenada's heritage. From a theoretical perspective, the thesis attempts to make a link between national heritage and national identity. The lack of appreciation or knowledge of Grenada's heritage is a direct link to the strength of its national identity. Grenada's national identity appears to have been derailed by the colonial powers for other identities such as race and class. Thus, the thesis argues that there is a need for teacher education on pre-history and the need for curriculum development in the primary school system in the areas of History, Geography and Social Studies. The thesis further states that the dissemination of indigenous archaeological knowledge to teachers through the school curriculum in the three subject areas can help equip students with the indigenous knowledge, particularly, pre-Columbian history. The thesis makes the claim that raising awareness for the preservation and protection of indigenous heritage in the tri-island state of Grenada, is one way to overcome the myth of the non-presence of Indigenous peoples. Learning and (re)interpreting the prehistory about Grenada through archaeological data can strengthen its national heritage and build a strong sense of national identity for the current and future generations.Show less
This Master thesis on archaeology and cultural heritage management of the Caribbean and Amazonia was written at the University of Leiden, Faculty of Archaeology. The special emphasis in this...Show moreThis Master thesis on archaeology and cultural heritage management of the Caribbean and Amazonia was written at the University of Leiden, Faculty of Archaeology. The special emphasis in this research is on finding out which role the Amerindian past and archaeology play in a Surinamese image of the past. The research design in the first place needed to reveal the past perception of individual people with a Surinamese Caribbean background. The interviewees who participated in this research however were Surinamese migrants who are living since many years in the Netherlands. The approach taken to reveal the past emphasis of individuals from the Surinamese community was through holding semi structured open interviews. The Surinamese community in the context of this research consists of groups of people that share their experience and memory on Suriname within communication, both in the Netherlands and their mother-country. It is within this community that an image of the Surinamese past is being constructed. A key note to the research is that the past is a present construct. From this point of departure multiple pasts do exist. People in their own diversity, within different environments, have to deal with personal socio-cultural realities. This implicates that a meaningful past for Surinamese people needs to be constructed from their individual and community perspectives. This research applied insights from memory theory, archaeological theory, heritage theory and a more anthropological example to show that such a construct asks for people’s balanced historical involvement and community concern. Community concern demands reciprocal involvement that should accomplish mutual understanding. The goal of this thesis is to show that archaeology can be a tool in accomplishing shared understanding and concern from doing research after past happenings and cultural environments. The thesis further advocates engaged archaeology as a tool to create shared understanding. Engaged archaeology does not only imply that an archaeologist should listen to society and people’s concern in order to find topics for research. It even more asks for stimulating participation of people in past interrogation and creating an open critical attitude towards personal perceptions and those of others. The role of the archaeologist in this process of past communication is one of being an example to people with respect to care about archaeological heritage and involvement in both the past and people’s present environment. As an archaeological professional, who executes a profession that primarily is concerned with people, the archaeologist’s task is to facilitate involvement and provide society with critical questions on people’s past supposition. The practice of archaeology in itself needs to be a research environment where people communicate their understandings and from this realize a more inclusive community of involved people that show interest in their surroundings and each other. There can be worked towards a more stable future from contemporary knowledge or understanding about the past. Besides the interview technique, in order to find out more on people’s past concern this research aimed for application of methods from the social sciences. These were methods like discourse analysis and grounded theory. From the interrogation a better understanding of contemporary Surinamese community was accomplished. It made clear that Amerindians in Suriname in general were perceived as being unchanged. From a Western colonial perspective they did not bring about much development and their culture was regarded primitive. Their political, economic and cultural significance was neglected within the culturally diverse and divided Surinamese colonial community. From contemporary and continuous political and societal shifts reorientation on those people who are indigenous to Suriname as well as on other groups in society however is needed in order to create communality. The recommendation to Surinamese society is that ongoing conceptualization on the past and people in society, is necessary in order to accomplish a stable community.Show less
Het landschap is onderhevig aan vele factoren, waarvan de mens er één is. Dit geldt ook voor het Caribische landschap, het onderwerp van deze studie. Vaak overschatten we onszelf en denken we dat...Show moreHet landschap is onderhevig aan vele factoren, waarvan de mens er één is. Dit geldt ook voor het Caribische landschap, het onderwerp van deze studie. Vaak overschatten we onszelf en denken we dat we het ecologische en klimatologische systeem snappen en alles kunnen creëren en controleren wat we willen. Wetenschappelijke studies, waaronder archeologie, hebben aangetoond dat we lang niet alles snappen en we behoorlijk afhankelijk zijn van de grillen van onder andere het klimaat en geologische processen als vulkanisme. Wat verder blijkt na bestudering van verschillende bronnen is dat de gedachte dat we als Europeanen als enige het landschap met opzet veranderden onjuist is. Voor de komst van de Europeanen werd er in de Caraïben behoorlijk wat gedaan om zo goed mogelijk te overleven. Kleinschalige tuintjes waar allerlei planten werden gekweekt en waarvoor stukken land werden afgebrand en de introductie van verschillende uitheemse dier- en plantsoorten zorgden onder andere voor de menselijke invloed op het landschap. Zelfs de archaïsche bewoners van de Caraïben deden meer aan landschap modificatie dan we aanvankelijk veronderstelden. Dit alles zijn we te weten gekomen door opgravingen, boringen en bestudering van historische bronnen. Curaçao is een goed voorbeeld van hoe het landschap is uitgebuit en hoe we daarvan nog steeds de gevolgen merken. Archeologische studies op andere plekken in de Caraïben en op andere plekken in de wereld leren ons verder hoe de mens in het verleden voor de komst van westerlingen de natuur behandelde en hoe men zich probeerde te redden te midden van natuurgeweld, klimaatveranderingen en een onvoorspelbare leefomgeving. Er vallen verschillende lessen te leren uit deze resultaten die bruikbaar zijn voor de toekomst en andere disciplines dan de archeologie. De belangrijkste les is dat we zuinig moeten zijn op onze omgeving, omdat ook wij nog steeds afhankelijk zijn van de natuur, maar dat we nooit in staat zullen zijn een landschap altijd te behouden zoals het op een moment in tijd is. Het landschap is altijd onderhevig aan veranderingen. Dit ontdek je pas als je het over een langere periode bestudeerd.Show less
Island archaeological studies are often characterized by island comparisons and the transfer of information between scholars working in many different island environments around the world....Show moreIsland archaeological studies are often characterized by island comparisons and the transfer of information between scholars working in many different island environments around the world. Comparisons between island environments, however, have never been systematically critiqued. This research questions the use of comparisons between island environments. Prehistoric and modern day differences are highlighted and their relevance for archaeologists working in both regions considered. Island comparisons are evaluated by i) examining the justifications with which comparisons can be made, ii) studying the past use and outcomes of comparisons between the Caribbean and the Pacific and iii) the application of a case study focusing on inter-island interaction and exchange at a local scale within both regions. Although archaeological mobility and exchange studies reveal high levels of inter-island interaction, there has been a tendency amongst island archaeologists towards oversimplifying island processes and a stark dichotomy between interacting islands and an archaeology of isolation or ‘essentialising practices’. Moreover it is argued that island archaeologists are methodologically and theoretically unprepared to deal with these issues due to academic legacies such as island biogeography magnified by popular views of isolation and exoticism. This research aims to systematically critique Island Archaeology and to move towards a more comprehensive understanding of the intricacies, possibilities and limitations of island comparisons.Show less
