Until the 1970s, archaeological data from New Caledonia in southern, insular Melanesia were interpreted in accordance with a colonial scheme that generally denied any major relationship between the current Indigenous Kanak inhabitants and the early part of pre-Contact chronology. The rise of anti-colonial claims from the 1970s onwards led to a process of political decolonisation of the archipelago throughout the past three decades. This further resulted in experimenting with new ways of doing archaeology in order to question old scientific certainties and integrate Indigenous approaches to researching the past in the discipline. This article proposes to analyse the main points of change with which a team of local professionals experimented, as well as new dilemmas that arose in their project, with the aim of contributing to the creation of a more inclusive future for the archaeological discipline in Oceania.
About 2500 years ago, people from the Korean peninsula migrated to the Japanese archipelago, bringing with them metal tools, wet-rice agriculture, and associated social structures different from that of the local Jōmon culture with which they inter-mingled. The resulting culture, known archaeologically as the Yayoi, formed the basis for the Japanese state. It was at this time that the trajectories of the archaeological cultures of the Japanese mainland and Hokkaidō Island began diverging. This divergence contributed to the historic and contemporary relationships between ethnic Japanese (Wajin) and Ainu people, such that the Japanese considered themselves “civilized” and the Ainu “barbarians.” In the nineteenth century, the Meiji government fully xcolonized Hokkaidō and the Ainu, exerting social and political control over the Ainu groups living there. In this article, I offer a brief background on the archaeology of Japan, with attention to the differential culture history of the ethnic Japanese and Ainu. Following this, I present a brief discussion of the Ainu to situate their historical and political position in contemporary Japanese society. I then provide an overview of Indigenous archaeology with a more focused discussion of its recent history in Japan and a critical evaluation of its possibilities and ways it could be beneficial to the Ainu. Finally, I discuss the ways that archaeological resources are again being used to create a new, homogenized nationalist past as a faux reflection of Japan’s “homogenous” culture.
The participation of Indigenous communities in archaeological research has remained peripheral in the Indian context. Given this situation, the involvement of Indigenous archaeologists has become critical to ensuring more inclusive representation in archaeological studies of Indigenous peoples’ pasts, histories, and heritages. This entails an engaged archaeology that enhances the participation of Indigenous communities in Northeast India to facilitate more nuanced understandings of their cultural heritage. In the absence of inclusivity and respect for Indigenous peoples, conflict, marginalization, and misrepresentation become apparent. It is within this context that the present essay aims to examine the nature of collaboration and engagement in community archaeology projects in the study of Indigenous communities’ local histories and other areas of heritage and cultural patrimony in Northeast India and explore the possibilities for a way forward
The colonial misrepresentation of Indian forest peoples or “tribes” as primitives, that is, as ahistorical communities populated by irrational individuals, constructed them as the subject of ethnographic studies rather than archaeological research. The marginalisation of the histories of Indian forest-dwellers and the delegitimisation of their knowledge resulted in only limited exploration and investigation of the forests and consequent methodological and theoretical gaps in research on past forest peoples. This article argues that archaeological practice in Indian forests needs to move on from its Eurocentric foundations rooted in racial theories and sustained by Brahmanical norms. This requires the development of a transdisciplinary framework that combines conventional archaeological methodologies with Indigenous worldviews and ways of knowing to better understand the past of India’s forest communities. This article focuses on the plateau of the Nilgiri mountains of southern India, a region of subtropical montane forests and home to several “tribal” communities and is structured in three sections. The first explores Indigenous understandings of space and time, contrasting their relational and cyclical characteristics with Eurocentric conceptualizations, and highlights their relevance to decolonising archaeological practice. The second examines the historical marginalisation of Indian upland forest communities within the colonial and Brahmanical ideological contexts and provides an overview of the archaeology of the Nilgiri plateau. The final section focuses on the Toda community’s spatial and temporal frameworks and discusses how their integration into archaeological analyses enhances methodologies by challenging disciplinary norms and enabling inclusive interpretations of cultural and historical complexity.
Mainland Southeast Asia encompasses many Indigenous populations, alongside a significant influx of immigrant populations, spanning from Prehistoric times to the modern era. The designation “Indigenous” is often restricted to peoples from the highland regions, while terms such as “native people” or “ethnic minorities” are used throughout Southeast Asia, leading to an uneven understanding of regional history. The incorporation of diverse local cultures into the larger polities of nation-states, coupled with their ideological transformations, have historically resulted in the assimilation of Indigenous peoples into mainstream culture within a framework of a centralized governmental regime. In the context of Thailand, archaeological materials seldom demonstrate historical connections among nearby ethnic groups, yet this archaeological heritage has been incorporated into the broader concept of a “Thai cultural heritage,” wherein “ethnic minorities” are positioned as distinct from dominant groups. Archaeologists must engage in critical analysis of the intricate historical circumstances surrounding specific locales before embarking on heritage management endeavors. Hence, an integrated approach combining the humanities with social and physical sciences becomes a necessary conceptual tool. The utilization of scientific research, localized historical frameworks, and long-term participatory research methods are considered essential theoretical and practical implements for establishing the foundations of a ‘Third Space’ in Thailand. This intervening space enables a new form of cultural translation that connects the past and present of Thai and Shan populations to foster a sense of belonging and a sense of place that has been achieved through contemporary negotiation rather than lineal descent. This article focuses on two points from a Southeast Asian perspective. The first is a critical examination of the socio-political context related to archaeological heritage management in the highlands of Pang Mapha of Northwest Thailand; the second considers the pros and cons of community archaeology and heritage management in practice.
The Pungnaptoseong site in Seoul has been revealed to be a large-scale fortress, constructed using the rammed-earth wall method, that may have served as the capital of Baekje during the Hanseong period from around 18 B.C.E. to C.E. 475. Excavation of Chinese coin-pattern pottery and Baekje’s distinctive roof-end tiles from the Gyeongdang district within Pungnaptoseong raised high expectations for dating the Hanseong Baekje period more precisely. This article investigates the chronology of the Chinese glazed coin-pattern pottery from Gyeongdang. Existing evidence suggests it may date as early as the Han Dynasty (202 B.C.E. - C.E. 220) or as late as China’s Three Kingdoms period (C.E. 220 – 280). Moreover, only one of the roof-end tiles at Pungnaptoseong exhibits a coin pattern; the majority feature unique designs distinct from those found on ceramic artifacts from neighboring polities. Such evidence complicates the placement of ceramic jars and roof-end tiles in specific periods of time, prompting a reconsideration of the established chronology for Hanseong Baekje.
Indigenous archaeology, emerging in the 1980s as a response to colonial appropriation and indigenous marginalization, represents a transformative shift toward collaborative, decolonial, and community-centered archaeological practice. While established in North America, Australia, and parts of Africa, its development in Asia and the Pacific has been uneven, shaped by diverse colonial histories, state policies, and contested definitions of indigeneity. This essay explores the origins, theoretical evolution, and methodological traits of Indigenous archaeology, emphasizing its focus on empowerment, repatriation, and the integration of Indigenous knowledge systems. In Asia and the Pacific, Indigenous archaeology navigates complex legacies of Western, Asian, and internal colonization, as well as state-centric heritage management practices that often exclude Indigenous voices. The case studies from India, Thailand, Taiwan, Japan, and New Caledonia in this issue of Asian Perspectives collectively illustrate both the progress that has occurred over the past several decades, as well as persistent challenges including legal constraints, institutional resistance, and the folklorization of Indigenous cultures. Examples of successful collaborative archaeological programs highlight the benefits of long-term cooperation, decentralized governance, and the integration of oral histories and local ontologies into archaeological interpretation. In this introductory essay, we argue for stronger legal recognition of Indigenous rights, decentralized heritage management, and educational reforms in order to foster more equitable partnerships among Indigenous communities, researchers, and governments. Indigenous archaeology in the region stands at a critical juncture, offering a pathway to more inclusive, politically engaged, and scientifically enriched understandings of the past — provided structural barriers are addressed through sustained cooperation among all interested parties.
This article examines the emergence of Indigenous archaeology in Taiwan within the broader context of settler colonialism and postcolonial transformation. While Indigenous archaeology has been developing for decades in regions such as North America and Oceania, it has only been recognized in Taiwan relatively recently. I argue that this delay reflects the island's complex colonial history, shifting national identities, and the enduring influence of state ideologies on archaeological research. Historically, archaeology in Taiwan operated within positivist and cultural-historical paradigms that legitimized colonial governance while marginalizing Indigenous voices. By situating Taiwan within global discussions of Indigenous archaeology—defined as archaeology conducted for, with, and by Indigenous peoples—this article examines the ways in which recent collaborative initiatives challenge epistemic hierarchies and reconfigure relationships between archaeologists and Indigenous communities. Drawing on Indigenous-led projects that integrate oral traditions, local epistemologies, and cultural values into the research, this study demonstrates that such practices foster more inclusive and ethically grounded approaches to understanding the past. Ultimately, the rise of Indigenous archaeology in Taiwan marks an ongoing process of epistemic decolonization and contributes to broader movements for historical justice, cultural revitalization, and collaborative heritage management
This article offers a novel interpretation of material remains to differentiate transcendent from non-transcendent rituals at Sanxingdui, a Bronze Age archaeological site in southwest China. This study establishes a five-element framework of ritual components (i.e., recipients, performers, assistants, offerings, and furnishings) and highlights the representations of ritual recipients, assistants, and furnishings as key differentiators of interworld communication in ritual contexts. By analyzing bronze artifacts from the Sanxingdui ritual pits that have been discovered and published so far, the research identifies two distinct artifact assemblages and their roles in ritual practices, categorizing them into transcendent and non-transcendent forms. The differing levels of investment in these ritual types provide insight into the emphasis on ritual at Sanxingdui. KEYWORDS: ritual, archaeology, bronze, southwest China, artifact assemblages, Sanxingdui.
The Aleti Tunu Bibi cave, located on the small volcanic island ofAtauro close to the island of Timor, is a sacred site for the region's inhabitants. The cave's archaeological potential was revealed in 2015 with the discovery of artifacts, rock art depicting marine fauna (mammals and reptiles), human remains, and a few remains of marine and terrestrial fauna. New material discovered in 2017 included sporadic remains ofmarine fauna, goats, and pigs, and a partial human skeleton with perimortem bone lesions. The analysis of these additional elements is presented here. Direct dating of the skeleton (14C AMS and U-series on bones and teeth) gave a burial date of ca. 4900 cal. B.P., indicating that this individual lived during the Holocene. The burial context suggests a primary burial. After thorough examination of the bone lesions, it was concluded that the individual may have been attacked by a saltwater crocodile (Crocodylus porosus), which is probably represented by the zoomorphic figures painted on the cave wall. The more recent remains of goats and pigs are associated with sacrificial rituals. Overall, the evidence points to intermittent use of the Aleti Tunu Bibi cave site as early as 18,000 years ago. Rock art and the intentional human burial allow us to describe the symbolic behavior of hunter-gatherers who heavily depended on a maritime environment.
The Jiahu site, located in the Central Plains of China, exhibits notable social complexity and distinct ideological characteristics. Analyses focused on human trauma documented in the burials, along with likely weapons for both blunt force trauma and piercing, and traces of potential defensive works, indicate the significance of intergroup conflicts at the site. An elite subset of the settlement population, composed predominantly of adult males, assumed multiple roles encompassing ritual practitioners, military leaders, and skilled hunters. These roles suggest an interplay of interlocking sources of social power in this early sedentary society, with a likely foundation in intercommunity conflict. This interplay of various social factors not only explains the early development of complexity in Jiahu society but also reveals the close connection between prehistoric violence and ideology in prehistoric transegalitarian society. KEYWORDS: Neolithic China, prehistoric violence, social conflict, ideology.
During the seventh century C.E., Japan adopted a new bureaucratic system called ritsuryo. This system was partly supported by taxing rural areas. Taxes were paid to the capital in Nara in the form of tributes of local agricultural, marine, or dairy products. The history of these tributes is mainly based on the written record; little material evidence has been secured to reconstruct how and where these tribute items were produced. This article focuses on the major tribute product from the Pacific coast, a bonito sauce recorded under the names nikatsuo (boiled bonito) and katsuoirori (bonito broth). We analysed lipids extracted from large ceramic cooking vessels known as nabe excavated from archaeological sites in the Suruga Bay area. These vessels were thought to have been used to produce bonito products at an industrial scale. Clear evidence of marine resource processing is confirmed in these vessels through the presence of chemical compounds related to aquatic organisms and stable carbon isotope values of individual fatty acids, indicating large-scale bonito product processing occurred at these sites. The results newly point to the possibility that such large-scale production of tributary bonito products may have been practised as early as the Asuka Period (592-710 C.E.), earlier than the Nara Period (710-794 C.E.) previously recognised.
