maroon archaeology is public archaeology

Maroon Archaeology Is Public Archaeology

Cheryl White, Tampa, FL, USA

E-mail: [email protected]

ABSTRACT________________________________________________________________

Researchers of the contemporary past have sought to be instrumental in

public dialogue about how artifacts speak to heritage matters relevant to

living communities and decision-making polities (Emberling and Hanson,

Catastophe!: the looting and destruction of Iraq’s past, 2008; Gibbon, Who

owns the past?: cultural policy, cultural property, and the law, 2005; Mullins,

Places in mind: public archaeology as applied anthropology, 2004; Renfrew,

Loot, legitimacy and ownership: the ethical crisis in archaeology, 2000;

Skeates, Debating the archaeological heritage, 2000). This approach has

made archaeology a public endeavor that serves the needs of inquisitive

researchers, as well as those groups of individuals whose lives may be

directly affected by the excavation, analysis, and interpretation of

archaeological remains. This paper will broadly assess how the archaeology

of Maroons—tribal communities of runaway slave descendants—has

affected the application of scholarly research in the former Dutch territory

of Suriname, SA. The shift in relevance is due to the Inter-American Court

on Human Rights 2007 judgment that allows Suriname Maroons to assert

decision-making authority on matters of land management and

development in ancestral and contemporary habitat. Vital to this endeavor

is, Maroon involvement in archaeological research and more importantly, an

overhaul in Surinamese antiquity laws.________________________________________________________________

Resume: Autrefois, les archeologues cherchaient a garder une position

neutre suite a des changements socio-politiques. Cette attitude a cependant

considerablement change au cours des dernieres annees. Les chercheurs du

passe contemporain ont cherche a jouer un role dans le dialogue public sur

la maniere dont les artefacts parlent de la transformation culturelle, en

particulier le dialogue public qui rend les questions de patrimoine dignes

d’interet pour les communautes vivantes et les regimes politiques de prise

de decision (Emberling et Hanson, Catastophe!: the looting and destruction

of Iraq’s past, 2008; Gibbon, Who owns the past?: cultural policy, cultural

property, and the law, 2005; Mullins, Places in mind: public archaeology as

applied anthropology, 2004; Renfrew, Loot, legitimacy and ownership: the

ethical crisis in archaeology, 2000; Skeates, Debating the archaeological

RE

SE

AR

CH

AR

CH

AE

OLO

GIE

SV

olu

me

6N

um

ber

3D

ece

mb

er

20

10

� 2010 World Archaeological Congress 485

Archaeologies: Journal of the World Archaeological Congress (� 2010)

DOI 10.1007/s11759-010-9154-4

heritage, 2000). Cette ligne de conduite a fait de l’archeologie une initiative

publique qui repond aux besoins des chercheurs curieux ainsi que des

personnes dont la vie peut etre directement concernee par la fouille,

l’analyse et l’interpretation des vestiges archeologiques. La discussion qui

suit explore la pratique de l’archeologie au sein des communautes tribales

des Marrons du Suriname, en Amerique du Sud. En outre, j’evoque les

epreuves et les difficultes a mener des recherches parmi les communautes

vivantes, ainsi que la participation des communautes descendantes, qui vont

au-dela des methodes archeologiques classiques. Je propose egalement une

interpretation de la legislation actuelle du Suriname sur les antiquites et

comment celle-ci influence l’examen des sites archeologiques des Maroon.________________________________________________________________

Resumen: En el pasado, los arqueologos intentaban mantener una posicion

neutral despues del cambio sociopolıtico. Sin embargo, esta postura ha

cambiado notablemente en los ultimos anos: los investigadores del pasado

contemporaneo han intentado formar parte del dialogo social sobre el

mensaje de los objetos en cuanto a transformacion cultural, en especial,

aquellos dialogos publicos donde las cuestiones de patrimonio desempenan

un papel clave en las comunidades vivas y en las polıticas con capacidad

decisoria (Emberling and Hanson, Catastophe!: the looting and destruction

of Iraq’s past, 2008; Gibbon, Who owns the past?: cultural policy, cultural

property, and the law, 2005; Mullins, Places in mind: public archaeology as

applied anthropology, 2004; Renfrew, Loot, legitimacy and ownership: the

ethical crisis in archaeology, 2000; Skeates, Debating the archaeological

heritage, 2000). Este enfoque ha convertido a la arqueologıa en una

disciplina al servicio de las necesidades de los investigadores inquisitivos y

de aquellas personas cuyas vidas se ven directamente afectadas por la

excavacion y la interpretacion de los restos arqueologicos. En el siguiente

debate se analiza la practica arqueologica entre las comunidades de los

cimarrones, una tribu de Surinam (Sudamerica). Comento ademas las

muchas tribulaciones que supone la investigacion en comunidades vivas, ası

como la participacion de la comunidad descendiente, que va mas alla de

los metodos arqueologicos estandar. Tambien se ofrece una interpretacion

de la actual ley de antiguedades de Surinam y su repercusion en el trabajo

en los yacimientos arqueologicos cimarrones._______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

KEY WORDS

Heritage Management, Maroon archaeology, Dutch antiquity laws, Applied/

public archaeology_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

486 CHERYL WHITE

Introduction

In the past, archaeologists sought to maintain a neutral position in thewake of socio-political change. This posture, however, has changed consid-erably in the last several years. Researchers of the contemporary past havesought to be instrumental in public dialogue about the relationshipbetween artifacts to cultural transformation, particularly public dialoguethat makes heritage matters relevant to living communities and decision-making polities (Emberling and Hanson 2008; Gibbon 2005; Mullins 2004;Renfrew 2000; Skeates 2000). This approach has made archaeology a publicendeavor that serves the needs of inquisitive researchers, as well as thoseindividuals whose lives may be directly affected by the excavation, analysis,and interpretation of archaeological remains. In this vein, researchers haveexpanded beyond archaeological methods to include oral historical testi-mony and ethnoarchaeology to better contextualize material findings (Og-undiran and Falola 2007; Shackel and Chambers 2004). According to JohnCarman (2005), archaeological researchers must encourage local involve-ment in all phases of study to engender co-ownership of archaeologicalsites. They must also have long-term research goals understood and sup-ported by target communities. Carman (2005) continues by stating thatarchaeologists must (1) establish their integrity, (2) engender trust, (3)encourage active participation in the project, (4) maintain a constant pres-ence in the area, (5) convey information to the community members inways to which they can respond, and (6) ensure that locally found archaeo-logical material remains in the area (87). This observation rings true forany researcher whose interest extends beyond the mandates of academe.Conducting an archaeological survey and excavation among living commu-nities creates an opportunity to inform site interpretation. If we entertainarchaeology in the public sphere and with the aid of descendant communi-ties, it is important that we are able to answer this vital question: Whoneeds our knowledge? When we can respond to this question with ease, wewill be at a juncture to more effectively discuss how material culture speaksto social issues faced by living communities.

Public Archaeology and Maroons in Former DutchSuriname

Historical archaeology in the Dutch Circum-Caribbean continues to drawon its potential to produce large amounts of evidence, suggestive of theeconomic systems embedded in Dutch plantation culture (Gilmore 2006).This affects social perception of the intent, purpose, value, and use of thearchaeological explorations, particularly the relevance to local inhabitants.

Maroon Archaeology Is Public Archaeology 487

In the former Dutch colony of Suriname, South America, the archaeologyof Maroons is an inclusive practice because it demands the full integrationand direction of Maroon peoples for its success.

As descendants of escaped slaves the Maroons of Suriname reside in20–40 person river side hamlets where they hunt, gather, fish and subsis-tence farm. ‘‘They practice a mild form of slash and burn horticulture andhave numerous rituals that reaffirm their relationship to their natural envi-ronment and their ancestors, including a matrilineal descent order and ma-trilocal housing schemes’’ (White 2009a:45). There are six documentedtribal groups of Maroons (Saramaka, Ndjuka, Boni, Matawai, Kwinti andParamaka) that reside in the river valleys which extend into central Suri-name’s Amazonian hinterland. The Saramaka Maroons are the largest andmost politically astute group with a population of roughly 30,000. Duringthe 16th and 17th centuries Maroons engaged European colonial powers,most notably the Dutch, in guerilla warfare. The fighting culminated withpeace treaties signed in the 1760s which laid the framework for Marooncultural transformation. The archaeology of these communities of escapedslaves and their descendants challenges the historical trend of Dutch infra-structural history.

The notion that a discourse needs to be in place to promote the archae-ology of Maroons as a public activity reveals the need for greater exposureto the inner workings of this branch of African-Diaspora historical archae-ology. The archaeology of Maroons in Suriname is by definition and prac-tice ‘‘public archaeology’’. Having worked among Maroons for more thana decade—both as an ethnographer and as an archaeologist—I havelearned several Maroon languages and participated in countless culturalpractices. Through the years I have learned that Maroon cultural mores,whether expressed through material artifacts or living culture, are deter-mined by and for Maroons, a privilege which they fought hard to earn inthe 1760s peace treaties with their Dutch colonizers.

Recently, the right to maintain traditional Maroon life ways in proxim-ity to ancestral communities was challenged during a 7-year-long landrights adjudication case brought against the government of Suriname bythe grassroots organization, The Association of Saramaka Authorities(ASA). In 2007, the Inter-American Court on Human Rights (IACHR)passed a judgment that allows the ASA to assert decision-making authorityon matters of land management and development within the boundaries ofMaroon ancestral and contemporary habitat.1 As an acknowledgment to itsefforts, ASA is the 2009 recipient of the Goldman Environmental Prize forgrassroots environmentalism (Goldman Environmental Prize 2009; White2009a). This posture means that archaeological investigators who ventureinto the Guiana Shield region of northeastern South America are bound tothe directives of Maroon peoples in all facets of archaeological research.

488 CHERYL WHITE

Incorporating the Maroon perspective into the construction of archaeo-logical research is the primary goal of the Maroon Heritage Research Pro-ject (MHRP). Founded at the University of the West Indies in the late1990s by Dr. Kofi Agorsah, it is currently directed by myself and composedof Maroons, student volunteers and academics. The MHRP is an archaeo-logical investigation of Maroon culture of the past informed by the present.The goal of the MHRP is to locate 17th- through 19th-century Maroonsettlements in the Neo-tropical forests of the circum-Caribbean and SouthAmerica. The methods include archaeological survey, excavation, andartifact analysis in addition to oral historical accounts and ethnography(Figure 1).

The tone of the relationship between Maroons and MHRP researchers isestablished at pre-expedition meet-and-greets with village elders. At thesesessions we respond to questions about the migratory trails of escaping

Figure 1. Saramaka Maroons and Dutch volunteers excavating an 18th-century

Maroon settlement. Photo by Maroon Heritage Research Project 2000


slaves during the height of the gran maroonage—or the mass exodus ofcaptive Africans into the tropical hinterlands—in the late 17th century.These meet-and-greets may sometimes take days as village captains corrob-orate our well-studied book knowledge against what oral history has taughtthem. However prudent, these encounters create the platform for publicdiscourse, which addresses the relevance and need to expose historicalmaterial culture. In addition, these encounters forge intellectual and work-ing relationships that straddle both the researchers’ need for scientific rigorand Maroon expectations for their involvement and interpretation of theirmaterial culture. The Maroon perspective is the primary source for inter-pretative knowledge and is applied to pre and post archaeological survey,excavation and analysis.

Moreover, Maroons are interested in and support archaeologicalresearch because they understand that archaeology can have an effect onhow history is understood in both a local and international public space.The harmful effects of antiquated Surinamese land rights laws on tribalpeoples of the hinterlands have forced Maroons to move toward develop-ing a legal identity that will positively affect political imposition on theirancestral and historical values.

The following discussion will broadly discuss how archaeology is con-ducted among living Maroon communities. Moreover, because of therecent IACHR adjudication, research of ancestral Maroon settlements hasgrown in personal relevance to the Saramaka Maroons of central Suri-name. For several years the Saramaka have resisted national attempts tousurp their tribal and historical rights to access, manage, and use tradi-tional land. The MHRP’s recent archaeological research of an early 18th-century Saramaka settlement has created a language of cultural historythat may prove to be a vital element to the representation of ancestralplaces and areas of cultural significance (Agorsah 1994, 1997, 1999, 2001;Agorsah and Childs 2006; Ngwenyama 2007; White 2009b). The Saramakamaintain the memory of their ancestors through oral histories about theirformative period (Price 1975 [1974], 1983). Even though extensive ethno-graphic research offers insight about the living culture, archaeology offersa definitive data source from which to draw conclusions about the Sara-makaans’ vital developmental period. Ethnography and archaeology alsoallow the Saramaka to harness an additional feature about their earlypresence in historical Suriname that may aid in their articulation for cul-tural relevance as they resist the destruction of the traditional Saramakaway of life.

490 CHERYL WHITE

Why is There Little Emphasis on the Archaeologyof Maroons?

To avoid confusion about the goals and intent of archaeology of Maroonpeoples vis-a-vis historical archaeology of the colonial plantations, I willpresent a cursory commentary on the posture of how historical archaeol-ogy deals with African-diaspora studies.

Historical archaeology of the African-Diaspora is based on investigatingdissenting themes. The wealth of archaeological information available(Haviser 1999; Little 2007; Singleton 1999) addresses how slaves lived andmade the best of plantation life, but still leaves us needing a broader per-spective of African-Diaspora historical studies. Moreover, historical/planta-tion archaeology’s inclusion of descendant communities typically addresseshidden racial disparities and inequalities (Orser 2007; Shackel and Cham-bers 2004). Even though there are historical archaeological studies thatincorporate descendant communities, the historical archaeology of Mar-oons offers a different kind of template. And one that is not centered onor explained with dissenting themes of class subordination, social injustice,or procurement of food rations—the common themes in plantationarchaeology. An alternative template would address how Maroons negoti-ated and/or reciprocated subsistence practices, ceramic technology, andhousing settlement patterns with their Indigenous counterparts.

How do we interpret the use and value of Maroon material culture thatdiffers from long-standing perceptions calcified in the historical archaeol-ogy of colonial plantations? We incorporate the knowledge of contempo-rary Maroons via oral historical accounts of migration patterns throughoutthe tropical forest, as well as participant ethnography to identify the conti-nuity of cultural practices. These methods may teach us something aboutpast behavioral practices outlined in oral and historical accounts and/orthe construction techniques of material culture.

However, much of the recent archaeological research in Suriname hasfocused exclusively on the history of Indigenous peoples. Despite accumu-lated knowledge about the Guiana Shield’s indigenous peoples (Versteeg1998, 2003; Versteeg and Bubberman 1992), it remains a challenge to dis-tinguish a pre-Columbian site from a post-conquest or historical site(White 2010). Much of the existing archaeological record in Surinamecomplements indigenous history, with excavations at sites deemed relevantto the recovery of the prehistoric cultures of the Guiana Shield. An impor-tant point to consider is that such perspectives hinder knowledge of sitesoutside the published parameters.

Moreover, Suriname’s interest in historical archaeology is mirrored byits political cousins, the Netherlands Antilles. It consists of Saba, Bonaire,


St. Eustatius, Saint Maarten, Curacao, and Aruba (this country has directpolitical link to Netherlands). Each country has its own socio-cultural his-tory relevant to Dutch exploration and proliferation in the Caribbean.Moreover, historical archaeology has held some significance in these coun-tries because of the potential to produce large amounts of evidence, sugges-tive of the economic systems embedded in Dutch plantation culture(Haviser 2001). Research interest in this geographical milieu began withthe formation of the Archaeological Anthropological Institute of the Neth-erlands Antilles in the late 1960s. The organization has since morphed intothe National Anthropological Archaeological Memory Management(NAAM); a clearing house on matters of cultural heritage. Ostensibly, thefocus on research throughout the Antillesis is placed on underwater investi-gation of shipwrecks, plantation ruins, forts, historical architecture, sugarfactories, and urban and commercial sites (Haviser 2001). However, researchbeyond Dutch colonial history is for want of a more robust approach.

In his inventory of historical archaeological work throughout the Neth-erlands Antilles, Jay Haviser (2001) cited the lack of a clear communicationof ideas and ambitions by researchers. He further stated that foreign pro-ject directors and their crew ran the risk of insulating themselves and indi-rectly isolating local patrons (Haviser 2001:76). But the ability to articulateresearch goals to the right audience, however, depends on the country andits infrastructural and local awareness and support of archaeology.

Building Cooperative Relationships

Archaeological investigations at Maroon sites in Suriname negate many ofthe aforementioned hindrances, because we work with the permission ofMaroon authorities (Figure 2). Prior to the beginning of research, permis-sion to maintain a presence in Saramaka territory and to trek into the for-est must be granted from the paramount chief and all governing bodies inwhichever village a crew chooses as a base camp. During formal meetings,village chiefs and elders require a full explanation as to the reasons andexpectations of the research and our source of knowledge about their his-tory (Figure 3). Also, forest treks to and from sites are dependent onknowledgeable Maroon guides.

Students and participants in a crew receive cultural training by Sara-maka colleagues on matters of language, customs, and gender roles. Thecustomary Maroon garb, panghi, is provided to project participants and allare encouraged to become involved in village social life (Figure 4). Also, tooffset disparities in gender roles, female MHRP participants are asked toadhere to Maroon customs regarding menstruation (during this timewomen are sequestered to one of several menstrual huts found along the

492 CHERYL WHITE

periphery of the village). In the Saramaka village base camp, time is alsospent engaging, via participant observation, in female-centered activitiesthat speak to other MHRP goals. These activities may include: engaging inthe social dynamics of caring for children; identifying different artisticexpressions as seen in sewing designs on the traditional panghi garb or thecalabash gourd; harvesting sand from the river for home floor construc-tion; resourcing for the appropriate type of timber to be used for houseconstruction; and aiding with farming chores or processing manioc intodry cassava meal to understand subsistence practices. Additionally, researchin the tropical forest is dictated by social events that may take place in thevillage. For example, during a funeral all individuals—project participants,primary researchers, or Saramakaan—are required to halt activity andremain in the village to participate in the mourning ceremonies.

Figure 2. Saramaka village elders offer rum libation to acknowledge MHRP mem-bers’ request to conduct archaeological research in Saramaka territory. Photo by

Maroon Heritage Research Project 2004


Saramakaans have the first and last word on the presence of archaeolog-ical investigators in their region—more than any legal polity in Suriname.The archaeology of Maroons—in relation to the established institution ofhistorical plantation archaeology—is still in its infancy and has not pickedup professional momentum. To launch and conduct Maroon archaeologi-cal research requires more of a grassroots approach. The research of Mar-oon settlements presents an opportunity for full engagement by the localcommunity. Nonetheless, archaeological research in Suriname lacks a gov-erning organization similar to the one applied to the Netherland Antilles.The Suriname National Museum acts as a holding house for material cul-ture, but there is no policy directive to address archaeological research vis-a-vis Surinamese antiquity law.

The Laws that Abide

Presently, academics and professionals in Suriname are not developingresearch programs in historical archaeology. Furthermore, the only regula-tory body applicable to archaeology—prehistoric or historical—is calledThe Law of Monuments 2002, which is regulated by the Ministry of theInterior, and is a replacement for The Law of Historical Monuments (G.B.1963 no. 23, altered by S.B. 1977 no. 45). Below is a translated excerpt2

from the Dutch version of the law:

Chapter I, Article 1, Section B1 Monuments, states: ‘‘All real estate or sec-tions thereof, that are at least fifty years old and are considered of general

Figure 3. Dr. Kofi Agorsah (center) meets with elders of the Saramaka Maroon villageTutubuka (Nieuw Aurora) in the Suriname River Valley. Photo by Maroon Heritage

Research Project 1999

494 CHERYL WHITE

significance due to their beauty, their art value, their significance to science,archaeology, the history of the country, their ethnographic value of architec-ture’’; Section B2 continues: ‘‘Terrains that are of general importance due tothe objects present as mentioned under 1’’; Section B3: ‘‘Terrains other thanmentioned under 2, constructions and statues, that are erected in commemo-ration of an event or a person and as such hold historical or artistic value’’.Chapter III, Article 20, Section 1: ‘‘Monuments that are found in the courseof excavation and to which no party can claim a right of property, are prop-erty of the State’’. Section 2: ‘‘The proprietor of the ground in which themonuments are excavated is obligated to transfer of the found monumentsto the State and has the right to compensation up to half of the value ofthose monuments’’. Article 21, Section 1: ‘‘The individual that finds anobject other than during excavation is obliged to declare these within thirtydays of recovery, with the mentioning of the exact location, time, monumentand CV of the discoverer of the find’’.

Figure 4. Author (facing front) and Dutch volunteer (at center) dressed in the tradi-tional Maroon panghi with Saramaka guides. Photo by Maroon Heritage Research

Project 2000


The original Law—and its more recent replacement—was enacted to iden-tify and appropriate existing cultural and historical structures into Dutchheritage policy (Law of Monuments 2002). The law, however, has minimalbearing on newly discovered sites and features that are either not-architec-tural in nature or not-structurally sound. In addition, the law does notoffer an outline or catalog that defines structures, shapes, or the construc-tion techniques and materials of newly discovered artifacts. Moreover, thelaw’s focus on erect structures offers little bearing on the location, crite-rion, and attributes that can potentially associate to the archaeology ofMaroon ancestral communities. This is partly due to the fact that none ofSuriname’s six officially recognized groups of Maroons live in the historicdistrict of Paramaribo (the urban capital) or the Central Suriname NaturePreserve (the tropical zone nationally recognized for preservation and con-servation) which places them outside of the realm of commentary concern-ing the application of the law.

This prohibits any strong consideration for historical sites that may befound in the tropical forest—in the places where Maroons traditionallylived (and still live). Furthermore, the legal stipulations of the Law ofMonuments 2002 affect any future incorporation of methods, such as oralhistorical testimony and ethnography, from Maroon communities. Thesecircumstances lead to more questions: How do we determine the relevanceof Maroon archaeological sites that do not feature brick or mortar archi-tecture? Does public interest and participation in archaeological researchinfluence the perceived value of artifacts, regardless of the potential associa-tion to a contemporary culture? We should consider the prospects of con-

Figure 5. Saramaka Maroon men (right) and Portland State University students (left)

review video. Photo by Maroon Heritage Research Project 2004

496 CHERYL WHITE

ducting relevant historical archaeological investigations in Suriname thatpropels the science into the public domain by incorporating peoples ofAfrican descent. Our goal for public discourse must begin with the livingpeoples affecting the launch and interpretation of archaeological researchin descendant communities (Figures 5, 6, 7).

Figure 6. Saramaka Maroon men (right) and students from Portland State University

(left) sift artifacts at an 18th-century Saramaka settlement. Photo by Maroon HeritageResearch Project 2004

Figure 7. Musket balls recovered from 18th century Saramaka Maroon site. The set-tlement was the scene of a battle between Dutch planters and Maroons. Photo by

Sahieda Joemratie 2009


Conclusion

Conducting archaeology among Suriname Maroons is a public act. It alsodemonstrates how science can work within the social dictates and needs ofliving communities without forfeiting rigor and academic goals. Earlier Iraised the question: Who needs our knowledge? When archaeological evi-dence may be used to demonstrate ancestral ownership, it positions itselfas a tool for those who seek to validate their cultural presence for the con-sideration of large governing bodies. The challenges that archaeologists ofMaroon history in Suriname face include: non-inclusive antiquity laws; aparadigm focus on historical archaeology that places emphasis on Dutchcolonial history; and the application of a comprehensive research approachto include ethnography and oral history. As researchers operating underthe mandates of living communities, archaeologists are forced to adhere toa set of standards outside of the academic world and include the needs ofdescendant communities into each phase of research. The proposal, execu-tion, analysis, and dissemination of information forces researchers to con-template what our research fulfills that is not purely academic. The timelylaunch of MHRP in Suriname gave the Saramaka Maroons another evi-dence-based resource to include in their land rights adjudication caseagainst the government of Suriname. Because of the IACHR judgment,decision-making authority was granted to Maroons. It requires that theSuriname government now include Maroons in all development decisionsthat may affect their ancestral settlements, habitats, and socio-cultural sur-vival in the hinterland. This wave of international and local public recogni-tion may soon call for a change in Surinamese antiquity laws. It thereforewould be advantageous to consider how oral historical testimony can con-textualize material culture that is beyond the brick-and-mortar parametersof historical archaeology, as it is currently recognized in Suriname. Archae-ological research has to address contemporary social issues. This marks anoted shift toward relevancy and social accountability to those who intendto use archaeological evidence for cultural and political gain.

Notes

1. See IACHR Case of the Saramaka People versus Suriname 2007 for full dis-cussion of the court proceedings.

2. The translation is by Dr. Renzo Duin, an Amazonian archaeologist currentlyof the Faculty of Archaeology, University of Leiden, Netherlands. I would liketo acknowledge and thank Laddy van Putten (Director of the SurinameNational Museum) who helped interpret The Law of Monuments 2002.

498 CHERYL WHITE

References

Agorsah, E. K.1997. Locational and Spatial Transformation Patterns of Maroon Settlements in Suri-

name: A Preliminary Report. Technical Report. Maroon Heritage ResearchProject. National Geographic Society and Suriname National Museum.

1999. Ethnoarchaeological Consideration of Social Relationship and SettlementPatterning Among Africans in the Caribbean Diaspora. In African Sites:Archaeology in the Caribbean, edited by J. B. Haviser, pp. 38–64. MarcusWeiner Publishers, Princeton.

Agorsah, E. K. (editor)1994. Maroon Heritage: Archaeological Ethnographic and Historical Perspectives.

Canoe Press, Kingston.

2001. Freedom in Black History and Culture. Arrow Point Press, Middletown.

Agorsah, K. E., and T. Childs (editors)2006. Africa and the African Diaspora: Cultural Adaptation and Resistance.

Authorhouse, Bloomington.

Carman, J2005. Against Cultural Property: Archaeology, Heritage and Ownership. Duck-

worth Publishers, London.

Emberling, G., and K. Hanson (editors)2008. Catastophe!: The Looting and Destruction of Iraq’s Past. Oriental Institute

Museum Publications. No. 28. The Oriental Institute Museum of the Uni-versity of Chicago, Chicago.

Gibbon, K. F. (editor)2005. Who Owns the Past?: Cultural Policy, Cultural Property, and the Law.

Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick.

Gilmore, G. R.2006. All the Documents are Destroyed!: Documenting Slavery for St. Eustatius,

Netherlands Antilles. In African Re-Genesis: Confronting Social Issues in theDiaspora, edited by J. B. Haviser, and K. C. MacDonald, pp. 70–89. UCLPress, New York.

Goldman Environmental Prize2009. The Goldman Environmental Prize 2009 Recipients (http://www.goldman

prize.org/recipients/current, accessed April 20, 2009).

Haviser, J.2001. Historical Archaeology in the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba. In Island

Lives: Historical Archaeologies of the Caribbean, edited by P. Farnsworth,pp. 60–81. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.


http://www.goldmanprize.org/recipients/current

http://www.goldmanprize.org/recipients/current

Haviser, J. (editor)1999. African Sites: Archaeology in the Caribbean. Markus Wiener Publishers,

Princeton.

Little, B.2007. Historical Archaeology: Why the Past Matters. Left Coast Press, Walnut

Creek.

Mullins, P. R.2004. African-American Heritage in a Multicultural Community: An Archaeol-

ogy of Race, Culture, and Consumption. In Places in Mind: Public Archae-ology as Applied Anthropology, edited by P. A. Shackel, and E. J. Chambers,pp. 57–70. Routledge, New York.

Ngwenyama, C. N.2007. Material Beginnings of Saramaka Maroons: An Archaeological Investigation.

PhD Dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Florida,Gainesville.

Ogundiran, A., and T. Falola (editors)2007. Archaeology of Atlantic Africa and the African Diaspora. Indiana University

Press, Bloomington.

Orser, C. E. (editor)2007. The Archaeology of Race and Racialization in Historic America (The American Expe-

rience in Archaeological Perspective). University Press of Florida, Gainesville.

Price, R.1975 [1974]. Saramaka Social Structure: An Analysis of a Maroon Society in Suri-

nam. Caribbean Monograph Series, No. 12, Institute of Caribbean Studies.University of Puerto Rico, Puerto Rico.

1983. First-Time: The Historical Vision of an Afro-American People. The JohnHopkins University Press, Baltimore.

Renfrew, C.2000. Loot, Legitimacy and Ownership: The Ethical Crisis in Archaeology. Duck-

worth Publishers, London.

Shackel, P. A., and E. J. Chambers (editors)2004. Places in Mind: Public Archaeology as Applied Anthropology. Routledge,

New York.

Singleton, T. (editor)1999. ‘‘I, too, am America’’: Archaeological Studies of African-American Life.

University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville.

Skeates, R.2000. Debating the Archaeological Heritage. Duckworth Publishers, London.

Versteeg, A.1998. The History of Prehistoric Archaeological Research in Suriname. In The

History of Earth Sciences in Suriname, edited by T. E. Wong, D. R. de

500 CHERYL WHITE

Vletter, L. Krook, J. I. S. Zonneveld, and A. J. van Loon, pp. 203–234.Kon. Ned. Academie Wetenschappen and Nederlands Instituut voor Toe-gepaste Geowetenschappen TNO, Amsterdam.

2003. Suriname Before Columbus. Stichting Surinaams Museum, Paramaribo.

Versteeg, A., and F. C. Bubberman1992. Suriname Before Columbus. Mededelingen Stitching Surinaams Museum

49A, Stitching Surinaams Museum, Paramaribo.

White, C.2009a. Saramaka Maroon Community Environmental Heritage: Threats to Access

and use of Ancestral Land. Practicing Anthropology 31(3):45–49.

2009b. Archaeological Investigation of Suriname Maroon Ancestral Communi-ties. Caribbean Quarterly 55(1):65–88.

2010. Kumako: A Place of Convergence for Maroons and Amerindians of Suri-name, S.A. Antiquity Journal 84(324):467–479.
