Send message to Author

Short Abstract

Participatory archaeology facilitates inclusive, democratic and multivocal debates and has the potential to provide people with a cognitive heritage preparedness against rising antidemocratic discourses. This can be further developed by strengthening knowledge networks on citizen science approaches.

Abstract

There is a current rise in authoritarian and anti-democratic movements globally, and Norway and many other countries experience external and internal pressure on democratic discourse. Contrary to this, archaeologists have worked for decades to establish practices that are inclusive, multivocal and democratic, such as participatory archaeologies. However, it constitutes a “wicked problem” to maintain open, accountable and transparent debates about heritage, identity and belonging in the face of totalitarian narratives and aggressive “alternative facts”.

In order to address this dilemma, participatory archaeology will have to move beyond notions of participation as inherently democratising and “good”. Drawing on experiences from Indigenous / Saami archaeology we can achieve more self-reflexive and purposeful approaches. Involvement in professional networks for dialogue about citizen science theory, methodology and ethics, such as ECSA and the network for citizen science in cultural history museums, SAMMEN FF, can also contribute to awareness and innovation in participatory archaeological knowledge production.

The disciplines’ strength is that it provides specified and tangible topics and arenas for democratic discourse that are also often emotionally meaningful to participants. Discussing and tolerating diverse perspectives on the lingering remains of the past that we are all surrounded by, wherever we live, can help build democratic literacy. The aim does not have to be consensus about heritage and the past but to tolerate dissensus and establish communities of disagreement. This practice can provide one source of social cohesion across our inevitably diverse local and national communities, amounting to what may be labelled a cognitive heritage preparedness.