Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T05:37:19.523Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The past as symbol of identity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Isabel McBryde
Isabel McBryde*
Affiliation:
Department of Prehistory and Anthropology, The Faculties, Australian National University, GPO Box 4, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review articles
Information
Antiquity , Volume 66 , Issue 250 , March 1992 , pp. 260 - 266
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, C. 1990. Repatriation, custodianship and the policies of the South Australian Museum, Bulletin of the Conference of Museum Anthropologists 23: 112–22.Google Scholar
Anon, . 1989. ‘Controversy’ News, Anthropology Today 5(6): 25.Google Scholar
Arnold, B. 1990. The past as propaganda: totalitarian archaeology in Nazi Germany, Antiquity 64: 464–78.Google Scholar
Clarke, D.L. 1973. Archaeology: the loss of innocence, Antiquity 47: 6–18.Google Scholar
Davidson, I. 1991. Notes for a code of ethics for Australian archaeologists working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander heritage, Australian Archaeology 32: 61–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, C. 1989. Archaeology and modern times: Bersu’s Woodbury 1938 and 1989, Antiquity 63: 436–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, M. 1990. Bones of contention: can Native Americans and archaeologists find common ground?, Earfhwatch August: 6–8.Google Scholar
Goldstein, L. & Kintigh, K.. 1990. Ethics and the reburial controversy, American Antiquity 55(3): 585–91.Google Scholar
Langford, R. 1983. Our heritage – your playground, Australian Archaeology 16: 1–6.Google Scholar
Mcbryde, I. 1985a. Introduction, in Mcbryde, I. (ed.), Who owns the past?: 1–10. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mcbryde, I. 1985b. Who owns the past? Melbourne: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mcbryde, I. 1986. Australia’s once and future archaeology, Archaeology in Oceania 21(1): 13–28.Google Scholar
Mulvaney, D.J. 1990. Bones of contention, The Bulletin 9 October: 104–6.Google Scholar
Mulvaney, D.J. 1991. Past regained, future lost: the Kow Swamp Pleistocene burials, Antiquity, 65: 12–21.Google Scholar
O’Regan, T. 1987. Who owns the past, in Wilson, J. (ed.), From the beginning: the archaeology of the Maori. Auckland: Penguin Books (NZ).Google Scholar
Read, P. 1990. Come on in, the water’s fine: some reflections on AHA proposed Code of Ethics, Australian Historical Association Bulletin 64–65: 33–42.Google Scholar
Silverman, N. 1989. Between past and present: archaeology, ideology and nationalism in the modern Middle East. New York (NY): Doubleday.Google Scholar
Sullivan, S. 1985. The custodianship of Aboriginal sites in south-eastern Australia, in Mcbryde, (1985b): 139–56.Google Scholar
Trigger, B.G. 1984. Alternative archaeologies: Nationalist, colonialist, imperialist, Man 19: 355–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trigger, B.G. 1989. A history of archaeological thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Watt, R. 1990. Museums as sacred repositories for human remains: the New Zealand experience, Bulletin of the Conference of Museum Anthropologists 23: 97–111.Google Scholar
Williams, E. & Johnston, D.. 1991. The World Archaeological Congress (WAC) and the WAC first code of ethics, Australian Archaeology 32: 64–7.Google Scholar
Willmot, E. 1985. The dragon principle, in Mcbryde, (1985b): 41–8.Google Scholar