Navegando por Assunto "Archaeological heritage"

Agora exibindo 1 - 2 de 2

Acesso aberto (Open Access)
Entre cacos e flores: apropriações, usos e significados dos vestígios arqueológicos pelos moradores do sítio Macurany, Parintins, Amazonas
(Universidade Federal do Pará, 2022-08-31) BIANCHEZZI, Clarice; ALMEIDA, Marcia Bezerra de; http://lattes.cnpq.br/1085631337892211
This research intended to comprehend the appropriations, uses and meaning given to the archaeological vestiges by people who lives nearby the archaeological sites located in Macurany community, Parintins, Amazon state. I present the narratives from Macurany´s people about the archaeological remains, their plurality of interactions with the Indigenous Dark Earth, the nut trees, landscape, along with the intangible – visages, haunted things, enchanted beings and other existences who can possess the body and spirit of local people and that in Macurany is also linked to the archaeological materiality. I highlight the challenges of archaeological heritage management in the Amazon, considering the archaeological domestic collections realities in Macurany and Parintins. The reflection that was brought aims at contributing to the archaeological patrimony management in the region and to better comprehend the relationships between the amazonian people and the traces from the ancestral occupations. The entanglement of agriculture cultivars, flowers and archaeological sherds, it was possible to recognize the affection and the sense of belonging of the people to their place and their traces; the things of the past and present in Macurany community.
Acesso aberto (Open Access)
Gestão compartilhada do patrimônio arqueológico na Amazônia: conflitos e desafios entre o oficial, o legal e o real
(Universidade Federal do Pará, 2021-06-04) SILVA, Ana Cristina Rocha; SIMONIAN, Ligia Terezinha Lopes; http://lattes.cnpq.br/6620574987436911; https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6690-7244
This thesis presents the conceptual expansion of the term cultural heritage brought by the Federal Constitution of 1988. Having done this, it contextualizes the reflexes of this expansion in Brazil's preservationist policy, starting in the 21st century. By accepting the broad understanding of cultural heritage defended by CF / 1988, the new preservation policy seeks to break the traditionalist paradigm, in order to allow civil society to play a leading role in the management of cultural heritage. Thus, it aims to guarantee access to and enjoyment of cultural goods for all, as well as to enable the exercise of citizenship and the sustainability of local populations. Classified as cultural heritage by article 216 of the CF / 1988, archaeological goods are contained in this set of challenges. In view of these paradigmatic transformations, the study presented here sought to understand how the semantic extension of the term cultural heritage and the (re) orientation of national cultural policy have been detached from the discursive field and transformed into democratic and emancipatory practices in the management of archaeological assets in the Amazon. The study aims to analyze the process of inclusion of local populations in the management of archaeological heritage, in the states of Amapá and Pará, in order to understand the role of the public authorities for the promotion and appropriation of cultural goods, focusing on the pillars of sustainability. Methodologically, the research was developed from the interaction between ethnographic and qualitative methods. The results point to the peripheral position of society in the management of archaeological heritage. With a genesis linked to a modernist project, the national patrimonial policy was based on a western view of the world and consolidated a practice centered on the preservation of monuments. Thus, dissonant epistemologies and cultural processes are disqualified by management strategies. In the Amazon, this practice ignores the multiple ways of apprehending the archaeological heritage by local populations. In addition, local knowledge and epistemologies are neglected by the extensive legal apparatus formed around archaeological heritage. For these reasons, in the region, the official preservation policy, the protection legislation and the reality of the local populations clash and make it difficult to implement the guidelines that guide the current patrimonial policy. In other words, the official, the legal and the real go in different directions and centralize the management of archaeological resources in the figure of the State and the specialists of the heritage.