Exploring the Depths of Vietnam's Ancient Past

A conference recently held in Hanoi (summarized here) sought to bring together new research, perspectives and voices of both international and Vietnamese archaeologists in a concerted effort to modernize the practice of our discipline within Vietnam itself, as well as give the general public a more accurate understanding of their own nation's past...before nation states existed. An example of just why this matters can be read here, in which the sale of a Dong Son Iron Age period bell (and many other items such as those in the photo above left) is discussed against a melange of viewpoints re cultural/national origins.

In preparation for an overview exhibit of Vietnamese archaeology and history that will tour three museums in Germany from 2014-2015, numerous scholars assembled at the Goethe Institute from Feb 29-March 2 to decide which sites, artifacts, maps etc. can best illuminate the last 4,000 years of Vietnamese prehistory and, most importantly, place it into regional context. The institutions in question are the Museum of Archaeology in Herne, the Reiss-Englehorn Museum in Mannheim, and the Archaeology and History museum in Chemnitz. It appears that the key sites and institutions in both northern and southern Vietnam (still a politically, culturally, linguistically and historically relevant division) are to be included in this traveling exhibit-thus providing a more unified background onto which the exhibit can 'map' the complexities of what is currently known about Vietnam's ancient past.

The goals of this conference in the abstract were two-fold: To highlight the importance of using and sharing contextualized archaeological discoveries as a means to counter-act the still prevalent nationalistic leanings of official interpretations and local public perception of the ancient past (when thought of at all), as well as share the richness of pre-Colonial Vietnamese history with a German public suggested to be mostly ignorant of it, according to project liaison Stefan Leenen. To me, the focus on continued improvement of methodology and analytical technique and the need for the current generation of local archaeologists (many the recipients of overseas training/field school experience and/or directly benefiting from international collaborations) to join the "pioneers" in "setting their own agendas for research," as noted by Prof. Ian Glover, one of the delegates.

As native Vietnamese speakers, they are the best suited to directly disseminate the results of their research to the public, and I have been honoured to work with and learn from many of them during my own tenure at the Institute of Archaeology in Hanoi. I would add (as I always do), that for this collaborative progress to continue, it is crucial that more foreign archaeological scholars in Southeast Asian countries make efforts to learn at least one of the main local languages. The conference also saw the inevitable airing of differences in Western and Vietnamese viewpoints, and the use of the past (and key symbolic artifacts within, such as Dong Son drums) as a means to assert economic sovereignty to contested territory, such as the Parasol Islands, which Vietnam, China, and several other nations currently seek to occupy/exploit, and use deliberately targeted archaeological "research" to further.

While these are important, I will leave them aside in favour of giving proper mention to the looting issue as discussed at this conference. The fact that Vietnamese site looting (often less visible on the ground that in other regional countries such as Cambodia) was mentioned at all is a very positive outcome, if Vietnamese and international scholars and activists are going to ever stem the "cultural rape" (as Prof. Higham succinctly puts it) occurring throughout the region. With the collection of ancient artifacts, especially Dong Son metalwork, still openly discussed online, the outcomes of conferences such as the above deserve all the international press they can get. Let's see what shape the final exhibits take, how Germany receives them, and most importantly, how the Vietnamese public receives them.

Human Remains Repatriated to Namibia

This is a quick post to report on the successful repatriation case of 20 human skulls to Namibia, after more than a century of storage at the Charite teaching hospital in Berlin (see the photo above left for an example). Namibia, then known as German Southwest Africa, was the site of Germany's brief attempt at colonial rule of foreign lands; a chapter in its history which ended rather badly. These skulls were taken from those who died in German prison camps during a retaliatory campaign of genocide against the Harero (Herero) and Nama (Namaqua) tribes from 1904-1907. This "first genocide of the 20th century," according to the article, was in response to a Harero uprising in January 1904 over alleged theft of land, cattle and women which killed 123 newly settled German civilians. The skulls were kept in a medical hospital to inform later eugenics-themed "research" intended to lend scientific credibility to Nazi claims of racial superiority.

It is great news, then, that these skulls will finally be returned on October 4th, with a reburial memorial and traditional mortuary rights being held on the 5th in the capital, Windhoek. As Namibia's former ambassador to Germany noted in 2008 (quoted in the article), the return of the skulls is "a question of retaining our dignity." I couldn't agree more. As this additional article points out, this repatriation is the tip of the iceberg, with the Charite museum allegedly having at least 7,000 skulls in its collections, as well as a variety of other bones, and several other museums in Germany the same; acquired under equally dubious circumstances. In their year of remaining funding, it is my hope that the physical anthropologists and historians involved will be able to collaboratively identify the most likely origin events that brought these skulls to Germany and arrange for their repatriation, after making sure that all relevant data that can be collected from them is. The injustices of the past should always be acknowledged and remedied as much as possible, but in my opinion, this does not excuse collecting all relevant information.