Currently, Pacific archaeology is predominantly characterised by activities emphasising local education and participation. The notion that archaeology should be public and that local community involvement is crucial has been debated since the 1960s, giving rise to the concept of Public Archaeology, which has also been incorporated into university education.
In the Pacific, Dr Yoshihiko Sinoto (1924–2017), known as the father of Pacific archaeology, was the very driving force behind Public Archaeology. It was I who expanded the scope of the his work in French Polynesia and Hawaii to extend it to Melanesia (primarily Papua New Guinea and Vanuatu) and Micronesia (primarily Palau and Pohnpei).
For roughly three decades from the early 1990s, I held a position in Japan determining and managing the policy of a fund forcusing Pacific island countries. While the Pacific islands are a treasure trove for ethnology, I established a policy for project deployment centred on the islanders themselves – focusing on how funding could benefit the island people rather than Western scholars. During this period, in the mid-1990s, Dr Sinoto approached me regarding a grant application for archaeological research in Tahiti. I conveyed that ‘funding for archaeological research itself is not possible, but if the content benefits the islanders, then it may be considered. Furthermore, French territories are fundamentally excluded, so it would be eligible for review only if there was a plan to expand into independent Pacific countries.’
Public or Community Archaeology, which benefits island communities, was precisely what Dr Sinoto had been conducting for many decades.
Archaeological surveys require months of on-site residence. Without the understanding of the local community accepting outsiders, they cannot succeed. Dr Sinoto's fieldwork site was Tahiti, yet he was agitating and leading local activists to preserve the local language and traditional culture in Tahiti, where French government assimilation policies still lingered. In other words, he was a rather unorthodox “scholar”.
Why?
Because the his father, Sinoto Yoshihito was a geneticist and President of International Christian University, who imparted liberal education to his children. One origin of liberal education lies in Rousseau's educational philosophy, "Emile". It cultivates the ability to think and act independently (autonomy) rather than relying on rules or coercion, thereby nurturing truly free citizens (members of society). Even if Dr Sinoto had not become an archaeologist, he would likely have pursued research centred on people, with freely enter and exit the ivory tower.
I, too, was raised under an educational philosophy influenced by my father, who himself was shaped by my grandmother having received Japan's first liberal education during the Taisho era. My father told me, ‘You needn't study school subjects; learn what interests you.’ Consequently, I was in a position to understand Dr Sinoto's course of action better than most. Archaeological surveys require not only scholars but also the understanding and cooperation of a broad range of people: local cultural administrators, tourism development stakeholders, media, educators, students, children, community representatives and their members, and even aid agencies and the UN organizations. While actual archaeology centres on intricate calculations and analyses difficult for laypeople to grasp, communicating this to individuals from diverse backgrounds presents a significant challenge. Though his activities may have transcended the traditional scope of “archaeology”, Dr Sinoto's entire being embodied the spirit of Émile.
