Content uploaded by Francisco Rivera Amaro
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Francisco Rivera Amaro on Dec 20, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ycah20
Journal of Community Archaeology & Heritage
ISSN: 2051-8196 (Print) 2051-820X (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ycah20
Assessing the industrial past in the highlands of
northern Chile
Francisco Rivera, Paula González, Rodrigo Lorca & Wilfredo Faundes
To cite this article: Francisco Rivera, Paula González, Rodrigo Lorca & Wilfredo Faundes (2020):
Assessing the industrial past in the highlands of northern Chile, Journal of Community Archaeology
& Heritage, DOI: 10.1080/20518196.2020.1741119
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/20518196.2020.1741119
Published online: 17 Mar 2020.
Submit your article to this journal
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Assessing the industrial past in the highlands of northern Chile
*
Francisco Rivera
a
, Paula González
b
, Rodrigo Lorca
b
and Wilfredo Faundes
b
a
Département d’anthropologie, Université de Montréal, Québec, Canada;
b
Independent Researcher
ABSTRACT
The Alto Cielo Archaeological Project is an interdisciplinary research
project carried out between 2015 and 2019 in Ollagüe, an indigenous
community located in the highlands of northern Chile. In this article, we
explore the community members’perceptions towards the recent past,
assessing the temporality of industrial sites associated with sulphur
mining in Ollagüe during the twentieth century. This article presents a
preliminary collaborative approach based on consultation and research
design, positing industrial ruins as a mechanism that could de-
monopolize interpretations associated with the recent past of Ollagüe.
KEYWORDS
Industrial heritage; sulphur
mining; temporality;
collaboration; Ollagüe; Chile
Introduction
The Alto Cielo Archaeological Project (hereinafter PAAC, the Spanish acronym for Proyecto Arqueoló-
gico Alto Cielo) is a four-year research project that includes five archaeologists, one anthropologist
and one architect who came together to study the history of sulphur operations in the indigenous
municipality of Ollagüe, in northern Chile. The main objectives were to understand better the
sulphur-mining industrial expansion period in Ollagüe and the consequent local Quechua commu-
nity’s socio-cultural transformations from 1890 until 1992, when the last active mining camp closed.
The hypothesis of PAAC is that the industrial past is intimately linked to the inhabitants of Olla-
güe’s identity and historical memory, from the beginning of the twentieth century onwards. Thus,
the ruins of industry and mining activities are invaluable material evidence, as they can provide a
more nuanced perspective about, for example, the proletarianization of the local pastoralists and
the identification of social dynamics in terms of unequal global economic relations (González-
Ruibal 2017). They also foster discussions about the ways in which these processes materialize. In
this paper, we argue that industrial ruins and the materiality of the recent past engender memory
places intertwined with the community’s contemporary concerns. Through a collaborative approach,
we evaluated and discussed these concerns for our research design and development.
Scholars have discussed collaborative indigenous archaeology from different angles (Atalay 2012;
Cipolla, Quinn, and Levy 2019; Colwell-Chanthaphonh 2012; Nicholas 2008; Vilches et al. 2015;
Watkins 2000). In Ollagüe, we adopted a practical stance in terms of setting the research agenda
through a preliminary collaborative approach centred upon the interests, current concerns of the
community, as well as what is considered important from the recent past. Our aim is to confront
and present different narratives to evaluate the inhabitants’perception of the local past and of its
relevance. Thus, according to the interests of the community and based on 14 interviews and 34 heri-
tage survey conducted among former workers, residents and children of Ollagüe (see details below),
we seek to identify recurrent topics and to establish a sequence of historical events and significant
© 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
CONTACT Francisco Rivera f.riveraamaro@gmail.com 27 Main Street, Apt. 2, Toronto, ON, Canada M4E 2V5
*This paper is the second installment of a Special Series entitled Post-industrial Landscapes, Communities, and Heritage, edited by
Dan Trepal and Kaeleigh Herstad.
JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ARCHAEOLOGY & HERITAGE
https://doi.org/10.1080/20518196.2020.1741119
places that were important for the people involved. In addition, we explore the interviewees’appreci-
ation of the sulphur camps, to evaluate people’s perceptions regarding the possibility of eventually
declaring these mining camps Historical Monuments (Title III, Law 17.288).
1
In Ollagüe, many community members tend to be suspicious of archaeological research because
of the way excavations were conducted in the past. Their bad perception towards archaeology and its
practitioners is related to the intensive archaeological excavations that have taken place in San Pedro
de Atacama since the 1950s (Ayala 2017). Archaeological research in Atacama attained a certain visi-
bility at national and international levels, especially as a result of the excavation and exhibition of
local mummies (Ayala 2008; Pavez 2012). This situation unleashed a conflict, still ongoing today,
between the indigenous and the archaeological communities. The excavations of mummies have
become a paradigm of unauthorized interventions and dispossession, by archaeologists, of the
past’s material heritage, being one of the main reasons for the local communities’negative percep-
tions towards archaeological practices.
In Chile, the history of archaeological practice is marked by a strong colonialist and nationalist
character. Supported by the notion of ‘national territory’, archaeology still exercises dominance
over the discourses and management of the material culture of the past. However, since the
1990s, these issues are constantly questioned by the indigenous communities (Ayala 2017; Ayala
et al. 2003; Ayala, Avendaño, and Cárdenas 2003). In this regard and following our agreement with
the Ollagüe community to respect the integrity of the sites, places, and landscapes, we adopted a
strategy to minimize impacts on them. Therefore, our archaeological research did not proceed
through excavations, as this is not the only technique that can produce data relevant to archaeolo-
gical problems (Cherry 2011; Vogel 1969). The aridity of the highlands of northern Chile provides
exceptional conditions, favourable to the conservation of materials. Our project therefore focused
on the analysis of surface assemblages (Harrison 2011), a virtual recollection of material culture
through photographs, drawings, architectural and topographical surveys, and detailed material
descriptions, which minimize interventional impacts on the sites (Vilches et al. 2012).
Despite the latent tensions between archaeologists and members of the Ollagüe community,
there is a recognition of the discipline as a source of relevant information about the local past,
and as a useful tool that can support territorial claims and negotiations between the indigenous com-
munity and the private and governmental domains. In the case of our project, the general reception
was positive, as the community recognizes the need to highlight the history of sulphur mining. By
neither excavating nor collecting artefacts, more reciprocal and trusting relations were established
with the community members.
Ollagüe: a municipality, a village and an indigenous community
To refer to Ollagüe can be confusing: Ollagüe is both a village, a municipality, and an indigenous com-
munity that the State officially recognizes. The village is located at 3660 metres altitude, in a munici-
pal territory of 2,912 km² (Figure 1). The municipality is in the Antofagasta region, a former Bolivian
region that the Chilean state invaded after the War of the Pacific, or Saltpeter War (1879–1884). The
region was created on July 13, 1888, this date marking a fundamental historical event in the Chilean
State’sefforts to control new territories incorporated after the war (Mondaca and Díaz 2014; San-
hueza and Gundermann 2007). However, the municipality of Ollagüe was not officially created
until 1979, under the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet (1973–1990).
Driven by industrial growth and mining exploitation, capitalist expansion emerged slowly in north-
ern Chile during the second half of the nineteenth century (Ortega 2005; Pinto and Ortega 1990). The
Antofagasta region was a first-hand witness of this process and it became the scene of large-scale
migrations that the presence of new industrial centres caused. This led to a population increase
and generated an important demand for products, services, and labour (Galaz-Mandakovic 2017; San-
hueza and Gundermann 2007). Along with the rest of the region, the municipality of Ollagüe was
impacted by these demographic and socioeconomic changes.
2F. RIVERA ET AL.
In Ollagüe, during the twentieth century, the main mining companies dedicated to the exploita-
tion of sulphur were the private companies of Luis Borlando and the Sociedad Industrial Azufrera
Minera Carrasco (S.I.A.M. Carrasco). The Carrasco company extracted the sulphur deposits of the
volcano Aucanquilcha. In 1950 their lodgings, previously located in Ollagüe, moved to the current
Amincha camp. Borlando’s company was established at the Buenaventura camp, south of Ollagüe,
where the deposits of the homonymous volcano were exploited. The demand for sulphur from
large copper mining and industrial centres such as Chuquicamata stimulated the companies’oper-
ations (Finn 1998). However, the fluctuating effects of the price of minerals on the international
market led to a continuous movement of workers and their families between the camps, until
their total depopulation during the 1990s. These once occupied sulphur camps are, therefore,
icons of mineral-capitalist expansion on a local scale.
Chilean modern mining industries, and the modernization policies through which indigenous
societies were integrated and absorbed, have however only recently been explored from an archae-
ological perspective (Vilches et al. 2014,2015; Vilches and Morales 2017). In this context, the PAAC
analyzed the abandoned mining and industrial sites of Ollagüe to explore the ways in which the com-
munity assimilated the arrival of capitalism and modernization policies through the mining industry.
We argue that we can understand the peculiarities of Chilean modernization through the uniqueness
of local developments and that it is possible to find this singularity in the material culture associated
with the history of this capitalist expansion.
While ethnological research has examined the transformation and cultural integration of indigen-
ous societies with modernization and with the State (Gundermann 2003), its main objective centred
on identifying and establishing definitions of indigenous identity. Although these studies do not
directly link to our exploration of the temporalities of industrial material culture, they have given
rise to important insights into the process of integration and absorption of the particularities of
Chilean modernization. These studies have highlighted that, in northern Chile, integration policies
based on parameters of unity and homogeneity obeyed the directives of the central political
power. The integration of these highland territories implied the establishment of a concrete presence
of the State, such as the police, the customs office, the municipality and the school (Mondaca and
Díaz 2014). Presently, we note that heritage policies have played a similar integrative role, because
Figure 1. Map of the study area.
JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ARCHAEOLOGY & HERITAGE 3
they have been used to define and to establish the symbolic territory of the community. We argue
that a collaboration in terms of assessing the temporality of the industrial heritage serves to counter-
act the vertical guidelines that these integration policies impose, seeking to de-monopolize standards
and principles defining what is and what is not historically important.
Assessing the recent past of Ollagüe
The PAAC was built upon three standard historical archaeological sources of information: historical
documentation, archaeological analysis, and collection of oral testimonies. In this paper, we focus
on the oral history and testimonies that we collected over the last four years. Following methods
common in historical archaeology (Beck and Somerville 2005), we collected oral history on past
and present Ollagüe, using both open and structured interviews and a heritage evaluation survey.
We envisioned three groups of interest: former workers and their family members, individuals who
lived in Ollagüe without working for the sulphur companies during their active period, and current
inhabitants (local or not) who occupy jobs associated with governmental services (police, custom
office, school, municipality).
We conducted some 14 in-depth interviews with elderly sulphur mining workers and their rela-
tives in the region. We expected these interviews to be richest while we were on the sites,
walking through their abandoned structures and derelict houses (Figure 2). Phenomenological
approaches have been used in archaeology since the 1990s and can be useful theoretical tools for
interpreting material culture and how it contributes to the ‘being-in-the-world experience’
(Thomas 1996; Tilley 1994). Assuming that the way people interact with the industrial sites they
inhabited is inextricably linked to the movements, memories, emotional experiences, interactions
with others, as well as the materiality of the places themselves, we were particularly interested in
the personal experiences of local residents who lived in places originally designed for industrial
mining. Thus, we also conducted some walking interviews to understand how people moved
through and interacted with their former built environments (Evans and Jones 2011;Yi’En 2014).
We carried out the heritage survey through applying an anonymous questionnaire of six ques-
tions, five of which left room for open answers. We distributed this questionnaire in the town of
Figure 2. Interviews and on-site visits to Buenaventura camp (Photo by Francisco Rivera).
4F. RIVERA ET AL.
Ollagüe, among students and teachers of the San Antonio de Padua School (the only Primary Rural
school in the village, hereinafter ESAP), officials of the municipality of Ollagüe, workers of the rural
post office and the public library, the police, officials at the customs service, workers of the commer-
cial warehouses. In addition, we shared the questionnaire among the main informants and intervie-
wees who had previously collaborated with the research project and who were already aware of our
research objectives (Rivera, Lorca, and González 2018). The questions were:
1) Do you think that knowing the past is: unimportant, moderately important or very important?
Why?
2) What do you know about Ollagüe’s past?
3) Do you know any historical places in and around the town? Which ones?
4) Have you visited the Ollagüe museum? How important do you consider it to be?
5) What do you know about the sulphur camps near Ollagüe?
6) What do you think of the sulphur camps being possibly declared as Historic Monuments? Do you
think this could benefit the community?
Of the 50 individuals who received the questionnaire, 34 replied, which corresponds roughly to
10% of the total population of Ollagüe (Table 1). Of those who responded, ten are children from
the ESAP. The other 23 are adults, both ollagüinos and people who work in Ollagüe, but whose
official residence is in another village or city. In the following section, we present the results of the
interviews and survey, discussing the main topics that came up during both.
The importance of the past
The survey and interviews started with a general question concerning the degree of importance one
personally accorded to the past. All interviewees and survey respondents mentioned that knowing
about the past is ‘important’or ‘very important’. Among reasons given to justify this importance,
we identified four groups of topics: to know about history, indigenous peoples, and national heritage;
to know about ancestors and identity; to maintain and/or recover traditions and customs; and finally,
to understand the present, to ponder, and to learn from mistakes.
The past of Ollagüe
When asked specifically about the past of Ollagüe, the interviewees responded by alluding to two
great historical moments. Some interviewees decided to anchor their answers in a time before the
existence of the village as we know it today. However, the moment most often referred to relates
to the beginnings of Ollagüe and its link with industrial activities, all during the twentieth century.
Emphasis is put on the close relationship between the current settlement and the railway station
Table 1. Population of Ollagüe according to the censuses from 1895 to 2017.
Year Men Women Total
1895 195 54 249
1907 110 65 175
1920 276 125 401
1930 238 217 455
1940 895 619 1514
1952 304 183 487
1960 Not available Not available 333
1970 Not available Not available 235
1982 425 229 654
1992 303 140 443
2002 210 108 318
2017 207 114 321
JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ARCHAEOLOGY & HERITAGE 5
of Ollagüe, because ‘the town was formed thanks to the railway station’
2
(Survey 9) (Figure 3).
Although sulphur camps are repeatedly mentioned, they are never thoroughly described. Responses
indicate that ‘they regrouped many people, and Ollagüe was like the centre’(Survey 17) and ‘Ollagüe
was a central town where all kinds of things were commercialized’(Survey 23).
The construction of the Ollagüe railway station appears as the first, and one of the most significant
events related to the economic, social, and cultural changes of the region (Blakemore 1990). As one
interviewee notes, with the train came the camps:
That is why this railway was so important. When Quilcha (the Aucanquilcha volcano) started …because that was
the first sulphur mining that started here. Quilcha …then (they built) the camp that you may already know, or to
which you will go, Amincha, which is ten kilometers from here. It is all there, intact, what were the plant, the camp,
the administration, there is even the school, all that. Okay, so it was after the sulphur began to be exploited. I don’t
know, it must have been about 1890 …(Interviewee 1 (male), Ollagüe)
The construction of the railway has been considered as one of the most important events in the
history of Ollagüe and is still vividly present in today’s collective memory. Its arrival responded to
the mining enterprises’needs for transport and workforce. Furthermore, and as it has been shown
in the Central Andes, railways are intertwined with the needs of large mining companies to encou-
rage the creation of a free labour market and integrate large indigenous population into the capitalist
economy (Flores Galindo 1974; Mallon 1986; Nash 1979; Rodríguez Ostria 1991; Salazar-Soler 2002).
With the goal of absorbing new wage labour, mining companies brought with them the spread of
capitalism through the development of means of transportation, transforming entire regions’econ-
omies, and at the same time, the social organization of local communities. The construction of the
Ollagüe railway station also shows that the movement of indigenous workers towards mining
camps, the expansion of capitalism through commercial networks and the role of communication
routes cannot be understood without also understanding the integration policies imposed on com-
munities by mining companies.
Figure 3. Construction of the Ollagüe railway station in 1890 (Photo by the Lassen Brothers. © Colección Museo Histórico Nacional,
Santiago. Reproduced with permission).
6F. RIVERA ET AL.
Referring to a time prior to the arrival of the train and the sulphur industries, only five out of thirty-
four interviewees indicated that ‘at the beginning it was the territory of Altiplano Indians’(Survey 2)
and that ‘it was a place of passage because the camelid shepherds from Bolivia transited through
these sectors’(Survey 12). Responses also mention that ‘Ollagüe was formed by the muleteers,
who worked a lot with the yareta
3
…The railroad arrived later, first there were caravans’(Survey
19). It is interesting to note in this response how it highlights the changes imposed by the train
and its role on replacing caravans of llamas, used as the main means of transport.
Finally, seven interviewees responded by alluding to traditional customs and practices without a
specific temporary affiliation, such as the performance of traditional rituals (the practice of flowering
llama herds and payments made to the volcanos during the month of August), widely explored and
described in other Andean contexts (Platt 1983). Finally, these responses also referred to Andean
medicinal practices associated with doctors (Andean yachos and midwives) as well as the use of ‘med-
icinal plants that help us a lot’(Survey 34).
About the historical places of the region
Regarding the question concerning the interviewees’knowledge of surrounding archaeological or
historical sites (Do you know any historical places in and around the town? Which ones?), six indicated
that they did not know any specific place. The remaining 28 answered affirmatively indicating several
places, which, organized by the frequency with which they were mentioned, are as follows:
1) The village of Cosca, which is currently uninhabited. It is a religious place where the sanctuary of
the Virgin of Andacollo is located, and where once a year a great religious feast is celebrated.
2) The sulphur camps of Buenaventura, Santa Cecilia, Puquios and Amincha.
3) The Ollagüe train station, currently abandoned, and the associated machinery house, located in
the very centre of the village.
4) Ujina, a former railway station of the Ollagüe-Collahuasi branch where sulphur and yareta were
loaded. During the twentieth century, this place attracted many people who traded informally
all kinds of products, brought from various places, including nearby cities, valleys and the Bolivian
altiplano (high plain). Every month, a large trading fair for the exchange of products also took
place there. Today, this fair no longer exists, mainly because Ujina is now situated within the Col-
lahuasi mining private property.
5) Quebrada del Inca, a place where horticulture is currently practiced by the people of Ollagüe.
6) Natural landmarks such as the salares (salt flats) of San Martín o Carcote, and the Aucanquilcha
and Ollagüe volcanoes.
7) Finally, few people also mentioned the town of Cebollar, a place 35 km southwest of Ollagüe. This is
where the borax industry was developed during the twentieth century and continues to this day.
The Ollagüe museum
The Ollagüe museum (Museo Arqueológico Leandro Bravo Valdebenito) was created in 1999 by munici-
pal decree and is currently administered by the municipality. When asked about the museum (Have
you visited the Ollagüe museum? How important do you consider it to be?), all the interviewees
stated that they considered it an important place for the community, even though five of them
had never visited. Responses said that the museum was important because ‘it has old things’
(Survey 16) and ‘to know what people used before the world was modernized’(Survey 33). Ten
respondents said that it represented the community of Ollagüe’s identity and heritage, while four
responses mentioned its importance for local tourism.
Nonetheless, several interviewees were critical of the museum’s current functioning, arguing that
‘it is always closed’(Survey 9), that it does not have good public outreach practices, and that object
exhibition is insufficient because ‘many things are missing’(Survey 20), ‘have been taken away’
JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ARCHAEOLOGY & HERITAGE 7
(Survey 14) and ‘should be recovered’(Survey 14), particularly pre-Hispanic mummies. This last state-
ment is particularly interesting. During our project, the elders of Ollagüe constantly indicated that
there had been excavations of ‘mummy families’in the Cosca and non-specified sectors, and that
these were now in the hands of people and institutions outside the community. While it can be
difficult to trace back the archaeological contexts and present-day locations of mummies coming
from this specific area, the practices described by many interviewees were very common in the
past. The disturbance of archaeological contexts is not without controversy, since not only foreign
agents partook in such practices. One interviewee mentioned that in the 80’s, he found a mummy
with ‘a quipu and sandbags’that he brought to the mayor of the commune, who gave him 5000
pesos in exchange for the mummy (US$6). He has no record of the mummy’s fate. Another intervie-
wee stated that there are currently people in the town of Ollagüe who are selling things from Cohasa,
a nearby village where there is a ‘mummy family’. For the interviewee, ‘people are afraid to go’to
Cohasa, because it is a place haunted by the presence of mummies. Similar stories are also included
in the 2008 report of the Historical Truth and New Deal Commission with Indigenous Peoples, in
which a ‘deplorable situation’is pointed out in a complaint made by the community concerning
‘the loss of an Inca archaeological context found in the Quebrada de Cohasa, more than 20 years
ago, of which there is no information to date’(Comisión Verdad Histórica y Nuevo Trato con los
Pueblos Indígenas 2008, 413). While these remains’whereabouts are unknown, the community, to
this day, is waiting for their repatriation. Elders constantly emphasized and expressed their desire
for these human remains to return to Ollagüe.
Repatriation is a widely discussed subject (Atalay 2012; Colwell-Chanthaphonh 2012) to which the
people of Ollagüe are particularly sensitive (Ayala et al. 2003; Ayala, Avendaño, and Cárdenas 2003).
The archaeological vestiges of the pre-Hispanic past, and especially the mummies, are elements that
put in tension the modern logic of a linear temporality, in which they are conceived as mere testimo-
nies of the past. Archaeologists’questionable practices in the past and present have made the inhabi-
tants of Ollagüe very concerned and critical of the discipline’s objectives.
The sulphur camps and the industrial past of Ollagüe
Concerning the specific question of the sulphur camps of Ollagüe (What do you know about the
sulphur camps near Ollagüe?), most informants highlighted their role as population centres. This is
a particularly important topic, because since the end of the nineteenth century, Ollagüe has seen
important demographic changes. Table 1 presents the population in the municipality, according
to censuses carried out from 1895 to 2017. Variations over the years can be understood in relation
to different waves of migration towards the municipality, having to do mainly with the boom and
later decline of the sulphur and borax mining industry.
We observe two great moments. In the decade of 1940, a period marked by a great State impulse
to develop the sulphur industry and, therefore, important migratory waves of workers arrived in
Ollagüe and the surrounding camps. A second moment is observed in the 1982 census which
shows that, despite a significant increase in population in the previous years, a sustained decline
in population began in this decade, a phenomenon that culminated in 1992 with the final closure
of Amincha, the last active sulphur camp of the region. Following Bengoa (2004, 208), the final
balance sheets on migration for 1993 showed a population growth rate of −47%, a depopulation
trend that continues to this day. What we show through this table is that the movements of popu-
lation from and towards the municipality have a direct relation with its mining-industrial boom and
bust. Local historical experiences such as those associated with Ollagüe’s sulphur mining past are
necessary to understand the global developments of capitalist expansion. Demographic changes
affect both the workforce and the size of the market, both key variables on which the industry is
based (Kirsch 1977).
Interviewees and survey respondents also pointed out, regarding sulphur camps, that ‘many
people lived there’(Survey 26) and that there were ‘a lot of foreign labor (Bolivians)’(Survey 31).
8F. RIVERA ET AL.
The seasonal migration of men, women, and children between Chile and Bolivia, from one side of the
international border to the other, was a common and long-standing phenomenon throughout the
twentieth century. As an inhabitant of Ollagüe remembers:
They (the sulphur miners) were …it seems they were from Bolivia. But that is how they lived at that time (…)No
one said that this person was from Chile and this person was from Bolivia, people just lived (Interviewee 2
(female), Ollagüe).
Migration is a recurring theme and an important subject. Interviews highlight that throughout the
twentieth century, migrants either contributing with capital or seeking temporary jobs constantly
arrived at mining camps.
And then (…) as the railroad from here to Bolivia was built, the English appeared. The Americans and the Eur-
opeans have always exploited that environment of Bolivia (Interviewee 3 (male), Ollagüe).
Another interviewee notes,
The first who arrived…as merchants if we can say, to exploit the material (sulphur) as fuel, were foreigners. I even
knew the owner of this corner …of that house you see there, who was Spanish. Then some Turks arrived, peoplesay.
I knew them by name only. The Chinese arrived, pure foreigners. Then they already saw that there was traffic, they
began to buy those fuels and send them to Calama, Antofagasta, I don’t know where (Interviewee 1 (male), Ollagüe).
Bolivian miners were for the most part the ones who were attracted to the sulphur centres of Ollagüe.
Many of them originated from the indigenous communities surrounding the sulphur mines and
worked for short periods determined by the obligations of the agricultural cycle in their places of
origin (Vilches and Morales 2017). A former worker remembers how the recruitment method was
carried out in Amincha:
The people there, from Amincha, up in the mine, at 6000 meters, 5000 and so many meters (…) the Chileans who
were in Amincha were mechanics, let’s say, electricians (…) even the boss was Bolivian, so there was almost no …
they were pure Bolivian people (laughs). The Bolivians come and work (…) There is a company and it says ‘I need
that many people’, the interested people arrive, ‘what nationality are you?’,‘I am Bolivian’,‘ah ok’,‘you?’,‘no, I am
Chilean’,‘ah no’.(…) That was happening here! (Interviewee 1 (male), Ollagüe).
In the 1950s, the American engineer William Rudolph, who worked for the American transnational
mining company ‘Anaconda’at the Chuquicamata copper mine, was one of the first to refer to
this situation of ethnic or national distinction. He also mentioned the conflicts and abuses suffered
by indigenous workers:
The indigenous workers commonly take jobs at the sulphur mines when not needed at their villages for repairing
irrigation ditches, plowing, sowing, and harvesting. Working the two types in the same gangs is not productive of
best results, for the Chilean looks down upon the indigenous worker and abuses him (Rudolph 1952, 576).
The international frontier, roughly porous during the twentieth century, slowly became a fundamen-
tal transformative agent leading to social and ethnic differentiation in the sulphur industry. In this
context, one important recent event was the adoption, in 1974, of the Executive Order 498. Promul-
gated under the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet in Chile, this document sought to regulate the
transit situation in the border area of the region, decreeing entry, transit, and residence permits
for a maximum of 50 Bolivian workers carrying out temporary work in Chilean mining camps. This
document is important for several reasons. First, it was promulgated just ten months after the military
coup d’état of 11 September 1973, which meant greater control of the country’s borders. Secondly,
because of the location of Ollagüe and its sulphur camps scattered along the international border,
these movements needed to be regulated in the eyes of the new dictatorial government. The
latter involved mainly the identification and registration of the local population, as well as the
control of the movement of miners working for Chilean sulphur companies. A series of decrees
and laws followed and were promulgated from this period, as a form of control of the territory, of
the productive territories of mining, and of the movement of people and goods.
4
The control
measures imposed by the dictatorship eventually led to the consolidation of ethnic (indigenous/
JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ARCHAEOLOGY & HERITAGE 9
non-indigenous) and national (Chilean/Bolivian) differences between workers and affected both per-
ceptions of identity regarding the origin of the workers and perceptions of social differentiation in the
camps themselves.
In addition to this situation of migration and movement, the arrival and development of mining
companies imposed a new and distinct form of spatial organization, leading to a third form of social
differentiation (low or high-status workers). New ways of inhabiting through housing camps at high-
altitude changed perceptions and relationships with the environment, transforming volcanos and
Andean landscapes into productive territories, modifying the ecological, economic and, mainly,
the social space of Ollagüe.
The company used to (build) camps, like lines of houses. In Amincha when you go, or if you already went, there
you will see the employee’s houses, the administration, all that. And then there are the other camps, like …
second class houses (Interviewee 1 (male), Ollagüe).
As demonstrated in other industrial contexts (see, for example, Cowie 2011), new camps and their
first- and second-class houses reveal that sulphur mining and capitalist expansion appear as a histori-
cal event that marks a turning point in the transformation of power relations, work conditions and
ways of inhabiting the territory (Figure 4).
Regarding the industrial activities carried out on the camps, responses mainly stated that ‘much of
Ollagüe’s past is in those camps that processed sulfur’(Survey 14). It is interesting to underline some
answers that could be considered as going against accepted knowledge, such as, for example, the
assertion that ‘they worked extracting sulphur from the skirts of volcanoes’(Survey 32). Technically,
sulphur mining in the volcanoes of the Ollagüe area was characterized by extraction in summits and
not on slopes. Another example is the assertion that sulphur ‘was one of the largest sources of econ-
omic support in Chile, and when it ceased to be sold, there was a great economic fall in our country,
since it was the most extracted and sold resource’(Survey 28). This statement overlooks the fact that
the Chilean sulphur industry was always marginal in comparison with other extractive mining indus-
tries (i.e. saltpeter, copper). Nevertheless, being open to alternative interpretations of these ruined
landscapes offers a complementary perspective of the many factors contributing to the construction
of historical narratives. As Holtorf (2005, 548) notes: ‘In the final analysis, the significance of
Figure 4. Workers’houses in Buenaventura (Photo by Francisco Rivera).
10 F. RIVERA ET AL.
archaeology may lie less in any specific insights gained about the past than in the very process of
engaging with the material remains of the past in the present’. In Ollagüe, these interpretations
reveal how significant and tragic the decline of sulphur exploitation, and the consequences of its
abandonment were for its peoples, showing that the perception of a locally deindustrialized area
is intimately related to perceptions of an economic crisis on a national scale.
In sum, mining work and wage labour were the determining factors in the emergence of a new
model of livelihood, and in the human concentration within new mining camps. However, a nostalgic
view of a lively mining landscape and of multiple movements across the border are counterbalanced
by the current state of abandonment of the sites. Survey responses highlight that the camps ‘now
remain pure ruins’(Survey 24), three of them referring to them as ‘ghost towns’(Survey 9, 10, 34).
As one interviewee pointed out:
Now there’s nothing. All the camps are just walls, there are no more people. Nobody lives there anymore (Inter-
viewee 2 (female), Ollagüe).
These ruined landscapes are the result of state policies. During the twentieth century, modernization
projects were reinforced in Chile based mainly on the state support of industrialization and mining
expansion through direct investments, credits, and subventions to develop domestic markets. This econ-
omic context lasted until the 1970s, when Pinochet’s dictatorship dismantled industrialization policies.
The new neoliberal economic plans of openness to the international free market, privatization, dereg-
ulation and especially the non-State intervention, doomed any industrialization efforts (Salazar 2003).
Sulphur camps as Historic Monuments
The last question on the survey was ‘What do you think of the sulphur camps being possibly declared
as Historic Monuments? Do you think this could benefit the community?’. This question allowed eval-
uating the future of these sites, as well as how could this change the future perceptions of the people
from the community towards these places. Orange (2008), for example, explored how the desig-
nation of Cornish Mining as World Heritage by UNESCO transformed the residents’perceptions
and forms of experience. Such studies suggest alternative approaches to the traditional paradigm
of heritage preservation (DeSilvey 2017), which in some cases, have led to the alienation of sites,
objects, and practices that are incorporated into the social life of local communities (Heinich 2009;
Herzfeld 2015). The possibility of mining camps being declared as Historical Monuments opens ques-
tions that we discussed elsewhere (Rivera and Lorca 2010), and that will certainly need further exam-
ination in the future. However, this possibility brought positive responses from all those interviewed.
They stated that such declarations would be beneficial for the community because it would promote
local tourism, therefore bringing economic benefits. It would allow Ollagüe residents ‘to know more’
(Survey 8) and could help spread local history, but most of all, it would help protect these camps from
abandonment and deterioration.
We also evaluated the intervention (or ‘event’) of the PAAC. We were particularly interested in
answers to this question because we are aware that we also manipulated, through research, the
sulphur mining ‘historical continuum’of Ollagüe. Through a manipulation of objects and memories,
and by declaring a site a monument of national interest, we would also participate in the production
of the recent past. By stressing the role of our archaeological practice as another historical event, we
were aware that this reinforcement of the sites’temporality is transmitted through modern and colo-
nial notions of heritage (Smith 2006), a heritage that objectifies time and identity, and that is possible
as far as it is isolated and made visible.
The temporality of Ollagüe’s heritage
Interviews with former workers and the surveys conducted in Ollagüe show that the community’s
relationship with industrial sites goes beyond a positivist attitude that treats material remains as
JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ARCHAEOLOGY & HERITAGE 11
mere objects of knowledge (Kalazich 2016; Mamani Condori 1996). The research focusing on the
temporality of Ollagüe’s industrial past also shows that sulphur mining history moves on fluctuating
fields. While it is experienced on the sites as an evocative subject of nostalgia, this history is also
officially defined through heritage State-policies. Ollagüe’sulphur mining is situated in a temporality
that overlaps the present and the past and the camp of Amincha is the best example that illustrates
this juxtaposition of different forms of time. Following the closure of its activities in 1992, Amincha
has, to this day, continued to be privately owned by the Carrasco family, former mining entrepre-
neurs. Its current state of (good) conservation is explained by the fact that the owners maintain
an indirect control, through caretakers and villagers, preserving the site for the future in the hope
that it can be used again as a camp in industrial activities. Despite the care that the owners
invest in its protection, Amincha is degrading every day. The site shows a process that changes
and transforms it as a result of the absence of an alternative heritage policy to preserve it.
Amincha won’t be protected following traditional guidelines and, in consequence, it is inevitably
and slowly degrading in a slow process of ‘ruination’(Pétursdóttir 2013). The site illustrates that
because of their proximity to the present, industrial sites are not temporally remote enough to be
oriented in a discourse about the past and, therefore, about heritage (González-Ruibal 2017).
Amincha also exemplifies the industrial-linear time that transforms the present into ruins, while sim-
ultaneously preserving industrial remains in the hopes that mining activities will return to the region
in the future (Figure 5).
In Ollagüe, there is a position that values the knowledge of the past as a relevant resource for iden-
tity and historical memory. This knowledge is valued both for the material past as well as for certain
traditional and immaterial practices that people seek to revitalize and that could become potential
sources of economic development (i.e. traditional weaving). There is also a strong association
between the recent history of the community and the industrial activities developed during the twen-
tieth century, particularly the installation of the railway and the ‘boom and bust’of the sulphur industry.
The interviews and survey are important as a collaborative effort because they have framed our
research praxis and agenda for the future. We see a positive evaluation of the community towards
the realization of some institutional or governmental policies, such as the development of the
Figure 5. Warehouse in Amincha (Photo by Francisco Rivera).
12 F. RIVERA ET AL.
museum and the possible declaration of sulphur camps as Historical Monuments. These policies are
seen both in terms of knowledge and preservation of the history of Ollagüe and as possible sources of
touristic and economic development. While the economic development of Ollagüe based on its
industrial heritage is perhaps unrealistic, this industrial centre’s history and its specificities are of
great value, not only as an important agent in the regional and national mining history, but as a
local player in a worldwide transition to a capitalist-based economy. Interviews and surveys also
showed that industrial material culture and heritage policies are active political elements in the
reconstruction of memories, of local identities, and in ethnic and territorial claims and discourses,
opening an alternative position on how past events and archaeological sites are remembered and
reproduced in current historical narratives (Ayala 2008; Ayala, Avendaño, and Cárdenas 2003; Jofré
2007; King 2012; Meskell 2005).
Conclusions
Modernization and capitalist expansion, expressed through mining expansion and industrialization,
characterize the twentieth century in northern Chile (Pinto and Ortega 1990). The development of
extractive industries and the imposition of a new pattern of economic logic related to global circuits
of capitalist markets integrated indigenous communities as wage workers.
The arrival of large-scale mining in the Andes was interpreted mainly as a rupture, defined by
changes in lifestyles and a unidirectional temporality going from peasants to miners (DeWind
1987). In Ollagüe, through an evaluation of the industrial past and the temporality of these socioe-
conomic changes, we have seen that it was less a rupture of linear time, than the juxtaposition of
‘another kind of time’(Ssorin-Chaikov 2017; Vilches and Morales 2017). Assessing industrial tempor-
ality and the recent past of Ollagüe allowed us in PAAC to move from a linear conception of history to
a multi-temporal conception of memory, evaluating the impacts of the events of the past in the
present (Olivier 2008).
Evaluating industrial time through a collaborative approach with the community leads to a novel
exploration of the events and places that marked the people of Ollagüe’s memory, opening the possi-
bility to give industrialheritage its proper visibility and going against the ideathat industrialsites do not
possess heritage value (Edensor 2005). In Ollagüe, the ruins of the sulphur mining could function as
places of interpretation and experience (DeSilvey and Edensor 2012), allowing the possibility to
explore and to propose an archaeology that loses its academic authority of interpretation. As DeSilvey
and Edensor (2012,471)pointout:‘As sites characterized by multiple temporalities, ruins offer oppor-
tunities for constructing alternative versions of the past, and for recouping untold and marginalized
stories’. An examination of the industrial time of Ollagüe shows how each event of its recent past
will have a different retention in people’s memory depending on the objects with which this
memory is associated. This association is an ongoing process that must be constantly evaluated.
Whereas archaeological research has enabled the growth of heritage policies and a discussion
about the multiple temporalities of the recent past, we also sought to explore other subjects, such
as the role of our research as another historical event in the biography of the sites and their industrial
landscape (Kopytoff1986; Morrison 2016; Roymans et al. 2009). Industrial material culture should no
longer be understood solely as a set of nostalgic artefacts providing a window to ‘discover’the past.
They also, and mainly, become political devices for producing knowledge of the past in the present
(Shepherd 2002).
Assessing the temporality of the industrial past of Ollagüe through a collaborative approach,
allows us to understand that material culture is not only as inert remains of a transformative socio-
historical and economic phenomenon (i.e. modernization, capitalism), nor as the mere material by-
products of global circuits of capitalist-based production and consumption. We highlight that indus-
trial ruins are not simply historical echoes of sulphur mining in Ollagüe but are also the reason for its
historical presence and, to paraphrase Rivera Cusicanqui (2010), they are mainly an expression of its
indigenous modernity.
JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ARCHAEOLOGY & HERITAGE 13
Notes
1. Available here: https://www.leychile.cl/Navegar?idNorma=28892.
2. All interviews and citation were translated by the authors.
3. Resinous moss plant, emerald green in colour, used mainly as fuel in mining smelting furnaces.
4. The Executive Order 2868, of 21 September 1979, establishes the new territorial division of the country, and with it
also that of the municipality of Ollagüe. The Executive Order 1204, of 3 November 1980,indicates the limits of the
Antofagasta region. The Law 20554, of 13 January 2012, creates the local police court in Ollagüe.
Acknowledgements
An early version of this paper was presented at the 2018 SHA Annual Conference in New Orleans. We thank Kaeleigh
Herstad and Daniel Trepal for their organization of the symposium and for their reviews. We are grateful to Carmen
Achu Colque, Eugenio González and the Quechua community of Ollagüe for their support to this research, Tiziana
Gallo and the anonymous reviewers for their precious insights and commentaries.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Funding
This work was supported by FONDART (Fondo Nacional para el Desarrollo Cultural y las Artes, Chile, Convocatoria 2017,
Folio #400081) and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (Vanier CGS).
Notes on contributors
Francisco Rivera is an archaeologist, currently a Ph.D. candidate in anthropology at the University of Montreal, Canada.
He is a consultant for the firm SurAndino Estudios Arqueológicos y Patrimoniales Ltda and received several grants for
research projects in the north of Chile. His research focusses on the historical archaeology of capitalism and the
anthropology of industrial mining. He is the author and co-author of articles and books such as El Mineral de Cara-
coles. Arqueología e historia de un distrito minero de la Región de Antofagasta (1870–1989) (Fondart, 2008) and
coeditor of El Perfume del Diablo: Azufre, Memoria y Materialidades en el Alto Cielo (Ollagüe, s. XX) (RIL Editores,
2020, in press).
Paula González is an archaeologist, social anthropologist and independent researcher. She has carried out several
archaeological and ethnographic fieldwork in indigenous communities in northern Chile, highlighting the practical
link between the two disciplines and the modern processes of memory construction through the material world. She
is coeditor of El Perfume del Diablo: Azufre, Memoria y Materialidades en el Alto Cielo (Ollagüe, s. XX) (RIL Editores,
2020, in press).
Rodrigo Lorca is an archaeologist and a consultant for the firm SurAndino Estudios Arqueológicos y Patrimoniales Ltda.
He has worked in various research projects in the north of Chile, specializing in pre-Columbian archaeology, historical
archaeology of urban contexts, and the analysis of historical material culture. He is the author and coauthor of articles
and books, including El Mineral de Caracoles. Arqueología e historia de un distrito minero de la Región de Antofagasta
(1870–1989) (Fondart, 2008) and coeditor of El Perfume del Diablo: Azufre, Memoria y Materialidades en el Alto Cielo
(Ollagüe, s. XX) (RIL Editores, 2020, in press).
Wilfredo Faundes is an archaeologist and independent researcher. He has worked in several research projects and CRM
as excavation and survey assistant, primarily in northern Chile. He has also carried out experimental archaeology and
didactic workshops for children and youths in Chile and Argentina and taught lithic classes in the archaeology
program at Universidad de Tarapacá. He is currently working on developing experimental approaches to lithic technol-
ogy, a research project led by Dr. Calogero Santoro.
ORCID
Francisco Rivera http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4938-7392
14 F. RIVERA ET AL.
References
Atalay, Sonya. 2012.Community-Based Archaeology: Research With, by, and for Indigenous and Local Communities.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Ayala, Patricia. 2008.Políticas del pasado: indígenas, arqueólogos y Estado en Atacama. San Pedro de Atacama: Qillqa
Ediciones.
Ayala, Patricia. 2017.“Arqueología y pueblos indígenas: los casos Aymara, Atacameño, Mapuche y Rapa Nui.”Boletín de la
Sociedad Chilena de Arqueología 47: 69–92.
Ayala, Patricia, Sergio Avendaño, Mónica Bahamondes, Ulises Cárdenas, and Álvaro Romero. 2003.“Comentarios y dis-
cusiones en el encuentro “Reflexión sobre patrimonio cultural, comunidades indígenas y arqueología”.”Chungara,
Revista de Antropología Chilena 35 (2): 379–409.
Ayala, Patricia, Sergio Avendaño, and Ulises Cárdenas. 2003.“Vinculaciones entre una arqueología social y la comunidad
indígena de Ollagüe (Región de Antofagasta, Chile).”Chungara, Revista de Antropología Chilena 35 (2): 275–285.
Beck, Wendy, and Margaret Somerville. 2005.“Conversations Between Disciplines: Historical Archaeology and Oral
History at Yarrawarra.”World Archaeology 37 (3): 468–483.
Bengoa, José, ed. 2004.La memoria olvidada: historia de los pueblos indígenas de Chile, Publicaciones del Bicentenario.
Santiago: Andros Impresores.
Blakemore, Harold. 1990.From the Pacific to La Paz: the Antofagasta (Chili) and Bolivia Railway Company, 1888–1988.
London: Lester Crook Academics/Antofagasta Holdings.
Cherry, John F. 2011.“Still Not Digging, Much.”Archaeological Dialogues 18 (1): 10–17. doi:10.1017/S1380203811000055.
Cipolla, Craig N., James Quinn, and Jay Levy. 2019.“Theory in Collaborative Indigenous Archaeology: Insights from
Mohegan.”American Antiquity 84 (1): 127–142. doi:10.1017/aaq.2018.69.
Colwell-Chanthaphonh, Chip. 2012.“Archaeology and Indigenous Collaboration.”In Archaeological Theory Today, edited
by Ian Hodder, 267–291. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Comisión Verdad Histórica y Nuevo Trato con los Pueblos Indígenas. 2008.Informe de la Comisión Verdad Histórica y
Nuevo Trato con los Pueblos Indígenas. Santiago: Comisionado Presidencial para Asuntos Indígenas.
Cowie, Sarah E. 2011.The Plurality of Power: An Archaeology of Industrial Capitalism. New York: Springer.
DeSilvey, Caitlin. 2017.Curated Decay. Heritage Beyond Saving. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
DeSilvey, Caitlin, and Tim Edensor. 2012.“Reckoning With Ruins.”Progress in Human Geography 37 (4): 465–485.
DeWind, Josh. 1987.Peasants Become Miners: The Evolution of Industrial Mining Systems in Peru, 1902–1974. New York:
Garland Pub.
Edensor, Tim. 2005.Industrial Ruins: Spaces, Aesthetics and Materiality. Oxford: Berg.
Evans, James, and Phil Jones. 2011.“The Walking Interview: Methodology, Mobility and Place.”Applied Geography 31:
849–858.
Finn, Janet L. 1998.Tracing the Veins: Of Copper, Culture, and Community from Butte to Chuquicamata. Berkeley: University
of California Press.
Flores Galindo, Alberto. 1974.Los mineros de la Cerro de Pasco, 1900–1930. Un intento de caracterización social. Lima:
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Departamento Académico de Ciencias Sociales, Area de Sociología.
Galaz-Mandakovic, Damir. 2017.“Turbinas y electricidad para la mina, lámparas a parafina para la población. Crónica de
una asimetría del capitalismo minero en Tocopilla (1914–1942).”Estudios Atacameños 54: 179–200.
González-Ruibal, Alfredo. 2017.“Ruins of the South.”In Contemporary Archaeology and the City. Creativity, Ruination, and
Political Action, edited by Laura McAtackney and Krysta Ryzewski, 149–170. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gundermann, Hans. 2003.“Sociedades indígenas, municipio y etnicidad: la transformación de los espacios políticos
locales andinos.”Estudios Atacameños 25: 55–77.
Harrison, Rodney. 2011.“Surfaces Assemblages. Towards an Archaeology in and of the Present.”Archaeological Dialogues
18 (2): 141–161.
Heinich, Nathalie. 2009.La fabrique du patrimoine. De la cathédrale à la petite cuillère. Paris: Maison des Sciences de
l’Homme.
Herzfeld, Michael. 2015.“Heritage and the Right to the City: When Securing the Past Creates Insecurity in the Present.”
Heritage & Society 8 (1): 3–23.
Holtorf, Cornelius. 2005.“Beyond Crusades: How (Not) to Engage With Alternative Archaeologies.”World Archaeology 37
(4): 544–551. doi:1080/00438240500395813.
Jofré, Daniela. 2007.“Reconstructing the Politics of Indigenous Identity in Chile.”Archaeologies: Journal of the World
Archaeological Congress 3 (1): 16–38. doi:10.1007/s11759-007-9000-5.
Kalazich, Fernanda. 2016.“La retórica de la apropiación: Patrimonio cultural indígena y ciencias sociales.”In Patrimonio y
pueblos indígenas. Reflexiones desde una perspectiva interdisciplinaria e intercultural, edited by Centro de Estudios
Interculturales e Indígenas (CIIR), 99–108. Santiago: CIIR-Pehuén.
King, Julia A. 2012.Archaeology, Narrative, and the Politics of the Past: The View from Southern Maryland. Knoxville:
University of Tennessee Press.
Kirsch, Henry W. 1977.Industrial Development in a Traditional Society. The Conflict of Entrepreneurship and Modernization in
Chile. Gainesville: The University Presses of Florida.
JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ARCHAEOLOGY & HERITAGE 15
Kopytoff, Igor. 1986.“The Cultural Biography of Things: Commoditization as Process.”In The Social Life of Things:
Commodities in Cultural Perspective, edited by Arjun Appadurai, 64–91. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mallon, Florencia. 1986.“Labor Migration, Class Formation, and Class Consciousness Among Peruvian Miners: The Central
Highlands, 1900–1930.”In Proletarians and Protest: The Roots of Class Formation in an Industrializing World, edited by
Michael Hanagan and Charles Stephenson, 197–230. New York: Greenwood Press.
Mamani Condori, Carlos. 1996.“History and Prehistory in Bolivia: What About the Indians?”In Contemporary Archaeology
in Theory: A Reader, edited by Robert W. Preucel and Ian Hodder, 632–645. Cambridge: Blackwell.
Meskell, Lynn. 2005.“Archaeological Ethnography: Conversations Around Kruger National Park.”Archaeologies: Journal of
the World Archaeological Congress 1 (1): 81–100.
Mondaca, Carlos, and Alberto Díaz. 2014.“La escuela de papel. Agencias y agentes educativos en Atacama. Municipio de
Calama y comunidades atacameñas (1888–1950).”Estudios Atacameños 47: 117–133.
Morrison, Kathleen D. 2016.“On Putting Time in Its Place: Archaeological Practice and the Politics of Time in Southern
India.”Cambridge Archaeological Journal 26 (4): 619–641. doi:10.1017/S0959774316000421.
Nash, June. 1979.We Eat the Mines and the Mines Eat Us: Dependency and Exploitation in Bolivian tin mines. New York:
Columbia University Press.
Nicholas, George P. 2008.“Melding Science and Community Values: Indigenous Archaeology Programs and the
Negotiation of Cultural Differences.”In Collaborating at The Trowel’s Edge: Teaching and Learning in Indigenous
Archaeology, edited by Stephen W. Silliman, 228–249. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
Olivier, Laurent. 2008.Le sombre abîme du temps: mémoire et archéologie. Paris: Seuil.
Orange, Hilary. 2008.“Industrial Archaeology: Its Place Within the Academic Discipline, the Public Realm and the Heritage
Industry.”Industrial Archaeology Review 30 (2): 83–95. doi:10.1179/174581908X347292.
Ortega, Luis M. 2005.Chile en ruta al capitalismo: cambio, euforia y depresión 1850–1880. Santiago: LOM Ediciones &
Centro de Investigaciones Diego Barros Arana.
Pavez, Jorge. 2012.“Fetiches kongo, momias atacameñas y soberanía colonial. Trayectoria de Gustavo Le Paige s.j. (1903–
1980).”Estudios Atacameños 44: 35–72.
Pétursdóttir, Þóra. 2013.“Concrete Matters: Ruins of Modernity and the Things Called Heritage.”Journal of Social
Archaeology 13 (1): 31–53.
Pinto, Julio, and Luis Ortega. 1990.Expansión minera y desarrollo industrial: un caso de crecimiento asociado (Chile 1850–
1914). Santiago: Universidad de Santiago de Chile.
Platt, Tristan. 1983.“Conciencia andina y conciencia proletaria. Qhuyaruna y ayllu en el norte de Potosí.”HISLA 2: 47–73.
Rivera, Francisco, and Rodrigo Lorca. 2010.“Uso social de una arqueología histórica del capitalismo y los dilemas de su
patrimonialización: el caso del Mineral de Capote.”Revista Chilena de Antropología 22: 33–56. doi:10.5354/0719-1472.
2011.13848.
Rivera, Francisco, Rodrigo Lorca, and Paula González. 2018.Mineros del Alto Cielo. Arqueología e historia en Ollagüe (s. XX).
Informe Final Fondart Convocatoria 2017, Folio 400081. Santiago: FONDART.
Rivera Cusicanqui, Silvia. 2010.Ch’ixinakax utxiwa: una reflexión sobre prácticas y discursos descolonizadores. Buenos Aires:
Tinta Limón.
Rodríguez Ostria, Gustavo. 1991.El socavón y el sindicato. Ensayos históricos sobre los trabajadores mineros. Siglos XIX–XX.
La Paz: ILDIS.
Roymans, Nico, Fokke Gerritsen, Cor Van der Heijden, Koos Bosma, and Jan Kolen. 2009.“Landscape Biography as
Research Strategy: The Case of the South Netherlands Project.”Landscape Research 34 (3): 337–359. doi:10.1080/
01426390802381185.
Rudolph, William E. 1952.“Sulphur in Chile.”Geographical Review 42 (4): 562–590.
Salazar, Gabriel. 2003.Historia de la acumulación capitalista en Chile: apuntes de clase. Santiago de Chile: LOM Ediciones.
Salazar-Soler, Carmen. 2002.Anthropologie des mineurs des Andes: dans les entrailles de la terre. Paris: L’Harmattan.
Sanhueza, Cecilia, and Hans Gundermann. 2007.“Estado, expansión capitalista y sujetos sociales en Atacama (1879–
1928).”Estudios Atacameños 34: 113–136.
Shepherd, Nick. 2002.“Disciplining Archaeology: The Invention of South African Prehistory, 1923–1953.”Kronos (Bellville,
South Africa) 28: 127–145.
Smith, Laurajane. 2006.Uses of Heritage. New York: Routledge.
Ssorin-Chaikov, Nikolai. 2017.Two Lenins. A Brief Anthropology of Time. Chicago: Hau Books.
Thomas, Julian. 1996.Time, Culture, and Identity: An Interpretative Archaeology. London: Routledge.
Tilley, Christopher. 1994.A Phenomenology of Landscape: Places, Paths, and Monuments. Oxford: Berg.
Vilches, Flora, Cristina Garrido, Patricia Ayala, and Ulises Cárdenas. 2015.“The Contemporary Past of San Pedro de
Atacama, Northern Chile: Public Archaeology?”Archaeologies: Journal of the World Archaeological Congress 11 (3):
372–399.
Vilches, Flora, and Héctor Morales. 2017.“From Herders to Wage Laborers and Back Again: Engaging With Capitalism in
the Atacama Puna Region of Northern Chile.”International Journal of Historical Archaeology 21: 369–388.
Vilches, Flora, Lorena Sanhueza, Cristina Garrido, Cecilia Sanhueza, and Ulises Cárdenas. 2014.“La minería de la sal
durante el siglo XX en San Pedro de Atacama, Chile (II Región): Entre la explotación artesanal y la
industrialización.”Estudios Atacameños 48: 209–228.
16 F. RIVERA ET AL.
Vilches, Flora, Lorena Sanhueza, Cecilia Sanhueza, UlisesCárdenas, and Cristina Garrido. 2012.Proyecto Fondecyt 1120087.
Expansión capitalista e identidad en los oasis de San Pedro de Atacama, 1880–1980: un enfoque interdisciplinario.
Santiago: CONICYT.
Vogel, Robert M. 1969.“On the Real Meaning of Industrial Archaeology.”Historical Archaeology 3: 87–93.
Watkins, Joe. 2000.Indigenous Archaeology. American Indian Values and Scientific Practice. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press.
Yi’En, Cheng. 2014.“Telling Stories of the City: Walking Ethnography, Affective Materialities, and Mobile Encounters.”
Space and Culture 17 (3): 211–223. doi:10.1177/1206331213499468.
JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY ARCHAEOLOGY & HERITAGE 17
