Integrating indigenous perspectives for the study of the maritime cultural landscapes in the Colombian Caribbean: an ancestral approach to the nautical space of the San José Galleon

In recent years, Colombia has implemented new conceptual, theoretical, and interpretive approaches to understanding past and, therefore, contemporary human dynamics in its scientific projects on maritime and underwater archaeology. This discipline is relatively new in the country, having developed over the past three decades. However, significant progress has been made in staff training, capacity building, and applying new methods that enhance the comprehension of maritime archaeological sites. One example is indigenous archaeologies, whose approaches and analytical contributions have recently been applied to shipwrecks and their associated contexts, including terrestrial, coastal, and underwater sites. The goal of this article is to present and discuss recent research advances in Indigenous Maritime Archaeology in the Colombian Caribbean. Particular attention is given to how this field has contributed to a more comprehensive understanding of nautical spaces from an ancestral perspective, with a focus on the San José galleon, which sank on 8 June 1708. These environments are understood as places where everything related to boats occurs. Thus, they are not limited or conditioned solely by ships as objects or only the materiality itself. For it is there where human and natural (or physical) elements come together in the configuration of this landscape.

Introduction

Colombia, historically constituted as a multi-ethnic and multicultural country, has been shaped as a territory and maritime space in which all kinds of actors, knowledge, wisdom, heritage, perspectives, learning, and notions have converged around what defines us as a society. This is precisely where cultural heritage fits in, as it is the result of everything that has defined a society over years, decades, and even millennia. However, heritage does not lie isolated in the past. In reality, the role it plays in the present is as significant as any other aspect that constitutes contemporary society. What we have become today, whether we are aware of it or not, is the result of the tangible and intangible achievements and legacies of humans in the past. This, of course, is not limited to terrestrial environments. Indeed, the sea and what lies beneath it plays a decisive role in who we are today as a society. The physical connection of continents and islands, often so distant, revolutionized the world as we see it today.

However, non-physical connections have taken on an even more prominent role in recent years because, although this is nothing new for many sectors of society, new paradigms are emerging that are reshaping our understanding of the past. This is where Indigenous Archaeology in Colombia comes in, as unique and necessary as ever: to understand the territory, the sea, and the landscape in which both are articulated. At the same time, the contexts in which the vestiges of the past are found are highlighted: archaeological contexts, as we will see later (Chirimuscay, 2023; Cuéllar, 2023; Franco, 2021; Izquierdo, 2021; Londoño, 2021; Tarapues, 2022; Sarcina, 2021; Vasco, 2010).

Whether coastal, intertidal, or underwater, these sites full of cultural heritage provide vital answers for understanding the historical itineraries of Colombian society. Sometimes, shipwrecks lie there as a result of navigation accidents, adverse weather conditions, or great naval battles. In the case of the latter, in Cartagena de Indias (Colombian Caribbean), the San José galleon was located in 2015 at a depth of 600 m (Figure 1; ARC-DIMAR, 2022; Del Cairo et al., 2025).

Figure 1

Figure 1. Archaeological Context of the San José galleon Shipwreck (ARC-DIMAR, 2022, p. 145).

This ship, sunk during the Battle of Barú in a confrontation between the English and Spanish during the War of Succession (1701–1713), was sailing from Portobelo (now Panama) to Cartagena de Indias for a final stop before heading back to the Iberian Peninsula. Intercepted on the afternoon of June 8, 1708, by an English fleet of nearly a dozen ships, it was wrecked that night due to a structural failure of the hull, the rumbling of its own cannons, and the impact of enemy artillery (Jaramillo, 2025). As a result, a large number of remains settled on the seabed, providing evidence not only of the naval architecture of the period but also of transatlantic trade, life on board, and other aspects that characterize the maritime world of the early eighteenth century (Figure 2). Rather than going into detail about its historical context or the precise archaeological characterization of what has been identified to date, this article takes a slightly different approach.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Archaeological evidence lying on the seabed in the archaeological context of the San José galleon Shipwreck (ARC-DIMAR, 2022).

Thus, the purpose of this paper is to present, discuss, and analyze the advances made in Indigenous Maritime Archaeology in the Caribbean, specifically highlighting the case of the San José galleon. In particular, it will focus on how this ancestral approach has provided a comprehensive understanding of maritime landscapes (areas where human adaptation and transformation have shaped the coastal and marine spaces we know today) and nautical settings, understood as places where all activities related to ships occur, from their construction to their final resting places. These are the waters in which the San José sailed, fought, and ultimately met its fate. In this case, the analysis draws on the notions, perspectives, and interpretations formulated by the Arhuaco people, an indigenous group from the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta in the State of Magdalena, Colombian Caribbean, and one of more than 115 Indigenous peoples that make up Colombia.

In this sense, the article is divided into three sections. First, it presents the conceptual, interpretative, and methodological frameworks related to ancestral and Indigenous perspectives in archaeology. Second, it examines how such perspectives can be applied to the nautical spaces of Cartagena de Indias, particularly through the case of the San José galleon, while drawing on other examples from Colombia. Finally, it presents the analytical proposal for the configuration of the San José as Sacred Heritage. All of this was developed within the framework of the project “Towards the Heart of the San José Galleon,” an initiative led by the Almirante Padilla Naval School (ENAP) of the Colombian Navy (ARC), the Colombian Institute of Anthropology and History (ICANH), the Colombian Maritime Authority (DIMAR), and the Ministry of Culture, Arts, and Knowledge.

Combining interdisciplinary, intersectoral, and interinstitutional efforts, this project aimed at the protection and investigation of deep waters in this context belonging to Colombia's Submerged Cultural Heritage proposed, as one of its objectives, to carry out this reflection from the perspective of one of the researchers who is part of the Arhuaco Community within the framework of a community and indigenous component. In short, it focused on integrating these perspectives into the analysis of the archaeological context, providing a much more comprehensive and holistic overview when seeking to understand the San José galleon and its close link with humans and the world from the present day.

Conceptual, interpretative, and methodological approaches to the ancestral and indigenous in archaeology

The present analysis is based on the approach of (Smith and Wobst 2005, p. 5), who point out that archaeology has an intrinsically colonialist character, prioritizing materiality over spirituality and scientific knowledge over religious dimensions. However, the rights of certain communities over archaeological sites and artifacts have only begun to be acknowledged in recent decades (Smith and Wobst, 2005). This acknowledgment has prompted the development of new interpretive, theoretical, and methodological approaches to studying archaeological contexts. One of these is known as Indigenous archaeology.

(Nicholas and Watkins 2014, p. 3777) define indigenous archaeology as an approach that integrates a set of ideas, methods, and strategies aimed at discovering and interpreting the human past, which are permeated by the values, concerns, and objectives of indigenous communities themselves. In other words, the archaeological record can be understood from local perspectives, rather than being restricted to previously established interpretive frameworks (Londoño, 2021). Along the same lines, Nicholas (2008) conceives of it as both a theoretical and practical manifestation of the discipline of archaeology.

One of the most significant contributions of (Nicholas and Watkins 2014, p. 3778) is the identification of three central objectives of indigenous archaeology. The first is that the knowledge generated about the past should ensure that archaeological practices respect local values; the second is that local definitions of “meaning” should be incorporated into the processes of identifying and protecting heritage sites; and the third is that the results of archaeological research should be relevant and useful to living communities. These objectives highlight the importance of ancestral knowledge, transmitted mainly through oral tradition, as an essential tool for recognizing, interpreting, and safeguarding archaeological sites.

In line with these objectives, Nicholas and Watkins (2014) distinguish four categories through which Indigenous archaeology can operate: reactive, interpretive, reflexive, and transformative. Two of these are particularly relevant to the present analysis, the reflexive and the transformative, as they best align with the context of the San José galleon project. The reflexive dimension, perhaps the most significant for the discussion developed in this article, directly engages archaeological practice with communities, shaping it as a necessarily collaborative process in which methods are adapted to local needs, including ceremonial activities. Building upon this, the transformative dimension enables the redefinition of heritage objects and sites from alternative frameworks, opening the door to reevaluating interpretations of material culture in light of oral histories, traditions, local knowledge, and religious beliefs. Overall, applying these categories contributes to a more representative and responsible archaeology, attentive to ethics and issues of social justice (Nicholas and Watkins, 2014).

The application of both dimensions mentioned above inevitably leads to consideration of the relationship between the tangible and the intangible in archaeological practice. In this sense, (Cuéllar 2023, p. 13) introduces the concept of multiple ontologies in indigenous archaeology, defining it as a proposal that opens the possibility of understanding the world from diverse perspectives, recognizing the existence of different realities shaped by the worldviews and practices of those who inhabit them. Thus, the tangible relates to archaeological heritage and the materiality that composes it, while the intangible corresponds to the meanings, knowledge, and worldviews that give meaning to those objects.

However, archaeological heritage, beyond the materiality that constitutes it, is not confined to tangible elements. A fundamental concept that integrates and gives meaning to it is the notion of landscape, since objects are not isolated but form part of a broader spatial and cultural context. As (Cuéllar 2023, p. 16) points out, landscapes do not exist by themselves; they bring together expressions and products of the past with continuities, ruptures, transformations, and re-significations that have occurred over time. Understanding this is essential, since the landscape is not only a physical entity but also a social and symbolic construction that emerges from the relationship between people and space (Cuéllar, 2023).

So how can these issues be approached methodologically? Nicholas (2024) had already asked this question about how to integrate indigenous epistemologies with Western archaeological practices. He argues that there are established methodologies for bridging the two, such as community-based participatory research and related approaches, as well as alternative frameworks such as collaborative and ethnocritical archaeology. A key point he emphasizes (2024, pp. 145–146) is that both Western archaeology and indigenous knowledge seek to understand, explain, and teach about the world, although they do so through different methods, such as observation, experimentation, belief, and other means.

Methodological advances have drawn on various case studies conducted around the world. (Cuéllar 2023) mentions that the theoretical developments and concerns of indigenous archaeology emerged in North America, Australia, and Africa in the mid-twentieth century. However, Nicholas (2024) argues that the participation of indigenous peoples in archaeology is much older, as Australian indigenous communities have been involved in archaeological research since the mid-nineteenth century. Different case studies can be found in various compilations such as Indigenous Archaeologies: Decolonizing Theory and Practice (Smith and Wobst, 2005), Being and Becoming Indigenous Archaeologists (Nicholas, 2010), and its sequel Working as Indigenous Archaeologists (Nicholas and Watkins, 2014).

Notably, Latin America has not been left behind. Gnecco and Ayala (2010) compiled a book of case studies and reflections on the relationships between indigenous peoples and archaeological work in various Latin American countries, including Mexico, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Chile, Argentina, and Brazil.

Romero (2003) discusses the reasons for, and potential solutions to, the paradoxical situation in regions with large indigenous populations and numerous archaeological sites, where links between scientific archaeology and indigenous populations have been limited, particularly in the Arica and Parinacota provinces in northern Chile. In the case of Flores and Acuto (2015), they propose a collaborative effort based on a counterpoint between the archaeological and indigenous voices. This allows them to reflect on and produce knowledge about the past, archaeological work, and the needs, thoughts, and identities of the indigenous peoples of the Calchaquí Valley in the province of Salta and Argentina more broadly.

Mendizabal and Theodossopoulos (2012), on the other hand, propose a collaborative effort based on the Emberá community's interest in the material culture of different periods associated with their territory in eastern Panama. Viewing archaeological research from the perspective of indigenous knowledge contributes to the decolonization of the discipline by creating synergies between anthropology, archaeology and initiatives to consolidate indigenous tourism.

Ogburn (2007) explored the role of Inca identity in current conceptions and expressions of identity among the Saraguro people of Ecuador. He also examined the potential role of archaeology in exploring the connections between the Saraguro people and their past. This has enabled them to consolidate strong links with indigenous archaeology, allowing them to learn more about their past and preserve archaeological sites, as well as promoting indigenous tourism.

In Colombia, on the other hand, indigenous archaeology has been addressed in different archaeological contexts and regions of the country. For example, the research of Vasco (2010) is worth highlighting, as he provides a critical reflection on the role of archaeology in constructing indigenous identity, focusing specifically on the Guambía reserve, which is inhabited by the Misak (Guambiano) people in the Cauca department. In this study, he argues that archaeology should be considered an active social science in the vindication of indigenous communities, demonstrating how knowledge of the past can be a valuable tool in defending territory and reconstructing community identities.

(Cuéllar 2023), for his part, analyses the current relationship between indigenous communities in southwestern Colombia and archaeology. He questions the aims and epistemic bases of modern archaeology, thereby enabling the consolidation of new, multivocal narratives within the discipline and the region.

Franco (2021) challenges the archaeological concepts used to interpret material culture, aiming to eliminate the colonialist elements that have characterized the discipline since its inception. By emphasizing the perspectives of indigenous communities, he establishes a foundation for intercultural and decolonial reflection in archaeological projects in southwestern Colombia.

In the case of Chirimuscay (2023), he proposes a new archaeological approach that combines the epistemologies of traditional archaeology with those of indigenous peoples. This approach highlights the concept of the Nupirau, or “Birth of Water,” which symbolizes the return of wisdom through the codes and messages of petroglyphs given to the Misak-Misak people by nature. He argues that archaeology is not indigenous, but for indigenous peoples, and must be directly connected to the broad participation of Misak-Misak elders, leaders, and young people.

It is also worth mentioning the research carried out by Tarapues (2022), which draws on the spirituality of the Pasto region to encourage discussion between various viewpoints, including archaeological and indigenous perspectives. Tarapues thus proposes an alternative approach to the material traces of the past, one that is based on the cosmosophical and cosmocratic thinking of the Pastos people—particularly in Güel, an archaeological landscape located in southwestern Colombia, in the Nudo de la Waka, also known as the Pastos region.

Sarcina (2021) presents his work with the Santa María de la Antigua del Darién community in Colombia's Chocó region, demonstrating how archaeological practice can impact community relations at various levels. This work provides a roadmap for indigenous archaeological projects in areas of high tension or conflict, based on the equitable and decolonizing management of cultural heritage knowledge.

In northern Colombia, particularly in the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta, Londoño's (2021) study of the Kogui indigenous community is notable, as it analyses the various ontologies that shape perceptions and characteristics concerning materialities referred to as archaeological. Adopting the perspective of the indigenous community, the study proposes tools for understanding the meanings of these materialities. In this way, it sparks a critical debate on decolonial, indigenous, and community archaeologies.

Izquierdo (2021) combines a Western scientific vision with that of indigenous groups. He seeks to recognize the ancestral territory of the Arhuaco indigenous groups in Simunurwa, in the Sierra Nevada, by representing it through a multi-plane construction that expresses the four levels of Mother Earth. This is understood as a sacred entity guided by elders and spiritual leaders. Archaeological elements are also incorporated into the construction.

However, globally and in Colombia, indigenous archaeology has mainly been addressed in terrestrial contexts. However, the situation is different in underwater contexts: while significant advances have been made in this field internationally, they are almost non-existent in Colombia. As Briggs and Campbell (2023) point out, decolonization and collaboration with indigenous communities require greater commitment in the field of maritime archaeology, as recent studies show that collaborations can lead to new discoveries and that interpretations change when non-Western ways of thinking are applied.

For example, Australia is recognized in this field. McCarthy (2018) explains how the Western Australian Museum has pioneered the incorporation of indigenous perspectives and participation in its research programs, involving not only archaeologists and academics, but also indigenous communities and the public. One case study is that of Ward et al. (2018), who sought to raise awareness of indigenous prehistoric coastal and submerged archaeological landscapes in Australia, with the aim of developing a more inclusive policy that specifically involves traditional owners in the protection of maritime cultural heritage.

Similarly, research has been conducted in the United States on prehistoric submerged contexts. For example, Lemke (2022) examined the submerged landscapes of the Great Lakes of North America, combining archaeology and virtual reality with indigenous communities to explore how hunter-gatherers responded to variations in water levels during the Holocene. This study represented a significant achievement in integrating indigenous voices and interests into archaeology (Lemke, 2022). In this same context, Lemke and Freeland (2025) argue that archaeological research in these environments must incorporate the perspectives and knowledge of indigenous communities, adopting an ethical approach that recognizes colonial history and respects cultural practices.

However, indigenous archaeology is relevant not only in prehistoric contexts, but also in colonial contexts and those associated with shipwrecks. For example, McCarthy (2018) points out that indigenous narratives about shipwrecks have often been ignored; however, research that has included this perspective has shown that, in colonial contexts, archaeological interpretations lack credibility if they do not include the participation and perspective of indigenous communities. This is because these narratives provide valuable information about historical interactions between indigenous peoples and Europeans (McCarthy, 2018). According to (Cuéllar 2023), indigenous archaeology has opened the possibility of rethinking both archaeological practice and theory. For the author, its greatest contribution is to propose community-based, collaborative, and decolonizing research, in which archaeological science is combined with the knowledge and epistemologies of indigenous peoples (Cuéllar, 2023, p. 14).

Similarly, Finney (2014) points out that underwater cultural heritage has traditionally been approached from a perspective focused on tangible or material remains. However, there is no reason to restrict the concept solely to these aspects: documentation and research must also consider intangible dimensions, as these enrich and broaden our understanding of the underwater environment (Finney, 2014). Hence, the management of underwater cultural heritage requires a comprehensive and holistic approach. As Finney (2014) and (Perez-Alvaro 2023) argue, more than in any other area of heritage, it is essential to “think outside the box,” in this case the shipwreck, to explore how intangible cultural heritage can broaden knowledge in this type of submerged archaeological context.

In Colombia, despite advances in the discipline, there remains the challenge of recognizing that for many indigenous communities, underwater environments are not only material remains, but sacred territories that hold memories, traditions, and spiritual connections that are passed down from one generation to the next. As (Cuéllar 2023) proposes, these spaces can be interpreted from the notion of multiple ontologies, conceived as living extensions of a territory and as repositories of ancestral knowledge. In this sense, the dialogue between indigenous communities and underwater archaeology provides an opportunity to reconsider how archaeological sites are preserved and interpreted, in line with the observations of Nicholas and Watkins (2014) on the significance of collaborative and transformative frameworks.

The incorporation of the indigenous perspectives discussed throughout this article enriches historical narratives by recognizing that each submerged object has meanings that transcend the tangible, aligned with the proposals of Finney (2014) and Perez-Alvaro (2023), who highlight the importance of holistic approaches to the management of underwater cultural heritage. Thus, the participation of the indigenous communities of Colombia, in this case the Arhuaco Community, represents an opportunity to consolidate the recognition of ancestral knowledge and indigenous worldviews as an important part of maritime and underwater archaeological research.

Ancestral approaches to the nautical spaces of Cartagena de Indias: the case of the San José galleon

Indigenous communities that have historically developed a close relationship with the different maritime, lake, and riverine bodies of water in Colombia have formed very close social and cultural relationships with the natural and anthropic elements of the environment in which they live. These links are known as territoriality, understood as the way in which human being's appropriate spaces, creating and building routes, leaving traces in nature, affecting and controlling their actions through their intervention in a specific geographical area (Gómez, 2019). Certainly, all this is not evident in current actions, but is the result of generational actions that endure overtime. Territoriality not only refers to a physically inhabited place, but also has an abstract basis, from the spiritual and mental point of view. In other words, the territory has a material and symbolic character, which shapes its own autonomous way of seeing and acting in space (Gómez, 2019). These relationships are essential for the preservation of the assets and contexts of Submerged Cultural Heritage, since they generate a direct link between ancestral knowledge (the intangible) and archaeological contexts (the tangible).

This can be better understood from the concept of the Maritime Cultural Landscape, which is defined as the space in which humans have historically coexisted with the sea, learning about it, transforming it, and adapting to it. This landscape brings together both tangible elements (material culture) and intangible manifestations (intangible culture), which are associated with the knowledge, practices and wisdom of communities that have historically coexisted with the sea (Westerdahl, 1980, 1992, 2011).

Thus, it is necessary to reaffirm that each of these elements manifests itself in physical spaces on land and in water. These spaces have been constituted historically from a sociocultural perspective, which determines how these relationships, practices, and knowledge are established and transmitted (Westerdahl, 2011).

In this way, it is possible to understand these landscapes from an archaeological perspective through a variety of movable and immovable archaeological correlates anchored to the spaces and activities that have developed in these contexts, thereby allowing them to be characterized. Complemented by the geographical characteristics of each of these maritime regions, this archaeological evidence enables us to characterize the social, cultural, economic, political, warlike and military dynamics that developed and consolidated in these landscapes holistically (Del Cairo et al., 2020).

Therefore, the concept of a Maritime Cultural Landscape enables us to gain a comprehensive understanding of the various ways in which communities have historically interacted with maritime spaces. This is why it is sometimes referred to as the archaeology of maritime communities. It involves analyzing aspects such as traditions surrounding the use of the sea, the exploitation of its resources, the characteristics of maritime environments, the construction of infrastructure associated with maritime practices, the definition and use of navigation routes, areas or zones, the naming of geographical features with references to the sea and the use of vessels. These aspects are usually transmitted through oral traditions, ritual practices, and ancestral knowledge (Westerdahl, 1980, 1992, 2011).

To mention a few case studies, the Zenú indigenous community in Colombia has historically forged a close relationship with rivers through the creation of a complex pre-Hispanic hydraulic system extending over more than 500,000 hectares of marshland in the Momposina Depression region, south of the Colombian Caribbean plains (Plazas et al., 1993). This system demonstrates the relationships between communities and maritime, lakes, and river landscapes. These constructions were designed by humans to control water during flood seasons, maximize agricultural areas, and accommodate a large population. This system consisted of a network of canals running perpendicular to the rivers throughout the region. These canals varied in size and served different functions (Plazas et al., 1993). This complex system highlights the daily interactions that this community has historically had with these bodies of water, demonstrating how they adapted to a mobile, seasonal, and amphibious territory. It also allows us to appreciate the complexity of these cultural landscapes and the diversity and potential of submerged heritage sites.

Similarly, the Muisca indigenous community, located in the Atiplano Cundiboyacense (center of the country), has historically built a close symbolic relationship between bodies of water and sacred places such as shrines and places of worship (Beltrán, 2022). Many of these have been located especially near lakes and lagoons, as water is seen as a sacred and vital element, directly linked to the origin of life. Muisca mythological accounts emphasize the importance of water cycles, represented by rivers, springs, lagoons, and lakes where the stars reflected their light (Beltrán, 2022).

Thus, these spaces have been favored for religious ceremonies, as it is believed that they were inhabited by certain deities. In addition to their spiritual significance, these bodies of water have also provided sustenance for agriculture, a primary activity for the region's subsistence since its incursion (Bohórquez, 2008). Therefore, it is possible to understand the underwater archaeological potential of these inland bodies of water and how studying them together with the community will allow us to learn about the changes that these contexts have undergone. We can also learn about the continuous activities of exploitation and use of the environment in these cultural landscapes.

In the case of the Wayúu Community, in the northeast of the Colombian Caribbean mainland, the Apalaanchi (who live on the beaches and by the sea) have a strong sense of maritime territoriality, marked by the links they build with their ancestors based on the places they occupy, as well as the places of origin of other family groups (Guerra, 2004; Sarmiento, 2023). This is evident in their territorial occupation, as their living spaces and cemeteries are adjacent to coastal resources, allowing them to regulate access to these areas. Therefore, their territory not only includes indigenous settlements located on the coast, but also their fishing sites in the waters of the Caribbean, in lagoons, salt flats, rivers, and various coastal bodies of water (Guerra, 2004; Sarmiento, 2023). Each of these elements on their territory includes submerged sites that are often directly linked to the way in which they are integrated into these maritime territories and their corresponding worldviews.

However, when characterizing and analyzing the nautical space of the archaeological context of the San José galleon from the notions, visions, and perspectives of the Arhuaco Community, the shipwreck and its surroundings must be recognized as a shared heritage that brings together both indigenous communities and society as a whole: a collective responsibility. Therefore, the present and future management of the artifacts found there must consider not only their material dimension (commonly analyzed in archaeology), but also the spiritual balance of the local community, of those who care for and protect them daily (a notion from indigenous archaeology). In this sense, integrating the ancestral wisdom of the Arhuaco worldview with commonly implemented scientific working methodologies allows for the development of respectfully comprehensive strategies. Thus, the preservation of the shipwreck as both a cultural and spiritual legacy is promoted, in line with the important efforts being made in this area, guaranteeing the rights of indigenous communities.

For the Arhuaco Community, the sea (“Mukuriwa”) is much more than a body of water; it is actually a living and sacred being, and therefore an active extension of Mother Earth. Consequently, “Mukuriwa” breathes, feels, perceives, and connects everything that is visible and invisible, thus forming a sacred fabric with the earth and those who inhabit it. In this way, this living system sustains, among many things, the balance of the world through its energetic charge, as it is inseparable from bodies of water such as rivers, swamps, lakes, lagoons, among others, which flow and coexist in the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta (as mentioned, where the Arhuacos live) in their encounter with the sea and what rests in it. Therefore, the connections with “Mukuriwa” lead the Arhuacos to carry out a variety of cultural and spiritual offerings that maintain, among many elements, the harmony of the ancestral territory inhabited yesterday and today with the cosmos, reaffirming their link with the “Línea Negra” (“Black Line”).¹

From this worldview, Mother Earth ordered the sea into nine different dimensions or levels. Each one fulfills a specific function associated with a spiritual responsibility of those who inhabit the territory. In addition, these levels produce what is called “A'buru” (understood as sacred materials), essential for the balance between the natural and the cultural (so common to observe in any archaeological approach). On the one hand, the first four levels or dimensions are understood and known as “Duna” (positive), which develop such vital elements as procreation and germination. The remaining five levels, on the other hand, are defined as “Gunsinna” (negative), which essentially complement the positive ones by ensuring, among other things, the integral development of the territory and its components. “Mukuriwa,” incidentally, acts as a regulator of the cycles of life themselves, with natural elements such as shells, corals, and algae, as these produce and sustain an energetic exchange between the Sierra Nevada and the Caribbean Sea over time, representing the vital organs of what is understood as Mother Earth.

In effect, the nine dimensions of “Mukuriwa” holistically represent the sacred spaces and energetic scenarios that interconnect the entire land, sea (together, the landscape), and even the universe from the Arhuaco spiritual worldview [Confederación Indígena Tayrona (CIT), 2017]. Namely, each dimension has a particular function in maintaining the harmony and balance of the cosmos, encompassing all the elements mentioned. More precisely, it connects the natural components of the environment, sacred cultural materials, and the processes of human life at different levels. All in all, these dimensions are closely related to the other continental bodies of water in the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta, as these energetic areas function as spiritual bridges between the material and the natural.

Above all, the coexistence, understanding, and care of all these dimensions is an ancestral task guided communally by spiritual leaders known as “Mamos.” They are the ones who preserve the knowledge and persistence of the rituals that ensure the balance of the cosmos. Based on all of the above, the following is a description of the nine dimensions of the “Mukuriwa” (closely linked to bodies of water such as lagoons, which are the subject of underwater archaeology), which are fundamental in themselves from the understanding of the “Ley de Origen”² [“Origin Law”; Confederación Indígena Tayrona (CIT), 2017]:

1) “Zanuriwa”: The first level where the land and sea meet, where sacred elements such as snails and shells, associated with ancestral foods, germinate in the sand. This space is interconnected with lagoons such as “Umuriwa,” “Naboba,” and “Ukungaka” known in the Sierra Nevada mountains, ensuring the necessary fertility of the earth that guarantees life cycles [Confederación Indígena Tayrona (CIT), 2017].

2) “Munuriwa”: Second level located outside the sea, where sacred elements perform functions associated with fertilization and procreation, supporting the first level “Zanuriwa.” It is linked to the “Mundiwa” lagoon, where ancestral materials are continuously regenerated [Confederación Indígena Tayrona (CIT), 2017].

3) “Gunuriwa”: Third level where snails and red crabs abound, representing the stage of procreation and development, connecting with the “Gundiwa” lagoon, which is used for various rites of payment [Confederación Indígena Tayrona (CIT), 2017].

4) “Tikiriwa”: Fourth level where different snails are born, these being white, red, and black, which are commonly used to regulate time and maintain the balance of subsistence, including crops and livestock. In this case, it is energetically connected to the “Ti'nugrewa” lagoon [Confederación Indígena Tayrona (CIT), 2017].

5) “Seynuriwa”: Fifth level understood as the “black sea,” where practices are developed to work on the childhood stage of human beings, as it contains materials for mortuary rituals, connecting with the “Eysachukwa” lagoon [Confederación Indígena Tayrona (CIT), 2017].

6) Jiwuru: Sixth level of the deep and blue where fish exist, as elements for payments that guarantee the balance of animals and plants in the landscape, connecting the Kurinha and Dominkwiwi lagoons [Confederación Indígena Tayrona (CIT), 2017].

7) “Jiwu Uru”: Seventh level where the components necessary to prevent diseases are generated, related to the “Kumundita” lagoon [Confederación Indígena Tayrona (CIT), 2017].

8) “Jiwu Chukiruru”: Eighth level, where essential materials are developed for the necessary payments that seek to prevent natural imbalances and adverse natural phenomena; linked to the “Ati Sanurwa,” “Dunkurway,” and “Yunkunarwa” lagoons [Confederación Indígena Tayrona (CIT), 2017].

9) “Seynmoru”: Ninth and final level, inhabited by spiritual parents who receive payments to protect the territory and life itself, linked to the two lagoons “Mitokwa” and “Muro'turwa” [Confederación Indígena Tayrona (CIT), 2017].

These are the nine dimensions of “Mukuriwa” where the San José galleon lies, the artifacts that compose it, the context that constitutes it, the landscape in which it is located, and the nautical space where it existed. Consequently, the shipwreck is considered by the Arhuacos as an energetic element deeply linked to the vital organs of “Mukuriwa” of Mother Earth. According to their worldview, everything in the universe, from the elements (gold, silver, bronze, copper, iron, stone, glass, ceramics, wood, etc.) to the contexts in which they are deposited forms part of a complex energetic fabric that sustains natural balance and spiritual harmony. Thus, this vessel is specifically immersed in the first dimension of “Mukuriwa”: “Zanuriwa,” as it is the energetic level where what can be understood as the guardians of the sea and the vital elements of Mother Earth converge.

Namely, the “Mamos” leaders, through spiritual consultations with the “Murunsama,” who are intermediaries between the material and spiritual worlds, perceive the San José galleon as an energetic magnet. In fact, its cargo not only has material value but also symbolizes essential components for the stability of the entire Earth and the cosmos. The construction of this intrinsic link explains why the ship was detained in this first dimension: the sea. There it lies in fulfillment of the energetic cycles of Mother Earth, who attracted and protected it in this place at a depth of 600 m, as part of a balance and equilibrium necessary for the maritime landscape in which it sailed.

Based on this comprehensive understanding, it is clear that the study of the San José cannot and should not be limited to an archaeological view of the exclusively material. Of course, although maritime and underwater archaeology has made significant advances in the study of submerged contexts and their landscapes (Duncan, 2006; Duncan and Gibbs, 2015; Ford, 2011; Westerdahl, 1992, 2011), the Arhuacos propose a complementary vision that integrates the scientific with the spiritual. This offers and enriches a more holistic understanding of archaeological heritage. For the “Mamos,” then, the San José galleon is not simply an archaeological relic, but in fact a living legacy that must be studied in accordance with an ancestral approach in harmony with the sky, the earth, and the sea, ensuring the sought-after preservation of universal balance.

Indigenous archaeologists play a fundamental role in this process, as their knowledge of the ancestral language allows them to act as bridges between the nine dimensions of the “Mukuriwa.” Therefore, their understanding not only encompasses scientific techniques (which they also learn and adapt to their own concepts), but also includes the spiritual interpretation of archaeological findings, allowing for a more complete, ethical, and respectful approach to Submerged Cultural Heritage. Therefore, the San José galleon is seen and can be associated with a time capsule that connects and preserves past traditions in present-day societies.

That is why the elements it carried are linked to the vital organs of Mother Earth, such as the minerals of the earth (the metals and containers it carried) and the resins of the forests (the woods with which the ship was built). In this way, they play a crucial and structural role in the energetic harmonization of the sea, the landscape, and the planet itself. Thus, its study is not considered to be, nor does it fall within the scope of, simple and purely scientific research, but rather a spiritual act that requires consultation and in-depth dialogue with the spiritual guardians of the territory: the indigenous communities that inhabit the landscape that forms the border between the sea and the land.

Analytical proposal for the configuration of the San José galleon as sacred heritage

As part of Colombia's national archaeological heritage, the remains of the San José galleon are considered inalienable, non-seizable, and imprescriptible property, in accordance with Articles 63 and 72 of the Colombian Constitution and Decree 1080 of 2015, which classifies them as part of the national archaeological heritage. The San José has been officially recognized as an Asset of Cultural Interest at the national level by Resolution 0085 of 2020, underscoring its scientific and cultural significance. Furthermore, Resolution 0712 of 2024 declared the area where the shipwreck lies as a Protected Archaeological Area, establishing the foundation for its conservation and integrated management.

This legal framework ensures the protection of the site within Colombia's national heritage system. However, from the perspective of the Arhuaco Community, the San José galleon holds an additional, spiritual dimension that transcends formal regulations. For the Arhuaco Community, the San José galleon symbolizes natural justice. Its permanence for more than 300 years in the Caribbean is not mere coincidence, but the result of an energetic dynamic which ensures that cultural heritage remains protected until cosmic cycles, and a joint dialogue between the sectors of society involved in its management and protection is necessary. For the Arhuacos, it is a reminder that absolutely everything in the universe is interconnected, reflecting a need for human actions to align with universal ethical principles.

To reach this analytical understanding, a methodological process rooted in Arhuaco tradition was carried out. Before approaching the coastal area, a traditional ceremony took place in a sacred site within the Sierra Nevada, chosen by the “Mamos,” the spiritual leaders of the community (Figure 3). Through rituals of harmonization and offerings known as “pagamentos,” permission was requested from the spiritual parents of the territory to open the path for the work ahead. This initial stage was fundamental, as it established the spiritual and mental readiness required for the following steps. Once at the seashore, guided by the Mamos, several sacred sites considered guardians of the coast were visited and further offerings were made (Figure 4). These acts of reciprocity and spiritual dialogue allowed the research team to comprehend the dimensions of the sea, understood in Arhuaco cosmology as Mukuriwa.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Gathering with the “Mamos” in the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta before visiting the coastal area.

Figure 4

Figure 4. Visits to the coast with the “Mamos” during the exploration of sacred sites.

The methodological exercise also included a mapping process guided by the “Mamos,” in which the four dimensions of the sea and their connections with the sacred lagoons of the Sierra were represented (Figure 5). Each line drawn in this cartography embodied meaning, carrying stories and energies that revealed the living nature of the territory. Through this process, the San José galleon was understood not merely as a sunken vessel but as a vital organ of Mother Earth, containing a special energy essential to the world's equilibrium.

Figure 5

Figure 5. Mapping exercise with the Arhuaco indigenous representing the dimensions of the sea.

In this sense, the shipwreck must be legally recognized and protected by law as a sacred site, embedded within the spiritual fabric of Colombian territory. According to the Arhuaco vision, its location in the first dimension of “Mukuriwa” (in “Zanuriwa”) is not coincidental, but rather a result of the energetic dynamics that connect the sea, the land, and the vital organs of Mother Earth. This recognition would allow: first, to protect the galleon under the aforementioned “Ley de Origen” (“Origin Law”), which regulates the conservation of places and spiritual elements of the local landscape; second, to establish its value as spiritual cultural heritage and not exclusively archaeological; third, recognize the shipwreck as an integral part of the interconnected network of sacred sites delimited by the aforementioned “Línea Negra” (“Black Line”), with an energetic function that is more than essential to the cosmic balance of space. To achieve these ends, a series of activities are proposed that constitute the analytical proposal for the San José galleon to have the status of sacred heritage as it should. Spiritual consultation and active participation of the “Mamos” leaders.

The “Mamos” as spiritual guides and experts on the maritime landscape, must accompany the efforts related to the San José galleon, as it is necessary to conduct periodic spiritual consultations to interpret the energies associated with the archaeological context in order to determine the appropriate cycles for its study and conservation. Similarly, it is considered extremely important to integrate this ancestral knowledge into future decision-making processes surrounding the scientific study of the galleon, ensuring that any action respects the spiritual and energetic principles of the place and space. Finally, it is essential to develop archaeological protocols that ensure that modern practices are aligned with the cosmic cycles defined by the “Ley de Origen” (“Origin Law”) of the Arhuacos.

Integrated articulation of ancestral and scientific knowledge

The management of the San José galleon should be an example of the interconnection of methodologies, knowledge, methods, practices, and techniques. To this end, it is proposed to continue with the implementation of interdisciplinary teams that include local indigenous archaeologists, scientists (natural and social), and spiritual leaders. On the other hand, it is suggested that methodologies be designed that combine modern scientific practices (widely used) with the spiritual rituals necessary to harmonize the elements to be studied and understood. Finally, tools such as the multidimensional cartography of the “Mamos” leaders should be used to understand and preserve the energetic connection of the shipwreck, its context, its landscape, and its territory.

Intercultural education and awareness processes

Efforts should be made to create educational programs to promote an interdisciplinary, intersectoral, and intercultural understanding of the profound and complex cultural and spiritual value of the San José galleon. These programs should seek to teach and learn from local indigenous communities about the spiritual relationship between the galleon, the first dimension of “Mukuriwa” (“Zanuriwa”), and the vital organs of Mother Earth. The Arhuaco perspective can thus stand out as a necessary bridge between spiritual and traditional sciences, so that they can work together to preserve the archaeological heritage located in deep waters. In turn, it is necessary to promote intercultural exhibitions and joint dialogue scenarios that comprehensively explain the spiritual significance of the San José, ensuring a respectful and conscious approach to its history and context (both at the level of the maritime landscape and the nautical space).

Strategies for ethical and respectful conservation

The intercultural scientific study of the San José galleon must be carried out under strict spiritual and cultural protocols. Before any research campaign, it is necessary to perform rituals before, during, and after any approach to the archaeological context, in order to guarantee the space-time continuity of cosmic balance. In the same vein, the study of artifacts must be understood not only as the analysis of historical remains, but also as the articulate understanding of sacred components that fulfill a function within the energetic fabric of the territory and the planet. Ultimately, it is essential to promote spaces for consultation with the “Mamos,” so their knowledge and perspectives can guide and enrich scientific research processes, promoting their ethical and respectful conservation.

Initiatives for the safeguarding and management of the context based on Arhuaco wisdom

As might be expected, the case of the management and safeguarding of the San José galleon could become a global model for the management of Submerged Cultural Heritage where indigenous peoples have a direct impact. It would be an example of good practice in how the ancestral wisdom of indigenous peoples (in this case the Arhuaco) can enrich and strengthen conservation and protection strategies. Consequently, it is necessary to move toward the formulation of national and international protocols (given that the diversity of indigenous peoples in the Americas is well known) that recognize and respect the spiritual dimensions of archaeological finds and their corresponding environments. At the same time, collaboration between indigenous communities, traditional and indigenous academics, and government entities must be promoted. Only then will be possible to preserve these cultural legacies under strict principles of sustainability and respect for the tangible and intangible.

Consequently, the management of the San José galleon represents a necessary, unique, and unprecedented invitation in Colombia to integrate the ancestral vision of indigenous peoples in a project with national and international reach. This historic opportunity, led in this case by the Arhuaco Community as part of the spiritual and cultural fabric of the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta, is a call to take responsibility for this particular and difficult task, which transcends the merely material and the purely scientific. Thus, this is the first maritime and underwater archaeology project in Colombia that applies these notions and recognizes the spiritual wealth and ancestral knowledge of indigenous peoples in the management of Submerged Cultural Heritage. In this way, it marks a milestone in the dialogue between contemporary and traditional science, and the ancestral sciences derived from local indigenous notions.

The Arhuaco Community, specifically, as part of this historic invitation, take on this challenge with the ethics that correspond to their worldview: an ethical perspective based on respect, balance, and mutual recognition between the actors and the notions involved. Their participation, naturally, is not limited to their role as spiritual guardians of the first dimension of “Mukuriwa” (“Zanuriwa”) but must extend to a commitment to integrate the other 115 indigenous peoples of Colombia into this collective effort in the long term. Each of these peoples can contribute invaluable voices and unique and differentiated knowledge that, together, will enrich and broaden our understanding of the connection between archaeological heritage and sacred territories.

In this unique context, the San José galleon, as was possible to personally consult with “Mamos” leaders from the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta, is not conceived solely as an archaeological object, but as a sacred site whose management must respect both its historical value and its spiritual significance (Personal interview with Mamo Bunsingamá, September 28, 2024). Likewise, the aforementioned integration of ancestral and scientific knowledge must be considered as the key to ensuring both technical and spiritual conservation (equally significant), always based on the notions provided by interculturality (Personal interview with Mamo Sintana Tana, November 10, 2024).

All of the above, taken together, will allow the shipwreck to be positioned as a global model of cultural preservation and integration of ancestral and modern knowledge, spatially and temporally connected. The investigation of the San José galleon is not only an archaeological challenge, but also a serious invitation to rethink how humanity approaches its scientific and spiritual relationship with the past, both in its artifactual and spatial dimensions. Integrating spiritual sciences with traditional sciences will allow us to fully understand that Submerged Cultural Heritage, in this case the San José, and the nautical space where it sailed and sank, is not static, but in fact an energetic bridge connecting generations, cultures, and dimensions.

Final considerations

In recent years, archaeological practice has reflected a need to reevaluate many of its approaches and to respond coherently to contemporary paradigms. Indigenous archaeology, which is not a recent school of thought but rather one that has been practiced for many years, is fundamental to the practice of Colombian archaeology. This is even more important given the growing interest in maritime and underwater archaeology at the local level in recent years. Under these premises, the exercise proposed in this article is only a first approach to the great potential and essential need for indigenous archaeology, in this case from the perspective of the Arhuaco Community, for the study, understanding, and comprehensive protection of the archaeological context of the San José galleon shipwreck.

Heritage, whether tangible or intangible and as an element in constant evolution, has always been subject to diverse perspectives and notions that go beyond a conception focused exclusively on the material, on the superficial. Naturally, an approach that goes beyond the merely empirical brings together all kinds of notions from the worldview of the artifactual, the contextual, and the landscape. This can be visualized from the land, from the coast, or from the water (as in this particular case). In turn, within the multiple dimensions of heritage, as outlined above, alternative frameworks of interpretation, analysis, and understanding contribute to generating an innovative vision of an archaeological site.

The transformative and reflective dimensions of heritage, then, bring together interpretations that go beyond the laboratory (which in no way detracts from its validity), including the aforementioned sources, knowledge, traditions, ceremonies, activities, and local beliefs of indigenous communities. A balance and harmony are thus established between the two perspectives, abandoning the notion that they are mutually exclusive (Nicholas and Watkins, 2014). They are, in short, collaborative, and the methods and techniques must advocate for a joint and articulated interpretation.

In this sense, the search for a representative, responsible, ethical archaeology that supports social justice in communities is a necessity for Colombian archaeologists, especially considering their multi-ethnic and multicultural context. Thus, the San José galleon is the perfect setting not only to apply this approach, as has already been done in this research, but also to make it visible and extend it nationally and internationally. In this way, concepts such as multiple ontologies can become the structural foundation for artifacts, their context, and their landscape to contribute to understanding the world itself from alternative and diverse perspectives. Archaeological materials are not isolated from their contexts, nor are those contexts detached from the world; everything forms part of broader cultural settings, in this case, maritime landscapes. A comprehensive understanding of these spaces, if based exclusively on their physical dimension, would be a mistake, as it must also account for the historical relationship between humans and place (Cuéllar, 2023).

In the case of the San José galleon, then, these interpretive proposals from indigenous maritime and underwater archaeology should promote a holistic understanding of the shipwreck, but also ensure that it is taught and explained to the general public from the perspectives outlined here. In other words, both the process and the results should be presented, highlighting the importance of this notion and how it applies to this study, drawing on disciplinary decolonization thanks to the contributions of indigenous communities. For it is they who act as interpreters and, at the same time, are the ones who can protect local heritage by coexisting with it in their territories. This is an exercise that highlights this widely explored field of study and has the capacity to recognize the realities of colonial history and its consequences both three centuries ago and in recent years. In conclusion, the epistemologies of indigenous peoples cannot be only the future scenario of archaeological interpretation; they must be the necessary analytical present of the discipline.

It is important to acknowledge that the perspective presented in this article may appear more harmonious than what might occur in other contexts. This perception is largely due to the liminal standpoint from which the San José galleon has been approached. One of the authors, Izquierdo, being both Indigenous and an archaeologist, inhabits an intermediate position between two epistemological worlds. This dual condition has allowed for the articulation of dialogues, the identification of shared principles, and the adaptation of methodologies that respond to both Indigenous and scientific ways of knowing in the context of the San José project. Nevertheless, as this is a prospective work, future research on the submerged remains of the galleon will inevitably involve encounters where Indigenous ontologies interact with those of science, and such exchanges may not always be entirely harmonious. The challenge lies precisely in sustaining this dialogue between different knowledge systems, recognizing that these interactions could become asymmetrical or even conflictive rather than complementary.

Ultimately, the project “Towards the Heart of the San José Galleon” and its commitment to understanding the archaeological context of deep waters from the worldviews of the Arhuaco Community generated a first contribution of this kind to Colombian maritime and underwater archaeology. This has promoted an understanding of the shipwreck in the entirety of its context, thanks to the indigenous maritime cultural landscapes of the Colombian Caribbean, and how ancestral approaches contribute to understanding nautical spaces. Considering, as one might intuit, that shallow or deep-water underwater archaeological contexts are not merely vestiges that recount the ancient past. In reality, they are sacred and spiritual landscapes that hold transcendental memories, knowledge, practices, traditions, and insights into the multicultural construction of Colombia as a nation. These are links that reflect the country's multi-ethnicity and have been transmitted transgenerationally within the 115 indigenous and native peoples that still exist today. Many of these peoples built their identity, defined their culture, and established their heritage by and around the sea, as well as the anthropic elements that centuries later are still preserved at the bottom of the sea.

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.

Author contributions

CD: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Supervision, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. DI: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. JA: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. JQ: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. JS: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. LB: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. CR: Funding acquisition, Investigation, Supervision, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.

Funding

The author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. This document is the result of the interdisciplinary and interinstitutional scientific research project “Towards the Heart of the San José Galleon,” developed by the Almirante Padilla Naval School (ENAP) of the Colombian Navy (ARC), the Colombian Institute of Anthropology and History (ICANH), the Colombian Maritime Authority (DIMAR), and the Ministry of Culture, Arts, and Knowledge. It has also been supported in its various phases by the Ministry of Science, Technology, and Innovation and the Colombian Ocean Commission (CCO).

Acknowledgments

We would like to extend our special thanks to the managers, leaders, and researchers of this project: CALM Hermann Leon, CF Alexandra Chadid, Alhena Caicedo, TN Nicolás Lizarazo, Mariana Carulla, Carla Riera, Johann Cuta, Linda Ballestas, Gabriela Caro, Antonio Jaramillo, Fernando Montejo, CN Germán Escobar, CC Saúl Vallejo, S1 Juan Santana, Vladimir Montaña, Felipe Lozano; as well as the Arhuaco Community, and local researchers from Cartagena de Indias: Lilia Herrera, Donayro Guzmán, Ada Jiménez, Felipe Contreras, José Pardo.

Conflict of interest

The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Generative AI statement

The author(s) declared that generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.

Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Footnotes

1. ^It is understood as the symbolic and spiritual boundary of an ancestral territory, encompassing all the sacred contexts that define it. Thus, rather than a purely physical limit, it represents a conceptual marker that gives material form to the extent of the ancestral land.

2. ^It is understood as the set of codes of both teaching and learning associated with the Arhuaco knowledge system and the collective ancestral wisdom of all the indigenous peoples of the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta.

References

ARC-DIMAR (2022). Galeón San José, I Campaña de Verificación No Intrusiva para la Seguridad del Bien de Interés Cultural del Ámbito Nacional. Bogotá, DC: Editorial Legis. Armada Nacional de Colombia (ARC) – Dirección General Marítima (DIMAR) – Corporación de Ciencia y Tecnología para el Desarrollo de la Industria Naval Marítima y Fluvial (COTECMAR).

Google Scholar

Beltrán, M. (2022). Prácticas y problemáticas alrededor del agua de la cultura muisca en Boyacá. Rev. Luciérnaga 14, 35–54. Available online at: https://revistas.elpoli.edu.co/index.php/luc/article/view/2183

Google Scholar

Bohórquez, L. A. (2008). Concepción sagrada de la naturaleza en la mítica muisca. Franciscanum. Rev. ciencias espíritu L(147), 151–176. Available online at: https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=343529807006

Google Scholar

Briggs, L., and Campbell, P. (2023). Shipwreck archaeology in the past 10 years. Archaeol. Rep. 69, 131–145. doi: 10.1017/S0570608423000054

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Chirimuscay, J. (2023). Pasado, memoria y territorio en el Nupirau Misak-Misak a través de los petroglifos de la vereda Los Naranjos, límite con el resguardo Indígena Guambiano de La María Piendamó – Kauka. Trabajo de grado (Pregrado). Universidad Externado de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia.

Google Scholar

Confederación Indígena Tayrona (CIT) (2017). Protocolo autónomo del Pueblo Arhuaco para el relacionamiento con el mundo externo, incluyendo la consulta y el consentimiento previo, libre e informado. Nabusimake: Oficina en Colombia del Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Derechos Humanos.

Google Scholar

Cuéllar, K. (2023). Panorama actual de la arqueología indígena en el suroccidente colombiano: reivindicación de la historia desde las epistemologías indígenas, paisajes de memoria y gestión de las herencias culturales. Trabajo de grado (Pregrado). Universidad Externado de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia.

Google Scholar

Del Cairo, C., Chadid, A., Quintana, D., López, A., Aldana, J., Báez, V., et al. (2020). Apropiación social del Paisaje Cultural Marítimo en Providencia y Santa Catalina: Caracterización del espacio náutico desde una perspectiva histórica. Bogotá, DC: Expedición Científica Seaflower Old Providence and St. Catalina. Dirección General Marítima (DIMAR) - Instituto Colombiano de Antropología e Historia (ICANH).

Google Scholar

Del Cairo, C., León, H., Caicedo, A., Aldana, J., Chadid, A., Quintero, J., et al. (2025). Sinergias para el Desarrollo de la Investigación del Patrimonio Cultural Subacuático en Colombia. Rev. PH 115, 96–110. doi: 10.33349/2025.115.5904

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Duncan, B. (2006). The Maritime Archaeology and Maritime Cultural Landscapes of Queenscliffe: A Nineteenth Century Australian Community. James Cook University.

Google Scholar

Duncan, B., and Gibbs, M. (2015). “Shipping mishaps and the maritime cultural landscape,” in Please God Send Me a Wreck, eds. B. Duncan and M. Gibbs (New York, NY: Springer), 7–33. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-2642-8_2

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Finney, S. (2014). The Intangible Underwater: Integrating Intangible Cultural Heritage into the Study of Underwater Cultural Heritage Sites. Available online at: http://www.themua.org/collections/files/original/96400081a6a9ed94a9c79b3a14de25e4.pdf (accessed September 11, 2025).

Google Scholar

Flores, C., and Acuto, F. (2015). Pueblos originarios y arqueología argentina. Construyendo un diálogo intercultural y reconstruyendo la arqueología. Intersecciones Antropol. 16, 179–194. Available online at: http://www.scielo.org.ar/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1850-373X2015000100

Google Scholar

Ford, B. (2011). “Introduction,” in The Archaeology of Maritime Landscapes, ed. B. Ford (New York, NY: Springer), 1–9. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4419-8210-0_0

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Franco, L. (2021). Una arqueología de las piedras: estatuas y ancestros en el suroccidente colombiano. Una perspectiva decolonial. Rev. Jangwa Pana 20, 524–539. doi: 10.21676/16574923.4431

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Gnecco, C., and Ayala, P., (eds.) (2010) Pueblos indígenas y arqueología en América Latina. Bogotá: Fundación de Investigaciones Arqueológicas Nacionales, Banco de la República; CESO, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de los Andes.

Google Scholar

Gómez, J. (2019). Prácticas de Autonomía Wayúu: Una mirada histórica, teórica y etnográfica. Bogotá: Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales.

Google Scholar

Guerra, W. (2004). Las comunidades costeras Wayuu: Diversidad intracultural y conocimientos de recursos marinos. Bogotá: Universidad de los Andes.

Google Scholar

Izquierdo, D. (2021). Simunurwa: arqueología indígena del orden, la territorialidad y las interconexiones energéticas, para la armonía y el equilibrio del universo del Pueblo Arhuaco en el Cerro Inarwa. Trabajo de grado (Pregrado). Universidad Externado de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia.

Google Scholar

Jaramillo, A. (2025). De la Explosión Masiva a la Mala Reparación: Causas del Hundimiento del Galeón San José. Anuario Estudios Americanos 82, 1–23. doi: 10.3989/aeamer.2025.1.1157

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Lemke, A. (2022). Anthropology underwater: Investigating hunter-gatherer responses to Holocene water levels through archaeology, indigenous partnerships and virtual reality. Hunter Gatherer Res. 8, 29–52. doi: 10.3828/hgr.2024.11

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Lemke, A., and Freeland, M. (2025). Naandamo: Indigenous connections to underwater heritage, settler colonialism, and underwater archaeology in the North American Great Lakes. Heritage 8:246. doi: 10.3390/heritage8070246

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Londoño, W. (2021). Indigenous archaeology, community archaeology, and decolonial archaeology: what are we talking about? A look at the current archaeological theory in South America with examples. Archaeologies 17, 386–406. doi: 10.1007/s11759-021-09433-y

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

McCarthy, M. (2018). Indigenous maritime investigations at the Western Australian Museum's Department of Maritime Archaeology: an overview after nearly 50 years. Austral. J. Maritime Archaeol. 42, 1–12. Available online at: https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.351846414895043

Google Scholar

Mendizabal, T., and Theodossopoulos, D. (2012). Los Emberá, el turismo y arqueología indígena: redescubriendo el pasado en el Panamá Oriental. Barranquilla: MEMORIAS, Revista digital de Historia y Arqueología desde el Caribe colombiano.

Google Scholar

Nicholas, G. (2008). “Native peoples and archaeology (Indigenous archaeology),” in The Encyclopedia of Archaeology, Vol. 3, ed. D. Pearsall (San Diego, CA: Elsevier/Academic Press), 1660–1669. doi: 10.1016/B978-012373962-9.00203-X

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Nicholas, G. (2024). Considering the past, present and future of Indigenous archaeology. Archaeol. Rev. Cambr. 39. doi: 10.17863/CAM.120382

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Nicholas, G., and Watkins, J. (2014). “Indigenous archaeologies in archaeological theory,” in Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology, ed. C. Smith (New York, NY: Springer), 3777–3786. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4419-0465-2_263

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Nicholas, G. P. (2010). “Being and becoming Indigenous archaeologists,” Archaeology & Indigenous Peoples, ed. G. P. Nicholas (Estados Unidos: Left Coast Press).

Google Scholar

Ogburn, D. E. (2007). Incas past and present: archaeology and the indigenous saraguros of southern ecuador. Stanford J. Archaeol. 5, 134-163.

Google Scholar

Perez-Alvaro, E. (2023). Indigenous rights and underwater cultural heritage: (de)constructing international conventions. Maritime Stud. 22:31. doi: 10.1007/s40152-023-00320-6

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Plazas, C., Falchetti, A., Sáenz Samper, J., and Archila, S. (1993). La sociedad hidráulica Zenú. Estudio arqueológico de 2.000 años de historia en las llanuras del Caribe colombiano. Bogotá: Museo del Oro, Banco de la República.

Google Scholar

Romero, Á. (2003). Arqueología y pueblos indígenas en el extremo norte de chile. Chungara. Rev. Antropol. Chilena 35, 337–346. doi: 10.4067/S0717-73562003000200014

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Sarcina, A. (2021). Arqueología comunitaria en un contexto de conflicto el proyecto Santa María de la Antigua del Darién (Chocó, Colombia). Rev. internacional patrimonio 69–106. Available online at: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=8279564

Google Scholar

Sarmiento, J. (2023). Biografía de las embarcaciones tradicionales Wayúu: Aproximación etnoarqueológica a los espacios y conocimientos náuticos en La Guajira, Colombia. Bogotá: Universidad Externado de Colombia.

Google Scholar

Smith, C., and Wobst, H. (2005). “Decolonizing archaeological theory and practice,” in Indigenous Archaeologies: Decolonising Theory and Practice, 1st Edn., eds. C. Smith and H. M. Wobst (London: Routledge), 5–16.

Google Scholar

Tarapues, V. (2022). Güel Apu Tasmak Ur. El sonido del espíritu en los Wawitas en el Pueblo de los Pastos de Güel: arqueología indígena y pedagogía territorial en el Resguardo del Gran Cumbal- Nariño. Trabajo de grado (Pregrado). Universidad Externado de Colombia Bogotá, Colombia.

Google Scholar

Vasco, L. (2010). “Arqueología e identidad: el caso guambiano,” in Pueblos indígenas y arqueología en América Latina, eds. C. Gnecco and P. Ayala Rocabado (Bogotá: Fundación de Investigaciones Arqueológicas Nacionales, Banco de la República; CESO, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de los Andes), 399–415.

Google Scholar

Ward, I., Smyth, D., Veth, P., McDonald, J., and McNeair, S. (2018). Recognition and value of submerged prehistoric landscape resources in Australia. Ocean Coastal Manage. 160, 167–174. doi: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2018.04.013

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Westerdahl, C. (1980). On oral traditions and place names. An introduction to the first stage in the establishment of a register of ancient monuments for the maritime cultural heritage. Int. J. Nautical Underwater Explor. 9, 311–329. doi: 10.1111/j.1095-9270.1980.tb01150.x

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Westerdahl, C. (1992). The maritime cultural landscape. Int. J. Nautical Archaeol. Underwater Explor. 21, 5–14. doi: 10.1111/j.1095-9270.1992.tb00336.x

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Westerdahl, C. (2011). “The maritime cultural landscape,” in The Oxford Handbook of Maritime Archaeology, eds. B. Ford, D. L. Hamilton, and A. Catsambis (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 733–762. doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199336005.013.0032

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar