Shumon T. Hussain
- since 2023 Research Associate, HESCOR/MESH, University of Colognem Germany
- 2019-2023 Assistant Professor, ClioArch Project, Aarhus University, Department of Archaeology and Heritage Stuides, Denmark
- 2019 Post-Doctoral Researcher, CRC 806, University of Cologne, Germany
- 2018-2019 Visiting Scholar, SUSTech, Shenzhen, People's Republic of China
- 2015-2018. PhD Researcher, Faculty of Archaeology, Leiden University, The Netherlands
- 2014 Research Assistant and Assistant Lecturer, Institute for Prehistory, University of Cologne, Germany
- 2012-13 Student Assistant, CRC 806 „Our Way to Europe“, University of Cologne/ NESPOS, Neanderthal-Museum Mettmann, Germany
- 2013 Master of Arts (M.A.) in Prehistoric Archaeology, University of Cologne, Germany (with distinction)
- 2011 Bachelor of Arts (B.A.) in Prehistoric Archaeology (major) and Philosophy (minor), University of Tübingen, Germany (with distinction)
Supervisors: Prof. Dr. Raymond Corbey, Prof. Dr. Marie Soressi, Dr. Krist Vaesen, Prof. Dr. Jürgen Richter, and Prof. Dr. Harald Floss
- 2019-2023 Assistant Professor, ClioArch Project, Aarhus University, Department of Archaeology and Heritage Stuides, Denmark
- 2019 Post-Doctoral Researcher, CRC 806, University of Cologne, Germany
- 2018-2019 Visiting Scholar, SUSTech, Shenzhen, People's Republic of China
- 2015-2018. PhD Researcher, Faculty of Archaeology, Leiden University, The Netherlands
- 2014 Research Assistant and Assistant Lecturer, Institute for Prehistory, University of Cologne, Germany
- 2012-13 Student Assistant, CRC 806 „Our Way to Europe“, University of Cologne/ NESPOS, Neanderthal-Museum Mettmann, Germany
- 2013 Master of Arts (M.A.) in Prehistoric Archaeology, University of Cologne, Germany (with distinction)
- 2011 Bachelor of Arts (B.A.) in Prehistoric Archaeology (major) and Philosophy (minor), University of Tübingen, Germany (with distinction)
Supervisors: Prof. Dr. Raymond Corbey, Prof. Dr. Marie Soressi, Dr. Krist Vaesen, Prof. Dr. Jürgen Richter, and Prof. Dr. Harald Floss
less
Related Authors
InterestsView All (58)
Uploads
Papers by Shumon T. Hussain
scholarly literatures, according to the scoping questions. Next, it presents eight heritage-focused case studies, each of which orients us towards solutions to the challenges of anthropogenic climate change. We need to consider an encompassing view of heritage, that draws from both the fields of heritage studies and heritage management. The archive of local and Indigenous knowledge and practice offers many potential solutions, but raises key questions around ethics, intellectual property and terms of engagement. Climate change itself needs to be understood as an historically situated phenomenon, that has involved and implicated populations and territories differently, especially across the Global North/ Global South divide. Recognizing this, it becomes imperative to foreground
a climate justice perspective in the search for solutions. Experience suggests that science-based solutions are likely to be socially, economically, politically and culturally entangled. Social science and
humanities-based approaches play a key role in allowing us to anticipate and understand such entanglements. Rather than being static and backward-looking, heritage is mobile, forward-looking and always in-the-making. Mobilising the affective power of heritage becomes a potentially powerful tool in organising for climate action—although this involves emphasising a different version of heritage, less concerned with national pasts and more with collective human endeavour. The creative
arts play a key role in imagining viable futures, and in producing resonance, ‘believe-ability’ and hope. The political struggle around the climate emergency is the struggle for multilateralism, dialogue and
cooperation, in the face of populist attempts to use a moment of historical anxiety for narrowly sectarian ends. From a heritage perspective, the question of relevance is: How do we mobilise the affective power of heritage in support of open, creative, and inclusive futures?
[...]
The totality of empathic experience condenses into a world access which is primarily channeled by empathy. The motive of “Einfühlung” is not only constitutive for an animistic everyday practice and practice of faith, but also results in the vitalization of previously dead matter through empathizing. In this sense, empathy and aesthetics approach each other very closely. One of the key messages of this book is the conclusion that an empathic positionality gives rise to an empathic epistemology, which possibly motivated Ice Age hunter-gatherers of Eurasia to artistically bring the perceived animated landscape with its rocks and caves into prominence. It is nothing less than the accentuation of already existing shapes in natural formations by painting or engraving; it is a case of recognition. Such glades of the empathic can be found numerously in Upper Paleolithic cave art where motives often mirror the natural morphology of the rock surface and thus imitate their implicit referential context. But also the prominent hand negatives and the various palimpsest motives of this cultural phenomenon and its time testify to this global world access. These are all examples of globally empathizing with the landscape as a whole, which finds its tentative climax in Altamira, Lascaux, and the Grotte Chauvet in the Ardèche valley. Not least by the evident narrative embeddedness of image stagings in a lot of painted caves demonstrates the elaborate empathy capacity of their makers. Human culture and sociality is first of all an empathic one.
With Jean-Jacques Hublin can be carefully retained that the differences between human and non-human are after all not that huge, but compassion and empathy need to be regarded as integral parts of a special adaptive kit explaining much of modern human success. The history of humankind is thus promoted to a history of empathy whose exposure is only to begin. Man is and has always been primarily empathetic: Homo empathicus.
remain challenging to understand, however. In recent years, our knowledge of the magnitude and frequency of climate change across this period has increased dramatically, as has our awareness of leads and lags in how climate change translates into environmental change both at the regional and local scale. Yet, the degree to which
technological developments parallel such climatic and attendant environmental transformations remain highly problematic. At the same time, conducting inter-regional comparative analyses is frequently hindered by the inherent complexities which characterize regional records as well as the lack of transparency in relation to the traditionally employed cultural taxonomic units. Although it is typically argued that the heterogeneous cultural topography seemingly diagnostic of the Pleistocene-Holocene transition signifies increasing regional differentiation and more and more localized forms
of human behavior and adaptation, most of these claims hinge on the issue of robust systematics and comparable taxonomies. In response, this session aims (1) to collate, compare and contrast the various cultural taxonomies (e.g. techno-complexes, industries, facies and regional groups) currently deployed in European Final Paleolithic
and early Mesolithic research and (2) to work towards a more source-critical and epistemologically informed synthesis of the socio-technical dynamics observable at this critical juncture in the evolution of early human societies.