Search

Anthropogenic and environmental processes present unique challenges for preserving cultural heritage in North Africa. Large parts of this region are characterised by unfavourable arid and semi-arid conditions and rapid changes to the landscapes caused by heightened regional development (e.g., urban expansion, road building, agricultural intensification, and socio-political conflicts). As a result, we are facing a fast-paced disappearance of heritage sites in regions that are still poorly understood. Following this, the utilisation of Earth observation data through aerial photographs and satellite imagery has emerged as an unmatched tool in the exploration of endangered archaeological heritage. Drawing on this context, this paper underscores the critical significance of incorporating digital research methods, such as remote sensing, GIS, or cartographic analysis, to ensure the evaluation and (digital) preservation of the historical sites along these vulnerable areas. Furthermore, our study seeks to provide new insights into data management and dissemination, fostering open research practices within North African archaeological research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The immediate past has been of interest within Polish archaeology only very recently. Research was first undertaken in 1967 and was incidental, tending not to change the general view of archaeologists focused on periods spanning prehistory to the Middle Ages, and then gradually adding the 17th and 18th centuries. A permanent change came in the 1990s with the emergence of development-led archaeology in Poland. Excavations preceding construction of motorways and other infrastructure projects revealed relics dating back to 1800-1945 on an unprecedented scale. Initially, insufficient historical knowledge made archaeological research particularly difficult. Now, after a few decades, this pioneer era is coming to an end, and there are archaeologists focusing mainly on the contemporary period e.g. archaeology of armed conflicts in the broadest sense of the term or narrowly specialised forensic archaeology. Nevertheless, the challenges of contemporary archaeology still exist. They are related to the key heritage management issues and significant consequences (including financial consequences) of resulting administrative decisions with regard to archaeological heritage of the 18th-20th centuries. In this article, individual challenges are discussed with regard to archaeology and memory, systems of heritage protection as well as preservation and research. Selected case studies are used to illustrate them all. The omission of time boundaries in binding legal definitions of both monuments and archaeological monuments is perfectly fine, because this ensures that all the relatively new relics are, in theory, as protected as older ones regardless of their state of preservation. However, in practice, archaeological research of a 19th-20th century site can cause confusion, from the first application for a research permit up to choosing a storage facility for the finds and their proper permanent curation. In order to go beyond the state-of-the-art in Poland, this article presents several solutions consistent with the existing legal framework. However, a uniform approach is still to be developed, even within the archaeological community.

The Brandenburg State Archaeology Museum has been conserving and analysing relics of war and terror for 25 years, and as a result of this work, archaeology is now an integral part of Nazi camp research (Kersting et al. 2016a; Theune 2018). Many camp sites have been investigated, including concentration camps and their subcamps, forced labour camps, and prisoner-of-war camps (Kersting 2020; 2022). While most objects of an industrial culture of the 20th century can be quickly assigned a function, functions do change. Such a shift is a characteristic of Nazi camp finds and reflects their context of bondage and deprivation. The identification of the functions of material remains enables their association with different spheres of life in the camp so that both perpetrator and victim groups are documented archaeologically. Moreover, these finds serve as tangible evidence to refute any relativisation of the crimes.

This paper underscores the critical need for open data practices in archaeo-historical research, particularly in the face of limited historical data availability, especially in underrepresented regions. Our study was conducted within the framework of the PERAIA project, which introduced an innovative approach by creating an open data database and web application to enhance data accessibility and reusability. This platform offers a comprehensive gazetteer that covers archaeological and heritage sites within the Eastern Mediterranean area (Crete and Marmarica) spanning Late Prehistory and Antiquity. To achieve this, we employed a digital research methodology that integrated legacy data with systematic aerial and satellite imagery analysis. This integration allowed us to identify previously known and unknown sites, enriched with associated (meta)data. Our commitment to open science is embodied in our open data practices. We also make the data accessible through Zenodo, ensuring that such data are available for potential reuse.

This article summarises the experience in the management of cultural heritage lived in the Museo Túcume, which was based on the scientific research undertaken at the pyramids since 1989, and which continued with the establishment of our museum in 1992. The work of involving the community throughout 31 years of uninterrupted labour was led by criteria of social, cultural, environmental and economic sustainability. The Management Plan, which is based on a situational diagnostic of the town plus the conceptualisation of our labour and that of the museum within the paradigm of Social Museology, allowed us to bring scientific knowledge over to the people, learn from popular wisdom, and—with the establishment of the Túcume Ecomuseum—to encourage citizen participation in the pursuit of the sustainable preservation of both the cultural and natural heritage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, the ways in which hobby metal detectorists searching for protected objects in the ploughsoil and archaeologists in Norway have collaborated and communicated throughout the public history of metal detecting in the country is outlined and problematized. Due to the opinions of individual archaeologists working in key positions and the autonomy of the country's local and regional management institutions, there are huge variations in both attitudes and practices toward metal detecting and its practitioners. In some areas, metal detectorists are allowed to search more or less freely, whereas in others, entire fields are protected after a few finds, making continued detecting without formal approval from the authorities illegal. Because of this, and the extreme difference in the activity level of individual detectorists, the number of recorded detecting finds varies immensely across county and regional borders. I suggest that channels for collaboration and communication be formalized and that a national and therefore uniform public reporting system be realized—given that it is, for the time being, largely up to individual archaeologists whether some of the country's most active citizen scientists are equally treated by the archaeological heritage management system in Norway. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Complutum is the property of Universidad Complutense de Madrid and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Understanding the public by analysing the wants, interests and expectations regarding their involvement in archaeology is one of the strategic aims of Europae Archaeologiae Consilium (EAC). Cultural heritage has been the topic of several public opinion polls in Poland over the past few years. In 2011 and 2015, the Narodowy Instytut Dziedzictwa (National Institute of Cultural Heritage) carried out two representative surveys. Subsequent polls focusing on more specific issues or groups of respondents were undertaken in 2015, 2017 and 2018. Other data from Poland come from the 2017 Special Eurobarometer survey on cultural heritage. They can be contrasted with archaeology-orientated opinion polls: a Europe-wide survey carried out within the NEARCH project led by Inrap (French National Institute for Preventive Archaeological Research) and several smaller-scale projects, which might be treated as starting points for more representative research.

Copyright of Revista Arqueologia Pública is the property of Universidade Estadual de Campinas - Portal de Periodicos Eletronicos Cientificos and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article is a follow-up to discussions held in the EAC Heritage Symposiums, and aims to answer one of the basic questions regarding the reasons for commencing any archaeological fieldwork. The subject is approached from the archaeological heritage manager's viewpoint, and question-driven fieldwork is understood here as scientific, as opposed to preventive and development-led archaeology. Basing my arguments mainly on the experiences of Polish archaeology, I argue in favour of the development-led research. It has been shaping European archaeology to the highest degree for several decades, and therefore should not be considered inferior or secondary. Considering the quality gap between purely scientific and development-led fieldwork, there is still a lot to be improved regarding the scope of research and its standards. Nevertheless, it still seems to have the highest potential for systemic heritage management consistent with the rules set out by the Valletta Convention and the Lausanne Charter (PDF), and for the development of archaeology as a science. Development-led archaeology is also the closest to the public and forces archaeologists to cooperate with various stakeholders.

With the aim of providing knowledge for informed choices, a series of tools have been developed for archaeological heritage management in the Netherlands. They include maps, datasets, methods, guidelines, best practice and web-based applications to facilitate the effective and efficient selection of valuable archaeological remains. The products relate to archaeological predictive modelling, disturbances by agriculture and other activities, archaeological heritage maps, prospection methods, research questions and scientific syntheses to close the archaeological heritage management cycle.

Copyright of Complutum is the property of Universidad Complutense de Madrid and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The concept of archaeological heritage management (AHM) has been key to wider archaeological research and preservation agendas for some decades. Many universities and other education providers now offer what is best termed heritage management education (HME) in various forms. The emphasis is commonly on archaeological aspects of heritage in a broad sense and different terms are often interchangeable in practice. In an innovative working-conference held in Tampere, Finland, we initiated a debate on what the components of AHM as a course or curriculum should include. We brought together international specialists and discussed connected questions around policy, practice, research and teaching/training, at local, national, transnational and World Heritage levels. In this article we take the Tampere discussions further, focusing especially on the meaning, necessity, implications and prerequisites of interdisciplinary HME. We offer our thoughts on developing HME that reflects the contemporary aspects and needs of heritage and its management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research explores archaeological heritage management at the Memphis and its Necropolis - the Pyramid Fields from Giza to Dahshur World Heritage Site in Egypt. The case study methodology involved a structured questionnaire in order to gather data from key stakeholders. The results suggest only partial implementation of the World Heritage Site (WHS) management plan due in part to financial constraints, while strategies to raise visitor numbers remain limited. Actions are required to promote tourism, and to find resources for site enhancements. Current site management responsibilities appear centralised, with a need to develop an integrated management plan for the WHS. There could be better understanding of the needs of visitors and how these can be met. The study recommends development of a more Integrated Management Plan for the site, perhaps also involving some restructuring of key (state) organisations and/or specifically the creation of an entity responsible for management of the site. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista de Arqueologia is the property of Revista de Arqueologia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In this study we draw attention to the inherent variability in the results of trial trenching, when taking into account the countless variations in orientation and positioning of trenches. Grids of trial trenches were simulated time and again on the excavation plans of 16 archaeological sites from Flanders, Belgium. Orientation and positioning of the grid layout was shifted randomly, whilst the area coverage varied from 2.5% to 80%. The intersection rates of the archaeological features allow to gain more insight in trends and variability that are inherent to the chosen design of trial trenches. It is assessed how robust a chosen grid layout performs on (multi-period) archaeological sites and how variable these results might be. The most effective layout appears to be a grid with short, parallel and discontinuous trenches or a standard grid, closely followed by 2 m wide continuous trenches. Implementing 4 m wide trenches reduces the effectiveness of the latter method substantially. When the area coverage of the trenches is below 10%, the results of the archaeological prospection become unreliable and can potentially lead to a substantial over-or underestimation of the actual feature density on the site. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Numerous archaeological investigations have been performed along the river Meuse in the Netherlands’ southeastern province of Limburg as part of the major ‘Maaswerken’ infrastructural project. To improve flood risk management and navigability, and for the purpose of gravel production and nature development, several areas of land covering a total of almost 2000 ha are being excavated to a great depth. In anticipation of this, archaeological research was performed for the purposes of recording and documenting archaeological remains in the most important areas and locations. From 1998 to 2015 the Cultural Heritage Agency of the Netherlands (Amersfoort) was in charge of the investigations, and acted as adviser to national public works agency Rijkswaterstaat.The archaeological research connected with the Maaswerken project differed from regular, site-based investigations in terms of the landscape archaeology perspective on which it was based. The research themes and principles associated with this perspective were published in several documents, including a scientific policy plan published in 2004, and presented in further detail in area programmes and project briefs. The policy plan assigned each project area to one of five value assessment categories, based on the intactness of the landscape and the archaeological potential for addressing the research questions. In areas of high landscape intactness and great archaeological potential (category 1) the Agency selected zones to be surveyed and assessed, and for archaeological excavation. Though most of the fieldwork, including specialist analysis, was performed in these zones, other category project areas have also been the subject of archaeological fieldwork, including borehole surveys, site-oriented research and watching briefs, but on a more incidental basis. Observations were also made in the river Meuse itself and in the river's winter bed.The archaeological investigations resulted in a large number of standard reports of desk studies and fieldwork, including reports of specialist analyses. A considerable proportion of these refer to the large-scale investigations at Borgharen and Itteren to the north of Maastricht, and at Lomm and Well–Aijen to the north of Venlo. The results of the investigations suggest the archaeological record here is rich and varied, with a time depth of c. 11,500 years, and traces of occupation and land use ranging from the Early Mesolithic (Well–Aijen, Borgharen) to the Second World War (Lomm).This paper reflects on almost 20 years of archaeological research in the project areas of the Maaswerken and on the principles and methods used in the field research. The common thread is the results of landscape and archaeological studies and the relationship between them. Examples are used to illustrate results that can be regarded as important from a national perspective, and in terms of archaeological heritage management. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The World Heritage Convention of UNESCO, which celebrated its 40th anniversary in 2012, was intended to promote the preservation and enjoyment of the world's most important natural and cultural heritage. It is now fast losing credibility because of political maneuvering and the inscription of sites that do not meet requirements for reasons of prestige and tourism development. This also threatens its role as an instrument to improve heritage management. That role is increasingly taken up by international corporations and banks, and globally we may well be seeing a shift from state-based frameworks that all go back to a 'European' way of dealing with heritage, a regime, to a global and transnational heritage regime. At the same time, existing infrastructure and legislation in Western countries are under scrutiny as a result of financial crisis and economic recession, and, for developing countries, the wisdom of importing Western procedures and ethics is rightly being questioned. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Heritage & Society is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Archaeological materials are finite, non-renewable, and irreplaceable. Preserving what they might contribute to human knowledge requires that we safeguard not only archaeological materials themselves, but also the contexts in which they occur. Unfortunately, the archaeological record is threatened by the acceleration of many natural processes (e.g. sea level rise and desertification) and human activities. Among the latter is tourism, now a major global and still burgeoning industry that has acted as a catalyst for rapid development within and around archaeological sites. Global tourism operates in what is essentially a laissez-faire environment. Mechanisms that might prevent or limit negative externalities associated with tourism development are present only at the level of the nation-state. I argue here that guidance for sustainable tourism can be found in the concept of global public goods. By committing to the production of global public goods, tourism will at the same time generate sustainable economic and social benefit at the local level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we address the methodology we used in the study and characterization of archaeological artefacts of The Buchillones found in the museums of the province of Ciego de Ávila. In conjunction with the presentation of the procedures used in the investigation, the results obtained, as well as for scientific and social work of museums impacts are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The ability of historical archaeology to make a significant contribution to our understanding of Queensland's recent past is hindered by factors including few practitioners, limited publications about historical archaeological research and a need to establish its relevance beyond the archaeological community. There exists great opportunities in Queensland for researchers to explore a diverse range of research topics of which only some are beginning to be investigated through historical archaeological enquiry. This paper investigates the current state of the discipline in Queensland, the challenges practitioners face today and into the future, and the avenues down which historical archaeologists may make significant contributions to our understanding of Queensland's recent past. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This paper reports the results of a study into the effectiveness of core sampling for discovering Palaeolithic and Mesolithic hunter-gatherer sites in the Netherlands and northwestern Belgium. Earlier work established optimal sampling strategies for use in archaeological heritage management survey in the Netherlands. However, the statistical model used for this was based on a limited amount of data on the distribution of lithic artefacts in Palaeolithic and Mesolithic sites. For the current study we have analyzed the distribution of artefacts in a selected number of excavated sites, and estimated discovery probabilities of these sites through simulation. The simulation results indicate that discovery probabilities are lower than expected due to the effect of clustering of finds. Furthermore, the density of flints in Palaeolithic and Mesolithic sites is generally lower than the estimates that were used for setting up the optimal sampling strategies, and a substantial number of sites is very small. This means that, in order to discover Palaeolithic and Mesolithic sites with sufficient reliability, we will have to apply more intensive survey strategies than have been recommended up to now. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Belgium has a long tradition of consultative commissions, responsible for the preservation of heritage. In the 1940s and 1950s, Belgian archaeologists expressed a need for such an institute, specifically competent for archaeology and the supervision of excavations. Only in 1965, the first members of a National Commission for Excavations were appointed. They had modest powers, but were able to advocate the value of archaeological heritage and, to a limited extent, supervise fieldwork performed by amateurs. The Commission was also asked to prepare a legal text that would protect archaeological heritage. However, ratified laws were not accomplished and, despite much regret of Belgian archaeologists, the Commission was abolished in 1979. During the 1980s, Belgium underwent several state reforms which ultimately resulted in the complete regionalization of archaeology (1988-89). Throughout this period, a shift in opinion occurred between Walloon (French-speaking) and Flemish (Dutch-speaking) archaeologists. This resulted in different arrangements of governmental agencies responsible for immovable heritage and archaeology. Nonetheless, as UNESCO had recommended in 1968, all three Belgian regions (including the Brussels-Capital Region) installed advisory commissions that were involved in the preservation in situ of archaeological remains. However, these consultative bodies had little influence on politics and policy. Especially in Flanders, the Archaeological Council achieved very little. Probably, the lack of continuity retained the Council from building up a reputation and authority. Nevertheless, advisory commissions for archaeology do make sense in Belgium. They provide a necessary 'forum' to discuss problems and to express undivided opinions; they form a 'channel' to communicate with policy makers; and they present an 'instrument' for advocating the preservation of archaeological heritage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: In summer 2009 a high resolution magnetic survey was executed inside the archaeological park of Egnazia (Southern Italy) for the subsurface mapping of buried features (“invisible archaeology”). Furthermore, a database was implemented in order to collect already-published data concerning the important excavated areas (“visible archaeology”). The magnetic maps provided a detailed plan as well as the geometry of the subterranean structures: with the aim of exploiting at best the capability of this important information, geophysical data were inserted into a Geographical Information System (GIS) comprising both other available spatial data (satellite image, aerial oblique photos, etc…) and some records of the database (i.e. photos of the main excavated structures, short descriptions, archaeological monographs, etc…). The information system, which was emulated and shared online at www.gisonda.it, supplies a synoptic multi-layered view of the area where the visible and invisible archaeology show their mutual relationships and the complex interactions both with elements of the landscape and the actual human activities (i.e. the modern road network, the coast line, etc…). Within this integrated information tool, the “invisible archaeology” detected through the non invasive survey, offers fundamental information to improve the scientific knowledge on the ancient settlement in a landscape framework. At the same time, it appears clear how remotely-sensed data revealing the presence of buried features can play a strategic role both in the decision-making process and local policies, thus rendering the Archaeological Heritage (AH) management more effective in terms of scientific, social and economic assets. This important challenge could be better achieved if all the information gained were shared and accessible (in a free and/or protected mode) to whoever interested (archaeologists, universities and research institutions, superintendeces, public administrations, private enterprises, etc.). The actual work represents a pilot project aimed at extending systematically the above described activities to the study and management of AH in the whole Apulia region. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: This paper reports a study on the effectivity and efficiency of trial trenching strategies for site discovery within the context of Dutch archaeological heritage management. It discusses the principles of site discovery by means of trial trenching, and suggests the optimal strategies for trial trenching survey, based on the results of simulations. Effective and efficient strategies for discovering different groups of archaeological sites are given, according to their presumed size, shape and feature density. The recommended strategies will be included in the Quality Norm for Dutch archaeology. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This article began life as a paper in the session 'Opening Doors for Archaeologists: Making Malta Work' at the 2006 EAA Annual Meeting in Kracow, Poland. It explores the back- ground of the European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage (Revised), also known as the Valletta Convention or the Convention of Malta. The article examines some of the major issues that were discussed and describes the drafting process of the Convention from the author's personal perspective as one of the members of the committee responsible. It concludes with a brief consideration of some subsequent developments and a plea for a more active role for the EAA at Strasbourg and Brussels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The dynamic social development in Iran over the last decades provided the acknowledgement of the archaeological heritage on the one hand, and a confrontation to the current managing system of archaeology on the other. This situation makes it necessary for archaeologists to formulate and implement a systematic regulation in the sphere of protection and management of the archaeological heritage. The fact is that, as the international conventions warn, the archaeological heritage is constantly under threat of destruction, and while in Iran the problem is not new, the destruction is on the increase. The constructions under the developmental projects and at the same time the increase of population are accompanied by the expansion of the new settled areas threaten large areas of archaeological sites. The deep economic crises of the country as well as a pauperization of majority of society, and a low degree of respect for the law, lead to an increase in looting and considerable damage to the archaeological heritage. The goals of this paper are (1) to identify problems that hinder the effectiveness of the Iranian national protection acts, and to suggest some way in which these problems could be remedied, (2) to promote further academic discussions of problems and solutions within archaeology and related fields, and (3) to encourage official authorities and other interest groups to press for changes needed in the Iranian national protection policies, to make it better serve the public interest. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]