Pub Date : 2021-08-25DOI: 10.1080/20518196.2021.1966171
P. Mullan
ABSTRACT This paper will explore how community archaeological projects supported by the National Lottery Heritage Fund, through its Landscape Partnership Scheme, have created opportunities for communities to reach a deeper and richer connection with their historical and cultural landscape in a society where the past is contested. Through the creation of those deeper connections, and active engagement by communities in the archaeological process, significant outcomes have been achieved: including greater protection of heritage assets, an enhanced sense of local identity, and a shared understanding of the past, something which is often difficult to achieve in a deeply divided society. The paper draws on the experience of some of the communities, archaeologists and programme managers and their evaluation of the projects.
{"title":"Community archaeology and the Heritage Fund in Northern Ireland","authors":"P. Mullan","doi":"10.1080/20518196.2021.1966171","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20518196.2021.1966171","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper will explore how community archaeological projects supported by the National Lottery Heritage Fund, through its Landscape Partnership Scheme, have created opportunities for communities to reach a deeper and richer connection with their historical and cultural landscape in a society where the past is contested. Through the creation of those deeper connections, and active engagement by communities in the archaeological process, significant outcomes have been achieved: including greater protection of heritage assets, an enhanced sense of local identity, and a shared understanding of the past, something which is often difficult to achieve in a deeply divided society. The paper draws on the experience of some of the communities, archaeologists and programme managers and their evaluation of the projects.","PeriodicalId":52158,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community Archaeology and Heritage","volume":"8 1","pages":"245 - 255"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44638209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-31DOI: 10.1080/20518196.2021.1953320
F. Benetti, Katharina Möller, F. Ripanti
ABSTRACT Opinions and practices in regard to public participation in archaeology vary widely in different countries. While so-called ‘community digs' and other forms of participation are very common in the UK and volunteering opportunities can be easily found on the internet, the situation in Germany and Italy is different. Although public participation does exist in the two continental countries, it is not as widespread as in the UK, because of various different obstacles, e.g. permit systems. To identify the challenges that archaeologists have to face when working with the public as well as to better understand professional archaeologists’ attitudes towards public participation and see whether different laws and policies have shaped them, a survey was conducted amongst British, German and Italian archaeologists.
{"title":"Working with communities: Public participation from the archaeologists’ perspective","authors":"F. Benetti, Katharina Möller, F. Ripanti","doi":"10.1080/20518196.2021.1953320","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20518196.2021.1953320","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Opinions and practices in regard to public participation in archaeology vary widely in different countries. While so-called ‘community digs' and other forms of participation are very common in the UK and volunteering opportunities can be easily found on the internet, the situation in Germany and Italy is different. Although public participation does exist in the two continental countries, it is not as widespread as in the UK, because of various different obstacles, e.g. permit systems. To identify the challenges that archaeologists have to face when working with the public as well as to better understand professional archaeologists’ attitudes towards public participation and see whether different laws and policies have shaped them, a survey was conducted amongst British, German and Italian archaeologists.","PeriodicalId":52158,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community Archaeology and Heritage","volume":"9 1","pages":"287 - 303"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20518196.2021.1953320","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49223810","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-27DOI: 10.1080/20518196.2021.1958615
F. Zaina, Licia Proserpio, Giulia Scazzosi
ABSTRACT Community engagement is now a consolidated and essential part of many archaeological research projects. In particular, it is widely recognized as a powerful tool for laying the foundation for any community archaeology programme. This paper explores the perceptions of a community living North-East of the city of Kufa (Iraq) towards the archaeological sites and cultural heritage in general. In particular, we designed an action-oriented research consisting of interviews and focus groups conducted between 2017 and 2019 at selected sites. The multifaceted picture that emerges from this research allows to better understand the relationships between the different actors revolving around the archaeological sites. The objective is to assess the awareness and understanding of the significance of its cultural heritage by the local community, and consequently propose recommendations including actions aimed at better safeguarding and communicating the archaeological sites.
{"title":"Local voices on heritage: Understanding community perceptions towards archaeological sites in South Iraq","authors":"F. Zaina, Licia Proserpio, Giulia Scazzosi","doi":"10.1080/20518196.2021.1958615","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20518196.2021.1958615","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Community engagement is now a consolidated and essential part of many archaeological research projects. In particular, it is widely recognized as a powerful tool for laying the foundation for any community archaeology programme. This paper explores the perceptions of a community living North-East of the city of Kufa (Iraq) towards the archaeological sites and cultural heritage in general. In particular, we designed an action-oriented research consisting of interviews and focus groups conducted between 2017 and 2019 at selected sites. The multifaceted picture that emerges from this research allows to better understand the relationships between the different actors revolving around the archaeological sites. The objective is to assess the awareness and understanding of the significance of its cultural heritage by the local community, and consequently propose recommendations including actions aimed at better safeguarding and communicating the archaeological sites.","PeriodicalId":52158,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community Archaeology and Heritage","volume":"8 1","pages":"256 - 272"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20518196.2021.1958615","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42425554","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-03DOI: 10.1080/20518196.2021.1945229
T. Kador, Sarah De Nardi
{"title":"Editorial","authors":"T. Kador, Sarah De Nardi","doi":"10.1080/20518196.2021.1945229","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20518196.2021.1945229","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":52158,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community Archaeology and Heritage","volume":"8 1","pages":"143 - 144"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20518196.2021.1945229","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46607209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-01DOI: 10.1080/20518196.2021.1988210
R. Laužikas, Johan P. Enqvist, Pedro Luengo, Rajna Šošić-Klindžić, Marina Toumpouri
ABSTRACT We studied the use of archaeological scholarly knowledge for supporting and promoting national identity by global non-professional communities. The data collection consisted of asynchronous online text-based Facebook focus group discussions in Croatia, Cyprus, Finland, Greece, Lithuania, and Spain. After, we conducted a qualitative content analysis of posts and comments we collected. Our research's main result is the identification of framing schemas that communicatively connect the personal perception and interpretation of scholarly archaeological knowledge with existing community knowledge on national identity. We identified, analysed, and discussed ten different framing schemas in this article: Uniqueness, Succession, Language, Christianity, Western civilization, Nature, Stranger civilizations, Double identities, National heroes, and Future expectations. The different framing schemas are interconnected, but application of the framing schemas varies in different countries.
{"title":"Discussing archaeology and the nation in six European countries: a discourse analysis","authors":"R. Laužikas, Johan P. Enqvist, Pedro Luengo, Rajna Šošić-Klindžić, Marina Toumpouri","doi":"10.1080/20518196.2021.1988210","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20518196.2021.1988210","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT We studied the use of archaeological scholarly knowledge for supporting and promoting national identity by global non-professional communities. The data collection consisted of asynchronous online text-based Facebook focus group discussions in Croatia, Cyprus, Finland, Greece, Lithuania, and Spain. After, we conducted a qualitative content analysis of posts and comments we collected. Our research's main result is the identification of framing schemas that communicatively connect the personal perception and interpretation of scholarly archaeological knowledge with existing community knowledge on national identity. We identified, analysed, and discussed ten different framing schemas in this article: Uniqueness, Succession, Language, Christianity, Western civilization, Nature, Stranger civilizations, Double identities, National heroes, and Future expectations. The different framing schemas are interconnected, but application of the framing schemas varies in different countries.","PeriodicalId":52158,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community Archaeology and Heritage","volume":"9 1","pages":"161 - 174"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48679848","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-17DOI: 10.1080/20518196.2021.1940431
S. Baugher
ABSTRACT Discovering Enfield Falls differs from many academic-managed heritage programmes that are top-down projects initiated by archaeologists. In it, planning originated with stakeholders determined to create a public history of a hamlet in New York (USA) which the state had demolished (in the early twentieth century) to create a park. This nineteenth-century hamlet had been both a commercial centre for farmers and a regional scenic tourist destination. Contemporary stakeholders did not need archaeologists to help them discover their history or to realize the heritage value of Enfield Falls. They needed archaeologists to collaborate with them to reveal the cultural landscape and history buried in the park to larger communities, both local and in the surrounding northeast region of the United States and Southeast Canada. This case study describes collaborations undertaken from 1998 to the present (fieldwork, museum exhibits, and more) by archaeologists, community members, and Cornell University archaeology service-learning students.
{"title":"Discovering Enfield Falls: A community initiated archaeological heritage project in Ithaca, New York","authors":"S. Baugher","doi":"10.1080/20518196.2021.1940431","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20518196.2021.1940431","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Discovering Enfield Falls differs from many academic-managed heritage programmes that are top-down projects initiated by archaeologists. In it, planning originated with stakeholders determined to create a public history of a hamlet in New York (USA) which the state had demolished (in the early twentieth century) to create a park. This nineteenth-century hamlet had been both a commercial centre for farmers and a regional scenic tourist destination. Contemporary stakeholders did not need archaeologists to help them discover their history or to realize the heritage value of Enfield Falls. They needed archaeologists to collaborate with them to reveal the cultural landscape and history buried in the park to larger communities, both local and in the surrounding northeast region of the United States and Southeast Canada. This case study describes collaborations undertaken from 1998 to the present (fieldwork, museum exhibits, and more) by archaeologists, community members, and Cornell University archaeology service-learning students.","PeriodicalId":52158,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community Archaeology and Heritage","volume":"8 1","pages":"273 - 289"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20518196.2021.1940431","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43474579","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-31DOI: 10.1080/20518196.2021.1928449
Chelsi Slotten
When was the last time you talked with a non-specialist about archaeology? Did they mention the latest journal article they read, a piece they saw on the news, or something they saw on social media? If I had to guess, I would say they brought up one of the latter two – that has certainly been my experience. As one of the hosts of the Women in Archaeology Podcast, I spend considerable time thinking about how to best communicate with the public about archaeology. The public we communicate with includes the general public, other archaeologists, and students. If we are committed to engaging in truly accessible and public archaeology that ‘engages the public in order to share archaeological findings and/or promote stewardship of cultural resources’ (McDavid 2002, 2), we need to consider our audience, where they are getting their information from, and how best to effectively communicate with them. Even with the best of intentions, archaeologists have often struggled to accomplish this goal. Difficulties in effectively communicating with the public primarily come down to two factors: mode of delivery and style of delivery. Academics and professionals are accustomed to lecturing, giving conference papers, and writing reports, articles, and books. These modes of delivery inherently limit one’s audience. Only people who can physically be present at a talk, can afford to purchase sometimes exorbitantly-priced books or journal articles, know how to access reports, and have the time to dedicate to finding and engaging with these materials have access. There is a profound burden of interest and ability on the public that is not conducive to widespread communication and dissemination of knowledge. Even if talks are recorded and put online, and published material was freely and easily accessed through open access journals, there would still be this issue: the style of delivery. Think about the last journal article you read or conference presentation you attended. How often did you hear someone use jargon, such as CRM, NHPA, NAGPRA, neoliberalism, transfer wear, sherd, lithics, or Clovis point without any explanation of what they are? There are innumerable words and phrases that are rooted in archaeological theory or history that make perfect sense to a trained archaeologist and have a place in professional settings. Those same words will not have the same meaning to the public and can be either off-putting or lead to confusion over what is being said. A recent survey by the Women in Archaeology Podcast found that listeners of archaeology podcasts were highly put off by shows that contain lots of jargon (Slotten 2021). The problem arises when archaeologists forget who their audiences are and speak to the interested public as if they were trained archaeologists. Unfortunately, this is a widespread problem as academics and professionals often lack the skills to effectively communicate with a broader audience (Birch 2013). As a co-host and co-creator of the Women in
{"title":"Podcasting as public archaeology","authors":"Chelsi Slotten","doi":"10.1080/20518196.2021.1928449","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20518196.2021.1928449","url":null,"abstract":"When was the last time you talked with a non-specialist about archaeology? Did they mention the latest journal article they read, a piece they saw on the news, or something they saw on social media? If I had to guess, I would say they brought up one of the latter two – that has certainly been my experience. As one of the hosts of the Women in Archaeology Podcast, I spend considerable time thinking about how to best communicate with the public about archaeology. The public we communicate with includes the general public, other archaeologists, and students. If we are committed to engaging in truly accessible and public archaeology that ‘engages the public in order to share archaeological findings and/or promote stewardship of cultural resources’ (McDavid 2002, 2), we need to consider our audience, where they are getting their information from, and how best to effectively communicate with them. Even with the best of intentions, archaeologists have often struggled to accomplish this goal. Difficulties in effectively communicating with the public primarily come down to two factors: mode of delivery and style of delivery. Academics and professionals are accustomed to lecturing, giving conference papers, and writing reports, articles, and books. These modes of delivery inherently limit one’s audience. Only people who can physically be present at a talk, can afford to purchase sometimes exorbitantly-priced books or journal articles, know how to access reports, and have the time to dedicate to finding and engaging with these materials have access. There is a profound burden of interest and ability on the public that is not conducive to widespread communication and dissemination of knowledge. Even if talks are recorded and put online, and published material was freely and easily accessed through open access journals, there would still be this issue: the style of delivery. Think about the last journal article you read or conference presentation you attended. How often did you hear someone use jargon, such as CRM, NHPA, NAGPRA, neoliberalism, transfer wear, sherd, lithics, or Clovis point without any explanation of what they are? There are innumerable words and phrases that are rooted in archaeological theory or history that make perfect sense to a trained archaeologist and have a place in professional settings. Those same words will not have the same meaning to the public and can be either off-putting or lead to confusion over what is being said. A recent survey by the Women in Archaeology Podcast found that listeners of archaeology podcasts were highly put off by shows that contain lots of jargon (Slotten 2021). The problem arises when archaeologists forget who their audiences are and speak to the interested public as if they were trained archaeologists. Unfortunately, this is a widespread problem as academics and professionals often lack the skills to effectively communicate with a broader audience (Birch 2013). As a co-host and co-creator of the Women in","PeriodicalId":52158,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community Archaeology and Heritage","volume":"9 1","pages":"134 - 137"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20518196.2021.1928449","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42403382","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-07DOI: 10.1080/20518196.2021.1911122
D. Abrampah
ABSTRACT This article discusses the important roles that archaeologists can play in development projects that affect the history and culture of indigenous people who live around a project site. It discusses the salvage archaeology that was done at one site, the Bui hydro-electric dam in Ghana, even though dam authorities refused, at first, to allow it. The article discusses how, through salvage work, archaeologists became cultural brokers and successfully mediated the ‘conflict’ between the Bui Dam Authority (BPA) and the affected communities. Community members were threatening not to relocate until their shrines and ancestral burials were relocated, which could have disrupted the construction activities of the dam and the project schedule. The relocation of the shrines and the burials revealed the importance of community spaces shared by the dead and the living, and showed how essential it is to be physically and spiritually invested in life and death.
{"title":"Haggling over graves and shrines: The intersection of archaeology, the community, and dam authorities at the Bui dam area in Ghana","authors":"D. Abrampah","doi":"10.1080/20518196.2021.1911122","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20518196.2021.1911122","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article discusses the important roles that archaeologists can play in development projects that affect the history and culture of indigenous people who live around a project site. It discusses the salvage archaeology that was done at one site, the Bui hydro-electric dam in Ghana, even though dam authorities refused, at first, to allow it. The article discusses how, through salvage work, archaeologists became cultural brokers and successfully mediated the ‘conflict’ between the Bui Dam Authority (BPA) and the affected communities. Community members were threatening not to relocate until their shrines and ancestral burials were relocated, which could have disrupted the construction activities of the dam and the project schedule. The relocation of the shrines and the burials revealed the importance of community spaces shared by the dead and the living, and showed how essential it is to be physically and spiritually invested in life and death.","PeriodicalId":52158,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community Archaeology and Heritage","volume":"8 1","pages":"229 - 244"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20518196.2021.1911122","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47895445","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-05DOI: 10.1080/20518196.2021.1894784
Alicia Castillo-Mena, Jaime Almansa-Sánchez
ABSTRACT Community engagement is a widespread requirement in current archaeological work. However, heritage management still lacks public participation in many regions. This paper aims to offer an example of community engagement as applied research in the context of an international conference. In order to do so, the strategy, the actions for the targeted communities and the outcomes of those actions will be presented, with a special focus on the context of World Heritage and the outcomes of the three conferences.
{"title":"Applied research through community building during International conferences. The case of the International conference on best practices in World heritage. Minorca, Spain","authors":"Alicia Castillo-Mena, Jaime Almansa-Sánchez","doi":"10.1080/20518196.2021.1894784","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20518196.2021.1894784","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Community engagement is a widespread requirement in current archaeological work. However, heritage management still lacks public participation in many regions. This paper aims to offer an example of community engagement as applied research in the context of an international conference. In order to do so, the strategy, the actions for the targeted communities and the outcomes of those actions will be presented, with a special focus on the context of World Heritage and the outcomes of the three conferences.","PeriodicalId":52158,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community Archaeology and Heritage","volume":"8 1","pages":"192 - 209"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20518196.2021.1894784","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42520873","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-04-03DOI: 10.1080/20518196.2021.1894765
Zahra Hussain
ABSTRACT This paper builds on the argument that large-scale infrastructural development in remote communities poses a threat to their local heritage landscape. This is done not only through physical intervention in landscapes (through bridges, roads, pipelines or ports) but also through imaginaries projected about development that tends to re-label local landscapes as hotspots for development. This paper explores drawing as a medium to explore fragile-heritage landscapes through the stories, folklores and experiences of local communities within their landscape. It proposes a mapping strategy that attempts to grasp the diminishing heritage landscapes of Gwadar, a coastal town in Pakistan which is being re-claimed as the hub of prosperity (port) connecting two infrastructural mammoths: the BRI land routes and maritime silk roads. Together with the community, their stories and memories, we ‘draw-in’ tangible, immaterial, invisible, human, spiritual and more-than-human entities, and their worlds that are at risk of erasure in the current wave of infrastructural development.
{"title":"‘Drawing in’ other worlds: Addressing fragile heritage landscapes through cosmopolitical maps","authors":"Zahra Hussain","doi":"10.1080/20518196.2021.1894765","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20518196.2021.1894765","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper builds on the argument that large-scale infrastructural development in remote communities poses a threat to their local heritage landscape. This is done not only through physical intervention in landscapes (through bridges, roads, pipelines or ports) but also through imaginaries projected about development that tends to re-label local landscapes as hotspots for development. This paper explores drawing as a medium to explore fragile-heritage landscapes through the stories, folklores and experiences of local communities within their landscape. It proposes a mapping strategy that attempts to grasp the diminishing heritage landscapes of Gwadar, a coastal town in Pakistan which is being re-claimed as the hub of prosperity (port) connecting two infrastructural mammoths: the BRI land routes and maritime silk roads. Together with the community, their stories and memories, we ‘draw-in’ tangible, immaterial, invisible, human, spiritual and more-than-human entities, and their worlds that are at risk of erasure in the current wave of infrastructural development.","PeriodicalId":52158,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community Archaeology and Heritage","volume":"8 1","pages":"127 - 141"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20518196.2021.1894765","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48661820","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：