Cold War Heritage and the Conservation of Military Remains in Yorkshire 1

Over the last few years there has been a growing interest in the future of military remains created in the UK since 1945. This interest has been sparked by debates that have taken place in archaeology, heritage management and conservation. Our purpose in this article is to intersect with these discussions and practice in a number of ways. First the article sets the discussion of Cold War military sites into the wider context of the rise of military archaeology and heritage conservation more generally. Second, it reviews some of the literature relating to Cold War heritage, both in terms of land management and reuse, but more centrally as a potential national heritage asset. Third, it outlines how this potential asset is managed currently within the heritage protection system and the heritage challenges posed by these remains, particularly the attempts which have been made to incorporate them into a mainstream heritage agenda. Finally, the paper considers the successes and limitations of heritage conservation strategies, under the auspices of the Cold War Monuments Protection Programme (MPP).     

The Archaeology of the Military Orders: The Material Culture of Holy War

THIS PAPER reviews the current state of research into the archaeology of the military orders. It contrasts the advances made by historians and archaeologists, with the latter continuing to focus on the particularism of individual sites, with an emphasis on architectural analyses. Historians have contributed new insights by adopting a supranational approach. This paper argues that archaeologists can build on this by adopting a more problem-oriented, comparative approach. Drawing on examples from frontier and heartland territories, archaeological approaches are subdivided into material investment, material identity and cultural landscapes, to place sites of the military orders within long-term, multi-scalar contexts. This contributes to a broader social and economic understanding of the orders, who contributed significantly to urbanisation, rural development and trade, and invested in material expressions of their authority and ideology. The paper concludes that more holistic, interregional approaches will move the archaeological study of the military orders forward.     

The “War on Terror” and the Military–Archaeology Complex: Iraq, Ethics, and Neo-Colonialism

The archaeological response to the 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq is often portrayed as a crusade to rescue antiquities, destroyed either directly by the military action itself or indirectly by the looting of archaeological sites and museums. I argue in this paper that this narrative is awfully inadequate, and masks the ethical and political dimensions at the core of this historical episode. I contend that, in their often well-intended attempts to rescue antiquities, most archaeologists involved have projected a professionalized, apolitical and abstract response, devoid of the social and political context, and based on the fetishisation of a narrowly and problematically defined archaeological record. I argue further that the increasing collaboration of many archaeologists with the invading militaries and occupation authorities since 2003, assisted by the “cultural turn” especially within the US military, have laid the foundations for an emerging military-archaeology complex. I trace the contours of this phenomenon by examining various archaeological and museum discourses and practices. This new development (with historical resonances that go as far back as the 18th century, if not earlier) is linked directly with the ontology and epistemology of archaeology, and deserves further close scrutiny and analysis. The thesis advanced here does not advocate inaction and withdrawal in situations of warfare, but a critical engagement that safeguards the autonomy of the scholar; critiques the political agendas and power structures of contemporary warfare; deconstructs its discursive basis and its ideological overtones; and shows its catastrophic consequences for people and things alike, past and present.     

Heritage Formulation in Overtly Politicized Environments: A Commentary

Archaeology undertaken in overtly politicized environments creates situations and data that archaeologists are not positioned to control either in the moment or in perpetuity. This commentary examines the five diverse, revealing case studies that appear Archaeologies 2.2 and 3.1 and identifies the underlying dynamics that can create both an ethical burden for archaeologists and potentially charged, even dangerous, situations for others. These include archaeological heritage management demands and failures; contrary heritage valuation; restriction of associations with potential heritage resources; balancing archaeological research goals against local economic, political and social aspirations; and the complex trans-border reality of archaeologically identified societies that complicates heritage deployment in modern contexts. Whether or not activist engagement or outcomes are part of our practice or intention, there is no such thing as a value-free archaeological outcome.     

Heritage spectacles: the case of Amphipolis excavations during the Greek economic crisis

This article explores the ways in which the archaeological excavations at Amphipolis, Northern Greece, were transformed into a ‘heritage spectacle’ during the summer of 2014. The article argues that the spectacularisation of Amphipolis excavations constituted a powerful, political medium for dis-orientating the wider Greek public from issues related to the severe economic crisis of the country. Although the practice of heritage spectacularisation is not new, the media spectacle of Amphipolis introduced an advanced mechanism for spectacularizing archaeological research and the past. The article deconstructs this mechanism through a thematic content analysis of about 100 newspaper articles published in the Greek press, filtered through the lenses of spectacle theory. As it is demonstrated, the spectacularisation process of Amphipolis excavations is embodied by emotive dramatisation, banal cultural symbols, escapism and power imbalances. The article concludes with an interpretive framework for heritage spectacles while highlighting ethical and practical implications regarding the role of archaeologists and heritage practitioners towards political ‘abuse’ of heritage in times of socio-economic and political crises.     

The HMS Swift shipwreck: The development of underwater heritage protection in Argentina

Abstract

The aim of this article is to evaluate, with a critical perspective, the legal framework for heritage protection in Argentina, viewing it within an international context and focusing on the HMS Swift shipwreck – sunk in Puerto Deseado (Santa Cruz province) in 1770 – as a case study. Moreover, some initial proposals for a management plan are presented as a first step in thinking about the challenges of preserving underwater sites in Argentinian Patagonia.

Through this analysis some interesting points are outlined, including the reasons that make the Swift shipwreck a leading case in Argentina. It is the first interdisciplinary underwater archaeology project in the country comprising archaeologists who are also divers; it is supported by national authorities; and it is the first project of its kind to give underwater archaeologists experience in dealing with archaeological research and preservation in an environment of multiple conflicting interests.

The international relevance of the Swift case relies on the nature of underwater cultural heritage as an international resource. The project's history is located in an international setting, derived from ihternational trade and communication, in which many ships and their contents have been lost far from their origin or destination. At a national level the Swift is a wreck with significant historical and cultural value. It is in a unique state of preservation and its location near to the shore makes it highly accessible. Locally,HMS Swift will be relevant when Puerto Deseado's community starts to recognise it as a significant part of their own heritage and local people become involved in the preservation of the wreck.     

Heritage Tourism, Identity and Development in Peru

In this paper the linkages between archaeology, identity, and tourism in Peru are discussed in the context of economic and social development. The role of archaeologists in the heritage process (patrimonialización) is shown to transcend the production of narratives and destinations pivotal to the touristic experience. Engagements beyond the material remains of the pre-Colonial past have been hampered by the complex role of the indigenous in the national mythology, as much as by the perceived mandate of the discipline. Promise and pitfalls of ethical practices leading to locally grounded strategies are explored in two case studies.     

Historical Archaeology and the Recent Urban Past

This paper examines the ways in which international historical archaeologists have explored the recent past, in an effort to inform and contribute to contemporary debates about social identity and social inclusion. It is argued that the archaeology of the mundane and everyday can contribute to contemporary culture by creating a sense of community and developing social cohesion. Emphasis is placed upon the archaeology of the recent urban past and case studies are presented from New York, Sydney and Cape Town. The paper concludes that the study of the materiality of urban social life offers a powerful research tool for social scientists, and that archaeologists and heritage interpreters should make greater use of this form of evidence within the context of early 21st‐century urban regeneration schemes in the UK.     

Re-visiting the field: Collaborative archaeology as paradigm shift

Abstract

The emphasis of the JFA on field methods resonates strongly with current disciplinary interest in multivocality and participatory research. In this new epistemology of inclusiveness, communities play an active role in the production of archaeological knowledge as well as in the conservation of cultural heritage. From the perspective of archaeologists trained in the U.S. who conduct research in Latin America, we historicize changes in the triadic relationship among archaeologists, contemporary communities, and things of the past. This examination focuses on the evolving social context of archaeological practice. The social milieu within which archaeology is conducted is explored further by reference to a recent survey of archaeologists that elicited comments on grand challenges to archaeology. A few examples of the many forms that an engaged archaeology might take are offered from the Maya region. Although collaborative research poses challenges that emerge as communities entangled with archaeological practice become research partners, we suggest that the enhanced relevance that accompanies this transformation is well worth the effort.     

Portraits in the Background of “Nothingness” Sheikh Jabber Burnt House, an Object of Persian Gulf War

War is a common heritage of Middle East, the experience of war was changed to a dramatic propaganda in Iran while the southern neighbor of Iran experienced it in another way: oblivion. In such a context, both states attempt to change the facts of the war, one to a process of sanctification and one to the portraits of nothingness. We, as archaeologists, were accidentally encountered with a heritage of Persian Gulf War during a contemporary archaeology project. Our curiosity made us to take a look at Jabber house, a forgotten building, a domestic architecture destroyed by a racket during the war. What was recorded in our frames was actually an artistic work, out of its original context. Our subjectivity as archaeologists made us to think about the other objects fossilized in museums, they are out of their painful context and structure, they are only beautiful, the portraits in the background of nothingness, in a burnt gallery. Persian Gulf War is treated in Kuwait as a negative heritage, what is discussed in this article as the main theme??a negative heritage lost its original context and meaning: Sheikh Jabber house.     

Talking about others: archaeologists,indigenous peoples and heritage in Argentina

Abstract

In the process of creating the Argentinean nation, the indigenous peoples were dispossessed of their lands and their sacred sites. The indigenous past was therefore neglected in a nation that was thought to be formed by European immigrants. As a result, pre-Hispanic heritage was considered part of the public domain of the State and a subject of scientific enquiry. In the last few decades, legal and political changes have encouraged indigenous peoples' claims on heritage issues. The aim of this paper is to analyse a number of contested heritage issues in which indigenous communities were involved, as well as a few examples in which archaeologists, authorities and indigenous groups have succeeded in building a dialogue regarding the care of specific archaeological sites. These issues are further discussed in the context of the current socio-political and economic crisis in Argentina.     

考古发掘与考古发现

考古发现和考古学理论方法是考古学赖以进步的两条腿。考古发现不断刷新考古学家的视野并为考古学研究的深入提供新的资料,考古学理论方法使考古学的眼睛更加明亮,分析和思考更具有科学的力量。理论方法让考古学家对考古发现有更深入的认识,考古发现同时也推动综合研究和理论方法的进步。此外,考古发现往往会引起社会的关注,考古发现和考古学知识的普及可以为考古学的进步提供良好的社会环境,从而对考古学的发展产生强大的推动力量。考古学的持续发展要求考古学家必须正确处理考古发现、考古学自身理论方法的完善以及考古学与化遗产保护、公众知识状况和社会需求的关系。     

The fusion of law and ethics in cultural heritage management: The 21st century confronts archaeology

Abstract

Archaeologists around the world face complex ethical dilemmas that defy easy solutions. Ethics and law entwine, yet jurisprudence endures as the global praxis for guidance and result. Global legal norms articulate ‘legal rights’ and obligations while codes of professional conduct articulate ‘ethical rights’ and obligations. This article underscores how a rights discourse has shaped the 20th century discipline and practice of archaeology across the globe, including in the design and execution of projects like those discussed in the Journal of Field Archaeology. It illustrates how both law and ethics have been, and still are, viewed as two distinct solution-driven approaches that, even when out of sync, are the predominant frameworks that affect archaeologists in the field and more generally. While both law and ethics are influenced by social mores, public policy, and political objectives, each too often in cultural heritage debates has been considered a separate remedy. For archaeology, there remains the tendency to turn to law for a definite response when ethical solutions prove elusive.

As contemporary society becomes increasingly interconnected and the geo-political reality of the 21st century poses new threats to protecting archaeological sites and the integrity of the archaeological record during armed conflict and insurgency, law has fallen short or has lacked necessary enforcement mechanisms to address on-the-ground realities. A changing global order shaped by human rights, Indigenous heritage, legal pluralism, neo-colonialism, development, diplomacy, and emerging non-State actors directs the 21st century policies that shape laws and ethics. Archaeologists in the field today work within a nexus of domestic and international laws and regulations and must navigate increasingly complex ethical situations. Thus, a critical challenge is to realign approaches to current dilemmas facing archaeology in a way that unifies the ‘legal’ and the ‘ethical’ with a focus on human rights and principles of equity and justice. With examples from around the world, this article considers how law and ethics affect professional practice and demonstrates how engagement with law and awareness of ethics are pivotal to archaeologists in the field.     

Reflections on Attending the WAC Ethics Committee Workshop

This short piece recalls my expectations for the Ethics Committee Workshop, reflects on how refreshing and stimulating it was to see all my expectations tumble, and concludes with further puzzlement about how to proceed. Supplementary abstract, written by Julie Hollowell: Joan arrived at Stanford with a specific interest in developing an International Code of Ethics with guidelines that would challenge archaeologists to carry out more responsible and ethical research abroad. She found that almost all of her preconceived ideas for such a Code were altered as a result of our discussions about the limitations of drafting a document specifying what was “good” or “bad” from a generalized perspective. The focus instead lay on the PROCESS of making ethical decisions, based on WAC principles, alternative ways of constructing an ethical outcome, and learning from case studies. She emphasizes that ultimately we will certainly want to weigh our suggestions for ethical-decision-making so that certain outcomes are favored over others and notes that this is where the application of social justice as a key organizing principle comes into play.     

Private Business Investments in Heritage Sites in Tanzania: Recent Developments and Challenges for Heritage Management

Private business investments in heritage sites in Tanzania have recently captured scholarly interest of some archaeologists. Curiosity in the matter has largely emanated from a fundamental need to widen the sites’ utilization through heritage tourism. This paper reviews a recent incident in which a local community explicitly opposed the minister of Natural Resources and Tourism handing over ceremony of Kunduchi ruins site to a private investor. The paper also highlights recent developments, problems in private business investments, and their potential implications to the conservation and management of heritage sites in Tanzania.     

On the Cultural Heritage of Robots

Cultural heritage management is an inherently retrospective discipline. To the detriment of future heritage management, some heritage places were not recognised and managed even though they had instant global significance after their creation (e.g. sites of the Apollo space programme). The current revolution in robotic technologies, coupled with the developments in artificial intelligence, suggests that the creation of self‐reflective robots capable of semi‐independent thought (processes) is not too far away. This paper explores the conceptual and ethical issues that heritage managers face when dealing with the heritage such robots will create.     

Advisory Commissions for Archaeology — Sense or Nonsense? The Case of Belgium

Abstract

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.     

The Roads of Andalusia and Valencia. A Spanish Transport Legacy of the 18th and 19th Centuries

Roads designed by civil or military engineers for animal-drawn vehicles before the arrival of the railways constituted an essential factor for the movement of goods and people and for the economy and trade in different countries. The improvement in road construction techniques over the 18th and 19th centuries, following the creation of the first civil engineering colleges and institutions, allowed greater transportation at diminishing cost. Despite its significance, this heritage has received comparatively little attention from industrial archaeologists. As such, the object of the present article is to provide an overview of the development in road planning and construction in Spain over the 18th and 19th centuries, in order to demonstrate the historical and technological value of these roads. The article also presents two sections of Spanish roads corresponding to the start and end of the study period, and identifies some of the main archaeological elements dating to their time of construction that prove the evolution in road technology. This process has made it possible to create an inventory which incorporates the main elements that characterise this type of infrastructure.     

Digging and destruction: artifact collecting as meaningful social practice

Collected sites are commonly seen as places requiring expert intervention to ‘save the past’ from destruction by artifact collectors and looters. Despite engaging directly with the physical effects of collecting and vandalism, little attention is given to the meanings of these actions and the contributions they make to the stories told about sites or the past more broadly. Professional archaeologists often position their engagement with site destruction as heritage ‘salvage’ and regard collecting as lacking any value in contemporary society. Repositioning collecting as meaningful social practice and heritage action raises the question: in failing to understand legal or illegal collecting as significant to heritage, have archaeologists contributed to the erasure of acts that aim to work out identities, memories and senses of place, and contribute to an individual’s or group’s sense of ontological security? This question is explored through a case study from the New England region of North America where archaeologists have allied with Native American and other stakeholders to advocate for heritage protection by taking an anti-looting/collecting stance. We explore alternatives to this position that engage directly with forms of collecting as meaningful social practices that are largely erased in site narratives.