Heritage as sector,factor and vector: conceptualizing the shifting relationship between heritage management and spatial planning

Heritage is a highly malleable concept that is constantly in flux and whose substance and meaning are continuously being redefined by society. From such a dynamic perspective, it is inevitable that new approaches and practices have developed for dealing with heritage in the context of planned development. While most scholars acknowledge the existence of various heritage approaches, one of the major defining features is often neglected: their distinctive outlook on spatial dynamics. In this article, the shifting role and purpose of heritage conservation in Dutch spatial planning is analysed. A conceptual framework is introduced that frames three approaches to the planning treatment of heritage; the sector, factor and vector approach, respectively. Although these approaches have developed in a historical sequence, the new did not replace the old but rather gained ground amongst different actors. Thus, three quite different ways of treating the past in the present now coexist in Dutch planning practice. Although this coexistence can raise conflict, we argue that contemporary heritage planning does not call for a one-size-fits-all approach, but rather for a mixed-mode model.     

HISTORY AND ITS DEAD

Thomas Laqueur has brought together half a century of research on modern European mortuary culture into an impressive narrative of how the Christian churchyard was replaced by the modern cemetery, how interment was partly replaced by the technology of cremation, and how writing and preserving the names of the dead coincided with democratization and social reform. Beyond the grand narrative of the history of modern burial, he also shows how the modern culture of history and memory is intertwined with the transformation of mortuary practices. On a deeper level, he points toward new ways of conceptualizing the relation between the living and the dead, leading up toward, if not fully confronting, the challenge that propels his own endeavor, namely the existential‐ontological predicament of living after those who have been and the nature of spectrality.     

Genauigkeit — was ist das? Wandel des Konzeptes zwischen Antike und Neuzeit

Since the concept of reality has been dominated by the methods of modern natural science, the criteria of precision have been restricted to exact measurement, i.e. quantification required by experimental science and technology. In premodern times, however, the paradigm according to which reality was conceived, designed a universal correspondence of substances and processes by the construction of analogies. These had a kind of ‘semantical’ precision, though different from mathematical, nevertheless in the end leading to mathematical proportionality. This premodern type of precision is explained by examples from Anaximenes and Plato.     

Die fauna bei Kālidāsa,II

Ohne ZusammenfassungS. IIJ, II (1958), S. 33–53.     

Minimally destructive DNA extraction from archaeological artefacts made from whale baleen

Here we demonstrate the successful extraction and amplification of target species DNA from artefacts made of whale baleen collected from excavations of past palaeo-Eskimo and Inuit cultures in Greenland. DNA was successfully extracted and amplified from a single baleen bristle of 1.5 cm length dated based on archaeological context to the period of the Saqqaq culture, more than 4000 years ago and following decades of storage at room temperature at the National Museum. The results reveal ancient baleen in archaeological material as a potential source of DNA that can be used for population genetic studies. We conclude that genetic investigation of historical baleen collections can contribute to our knowledge of the prehistoric population genetics of baleen whales, for example by quantifying the impact of modern whaling on the genetic diversity of bowhead whales.     

Eduard Nielsen's Oral Tradition Sixty Years After

ABSTRACT

When Eduard Nielsen’s Oral Tradition appeared in 1954 the author’s main motivation for writing it was frustration with what was felt to be serious shortcomings in current methods of Old Testament research. Influ-enced by “Scandinavian” scholarship (above all Pedersen, Nyberg, and Engnell), Nielsen wishes to replace historical critical approaches with more adequate, updated methods. In particular, he wants to integrate insights into the oral processes that lead to the creation of the literature of the Hebrew Bi-ble into his exegetical techniques. For comparative purposes, Nielsen utilizes texts from ancient cultures where orality was predominant. He discusses above all Greek, Mesopotamian, and Old Norse sources. In view of the huge interest in orality and memory in academia today it is obvious that Nielsen was far ahead of his time. It is more than regrettable that so little attention has been paid to this pioneering work.