**[2003 EAA](http://www.eaa2003am.spb.ru/program.html) Session**

**Archaeology as Inspiration for Public Audiences**

Organized by John H. Jameson, Jr. (USA), e-mail: <john_jameson@nps.gov>

*This session describes projects, programs, and initiatives in both
public and private sectors that demonstrate how the discipline of
archaeology as well as archaeological information and objects can be
sources of inspiration as well as education for public audiences and
society. Examples at programmatic, community, and site specific levels
stem from innovative programs within government agencies, museums,
universities, and private groups that use the archaeological record to
enhance the public\'s or visitor\'s experience. These programs create
opportunities for public audiences to form intellectual and emotional
connections to the meanings and significance of archaeological
information and the people and events that created them. They include
public interpretation programs, outreach projects, training modules,
publications, interpretive art projects, and exhibits, presented in a
variety of forums that engage, entertain, and educate about cultural
heritage.*

Thursday, 11 September 2003

[Final Agenda:]{.underline}

14:00 Introduction to the Session - John H. Jameson, Jr.

14:10 Archaeology on the Inspirational Highway - John H. Jameson, Jr.

14:30 Nexus Archaeology: explorations in archaeology, art and memory -
John Schofield

# 14:50 Enhancing public appreciation of archaeology in eastern Australia - 

Wendy Beck and John Appleton

15:10 Sites and identity: Archaeology with the Barunga /Wugularr
Aboriginal communities in remote northern Australia **-** Jane Balme and
Claire Smith

15:30-15:40 10-minute break

15:40 Dividing walls: sites of disputed memory: preserve or obliterate?
**-** Celia Clark

16:00 Which Bits do We Bother with? Consultant Public Archaeology in
Australia *-* John Appleton

16:20 Archaeology and its Multiple Actors on the Media Arena *-* Sara
Hagstrom

16:40-18:00 Open discussion and audience feedback

[Paper titles and abstracts]{.underline}:

**1. Archaeology on the Inspirational Highway**

# John H. Jameson, Jr., US National Park Service, e-mail: [***john_jameson@nps.gov***](mailto:john_jameson@nps.gov)

Public archaeologists in the US National Park Service (NPS) and
elsewhere are not content to rely solely on traditional methodologies
and analytical techniques in their attempts to reconstruct human history
and bring it to life for the public. We want to venture beyond
utilitarian explanations and explore the interpretive potential of
cognitive imagery that archeological information and objects can
inspire. At our parks and historic sites, we use the archaeological
record to enhance the visitors\' experience, and, working with our
public interpretation colleagues, help to create opportunities for
visitors to form intellectual and emotional connections to the meanings
and significance of archeological information and the people and events
that created them. A new NPS Course of Study to cross-train
archaeologists and park interpreters emphasizes these principles.

Archaeology can inspire a wide variety of artistic expressions ranging
from straightforward computer-generated reconstructions and traditional
artists\' conceptions to other art forms such as sculpture, poetry, and
opera. Although some level of conjecture will always be present in these
works, they are often no less conjectural than technical interpretations
and have the benefit of providing visual and conceptual imagery that can
communicate contexts and settings in compelling and unique ways. The
cognitive connections between archaeology and art reflect an inductive
approach in defining and explaining the resource and making it more
meaningful to the public. An emphasis on artistic interpretations and
narrative is consistent with a new direction in archaeological practice
that challenges the positivist paradigm of processual archaeology,
promotes the relevance and validity of deductive reasoning over
inductive reasoning, and represents a fundamental change in how
archaeologists plan and conduct research and evaluate significance.
Since 1991, the Southeast Archaeological Center, US National Park
Service, through its interpretive arts program, has supported national
parks and other public agencies in producing art works that help tell
the fascinating stories of America\'s cultural heritage. Recent
publications and academic symposia organized by the Center have examined
a variety of examples of this new approach as it applies to more
meaningful and effective approaches to interpretation that emphasize
public awareness, access, and inspiration.

**2. Nexus Archaeology: explorations in archaeology, art and memory**

John Schofield, English Heritage, e-mail:
<john.schofield@english-heritage.org.uk>

One of the more surprising outcomes of English Heritage's recent
assessment of Cold War sites in England has been the degree to which
these robust, iconic, monumental and historically significant military
structures have provided the inspiration for artistic representation.
Place has provided the dramatic backdrop for works that create,
galvanise and stimulate memory of this contemporary past. Art in this
case is reflexive of the sense and character of place, taking from
landscapes of the later twentieth century as well as contributing
towards their reconstruction, their reinterpretation. But artistic
expression can also: provide a focus for ownership claims (as with
District Six in Cape Town); give material expression to protest and
opposition (as at Peace Camp, in the Nevada Desert); make the intangible
tangible (the Berlin Wall, in some areas); enhance and give time-depth
and relevance to contemporary working and living spaces; and provide an
alternative mode of expression for otherwise 'conventional'
archaeological projects. In this last example, the artefacts, contexts
and record sheets are one product of the excavation -- literally
'preservation by record'; but artistic representation, influenced by the
process and results of excavation can create additional -- and
polysemic - narratives, attracting an ever-wider and more diverse
audience to appreciate the relevance and validity of researching and
documenting the contemporary past; public archaeology through media
including archaeology, but not exclusively so.

This contribution will outline these general points with examples,
including notably current work on Cold War sites in England, as well as
District Six, Berlin and the Nevada Desert.

# 

# 3. Enhancing public appreciation of archaeology in eastern Australia

Wendy Beck, University of New England, e-mail: <wbeck@metz.une.edu.au>;
and

John Appleton, Archaeological Surveys and Reports Ltd, e-mail:
<japples@northnet.com.au>

Archaeological sites in coastal New South Wales are under particular
threat from development as the population of Australia expands along the
desirable coastal fringes. This has led to a relatively high level of
archaeological activity and investigation in these areas, unlike most of
inland Australia. However, there are relatively low levels of public
interest in archaeology in coastal communities. This paper looks at two
cases studies of presenting archaeological places to a public audience
with the goal of engaging public attention and changing people\'s ideas
about the past. Both cases address widely-held stereotypes about
heritage in NSW. The first case confronts stereotypes of Indigenous
Australians at Corindi Beach, and the second targets stereotypes of
colonial historical places within an unsympathetic planning environment
at Port Macquarie. The focus in the first case is on archaeology and
landscape, while in the second on archaeology and artefacts. The first
case uses innovative presentation through written guides to an extant
landscape, whereas the second looks at presenting the past as a lost
landscape through aesthetically pleasing objects. The problems and
advantages of these approaches are compared and discussed.

**4. Sites and identity: Archaeology with the Barunga /Wugularr
Aboriginal communities in remote northern Australia**

Jane Balme, School of Social and Cultural Studies, University of Western
Australia, e-mail: <jbalme@cyllene.uwa.edu.au>; and

Claire Smith, Department of Archaeology, The Flinders University of
South Australia, e-mail: <Claire.Smith@flinders.edu.au>

Archaeology on land belonging to people living on the remote Barunga and
Wugularr Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory of Australia
has been increasingly influenced by the participation of community
members. This has resulted in a change in the direction of the work from
an archaeology of chronology and continental distributions of artefacts
to an archaeology about landscape and identity in the present.

The Barunga/Wugularr communities are mixed language residential groups
created after the 1913 opening of a tin mine in the area which depended
on Aboriginal labour. The transformation of these people from a hunting
and gathering economy to a more sedentary life associated with mining
and regularly living in mixed language residential groups involved both
economic and social change. A new shared community identity is created
by constantly re-conceptualising their landscape. At the same time
people continue to maintain links and rights to traditional lands. It is
the documentation of this present day landscape that the community
emphasises in the current collaborative archaeology. Part of their
desire to record these sites is to ensure that the process continues but
it is also partly to demonstrate the importance of places to children.
Children are included in the work and accompany archaeologists and
knowledgeable elders on site visits. They also learn about the project
from materials produced for schools.

**5.** **Dividing walls: sites of disputed memory: preserve or
obliterate?**

Celia Clark, Portsmouth Society, <celiadeane.clark@btopenworld.com>

Where they survive, offensive or defensive walls and naval and military
sites, built to defend nations or divide people, are often sites of
disputed memory. How do the disparate passions and other responses they
arouse affect their physical survival and their interpretation, and what
is the effect of the passing of time on these issues?

Structures such as the 'Peace Line' in Belfast will be seen quite
differently by Catholic, Protestant and military personnel, as will the
Berlin Wall, military and naval sites such as Rangsdorf and Wunsdorf
Eastern Germany, and Kronstadt in St. Petersburg.

The paper will identify different discourses, values and meanings
attached to these sites within different cultures and contribute to site
interpretation by identifying different practices and potentials, as
well as to to conservation practice and presentation of sites via
revaluation of their significance to different groups and individuals.
Different nations\' planning and conservation policies affect the
long-term survival of these sites and structures, and these in turn will
be shaped by national attitudes.

**6. Which Bits do We Bother with? Consultant Public Archaeology in
Australia**

John Appleton, Archaeological Surveys & Reports Ltd, Armidale,
Australia, <japples@northnet.com.au>

In common with many other places in the world, in Australia the
assessment, recording, preservation and management of the archaeological
record is overseen by three sectors, the public servants, the academics
and researchers, and the Consultant Public Archaeologists. This paper
looks at the problem Consultant Public Archaeologists in New South Wales
have in determining what and how cultural material should be preserved,
at what cost, and by whom.

While there is legislation that sets out the broad parameters of
protective measures to ensure that the cultural record is managed in the
appropriate fashion there is no legislation that sets out the role and
responsibilities of Consultant Public Archaeologists. Other
archaeologists such as academics focus primarily on the well-known or
established sites, places and relics, or sites of potential research,
both for practical and for economic reasons. Similarly, the
archaeologists employed by the State Heritage Office (which oversees
heritage sites) and the National Parks and Wildlife Service (which
oversees Indigenous sites) tend to concentrate their efforts on managing
the visually impressive and easily interpreted sites. The Consultant
Public Archaeologist on the other hand is required to assess the
significance all types of sites, including those of little academic
interest, and of few aesthetic qualities. While their primary
responsibility is to provide a safeguard against the unmanaged
destruction of all site types there is also a responsibility to ensure
that measures should be taken to preserve examples of all significant
site types. However, the Consultant Public Archaeologist must work
within the client\'s expectations, and as a consequence there are
limitations to what can be achieved to preserve and manage those
archaeological sites deemed not to be of academic or of potential public
interest. In this paper I will discuss some of the ways in which the
Consultant Public Archaeologist might address this imbalance.

**7. Archaeology and its Multiple Actors on the Media Arena**

Sara Hagstrom, Uppsala University, Sweden

The paper intends to present different public themes and expectations
around concepts such as \"prehistory\" and \"archaeology\" during
different decades of the 20th century, through a analysis of the content
in a northern Swedish newspaper. The production of images of the past on
a collective arena such as the media, as a part of the discourse of
civil society, and the role of the archaeologist in this context of
multiple meanings, is discussed, mainly through some examples of media
events.