|
Heritage
The recognition of
heritage as a vital component of national, ethnic,
and community identity that contributes to a “sense of
place” has resulted in worldwide attention that has been
growing for the past few decades. Archeology and the
archeologically recovered past are integral elements of
heritage. Therefore, it is important to
effectively interpret the meanings of our archeological
heritage to enhance cultural conversations about the
past, its meanings in the present, and for the future.
 Heritage
encompasses a broad array of resources: community
identity, ethnic and cultural traditions, environmental
resources affected by both human and natural actions,
historic architecture, and archeological ruins. The
emerging field of heritage resource studies
reflects the need for research devoted to understanding
the cultural characteristics of heritage, its importance
in contemporary society, and its uses.
 |
Whose past is to be
represented? |
|
|
How are competing
claims to the use of environmental resources to be
resolved? |
|
|
How are preservation,
conservation, and development, often inherently
conflicting efforts, to be balanced? |
Answering these questions
has led to a view of heritage that stresses the
relationships between the uses of the past, local
cultural expressions, and the natural environment.
Investigation of these issues crosses many disciplines,
including cultural anthropology, archeology, historic
preservation, community development, environmental
sciences, and others.
The Public Meaning of
Heritage
Areas and sites
designated as National Parks were selected on the basis
of their national significance, however our national
history is comprised of numerous compelling stories of
individual people and isolated historic sites. Many
National Parks contain natural and cultural resources
that are significant on the local and regional levels as
well as the national level. While such sites contribute
collectively to national history, their contribution can
only truly be understood within their local and regional
contexts.
Academic researchers,
park planners, and interpreters often have different
ideas about the relative importance of different
components of a park’s natural and cultural resources in
terms of their position in our national history. It is
important to recognize that, for public interpretation,
the public’s opinion of what constitutes heritage
and the public’s belief in the importance of individual
people, places, and events must be given great weight.
Giving consideration to public opinion and beliefs does
not mean aiming to the lowest common denominator, like
some commercial enterprises do to attract the greatest
number of people. Instead, public beliefs about the past
are integral to the very definition of heritage.
History and Heritage
A distinction should be
made between history—what happened in the
past—and heritage—the meanings that history holds
in today’s society.
|
|
Archeology
primarily deals with history, in that
archeological research attempts to determine what,
how, and why something happened in the past. |
|
|
Public
interpretation,
on the other hand, deals with heritage in
helping the public make intellectual and emotional
connections to the past. |
Such connections — the
revelation provided by interpretation — derive from the
public’s ability to place historical information into a
modern context.
Multiple Perspectives
The
distinction between history and heritage, however, is
often fluid. In the American Southwest, for example,
some sites of Native American ancestry that are
important as archeological resources also figure into
the present-day lives of Native Americans. Many Native
Americans incorporate ancient sites into contemporary
cultural practices and believe that certain kinds of
scientific investigation (particularly of ancestral
grave remains) should not be conducted.
This issue can arise for
archeological sites associated closely with other groups
as well. Whereas the histories of underrepresented
groups have largely been overshadowed by the dominant
national themes of early European settlers and economic
progress, in recent years historical and archeological
research from different perspectives has broadened the
resources for interpretation.
Efforts to interpret the archeological record must take
into consideration the socio-cultural situation at the
time the archeological excavations were conducted and
should include multiple perspectives. For example, some
exhibits may contain artifacts that were excavated in
the early to mid- 20th century but may lack a
recent context for making sense of them. Interpreting
the national heritage solely through these materials
could simply perpetuate biases that were inherent in the
original excavations. A different approach could provide
visitors with information on the history of archeology,
how research topics were selected, and how further
excavations might address topics that were not
previously addressed.
Authenticity and Relevance
The distinction between
history and heritage reflects the different roles and
responsibilities archeologists and interpreters have to
the visiting public.
|
|
Archeologists have the responsibility to provide authenticity, in that
material remains provide a direct link to past human
behavior; and |
|
|
Interpreters have the responsibility to frame this authentic information in a
manner that is relevant to the modern lives
of visitors. |
The public expects, and
is entitled to, compelling stories about our nation’s
history that are both authentic and relevant. Therefore,
archeologists and interpreters must work together in
order to fulfill both responsibilities.
|
