Key Concepts in Public Archaeology – Introduction Chapter Notes

Field sits “where archaeology meets the world.”
Multiple complementary definitions stress interaction, ethics, negotiation, consumption, and improvement of relationships between archaeology and non-specialists:
- Ascherson (2000) ➜ ethics emerging when archaeology enters “real world of economic conflicts and political struggle.”
- Schadla-Hall (1999) ➜ any activity with potential public interaction.
- Merriman (2004) ➜ studies how archaeology becomes public culture; contestation inevitable.
- Moshenska (2009a) ➜ critiques production/consumption of archaeological commodities.
- Matsuda & Okamura (2011) ➜ examines and seeks to improve archaeology–public relationship.
Working chapter definition: “practice and scholarship where archaeology meets the world.”

Provide concise snapshots of major ideas & case studies across public archaeology.
Usable either cover-to-cover (broad competency) or chapter-specific (targeted insight).
Reader should leave knowing:
1. What public archaeology is.
2. Why it matters.
3. How to act within it.

Moral & academic duty to share scientific work “to the fullest possible extent” with general public.
Obligation to communicate in “common clay” of popular understanding.
Not first/only advocate but a prominent early exemplar.

Discipline spans professional–academic–amateur, local–global, science–humanities divides.
National traditions (Greece, Argentina, UK, Japan, etc.) generate divergent vocabularies and priorities.
Author adopts inclusive lens; acknowledges term also used narrowly for outreach alone.

Analogy to sciences:
- Science Studies (critical research) vs. Science Communication (practice of sharing).
- Public archaeology melds both roles simultaneously.
Draws upon museum studies, communication skills, social theory, economics, tech, etc.
Makes field “more complicated—and more interesting.”

Book’s stance shaped by 20+ yrs at UCL Institute of Archaeology.
Intellectual lineage: Peter Ucko’s radicalism → teaching/writing by Tim Schadla-Hall, Nick Merriman, Neal Ascherson & students.
Contributions include:
- Digital media studies.
- Engagement with cultural economics.
- Heritage & human-rights perspectives.
Acknowledges divergent US/UK uses of term (CRM focus vs. broader critical model).

(After Bonacchi & Moshenska 2015 – Figure 1.1)

“Amateur” or volunteer societies; precede professionalization.
Licensing/legal frameworks vary globally.
Metal-detecting a controversial subset; ethics & data quality uneven.
Demographics skew: older, white, middle-class (societies); overwhelmingly male (detectorists).

Concept traceable to McGimsey’s 1972 book Public Archaeology.
Encompasses national/regional heritage agencies (e.g., US National Park Service).
Now often labelled Cultural/Heritage Resource Management (CRM/HRM).
Emphasis on power, accountability, stewardship of taxpayer-funded assets.

Occurs in museums, heritage sites, field schools, classrooms, online, cruise lectures, etc.
Mix of formal teaching & craft-based experiential learning.
Debate between “deficit model” (fill knowledge gap) vs. “multiple perspectives” approach (Merriman 2004).

Largest economic footprint; includes TV (Time Team), best-selling books, magazines, apps, games.
Engages “antiquarians” with broad casual interest (Holtorf).
Shallow yet wide engagement crucial for political & financial support.

Critical scholarship analysing archaeology’s economic, legal, social, cultural, ethical contexts.
Scrutinises heritage cuts, community struggles, conflict archaeology, identity politics, etc.
Ethics topics: cultural property, descendant rights, sustainability.

Categories overlap: e.g., crowdsourced digitisation (open + popular + academic).
Career pathways flow among sectors (visitor ➜ volunteer ➜ student ➜ professional/media).
Typology is descriptive, not prescriptive; illustrates breadth of methods & audiences.

Leverage mature fields of Science Communication & Science Studies for skills (writing, media production, ethnography, epistemology).
Situate archaeology within broader Public Humanities (public history, classical reception, digital humanities, museum studies).
Recognise that archaeology is one strand within diverse public engagements with the past.

Current deficit: limited large-scale, systematic information on public attitudes, non-visitors, cross-national comparisons.
Strategies:
- Collaborate with market-research frameworks.
- Meta-analyse dispersed small studies.
- Integrate rigorous monitoring & evaluation into every project (often required by funders like HLF).
- Teach data skills in public-archaeology curricula and CPD.
Better data fundamental for assessing impact, refining methods, advocating funding.

Central question: Who owns, interprets, and benefits from the past?
Public archaeology negotiates competing claims (economic, nationalist, descendant, scholarly).
Balances openness with preservation; participation with professionalism; entertainment with accuracy.
Ultimately seeks democratised, accountable stewardship of archaeological heritage.