So, I am in the process of writing (hopefully finishing) my thesis. To give those of you who don't know and care some background, I am writing about archaeological site management in Turkey. The main chapter is a Site Management Plan for the Bronze-Age (c.2000 B.C.) excavation at Alalakh, which I worked at last summer and will return to work at again this summer, in a month. The site was excavated back in the 1930s and 40s by Sir Leonard Woolley, a famous British Archaeologist who was buddies with Agatha Christie. Currently the site is being excavated by one of my Professors, Aslıhan Yener. They have been excavating and studying the site for about the last 10 years. In the past couple of years they have decided to present the site more efficiently and officially to visitors as well as taking greater length to preserve Woolley's excavated remains as well as the recently excavated spaces. All this while continuing the scientific excavation seasons every summer.
All over the world and especially in Turkey, during the past decade, there has been a concerted effort to increase preservation and presentation efforts at Heritage Sites. This is often due to increase tourism but in a way helps (depending who or how you look at it) the preservation of culture and heritage. Turkey is also increasing their nominations to the World Heritage committee of UNESCO which then requires more standards and management efforts. Site Management Plans are one of these requirements which are beginning to be required for every site in Turkey, not just the ones applying for World Heritage status. Of course, it is another discussion as to who is really enforcing this requirement or funding it for that matter. Nevertheless, site managements plans can be useful in some situations, though more often than not they are shelved and never used because everyone involved are unable to agree on all decisions stated. The Management Plan which I am writing is only a preliminary plan, firstly because it is just me writing it, for a plan to be fully operational all persons involved and experts should be able to write or be heavily consulted about the relevant section, and secondly because I am only writing it in one year (Inşallah = god willing). A plan should be a long, drawn out process of constant consultation and discussion and editing as excavations progress and as different experts are brought in. So hopefully what I write can at least be used as a starting point and usable document for further development of the site. Besides the basics of the plans, such as stating the significance, values, historical background, funding options and stakeholders (people with some degree of interest in the site) I have also been given the task of discussing, and in some cases designing, the practical aspects which will also be implemented such as the visitors path, information panels and revamping Woolley's original excavation house as a information (or visitors) center. Some of these elements have already been designed and planned by the architect they have hired, such as the path and structure which will be built to cover and conserve the remains. The other elements such as panels and exhibits have been left to me, as the "heritage expert" to design. However, before I can get to any practical design stages, I have been caught up in the theoretical background as to how people really experience a heritage site, what information they are interested in and how much they can understand and how to connect the information to the process of excavation, to the surrounding landscape which houses many other ancient communities, and to the artifacts themselves which are housed in museums in the nearby city of Antakya as well as in the British Museum all the way in London. This brings in all sorts of theories and ideas, from Public Archaeology to Reception Theory (a personal fave from art classes at Wellesley) to New Museology methods. I have always had a tendency to get caught up in the preliminary, conceptual conversation before getting to the practical aspects, but really, how can you decide how to design and layout and strategically place an information panel, assuming you really want visitors to read it and understand and appreciate it, without taking into account all these theoretical concepts? Yes, you could stick the boring history on it and some pictures...but I barely ever read that stuff and who does? Though, it is interesting the practical aspects that do come up which can easily be overlooked if you are not looking at the greater picture. For example, when I walk around a site or museum I get tired, I want to sit down...therefore you need to add benches to the site and you need to add them in shady spots because who wants to sit and relax in the hot summer sun of south Turkey? This being said, I have been going through a great deal of practical as well as theoretical concepts in relation to my thesis. It has certainly been an interesting process and I have learned a lot, and am still learning a lot. I have been fortunate lately to network and meet with more 'heritage experts' who have more experience in the field though, really for every situation different approaches and methods have to be applied because every site is different and has different strengths and threats.
It was interesting last week, I attended a conference in Istanbul entitled 'Memory, Materiality and Cultural Heritage.' The conference was mainly dominated by anthropologists, who have a vastly different approach to heritage than archaeologists, a much more human-centered sensitivity rather than a focus on the ancient, material remains. I, personally, do not have an anthropologists viewpoint but I understand the need to incorporate the recognition of the local communities in the development of heritage sites. When you are only there for the summer, they are there year-round and have to deal and interact with any tourists who visit and they are the ones given responsibility to protect the site. And the more they can identify and respect the remains the more they will consider it their duty to protect it. Especially in my situation, we can't expect a spiritual connection by them to the ancient community, seeing them as their ancestors whose remains they must protect as is found in some parts of the world. Instead this is a 4,000 year old site and a recently settled, small, poor village whose even existence is threatened by the government because they dwell on the mound itself. They aren't allowed to expand and renovate their homes because they are in a legally protected heritage zone. And of course they have no where to more to, let alone the money which would be required for resettlement elsewhere. Yet, we have to expect or convince them that they have important ties to this ancient community in the hopes that they will respect it, protect the site and be proud of it, wanting to share it with their children, neighbors and visitors.
So, the question remains, how do you answer all these questions? efficiently, affectively and sensitively? All I have got so far is that it is a process, a very long one and I am not sure that it has an end. Now, I should go and actually write my thesis, now that I have vented some of my ideas, frustrations and concerns. Hope it hasn't bored you too much but since I know I don't post very often about what I am doing, I wanted to show that I have been thinking, if not doing. I'll leave it at that for now, maybe add some more later...
