1887
Volume 28, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0957-6851
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9838
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Existing archaeological heritage communication focuses on educating the public by emphasising scientific knowledge from the perspectives of experts (e.g. archaeologists), often sidelining the perspectives of the local community. Nevertheless, the local community’s perspective is equally important in providing humanistic insights and in connecting the past to the present context. This research explores how local communities make meaning of and relate heritage to their social identity. In-depth interviews were conducted with 20 purposely-sampled representatives from various local community groups in Lenggong Valley, Malaysia; including village heads, village elders and individuals from various social and cultural backgrounds. The findings provide interesting insights into how the local community defines and connects to heritage. Importantly, this study highlights multilayered dimensions of archaeological heritage that are intricately connected to contemporary society. Incorporating these wider dimensions into archaeological heritage communication will result in communication that is more socially, culturally and psychologically relevant, thus engendering greater interest and appreciation.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/japc.00008.noo
2018-01-19
2019-12-12
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Agbe & Davies, A. S.
    (2010) Concepts of community in the pursuit of an inclusive archaeology. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 16(6), 373–389. doi: 10.1080/13527258.2010.510923
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2010.510923 [Google Scholar]
  2. Ahmad, Y.
    (2006) The scope and definitions of heritage: from tangible to intangible. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 12(3), 292–300. doi: 10.1080/13527250600604639
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13527250600604639 [Google Scholar]
  3. Beale, N.
    (2012) How community archaeology can make use of open data to achieve further its objectives. World Archaeology, 44(4), 612–633. doi: 10.1080/00438243.2012.743252
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2012.743252 [Google Scholar]
  4. Braun, V. , & Clarke, V.
    (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
    https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa [Google Scholar]
  5. Brighton, S.
    (2011) Applied archaeology and community collaboration: uncovering the past and empowering the present. Human Organization, 70(4), 344–354. doi: 10.17730/humo.70.4.w0373w8655574266
    https://doi.org/10.17730/humo.70.4.w0373w8655574266 [Google Scholar]
  6. Connell, D.
    (1997) Participatory development. Development in Practice, 7(3), 248–259. doi: 10.1080/09614529754486
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09614529754486 [Google Scholar]
  7. Dudley, S. H.
    (Ed.) (2010) Museum materialities: objects, engagements, interpretations. London, England: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Dzulkifli, A. R. , Ramli, M. , Bahiyah, O. , Hock, C. M. , & Md Noor, S.
    (2011) Transforming higher education for a sustainable tomorrow: 2010 laying the foundation. Penang, Malaysia: Penerbit USM.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Grimwade, G. , & Carter, B.
    (2000) Managing small heritage sites with interpretation and community involvement. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 6(1), 33–48. doi: 10.1080/135272500363724
    https://doi.org/10.1080/135272500363724 [Google Scholar]
  10. Holmes, K. M. , & O’Loughlin, N.
    (2014) The experiences of people with learning disabilities on social networking sites. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(1), 1–5. doi: 10.1111/bld.12001
    https://doi.org/10.1111/bld.12001 [Google Scholar]
  11. Holtorf, C.
    (2007) Can you hear me at the back? Archaeology, communication and society. European Journal of Archaeology, 10(2–3), 149–165. doi: 10.1177/1461957108095982
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461957108095982 [Google Scholar]
  12. (2010) Meta-stories of archaeology. World Archaeology, 42(3), 381–393. doi: 10.1080/00438243.2010.497382
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2010.497382 [Google Scholar]
  13. Holtorf, C. , & Fairclough, G.
    (2013) The new heritage and re-shapings of the past. In A. González-Ruibal (Ed.), Reclaiming archaeology: beyond the tropes of modernity. (pp.197–210). Hoboken, NJ: Taylor and Francis. Retrieved fromwww.123library.org/book_details/?id=106176 doi: 10.4324/9780203068632.ch15
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203068632.ch15 [Google Scholar]
  14. Interpretation Australia
  15. Jaafar, M. , Md Noor, S. , & Rasoolimanesh, S. M.
    (2014) Awareness and willingness for engagement of youth on World Heritage Site: a study on Lenggong archaeological site. Asian Social Science, 10(22). doi: 10.5539/ass.v10n22p29
    https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v10n22p29 [Google Scholar]
  16. Kelly, R. L. , & Thomas, D. H.
    (2012) Archaeology: down to earth (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, B.
    (1995) Theorizing heritage. Ethnomusicology, 39(3), 367. doi: 10.2307/924627
    https://doi.org/10.2307/924627 [Google Scholar]
  18. (1998) Destination culture: tourism, museums, and heritage. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Marshall, Y.
    (2002) What is community archaeology?World Archaeology, 34(2), 211–219. doi: 10.1080/0043824022000007062
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0043824022000007062 [Google Scholar]
  20. Mohd-Isa, A. F. , Zainal-Abidin, Z. , & Hashim, A.
    (2011) Built heritage maintenance: a Malaysian perspectives. Procedia Engineering, 20, 213–221. doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2011.11.158
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.11.158 [Google Scholar]
  21. Moscardo, G.
    (1996) Mindful visitors. Annals of Tourism Research, 23(2), 376–397. doi: 10.1016/0160‑7383(95)00068‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-7383(95)00068-2 [Google Scholar]
  22. O’Reilly, D.
    (2005) Cultural brands/branding cultures. Journal of Marketing Management, 21(5–6), 573–588. doi: 10.1362/0267257054307336
    https://doi.org/10.1362/0267257054307336 [Google Scholar]
  23. Portal Rasmi Majlis Daerah Lenggong
    Portal Rasmi Majlis Daerah Lenggong (2015, October23). Latar Belakang. RetrievedOctober 5, 2017, fromwww.mdlg.gov.my/ms/mdlg/profil/latar-belakang
  24. Rasoolimanesh, S. M. , & Jaafar, M.
    (2017) Sustainable tourism development and residents’ perceptions in World Heritage Site destinations. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 22(1), 34–48. doi: 10.1080/10941665.2016.1175491
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2016.1175491 [Google Scholar]
  25. Rasoolimanesh, S. M. , Jaafar, M. , Kock, N. , & Ramayah, T.
    (2015) A revised framework of social exchange theory to investigate the factors influencing residents’ perceptions. Tourism Management Perspectives, 16, 335–345. doi: 10.1016/j.tmp.2015.10.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2015.10.001 [Google Scholar]
  26. Richardson, L. -J. , & Almansa-Sánchez, J.
    (2015) Do you even know what public archaeology is? Trends, theory, practice, ethics. World Archaeology, 47(2), 194–211. doi: 10.1080/00438243.2015.1017599
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2015.1017599 [Google Scholar]
  27. Smith, E. R.
    (2014) Social identity and social emotions: toward new concepitualizations of prejudice. In D. M. Mackie & D. L. Hamilton (Eds.), Affect, cognition, and stereotyping: interactive processes in group perception (pp.297–314). Cambridge, MA: Academic Press. Retrieved fromhttps://nls.ldls.org.uk/welcome.html?ark:/81055/vdc_100026159183.0x000001
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Smith, L.
    (2006) Uses of heritage. London, England: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Tajfel, H.
    (1974) Social identity and intergroup behaviour. Social Science Information, 13(2), 65–93. doi: 10.1177/053901847401300204
    https://doi.org/10.1177/053901847401300204 [Google Scholar]
  30. (Ed.) (1978) Differentiation between social groups: studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations. London, England: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. (Ed.) (2010) Social identity and intergroup relations. Cambridge, England: Cambridge Univiversity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Tajfel, H. , & Turner, J.
    (1979) An intergrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp.33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks Cole.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Tse, H. H. M. , & Chiu, W. C. K.
    (2014) Transformational leadership and job performance: a social identity perspective. Journal of Business Research, 67(1), 2827–2835. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.07.018
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.07.018 [Google Scholar]
  34. Tully, G.
    (2007) Community archaeology: general methods and standards of practice. Public Archaeology, 6(3), 155–187. doi: 10.1179/175355307X243645
    https://doi.org/10.1179/175355307X243645 [Google Scholar]
  35. Turner, J. C. , Hogg, M. A. , Oakes, P. J. , Reicher, S. D. , & Wetherell, M. S.
    (1987) Rediscovering the social group: self-categorization theory. Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. UNESCO World Heritage Centre
    UNESCO World Heritage Centre (2017) Archaeological Heritage of the Lenggong Valley. RetrievedOctober 5, 2017, fromwhc.unesco.org/en/list/1396/
  37. Vecco, M.
    (2010) A definition of cultural heritage: from the tangible to the intangible. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 11(3), 321–324. doi: 10.1016/j.culher.2010.01.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2010.01.006 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/japc.00008.noo
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/japc.00008.noo
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error