OPEN ACCESS
CC BY 4.0
©The Authors. The contents of this volume are licensed under the Creative
Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. For a copy of this license, visit
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons,
444 Castro Street, Suite 900, Mountain View, California, 94041, USA. This license
allows for copying and adapting any part of the work for personal and commercial use,
providing appropriate credit is clearly stated.
ISSN: 2532-3512
How to cite this volume:
Please use AJPA as abbreviation and ‘A rcheostorie. Journal of Public Archaeology’
as full title.
Published by:
Center for Public Archaeology Studies ‘A rcheostorie’ - cultural association
via Enrico Toti 14, 57128 Livorno (ITALY) /
[email protected]
First published 2018.
Archeostorie. Journal of Public Archaeology is registered with the Court of Livorno
no. 2/2017 of January 24, 2017.
ARCHEOSTORIE
VOLUME 2 / 2018
www.archeostoriejpa.eu
TM
Editor in chief
Cinzia Dal Maso - Center for Public Archaeology Studies ‘A rcheostorie’
Luca Peyronel - University of Milan
Advisory board
Chiara Bonacchi - University of Stirling
Luca Bondioli - Luigi Pigorini National Museum of Prehistory and Ethnography, Rome
Giorgio Buccellati - University of California at Los Angeles
Aldo Di Russo - Unicity, Rome
Dora Galanis - Hellenic Ministry of Culture and Sports
Filippo Maria Gambari - Italian Ministry of Cultural Heritage
Peter Gould - University of Pennsylvania and The American University of Rome
Christian Greco - Egyptian Museum, Turin
Richard Hodges - The American University of Rome
Daniele Manacorda - RomaTre University
Stefania Mancuso - University of Calabria
Akira Matsuda - University of Tokyo
Marco Milanese - University of Sassari
Massimo Montella - University of Macerata
Valentino Nizzo - National Etruscan Museum of Villa Giulia
Massimo Osanna - University of Naples Federico II
Elisabetta Pallottino - RomaTre University
Grazia Semeraro - University of Salento
Francesca Spatafora - Archaeological Museum ‘A ntonino Salinas’, Palermo
Sebastiano Tusa - Department for Cultural Heritage and Sicilian Identity
Guido Vannini - University of Florence
Giuliano Volpe - University of Foggia
Enrico Zanini - University of Siena
Editorial board
Giulia Osti - University of Bologna
Sara Pizzimenti - Sapienza University of Rome
Francesco Ripanti - University of Pisa
Gioia Zenoni - Independent researcher
Language editor
Simone Marchesi - Princeton University
Referees
Chiara Bonacchi, Paul Burtenshaw, Tommaso Casini, Isabella Colpo, Fiorella Dallari, Guido
Ferilli, Sara Ferrari, Claudia Fredella, Jennifer Mathews, Bodil Petersson, Frances Pinnock,
Pier Luigi Sacco, Marco Valenti, Guido Vannini
INDEX
7 Editorial
Cinzia Dal Maso & Luca Peyronel
11 Memories
What is meant by ‘archaeology’ today?
13
Daniele Manacorda
Saranda 1998: A vision for Butrint and other cultural
heritage strategies
17
Richard Hodges
27 Topic of the Year
‘Museums without walls’ and sustainable development
in Jordan. Some thoughts from the Madaba Regional
Archaeological Museum Project
29
Marta D’Andrea, Andrea Polcaro, Douglas R. Clark, Suzanne Richard
The conquest of Akragas: How the past changed the present 47
in the Valley of the Temples (Agrigento, Sicily)
Laura Danile, Giovanni Virruso & Claudia Speciale
Community-centred supply chains and sustainable
archaeological tourism
61
Peter G. Gould
Archaeology and Cultural Routes: A relationship to develop
75
Alessio Innocenti
‘Multicultural Public Archaeology’. A strategy to expanding
multicultural audience in Sicilian archaeological museums
Flavia Zisa
89
97 Satura Lanx
Culture as values
99
Aldo Di Russo
In the Lombards’ footsteps: Proposals for educational
visits to localities in the UNESCO serial site “The
Longobards in Italy. Places of power (AD 568-774)”
115
Francesca Morandini, Maria Stovali & Angela Maria Ferroni
125 Archaeotales
The Man in Chains from Baratti, the slave that dreamt of
freedom
127
Mariangela Galatea Vaglio
Medusa, the goddess of Poggio del Molino
129
Mariangela Galatea Vaglio
Ötzi, the last of the shamans
133
Giorgia Cappelletti
139 News
Five years of Digital Invasions, and they do not cease to
amaze and innovate
141
Cinzia Dal Maso
What is PArCo, the Public Archeology Park
145
Cinzia Dal Maso
Exhibited in Populonia the recently discovered Man in
Chains from Baratti
149
Giorgio Baratti & Carolina Megale
Immersive virtual reality: The technology that brings us
back to the times of Augustus and Nero
151
Cinzia Dal Maso
San Giovanni Metro C Station in Rome: An archaeological
feast for everyone
Cinzia Dal Maso
153
Faragola. Destruction and reconstruction of an
archaeological site
155
Giuliano De Felice
The Symbola Report and professions in archaeology:
What the numbers say
157
Chiara Boracchi
161 Reviews
Strength and ethics of the context: Giving a true meaning
to History and to our lives
163
Daniele Manacorda
Exploring public archaeology
167
Francesco Ripanti
Cinema in the Stone Age or a film about the Stone Age?
171
Alessandra Cilio
Father and Son: Videogame or emotional experience?
Giuliano De Felice
175
Vol. 2 / 2018
Section REVIEWS (pp. 167 - 170)
www.archeostoriejpa.eu
Review: Exploring public archaeology
Francesco Ripanti
Center for Public Archaeology Studies ‘Archeostorie’,
[email protected]
Key Concepts in Public Archaeology. Gabriel Moshenska (ed), London, UCL Press 2018, 250 pages, Free Enhanced
Digital Edition, Open access PDF, Apple App, Android App, hardback - £40, paperback - £20, epub - £5.99.
Open Access
Keywords: public archaeology, Gabriel Moshenska, University College London
For those in search of current perspectives
on public archaeology, “Key Concept in Public
Archaeology”, edited by Gabriel Moshenska,
is a must-read. The book originated through
lecturing the Master Degree’s curriculum in
Public Archaeology at the University College
London (UCL). It is a collection of papers
that exhaustively introduces the various
topics related to public archaeology. Since the
contributors are amongst the scholars who
helped to affirm public archaeology as an
established academic subject, this book is an
invaluable starting point for both students and
practitioners “who want to better understand
this point of contact between archaeology and
the wider world, and for those who want to
work at that interface” (p. 3).
The first nine chapters were originally
published as an ‘enhanced digital book’ on
the UCL press website (February 2017), with
further chapters added over the following
months. This innovative version is still
available online (ucldigitalpress.co.uk/Book/
Article/22/47/0/) and turns out to be an
interesting experiment for a book related to
a public field of study. The reader has the
possibility to add bookmarks, highlight the
text, take notes, and share the contents via
social networks and export citations via email.
I would appreciate having the ability to enlarge
the figures and seeing popups with references
on bibliographical citations.
As curator of the volume and co-organizer
of the Master Degree, Gabriel Moshenska
introduces the book by delving into the
definition, the meanings, and the challenges
of public archaeology. After quoting the most-
known definitions proposed over the last twenty
years, he offers a new, comprehensive one:
“public archaeology as practice and scholarship
where archaeology meets the world” (p. 3).
Stressing the all-encompassing and hybrid
nature of public archaeology, this inclusive
definition works out as the main framework
for the book: public archaeology does not
refer only to specific fields as communication,
education, or outreach but addresses different
categories, which often overlap with each
other. The typology ‘Some Common Types
of Public Archaeology,’ arranged in the form
of a graphic composed of coloured squares,
offers a very effective overview of the various
elements included in each category (p. 6). With
translations in different languages - including
Italian and Spanish - the typology was already
very popular on the Web and, in my opinion,
succeeds in “make people aware of the breadth
of possibilities within public archaeology, the
range of approaches and methods that can be
selected, developed, and put into practice.” In
my opinion, along with the fluent explanation,
the inclusion of the graphic contributes
to making this chapter one of the most
comprehensible and complete introduction to
public archaeology ever published so far.
The main body of the book is dedicated to
deepen the readers understanding of areas
where archaeology meets the world. Probably
due to the overlap of the different areas,
the chapters are not grouped in sections.
Examining the table of contents, it appears the
topics are not organized logically. However,
the topics roughly cover the various categories
presented in the typology; they are aligned with
CC BY 4.0 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. ©The Author(s).
How to cite Ripanti, F. 2018. Review: Exploring public archaeology. Archeostorie. Journal of Public Archaeology. 2: pp.
167-170. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23821/2018_7b
Francesco Ripanti
the inclusive definition of public archaeology
proposed by Moshenska. Ranging from
community archaeology to the market for
ancient art, including very actual themes as
economics, education, nationalism and digital
media, each chapter provides the readers with
textbook-level introductions and some relevant
case studies, arranged in boxes.
Especially in those countries where the
study of public archaeology is growing, these
introductory chapters are helpful in many ways.
For instance, these chapters create common
terminology, highlight the most popular
debates and controversies, and define some
research methods.
The creation of unified terminology is a
fundamental starting point for discussions
and confrontations. In Chapter 7, “Presenting
archaeological sites to the public,” Reuben
Grima provides precise definitions for
concepts such as archaeological site, public,
interpretation, presentation, accessibility, and
sustainability. In Chapter 5, “Digital media
in public archaeology,” Chiara Bonacchi
examines two different modes of digital
engagement: “broadcasting” and participatory
approaches. The definitions of “broadcasting”
and participatory approaches specific traits and
boundaries and the description of compelling
examples are useful for understanding the
differences and starting to deepen this field,
which is likely to increase its influence and its
area of application (pp. 61-70).
The acquaintance with current debates is
necessary to provide priority to specific topics
and address them with full knowledge of the
facts. One of the most reiterated debates in the
book concerns the degree to which the social,
cultural, economic, and legislative settings affect
the relationship with the public in different
contexts. For example, this topic is addressed
by Suzie Thomas in Chapter 2, “Community
archaeology” (p. 16) and in Chapter 8, “The
Treasure Act and Portable Antiquities Scheme
in England and Wales,” with the entire chapter
dedicated to describing a concrete solution for
a universal problem as adopted in a defined
geographic area.
In one of the first books dedicated to public
archaeology, Merriman (2004: p. 5) stated, “In
being about ethics and identity, therefore, public
archaeology is inevitably about negotiation
and conflict over meaning”; controversy
is one of the key concepts of this book. In
168
Chapter 7, “The archaeological profession and
human rights,” Samuel Hardy focuses on the
exhibition agreements between looted states
and recipient institutions (pp. 99-100). In
Chapter 10, “Commercial archaeology in the
UK: public interest, benefit and engagement,”
Hilary Orange and Dominic Perring deal with
the diffused perception of public engagement
as an unnecessary delay (p. 145). In Chapter
12, “Archaeology and nationalism,” Ulrike
Sommer delves into the use of archaeological
finds to illustrate past greatness (p. 181) and the
unravelling of national origin tales and their
ideological underpinnings (p. 183).
The use of proper research methods is
one of the turning points for studying and
analysing the interaction between archaeology
and society in different areas. For example, in
Chapter 2, “Economics in public archaeology,”
Paul Burtenshaw introduces this field of study
and states that “methods to access this value can
be broadly divided into two types – revealed
preference and stated preference” (p. 34). The
inclusion of a box reporting the case-study of
the contingent valuation survey applied to
valuing different road options for Stonehenge
support the theoretical description with a
concrete example (p. 35).
Although this book is based on an English
perspective, the practitioners from the rest of
the world may try to develop, think about, and
evaluate their own experiences on the basis
of the solid methodological and theoretical
basis introduced in this book. This is not to
deny national or even regional specific traits.
However, an extensive application of the proper
research methodologies and a greater attention
on evaluation will contribute to highlight the
differences, and will promote confrontations
and discussions based on data, enriching the
discipline.
Once fixed in the mind the encouraging
perspectives promoted in the book, it would
be valuable to go back and read again the
last pages of the Introduction (pp. 11-13)
where Moshenska states two areas of growth:
interdisciplinarity and data. For the former,
the author indicates the need for drawing
from related fields of science communication
and science studies in addition to exploring
public archaeology as one component of ‘public
humanities.’ For the latter, more data are
needed because “we know startlingly little about
the public themselves” and “public archaeology
Review: Exploring public archaeology
projects need to become more proactive
and consistent in gathering monitoring and
evaluation data on themselves.”
Addressing these two areas from a global
perspective will be a challenge for the future.
References
Merriman, N. 2004. Introduction: Diversity
and Dissonance in Public Archaeology. In N.
Merriman (ed), Public archaeology, pp. 1–17. New
York: Routledge.
169