From Valletta to Faro: Archaeological Heritage and Communities

Archaeologists and authorities such as the Department of National Heritage and Museums in Malaysia are always racing against time to protect archaeological heritage before it is damaged or destroyed by the rapid pace of economic development in the country. Moreover, recent interest in archaeological tourism has created new challenges to safeguarding Malaysia’s archaeological heritage. Finally, limited skilled experts and financial resources have constrained the ability of Malaysia’s museums to properly store and conserve artifacts. This chapter first presents some of these challenges, using specific case studies of Lenggong Valley in Perak, which was recently inscribed on UNESCO’s World Heritage List, and the archaeology-rich areas in the Bujang Valley, Kedah and Malaysian Borneo. It then describes the legislative context within which heritage management operates in Malaysia, and considers further steps that could be taken by governments and other stakeholders to enhance the preservation of Malaysian archaeological heritage.

The cultural and historical accumulation of various cultures and their socio-spatial development throughout history have left behind numerous archaeological sites in contemporary Turkey. Some of the more popular ones, Catalhoyuk, Ephesus, Hierapolis, Troy, Hattusa, Pergamon, Aphrodisias and, more recently, Gobekli Tepe, which is a unique site that has dramatically changed the understanding of human history, are listed on the UNESCO World Heritage List. At all such sites, the primary concerns are related to site management, and these can be resolved through the provision of basic guidance and tools rather than through urban and regional planning strategies. This article focuses on the problems and recent planning discussions in urban or regional contexts related to the conservation of archaeological heritage. The article begins by discussing the current legislation and administrative framework to provide an understanding of recent planning issues in Turkey. Finally, the main themes of the article are two particular planning challenges related to archaeological heritage in Turkey—large-scale projects that threaten archaeological heritage and multi-layered historic city centres—which will be discussed in detail supported by case studies as Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir, Antakya, Tarsus and Bergama.

The debates on archaeological heritage research, preservation and management have increased in recent years due to the impact of European standards such as Council of Europe Conventions and the European Union (EU) integration process (for example Coles and Olivier, 2001; Fairclough and Rippon, 2002; Pickard, 2002; Cleere, 2005; Willems and van den Dries, 2007; Kristiansen, 2008; Bloemers et al., 2010; Council of Europe, 2011). The Valletta Convention (the revised European Convention on the Protection of Archaeological Heritage, 1992), the International Council of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) Charter for the Protection and Management of the Archaeological Heritage (1990) and The Valletta Principles for the Safeguarding and Management of Historic Cities, Towns and Urban Areas (2011) are playing important roles in this process of archaeological heritage preservation activities. The consolidated version of the Lisbon Treaty also makes cultural heritage an issue for the EU member states; ‘… It shall respect its rich cultural and linguistic diversity, and shall ensure that Europe’s cultural heritage is safeguarded and enhanced’ (Article 3.3), and there is also the Council Directive 93/7/EEC on the return of cultural objects unlawfully removed from the territory of a Member State.KeywordsEuropean UnionCultural HeritageCultural GoodCultural ObjectIllegal TradeThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

We argue that the apparently successful implementation of the European Malta Convention (1992) in the Netherlands resulted in a relatively closed archaeological policy system, which separates ordinary people from experts. As a result, citizens were increasingly excluded from the archaeological process. The process of closure and exclusion is made visible by investigating Dutch amateur archaeologists and their changing roles within Dutch archaeology. Amateur archaeologists are a group of semi-experts often deemed essential to the quality of research and policy regarding archaeological heritage. Their marginalization after Malta caused discussion and frustration, undermining public support for the initial policy goal of the Malta Convention: conservation of archaeological heritage. Our analysis draws on recent academic debates concerning the policy-practice nexus in processes of Europeanization. Reducing negative side effects and re-targeting policies for greater efficacy and democracy requires insight into the pathways of implementation.

Pastarasis dešimtmetis paveldo apsaugos srityje yra susijęs su 2005 m. įsigaliojusiu Nekilnojamojo kultūros paveldo apsaugos įstatymu. Ryškiausi pokyčiai vyko archeologinio paveldo apskaitos, apsaugos reikalavimų įteisinimo bei archeologinių tyrimų reglamentavimo srityse. Apskaitos problematika aptariama vertinimo, paveldo objektų gradacijos ir paveldosauginių apribojimų taikymo aspektais. Straipsnyje taip pat nagrinėjamos šios archeologinio paveldo apsaugos priemonės: informavimas apie žemės plotui taikomusarcheologinio paveldo apsaugos apribojimus; galimų veiklų ir sąlygų archeologinio paveldo objekto teritorijoje ir apsaugos zonoje nustatymas; archeologinių tyrimų privalomumo atvejų apibrėžimas. Aptariamas rcheologinių tyrimų reglamentavimas, archeologinio paveldo apsaugos in situ klausimas.

Archaeological heritage is fragile and nonrenewable. In Africa, it is vulnerable to developmental projects in construction, mining, and agriculture as well as intentional and unintentional vandalism through everyday use and tourism. Looting, illegal trade of antiquities, and terrorism have also emerged as other significant threats to archaeological heritage in Africa. Looting and vandalism of sites and objects result from lax monitoring mechanisms and a general lack of awareness of archaeological matters among the public. Although most African countries have the legal protection of archaeological heritage, the effectiveness of these has been under question. African heritage legislations have been criticized for the lack of predevelopment assessments that would ensure the protection of recorded and unrecorded archaeological heritage. They have also been censured for protecting just the physical aspects of archaeological heritage, leaving out the intangible aspects that actually give the heritage value, especially among African communities. Another challenge was the exclusion of local communities and customary management systems in the protection of archaeological heritage. Provisions for counteracting looting and illegal trade in antiquities, coming especially from archaeological sites, were also considered weak and requiring improvements. The response to the debate on the effectiveness of the legal protection of heritage has been varied across the continent. Some African countries have responded by writing new laws, amending old ones, or providing other supporting legal provisions such as national cultural policies or regulations. Countries that have instituted new legal provisions include Namibia, Botswana, Kenya, Mali, Egypt, Mauritania, and the Republic of the Congo. Those who reworked their protective mechanisms have attempted to address many of the issues raised. Countries such as Namibia, Botswana, and Mali have included clearly defined provisions for predevelopment assessments. Others such as Liberia included archaeological heritage in their environmental protection laws. Although fewer countries have had legislation to protect intangible aspects, supporting legal provisions such as national cultural policies have helped in this regard. However, very little has been done on the inclusion of customary laws and systems of archaeological protection. Going forward, African nations have to quickly consider emerging issues such as digital manipulation, heritage-based product development, increased need for intervention conservation, and sustainable economic utilization of heritage for the development of individuals, communities, and nations. The legislative process in Africa has to be expedited to quickly and efficiently deal with these issues before they cause harm to the archaeological heritage.

In Ottoman Turkey, interest in archaeology and archaeological sites started with the discovery of impor­tant sites like Troy, Ephesus and Pergamon in the nineteenth century. Due to lack of legislation related to the protection of archaeological heritage, the finds from the early excavations were transported to Euro­pean museums or private collections. In late nineteenth century, an archaeological museum was found­ed in Istanbul and the extant legislation was amended to keep the discovered objects in the country. With the establishment of the Turkish Republic, archaeology was taught in the universities and the capacity to preserve archaeological heritage was developed by conservation programs. Yet, until 1973 it was not pos­sible to designate archaeological sites and define measures for the protection of the surrounding areas. In addition to the law on protection of cultural heritage, several principles were developed to classify and pre­serve the archaeological heritage. In 1999, Turkey signed the Valetta Convention for the Preservation of European Archaeological Heritage and tries to follow the guidelines set by this document. Turkey's rich archaeological heritage spans from the prehistoric to late medieval period, including Byzan­tine and Seljuk sites. The number and variety of assets requires careful documentation and protection. Archaeological sites are threatened by natural as well as man made factors. Some sites disappear even with­out being recorded. It is necessary to raise awareness in the protection of the cultural heritage and support the protection process with financial means and multidisciplinary work. The completion of the cultural her­itage inventory, the implementation of site management plans, monitoring of the archaeological sites and the surrounding landscape are important topics to be considered.

The article is a retrospective review of the historical development process of the attitudes towards the conservation of cultural heritage through the existing literature on the subject. Consequently, in the article, both the developments in conservation in the international platform and their reflections in Turkey since Ottoman Period onwards are presented. Besides the developments in conservation of cultural heritage in general, a special emphasis is given to the changing attitudes in conservation of archaeological heritage through examples from Turkey and the world.

Legislation and regulations aimed at ensuring the preservation of cultural heritage exist in many countries worldwide and Egypt. The legislation creates a regulatory framework and defines the roles and responsibilities of various departments and agencies, while it also formalizes institutional arrangements. In the Antiquities sector, the main objective of such legislation is to protect, for the enjoyment of future generations, the Archaeological heritage resource from any unwarranted destruction. The analytical method of the texts of the relevant laws has been adopted in writing the research as it is based on extrapolation and comparison, through reviewing the legal texts that the legislator mentioned in this regard, whether they are at the heart of the Constitution of the Arab Republic of Egypt for the year 2014, contained in the laws that relate to antiquities and heritage trying to analyze it and discussing it to demonstrate its sufficiency to provide the necessary protection and management tools for this important archaeological heritage. Legislation, both internationally and nationally, on archaeological heritage management is often based on a dominant heritage discourse that focuses on material conservation. The range of legislation that either directly or indirectly influences the protection and management of Archaeological heritage is extensive currently there exists within the Egyptian legislative landscape a myriad of statutes that impinge on Archaeological heritage. This paper explores the Integration between these statutes and the availability of strengthening the imperative to protect Archaeological heritage through such instruments as policy statements and plans. The effectiveness of these changes, however, will only become apparent as these planning instruments are reconsidered in light of the enhanced requirements.

There are roughly 2300 recognized archaeological sites in Taiwan. Under the Cultural Properties Preservation Law (CPPL) of 1982, archaeological heritage falls under the category of 'historic relics'. However, archaeological sites are not designated as such until they have been excavated and studied to prove their cultural value. Protection of the archaeological heritage has been reinforced through the Environmental Impact Assessment Act (EIAA), which regulates all environmental management plans. These study and determine the degree and scope of the potential impact of development on the cultural environment.The CPPL was extensively amended and promulgated in 2005, and in this recent document discussed archaeological heritage in a distinct chapter (Chapter 3 with 16 acts). Furthermore, three regulations have been issued concerning the examination of designations of archaeological sites, qualification standards for excavation, as well as the administration and protection of archaeological sites. The newly enacted Cultural Law and Regulations confer competent authorities at all levels with all powers to supervise, administer, and then protect valuable buried cultural property. Although the protection of archaeological heritage has been better enforced since 2005, archaeological remains in Taiwan are still under various threats. Preservation of the cultural heritage is threatened by development, in many cases resulting in impasse. This paper discusses several recent examples of such dilemmas and presents a personal opinion on a better way to settle the controversy.

In the last year, the development of photogrammetry by airborne vehicles has had a significant increase in the applications of architectural surveying and environmental monitoring, integrating (sometimes even to replace) the classic techniques of Geomatics and introducing new possibilities in the Remote Sensing compared to traditional aerial photogrammetric technique. The use of Computer Vision algorithms, above all from the Artificial Vision discipline, allowed the extraction from image sets, clouds of very high density points and metric quality, increasingly used in the sectors of our interest (architectural and environmental). The rapid success of these systems is attributable to the quality of the metric and infographics results produced, to the speed of the acquisition phase and to products that can be realized in post-processing in addition to the ease disclosure of the 3D data. The diffusion of the new photogrammetric process has occurred hand in hand with the passive sensor technology innovation, due to the emergence of commercial cameras on the market able to acquire images of excellent metric and high-resolution quality. The work developed during the PhD course, based on the many experiences carried out in the Model Laboratory of the University of Salerno, focused on the use of UAV for the aerial photogrammetry, using and analysing different system configurations, i.e. different types of passive sensors and different air carriers on which these have been installed. The applications carried out occupied several application cases, with morphological characteristics and different degree of detail, depending on the final required metric data. The research focused on the analysis of the deviation that an aerofotogrammetric survey can produce with respect to the classic topographic surveys, by total station, GPS (Global Positioning System) or TLS (Terrestrial Laser Scanner), instruments with significantly higher sensitivity than the airborne system, and therefore affected by minor uncertainties. In the various applications, using topographic measurements from different systems and using the so-called GCP (Ground Control Point), the metric deviations between the geo-referenced photogrammetric model and the topographic support were calculated, evaluating the system’s metric potential in different configurations. Moreover, by a script, the reprojection errors were measured for each point of the cloud generated by the entire photogrammetric process; from statistical analysis of the reprojection error in the various case studies, the modalities for which the aerofotogrammetric survey has the smallest deviations have been evaluated. The elaborated case studies come essentially within the archaeological field, in which, in close contact with the various Sovraintendenze, the possible elaborations to be returned for an initial computerization of the survey were analysed. The set of works produced and delivered to the various Sovraintendenze, represents the starting point for the conservation and preservation of the archaeological heritage, from which to obtain information for different areas of interest (degradation assessment, calculation of subsidence and/or deformations, etc,). The comparison with the classical topography is necessary for a metric comparison of the 3D model, from which all the elaborates will be derived (orthophotos, sections, level curves, etc.).

The article covers the topic of the possibility of conducting forensic historical and archaeological examination. The problems that arise when protecting archaeological monuments are relevant not only for Ukraine but also for many countries of the world. Preserving history is an important task for every civilized country. To ensure effective protection of historical heritage of Ukraine, it is necessary to have effective mechanisms to prevent and protect archaeological monuments against destruction and theft. Formation and development of forensic historical and archaeological examination is essential to improve Ukrainian legislation, including the field of forensic science. To effectively apply state policy on the issues of archaeological monuments preservation while pre-trial investigation of criminal offenses, it is necessary to make an active use of special knowledge in the field of historical and archaeological research. One of the peculiarities of forensic research is that it should be performed in compliance with appropriately approved expert methods, characterised by combining in itself the ne­cessary requirements for research and being the basis for quality and speed for solving forensic examination tasks. In this regard, their study and development are significant in research and practice. The aim of the article is to study the role of forensic historical and archaeological examination in preservation of archaeological heritage. It analyses the respective literature and legislation of Ukraine dedicated to forensic examination, forensic historical and archaeological examination and international experience in the field of archaeology. Keywords: archaeological heritage, archaeological monuments, forensic historical and archaeological examination, protection of archaeological heritage in Ukraine.

The article reinterprets the process of legal support for archaeological research in independent Ukraine. The formation of the legislative framework for the protection and use of historical and cultural monuments was monitored. The «Regulations on the State Register of National Cultural Property» was considered. Attention is focused on the laws «On the protection of cultural and historical heritage» and «On the protection of archaeological heritage», which were adopted with the aim of improving the legal regulation of the protection and preservation of material remains of the past, and the effectiveness of their use in practice is analyzed. The relationship between the current legislation of Ukraine and the development of archaeological research is indicated. The powers of central executive bodies and other cultural heritage protection bodies, without which the implementation of archaeological research at the legislative level is impossible, are considered. Attention is paid to permits for conducting archaeological explorations, excavations and other earthworks. The importance of the preparation of scientific reports by archaeologists in archaeological activities was noted, and it was indicated that thanks to the detailed regulation of the process of conducting archaeological research and submitting scientific reports, the state of archaeological sources improved. Attention is focused on revealing the activities of the Institute of Archeology of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine and the Department «Field Committee», which monitors the quality of professional excavations on the territory of Ukraine. The rights and responsibilities of archaeological heritage researchers are highlighted, the legal status of the archaeological expedition is considered. The main provisions of the Code of Ethics of a Professional Archaeologist, which was created to determine the basic moral and ethical norms of professional archaeologists' activities and their attitude to archaeological heritage, are reflected. Attention was paid to the activities of research centers: «Rescue Archeology Service» (1994), «Protection Archeology Service of Ukraine» (2001), «Centre of Archeology of Kyiv of the Institute of Archeology of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine» (2006), which allows identifying and saving valuable monuments tombs of different archaeological periods. It is noted that a significant problem in the field of archaeological heritage protection is the coordination of the activities of developers and subjects of economic activity with the bodies of cultural heritage protection. The importance of cooperation of state bodies for the protection of historical and cultural heritage with archaeological institutions was considered, it was noted that this cooperation will allow to develop an effective system of protection of archaeological heritage, to carry out professional certification of monuments of the past, to improve legislative and regulatory acts, which as a result could improve the state of preservation of monuments of archeology and reduce their theft. It is indicated that in 2021, the Institute of Archeology of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine issued «Proposals on improving the legal protection of archaeological heritage...» to speed up the process of Ukraine joining the Council of Europe Convention, which will allow to more effectively fight against illegal construction works, «treasure hunters» and minimize destruction of archaeological monuments. Key words: monument protection legislation, archaeological heritage protection, archaeological research, scientific report, archaeological monuments.

The protection of Palestine's archaeological heritage faces several serious obstacles: unenforced laws, lack of public awareness, deterioration of Palestine's economic status, unregulated urban development, and the protracted political conflict between the Palestinians and Israelis. As a result, a significant number of archaeological features and sites have been vandalized, looted, or intentionally destroyed without compunction over the past several decades. The Palestinian-Israeli political conflict has negatively affected the archaeological heritage in “Area C,” which remains under complete Israeli civil and military control. This area includes nearly 60% of the archaeological heritage located within the Palestinian Occupied Territories, but the Palestinian Department of Antiquities and Cultural Heritage lacks the authority to monitor and protect these sites. Furthermore, the Israeli civil and military authorities in the West Bank do not provide the necessary protection of cultural heritage resources in Area C. The devastation of these resources throughout the Palestinian Territories provides the impetus for this research. The main aim is to identify the results of the political conflict on Palestinian archaeological and cultural heritage sites, using a case study at the site of Khirbet el-Lauz.

The evolving dynamics of climate change and water resource management present unique challenges for the research and conservation of archaeological heritage, particularly within reservoirs. The Dolmen of Guadalperal in Spain and its surrounding archaeological sites exemplify such a scenario. This study is dedicated to the development and application of a comprehensive methodology for archaeological documentation and site detection, integrating an array of approaches including Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) from Sentinel‐1, photogrammetric restitution using historical imagery and geometric recording of sites with diverse sensing equipment. A distinctive aspect of this research lies in juxtaposing multibeam sonar data, typically associated with underwater surveys, with standard land‐based documentation methods like photogrammetry and LiDAR. The results demonstrate the effectiveness of integrating data from these diverse techniques in detecting new archaeological sites and monitoring their alterations, which could be potentially harmful.