PUBLIC AND COMMUNITY ARCHAEOLOGY 2021

 COMMUNITY OR PUBLIC ARCHAEOLOGY 

Archaeology meets the world in public archaeology as a practice and a field of study.

Ascertain 2000: 2, defines public archaeology as "all the New Territories on the outskirts of direct inquiry into the remains of material culture... All of them are concerned with the issues that occur when archaeology enters the actual world of economic and political turmoil. In other words, they are ethical issues.

According to, (Schadla-Hall 1999: 147), any area of archaeological activity that interacted or had the potential to interact with the public – the vast majority of whom know little about archaeology as an academic subject for a variety of reasons.

It also investigates the processes and effects of archaeology's integration into a broader public culture, where contestation and dissonance are unavoidable. As a result of its focus on ethics and identity, public archaeology is inevitably about meaning negotiation and conflict. Merriman (2004).

In another sense, is a subject that investigates and strives to strengthen the interaction between archaeology and the general population (Matsuda and Okamura 2011: 4).

The goal of this article is to gave the reader with an overview of public archaeological research and practice in the field. It also gave the researchers a series of glimpses of essential ideas and areas of study that are brought together as an introduction to one of the most challenging and gratifying aspects of the wider archaeological work, albeit one that is inevitably brief and incomplete. If you read this article from front page to end, you'll gain a solid understanding of public  archaeology as a complex, rich, and diverse field, as well as knowledge of some of the most notable and famous examples of public archaeology in action. If you go to a given chapter, you'll discover a succinct and incisive introduction to one area of public archaeology, as well as case studies and a list of recommended literature to further your knowledge. I am convinced that no matter how you use this article, you will have a greater understanding of what public archaeology is, why it matters, and what you can do about it. To begin, it is necessary and useful to ask what we mean by public archaeology and to analyze some of the numerous ways it has been described, building on the quotes above. Archaeologists with the best of intentions, public  archaeologists from Greece, Argentina, the United Kingdom, and Japan will frequently find ourselves talking at cross purposes. For the time being, I'll use the title's term as a working definition for this chapter: 'practice and scholarship where archaeology meets the world.' This book is for those who wish to learn more about the interaction between archaeology and the rest of the world, as well as those who want to work at it.

The indigenous communities were campaigning to protect local heritage sites, archaeologists and producers are currently configured to create television documentaries, metal detector users bringing their finds to local museums for identification and recording, archaeological heritage sites researching their visitor demographics, students studying the depiction of prehistoric women in comic article, and pledging to protect local heritage sites are all examples of public archaeology. 

The purpose of this paper is not to define the field's borders; rather, it is to provide an overview of the public archaeological ideas that underpin this book, as well as to highlight the benefits of studying and practicing public archaeology.

Hybridity 

In the brief explanation above, the phrase "practice and research" spoke to one of the difficulties in comprehending current public archaeology: the discipline's hybrid nature. The best way to understand this hybridity and the ensuing relationship between public archaeology and archaeology as a whole is to look at the sciences. Science studies and science communication both contribute to the natural sciences. Science studies is the study of scientific practice in its various contexts, including economic, social, cultural, philosophical, legal, and other factors. It is a very good enough and interdisciplinary field of study that incorporates sociology, history, public policy, literary criticism, and other disciplines (Sismondo 2010). Science communication is a more hands-on subject that focuses on the skills and tactics for extensively disseminating scientific knowledge and understanding in domains like education and government. Science communicators operate in a variety of settings, including media, museums, universities, and the scientific industry, and use talents as diverse as technical writing and stand-up comedy (Brake and Weitkamp 2009).

Within the larger discipline of archaeology, public archaeology fills the functions of both scientific studies and science communication, linking critical academic inquiry and professional practice. Public archaeology also depends on the literature, concepts, and abilities established in these professions, as well as similar fields like museum studies (Merriman 2004). This blending of knowledge and practice, as well as the hazy zones of overlap in between, complicates – and intrigues – public archaeology. 

History of Public Archaeology 

At this point, some clarification or perhaps a confession is required. The public archaeology approach discussed in this introduction and throughout the book is neither universally agreed upon nor widely embraced. In truth, there are several restricted, overlapping, and varied definitions of the phrase in use around the world, with the most significant discrepancy occurring between the United Kingdom and the United States (Fagan 2003; Jameson 2004; McDavid 2004). To be completely real, the opinion on public archeology given during this book is supported on quite 20 years of labor at University school London's Institute of archeology and a worldwide diaspora of graduates from what we have a tendency to might say the "London school" of public archeology. beginning within the late Nineties, this essential mass of scholarship, teaching and learning, and business enterprise was engineered on Peter Ucko's radical and unorthodox work, and burning by Tim Schadla- Hall, Nick Merriman, and Neal Ascherson's lessons and writing, moreover because the work of their students (Ascherson 2000; Grima 2002; Matsuda 2004).

A classification system

During my years of teaching and study, I discovered that the lack of a common definition of public archaeology was producing confusion among students, scholars, and practitioners. The difference between the above inclusive definition of public archaeology (practice and scholarship where archaeology meets the world) and its narrower definition within the broader field of archaeology as a synonym for public outreach by professional archaeologists was the single greatest problem for me. To address these issues, I created a basic seven-part typology in the form of a visual, which I originally released as an illustration in an open access work (Bonacchi and Moshenska 2015). This typology, labeled 'Some Common Types of Public Archaeology,' provides a decent overview of the field's various and distinct features, which are defined and developed in Figure 1.1. Despite the fact that I have categorized them as independent categories, there is clearly a lot of overlap.

Archaeologists collaborating with the general public 

This first category encompasses a large portion of what is commonly known as public archaeology or, in some circumstances, community archaeology (Marshall 2002; Moshenska and Dhanjal 2012; Thomas 2014). It refers to professional archaeological work that includes, by design, involvement opportunities for members of the general public or a specialized community. Many of these initiatives are sponsored by museums, commercial archaeology units, university departments, and local government organizations, and many are funded by the Heritage Lottery Fund in the United Kingdom (Bewley and Maeer 2014). While the specific formats of these events differ, they always aim to provide the public with hands-on experience with archaeological skills and procedures, as well as insights into their local area's history. These chances for public participation are increasingly shifting away from digs and toward museum and archive archaeology, including archaeological archive outreach and online crowdsourcing of archaeological data (Bevan et al. 2014). Professional archaeologists are usually always in charge of initiating and executing initiatives of this nature, sometimes in collaboration with organizations such as schools or community groups (Dhanjal et al. 2015; Nevell 2014; Simpson and Williams 2008). 

Archaeology by the people 

Professional archaeology is the second type of public archaeology: work done by local archaeological societies and amateur interest groups (often to the highest professional standards) (Manley 1999). Many local organizations in the UK stretch back to the early nineteenth century, and their work predates the establishment of professional archaeology (Wetherall 1994). In addition to fieldwork and archive-based archaeological study, many amateur archaeology societies host presentations or events, which are frequently tied to formal educational institutions. Professional archaeologists' work varies greatly from country to country. Non-professional archaeological work is subject to licensing systems or legal restrictions in many countries, and amateurs can only participate in projects led by professionals in others (Duineveld et al. 2013). The work of metal-detecting users and metal-detecting clubs is one of the most contentious areas of amateur archaeology (Thomas 2012). Again, metal detecting regulations vary widely over the world, ranging from outright prohibitions to unrestricted freedom (Dobat 2013; Rasmussen 2014).  Many archaeologists do not consider metal detecting to be an archaeological activity, equating it to treasure hunting: working standards and ethics are highly diverse, although metal detector users provide valuable research that is put into archaeological heritage databases at best (Bland 2005). Public archaeology experts are interested in the demographics of amateur archaeologists: for example, most archaeology society members are elderly, white, and middle class, but metal detector users are overwhelmingly male. Amateur archaeology is the oldest type of public archaeology, although it is increasingly threatened by restrictive legislation and professional practice.

Archaeology in the public sector

Charles McGimsey discharged the primary book within the field, Public anthropology, in 1972. The thought of 'public,' in line with McGimsey, refers to the state instead of the individuals themselves: it is best delineated as public sector anthropology. This wide class encompasses all activity done on a national, regional, or native scale by collectivist or -funded agencies to manage, protect, study, and transmit archeologic heritage. The U.S. National Parks Service, that employs an enormous range of archaeologists and heritage specialists, is one in all the most important of those organizations (Jameson 2004). With the rise of words like cultural resource management and heritage management, it's becoming less popular to refer to this job as public archaeology (King 2012). The importance of embedding these activities within a broader public archaeology, on the other hand, is to emphasize the power and democratic responsibility of taxpayer-funded agencies in charge of huge archaeological resources. They may not work directly with the public or even be visible to the public, but they are (at least in theory) accountable to it. 

Educational Archaeology

A lot of work in public archaeology is focused on the idea of education, which is founded on the premise that specialists have a responsibility to share their knowledge with those who can understand and apply it. Visitors interact with displays and archaeological materials in museums and historic sites, while curatorial personnel and museum learning professionals work to provide archaeological education (Corbishley 2011; Henson 2000). Education can take several forms in public or community archaeology projects: visitors may get informal discussions and guided tours; in other circumstances, they may receive basic archaeological skills training. Many projects feature field schools where amateur or student archaeologists can learn how to excavate, record, and survey (Baxter 2009). This training may resemble formal teaching and learning in certain instances, but in many circumstances, archaeological abilities are shared and developed via practice, with more experienced fieldworkers advising and supporting others. Which is consistent with a wider view of archaeological knowledge as a 'craft' (Faulkner 2000; Shanks and McGuire 1996; Walker and Saitta 2002). Formal education in archaeology is a sign of public interest in the field: Most archaeology classes in schools, colleges, and universities are electives. Archaeology is a well-known topic for lecture tours and cruises, as well as online courses, adult education courses, and evening classes; many well-known public archaeologists have worked in these sectors. According to Merriman, public archaeology has long been predicated on the 'deficit model,' which says that specialists have a responsibility to fill the gap in scientific knowledge in the general public, who are considered as empty vessels to be filled with information (Merriman 2004). Merriman's critique and proposed alternative, a "different viewpoints" approach, has increased public archaeology's knowledge of education, but in practice, a broad variety of educational philosophies are used, tacitly or explicitly, with varying degrees of effectiveness.

Archeology in the open

The degree to which archaeology can be made open is one of the most intriguing aspects of public archaeology: unlike many other sciences and scholarly fields, many of the processes of practices archaeology (particularly around excavation) are visible and easily comprehensible to the general public (Farid 2014; Moshenska 2009b; 2013; Tilley 1989). People watching an excavation can see artifacts, bodies, and structures emerge from the ground in front of their eyes, which is one of the reasons archaeology is so popular on television. This openness has been a factor in archaeology's appeal and success throughout its history. Tourists visiting digs irritated Sir Flinders Petrie and thrilled Sir Mortimer Wheeler, but many modern excavations, especially in urban areas, allow views of the site via viewing platforms or, in a recent times, webcams (Morgan and Eve 2012; Moshenska and Schadla- Hall 2011). Visitors are often permitted to explore the digs and speak with the archaeologists, but in some situations, tour guides are utilized. While digging is another one aspect of archaeology, openness is a critical component in maintaining archaeology's public profile and democratic nature as something (at least potentially) participatory and available to anybody. Open archaeology is one of the characteristics that distinguishes public archaeology from the broader fields of science communication and science studies. 

Archaeology in the public eye 

This is also known as media archaeology or popular culture archaeology: the dissemination of archaeological research to the general public using easily available and user-friendly media rather than the more serious and extensive educational methods outlined above. At the same time, in terms of economics, employment, and impact on public understanding of archaeology and the human history, this is perhaps the most important field of public archaeology. Public archaeologists frequently forget that the general public does not want to be archaeologists and does not want to know a lot about archaeology (Merriman 1991). In truth, most archaeologists are antiquarians: they have a broad interest in the past that includes local history, genealogy and family history, some military history, and a degree of interest in, say, Ancient Rome or Biblical places (Holtorf 2005, 2007). This huge majority learns about antiquity from television documentaries like Time Team, museum and gallery exhibitions, and popular books and magazine articles written by media-friendly scholars (Bonacchi 2013; Fagan 2005). A growing number of people are using digital media to interact with these sources, such as researching heritage sites and museums online and downloading apps and films, and public archaeology scholarship is increasingly taking this into consideration (Pett 2012). To preserve popular interest and support for archaeological legacy in political, cultural, and economic terms, archaeology relies on this shallow participation by a large audience. They are our market, and we would be foolish to disregard or mischaracterize them. 

Public archaeology at the university level 

I previously described public archaeology as a unique blend of practice and critique. The six categories listed above are mostly related with public archaeological practice; this last one is concerned with the discipline's critical features of scholarship. The academic field of public archaeology is concerned with archaeology where it meets the world, yet it draws on and informs the methods outlined above: it stands on the ground floor with a view of the garbage bins in the ivory tower (Flatman 2012). The study of archaeology in its economic contexts draws on the work of cultural organizations striving to stay afloat in the face of budget cuts, as well as communities working to protect their ancient sites from environmental dangers (Gould and Burtenshaw 2014). Archaeology's legal and political circumstances impact whether archaeological sites endangered by violent conflict will survive, as well as the constraints and opportunities for amateur archaeologists, scholars, looters, and other interested parties (King 2013). Archaeology's are involvement in the creation of individual and Public identities among nation states and diasporas is defined by studying its social and cultural surroundings (Kohl 1998; Trigger 1984). In the end, much of the scholarly challenges of archaeology in this and other situations is an ethical critique directed at the archaeological profession and the heritage sector in general. 

Traditional archaeological ethical concerns, such as the nature of cultural property, dealing with descendent communities, and ensuring material and social sustainability, are central to the study and practice of public archaeology (Carman 2005; Colwell-Chanthaphonh and Ferguson 2006; Tarlow 2006; Zimmerman et al. 2003). 

This seven-part typology is meant to be descriptive rather than prescriptive, and any involvement with public archaeology will rapidly reveal the overlap and links between these seemingly disparate categories. Digital media is used in crowd-sourced archaeology projects to connect members of the public with academic research initiatives, with the findings of their efforts feeding into museum exhibits. A visit to a working archaeological site may encourage people to join a local archaeology or history group and begin learning – and eventually teaching – archaeological skills of their own.  A student who is motivated to study archaeology by television programs may go on to produce or work in media archaeology, or become a researcher, or work in the public sector. Finally, this typology intends to raise awareness of the diversity of options available in public archaeology, as well as the variety of approaches and methodologies that can be chosen, refined, and implemented.