Meeting the past in the present: authenticity and cultural values in heritage conservation at the fourteenth-century Majapahit heritage site in Trowulan, Indonesia

ABSTRACT

Discourse on heritage conservation has undergone significant changes in both scope and substance since the Nara Document on Authenticity in 1994. Current heritage policy dictates that conservation should be conceived as a complex process, which aims to make use of heritage places whilst retaining their cultural values and authenticity. However, these two latter aspects are critical and need to be carefully interpreted. Authenticity is not only a matter of physical materiality, but also has to do with identifying intrinsic values which sustain the memory of the past.

Taking the Majapahit Houses Programme (MHP) in Trowulan heritage site as a case study, this paper shows how these notions of authenticity and cultural values have come into conflict with present-day conservation practices. Flexibility is the key to the development of balanced heritage policies. One way of achieving this is by giving local communities the chance to mediate their own heritage-related disputes and personally participate in the practice of heritage conservation. Only then will a common policy be achieved and heritage experts and local communities find a way of working together to achieve sustainable outcomes.

KEYWORDS:

• Heritage conservation
• cultural values
• authenticity
• Trowulan
• Majapahit Houses Programme

Acknowledgments

The writing of this research paper was supported by Prof. Peter Carey, Fellow Emeritus of Trinity College, Oxford and Adjunct Professor at Faculty of Humanities, University of Indonesia, and Dr. Chris Baker, Honorary Editor of the Journal of the Siam Society, for their assistance in polishing the original English text, and for their extensive input into the material presented here. We would also like to place on record our appreciation for Supriyadi, Akub, and all the local community in Trowulan for sharing their time with us. We also thank the IJHS Editor, Prof. Laurajane Smith, and the two anonymous IJHS reviewers for their valued comments which greatly improved the quality and focus of our original manuscript. We also thank our assistants: Aria Bagiasa, Rizky Bolang, Tri Abrianti, and Fiqi K. Malik for assisting with data collection and its presentation, and Widya Amasara for brainstorming during the writing process of this manuscript.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. According to Ramelan et al. (2015, 65), the correct figure is 42 villages. Five villages were double-counted and two are unnamed.