Prejudice, military intelligence, and neoliberalism: examining the local within archaeology and heritage practices in Jordan

ABSTRACT

A particular theme dominates contemporary heritage projects in the neoliberal context of Jordan: sustainable development on the basis of participatory approaches. Although these approaches are celebrated in academic and governmental circles, the history and power dynamics within which they operate remain underexplored. We aim to establish a theoretical framework that examines why and how local communities in the Arab region shifted from periphery to centre, and from background to foreground, in the field of archaeology and heritage. We situate archaeology and heritage within two seemingly different contexts, colonialism and neoliberalism, that have governed the relationship between the West and the Arab region. As we contrast colonialist exclusionary policies with the inclusivity promoted by neoliberal policies in archaeological and heritage projects in Jordan, we argue that despite the obvious differences between the two, they both managed to make substantial shifts in the perception of and attitudes toward archaeology and heritage. In spite of participatory paradigms, the shifts seem to have always come ‘from the outside’, operating on sites and peoples alike.

KEYWORDS:

• Colonialism
• neoliberalism
• archaeology-based and heritage-development projects
• participatory approach

Acknowledgment

Professor Peter Stone in Newcastle University provided the much-needed encouragement to initiate the critical approach in this article back in 2007 when Shatha was his PhD student. Professor Zeyad Al-Salameen and Dr Aahed Khliefat recently read and commented on earlier versions of this article. Our friends and colleagues in the Hashemite University and the United Arab Emirates University contributed to this article through supportive structured and casual conversations. The CBRL Prize for Best Article Committee and the editor of Contemporary Levant provided intense revisions of the ideas and the language of this article. We are grateful to all of them.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributors

Shatha Abu-Khafajah graduated as an architect from the University of Jordan in 1997. She specialized in documentation and conservation of archaeological heritage while doing her master degree in archaeology. Her PhD in cultural heritage management from Newcastle University enabled her to synthesise architecture and archaeology with special interest in establishing a sustainable approach to heritage management in the Arab region that is community-based and context-oriented. She is currently an associate professor at the Hashemite University in Jordan. Her research focuses on examining the relationship between people and their built environment.

Riham Miqdadi obtained her BA and MA degrees in Archaeology from Mo’tah University and University of Jordan respectively. She pursued her PhD degree in Near Eastern Archaeology from University of Tübingen in Germany. Riham participated in several archaeological excavations in Jordan and Syria. She is currently an assistant professor at the Department of History and Archaeology in the United Arab Emirates University. Her research focuses on ancient near eastern archaeology, Arabian Gulf archaeology, typology of the ancient pottery and manufacturing techniques, and cultural heritage studies and practices.

Notes

1 We particularly refer to the different colonial regimes of the late 19th and early 20th centuries and contemporary powers that have shaped and continue to shape the current spatial, socio-political and economic context of the Arab region.

2 We would encourage a meta-analytical approach to this literature on which we can begin to build a solid critique.

3 Since its establishment WAC has emphasized diversity and inclusion in the discipline of archaeology (Stone 2006, p. 63). Concepts of locality, diversity and inclusion were also used to mitigate universality in the 1979 Australia ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance (Burra Charter), the 1983 Canada ICOMOS Appleton Charter for the Protection and Enhancement of the Built Environment, the 1992 New Zealand ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural Heritage Value, the 2002 Principles for the Conservation of Heritage Sites in China and the 2003 Indonesian Charter for Heritage Conservation.

4 For example, Ghana (Mawuko-Yevugah 2010), Spain (González 2014) and Russia (Plets 2016).