Local community intangible cultural heritage associated with Gebel El-Barkal and Napatan region archaeological sites: values, identity, and ownership claims

Elnour, Ismail (2023). Local community intangible cultural heritage associated with Gebel El-Barkal and Napatan region archaeological sites: values, identity, and ownership claims. University of Birmingham. Ph.D.

Preview

Elnour2023PhD_Redacted.pdf
Text
Available under License All rights reserved.
Download (15MB) | Preview

Abstract

Individual scholars, governments, and international organisations have become increasingly interested in studying the interrelation between local communities and their heritage, notably archaeological sites. Most of these studies are limited in their approach and scope. First, they are driven by the national and international official heritage discourse, which presents the conceptualizations of the elite and not the voices of the local communities, whereas only a few of them give significant weight to the voices of the local communities. Secondly, these studies have also represented the common mode of separation between Tangible and Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH), accentuating official authenticity criteria in favour of the social realities associated with these archaeological sites. Thirdly, the method of involving local communities tends to be a top-down process, which creates either a disconnection mode with archaeological sites or an escalation of ownership claim conflict between local communities and national official state institutions.
This study explores the challenges of confronting the above limitation in a Sudanese context, through the lens of uses and modes of local community engagement with Gebel El-Barkal and Napatan region archaeological sites. This heritage setting is designated by UNESCO as a World Heritage Site of Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) to humanity, as well as being of considerable symbolic value in Sudan as a national monument; likewise, it plays a role in a multitude of more informal contexts of local everyday social and cultural life. Even if it is less well considered, the context of local social and cultural life is imbued with rich meanings that are also part of a larger and more complex process of heritage-making and its contestation, which it is critically important to understand.
In this study I argue that a bottom-up approach is the most effective method for addressing the relationship between local communities and archaeological sites. Moreover, I argue that adopting this method should begin with acquiring a sound understanding of how local communities conceptualise archaeological sites, their sense of place, and the values associated therewith. Examining local communities’ ICH associated with archaeological sites is the most efficient method for achieving this goal. This assertion is based on the notion that ICH linked with the site is a form of knowledge that scholars may use to deepen their understanding of the social and cultural context of the local community. Furthermore, ICH is an alternative discourse that competes with the Authorized Heritage Discourse (AHD). Thus, local communities’ ICH, national communities’ AHD, and the international conception of OUV of the site as defined by UNESCO all express distinct identity claims and values.
This qualitative research employed ethnography and phenomenology to investigate the local communities and their ICH associated with the investigated sites. Employing this methodology, this thesis examines cultural values of these archaeological sites from the perspective of the local communities. Social contact also furnishes information and discourse that contribute to the construction of this reality, responsible for the complex process of formation of identities and values of crucial importance for uses and meanings of the site. Capturing these diverse realities necessitates critical attention to understanding a range of important factors that position different communities in relation to the site, including the role of ethnicity, religion, social class, gender, and age.

Type of Work:

Thesis (Doctorates > Ph.D.)

Award Type:

Doctorates > Ph.D.

Supervisor(s):