Significance evaluation plays a central role in archaeological heritage management. In this paper, a practical approach is presented based on experiences and recent discussions in the Netherlands. A restricted number of values (perception, physical quality and intrinsic quality) are operationalized as criteria in order to evaluate archaeological phenomena. In this manner, a more transparent framework is created to help determine if a monument is worth preserving. In the process of selection, monuments worth preserving are scrutinized from the viewpoints of policy considerations and priorities in archaeological heritage management in order to select monuments deserving of sustained preservation. The form of this system of significance evaluation is such that it can be used by all government levels, that the process is understandable for non-archaeologists, and that its results remain relevant from a research perspective.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BLOEMERS, T., 1997. Landschaftsarchäologie und Raumordnung in den Niederlanden. Aktuelle Trends und Themen. Archäologisches Nachrichtenblatt 2:229-243.
2.
BRIUER, L. and C. MATHERS, 1996. Trends and Patterns in Cultural Resource Signficance: an Historical Perspective and Annotated Bibliography. Alexandria: US Army Corps of Engineers Virginia (IWVR Report 96-EL-1).
3.
COUNCIL OF EUROPE, 1992. European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage (revised). European Treaty Series, 143. Strasbourg: Council of Europe .
4.
DARVILL, T., 1995. Value systems in archaeology. In M.A. Cooper, A. Firth, J. Carman and D. Wheatley (eds), Managing Archaeology: 40-50. London and New York: Routledge .
5.
DARVILL, T., S. BURROW and D.-A. WILDGUST, 1995. Planning for the Past, Volume 2. An Assessment of Archaeological Assessments, 1982-1991, Bournemouth and London: Bournemouth University and Engish Heritage .
6.
DARVILL, T. and A.K. FULTON, 1998: MARS: The Monuments At Risk Survey in England, 1995. Main Report. Bournemouth and London: Bournemouth University and English Heritage .
7.
DARVILL, T., A. SAUNDERS and B. STARNN, 1987. A question of national importance: approaches to the evaluation of ancient mbnuments for the monuments protection programme in England . Antiquity61: 393-408 .
8.
DEEBEN, J., D. P. HALLEWAS, J. KOLEN and R. WIEMER, 1997. Beyond the crystal ball. Predictive modelling as a tool in archaeological heritage management and occupation history. In W.J.H. Willems, H. Kars and D. P. Hallewas (eds), Archaeological Heritage Management in the Netherlands: 176-118. Assen/Amersfoort: Van Gorcum/Riksdienst voor het Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek .
9.
GROENEWOUDT, B.J., 1994. Prospectie, waardering en selectie van archeologische vindplaatsen: een beleidsgerichte verkenning van middelen en mogelijkheden. Nederlandse Archeologische Rapporten, 17. Amersfoort: Rijksdienst Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek.
10.
GROENEWOUDT, B.J. and J.H.F. BLOEMERS, 1997. Dealing with significance: concepts, strategies and priorities for archaeological heritage management in the Netherlands. In W.J.H. SWillems, H. Kars and D.P. Hallewas (eds), Archaeological Heritage Management in the Netherlands: 119-172. Assen/Amersfoort: Van Gorcum/ Rijksdienst voor het Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek .
11.
GROENEWOUDT, B.J. and R.C.G.M. LAUWERIER, 1997. Kennisatlas, stand van kennis en kennisleemten; een snelle inventarisatie. Interne Ra'pporten ROB, 33. Amersfoort: Rijksdienst voor het Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek.
12.
LEONE, M.P. and P.B. POTTER JR., 1992. Legitimation and the classification of archaeological sites . American Antiquity57: 137-145 .
13.
LIPE, W.D., 1984. Value and meaning in cultural resources. In H. Cleere (ed.) Approaches to the archaeological heritage: 1-11. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
14.
LÜNING, J., 1997. Landschaftsarchäologie in Deutschland, ein Programm. Archäologisches Nachrichtenblatt 2:277-285.
15.
MACINNES, L. and C.R. WICKHAM-JONES, 1992. All Natural Things. Archaeology and the Green Debate. Oxbow Monograph, 21. Oxford: Oxbow .
16.
MORATTO, M.J. and R.E. KELLY, 1978. Optimizing strategies for evaluating archaeological significance . Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory1: 1-30 .
17.
NEUSTUPNY, E., 1991. Community areas of prehistoric farmers in Bohemia . Antiquity65: 332-347 .
18.
OLIVIER, A., 1996. Frameworks for our Past, A Review of Research Frameworks, Strategies and Perceptions. London: English Heritage .
19.
REED, A.D., 1987. A technique for ranking prehistoric sites in terms of scientific significance . American Archaeology6: 127-130 .
20.
ROORDA, I.M. and R. WIEMER, 1992a. The Archis Project: towards a new national archaeological record for the Netherlands. In C.U. Larsen (ed.), Sites and Monuments. National Archaeological Records: 117-122. København: National Museum of Denmark .
21.
ROORDA, I., and R. WIEMER, 1992b. Towards a new archaeological information system in the Netherlands. In G. Lock and J. Moffets (eds), Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology (BAR International Series 577): 85-88. Oxford: BAR .
22.
SCHUYF, J., 1995. Heidens Nederland; Zichtbare overblijfselen van een niet-christelijk verleden. Utrecht: Matrijs.
23.
STARTIN, B., 1993. Assessment of field remains. In J. Hunter and I. Ralston (eds), Archaeological Resource Management in the UK; an Introduction: 184-196. Stroud: Alan Sutton .
24.
WAINWRIGHT, G.J., 1991. Exploring our Past, Strategies for the Archaeology of England. London: English Heritage .
25.
WILLEMS, W.J.H., 1997. Archaeological heritage management in the Netherlands: past, present and future. In W.J.H. Willems, H. Kars and D.P. Hallewas (eds), Archaeological Heritage Management in the Netherlands: 3-34. Assen/Amersfoort: Van Gorcum/Rijksdienst voor het Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek .
26.
WILLEMS, W.J.H., H. KARS and D.P. HALLEWAS (eds), 1997. Archaeological Heritage Management in, the Netherlands. Assen/Amersfoort: Van Gorcum/Rijksdienst voor het Oudheidkundig;Bodemonderzoek .
27.
ZOETBROOD, P.A.M., M.J.G. MONTFORTS, I.M. ROORDA and R. WIEMER, 1997. Documenting the archaeological heritage. In W.J.H. Willems, H. Kars and D.P. Hallewas (eds), Archaeological Heritage Management in the Netherlands: 330-345. Assen/Amersfoort: Van Gorcum/Rijksdienst voor het Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek .
