International Journal of Heritage StudiesVol. 11, No. 4, September 2005, pp. 309–325ISSN 1352–7258 (print)/ISSN 1470–3610 (online) © 2005 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/13527250500235591Whose Sense of Place? Reconciling Archaeological Perspectives with Community Values: Cultural Landscapes in EnglandEmma WatertonTaylor and Francis LtdRJHS123542.sgm10.1080/13527250500235591International Journal of Heritage Studies1352-7258 (print)/1470-3610 (online)Original Article2005Taylor & Francis Group Ltd114000000September 2005Like other forms of heritage, landscape provides a vital repository of cultural meaning inrelation to identity, belonging and sense of place. Despite this, the process of heritagemanagement tends to obscure these links between landscapes and communities, and is thusneglectful of the experiences, perspectives and recollections that both individuals andgroups bring to their engagement with heritage. This paper draws on the Hareshaw Linncommunity project to illustrate the diverse ways in which communities construct relation-ships with landscape. This case study serves as a reminder that the heritage managementprocess cannot usefully be reduced to the technical and scientific practice it is often assumedto be, as it is often both emotional and conflict ridden. In light of this, it is essential to ques-tion why landscape is underplayed in legislation and public policy, and this necessarilyentails the exploration of issues such as ownership, power, knowledge and ‘public’ heritage.Keywords: Cultural Heritage Management; Cultural Landscape; Community Values; Ownership; Power/Knowledge; Identity; Sense of Place; ArchaeologyRecent emphasis on the political and ethical responsibilities of Cultural HeritageManagement (CHM) has prompted attempts to reconsider the management processitself. Perhaps most notably it has been those debates emerging from post-colonialnations that have triggered such a staunch questioning of the theoretical frameworksthat support and inform the management process. While such contexts have allowed amix of circumstances ripe for unpacking ideas of ‘universal applicability’ and theEmma Waterton, University of York. Correspondence to: [email protected] E. Watertoncertainty of Western modes of knowledge, this line of questioning has seldom beenextended into Western settings. These debates, however, should not be confined topost-colonial nations alone, as they raise issues that carry a broader relevance. Forexample, notions of ownership, control, power, knowledge, stewardship and ‘thepublic’ have been subjected to renewed interest and reconsideration. Importantly,however, such debates have worked not only to recast particular concepts but have alsoprompted a critical reflection on what it actually means to manage heritage. This paperattempts to pick up the challenge of utilising both these reworked concepts and a re-imagined management process, and to examine them through the critical analysis of aconcrete case study in the UK—the Hareshaw Linn community project in Bellingham,Northumberland. In particular, this research centres on the conflict that surrounds theconcept of ‘cultural landscapes’, and attempts to reconcile dominant archaeologicalperspectives of ‘landscape’ with a broader, postmodern-inspired understanding ofheritage as experienced through ‘landscape’.1 Here, the concept of ‘landscape’ oscillatesbetween the dominance of aesthetic and scientific values within heritage protection,and an understanding that invariably draws in intangible associations such as identity,social history and a sense of place, thus providing an important focus for local commu-nities.2 The case study is thus able to illustrate the interaction of two discordant viewsregarding heritage, and presents an opportunity to explore the ways in which these areencountered within current management frameworks, particularly in terms of how oneof these works to counter and foreclose the other. It also provides a useful slate uponwhich to assess current political engagements with a broader social agenda, such as therecent policy emphasis on social inclusion and efforts to capitalise on the apparent linksbetween community cohesion and cultural heritage. While this union is sound intheory, questions need to be asked as to how this policy actually unfolds in concretesituations.Drawing on the arguments outlined above, the intention of this article is theoreti-cally to refashion the expert–community relationship and attempt to open an oppor-tunity for constructing understandings of landscape previously marginalised bydominant expressions of science and materiality. Through the introduction of theHareshaw Linn case study, a series of arguments will be developed that can usefully beapplied to the broader management process. Essentially, this is due to the opportunitythis case study offers for examining the discursive conflict that underpins currentmanagement directions. This struggle will be illustrated by first developing a broadunderstanding of the history of archaeological theory, and counter-posing this againstthe emergence of a distinct, local appreciation of how to manage and interact withlandscape. Together, the two provide substance for a sustained analysis.Why and for Whom? The Hareshaw Linn Community ProjectThe Hareshaw Linn community project provides the circumstances within which todiscuss the parameters of heritage management in both theory and practice. It drawsfrom a community project in Bellingham, which lies just within the NorthumberlandNational Park, in northern England, and is thus subject to the principles set out in theInternational Journal of Heritage Studies 311Environment Act of 1995.3 This act places a duty on National Park Authorities aimedat ‘conserving and enhancing natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of theNational Park’ and ‘promoting opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment ofthe special qualities of [the] areas by the public’. Using a National Park as a basis foranalysis presents a special set of circumstances, because their remit incorporates bothnatural and cultural elements under one common authority. The Hareshaw Linn hasbeen managed under the authority of the National Park since 1974, with the principleobjective of maintaining the natural and scientifically important elements of thelandscape, particularly the ancient semi-natural deciduous woodlands making up theLinn. These were