Editorial

Abstract

In the opening paper of this double issue, David Gill provides an overview of the development of guidebooks of the Ministry of Works, the forerunner to the current UK heritage preservation bodies. While museum catalogues have been frequently used in art historical research to understand the development of curatorial practices, by contrast, guidebooks have generally been an under-utilized resource, albeit with few notable exceptions, such as Jocelyn Anderson’s recent studies of Country Houses guidebooks (2011; 2018) and Amara Thornton’s work on archaeological publishing (2018). Gill provides one of the first analyses of this material relating to UK heritage sites. His paper shows how theMinistry of Works responded to increasing popular interest in its archaeological sites and historic buildings, from the initial introduction of guidebooks by the Ministry in 1918 up to the reconfiguration of its responsibilities as English Heritage, in 1983. Gill demonstrates the changing nature of these publications in response to varying forms of public engagement. The value of studies such as this lies in the treatment of guidebooks as artefacts of changing consumption patterns at heritage sites, and their utility as signifiers of the way in which sites are packaged for visitors. While interpretation panels, shop merchandise, and corporate branding exercises come and go — and often escape the clutches of the archive — the mass market nature of guidebooks ensures that copies survive, providing a snapshot into prevailing attitudes towards the public. Moreover, the longitudinal study that this type of material affords can help offer insights into the perennial discussions surrounding the perception that organizations like English Heritage are ‘dumbing down’ their interpretation to sate a wider audience. In the following paper, Qioawei Wei and Luo Zhao provide an overview of the development of public archaeology in China through the implementation of that country’s National Archaeology Parks project. The authors contextualize this project by first discussing the history of archaeological outreach in China; a history that deserves to be better known and that has important implications for our predominantly Western understanding of public engagement with archaeology. The authors discuss the introduction of the concept and discipline of ‘public archaeology’ into China from the early 2000s, and how this has been adapted to the Chinese context. The National Archaeology Parks are administered by the State, and as such have the weight of bureaucratic muscle behind them to ensure their rapid implementation — since 2009, thirty-six parks have been inaugurated across China and more are planned. Generally speaking, these parks appear to be a useful resource for promoting the importance of the preservation of archaeological sites as a scientific and cultural endeavour. The limitations, of course, on the development of public archaeology in China is its critical focus. While these parks have public archaeology, Vol. 16 Nos. 3–4, August–November 2017, 129–131