3rd International Landscape Archaeology Conference 2014 Rome, Italy, 17th

– 20th of September 2014

SESSION ABSTRACTS Nr. Session name Conveners 1 Social Landscapes - methodological approaches

integrating material and linguistic data in landscape archaeology.

A. Busch, M. Horster & M. Teichmann

2 Inland and mountainous areas of the Italian Peninsula and population patterns from Protohistoric to Medieval period.

F. Cambi & V. Acconcia

3 The wind of change: town, country, land-use and settlement patterns between the fourth and the seventh century AD.

C. Corsi & F. Carboni

4 Archaeological protection and landscape planning. legislation and new professional positions for European archaeologists.

V. di Stefano & A. Pintucci

5 Human niche construction in landscape archaeology.

M. Ertsen, S. Kluiving & T. Wilkinson

6 Bridging the gap - integrated approaches in landscape archaeology.

D. Knitter, W. Bebermeier & O. Nakoinz

7 Disasters that change landscapes: causes, evolution afterwards and researching disaster-struck landscapes.

A. de Kraker

8 Archaeomorphology as landscape archaeology: new approaches and perspectives.

H. Orengo & J. Palet

9 Ancient topography and archaeology of landscape. S. Quilici-Gigli & M. Guaitoli 10 Landscape and migration. K. Rieger & N. Sojc 11 CRM implications of regional survey projects in the

northern Mediterranean area. M. van Leusen

12 Computational modeling in landscape archaeology: back to the drawing board?

P. Verhagen, M. Brouwer-Burg & T. Whitley

13 Seeing heritage through the lenses of landscapes. B. Pedroli & G. Fairclough

1. Social Landscapes - methodological approaches integrating material and linguistic data in Landscape Archaeology

Alexandra Busch Marietta Horster

Michael Teichmann Over the last decades Landscape Archaeology has advanced significantly adopting and applying a wide range of new techniques from the geosciences like remote sensing, geophysical prospection and Geographical Information Systems. These techniques dominate alongside with bioarchaeology, soil sampling and excavation data as multiple research methods – rooted in natural sciences – the analysis and description of the development of landscapes. In contrast to these “quantifiable data”, the potential of linguistic data as a source for studying landscape development in its broader spatial context is rarely exploited, though it provides detailed and important information on the administration, the economy and religion – factors that had a strong impact on landscapes and that are linked to their development and perception. This session aims at discussing and bridging the gap, between the material and textual evidence as complementary sources in approaching the complexity of ancient social landscapes. The limitations and possible biases of such a methodology should also be reflected. In our view there is an enormous potential for enriching archaeology on social landscapes by combining material and linguistic data for nearly all social groups, emphasizing therefore the interdependencies of landscape and its inhabitants in various spheres of life. A particularly interesting challenge consists in the fusion of linguistic data and the archaeological record in a GIS environment. In the 1990ies, some studies merging such data to analyze the variety of ‘landscapes’ have been successfully applied for the Eastern Mediterranean (e.g. Susan Alcock 1993, who distinguished rural, civic, provincial, and sacred landscapes in Roman Greece). However, apart from singular contributions on the micro-level of one city or settlement, the manifold new data sets have but rarely been connected with the interaction of humans with and within a natural landscape in a given period. Latin epigraphy possesses a high potential for the research on ancient regions. It has (or should have) become a standard procedure to assess inscriptions in their respective material contexts, but this is often reduced to individual objects and to the study of the elites’ culture. Even for the elites of Roman Italy, there are but few studies that set them in the human landscapes and social networks of a given region or city. Due to its extraordinary role for the history of the Roman world, the wealth in archaeological and textual sources and the advanced state of research on Roman central Italy will serve as an exemplary starting point: Since the mid-Republican period, central Italy went through recurrent war damages, overthrows of the political framework, and demographic changes. The natural environment was therefore affected in numerous ways by human impact, which changed the landscape (rural land use, infrastructure, production and commerce, settlement patterns) with all its consequences for social stratification and socio-political hierarchies. Contributions on social landscape of other regions or cultures are also welcome.

2. Inland and mountainous areas of the Italian Peninsula and population patterns from Protohistoric to Medieval period:

approaches to landscape, natural resources exploitation and to the persistenc e of traditional routes from the point of view of Thyrrenian

and Middle -Adriatic Area.

Franco Cambi (Università degli Studi di Siena, IT) Valeria Acconcia (Università degli Studi di Chieti-Pescara, IT)

The aim of the session is to effort problems connected to the inland territories of Italian Peninsula, characterized by more or less accentuated heights which make contacts and relationships among the settling communities and their peer-to-peer level of development and integration less definite than other communities occupying more accessible areas. This topic obviously can be analyzed for every period from Prehistory to Modern Age. For instance, the relevance which inland and/or mountainous areas have in comparison to plain and coastal areas seems to increase in specific historical periods; although during others periods they seem to be “peripheral”.

Furthermore, different geomorphological characters fix adaptative forms of local communities, especially before Romanization. They model their identities (also in an ethnic sense) in relationship to major or minor degree of isolation and integration with the environment in which they develop. Moreover, inland and/or mountainous areas answer in various ways to the inclusion in state-territorial organizations, as shown by changes during Romanization process. They also express specific choices in food supplying and territorial exploitation patterns, as demonstrated by the persistence of some “typical” agricultural productions, or by the continuity in the use of transhumance, well adapted to mountain or hill territories, where agriculture does not reach an extensive scale.

We want to develop these topics, including territorial analysis, methodologies applied on areas scarcely accessible and with a scarce surface visibility (remote sensing; geophysics), analyzing transhumance routes, paleobotanic and arcaheozoological records, metals and stone supply etc. We want to stimulate the discussion on population patterns, adaptation of communities and their answer in terms of self-representation; on historical and cultural persistence; on commercial and exchange routes.

The area mainly involved in this theme will be the Appenine range. In matter of pastoralism, great prominence has been given to long-distance transhumance, so-called horizontal, as well as long-distance, as attested in Italy in particular between the Apennines and Apulia. But nothing or scarcely it has been the interest involving local or short transhumance, also in the Thyrrenian area.

Transhumance has been practiced in the Mediterranean basin since prehistoric times. The trajectory of pastoralist activities in antiquity has long been a matter of debate that has affected researchers’ methodological approaches. Both transhumant and sedentary flocks were integrated with agricultural operations to a considerable extent. The dynamic between lowlands and mountains represent an integrated system connected by forms of mobility generated thorough transhumance. From this perspective, for instance the case of central-southern Etruria in antiquity represents a quite ignored context.

Pastoralism has always been considered a highly mobile practice. Thus, the identification of pastoral (mixed) sites and activities, archaeologically speaking, has followed the presence or the absence of a series of indicators including low artifact densities and characteristic artifact remains associated with pastoralist activities. The pastoral sites and routes have been considered virtually impossible to identify in the archaeological record. More traditional historic and archaeological studies must be integrated with landscape archaeological perspectives and methods (historical ecology, paleoebotanical sequences, archaeozoology, isotopic analysis, path analysis involving GIS techniques and so on).

3. "The wind of change: town, country, land -use and settlement patterns between the fourth and the seventh century AD"

Francesca Carboni

Cristina Corsi In the course of the last 20 years a novel interest towards the transitional phases between Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages has arisen while an endless flow of new data about the period between the fourth and seventh centuries has become available. Although the progressive elaboration and dissemination of these results have started to shed some light on the so-called “dark ages” it is undoubtedly true that the methodological framework and the theoretical elaboration have not kept pace with these fieldwork achievements. Possibly because in the international context the formation of specialists in this field is still in an embryonic phase, we are often confronted with superficial analysis of the settlement dynamics and with poor criticism of ancient sources. This session intends to start the debate about the approaches to this specific phase in the light of regional and sub-regional synthesis, balancing the presentation of new data with methodological discussion. As the definition “Late Antiquity” is often used in literature for very different time spans, it is first of all essential to agree on a chronological framework, which will take into account the different historical developments in Europe and in the Mediterranean basin. Speakers will be invited to present the newest data about settlement patterns in wide geographical contexts during these four centuries of “incubation” of the changes that will announce the new world of Medieval Europe. Contributors will be asked to present regional case-studies in the light of the newest acquisitions in our knowledge on trade and productions and, with support of the geosciences, on changes in the ecological conditions. Topics such as the relationship between town and country, the settlement patterns, the transformations in land-use and communication networks, different forms of land division and reclamation or water regimentation activities, well attributable to Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages, will be investigated. Issues related to the transformation of urban space and the suburbs, as well as the dynamics of expansion, reduction or abandonment of towns will be addressed, preferably inserted in the wider evaluation of the surrounding landscape and catchment area. Settlement patterns analysis should be conducted in the light of the newest acquisitions in our knowledge of trades and productions in this phase and possibly with the support of the geosciences to reconstruct changes in the ecological conditions. Accepted contributors will be also invited to take part in a “panel” where some more methodological and theoretical matters will be discussed. Therefore, the session will be organized in two distinct parts: a brief introductory speech by the chairs followed by 7/8 presentations of max 20 minutes each and with 5 min of specific questions, after which a panel discussion of 1 hour will follow.

4. “ ARCHAEOLOGICAL PROTE CTION AND LANDSCAPE PLANNING. Legislation and new professional positions for European

Archaeologists”

Valentina Di Stefano (Ufficio Stampa Confederazione Italiana Archeologi, IT) Alessandro Pintucci (Ufficio Stampa Confederazione Italiana Archeologi, IT)

The seminar aims at stimulating a discussion among European representatives of archaeological Institutions, experts, professionals, and academics in relation to norms and practices for the protection of the archaeological heritage, with particular regard at landscape and territorial planning. This proposal takes its roots from the positive outcomes of a previous seminar held by CIA in 2011 titled “Archaeology and landscape between protection and planning” (the concerned proceedings are being sent for print). The seminar focused on the issues of protection and landscape planning on local Italian scale. The proposed seminar aims at deepening and widening the debate at European level. During the last years, in terms of norms and legislations, the world of archaeology has notably improved in order to harmonize and modernize the protection and preservation system and to enhance the cultural heritage. The archaeological professional activities have also considerably developed in order to satisfy the needs of the society. Nonetheless, the norms and legislation system have not been able to safeguard this professional category and to identify adequate and specialized educational paths. Thus the seminar will focus on the analysis of the present situation with an European outlook and on the role implemented by Archaeological Institutions, both at regional and national level and by professionals for the territorial and landscape planning researches and for the infrastructure development. The seminar will foster a discussion on the norms in terms of preventive archaeology as applied within the member countries of the European Union, through the presentation of empirical cases of studies. Objectives: The main objective of the seminar is to provide the audience with a discussion on relevant issues of contemporary archaeology. Starting from the analysis of the current situation among the member states, the debate aims at contributing to the elaboration of proposals for the identification of instruments and procedures for the protection and preservation management and the enhancement of the cultural heritage. The seminar might offer a determinant contribution to the urgent need of identifying legislative standards for the cultural heritage at European level. Furthermore, the discussion on the evolution of the archaeological profession, at particular regard to landscape and territory design and modelling, could provide the basis for developing a common proposal to promote the recognition and valorisation of the figure of the professional archaeologist at European level.

Target groups: The seminar targets European representatives of cultural institution, universities, public administrations and professionals. The seminar will offer to the participants an occasion for improving reciprocal knowledge and discuss about specific and common needs. Considering the thousands of professionals operating within this sector, as from archaeologists to landscape architects, the seminar would provide a relevant chance to for experts’ update and proficient stimula to identify new professional possibilities.

5. Human Niche Construction in Landscape Archaeology

Maurits Ertsen (Delft University of Technology, NL) Sjoerd Kluiving (VU University Amsterdam, NL)

Tony Wilkinson (Durham University, UK)

The session calls for contributions providing empirical evidence for co-evolving social/economic arrangements and landscapes as environmental systems – e.g. studies that take a historical or archaeological approach, or use social science methods to assess how communities/societies create and respond to environmental change. In addition natural scientific studies are welcomed that incorporate HNT elements in their papers, e.g. . Are landscape gradients the starting points where organisms (humans) are altering its own selective environment (inceptive change)? Or is it the lack of such gradients that initiate humans to respond to a (deteriorated) selective environment (counteractive change)? Organisms are constantly changing their environment: the famous beavers build dams, termites build huge mounds, and the changes wrought by humans have transformed the surface of the earth. In turn, the environment changes organisms; selective pressures from any given environment have an influence on survival strategies of those living within that environment. The concept of Niche Construction stresses that organisms – in changing their selective environment – change themselves in the long term. Human Niche Construction Theory simply argues that humans do so too and produce interlinked changes in four domains: 1. The material environment – modified by human agency 2. The social arrangements – when modifying the environment and responding to the changes 3. The genetic structure of the human group – as a result of modifications 4. The material environment for other species – which would transform those species As originally conceived, Human Niche Construction Theory claims to include the genetic level in its field of study. The well-known examples of lactose-intolerance and sickle-cell-tolerance of malaria show that such an inclusion is entirely possible. However, direct relations between genetic change and landscape are hard to claim and the data to study any relation are not available yet. Therefore, this session will focus on the two directional nature of the interactions between material environment and social arrangements, in order to capture work that examines how humans change their environment, and how subsequent environmental changes alter societal functioning.

6. Bridging the Gap - Integrated approaches in Landscape Archaeology

Daniel Knitter (Freie Universität Berlin, DE) Wiebke Bebermeier (Freie Universität Berlin, DE)

Oliver Nakoinz (Institut für Ur- und Frühgeschichte, DE)

It is common sense that Landscape Archaeology needs interdisciplinary collaboration between a broad range of disciplines. To understand landscape as a whole the expertise of humanities and sciences is necessary. Nevertheless, though geosciences reveal information of environmental characteristics and archaeologists investigate the traces of human occupation both have to work together in order to understand natural as well as social dynamics. For instance the investigation of pollen and phytoliths enables researchers to gain information about cultivated plants and the vegetation history of an area. Nevertheless, they are not able to answer complex questions of how these specific characteristics shaped and were shaped by the people that lived there. The same holds true for isotope or DNA studies. They offer important insights regarding distribution of specific goods and people, nourishment, and spread of technology. Notwithstanding, these are just raw data that have to be interpreted based on paradigms of human-societal organization. Similarly we could give such statements for humanities studies that lack the integration of sciences and are hence not able to cover all necessary aspects of human-societal-natural interactions and dynamics. Landscapes Archaeology starts with a culturhistorical question concerning a cultural landscape, uses scientific data and methods, even for archaeological finds and ends up with a culturhistorical interpretation. All these aspects are known and no research project is funded that will not consider these kind of necessary interdisciplinary research. Landscape Archaeology is interdisciplinary research. But how is this done? Which paradigms apply in interdisciplinary research? What ontologies are able to integrate science and humanities? Is the intended holistic thinking possible with the available methods and theories? After all, does the gap between science and humanities still exist in landscape archaeology? Since landscape is a holistic term, this session is intended to discuss the approaches that integrate humanities and sciences as transdisciplinary task in a holistic framework.

7. Disasters that chang e landscapes: causes, evolution afterwards and researching disaster -struck landscapes

Adrie de Kraker (VU University Amsterdam, NL)

Cultural landscapes are dynamic and therefore tend to change continuously. Sometimes natural hazards occur and such landscapes become frozen in time, e.g. buried underneath a layer of volcanic ash or new deposits. As soon as natural hazards affect cultural landscapes they become disasters . In particular coastal areas tend to flood and as a result may change into a natural landscape again. But, do they also get frozen in time? This session does not only look into the causes of flooding of coastal and river landscapes and how they are affected by a flooding event, but it also investigates how a flooded landscape slowly changes into a ‘new’ type of landscape. Does nature take over completely or is man still playing a role in determining landscape development? In some areas across Europe flooded landscapes only partly changed into natural landscapes again. The same might have occurred elsewhere but then caused by some other kind of disaster. These could be landscapes affected by volcanic eruption, hit by earth quakes, affected by malaria or some other contagious disease during the past This session calls for oral and poster presentations that look into

• Causes and results of natural hazards on cultural landscapes; • Interaction of natural processes and human impact on disaster landscapes; • The archaeology of the disaster landscapes; • Preservation of disaster landscapes.

8. Archaeomorphology as landscape archaeology: new approaches and perspectives

Hector A. Orengo (Department of archaeology, University of Nottingham. UK)

Josep M. Palet (Landscape Archaeology Research Group (GIAP), Catalan Institute of Classical Archaeology)

Archaeomorphology, the study of human-made landscape forms such as roads, field systems, terraces, water channels and the urban shape is an important part of landscape studies. The archaeological features studied through archaeomorphological approaches display a long-term chronology and play an important role in the configuration of human habitat, movement and sustenance. In many cases, this role can still be appreciated in today’s cultural landscapes. However, during the last decades the archaeomorphological study of centuriations and other field systems has been considered a marginal and unscientific discipline. This is largely due to the multiplication of unreliable archaeomorphological studies on centuriations developed from the 70s to the 90s, some of which have been proved wrong by large-scale archaeological excavations. Nonetheless, the last decade has seen a revival of centuriation and other archaeomorphology-based studies. Events such as the 2009 international conference ‘The application of centurial systems and methods of agrarian organisation from the roman period to the early middle ages’ or the publication of ‘Agri Centuriati, An International Journal of Landscape Archaeology’ since 2004 have helped putting this discipline ‘back on the map’. Several factors have contributed to this: • Firstly, a dramatic improvement of the quality and reliability of archaeomorphological

analyses. The development and increased availability of digital carto-photographic materials and RS and GIS-based techniques has been an important landmark in this respect.

• More importantly, the use of multidisciplinary approaches, which include geoarchaeology, geophysics, survey, ancient document analysis or palaeoenvironmental analysis, have helped reintegrating archaeomorphology into the wider field of landscape archaeology.

• The discard of old hypothesis based on strict interpretations of the writings of the Roman agrimensores or later texts. In this way, chronological interpretations based on modular distances and orientations of the system’s axes are not considered reliable any more. Also, orthogonal field systems with distances between axes that are equivalent to multipliers of the Roman actus do not necessarily need to be of Roman origin. In the same way, interpretation has moved from economic, punitive or materialistic approaches to more social and cultural focussed explanations.

• Finally, the use of verification procedures such as fieldwalking, excavation or statistical analysis has provided a much needed way to assess the reliability of the hypothesis.

This session aims to prove the potential of the ‘new archaeomorphology’ for the understanding of past landscape configurations and the explanation of historical processes. The techniques available to the archaeomorphologist will be summarised and a workflow for best practice will be proposed. Papers will be invited which show the use of multidisciplinary, long-term approaches to archaeomorphological analysis regardless of the period or form of field system under study. Those papers illustrating how archaeomorphological approaches can be used to explain or reinterpret historical or cultural processes will be particularly welcome.

9. Ancient topography and archaeology of landscape.

Stefania Quilici Gigli (Università Napoli, IT) Marcello Guaitoli (Università di Lecce, IT)

The current provisions of the law (on preventive archeology, landscape plans, etc.) introduce the obligation to devote increasing attention to the preservation and valorisation of the territory and its cultural components. The 'scientific contribution offered from Ancient Topography and Archaeology of Landscapes, made it shared the idea that the landscape must be known not for occasional emergencies, but thanks to a specific information based on traditional methods and the most advanced technology applied, so as to prevent risks in spatial planning and contribute to the enhancement of the archaeological potential of the territories.

10. Landscape and Migration

Anna-Katharina Rieger (Martin-Luther-University Halle, Wittenberg, DE) Natascha Sojc (Leiden University, NL)

Migrating pouplations and moving socio-cultural groups are a common phenomenon in the ancient Mediterranean. People moved deliberately for economic and demographic reasons, because of life style traditions or in the wake of military altercations. Research has addressed these phenomena under diverse headings, such as colonisation, migratory movements, transhumance and nomadism, using a broad range of methodological and theoretical approaches. Landscape archaeology, which deals with entities of earth surface on different scales and takes a diachronic view of the cultural inscriptions into the landscapes, is perfectly suited toapproach questions of migration since it charters changes in landscapes, which can drivemigratory movements, and links landscape alternations to the influx of new settlers due to migration and their respective social, technical and material impacts. However, as is the case with all sub-disciplines of archaeology, we cannot observe physical movement, but instead deal with “frozen” chronological levels of situations. Thus, landscape archaeology encounters the methodologically challenging problem of reconstructing migration movements in and through landscapes. How can the patterns resulting from topographical and chronological population shifts best be made legible and how can we interpret the environments that emerged? This session intends to bring together various current approaches in Mediterranean archaeology in order to investigate a topic that has, in former times, been instrumentalized to further Eurocentric views (e.g. colonisation) because it was (and sometimes still is) a sensitive issue for some of the regions. Aware of this specific background, the session intends to advance the understanding of the complex scopes and ranges of migration from landscape archaeology’s perspective, one that is explicitly longterm and neither restricted to certain phases of history nor interested in studying only ‘one’ cultural group’s interaction with space. The session will deal with subjects such as the historical dimension of migration, “moving objects”-approaches and patterns of distribution, recurrent movements inscribed in landscapes, as well as survey and GIS-methodologies as tools for retracing migration and ,finally, the significance of migration in landscape-heritage concepts. Contributions will begin with the common assumption that the social, cultural, economic and heritage-related implications of migrations that take place in larger regional or intraregional contexts have a topical impact on socio-cultural developments and forms of living. The patterns of and perspectives on migration that are presented will be drawn from historic situations and the archaeological record in Mediterranean areas in order to help us understand processes of cultural inclusion, failed acculturation and the construction of hybrid identities. Theoretical reflection will take the underlying hegemonic, antagonistic or agonistic principles of the actions that marked landscapes into account and question the extent to which colonial, postcolonial (and other theoretical) paradigms structure the scientific approaches to migration in landscapes.

In order to realize the goal of this session, the organizers invite papers addressing the following aspects of landscape and migration:

• methodological approaches to the archaeology of migration; • landscapes as bearers of identity and memory; • revision of landscape / inhabitant concepts (e.g. autochthony); • boundaries and demarcations in landscapes; • migrations and landscape heritage.

11. CRM Implications of Regional Survey Projects in the Northern Mediterranean Area

Martijn van Leusen (Groningen Institute of Archaeology, NL)

The purpose of the proposed session is to consider past, current and future relations between academic researchers and heritage managers within the framework of large-scale (regional) survey projects. The goals of landscape archaeological projects are increasingly at odds with established procedures for obtaining research permissions, arranging long-term finds storage, and reporting and data transfer. Moreover, the current site-focused priorities of heritage managers prevent an effective management response to the kinds of natural and anthropogenic taphonomic processes affecting the vast bulk of the Mediterranean archaeological landscape. Some suggested topics for the session are therefore:

- In what way(s) are regional field survey data used for archaeological landscape management and valorization activities? Can we work towards zonal (area) protection and valorization to get away from the current focus on ‘important sites’?

- The role of foreign institutes: could or should they ‘band together’ to negotiate with state heritage management officers?

- How could collaboration between researchers and managers be improved? Can survey data be supplied in a more effective manner, e.g. as uploaded Google Earth layers?

We welcome contributions from project directors that have put, or are planning to put, more than a token effort into the CRM aspects of their work. To avoid a purely academic debate, the session and conference organizers will put particular effort into soliciting contributions by regional and national heritage management officers. Session format: some speakers will be invited by the session organizers, but there will be room for outside submissions as well. Given the topic of the session, papers can be brief (10 minutes) and will be interspersed with a chaired discussions. Speakers to be invited: representatives of national and regional heritage management offices in Italy and other northern Mediterranean countries (to be decided); heads of foreign institutes in Rome and elsewhere; directors of recent and current landscape archaeological projects.

12. COMPUTATIONAL MODELLING IN LANDSCAPE ARCHAEOLOGY: BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD?

Philip Verhagen (VU University, Amsterdam)

Marieka Brouwer-Burg (University of New Hampshire, Durham NH) Thomas G. Whitley (University of Western Australia, Perth)

Computational models have become the bread and butter of many landscape archaeological studies. They can cover a broad range of techniques and applications, from statistical extrapolations to complex GIS-based predictive models, advanced pattern recognition techniques and dynamical systems models. Many papers on computational modelling however only address the issues of setting up the model, and mainly present the methodology. New techniques therefore run the risk of being embraced without a clear understanding of their applicability and limitations in an archaeological context, and testing of the results, if at all possible, is not always a major concern. Related to this, the increasing sophistication of modelling techniques makes it harder to convey their results and limitations to non-specialists. In this session, we want to the address some basic conceptual issues of computational modelling:

- in what cases is modelling useful or even necessary, and what are the appropriate techniques?

- how do we tackle the perpetual confrontation between data and theory? - how do we interpret modelling results, what do the numbers mean? - how do we present the results in a meaningful way? - and how do we proceed with testing the results?

We invite papers that approach one or more of these issues from a theoretical angle, as well as case studies highlighting one or more of these aspects.

13. Seeing heritage through the lenses of landscape

Bas Pedroli ( Wageningen University, NL) Graham Fairclough (University of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK)

This session is inspired by the recognition that landscape is not merely a category of heritage, but a global frame within which heritage can be differently understood, cherished and protected. Landscape also offers ways to draw greater social, economic and environmental benefits from heritage. Aim of this session is to deepen the exchange of research results and insights on the natural connections that exist between the domains of landscape and heritage, both in research and policy terms. The session will provide well-prepared discussion statements on the basis of a call for contributions, and ample time for debate. Seeing heritage through the lenses of landscape allows heritage in the face of significant environmental and social change to be a solution not a problem. The session will explore the interlocking spaces between two Council of Europe conventions – the European Landscape Convention and the Faro Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage to Society – to demonstrate how they align with and support each other. Being acutely aware that landscape falls simultaneously into three categories of heritage – it is at one and the same time tangible and intangible, and increasingly it is being experienced by many people through digital means – this session will therefore also use the rich concept of ‘landscape’ as a laboratory to closely examine the nature and potential of ‘heritage’.