Graham Fairclough

Meaningful constructions – spatial and functional analysis of medieval buildings

Spatial analysis has enjoyed a considerable vogue in archaeological studies over the past two decades, though usually applied in prehistoric contexts. The paper applies well tried techniques to the analysis of complex high-status medieval buildings and demonstrates their superiority in terms of data (especially when used in parallel) on social function and status over subjective analysis based on notions of symbolic or functional characterization.

‘The Long Chain’: Archaeology, Historical Landscape Characterization and Time Depth in the Landscape

Landscape Assessment in England in its modern sense has origins in the late 1980s, following unsuccessful attempts to produce objective, quantified methods (Countryside Commission 1987; 1993; Countryside Agency & Scottish Natural Heritage 2002). More broadly, the method can be carried back to the 1940s and 1950s and the creation of the first UK protected areas, known in UK legislation as National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty using criteria of ‘specialness’, perceived naturalness and aesthetic quality. Going back further, there is a long English tradition of landscape assessment based on the aesthetic values of landscape; this included interest in consciously designed high status ornamental landscape. For some heritage managers and planners, ‘landscape’ still seems to mean only ‘natural’ or ‘designed’ landscape.

Lens, mirror, window: interactions between Historic Landscape Characterisation and Landscape Character Assessment

Abstract Contemporary wisdom holds that landscape research requires cross-disciplinary collaborations, and consideration of character has been seen as one way to achieve this, yet character-based methods of landscape assessment incline towards unidisciplinarity. This is the case in the UK, with two parallel methods in use since the early 1990s. Both have become influential across Europe in the drafting and implementation of the European Landscape Convention. This paper, a contribution to a special issue of Landscape Research, focuses on one of the methods, Historic Landscape Characterisation (carried out mainly by archaeologists and heritage managers), and compares it with Landscape Character Assessment (used by the landscape architects and geographers) to examine the concepts of both landscape character and interdisciplinarity. It concludes that although a single integrated method for landscape assessment could be desirable, there remain benefits in having separate methods, and the process of combining parallel landscape assessments can bring research benefits.

Introduction to a special issue: the future of landscape characterisation, and the future character of landscape – between space, time, history, place and nature

Abstract In any discussion of landscape characterisation the elephant in the room is the question of just what is landscape? Another way of putting this question is to simply ask: ‘How would you characterise landscape?’ What this implies is that there is a certain circularity in landscape characterisation because, through the very act of characterising landscape, one is also defining what one means by landscape. The European Landscape Convention’s definition of landscape as ‘an area, as perceived by people, whose character is the result of the action and interaction of natural and/or human factors’ suggests a similar circularity because the character of an area, as it results from the action of natural and/or human factors, is dependent upon human perception, which is presumably also, in addition, one of the human factors acting upon the landscape. This circularity, or ‘circulating reference’, to use Bruno Latour’s term, is fundamental to Denis Cosgrove’s analysis of the origin of the modern concept of landscape as scenic space, and his analysis, we would suggest, helps explain some of the questions raised in this special issue concerning landscape characterisation and the future character of landscape .

Le Paysage en Bretagne: enjeux et défis

which are often seen as a road map to north Norway. Emblems include the midnight sun, continuous summer light and polar ice, which all represent purity, innocence, divinity, and a freedom from human sin including industrial pollution. Other emblems show winter darkness, freezing snow blizzards and moving ice, representing danger, anxiety, and depression. Such local identifiers contrast with western Norway’s mountains and fjords. After 500 years of domination by the Danes, the fjord landscape was seen as ‘original and true’, filled with romantic and patriotic symbols, which have been revealed through myths in art and literature. Finland is seen as an island of light and dark ranging from the dramatic Aurora Borealis to the prismatic effect of sun shining through ice, giving winter a delicate colour. ‘Christianised fields’ are light ‘blessed’ plots, which contrast with the dark and profane primeval forests where demons dwell. Primitive myths about Finnish landscapes have persisted longer than in many other European countries. The book concludes with chapters summarising geographic and regional characteristics. Jones and Hansen provide a succinct overview of the geophysical and climatic conditions that have resulted in the historical economies of each Nordic country. They conclude by pointing out that, despite environmental hardship, people in all countries enjoy a high standard of living and a well-integrated sense of nationhood. In the last chapter, Sporrong describes the geo-physical processes that have determined the form of Nordic landscapes and their resources, which have resulted in sparse rural settlements evolving into the highly urbanised areas of today. In trying to convey both the depth and the comprehensiveness of Nordic Landscapes, this review gives only glimmers of what lies within this marvellous book.

Large Scale, Long Duration and Broad Perceptions: Scale Issues in Historic Landscape Characterisation

Historic Landscape Characterisation (HLC) is a method of landscape-scale interpretation and analysis of the historic environment that has been developed over the last 10 years for archaeological resource management purposes by English Heritage and English local government (Aldred and Fairclough, 2003; Clark et al., 2004; English Heritage, 2004; Fairclough, 2002). This chapter examines how HLC confronts scale in several guises. The HLC method is GIS-based, which immediately introduces simple issues of spatial scale at three levels: input, output and interpretation. Issues of scale related to geographic size (‘‘map scale’’) are fairly mechanical, however, and relatively easily resolved. HLC also confronts more challenging scale issues: some also concerned with spatial scale, but most with other scales such as temporal, perceptual or social. Some concern even more interesting questions such as scales of use, application and objectives. These issues can be divided into two groups – first, categories of scale – space, time and perception – that define the HLC method; and second, less central and more unusual, types of scale issues that mainly arise from HLC projects. First, however, a short description of HLC is needed.

Via Tiburtina: Space, Movement and Artefacts in the Urban Landscape

timber trade in Britain, and presents a remarkably lucid and authoritative overview that will be a benchmark for this subject for many years to come. The last part of this, ‘The Forest Industry and Environmentalism’, begins with the 1980s, and covers the development and impact of the Forestry Stewardship Council (FSC), although inexplicably failing to mention that the entire (800 000 hectare) public forest estate was certified by FSC in 1999 as being sustainably managed by the Forestry Commission; a remarkable achievement. Chapter 9: ‘New Directions’ begins with a reflection on the social forces that shaped forestry in the post-war years, and then follows the rise of woodland ownership by trusts and other non-government bodies. The next section ‘The Broadleaves Review’, describes the momentous turn around in the mid 1980s when the importance of ‘ancient woodlands’ was recognised, and the 1985 Wildlife and Countryside Act amendment gave the Forestry Commission a duty to balance timber production with environmental benefits. The rest of the chapter follows the rise in importance of ‘multi-purpose’ and urban forestry. I am uncomfortable with the characterisation of the history of forestry in three phases (page 170), the strategic, industrial and multipurpose phases, because this doesn’t recognise the present phase dominated by Sustainable Forest Management (SFM), and the considerable challenge faced by foresters in understanding and balancing the social, economic and environmental dimensions of everything that they do. The environmental emphasis given by the Forestry Commission to forest management in the 1980s and 1990s (p. 159) has been followed by a period in which the social dimension is beginning to be understood, but this development is not covered. Perhaps it must be the subject of a book yet to be written! I expect Woods and People will become standard reading for serious students of British forestry at home and abroad for a long time to come.

Essentially cultural: Perspectives on landscape from Europe

This paper offers a perspective on cultural landscape from a European viewpoint and from the background of an archaeologist grounded in heritage practice. The perspective is illustrated in the British method of historic landscape characterization and the work of the CHeriScape network investigating the synergy between landscape and heritage. It is framed not by UNESCO World Heritage documents but by the Florence European Landscape Convention (ELC) and the Faro Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society (Faro Convention). Together these conventions posit new ways of using the concept of landscape in its most essential cultural form as one of the most significant ways in which people construct place-based identities and understand their interactions with each other and the environment. Landscape can help society address major global challenges such as climate change, numerous forms of globalization, and social change in order to move towards more culturally-sensitive and sustainable practices.

Recalibrating Through ‘Landscape’

Abstract Abstract This short paper acts as an introduction to the relationships between scale and landscape. It considers the impact that the adoption of landscape-based ways of seeing and thinking should have on the practice of archaeology. This impact is particularly strong in relation to concepts of the past-in-the-present, the increasingly outmoded constructions of ‘site’ and ‘period’, and the aims and opportunities of the EngLaId project.

Landscape and heritage: ideas from Europe for culturally based solutions in rural environments

The impact of globalised trends changing the rural environment is often thought to require environmental and ecology-focused policies and actions. But many of the problems have human (societal) causes, and solutions need also to be primarily culturally based. This essay, drawing on the ‘CHeriScape’ network in western Europe, explores the advantage of seeking a more comprehensive, integrative response to rural change using the twinned concepts of landscape and heritage. It discusses recent developments in conceptualising landscape and heritage, and how these could support effective culturally based approaches that are participatively democratic and also take account of human behaviour. After brief summaries of evolving paradigms for landscape and heritage, and of global challenges, the paper suggests that a landscape–heritage nexus, familiar to the lay public but capable of nuanced and fluid application, offers an effective way ahead. It concludes by identifying some obstacles that hinder the effective implementation of such an approach.