It has been widely accepted that elements of the historic environment have been deployed to create an 'authorized heritage discourse' which supports the 'top-down' reinforcement of particular identities. Archaeology can be a vehicle for the expression of alternative identities. This article looks at the ways in which the historic environment has been used in Telford, an English new town created in the 1960s, both to support the creation of this new place, and in opposition to it. A community archaeology project undertaken by the author in 2010 is described, and forms the basis of a discussion on the role of communities in heritage, the ways in which community identities may shift, and how relationships between communities and the historic environment profession may evolve.

Concerns over the condition of linear earthworks in north-east Wales have resulted in a series of projects undertaken by the Clwyd-Powys Archaeological Trust (CPAT). These have taken place on both Offa’s Dyke and Wat’s Dyke, and on parts of those monuments that are both legally protected (scheduled) and those which have no such protection. This article reports on two such projects, jointly funded by Cadw and the National Trust, which looked at Offa’s and Wat’s Dykes in 2018 and 2019. Excavations took place on unscheduled sections of both monuments where little above-ground evidence survived; in both cases the work revealed well-preserved sections of ditch and bank. Samples were recovered for palaeoenvironmental analysis and dating. The implications of these results for research and protection of the monuments in the future are discussed.

This paper considers the rise of community archaeology in England and Wales, its relationships with other branches of archaeology, and its longterm sustainability. Possible meanings of sustainability are discussed from an international and interdisciplinary perspective, before questions of social, intellectual and economic sustainability in community archaeology are considered. It is argued that true sustainability for community archaeology will only be possible if research outcomes and public benefit are considered as being of equal value.

No abstract

No abstract