2016•Journal of Community Archaeology & HeritageRequires access

Conflict Archaeology in the Netherlands: The Role of Communities in an Emerging Archaeological Discipline

J.A.T. Wijnen, I.A. Schute, Ruurd S. Kok

Open publisher page 9 citations

Abstract

While we were preparing another paper, we were surprised not to find an existing peer-reviewed overview of the Dutch development of conflict archaeology. Though a vast number of publications, theoretical debates and conferences on this topic does exist, nothing has appeared in academic journals. We argue that Dutch archaeology of modern conflict is primarily a community-driven development and that this is the cause for the current gap. To set the record straight we provide a review of this development up to 2015 and we argue that conflict archaeology might be the best example of community archaeology in the Netherlands yet because it started with the public. To illustrate how the results of conflict archaeology in archaeological heritage management can have an impact on local, national and army communities, we discuss the case of the 1940 battlefield ‘Grebbeberg Mount’.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

While we were preparing another paper, we were surprised not to find an existing peer-reviewed overview of the Dutch development of conflict archaeology. Though a vast number of publications, theoretical debates and conferences on this topic does exist, nothing has appeared in academic journals. We argue that Dutch archaeology of modern conflict is primarily a community-driven development and that this is the cause for the current gap. To set the record straight we provide a review of this development up to 2015 and we argue that conflict archaeology might be the best example of community archaeology in the Netherlands yet because it started with the public. To illustrate how the results of conflict archaeology in archaeological heritage management can have an impact on local, national and army communities, we discuss the case of the 1940 battlefield ‘Grebbeberg Mount’.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 9 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

While we were preparing another paper, we were surprised not to find an existing peer-reviewed overview of the Dutch development of conflict archaeology. Though a vast number of publications, theoretical debates and conferences on this topic does exist, nothing has appeared in academic journals. We argue that Dutch archaeology of modern conflict is primarily a community-driven development and that this is the cause for the current gap. To set the record straight we provide a review of this development up to 2015 and we argue that conflict archaeology might be the best example of community archaeology in the Netherlands yet because it started with the public. To illustrate how the results of conflict archaeology in archaeological heritage management can have an impact on local, national and army communities, we discuss the case of the 1940 battlefield ‘Grebbeberg Mount’.

Key concepts: Conflict archaeology, Archaeology, Battlefield, History, Historical archaeology, Mount, Archaeology of the Americas, Nothing

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Conflict Archaeology in the Netherlands: The Role of Communities in an Emerging Archaeological Discipline — Research Paper | ScholarLens