Agricultural open-air museums date back to the late 19th century, as it became fashionable to collect examples of local folklife. They collected historic, relocated buildings, furnished them with...Show moreAgricultural open-air museums date back to the late 19th century, as it became fashionable to collect examples of local folklife. They collected historic, relocated buildings, furnished them with original objects, and often enlivened the museum and building with plants, animals, and costumed interpreters. Archaeological open-air museums(AOAMs) were born out of an interest in reconstructing the archaeological past. The first AOAMs were based on pile dwellings discovered in Swiss and German lakes in the late 19th century. AOAMs are popular cultural destinations, but both AOAMs and agricultural open-air museums have faced the critique of inauthenticity. This study discusses how a concern over ‘authenticity’ could prevent different questions about AOAMs from being asked. For example, how can AOAMs engage with the past in a way that is relevant in the present, and for the future? One way to do this is to participate in climate change communication. Current media messaging is often overwhelming, or it presents climate change as contentious. Museums can be important locations for communicating climate change awareness and action in ways that do not centre fear or helplessness. A survey of the literature around climate change communication in museums shows that AOAMs are uniquely placed within museum archaeology to address many aspects of climate change engagement, using various themes and strategies. As museum spaces, they are friendly places to learn about complex issues. As places of archaeological interpretation, they can demonstrate time depth and tell local, personal stories with an affective component. As outdoor spaces, they offer immersive experiences and can facilitate a sense of connection with nature. They can engage visitors with themes of sustainability, biodiversity, and ancient plants, animals, and crafts, and show how these relate to the present. Through museum interpreters and other visitors, as well as narratives and interpretation, they can foster a sense of connection to other people both in the present and in the past. Using the case studies preHistorisch Dorp Eindhoven, Archäologisches Freilichtmuseum Oerlinghausen, and Pfahlbauten Unteruhldingen, this study discusses to what extent the museums are engaging in these themes and strategies, using an analytical framework that pays close attention to the use of various components of the museum – setting, space and layout, display types, subject and text, activities and educational programmes. The research shows that each museum emphasizes different themes and strategies. PreHistorisch Dorp focuses on creating immersive experiences by creating independent activity areas and telling personal stories of life in the past with fictional characters. Archäologisches Freilichtmuseum Oerlinghausen offers many organised events, activities and programmes, which focus mainly on ancient crafts and the connection between people and their environment. Pfahlbauten Unteruhldingen has the Steinzeitparcours, a park/garden area dedicated to encouraging a connection to nature through learning about the uses for various trees in the past. This research shows that there is room for AOAMs in the broader discussion around archaeological museums and climate change, and that they can bring a unique element of direct connection to the visitor experience.Show less
Research on ecosystem resilience and climate-ecosystem interactions is extremely complex due to the large variety of factors that play a role. This research aimed at determining which factors are...Show moreResearch on ecosystem resilience and climate-ecosystem interactions is extremely complex due to the large variety of factors that play a role. This research aimed at determining which factors are involved in ecosystem resilience, which methods are needed to research this, and how archaeology can contribute to such research. The influence of the 8.2 ka climate event on the natural environment of Tell Sabi Abyad served as a case study for larger-scale research on ecosystem resilience. This study presents critical notes to the assumption that the changes which took place in Tell Sabi Abyad at the timing of the 8.2 event were a consequence of climate change. First, the timing of the changes in Tell Sabi Abyad is earlier than the timing of the expected impact of the 8.2 event. In addition, the botanical records of Tell Sabi Abyad do not indicate a climate deterioration. As no direct influences of the 8.2 event have been observed, it is likely that the natural environment of Tell Sabi Abyad had a level of resilience that was high enough to cope with the sudden effects of the 8.2 climate perturbation. Possibly other factors, like anthropogenic influences or cultural development, account for the changes observed in the archaeological material of Tell Sabi Abyad. Furthermore, this study shows that archaeology can form a valuable contribution to research on ecosystem resilience if future research would focus on wild plant and animal species and long term ecosystem changes. This would enable research on the direct effects of climate change. By combining the archaeological results found in such research, a dataset can be made with information on the characteristics of ecosystems with different levels of resilience and different levels of environmental impact.Show less
