Custom Writing Service http://StudyHub.vip/Archaeology-And-Cultural-Heritage--Revi 👈

1. Hanna 1
Archaeology and Cultural Heritage: Review of the Theory and Practice
by Monica Hanna
Abstract
This review article discusses the theoretical and practical framework that the research
presented has been based on. The research has been a product of inter-disciplinary work that
has tried to present new ideas through social theory, heritage management, cultural rights, and
archaeology. Archaeology and cultural heritage not only have been debated to be subjective or
objective; a hard science or a social science, but also have been entangled with cultural policy,
politics of power, as well as studies of space, knowledge, gender, and identity. This essay deals
with such epistemes related to the field considering the reviewed research and future
perspectives.
I. Introduction
The current focus in archaeology and heritage research emphasizes on the complex
relationship between theory and praxis. The latest research has both tried to reflect on current
practices of archaeology in excavations, in museums, in heritage management, in the arts, and
in public consumption of archaeology and heritage, in addition to how the media present both
(Renfrew and Bahn 2020). The interpretations made by archaeologists, historians, heritage
professionals are not simply the product of new excavations or archival finds that are being
brought to light in ever-increasing amounts, but they also depend upon the development of new
techniques of inquiry and the changing nature of the questions research pose when this data is
approached. Today, archaeologists and heritage professionals tackle these new corpora of
complex data in a new world that does not only focus on analyzing the data to write a historical
and scientific narrative of the archaeological context, but also addresses the power imbalances
of two-hundred years of western intervention in archaeology in general and Egyptian heritage
in particular. The research questions that we today examine arise not only from academic
curiosity, but also from “hearing the living about their own dead” through analyzing
perspectives of contemporary society about its own past (Haikal 2003). Heritage studies today
focuses on notions of analysis whose past do we investigate and how contested is this past
between the different stakeholders. It is only through such progressive approaches such as
community archaeology, public archaeology, heritage management and critical heritage studies
(Hamilakis and Yalouri 1996, Hamilakis 2005, Hamilakis and Anagnostopoulos 2009,

2. Hanna 2
Hamilakis 2011), that we can write a new historical narrative that decolonizes and democratizes
the past (Hamilakis 2012, Hamilakis and Duke 2016, Bauer, Lindsay, and Urice 2016, Nicholas
and Hollowell 2016, Reid 1985, Smith and Wobst 2005, Gbazoul 2007, Hamilakis 2018,
Mignolo and Walsh 2018, Trigger 1984, 2010). The research I have tried to produce in the past
decade attempted to challenge the Western perceptions of Egyptian heritage (Keuss 2021)
through integrating both local communities and women as well as their diversity in the
historical narrative to try to decolonize and democratize the discipline by showing such
conflicts resulting from the historical power imbalance. Such inequalities reflect on the
interests, perspectives, and futures of the communities as well as the future of the heritage
(Hanna, Aboubakr, and Keshk 2012, Tully and Hanna 2013). In addition, I have tried to analyze
the policies of governance that influence the Egyptian heritage management which further puts
an increasing prominence on archaeological ethics (Pluciennik 2001, Meskell and Pels 2005,
Vitelli and Colwell 2006, Meskell 2007, Scarre 2008, Bell and Paterson 2009, Meskell 2010,
Soderland and Lilley 2015, Gonzalez-Ruibal 2016, Hamilakis and Duke 2016, Hamilakis 2016,
Reinhard and Pollock 2016, Nicholas and Hollowell 2016, Sayer 2017). The research reviewed
focuses on critical heritage studies and archaeological ethics to overshadow the past as the big
business in terms of tourism as heritage consumption and in auction rooms as antiquities
dealing. The latter were analyzed as the place where illegal excavations, looting and thefts lead
to material culture ending up in private collections and public museums (Ikram and Hanna
2013, Hanna 2013c, b, 2015, 2020). Such research has focused on how the international crimes
of art are still part of the neo-colonialist structure where the western societies are still the legal
and illegal market for cultural heritage.
II. Theoretical Review: the Theoretical Framework
From the 1960s and until the 1980s, archaeology was mostly an empiricist and anti-
theoretical discipline (Shanks and Tilley 1988, Trigger 1984, 2010, Clarke 1973). Attempts of
archaeologists, heritage professionals and social theorists to insert the past in the present to
realize how they both interacted in a conceptual framework was based on social theory rather
‘middle-range’ empiricism or ethnoarchaeological work (Shanks and Tilley 1988, 1992, 1996).
Such attempts faced resistance from within the discipline and encouragement from the rest of
the social sciences and humanities academia. Since the 1980s, archaeology has evolved to
becoming a social science and practice that is firmly situated in the present to progress into a
highly self-reflexive discipline conscious of itself as a political practice dependent on power
relations and historical inequalities (Shanks and Tilley 1988). However, strong criticisms have

3. Hanna 3
been given as a response to the attempts of theorizing archaeology (Hodder and Hutson 2003,
21) and this resulted in the inhibition of the growth of the discipline itself.
Method as explained by Derrida puts the subjective out of the question equation;
however, method has a difficult relationship with the past at the same time through separating
the subject from the object, value from fact and the present from the past (Derrida 2014, Shanks
and Tilley 1988, Shanks 2005). I prefer to use method interchangeably with praxis (Olsen et
al. 2012) in the sense of how “theory does not express, translate, or serve to apply practice: it
is practice”(Foucault and Deleuze 1977, 208). Method tries to give us a solid feeling that we
as archaeologists are detached from the present to understand the past by continuously relating
to the material culture and the scientific method and this releases us from the burden of
understanding alternative meanings of the alternative pasts (Shanks and Tilley 1988, 1992,
1996, Shanks 2005, Hodder 1995). Archaeology is compelled to use theory to construct the
past because of the distorted and fragmented evidence that is usually found (Hodder 1995, 5).
Such methods are like carrying out experiments on the material culture to provide an
explanation of what, where, why, how, and when. The object and the data extracted from the
object have formed the main foundation of the infrastructure of archaeology. This has taken
away the agency from the archaeologist who is the observing subject for the material culture.
However, this has transformed archaeology to become the perception and experience of
objectivity towards what remains from the past and is regarded as disembodied and sanctified
(Shanks and Tilley 1988, 9). This focus on the archaeological feature, whether an object, or an
architectural item has become theory and value-free, identical and transcendent with a clear
manifestation of a historical sense (Shanks and Tilley 1988). The writing of history then is
found in this archaeological feature in the given space and time; the object demarcates the
historical moment and transforms the past to be instantaneously present (Shanks and Tilley
1988, 9). Such transformation changes the position of the archaeologist where they no longer
become a neutral tool for recovering the past who is conceptually detached to focus on a special
time and space that is treated as an independent variable against a morbid present (Shanks and
Tilley 1988, 13).
The epistemological question of whether archaeology is a science or is an art has been
responded to by the famous British archaeologist Mortimer Wheeler: ‘neither, it is a vendetta
against the past in the present’(Shanks 2005, 1). Such judgement on disciplines of archaeology
has widely been accepted by archaeologists as the field is continuously under debate.
Archaeology as a ‘vendetta’ puts it continuously in the prese(n)t in the heart of the cultural

4. Hanna 4
political discourse, and it becomes as much about the present than the past. Egyptian
archaeology first started as antiquarianism in the 19th
Century (Thompson 2015, Shanks 2016),
and then evolved through William Matthews Flinders Petrie in the early 20th
Century to a more
scientific method that carried a lot of racism and antagonism to the indigenous cultures of
Egypt (Ramsey 2004). The method of the scientific and objective archaeologist in a Sherlock
Holmes fashion was a faulty one (Shanks and Tilley 1988), as more subjective archaeologies
evolved to inquire both about the nature of the ‘subjective’ and the ‘objective’ parallel to the
evolution of social theory. However, Egyptian Archaeology has continued in its traditional
form resisting the change that was happening in the wider field of archaeology, social sciences,
and humanities.
Despite the stasis of Egyptian archaeology theory, world archaeologies continued to
evolve to understand the relationship to social history a sub-discourse in the archaeological
theories describing subjectivity and power. Archaeology followed structuralism in its
systematic study and analysis of the history of human thought and knowledge (Dickens and
Fontana 2015, 30) which further was altered by Foucault’s analysis in ‘Archaeology of
Knowledge’. Many archaeologists today rely a lot on the works of Michel Foucault (Foucault
1982, Foucault and Miskowiec 1986, Foucault 2007, Foucault 2012, Foucault 2013, Foucault
2019, Foucault 2020), who tried to create a new model of sociality through rectifying people
or ‘bodies’ as objects of knowledge. Methods of ordering, generating hierarchies, and punitive
machinery developed in the 19th
century (Fahmy 2002, 134) to produce different types of
oppression and subjectification (Shanks and Tilley 1988, 69). The prison (Foucault 2019)
remains one example among many of the technology of discipline, surveillance and
punishment and the most visible, however, in Foucault’s terms, discipline has reached the
museum to mimic the same discipline through what he described as spatial heterotopias
(Foucault and Miskowiec 1986, Hanna Forthcoming, Tully and Hanna 2013). Disciplining the
past through the discursive western practices is a manifestation of power, domination, and
repression. This subjugation as an operation of power coupled with colonialist and imperialist
ideologies has created thousands of western museums filled with objects of the colonized
‘other’ (Hanna 2021, Forthcoming, Tully and Hanna 2013), not so different of the images
created by Edward Said in his work Orientalism (Said 1995, 1989, Gbazoul 2007) and the
subduing of the ‘Orient’. Foucault’s work despite the contemporary critique (Lemke 2011, 10,
Trigger 2010, 10) continues to show the centrality of power in relation to social practices
through which archaeology is central and the intricate relation of power, agency and control

5. Hanna 5
through its creativity and oppression (Shanks and Tilley 1988, 71, Tully and Hanna 2013). This
brings the argument to the question of the connection between discourse and power. Foucault
like no one else has taught this lesson well through explaining the structures of enabling the
production of knowledge is always permeated with relations of power (Shanks and Tilley 1992,
263, Tully and Hanna 2013), where “Man” is a subject and object of knowledge (Foucault
2005, Lowenthal 2015, 402).
Culture could be understood as a “discourse of excellence” and heritage becomes the
religion of preserving timeless and universal human treasures (Shanks 2001, Tully and Hanna
2013), making heritage an elitist affair. This asks the important questions of who produces the
past and why? In the situation of Egyptian archaeology, the agency of knowledge production
has remained under foreign powers; for example, in 1922, when the Tutankhamun tomb was
discovered, Egypt coming out of the 1919 revolution filled with nationalist sentiments decided
to keep the collection, yet the Egypt Exploration Society exported the archive of the excavation
to the United Kingdom stripping away the agency of all Egyptian archaeologists to the future
knowledge production of their past (Riggs 2020). The national production of Egyptian
archaeology, history and heritage has struggled for years (Reid 1985, 1992, 2002, 2003, 2015).
The theoretical research framework since the 1980s has been focused on not only doing
archaeological excavations, surveys, or collecting material culture, but the focus has shifted to
what it means to do excavations and mostly about how archaeology is about different
experiences in the past and of the past (Dickens and Fontana 2015). The humanities have
constructed a theory of the artefact/object that claims to have heralded the circumstances of the
modes of knowledge projections and also gives the infrastructure for the subjective
interpretations (Dickens and Fontana 2015). In the theoretical framework that I try to produce
research within, I want to consider all the dimensions of the archaeological and heritage
experience that is not necessarily intellectual, cognitive, or scientific. That is why my most
recent two publications (Hanna 2021, Forthcoming) focus on the experience of the embodiment
(Merleau-Ponty 1962) of the past as well as of experiencing the past in the present. In exploring
embodiment, I try to relate how archaeology and heritage can have role in the present through
producing narrative and critical engagement of cultural experience, where the past enables the
present through historical identity, heritage consumption, cultural consciousness and
nationalist movements (Shanks 2005). Archaeology today as the study of the material remains
of the past connects and resonates the “things” remaining from the past with how we feel,
interact, smell, taste and engage with in the present.

6. Hanna 6
Artefacts are found in excavations, logged in notebooks, databases and eventually
displayed in museums to present metonymically the history they are part of. The forms of
display create the space and time for the conception of the display, and so the museum becomes
a multi-temporal repository of the past, yet spatially alienates the objects from their context
(Hanna Forthcoming). The object as has been explained by Baudrillard must be placed in the
theory of signification as part of the social constitution of reality (Hanna Forthcoming,
Baudrillard and Hildreth 1981). Baudrillard said: “Everything is indiscriminately conserved
and archived…We no longer make history…We protect it like an endangered masterpiece”
(Lowenthal 2015, 588, Baudrillard 2020). It has also been theorized by the work of Bourdieu
as an effective frame of social action that is ideologically informed due to its perceived
functionality (Bourdieu and Nice 1977, Bourdieu 1979, Hanna 2020, Trigger 2010, 469).
Merleau-Ponty in his book on Phenomenology of Perception (Merleau-Ponty 1962) has
emphasized the perception in great detail on how the perceiving subject as the archaeologist or
the museum curator or the visitor conceives the embodied spatial relations through the lived,
dynamic and open discourse of experiencing the artefact and its relationship to the past and
contemporary world (Shanks and Tilley 1988, 96, 1992). Baudrillard focused on how
perception creates a common media through the senses of hearing, touching, smelling, tasting,
and seeing. I have tried to explore these theories contesting the bust of Nefertiti through its
sensoriality and temporality. There is not any other artefact that can be equally contested
through theory and praxis than the Nefertiti’s bust in terms of how it reflects the different
theoretical frameworks of Foucault, Baudrillard, Bourdieu, Merleau-Ponty and Butler as I have
tried to discuss in an inter-disciplinary manner in my last papers: “Contesting the Lonely
Queen” and “Women are from Africa and Men are from Europe” (Hanna Forthcoming, 2021).
Parallel to the social theories and the reflections on their praxis, Butler (Butler and
Trouble 1990, Butler 2011) has developed the clear field of thought of writing on the relevance
of concept of performance based on Merleau-Ponty’s embodiment through the expression and
presentation of gender. I have tried to express the relationship between post-colonial theory,
embodiment and gender through focusing on the relationship between the white male and the
female ‘other’ from Africa (Hanna 2021). Androcentrism has been parallel to colonialism and
the orientalist view of the “Other” (Hanna 2021). With the evolvement and focus of work
through the Foucauldian model, Judith Butler produces the ‘Feminist Theory’ based on the
work of Derrida on his notion of iteration affecting a whole set of meanings of gender agency
through history and through contemporary meanings of the past (Hodder and Hutson 2003,

7. Hanna 7
100, Butler 2014, 12-15). Butler has worked on this idea of gender agency that has affected the
norms; the norms drove the actions of societies in the past and that agency helped gendered
subjects resist particular models (Butler 2014, 15-16). By using Butler’s models and relying on
work that builds archaeological models on it such as Meskell and Joyce (Joyce 2004) who
fused the work of Butler and Merleau-Ponty, I related to the discovery of Ancient Egypt from
a different gender perspective, analyzing the relationship between women of the past and men
of the present and reflecting on their power structures.
III. Praxis Review: Cultural Heritage Studies
Most field archaeologists and heritage professionals are not concerned at all with theory,
but rather focus on a weak middle-rage positivism. This brings why the practice lies in the heart
of the field praxis in Egypt. Not only Egyptian archaeologists shy away from theory, but also
most of the international archaeological missions, and heritage professionals have published
very little on how the social theory relates to Egyptian Archaeology. My post-doctoral career
has progressed focusing on method rather than theory and so most of my early articles have
been related to either archaeological survey, heritage management, and/or cultural rights. It
was through working on community archaeology and particularly archaeological ethnography
that have just been theorized by Ian Hodder and Lynn Meskell (Meskell 2005, Hodder 2012)
as the decolonized version of ethnoarchaeology that I have started to formulate my
understanding of theory that I later have been basing my research on. As Kant said: “Theory
without practice is empty; practice without theory is blind”, and so I do not believe that both
are separate. Therefore, more studies in Egyptian archaeology and heritage are needed to reflect
on theory, and more theoretical studies of archaeology need to discuss Egypt more. There is an
unofficial divide between theory and heritage management particularly in sites that are facing
rapid destruction, rapid looting, or unplanned development (Hodder 1995, 2, Ikram and Hanna
2013, Hanna 2013c, b, a, 2014, 2015, 2020). At such moments when I wrote these articles,
Egyptian heritage was facing unprecedented challenges of looting and land grabbing after the
2011 uprising. As Baudrillard in his book (Baudrillard 2020) explained how modern looting is
a typical sign of Neo-Imperialism, I tried to analyze such cultural desecration in terms of his
work. The data needed to be documented quickly through multidisciplinary methodologies and
so lesser attention to theory was given, as Ian Hodder says, we had to “get our act together”
(Hodder 1995, 2) to attempt and saving and rescuing the heritage at hand.

8. Hanna 8
The Venice Charter (ICASHB 1964) has started the heritage discourse in the world post
World War II. Despite heritage management has had its roots prior to the World Heritage
Convention in 1972, when the different nations started with the listed buildings, monuments,
and archaeological sites in the different countries. Yet it did not take any official form in
practice and in academia before signing and improving the convention and getting such serious
attention in the 1990s. Not only 1972 and the later conventions helped - with its differentiation
of tangible and intangible forms - the new discipline of heritage studies to develop. But before
also the declaration by the world’s nations of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(UDHR) in 1948, with article 27 on the right to freely participate in Cultural, Artistic and
Scientific Life and its advancement and benefits, has been leading to a new movement in
managing the past worldwide. Despite the convention having been drafted by mostly experts
of the colonialist and imperialist past powers, and much less representations from the rest of
the world, it has, also due to its many operational improvements later, still succeeded in
preserving many of the world’s heritage, being a result also of the experiences collected during
the famous Nubian rescue campaign in Egypt. This has started a huge corpus of research into
practical heritage site management and linked heritage not only to the formation of cultural
identities, peacemaking, but more importantly into the world’s sustainable heritage
development (Atalay 2009, Lyon and Wells 2012, Misso et al. 2018, Sörlin 2009, Zan et al.
2015, Auclair and Fairclough 2015, Mawere and Mubaya 2016, Sulhaini, Saufi, and Rusdan
2017, Line, Hanks, and Miao 2018, Harrison 2013, Logan, Craith, and Kockel 2015). Heritage
studies has moved archaeological studies from the ivory tower of academia to the practical
world in how people can define their sustainable economic future through heritage (Lin 2011,
Lyon and Wells 2012, Labadi 2013, Hutter 1997, Bandarin and Oers 2015, Licciardi and
Amirtahmasebi 2012). Today, many experts call for the update of the fifty-year old convention
(Meskell 2018), to be able to face the challenges of the 21st
century.
Heritage has been quite under-theorized (Harrison 2013, xiii) and relied mostly on
systems of best practices through “expert advice” where most of the problems have come from
politics of representation. In my papers (Hanna, Aboubakr, and Keshk 2012, Hanna 2013c, b,
Tully and Hanna 2013, Hanna 2015, 2020), I advocate for the necessity to consider heritage as
a subject of broad collective, public, economic, political, and part of the climate change
discourse. Heritage today has become a cross-disciplinary field of study that stretches from
archaeology, architecture, urban planning, conservation, history, anthropology, sociology,
linguistics, art, culinary arts, music, film, archival science, ecology, geology, planning and

9. Hanna 9
management, economics, political science, and sustainable development. Such encompassing
discipline is ever growing and has been beautifully elaborated by David Lowenthal in his book
and its revisit (Lowenthal 2015). Since the initial publication of the book in the 1980s and the
conceptualization of heritage has been evolving to integrate different and diverse material
cultures with their aspects both tangible and intangible (UNESCO WH 2003 Convention on
Intangible Heritage). This wide array has challenged basic ideas of the UNESCO WH
convention as the ‘universality’ of heritage and its values, and from there to what is a
‘universal’ museum (Hanna Forthcoming, Curtis 2006, Fiskesjö 2010, Labadi 2013). It has
also encouraged further conventions to be held such as the UNESCO WH 2005 convention on
the diversity of cultural expressions. This convention brought new aspects into the discussion
of heritage critical studies showing how a unilineal nationalistic approach to heritage could be
too limited, and that best practices entail a better representation of cultural diversity.
The events of looting, thefts, and destruction of the 2011 uprising gave us the good
lesson that no amount of conservation or walls and security will be able to protect the Egyptian
heritage. In fact, in a Foucauldian sense (Foucault 2019), these walls have imprisoned Egyptian
heritage and kept it inaccessible for the people for years due to colonialist, post-colonialist
legacies and neo-colonialist practice in addition to the lack of cultural policies to democratize
heritage (Tully and Hanna 2013, Hanna 2013c, b, 2015, 2020). Future research planned for in
the field of heritage praxis in Egypt ought to focus on ideas for enabling archaeology to provide
more social development, interaction, and engagement of present people with the past, by
relying also on discussions of the importance of heritage within the Framework of the SDGs
of the 2030 UN Agenda.
IV. Future Research
a. “Action for Restitution in Africa” Project
I have won a research grant of 151, 000 sterling pounds for a project in conjunction with
University of Oxford, University of South Africa and University of Ghana to decolonize
Western museums through ample research in collecting, politics of collecting in the past and
restitution and repatriation. Currently, as the principal investigator, I have formed an
interdisciplinary team with Prof. Nashwa al-Bendary and fourteen junior researchers from the
College of Archaeology and Cultural Heritage, College of Computer Science and Information
Technology, College of Management and Technology (Political Science Department) to work
on creating an inventory list of objects in Western museums that could be repatriated either

10. Hanna 10
due to illegal export by researching in the National Archives of Egypt (Dar al-Wathaeq al-
Qawmiya) or through international archives or through Western museums’, archives in the
west? giving us the opportunity to research their collections in their ethical reformation
process? of their museum collections, such as the Pitt Rivers Museum. The project has started
in July 2020 and has been progressing with great results already through findings of illegal
exports of “antiquities” in the 19th
century that will allow Egypt in the future not only to
repatriate them, but also to start a different discourse on decolonization. Not only the research
focuses on the objects, but the discourse extends to how a proper repatriation can be made
through the restitution of the knowledge and agency to the Egyptians to become the new praxis.
The project also focuses on how western violence towards the Egyptian cultural heritage in the
past can be remedied and how through appropriate discourse, the cultural piracy of the past can
be dealt with ethically today.
b. Geoheritage in Egypt Project
My future work also tries to develop practices in heritage management to work towards the
SDG goals through approaches of working from bottom up in practical projects that benefit
communities and sets a working model that can be replicated. I am currently shortlisted through
the AASTMT research grant for a project to document new geological heritage sites as well as
create appropriate risk assessment and heritage management plans for them.
c. Cultural Continuity
A future publication is also planned for the cultural continuity throughout the historic
palimpsest of the Egyptian heritage.
d. The Egyptocentric View of the Past
A lot of what has been published about Ancient Egypt has been either Eurocentric or
Afrocentric or androcentric. I hope in the upcoming years to be able to work with other
colleagues of a series of publications that writes a different historical narrative based on
material culture and archival research.
V. Conclusion
Most of the theory about archaeology, methods and praxis of heritage management has
emerged mainly from Europe and the West. I hope that by trying to engage Egyptian
archaeology in theory and the decolonizing aspects of methods and praxis to push those other
colleagues to join into re-writing the theoretical discourse of Egyptian archaeology. Theorizing

11. Hanna 11
Egyptian archaeology has lagged the other disciplines and perhaps, someone would be able to
build on the work by Rifaa al-Tahtawy in the 19th
Century of an Egyptian Nahda to re-theories
the discipline from a non-western perspective to enrich the archaeology and heritage discourse
in the upcoming years.

12. Hanna 12
Works Cited
Atalay, Sonya. 2009. "Atalay, S., 2009. Building a Sustainable Archaeology at Çatalhöyük."
Last Modified 2009. http://www.catalhoyuk.com/archive_reports/.
Auclair, Elisabeth, and Graham Fairclough. 2015. Theory and Practice in Heritage and
Sustainability: Between past and future: Taylor & Francis.
Bandarin, Francesco, and Ron van Oers. 2015. Reconnecting the City: the Historic Urban
Landscape Approach and the Future of Urban Heritage.
Baudrillard, Jean. 2020. The System of Objects: Verso Books.
Baudrillard, Jean, and Lee Hildreth. 1981. "Beyond the unconscious: the symbolic."
Discourse 3:60-87.
Bauer, Alexander, Shanel Lindsay, and Stephen Urice. 2016. "When Theory, Practice and
Policy Collide, or Why Do Archaeologists Support Cultural Property Claims?" In
Archaeology and Capitalism From Ethics to Politics, edited by Yannis Hamilakis and
Philip Duke.
Bell, Catherine E., and Robert K. Paterson. 2009. Protection of First Nations cultural
heritage : laws, policy, and reform. Vancouver: UBC Press.
Bourdieu, P., and R. Nice. 1977. Outline of a Theory of Practice, Cambridge Studies in
Social and Cultural Anthropology: Cambridge University Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1979. "Symbolic power." Critique of anthropology 4 (13-14):77-85.
Butler, Judith. 2011. Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of sex: Taylor & Francis.
Butler, Judith. 2014. Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of "Sex": Taylor &
Francis.
Butler, Judith, and Gender Trouble. 1990. "Feminism and the Subversion of Identity."
Gender trouble 3:1.
Clarke, David. 1973. "Archaeology: the loss of innocence." Antiquity 47 (185):6.
Curtis, Neil. 2006. "Universal Museums, Museum Objects and Repatriation: The Tangled
Stories of Things." Museum Management and Curatorship 21 (2):117.
Derrida, Jacques. 2014. Plato’s pharmacy: Routledge.
Dickens, David, and Andrea Fontana. 2015. Postmodernism And Social Inquiry: Taylor &
Francis.
Fahmy, Khaled. 2002. All the Pasha’s Men: Mehmed Ali, His Army and the Making of
Modern Egypt: I.B.Tauris.
Fiskesjö, Magnus. 2010. "The Global Repatriation Debate and the New
‘Universal’Museums." Handbook of Postcolonial Archaeology. Left Coast. Walnut
Creek:303.
Foucault, M. 2005. The Order of Things: Taylor & Francis.
Foucault, M. 2012. The History of Sexuality: An Introduction, Vintage: Knopf Doubleday
Publishing Group.
Foucault, M. 2019. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison: Penguin Books Limited.
Foucault, Michel. 1982. "The subject and power." Critical inquiry 8 (4):777-795.
Foucault, Michel. 2007. "On Violence." In Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison,
edited by B. Lawrence Bruce and Karim Aisha, 445-471. Duke University Press.
Foucault, Michel. 2013. Archaeology of knowledge: Routledge.
Foucault, Michel. 2020. Power/knowledge: Routledge.
Foucault, Michel, and D Deleuze. 1977. Intellectuals and power: Language, countermemory,
practice. Cornell University Press Ithaca, NY.
Foucault, Michel, and Jay Miskowiec. 1986. "Of Other Spaces." Diacritics 16 (1):22.
Gbazoul, F. J. 2007. Edward Said and Critical Decolonization, Alif (Cairo, Egypt). [Special
issue]: Amercain University in Cairo Press.

13. Hanna 13
Gonzalez-Ruibal, Alfredo. 2016. Ethics and the archaeology of violence. Place of publication
not identified: Springer-Verlag New York.
Haikal, Fayza. 2003. "Egypt’s Past Regenerated by its own People." Consuming Ancient
Egypt:123.
Hamilakis, Y., and A. Anagnostopoulos. 2009. Archaeological Ethnographies, Public
Archaeology: Maney Publishing.
Hamilakis, Yannis. 2005. "Whose World and Whose Archaeology? The Colonial Present and
the Return of the Political." Archaeologies 1 (2):94.
Hamilakis, Yannis. 2011. "Museums of Oblivion." Antiquity 85 (328):625.
Hamilakis, Yannis. 2012. "Are We Postcolonial Yet? Tales from the Battlefield."
Archaeologies 8 (1):67. doi: 10.1007/s11759-012-9200-5.
Hamilakis, Yannis. 2016. "From Ethics to Politics." In Archaeology and Capitalism From
Ethics to Politics, edited by Philip Duke and Yannis Hamilakis.
Hamilakis, Yannis. 2018. "Decolonial Archaeology as Social Justice." Antiquity 92
(362):518.
Hamilakis, Yannis, and Philip Duke. 2016. Archaeology and Capitalism From Ethics to
Politics. Edited by Yannis Hamilakis.
Hamilakis, Yannis, and Eleana Yalouri. 1996. "Antiquities as Symbolic Capital in Modern
Greek Society." Antiquity 70 (267):117.
Hanna, Monica. 2013a. "Looting in Egypt: The Unfortunate Site of Abusir el-Malek." Society
for the Study of the Egyptian Antiquities Newsletter, 2013, 3.
Hanna, Monica. 2013b. "Losing Heritage, Losing Identity." al-Rawi, 2013, 22.
Hanna, Monica. 2013c. "What Has Happened to Egyptian Heritage after the 2011 Unfinished
Revolution?" Journal of Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology & Heritage Studies 1
(4):371.
Hanna, Monica. 2014. "Egypt's Struggle." Current World Archaeology (63):12.
Hanna, Monica. 2015. "Documenting Looting Activities in Post-2011 Egypt." In Countering
Illicit Traffic in Cultural Goods: The Global Challenge of Protecting the World’s
Heritage., 47. Paris: ICOM.
Hanna, Monica. 2020. "Cultural Heritage Attrition in Egypt." In Testing the Canon of Ancient
Near Eastern Art and Archaeology, edited by Amy Rebecca Gansell and Ann Shafer,
318. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hanna, Monica. 2021. "Women are from Africa and men are from Europe." In The Routledge
Companion to Black Women’s Cultural Histories, 13-22. Routledge.
Hanna, Monica. Forthcoming. "Contesting the Lonely Queen." Public Culture.
Hanna, Monica, Sara Aboubakr, and Fatma Keshk. 2012. "The Documentation of the
Cultural Heritage of the Bedouin of South Sinai: A Pilot Study in Serabit el-Khadim."
2012.
Harrison, Rodney. 2013. Heritage: Critical Approaches: Routledge.
Hodder, Ian. 1995. Theory and Practice in Archaeology. Second ed. London: Routledge.
Hodder, Ian. 2012. The Present Past: An Introduction to Anthropology for Archeologists: Pen
& Sword Archaeology.
Hodder, Ian, and Scott Hutson. 2003. Reading the Past: Current Approaches to
Interpretation in Archaeology: Cambridge University Press.
Hutter, Michael. 1997. Economic perspectives on cultural heritage. Place of publication not
identified: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ikram, Salima, and Monica Hanna. 2013. "Looting and Land grabbing: the current Situation
in egypt." ARCE Bulletin 202:34.
Joyce, Rosemary A. 2004. "Embodied subjectivity: gender, femininity, masculinity,
sexuality." A companion to social archaeology:82.

14. Hanna 14
Keuss, Clara R. 2021. "Arab Authors’ Responses to Cross-Cultural Experiences with Europe:
The Contrasting Perspectives of ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Jabarti and Rifa ‘a al-Tahtawi."
Global Tides 15 (1):1.
Labadi, Sophia. 2013. UNESCO, cultural heritage, and outstanding universal value : value-
based analyses of the World Heritage and Intangible Cultural Heritage Conventions.
Lanham, Md.: AltaMira Press.
Lemke, Thomas. 2011. "Critique and experience in Foucault." Theory, Culture & Society 28
(4):26-48.
Licciardi, Guido, and Rana Amirtahmasebi. 2012. The Economics of Uniqueness: Investing
in Historic City Cores and Cultural Heritage Assets for Sustainable Development:
World Bank Publications.
Lin, Jan. 2011. The power of urban ethnic places: cultural heritage and community life. New
York: Routledge.
Line, Nathaniel D., Lydia Hanks, and Li Miao. 2018. "Image Matters: Incentivizing Green
Tourism Behavior." Journal of Travel Research 57 (3):296. doi:
10.1177/0047287517697848.
Logan, William, Máiréad Nic Craith, and Ullrich Kockel. 2015. A Companion to Heritage
Studies: Wiley.
Lowenthal, David. 2015. The Past is a Foreign Country - Revisited: Cambridge University
Press.
Lyon, Sarah M., and E. Christian Wells. 2012. Global Tourism: Cultural Heritage and
Economic Encounters: Rowman Altamira.
Mawere, Munyaradzi, and R. Mubaya. 2016. Colonial Heritage, Memory and Sustainability
in Africa Challenges, Opportunities and Prospects.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1962. Phenomenology of Perception Phénoménologie de la
Perception: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Meskell, Lynn. 2005. "Archaeological ethnography: conversations around Kruger national
park." Archaeologies 1 (1):81-100.
Meskell, Lynn. 2007. "Heritage Ethics for a Present Imperfect." Archaeologies 3 (2).
Meskell, Lynn. 2010. "Human Rights and Heritage Ethics." Anthropological Quarterly 83
(4):839.
Meskell, Lynn. 2018. A Future in Ruins: UNESCO, World Heritage, and the Dream of
Peace: Oxford University Press.
Meskell, Lynn, and Peter Pels. 2005. Embedding ethics. Oxford, UK; New York: Berg.
Mignolo, Walter, and Catherine Walsh. 2018. On Decoloniality: Concepts, Analytics, Praxis:
Duke University Press.
Misso, Rosa, Zacharoula Andreopoulou, Gian Paolo Cesaretti, Safwat Shakir Hanna, and
Ioakeim Tzoulis. 2018. "Sustainable development and green tourism: new practices
for excellence in the digital era." Journal for International Business and
Entrepreneurship Development 11 (1):65. doi: 10.1504/jibed.2018.090035.
Nicholas, George, and Julie Hollowell. 2016. "Ethical Challenges to a Postcolonial
Archaeology: The Legacy of Scientific Colonialism." In Archaeology and Capitalism
From Ethics to Politics, edited by Yannis Hamilakis and Philip Duke.
Olsen, Bejornar, Michael Shanks, Timothy Webmoor, and Christopher Witmore. 2012.
Archaeology: The Discipline of Things: University of California Press.
Pluciennik, Mark. 2001. The responsibilities of archaeologists: archaeology and ethics.
Oxford: Archaeopress.
Ramsey, Jason D. 2004. "Petrie and the intriguing idiosyncrasies of racism." Bulletin of the
History of Archaeology 14 (2):15-20.

15. Hanna 15
Reid, Donald. 1985. "Indigenous Egyptology: The Decolonization of a Profession?" Journal
of the American Oriental Society 105 (2):233.
Reid, Donald. 1992. "Cultural Imperialism and Nationalism: The Struggle to Define and
Control the Heritage of Arab Art in Egypt." International Journal of Middle East
Studies 24 (1):57.
Reid, Donald. 2002. Cairo University and the Making of Modern Egypt, Cambridge Middle
East Library: Cambridge University Press.
Reid, Donald. 2003. Whose Pharaohs?: Archaeology, Museums, and Egyptian National
Identity from Napoleon to World War I: University of California Press.
Reid, Donald. 2015. Contesting Antiquity in Egypt: Archaeologies, Museums, and the
Struggle for Identities from World War I to Nasser: American University in Cairo
Press.
Reinhard, Bernbeck, and Susan Pollock. 2016. "‘Grabe, Wo Du Stehst!’ An Archaeology of
Perpetrators." In Archaeology and Capitalism From Ethics to Politics, edited by
Yannis Hamilakis and Philip Duke.
Renfrew, C., and P. Bahn. 2020. Archaeology: Theories, Methods and Practice: Thames &
Hudson, Limited.
Riggs, Christina. 2020. Photographing Tutankhamun: Archaeology, Ancient Egypt, and the
Archive: Taylor & Francis.
Said, Edward. 1989. "Representing the Colonized: Anthropology's Interlocutors." Critical
Inquiry 15 (2):205.
Said, Edward. 1995. Orientalism: Penguin Group.
Sayer, Duncan. 2017. Ethics and burial archaeology: Springer.
Scarre, Chris. 2008. The ethics of archaeology: philosophical perspectives on archaeological
practice. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Shanks, M. 2005. Experiencing the Past: On the Character of Archaeology: Taylor &
Francis.
Shanks, Michael. 2001. "Culture/Archaeology: the dispersion of." Archaeological theory
today:284.
Shanks, Michael. 2016. The Archaeological Imagination: Taylor & Francis.
Shanks, Michael, and Christopher Tilley. 1988. Social Theory and Archaeology: University
of New Mexico Press.
Shanks, Michael, and Christopher Tilley. 1992. Re-constructing Archaeology: Theory and
Practice. New Mexico: Polity Press.
Shanks, Michael, and Christopher Tilley. 1996. Social Theory and Archaeology. Cambridge:
Polity Press.
Smith, Claire, and Hans Martin Wobst. 2005. Indigenous Archaeologies: Decolonizing
Theory and Practice. London; New York: Routledge.
Soderland, Hilary A., and Ian A. Lilley. 2015. "The fusion of law and ethics in cultural
heritage management: The 21st century confronts archaeology." Journal of Field
Archaeology 40 (5):508. doi: 10.1179/2042458215y.0000000024.
Sörlin, Sverker. 2009. "The World System and the Earth System: Global Socioenvironmental
Change and Sustainability since the Neolithic." Scandinavian Economic History
Review 57 (3):303. doi: 10.1080/03585520903122632.
Sulhaini, Akhmad Saufi, and Rusdan. 2017. "Developing Halal Tourist Destination:
Investigating Lombok’s Potentials from Destination Marketing Perspective." In
Balancing Development and Sustainability in Tourism Destinations, edited by
Akhmad Saufi, Imanuella R. Andilolo, Norain Othman and Alan A. Lew, 67.
Singapore: Springer Singapore.

16. Hanna 16
Thompson, J. 2015. Wonderful Things Volume 2 : A History of Egyptology: 2: The Golden
Age: 1881-1914, Wonderful Things: A History of Egyptology: American University in
Cairo Press.
Trigger, Bruce G. 1984. "Alternative Archaeologies: Nationalist, Colonialist, Imperialist."
Man:355.
Trigger, Bruce G. 2010. A history of Archaeological Thought. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Tully, Gemma, and Monica Hanna. 2013. "One landscape, many tenants: Uncovering
multiple claims, visions and meanings on the Theban necropolis." Archaeologies 9
(3):362.
Vitelli, Karen D., and Chip Colwell. 2006. Archaeological ethics. Lanham, MD: Altamira
Press.
Zan, Luca, Sara Bonini Baraldi, Maria Lusiani, Daniel Shoup, Paolo Ferri, and Federica
Onofri. 2015. "Managing cultural heritage: an international research perspective."
Last Modified 2015.
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk
&AN=841917.