intends to make space for a longer historical analysis of the development of heritage as a process.
By providing longer historical narrative of heritageisation as a process, Harvey situates the myriad of multiple connected inter-disciplinary research that makes up the terrain of heritage studies today.

ranges over evolution of a medieval sense of heritage and how it is related to transitions in the experience of space and place.

a medieval sense of heritage and how it is related to transitions in the experience of space and place

some early modern developments in the heritage concept, relating them to societal changes associated with colonial and post colonial experience

treating heritage simply as a set of problems to solved and enable to engage with debates about the production of identity , power and authority throughout society.

premise

• focus of heritage discourse discourse towards pratices at present which temporally closes the potentials of historical scope for discipline as a whole.
• broad and malleable in definitions
• contemporary studies often too preoccupied with certain manifestation of heritage's recent trajectory.
• Heritage has always been with us and has always been produced by people according to their contemporary concerns and experiences.
• "every society has had a relationship with its past, even those which have chosen to ignore it and it is through the understanding the meaning and nature of what people tell each other about their past, about what they forget, remember, memoralise and or fake, that heritage studies can engage with academic debates beyond the confines of present-centered cultural, leisure or tourism studies."- David Harvey, Pg 320
  

Presentness of Heritage: Heritage definition and apparent demise of history

• Arnold et al (1998) >>> broadness of blanket term of heritage
• Terry Chandler (1999) >>> 'unsystematized' and 'heterogeneous' nature of heritage studies potentially leaving us with little more than 'morass of case studies'.
• McCrone et al (1995)>> heritage as a modern concept ....it belongs to the final quarter of the twentieth century.>>> ' heritage as a condition of the later twentieth century'
• Lowenthal() >>> heritage has become a self conscious creed
• Graham et al. >>> word heritage has come to mean more than a legal bequest.

• Robert Hewison(1988)>>>critical response to heritage industry >> rise of heritageisation to the later 20th century.

  
  

• origin of very present centered professional terrain have been dated to later 19th century heritage intiatives in general and 1882 act in particular. (Carmen, 1999)

  
  

• McCrone et al >>>relates the rise of heritage to the post-fordist economic climate that characterises this post-modern era, claiming that heritage has its roots in the restructuring of the world economy- a process which began in the 1970s. But Harvey criticizes it to be completely along commercial lines, heritage being portrayed as one-dimensional alley- just another aspect of burgeoning leisure industry

• Hardy (1988)>>>heritage as value loaded concept, meaning in whatever form it appears, its very nature relates entirely to present selects an inheritance form an imagined past for current use and decides what should be passed on to an imagined future.
• Hewison (1999) >>>in his attack on heritage industry>>> heritage was somehow threatening history, destroying an authentic version of the past and replacing it by simulacra of the past. as all heritages is produced completely in the present, our relationship with the past is understood in relation to our present temporal and spatial experience.
• Johnson (2000)>>> Evidence of History cannot be so easily separated from the interpretation built upon it. >>> distinction between true history and false heritage may be more illusory than actual.

• Nora (1977) >> draws Distinction between an elite, instiutitionalised memory preserved in the archives, and the memory of oridinary people, unrecorded and ingrained in the unspoken traditions and habits of everyday life. >>> Rather than seeing traditional memory as something that has ended and defeated by 'false heritage' , Nora sees it as having been transformed partly through technological and archival development and democratised. In this light rather than viewing heritage as a false, distored history imposed on the masses, we can view heritage sites as forming one link in a chain of popular memory.

  
  

• Lowenthal >>> sees heritage as practice>>>that clarifies past so as to influse them with present purposes, while Hewison has defined heritage as that which a past generation has preserved and handed on to the present and which a significant group of population wishes to hand on to the future.

• In order to investigate historical case studies, Harvey uses the definition of heritage as contemporary product shaped from history>>> this concise definition conveys that heritage is subjective and filtered with reference to the present, whenever the present actually is. It is value laden concept,related to process of commodification, but intrinsically reflective of a relationship with the past, however the past is percieved and defined.
  
  

Heritage practices in the pre-modern period
(examples )

As per Harvey, people still had a relationship with the past and they stilll actively preserved and managed aspects or interpretations of the past, they were just nurtured into a different experience of this heritage.

The development of heritage processes at Ancient Monuments
(examples)

Concluding thoughts

1. concepts of heritage have always developed and changed according to the contemporary societal context of transforming power relationships and emerging nascent national(and other) identities. This relationship can be seen as hand-in-hand transformation rather than one of straight cause and effect.
2. As historians have been criticized for a percieved 'fetishization' of the 'written archive', heritage studies can sometimes come across as fetishising authentic and preserved physical relics and remains. To counter this, Brett's (1993) comments about history being a verb; likewise, heritage is not given , it is made and so is , unavoidably , an ethical enterprise.'

3. Lowenthal relates the secularizing tendency within heritage to a process of democratisation.

   
   

4. Heritage is not a new phenomenon, nor even one particularly or exclusively associated with modernity. Rather, the transformations that are implied by modernity are simply mirrored by an increasing intensification, recycling, depth and scope of heritage activity.

   
   

5. The present tendency for nostalgia and finding solace in heritage is just the latest phase of a much longer trajectory.

   
   

6. Lowenthal - " history itself is a heritage">>> 'contemporary products shaped by the past' .....Lowenthal argues that 'heritage far from being fatally predetermined or God given, is in large measure our own marvellously malleable creation. Heritage is not an innate or primordial phenonmenon, people have to taught it.

   
   

7. We need to acknowledge , understand, and embrace the very long term temporal trajectory of the heritage phenomenon, otherwise, we would not understand it at all.

   
   
   

As Lowenthal stresses, understanding heritage is crucial, ' We learn to control it lest it control us.'