Archaeologies

, Volume 5, Issue 2, pp 306–322 | Cite as

Placemaking Through Protest: An Archaeology of the Lees Cross and Endcliffe Protest Camp, Derbyshire, England

Research

Abstract

The article describes the preliminary results of an archaeological survey of a protest camp occupied since 1999 in Derbyshire, England, and reflects briefly on the role of archaeology in researching contemporary activism and protests. The camp is structured by the everyday activities involved in living in the landscape, by the ‘manufactured vulnerability’ created using characteristics of the environment to contest an attempted eviction, and the public statements of protest that symbolise the campaign to the wider world. Through its longevity and the high profile of the wider anti-quarry campaign the camp is now a key element in the history of its landscape, and it is on these terms that it became the subject of archaeological research.

Keywords

Contemporary archaeology Environmental protest Material culture Architecture 

Résumé

L’article décrit les résultats préliminaires d’une enquête archéologique menée dans un camp de protestation occupé depuis 1999 à Derbyshire, Angleterre, et reflète brièvement le rôle de l’archéologie dans des recherches concernant l’activisme contemporain et les protestations. Le camp est structuré par les activités quotidiennes impliquées s’inscrivant dans le paysage, par la ‘vulnérabilité fabriquée’ créée en utilisant les caractéristiques de l’environnement pour contester une expulsion tentée et les déclarations publiques de protestation qui symbolisent la campagne aux yeux du monde, au sens plus large. Malgré sa longévité, son haut profil et la vaste campagne des archéologues, le camp est maintenant un élément clé de l’histoire de son paysage, et c’est sur ces termes qu’il est devenu un sujet de l’archéologie.

Resumen

El artículo describe los resultados preliminares del estudio arqueológico de un campo de protesta ocupado desde 1999 en Derbyshire (Inglaterra), y reflexiona brevemente sobre el papel de la arqueología en la investigación del activismo y las protestas contemporáneas. El campo se estructura en función de las actividades diarias relacionadas con la vida del lugar, de la « vulnerabilidad manufacturada» creada con las características del entorno para protestar contra un intento de desahucio y de los mensajes públicos de protesta que simbolizan la campaña para un mundo más amplio. Por su longevidad e importancia dentro de una campaña más amplia contra las canteras, el campo es ahora un elemento clave de la historia del lugar, razón por la que se ha convertido en el objeto de estudios arqueológicos.

References Cited

  1. Anderson, J. (2004). Spatial politics in practice: the style and substance of Environmental Direct Action. Antipode 36: 106-25. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8330.2004.00384.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. British Library n.d. Treehouses and Tunnels. Available at: www.bl.uk/learning/histcitizen/21cc/counterculture/disruption/treehouses/treehousesandtunnels.html, accessed 21/5/09.
  3. Doherty, B. (2000). Manufactured vulnerability: protest camp tactics. In Seel, B., Paterson, M. and Doherty, B. (eds), Direct Action in British Environmentalism, Routledge, London, pp. 62-78.Google Scholar
  4. English Heritage (2007). Understanding the Archaeology of Landscapes: a Guide to Good Recording Practice, English Heritage: Swindon.Google Scholar
  5. Evans, K. (1998). Copse: The Cartoon Book of Tree Protesting, Orange Dog Productions: Chippenham.Google Scholar
  6. Griffin, C. (2008). Protest practice and (tree) cultures of conflict: understanding the spaces of ‘tree maiming’ in eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century England. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers New Series 33: 91-108.Google Scholar
  7. Guardian Films n.d. Your Greenham. Available at: www.yourgreenham.co.uk, accessed 21/5/09.
  8. Hindle, J. 2006. Nine Miles: Two Winters of Anti-Road Protest. Underhill.Google Scholar
  9. Jordan, J. (1998). The art of necessity: the subversive imagination of anti-road protest and Reclaim the Streets. In McKay, G. (ed), DiY Culture: Party and Protest in Nineties Britain, Verso, London, pp. 129-151.Google Scholar
  10. McKay, G. (1996). Senseless Acts of Beauty: Cultures of Resistance Since the Sixties, Verso: London.Google Scholar
  11. McGuire, S., and Smith, K. 2007. Stanton Moor Conservation Plan 2007. Unpublished report, Peak District National Park Authority.Google Scholar
  12. Merrick (1996). Battle for the Trees. Godhaven Ink, Leeds.Google Scholar
  13. PDNPA (2007). Progress Report on Planning Issues at Lees Cross/Endcliffe Quarries, Stanton Moor (P5695/AJC). Peak District National Park Authority Planning Committee, Appendix to Report Submitted on 15 June 2007. Available at: www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/index/looking-after/npa/committees/planning-committee-2007.htm, accessed 21/5/09.
  14. Plows, A. (2006). Blackwood Roads Protest 2004: an emerging (re)cycle of UK eco-activism? Environmental Politics 15(3): 462-472. doi:10.1080/09644010600627949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Purkis, J. (1996). Daring to dream: idealism in the philosophy, organisation and campaigning strategies of Earth First!. In: Barker C. and Kennedy, P. (eds). To Make Another World: Studies in Protest and Collective Action. Avebury Aldershot, pp. 197-217.Google Scholar
  16. Reclaim the Streets n.d. How to Sort a Street Party. Available at: http://rts.gn.apc.org/sortit.htm, accessed 3/2/09.
  17. Road Alert! 1997. Road Raging! Top Tips for Wrecking Roadbuilding. Newbury, Road Alert! Available at: www.eco-action.org/rr/, accessed 21/5/09.
  18. Roseneil, S. (1995). Disarming Patriarchy: Feminism and Political Action at Greenham, Open University Press: Milton Keynes.Google Scholar
  19. Schofield, J. (2009). Peace site: an archaeology of protest at Greenham Common airbase. British Archaeology 104: 44-49.Google Scholar
  20. Wall, D. (1999). Earth First! and the Anti-Road Movement: Radical Environmentalism and Comparative Social Movements, Routledge: London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© World Archaeological Congress 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ARCUSUniversity of SheffieldSheffieldUK
  2. 2.Department of ArchaeologyUniversity of SheffieldSheffieldUK

Personalised recommendations