Prerequisits:

There are no specific prerequisites. However, prior knowledge of basic theories and research methods in ethnology, anthropology, folklore studies, cultural heritage studies, or related fields—is recommended.

Content (Syllabus outline):

1. Introduction: A Critical Approach to the Heritagization of Transnational Phenomena
   (an overview of approaches to the heritagization of transnational phenomena, focusing on theoretical concepts and frameworks, as well as on case studies of practice in Slovenia [e.g. šavrinke, aleksandrinke] and abroad).
2. Migrations as Intangible Heritage
   (understanding heritage created by migration, with emphasis on key concepts in migration studies—particularly the shift from the binary of emigration and immigration towards transnational migration and mobility studies, which allow migration to be understood as a process).
3. Musealization of the Heritage of Mobile and Migrant Phenomena
   (incorporating migration and multicultural society into museums; development of museums dedicated to migration; musealization of labor migration; musealization of refugee movements; challenges in musealizing migration and mobility phenomena; communication with the public).
4. Difficult Heritage in a Mobile World
   (heritagization that is dissonant; dealing with the difficult heritage of migration and refugee phenomenona; participatory heritage-making with mobile individuals and groups; ethical commitments).
5. From the Margins to the Center: Multicultural Societies and Transformations of the Heritage Canon
   (synthesizing migration approaches with heritage approaches; incorporating migration and mobility into national and transnational heritage regimes and into the authorized heritage discourse).

Readings:

• Byrne, D. (2016a). The need for a transnational approach to the material heritage of migration: The China–Australia corridor. Journal of Social Archaeology, 16(3), 261–285. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469605316646228
• Byrne, D. (2016b). Heritage corridors: Transnational flows and the built environment of migration. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 42(14), 2350–2378. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2016.1179108
• Contini, L. (2024). Liminal Landscapes: Notes from a Walking Seminar in the Florence-Prateese Plain. Heriskop. 25. 10. 2024
• Dellios, A. (2015). Marginal or mainstream? Migrant centres as grassroots and official heritage. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 21(10), 1068–1083. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2015.1041416
• Dellios, A., & Henrich, E. (2020). Migratory pasts and heritage making presents: Theory and practice. In A. Dellios & E. Henrich (Eds.), Migrant, multicultural and diasporic heritage: Beyond and between borders (pp. 1–17). Routledge.
• European Commission. (2019, December 28). European Museums in the Age of Migration. https://ec.europa.eu/research/infocentre/article_en.cfm?id=/research/headlines/news/article_18_03_16_en.html?infocentre&item=Infocentre&artid=47818
• Glick Schiller, N. (2015). Explanatory frameworks in transnational migration studies: The missing multi-scalar global perspective. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 38(13), 2275–2282. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2015.1058503
• Hafstein, V. T. (2018). Making intangible heritage: El Condor Pasa and other stories from UNESCO. Indiana University Press.
• Harrison, R. (2012). Heritage: Critical approaches. Routledge.
• Hicks, D. (2020). The British Museums: The Benin Bronzes, Colonial Violence and Cultural Restitution. London, Pluto Press.
• Innocenti, P. (Ed.). (2014). Migrating heritage: Experiences of cultural networks and cultural dialogue in Europe. Ashgate.
• Macdonald, S. (2013). Memorylands: Heritage and identity in Europe today. Routledge.
• Sheller, M. (2011). Mobility, Sociopedia.isa, Drexel University.
• Sheller, M., J. Urry (2006). The new mobility paradigm. Environment and Planning, 38 (2), 207 ̶ 226.
• Smith, L. (2011). Affect and registers of engagement: Navigating emotional responses to dissonant heritage. In L. Smith, G. Cubitt, R. Wilson, & K. Fouseki (Eds.), Representing enslavement and abolition in museums: Ambiguous engagements (pp. 260–303). Routledge.
• Smith, L. (2017). “We are . . . we are everything”: The politics of recognition and misrecognition at immigration museums. Museum and Society, 15(1), 69–86. https://doi.org/10.29311/mas.v15i1.698
• Tunbridge, J. E., & Ashworth, G. J. (1996). Dissonant heritage: The management of the past as a resource in conflict. John Wiley.
• Wang, C. (2019). Ambivalent heritage: The im/possibility of museumifying the Overseas Chinese in South China. Modern China, 46(6), 559–584. https://doi.org/10.1177/0097700419845767
• Urry, J. (2000). Sociology beyond Societies: Mobilities for the Twenty-First Century. London: Routledge.
• Waterton, E., & Watson, S. (Eds.). (2010). Heritage and community engagement: Collaboration or contestation? International Journal of Heritage Studies, 16(1–2), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527250903441705
• Wimmer, A., & Glick Schiller, N. (2003). Methodological nationalism, the social sciences, and the study of migration: An essay in historical epistemology. International Migration Review, 37(3), 576–610. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2003.tb00151.x
• Whitehead, C., Eckersley, S., Lloyd, K., & Mason, R. (Eds.). (2016). Museums, migration and identity in Europe: Peoples, places and identities. Routledge.

Objectives and competences:

The primary aim of the course is to provide in-depth knowledge of the ways and cases of heritagization that include the experiences of groups and individuals with a migratory background. Students will become familiar with models and approaches that critically examine heritage defined solely in national terms, allowing for a shift toward the heritagization of migration and migrants. Through an understanding of the multilayered existing and emerging connections between the national, global, and local in the field of heritage and memory, students will be able to critically evaluate earlier, more sedentary models of heritage-making as well as contemporary ones, which address multiculturalism, urbanity, migration, and mobility.

Competencies

Through lectures, discussions, and independent work, students will acquire general competencies in critical thinking and in approaching established models of heritage. They will also gain subject-specific competencies, such as mastering the terminology of both migration and heritage studies, learning to work independently with study material, critically evaluating sources of information, and analyzing them in accordance with the most up-to-date approaches in critical heritage studies. Upon completion of the course, students will be able to independently analyze, present or assess individual case studies of heritage in a mobile world.

Intended learning outcomes:

By the end of the course, students will be able to:

• Prepare a written assignment on the heritagization of migration and mobility.
• Present their written assignment using contemporary presentation techniques.
• Discuss and clearly articulate their position in relation to selected theoretical approaches and frameworks.
• Apply ethical commitments in both research and the presentation of scientific results.

Learning and teaching methods:

Types of learning/teaching:

• Frontal teaching
• Work in smaller groups or pair work
• Independent students work
• e-learning

Teaching methods:

• Explanation
• Conversation/discussion/debate
• Work with texts
• Case studies
• Different presentation
• Inviting guests from companies

Assessment:

• Long written assignments 40 %
• Presentations 20 %
• Final examination (written/oral) 40 %

Lecturer’s references:

• Bofulin, M. (2016). Daleč doma: Migracije iz LR Kitajske v Slovenijo. Založba ZRC SAZU.
• Bofulin, M. (2019). Heritagization of Chinese migration: From binaries to connections. Asian Studies, 10(2), 385–396. https://doi.org/10.4312/as.2019.10.2.385-396
• Rogelja Caf, N., Spreizer, A. J., & Bofulin, M. (2020). Morje mnogih rib: Odbiranja preteklosti v severovzhodnem Jadranu. Traditiones, 49(3), 17–34. https://doi.org/10.3986/Traditio202049030
• Bofulin, M. (2025). Local diaspora engagement and emigration as a cultural resource: The case of a Europe-bound sending area in Southeast China. In M. Thunø (Ed.), Handbook of Chinese migration to Europe (pp. 297–323). Brill.
• Rogelja Caf, N. (2019). A life in letters : an anthropological reflection on the correspondence of Slovene missionary sr. Conradina Resnik. Dve domovini : razprave o izseljenstvu. 50: 89-108, DOI: 10.3986/dd.v2019i50.7460.
• Ledinek Lozej Š. & Rogelja Caf N. & Kanjir U. (2018). Walks through the multi-layered landscape of Šavrinkas’ Istria : eggs, books, backpacks and stony paths. Landscape research. 43 (5): 600-612. DOI: 10.1080/01426397.2017.1336207.
• Gombač J. & Rogelja Caf N. & Klun L. (2024). Counter-archive: reflections on the (non)possibility of migrant heritage. Heriskop : razprave o dediščinjenju na obrobju. 5: 16-29.  https://dediscina.zrc-sazu.si/en/2024/05/counter-archive-reflections-on-the-nonpossibility-of-migrant-heritage/#page-content.