Salam Al Quntar, Katharyn Hanson, Brian I. Daniels, and Corine Wegener 154 NEAR EASTERN ARCHAEOLOGY 78:3 (2015) Attendees at the 2015 Emergency Preparedness and Disaster Response for Cultural Heritage course practice using GPS units to document damage locations at the IIACH. Photograph by Katharyn Hanson. Responding to a Cultural Heritage Crisis: The Example of the Safeguarding the Heritage of Syria and Iraq Project Concerns about cultural heritage feature prominently in the present humanitarian crisis in Syria and Iraq. With over 250,000 dead and millions displaced, all aspects of daily life have been upended. Destruction of the region’s historical sites has prompted an outpouring of international concern. Despite many humanitarian interventions designed to address the current crisis in Syria and Iraq, there have been fewer efforts to protect the heritage that represents the cultural identity of Syrians and Iraqis inside both countries. At the same time, a question keeps returning: What can we do to protect cultural heritage in this crisis? In this article, we discuss how the Safeguarding the Heritage of Syria and Iraq (SHOSI) Project has answered this perennial question. The international heritage community – what we might de- scribe as the group of archaeologists, museum professionals, historic preservationists, historians, librarians, archivists, and the experts at major international cultural organizations such as UNESCO, the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), the International Centre for the Study of the Pres- ervation and Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM), and the International Council of Museums (ICOM) concerned with heritage preservation – has a great deal of interest in respond- ing to the present crisis in Syria and Iraq. Nonetheless, it is not well-integrated into the international humanitarian and disas- ter response community in order to translate this goodwill into action. Humanitarian response is understood to constitute aid and actions designed to save lives, alleviate suffering, and main- tain and protect human dignity during and in the aftermath of complex emergencies; it is also expected to act on the basis of need alone, be neutral and non-discriminatory in dealings with affected populations, and implement programming independent of other political, economic, military, or diplomatic objectives (ICRC/International Federation 1994; Good Humanitarian Do- norship Initiative 2003). The international heritage community can situate itself within this framework. Safeguarding an affected population’s cultural heritage – once individual human lives have been protected – shows respect for human dignity by protecting a community’s cultural identity and sets the groundwork for a return to a sense of normalcy following a disaster. Responding to the Crisis in Syria and Iraq The attributes of successful humanitarian efforts to protect cul- tural heritage in emergencies after World War II have yet to re- ceive systematic evaluation or assessment, but positive outcomes appear to be correlated with the participation of local communi- ty members who are in the best position to act when a crisis situ- This content downloaded from 160.111.254.17 on Wed, 08 Aug 2018 18:39:39 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms NEAR EASTERN ARCHAEOLOGY 78:3 (2015) 155 ation occurs (e.g., Cassar and Rodriguez Garcia 2006; Grissman 2006; Hammer 2014; Kurin 2011). The international heritage community cannot do much to protect cultural heritage inside Syria and Iraq directly, but it can support willing heritage profes- sionals and activists inside both countries who are already doing so. Perhaps the greatest conceptual challenge for the archaeo- logical community is to reimagine heritage protection as one of many humanitarian actions that offer direct support to popula- tions in crisis. Such a step would reflect the next stage in the ar- chaeological engagement with cultural heritage, which has em- braced a more community-centered approach over the past two decades in sympathy with theoretical developments in human rights law, critical race theory, gender studies, indigenous rights and recognition, and the de- colonization of the academy (e.g., Hodder 2010; Liebmann and Rizvi 2008; Meskell 2010a; Meskell 2010b; Silver- man and Ruggles 2007). Even when adopting a hu- manitarian approach to heri- tage protection during con- flict, there are other obstacles to the full implementation of emergency heritage projects in Syria and Iraq. Navigat- ing the legal environment for this crisis is complex. The United States and the Euro- pean Union impose sanctions against activities that involve the Syrian financial system. In the United States, these sanc- tions also extend to collab- orative work with the Syrian government and its instru- mentalities, which includes the Syrian Directorate Gen- eral of Antiquities and Museums (DGAM). The Syrian Sanctions Regulations only permit a limited humanitarian exemption under 31 CFR Part 542(a)(5) for “[a]ctivities to support the preservation and protection of cultural heritage sites in Syria, including, but not limited to, museums, historic buildings, and archaeological sites.” American heritage professionals seeking to assist the protection of Syrian cultural heritage are legally obliged to forgo working di- rectly with the Syrian DGAM. The case of Iraq is different, as the United States no longer maintains sanctions against its govern- ment. However, there are export controls on certain equipment and goods as well as a need to vet Iraqi nationals, like the Syrians, against the US Department of the Treasury’s Specially Designated Nationals List prior to payment for their work. Implementing emergency cultural heritage projects inside Syria and Iraq can therefore be summarized as both incredibly difficult and absolutely necessary. This paradox is not irresolvable. Here, we demonstrate that emergency heritage responses are indeed pos- sible inside Syria and Iraq – even in the midst of the present crisis – using the SHOSI Project’s recent emergency training activities and emergency preservation projects as an illustrative example. The Safeguarding the Heritage of Syria and Iraq Project In spring 2013, as the Syrian crisis began to worsen, the Smith- sonian Institution convened a meeting to discuss potential in- terventions that could protect Syria’s cultural heritage. The Safe- guarding the Heritage of Syria Initiative, also known as SHOSI, developed following this meeting. SHOSI began with the Penn Cultural Heritage Center at the University of Pennsylvania Mu- seum; the Office of the Under Secretary for History, Art, and Culture at the Smithsonian Institution; the Geospatial Technolo- gies Project at the American Association for the Advancement of Science; the US Institute of Peace; and The Day After Association (a Syrian NGO) as its core partners. At the time, the civilian situ- ation on the ground had not deteriorated as it would through- out the summer of 2013 and into 2014, and SHOSI proposed implementing a project that would work to restore governance capacity over Syria’s cultural sector in the regions of the country outside the control of the Assad regime through Local Coordi- nation Committees, Free Syrian Army, and community groups (Al Quntar 2013). Similar efforts had already been undertaken by The Day After Association in regard to judicial and civilian infrastructure in Syria. Events on the ground required SHOSI to adapt its plans, shifting away from a focus on developing gover- nance to implementing emergency activities. In summer 2014, as ISIS advanced into Iraq, SHOSI ex- panded its ongoing efforts to support Iraqi heritage profes- sionals, and renamed itself the Safeguarding the Heritage of Syria and Iraq Project. The Iraqi Institute for the Conserva- Figure 1. Attendees at the 2014 Emergency Care for Syrian Museum Collections course in Gaziantep, Turkey, discuss at-risk collections. Photograph by Brian I. Daniels. This content downloaded from 160.111.254.17 on Wed, 08 Aug 2018 18:39:39 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 156 NEAR EASTERN ARCHAEOLOGY 78:3 (2015) tion of Antiquities and Heritage also joined as a core partner. There are key differences between Syria and Iraq in the pres- ent crisis. Most notably, Iraq retains some governance capa- bility over cultural heritage in ways that Syria has not, which provides a governance framework for all emergency heritage efforts. However, there is a similar need in both countries to increase the capacity for emergency response among heritage professionals and, where appropriate, to implement emergency preservation projects that safeguard the most at-risk cultural heritage sites and collections. In all cases, the ability of heritage professionals inside Syria and Iraq to act is limited by the con- flict, as the personal safety of those engaged in emergency ef- forts remains a paramount concern. Travel to trainings and the implementation of emergency preservation projects can only occur when safe passage can be reasonably assured. Because of the fluid conditions presented by the conflict, the Syrians and Iraqis working with the SHOSI Project are constantly reassess- ing their local ability to travel and to access cultural sites, and the in-country project teams and international partners com- municate regularly to discuss potential risks and to discourage excessive risk-taking. Emergency Training Activities Following complex emergencies, the international heritage community has often responded by offering training programs for the impacted country’s heritage professionals. It is therefore no surprise that emergency workshops have been the front- line defense in the present Syrian and Iraqi crisis. To date, most of the emergency trainings have been focused on the staff of Syria’s Directorate General of Antiquities and Muse- ums (DGAM). By summer 2015, UNESCO had sponsored four courses, one each on combating illicit trafficking, emergency stabilization for built heritage, the protection of moveable heritage, and the recording of intangible heritage (UNESCO 2015). Approximately 100 trainees had participated from Syria (as well as Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon, and Turkey in the case of the illicit trafficking workshop). Most of the UNESCO courses’ at- tendees have been based in Damascus, which has seen the least conflict. In 2013, ICOMOS and ICCROM also offered eTrain- ing courses through video conferencing to the Syrian DGAM (ICOMOS 2013). By contrast, less attention has been given to the areas outside of the Assad regime’s control, and therefore the areas of Syria most at-risk. By 2014, it was difficult for international heritage organizations to travel into the country, and many Syrian heri- tage professionals working outside of the DGAM’s control had, by that point in the conflict, been caring for collections salvaged from damaged museums and religious institutions. To address specific concerns arising from caring for portable ob- jects in these conditions, the SHOSI Project led a three-day Emergency Care for Syrian Museum Collections course in Gaziantep, Turkey, in late June 2014 (Daniels 2014). Approximately twenty people primarily from the provinces of Aleppo and Idlib attended this training (fig. 1). Its pur- pose was three-fold: 1) to of- fer information on how to secure museum collections safely during emergencies; 2) to provide participants with basic supplies for packing and securing museum collections; and 3) to create a dialogue about emergency responses and needs. Attendees from the course were able to return to Syria with basic supplies and to immediately put them to use. Following ISIS’ attacks in Iraq and occupation of Mosul in summer 2014, the SHOSI Project sought to bring an emergency heritage protection workshop to an audience of Iraqi heritage professionals similar to the training that had occurred in Gaziantep, leading to its partnership with the Iraqi Institute for the Conservation of Antiquities and Heritage (IICAH) in Erbil. The IICAH has established itself as the leader in Iraq for cultural Figure 2. Katharyn Hanson and Brian Lione welcome students back to the IIACH for the summer 2015 Emergency Preparedness and Disaster Response for Cultural Heritage course in Erbil. Photograph courtesy of the Iraqi Institute for the Conservation of Antiquities and Heritage. This content downloaded from 160.111.254.17 on Wed, 08 Aug 2018 18:39:39 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms NEAR EASTERN ARCHAEOLOGY 78:3 (2015) 157 heritage education and training over the past six years, educating more than 250 graduates in short workshops and long-form aca- demic coursework offered by academic institutions and interna- tional NGOs (Johnson and Lione 2013). The IICAH collaborates with representatives from the Iraqi government, including the State Board of Heritage in Baghdad (SBAH) and the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) Directorate of Antiquities. Since December 2010, the IICAH has been managed by a five-member Iraqi Board of Directors drawn from the SBAH and the KRG. With the support and en- couragement of the IICAH, as well as SBAH and KRG rep- resentatives, over four weeks during the summer of 2015, the SHOSI Project offered a course on Emergency Pre- paredness and Disaster Re- sponse for Cultural Heritage (fig. 2). The course took place at the IIACH’s facilities in Erbil with seventeen partici- pants from throughout Iraq who work in museums man- agement, government admin- istration, at archaeological sites, and in heritage build- ings. Many of the participants came from areas affected by current armed conflict and general instability. Crucially, the workshop brought to- gether students representing Iraq’s diverse demographic groups: Muslim and Chris- tian, Sunni and Shia, Kurd and Arab, women and men, junior and senior, who were all working toward the goal of heritage preservation. In this way, the Erbil course helped to realize the goal of building a professional cohort that is grounded in strong personal relationships and can be re- sponsive to disaster response as the need arises. The Erbil course’s content drew upon the prior experience of the Gaziantep training. It had three principal goals: 1) to discuss how to identify at-risk cultural heritage; 2) to offer training in site assessment and risk management planning; and 3) to create a dialogue about emergency risks and a response network. In the context of Iraq, translating these goals into practice meant basic instruction in the safe packing and movement of collections, the methods of damage assessment, remote sensing techniques, the process of triage for sites and museum collections, and the de- sign and implementation of disaster response plans. This diverse content illustrated a broad spectrum of potential responses to hazards and disaster situations (fig. 3). Emergency Preservation Projects In addition to training activities, the SHOSI Project is also im- plementing emergency preservation projects for at-risk cultural heritage. Following the Gaziantep workshop in June 2014, it became apparent that emergency trainings were insufficient to prompt emergency preservation activities. While the trainings facilitated the exchange of in- formation and increased par- ticipants’ abilities to imple- ment emergency responses, conservation supplies and funding for labor were ur- gently required if action was to be taken in a timely man- ner. Thus, the training work- shops became the gateway to a more sustained engagement in the protection of Syrian and Iraqi cultural heritage for the SHOSI Project, rather than an endpoint. The challenge was not so much ameliorating a lack of expertise on the part of Syr- ian participants, who were themselves experienced heri- tage professionals, but in ad- dressing the logistical issues of transferring funds, equip- ment, and supplies into Syria legally. The June 2015 Erbil workshop exposed many of the same issues in Iraq. While these challenges seem almost insurmountable in a conflict zone, they are precisely what humanitarian interventions must address during complex disasters on a regular basis. Emergency preservation proj- ects are likely only to be suc- cessful when implemented within such an overarching framework. In practice, the SHOSI Project’s interventions are prioritized according to immediate need by in-country heritage professionals, and these sites are then assessed according to the present security situation and the degree of likely risk to the col- lection or to the heritage site. One example of the SHOSI Project’s completed emergency preservation projects is in its work at the Ma’arra Museum. Par- ticipants at the 2014 Gaziantep workshop identified the museum as one of the most significant and at-risk heritage sites in the Idlib region. The museum is itself an historic building, a caravansary Figure 3. Iraqi heritage professionals holding the results of their assignment to pack an artifact using only material from their dorm rooms. Photograph by Katharyn Hanson. This content downloaded from 160.111.254.17 on Wed, 08 Aug 2018 18:39:39 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 158 NEAR EASTERN ARCHAEOLOGY 78:3 (2015) known as Khan As’ad Pasha, which was constructed dur- ing the Ottoman period in the sixteenth century c.e. In 1987, the building was restored and opened as a museum devoted to the exhibition of Roman and Byzantine period mosa- ics. The mosaics were con- served according to Syrian best practices of the era; they are encased within the floor or fixed permanently to the walls with concrete. Located in Ma’arat al-Nu’man at a stra- tegic crossroads, the museum was caught in the crossfire of the Battle of Ma’arat al- Nu’man in 2011. During these clashes, some mosaics and sculptures were damaged and exhibit cases were broken. The building also sustained physical damage. An immedi- ate need existed to safeguard the non-portable museum collection in case the building sustained additional damage. Following the Gaziantep workshop, the museum’s cura- torial staff developed a plan to protect the building and mosa- ic collection in situ, which was further developed by interna- tional conservation specialists at the Smithsonian and other organizations. The conserva- tion work began at the muse- um in October 2014, and was carried out by an in-country team of heritage professionals, which included the museum’s staff, archaeologists, and civil society activists from the area. At first, all holes in the roof were cleaned and then filled with bars and cement. Collapsing arches in the caravansary’s courtyard were also repaired using local stone in order to match the original build- ing materials. After these basic efforts to shore up the building, the team addressed the mosaic collection. The team first cleaned any accumulated dust from the mosaics, and then applied a layer of water-soluble glue followed by flashspun polyethylene fiber or cot- ton cloth to fortify and keep the tesserae together (fig. 4). Sandbags were then stacked alongside the mosaics to offer additional blast protection and to minimize potential damage in case of a wall-col- lapse or shrapnel fire. Altogether, some 1,600 square feet of mosaics were protected in this manner (fig. 5). All the materials involved in this emergency project can also be cleaned or removed easily with- out any lasting negative effects to the mosaics. These prevention mea- sures were proven to be timely and successful. In June 2015, the Assad regime’s air force dropped an explosive barrel on the Ma’arra Museum. The caravansary’s mosque and hospice, located in the central courtyard of the main muse- um building, took a direct hit (fig. 6). The mosque’s cupola, lobby, and eastern wall were destroyed and the cupola and the eastern wall of the hospice were seriously damaged. The explosion also caused the de- struction of parts of the cor- ridor leading to the eastern wing of the museum. The mu- seum staff survived the bomb- ing as did the most significant mosaics in the collection. The mosaics exhibited in the east- ern gallery of the museum were undamaged, surviving the collapse of the wall lead- ing in front of the gallery. The emergency protection of these mosaics by sandbags played an important role in their sur- vival and apparently diffused the full force of the bomb blast (fig. 7). Three small mosa- ics were severely damaged in the corridor; these represent a less significant component of the collection. A few column capitals and basalt doors dis- played in the corridor were partially damaged. By the end of June 2015, the Ma’arra Museum’s staff had start- ed the salvage of the collapsed rubble according to a marked grid removal system with full photographic and video documenta- tion. These activities followed the best practices established by ICCROM for the recovery of historic building materials in a disaster situation. The museum’s staff had also initiated the pro- cess of evaluating the building’s structural damage, especially for those sections that hold the mosaics. Taking Action The SHOSI Project’s interventions demonstrate that it is possi- ble to assist heritage professionals caught in a situation such as the present Syrian and Iraqi conflict. Doing so requires the full, collaborative involvement of local Syrians and Iraqis, who are Figure 4 (above). The Ma’arra Museum’s curatorial staff preparing the mosaics for sandbagging, December 2014. Photograph source anonymous for protection. Figure 5 (below). Reinforced and stabilized mosaics at the Ma’arra Museum, December 2014. Photograph source anonymous for protection. This content downloaded from 160.111.254.17 on Wed, 08 Aug 2018 18:39:39 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms NEAR EASTERN ARCHAEOLOGY 78:3 (2015) 159 the only people in a position to implement emergency projects. Moreover, they must take the lead, as only they will be able to assess the risks involved in protecting a cultural heritage site. In- volving our Syrian and Iraqi colleagues as full partners who have a voice in the decision-making about heritage protection hardly seems novel; indeed, it is a core tenant of community archaeology. Yet, an approach that empowers Syrian and Iraqi heritage profes- sionals in full project implementation is rare. We would maintain that the extent to which the SHOSI Project has experienced any degree of success, it is due to the adoption of this orientation. Many emergency preservation projects like the SHOSI Proj- ect’s efforts at the Ma’arra Museum are needed; much work across Syria and Iraq remains to be done. Although archaeolo- gists tend to focus on documenting site damage – a core skill of the discipline, members of the field have the knowledge and ability to do much more. Archaeologists obtain permits, inter- act with government authorities, export equipment and supplies across borders, and negotiate with local communities for a range of services. All of these activities share a kinship with humanitar- ian aid projects, providing a template in which the international heritage community and humanitarian community can reach out to Syrians and Iraqis to create joint emergency preservation projects. The future of this region’s cultural heritage likely de- pends on such collaborations. Acknowledgments Earlier versions of this paper were presented by the authors at the 2015 Society for American Archaeology annual meeting. The work discussed here has been supported by the J. M. Ka- plan Fund, Sotheby’s, and the Prince Claus Fund for Culture and Development. This article has benefited from conversations with Brian M. Lione, Jesse S. Johnson, Patty Gerstenblith, Laurie Rush, Susan Wolfinbarger, Shaker Shbib, Ali Othman, Mariam Bachich, Lauren Ristvet, Richard M. Leventhal, Amr Al-Azm, and Steven Heydemann. Thanks to Jesse Casana for the invita- tion to publish in this edition of Near Eastern Archaeology and to two anonymous reviewers for their comments. References Al Quntar, Salam. 2013. Syrian cultural property in the crossfire: Reality and effectiveness of protection efforts. Journal of Eastern Mediterranean Archaeology & Heritage Studies 1: 348–51. Cassar, Brendan and Ana Rosa Rodriguez Garcia. 2006. The Society for the Preservation of Afghanistan’s Cultural Heritage: An Overview of Activities Since 1994. Pp. 15–38 in Art and Archaeology of Af- ghanistan: Its Fall and Survival: A Multidisciplinary Approach, ed. Juliette van Krieken-Pieters. Leiden, NL & Boston, MA: Brill. Daniels, Brian I. 2014. Heritage at Risk: U.S. Museums Partner to Help Syrian Colleagues. Museum Magazine. November/December. Good Humanitarian Donorship Initiative. 2003. 23 Principles and Good Practice of Humanitarian Donorship. Stockholm: Government of Sweden. Accessed at http://www.ghdinitiative.org/ghd/gns/princi- ples-good-practice-of-ghd/principles-good-practice-ghd.html Grissmann, Carla. 2006. The Kabul Museum: Its Turbulent Years. Pp. 61–75 in Art and Archaeology of Afghanistan: Its Fall and Survival: A Multidisciplinary Approach, ed. Juliette van Krieken-Pieters. Leiden, NL & Boston, MA: Brill. Hammer, Joshua. 2014. The Race to Save Mali’s Priceless Artifacts. Smithsonian Magazine. January: http://www.smithsonianmag. com/history/Race-Save-Mali-Artifacts-180947965/ Hodder, Ian. 2010. Cultural Heritage Rights: From Ownership and Descent to Justice and Well-being. Anthropological Quarterly 83: 861–82. ICRC/International Federation. 1994. Code of Conduct for the Inter- national Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and Non-Govern- mental Organizations (NGOs) in Disaster Relief. Geneva: ICRC/ International Federation. Accessed at https://www.icrc.org/eng/ resources/documents/publication/p1067.htm Johnson, Jesse S. and Brian M. Lione. 2013. The Iraq Institute: Ed- ucating a New Generation of Heritage Professionals. TAARII Newsletter. Fall. Kurin, Richard. 2011. Saving Haiti’s Heritage: Cultural Recovery After the Earthquake. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press. Liebmann, Matthew, and Uzma Z. Rizvi, eds. 2008. Archaeology and the Postcolonial Critique. Landham, MD: AltaMira Press. Meskell, Lynn. 2010a. Conflict Heritage and Expert Failure. Pp. Figure 6 (left). The courtyard of the Ma’arra Museum following the barrel bombing on June 15, 2015. Figure 7 (right). Intact mosaics at the Ma’arra Museum following the barrel bombing on June 15, 2015. Photographs courtesy of Le patrimoine archéologique syrien en danger (PASD)/The Safeguarding the Heritage of Syria and Iraq Project. This content downloaded from 160.111.254.17 on Wed, 08 Aug 2018 18:39:39 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 160 NEAR EASTERN ARCHAEOLOGY 78:3 (2015) 192–201 in Heritage and Globalisation, eds. Sophia Labadi and Colin Long. London: Routledge. . 2010b. Human Rights and Heritage Ethics. Anthropological Quarterly 83: 839–60. Rouhani, Bijan and Samir Abdulac. 2013. Protection of Syria’s Cultural Heritage in Times of Armed Conflict: ICOMOS-ICCROM e-learning course for Syrian cultural heritage professionals. Paris: ICOMOS-ICORP, 2013. Available at http://icorp.icomos.org/ index.php/news/40-protection-of-syria-s-cultural-heritage-in- times-of-armed-conflict-icomos-iccrom-e-learning-course-for- syrian-cultural-heritage-professionals. Silverman, Helaine and D. Fairchild Ruggles. 2007. Cultural Heritage and Human Rights. Pp. 3–22 Cultural Heritage and Human Rights, Helaine Silverman and D. Fairchild Ruggles, eds. New York: Springer. UNESCO. 2015. Emergency Safeguarding of the Syrian Cultural Her- itage. Paris: UNESCO. Accessed at http://www.unesco.org/new/ fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CLT/pdf/UNESCO_Safeguard- ing_Syrian_Cultural_Heritage.pdf ABOUT THE AUTHORS Katharyn Hanson is a fellow with the Penn Cultural Heritage Center at the University of Penn- sylvania Museum and a visiting scholar at the Geospatial Technologies Project at the American Association for the Advancement of Science. She works as an archaeologist specializing in the protection of cultural heritage and has been involved in various archaeological fieldwork projects for over 19 years. She also serves as the Program Director for the Archaeological Site Preservation Program at the Iraqi Institute for the Conservation of Antiquities and Heritage in Erbil, Iraq. Dr. Hanson received her Ph.D. from the University of Chicago. Salam Al Quntar is a visiting scholar at the Institute for the Study of the Ancient World, New York University, a consulting scholar at the Penn Museum, and a National Geographic Emerging Ex- plorer. She is one of the co-directors of the Safeguarding the Heritage of Syria and Iraq Project. Dr. Al Quntar has worked on numerous archaeological and heritage projects in Syria and has been the co-director of the Tell Hamoukar Expedition since 2005. She received her Ph.D. from the Univer- sity of Cambridge. Corine Wegener is the Cultural Heritage Preservation Officer at the Smithsonian Institution, where she coordinates domestic and international programs for cultural heritage in crisis for the Office of the Under Secretary for History, Art, and Culture. Before coming to the Smithsonian in 2012, she was associate curator of Decorative Arts, Textiles, and Sculpture at the Minneapolis Institute of Arts. Ms. Wegener also served twenty-one years in the US Army Reserve, including as an Arts, Monu- ments, and Archives Officer in Army Civil Affairs. Over the past twelve years, she has worked on cultural emergency projects. Ms. Wegener is founding past president of the US Committee of the Blue Shield and the President of the International Council of Museums (ICOM) Disaster Relief Task Force. She has M.A. degrees in both Political Science and Art History from the University of Kansas. Brian I. Daniels is the Director of Research and Programs for the Penn Cultural Heritage Center at the University of Pennsylvania Museum and a research associate at the Smithsonian Institu- tion. He also serves as one of the co-directors of the Safeguarding the Heritage of Syria and Iraq Project. A specialist in cultural heritage policy, he has regularly appeared before the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee at the US Department of State and has worked for over fifteen years with local communities on heritage preservation issues. Dr. Daniels received his Ph.D. from the University of Pennsylvania. This content downloaded from 160.111.254.17 on Wed, 08 Aug 2018 18:39:39 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms