This is the second surviving Voices of the Past update from archaeologist Claire Casey as she tried to turn Paisley’s Past from an idea into a working community-archaeology project. Part I documented the concept and its participatory goals.
By early 2011, the project had entered the less glamorous but decisive phase between concept and fieldwork: assembling people, institutional support, publicity and money. Claire remained the project organizer, joined by archaeologist Ellie McCulloch and historian Dr. Anders Ingram.
Building a team before opening a trench
The second post exposes a problem that polished project retrospectives often hide: an excavation cannot begin just because the research question is good. Paisley’s Past needed complementary expertise, partner institutions, volunteers, public legitimacy, press attention and funding before the first piece of turf could be lifted.
In January 2011 the three-person core team carried out a reconnaissance of Paisley town centre, using the visit both to familiarize new team members with the proposed sites and to refine the project together.
Turning interest into an institutional network
Claire reported support from Reid Kerr College, the Renfrewshire Local History Forum, the University of the West of Scotland and Archaeology Scotland. The envisioned contributions were practical: student participation, local-history knowledge, archaeological support and connections to volunteers. Meanwhile, the project’s Facebook page was already generating inquiries from people who wanted to participate.
Publicity became another workstream. The project appeared in local coverage and in the March–April 2011 issue of History Scotland, while the team continued seeking wider media attention. Funding was still unresolved and was intended to support both fieldwork and post-excavation—the expensive work that continues after excavation stops.
The outcome we can document
The surviving record confirms that the project successfully moved from an individual proposal into a recognizable initiative with a core team, partner support, volunteer interest and public visibility. What it does not currently establish is whether the planned three-year field program was funded and carried through as envisioned. That boundary matters: project formation is an outcome we can document; completion is not one we should infer.
Other participatory heritage initiatives have since flourished in Paisley, including oral history archives and later urban-heritage projects, but I have not found evidence strong enough to treat those as direct continuations of Claire’s project.
What remains
This second installment makes the practical lesson clearer than the first: community heritage does not become participatory simply because volunteers are invited. Participation has to be supported by relationships, expertise, communications, logistics, money and institutions willing to share the work. The community is part of the system, but the system still has to be built.
Case Study at a Glance
Context: By early 2011, Paisley’s Past had progressed from Claire Casey’s initial idea to a three-person organizing team. Highlight the Supporting Passage
Challenge: Convert an appealing community-archaeology concept into a project with enough expertise, legitimacy, partners and resources to support fieldwork. Highlight the Supporting Passage
Practice: Build a multidisciplinary team, recruit institutional partners, cultivate volunteers, seek publicity and pursue funding before excavation. Highlight the Supporting Passage
Outcome: The project gained a team, support, volunteer interest and public visibility; the surviving record does not verify completion of the proposed three-year field program. Highlight the Supporting Passage
What this case suggests: Shared authority requires operational infrastructure—relationships, resources and roles—not only an invitation to participate. Highlight the Supporting Passage
Supporting Documents & Sources
- This post is the second surviving installment documenting the formation of Paisley’s Past.
- The earlier Voices installment preserves the project’s initial concept and community-archaeology ambitions.
Archive Note / Provenance
The most valuable thing about this record may be that it stops before resolution. It preserves the middle stage of heritage work—the point where aspiration has to become staffing, partnership, funding, logistics, and institutional support.
The surviving record confirms that the project moved from an individual idea into a recognizable initiative with a team, partner support, volunteer interest, and public visibility; it does not establish completion of the proposed three-year field program.
Critical Questions + Add to the Record
- Who gets to speak, and whose knowledge is heard?
- What happens when useful tools become systems we depend on?
Application here: community participation only becomes durable when relationships, expertise, communications, logistics, money, and institutional roles are built around it.
If you know what happened to Paisley’s Past after this update—or have photographs, reports, funding records, or memories of participation—help complete this record.
Leave a Reply