Page 155 - Studia Universitatis Hereditati, vol 13(2) (2025)

tian domination and later Habsburg adminis- nomic change. It also provides a basis for con-
tration reshaped its urban functions, but it is im- necting archaeological interpretation with con-
portant to note that the gradual shifts in trade temporary challenges such as climate change,
routes and geopolitical priorities led to a decline sea-level rise, and sustainable land use.
in regional importance. This enables us to inter-
pret Osor as a microcosm of Adriatic history, re- Accessibility as a Heritage Problem
flecting transitions from prehistoric networks to Physical accessibility in Osor is shaped by its in-
Roman imperial structures, from ecclesiastical sular geography. Although Cres and Lošinj are
power to early modern marginalisation. Its ur- connected by a bridge, access to the archipela-
ban fabric preserves these layers in compressed go depends on ferry routes from the mainland
form, making the town an exceptional site for and is subject to weather conditions and season-
interpretation. al fluctuations that affect tourists but also re-
Recent archaeological research, especially searchers and educators. School groups, for ex- 155
within the project Osor beyond the myth, has ample, face logistical and financial barriers to
significantly expanded knowledge of Osor’s ur- organising visits, particularly outside the peak
ban and landscape archaeology. New results tourist season. In general, physical accessibility
position Osor not as an isolated town but as to archaeological sites is a growing concern, es-
the core of a wider archipelagic system involv- pecially for those with disabilities (Cantarellas
ing both terrestrial and maritime components. 2023, 519–22). Historic urban sites often present
Material culture from excavations includes ce- physical barriers, and archaeological areas can be
ramics, sculpture, architectural fragments, and left as islands of ruins, fenced and inaccessible
everyday objects that reflect both local produc- (Ribeiro et al. 2012, 4149; La Mantia 2024, 156).
tion and long-distance exchange. These finds The transport (in)connectivity, biodiversity, cul-
are preserved and partially displayed in the Ar- tural heritage, and carrying capacity are all cru-
chaeological Collection of Osor. The collection cial elements to consider when developing stra-
provides an essential interpretive point, linking tegic plans for areas with specific characteristics
physical artefacts with urban space and histori- (Cecić 2023, 87–96). Physical accessibility also
cal narrative. Yet, despite this research richness, intersects with infrastructure limitations. Osor Make Osor Great Again: Accessible Archaeology Between Island and Cloud
public interpretation remains relatively frag- does not have accommodation facilities and
mented. Archaeological results are presented transport infrastructure to host larger number
through exhibitions, publications, but they lack of visitors. While this protects the integrity of
a unified narrative framework connecting land- the historic town, it also limits the scale of herit-
scape, material culture, and social history. This age outreach through traditional tourism mod-
fragmentation reflects structural issues com- els. These conditions generate a paradox: Osor’s
mon to small heritage sites: limited institution- archaeological and historical value is high, but
al capacity, seasonal staffing, and dependence its practical accessibility is low. The consequence
on tourism seasonal cycles. Besides monuments is a communication gap between research pro-
and artefacts, Osor presents a cultural landscape duction and public promotion. Knowledge cir-
in which built heritage, natural environment, culates within academic networks but has no
and ritual practices are intertwined. This land- strategy to reach broader audiences.
scape dimension is important for understanding Accessibility is not only spatial but also
Osor’s heritage value. Archaeology here is not epistemic. Even when visitors reach Osor, inter-
limited to particular sites but also reflected in pretation depends heavily on their prior knowl-
spatial relations between town, sea, and hinter- edge and on limited material. Archaeological
land. Therefore, its interpretation can integrate collection and heritage signage provide informa-
environmental history, mobility, and socio-eco- tion, but rely on static display formats that are