Three papers in this CMAS issue focus on the management of southern African rock art sites. This is not by coincidence. They proceed from discussions held during a special ‘rock art heritage and management’ session (organised by Mélanie Duval and Stéphane Hœrlé) of the 23rd biennial meeting of the Society of the Africanist Archaeologist (Toulouse, France, 2016). The aim of this session was to examine to what extent and for which stakeholders rock art sites are a ‘cultural heritage’, beyond different challenges of preservation, promotion, and appropriation. Although presented papers covered the entire continent1 a large majority focused on Southern Africa where research on this subject seems encouraged by a conjunction of available means and acute issues related to the plurality of uses: domestic (pens), spiritual (ritual to ancestors), medicinal (use of pigments for medicines), tourist (development of open-air sites). This is exemplified by the papers gathered in this issue. Papers by Paul Hubbard and Mélanie Duval et al. were originally presented and discussed during the 2016 SAfA meeting. The paper by Ancila Nhamo is an original contribution submitted while this special issue was being put together. It was included because it offers another viewpoint on the situation in Zimbabwe and deepens our understanding of what is at stake for rock art site management. Although these papers base their discussion on Zimbabwean and South African experiences, many countries face similar challenges, albeit under different circumstances. These three papers, therefore, inform on general issues in rock art management and conservation for all countries with open-air rock art. Witness throughout all times, present all over the world, rock art sites are involved in complex heritage-making processes joining a large range of environmental (Darvill and Fernandes 2014) and human factors (Jopela 2011). In Africa rock art is mostly found in easily accessible open-air sites and these human factors are often linked with a variety of uses: domestic, spiritual, medicinal and/ or tourist. These factors are made more complex by polymorphic cultural and identity stakes (Duval 2012), as rock art sites are linked with the history of the peopling and the evolution of the activities and land uses (Pleurdeau et al. 2012), today mobilised by various stakeholders in post-colonial contexts (Hampson 2013; Ndlovu 2011). All in all, because they have permeated people’s natural, cultural and mental landscapes for such a long time, rock art sites not only raise the usual issues related to heritage-making process but also shed a revealing light on the relationships between stakeholders, space and time (Harvey 2001). The analysis of heritage-making process, i.e. the process through which a ‘spatial object’ becomes an ‘heritage object’ which social groups want to preserve through time, is directly connected to issues such as the interplay of participants at different levels (Ndoro and Pwiti 2001), local community involvement (Sullivan 2004), tourism management (Duval, Gauchon, and Smith 2017) and contents of promotion discourse (Mazel 2008), among others. In an applied prospect, one of the stakes is to define evolutionary balances between the various actors, in order to reconcile the diverse manners to perceive why and how an archaeological site makes sense (Waterton 2005). In their papers Ancila Nhamo and Paul Hubbard investigate the stakes of rock art management in the Zimbabwean context. While Ancila Nhamo proposes a global approach to rock art preservation issues in the country, Paul Hubbard digs into the history of rock art management in the Matobo Hills.

中文翻译：

---

客座社论

本期CMAS发行的三篇论文重点介绍了南部非洲岩石艺术遗址的管理。这不是巧合。他们从非洲考古学家学会第23届双年度会议（法国图卢兹，2016年）的``岩石艺术遗产和管理''特别会议（由梅拉妮·杜瓦尔和斯特凡·霍尔利组织）进行的讨论开始。本届会议的目的是研究岩石艺术遗址在多大程度上和哪些利益相关者是“文化遗产”，超越了保存，宣传和挪用的各种挑战。尽管已发表的论文涵盖了整个非洲大陆1，但大多数论文集中在南部非洲，在该主题下，似乎人们可以通过使用现有方法以及与多种用途相关的尖锐问题（家庭（笔），灵性（祖先的仪式），药用（用于药物的色素的使用），游客（露天场所的开发）。本期收集的论文对此进行了说明。Paul Hubbard和MélanieDuval等人的论文。最初是在2016 SAfA会议上介绍和讨论的。Ancila Nhamo的论文是在本期特刊撰写时提交的原始稿件。之所以加入该文件，是因为它提供了关于津巴布韦局势的另一种观点，并加深了我们对岩石艺术场地管理所面临的风险的理解。尽管这些论文的讨论基于津巴布韦和南非的经验，但许多国家面临着类似的挑战，尽管情况不同。因此，这三篇论文介绍了所有露天岩石艺术国家在岩石艺术管理和保护方面的一般性问题。全世界各地的岩石艺术遗址一直见证着复杂的遗产制作过程，这些过程涉及各种环境（Darvill和Fernandes 2014）和人为因素（Jopela 2011）。在非洲，岩画大多出现在容易到达的露天场所，而这些人为因素通常与多种用途相关联：家庭，精神，医学和/或游客。由于岩石艺术遗址与人们的历史以及活动和土地用途的演变有关（Pleurdeau et al。2012），今天，由于多种多样的文化和身份认同，这些因素变得更加复杂（Duval 2012）。后殖民背景下的利益相关者（Hampson 2013; Ndlovu 2011）。总而言之，因为它们已经渗透了人们很长时间的自然，文化和精神景观，岩石艺术遗址不仅提出了与遗产制作过程相关的常见问题，而且还揭示了利益相关者，空间和时间之间的关系（Harvey 2001）。对遗产创造过程的分析，即“空间对象”成为社会群体希望通过时间保存的“遗产对象”的过程，直接与诸如不同级别的参与者之间的相互作用等问题相关（Ndoro和普瓦蒂（2001），当地社区的参与（沙利文（Sullivan）2004），旅游业管理（杜瓦尔（Duval），高雄（Gauchon）和史密斯（Smith）2017）以及促销话语的内容（Mazel 2008）。在应用前景中，利益之一是定义各个参与者之间的进化平衡，以便调和以多种方式理解考古遗址为何以及如何有意义的方式（Waterton 2005）。Ancila Nhamo和Paul Hubbard在他们的论文中研究了津巴布韦语境中岩石艺术管理的重要性。虽然Ancila Nhamo提出了解决该国岩画保护问题的全球方法，但Paul Hubbard探究了马托波山（Matobo Hills）岩画管理的历史。