Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Recognising built heritage solely through its physical fabric has long been recognised as a constraint on heritage interpretation. In the Indian context, everyday heritage places revered by resident communities often appear architecturally insignificant and mundane. Although mapping these structures is a preliminary step in heritage conservation management and planning, when it comes to recognising them as “everyday” built heritage, there is a gap. Building on the well-established method of using geospatially co-ordinated historical maps to identify archaeological heritage, this article explores maps as a source for identifying everyday built heritage in the Malaprabha River Valley, Karnataka, India. This exploratory study uses standardised topographic maps published by the Survey of India in the early twentieth century CE. Field validation of the map features highlighted the need to read the built environment in its spatial context and to understand how each identified heritage structure existed within a network. In the process, the article foregrounds the need to engage critically with maps’ subjectivities as a source and with mapping as a process that represents an ideal for a more informed understanding of heritage in its spatial context.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kuili Suganya (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: