TEHIC-Handbook_of_best_practices

5. Heritage interpretation and university education 73 and social sciences or, indeed, from natural sciences or any other field of knowledge. Furthermore, and in order to illustrate this better, within humanities it might be history, history of art, anthropology/ethnology and so on, very similar to diverse social or natural sciences sub-fields where heritage issues and, accordingly, heritage interpretation might appear as being not only a relevant cross-boundary (inter/multi) field of study but sometimes as the key one. Higher education identified as the post-secondary education (i.e., as third-level, or tertiary education) is, by definition, an optional final stage of formal learning that occurs after completion of secondary education. Third-level education consists of university, college and polytechnic academic programmes that offer formal degrees after high school or secondary school. How does heritage interpretation stand on it, today and historically? We could track some activities all the way back to the Roman Empire or even to earli - er times which today might be seen as heritage interpretation. David C. Harvey, in his influential article ‘Heritage pasts and heritage presents: Temporality, meaning and the scope of heritage studies’ (2001, 323) says: “heritage has always been with us and has always been produced by people according to their contemporary concerns and experi - ences. Consequently, we should explore the history of heritage, not by starting at an arbitrary date like 1882, but by producing a context-rich account of heritage as a process or a human condition rather than as a single movement or personal project”. Also, Peter Howard in his book ‘Heritage: Management, Interpretation, Identity’, published in 2003, deals with the idea that heritage can actually be whatever we want it to be, and that the existence of such a wish is key to any heritage related process: “… things actually inher - ited do not become heritage until they are recognised as such. Identification is all.” (Howard 2003, 6). While the first quotation reminds us of the importance of time and context, the second one is closer to the topic we are addressing here. Heritage only exists once it has gained recognition and identification, which is a sort of interpretation of heritage (basically what is heritage or what it is not heritage, and why so). While ‘interpretation of heritage’ is not the same thing as what we mean by heritage interpretation both are, we might say, fully dependant. If someone is not aware of how heritage is created/constructed (and how it could be destroyed/deconstructed) he/she will have more challenges to research complex and/or deeper meanings that heritage is possible to transcend. By saying this we do not want to undermine the work of numerous heritage interpreters (tourist, museum, park guides) who are doing their job in this field extremely well. Our point is: heritage interpretation is much more complex (a field of study) than the way it is often presented. Or, to be clearer, making a simple comparison: if we want to broadcast a classical concert, a radio or TV company not only needs to have an educated musicologist who knows the structure of compositions but that person must