A report on the Sudan Memory digitization project recommends practical measures for preserving cultural heritage when conflict, instability and climate change threaten physical collections. Its findings are based on 14 interviews with people who contributed to the project.
Titled “Digital heritage preservation for vulnerable collections: Reflections on the Sudan Memory project history and inventory,” the report was written by Laura Gibson of King’s College London, independent researcher and editor Sara El-Nager, and Hannah Ishmael, also of King’s. The report examines Sudan Memory, described as the first mass digitization project undertaken in Sudan.
Since 2013, the project has digitized approximately 148,000 items of Sudanese cultural heritage. These include photographs, manuscripts, museum objects, audio and film, as well as a three-dimensional interactive model of historic Suakin Island. The initiative was led by Marilyn Deegan of King’s College London’s Department of Digital Humanities, working with Sudanese and international partner institutions.
The project’s role has become more urgent since war began in Sudan in April 2023. The source report says looting and destruction have affected institutions including the National Museum and Khalifa House Museum. Sudanese contributors emphasized that documentation can preserve information about people, places and everyday life as well as individual objects. Ikram Madani Ahmed, director of the Natural History Museum at the University of Khartoum, said digital records could provide material from which physical collections might eventually be rebuilt if they are lost.
The report identifies five priorities for digitization projects in crisis settings. Institutions should emphasize training and mentoring so local expertise can continue beyond individual funding periods; establish trust with collection holders, especially over ownership and access; and design projects to be flexible, mobile and decentralized in anticipation of instability.
The authors also recommend recording oral histories and contextual information alongside physical objects. Finally, they argue that projects should use a context-appropriate “good enough” standard rather than allowing ideal technical benchmarks to delay documentation.
The authors hope lessons from Sudan Memory will assist institutions and agencies working with threatened collections elsewhere. They also say the recommendations could contribute to future transitional-justice and post-conflict reconstruction efforts.
