This thesis investigates some of the impacts a ‘dictatorship’ can have on the management and uses of heritage sites. More specifically, it endeavours to examine how a dictator’s interests in certain heritage sites and particular territories can affect how heritage becomes preserved and promoted in both the medium and long-terms. The relationship between heritage and dictatorship has, arguably, been relatively under-studied compared to research on the nation-state. In recognising the importance of understanding how different political systems (in this case exemplified by dictatorial regimes) can have various and particular outcomes on heritage, this study will develop the concept of ‘Authorised Dictatorial Discourse’ (ADD) as an original contribution to the field of Heritage Studies. It stems from Laurajane Smith’s (2006) seminal works on Authorised Heritage Discourse and her argument about how authorities in the form of decision-making bodies have medium and long term impacts on the preservation and promotion of heritage sites and that this happens detached from the wider public. I argue that her concept is based on democratic political systems.

To develop the concept of ADD, South Korea’s Military Dictatorship Era (1961-1988) will be used as the central case study. The two dictators (Park Chung Hee and Chun Doo Hwan) orchestrated strictly controlled and very particular heritage and territory polices. Their authoritarian decisions debatably had profound impacts, making their cases very suitable for further analysis. To provide more detailed insights, this dissertation will analyse six heritage sites in terms of how they were targeted by the two dictators as tools of narrative constructions. These case studies will be used as an analytical lens to: 1) cast light on how and the extent to which the politics of heritage and the politics of territory were interlinked and influenced the management and uses of heritage, 2) reflect on the common pattern of heritage and territorial management during dictatorships, and 3) argue how the current AHD (Smith 2006) need to be problematised in terms of its remit.