Zprávy památkové péče 2018, 78(1):24-29 | DOI: 10.56112/zpp.2018.1.05

General considerations on confidentiality as a protective tool in archeology

Balázs Komoróczy

ARÚB AV ČR

The idea of concealing archeological results in order to protect individual sites comes up occasionally in professional considerations. This is likely most often motivated by the desire to protect the site from amateur metal detector users. It is important, however, to duly reflect on whether any attempt at secrecy is realistic in the field of archeology, whether it is justifiable, and whether it really can bring any positive results.
It is impossible to identify any legal or social support for the attempt to maintain confidentiality from the general public. Archeology in the Czech Republic is predominantly publicly funded, and it is executed in institutions established by society and maintained in the public interest. Archeology, as a social science, should itself be interested in maximizing the awareness of the public, from whom any form of concealment protection is generally not necessary. On the contrary, all the protective tools that must be applied to certain archaeological sites (mostly immovable) are, in the interest of high transparency and awareness, significantly more enforceable, justifiable, and sustainable. The occasional unwanted threat posed to archaeological sites by the public is, or might be, the result of insufficient awareness.
At first glance, it may seem that secrecy can be a protective tool against metal detector users. A study of this scenario, which is based, among other things, on the results of an extensive questionnaire survey from early 2017, suggests that it is not even possible to achieve the desired result through secrecy. The amateur metal detector user community is highly active and receptive to archeology. In addition to the usual consumption of professional and promotional products, it also intensively exchanges information about specific sites as well as general knowledge of the field in a more or less laicized form. Like the rest of the public, it uses the virtually unconcealable digital world, but it does so very actively, on its own initiative and with highly motivated effort. This community is very adept at reading freely available aerial photographs and old maps, it knows how to use available versions of all possible lists of sites, it studies publicly accessible digital resources of professional texts, etc. At the same time, quite extensive cooperation between archaeological worksites and amateur metal detector users has developed in the Czech Republic in recent years, something which both parties consider to be a positive development.
Based on all the arguments, it can be said that confidentiality beyond the autonomous process of producing and publishing scientific results is irrelevant and lacks an identifiable positive impact on the condition and quality of the overwhelming majority of immovable and movable archaeological sites. On the contrary, a policy of transparency of archaeological work, open communication about professional activities, and public and easy identification of archaeological sites can be the only way to achieve the best possible awareness on the part of the public, including the various components of local, regional, and national authorities. The solution to the problems that a policy of secrecy is supposed to cure (damage and theft at archaeological sites) lies elsewhere.

Keywords: metal detectors, information confidentiality, disclosure of information, detector users, protection of archaeological heritage, public interest, archeology

Published: March 1, 2018  Show citation