‘Black Archaeology’ in Eastern Europe: Metal Detecting, Illicit Trafficking of Cultural Objects, and ‘Legal Nihilism’ in Belarus, Poland, Russia, and Ukraine

IF 0.8 4区 历史学 0 ARCHAEOLOGY
S. Hardy
{"title":"‘Black Archaeology’ in Eastern Europe: Metal Detecting, Illicit Trafficking of Cultural Objects, and ‘Legal Nihilism’ in Belarus, Poland, Russia, and Ukraine","authors":"S. Hardy","doi":"10.1080/14655187.2017.1410050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Across Eastern Europe, professional archaeologists and metal detectorists testify that some archaeological sites have been emptied of metal objects, despite significant efforts to combat illicit trafficking of cultural objects. Yet there is little empirical evidence in relation to the scale of the problem within countries or its comparative scale between countries in the region. This paper presents open-source analysis of membership of online forums and social networks, as well as other empirical indicators, such as sales and ownership of metal detectors. It identifies and contradicts speculation and propaganda from archaeologists and detectorists, then offers empirical evidence in their place. It suggests the activity of at least 14,910 illicit detectorists in Belarus (around 1 in 638 residents), 54,066 illicit detectorists in Poland (around 1 in 702 residents), 26,377 illicit detectorists in Ukraine (around 1 in 1706 residents) and 75,158 illicit detectorists in Russia (around 1 in 1921 residents). It suggests that, in many of the worst-affected communities, above and beyond the technicalities of permissive, restrictive, or prohibitive regulation, the most important factors in the preservation of archaeological knowledge may be the economy and the rule of law.","PeriodicalId":45023,"journal":{"name":"Public Archaeology","volume":"15 1","pages":"214 - 237"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14655187.2017.1410050","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Archaeology","FirstCategoryId":"1090","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14655187.2017.1410050","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHAEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

Abstract

Across Eastern Europe, professional archaeologists and metal detectorists testify that some archaeological sites have been emptied of metal objects, despite significant efforts to combat illicit trafficking of cultural objects. Yet there is little empirical evidence in relation to the scale of the problem within countries or its comparative scale between countries in the region. This paper presents open-source analysis of membership of online forums and social networks, as well as other empirical indicators, such as sales and ownership of metal detectors. It identifies and contradicts speculation and propaganda from archaeologists and detectorists, then offers empirical evidence in their place. It suggests the activity of at least 14,910 illicit detectorists in Belarus (around 1 in 638 residents), 54,066 illicit detectorists in Poland (around 1 in 702 residents), 26,377 illicit detectorists in Ukraine (around 1 in 1706 residents) and 75,158 illicit detectorists in Russia (around 1 in 1921 residents). It suggests that, in many of the worst-affected communities, above and beyond the technicalities of permissive, restrictive, or prohibitive regulation, the most important factors in the preservation of archaeological knowledge may be the economy and the rule of law.
东欧的“黑色考古”:白俄罗斯、波兰、俄罗斯和乌克兰的金属探测、文物非法贩运和“法律虚无主义”
在整个东欧,专业考古学家和金属探测器证实,尽管为打击非法贩运文物作出了重大努力,但一些考古遗址的金属物品已被掏空。然而,几乎没有经验证据表明这一问题在国家内部的规模或在该区域各国之间的比较规模。本文介绍了在线论坛和社交网络成员的开源分析,以及其他经验指标,如金属探测器的销售和所有权。它识别并反驳考古学家和侦探家的猜测和宣传,然后提供经验证据来代替他们。它表明在白俄罗斯至少有14910名非法侦探(大约每638名居民中有1名),在波兰有54066名非法侦探(大约每702名居民中有1名),在乌克兰有26377名非法侦探(大约每1706名居民中有1名),在俄罗斯有75158名非法侦探(大约每1921名居民中有1名)。它表明,在许多受影响最严重的社区,除了允许、限制或禁止监管的技术细节之外,保护考古知识的最重要因素可能是经济和法治。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Public Archaeology
Public Archaeology ARCHAEOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信