Preventive archaeology and archaeological service in Slovenia

Regeszeti kotet:Regeszeti kötet 2007.10.31 15:33 Page 181 PREVENTIVE ARCHAEOLOGY AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SERVICE IN SLOVENIA BOJAN DJURIĆ For a better understanding of the context in which archaeological service is organized in Slovenia let us first give some general information. The territory of Slovenia measures 20,254 km2 with 1,965,986 inhabitants dispersed in 198 communes, with an average population density of 98 persons per km2. A regional division of the territory is in the planning stages. Geographically, Slovenia is characterised by a high degree of diversity, which has had a great impact throughout history on the settlement pattern and, consequently, on the density of the archaeological remains. The field of archaeology is divided into four areas: Scientific research, conducted by the Institute of Archaeology at the Scientific Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts (http://www.zrc-sazu.si/iza/En/pageloader.html?Naslov_IZA.html) with 14 archaeologists, financed by the Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology; I Education and scientific research, conducted by (a) the Department of Archaeology (from 1951, http://arheologija.ff.uni-lj.si/si_index.html) at the Faculty of Arts of the University of Ljubljana with 10 professors and assistant professors and by (b) the Faculty of Humanities of Koper at the University of Primorska (from 2006; http://www.upr.si/en/) and its Institute for Mediterranean Heritage at the Science and Research Centre of Koper (http://www.zrs-kp.si/EN/home.htm) with 1 professor and 1 assistant professor. Both universities are financed by the Ministry of Higher Education, Science and Technology; I Protection of movable archaeological heritage, maintained in the National Museum of Slovenia (http://www.narmuz-lj.si/), with 7 archaeologists, and in 14 regional and other museums in 14 regional centres, with 23 archaeologists. All museums are presently financed by the Ministry of Culture; I Protection of non-movable archaeological heritage, conducted by the Institute for the Protection of Cultural Heritage of Slovenia with its head office in Ljubljana (http://www.zvkds.si/; no archaeologist employed) I 181 Regeszeti kotet:Regeszeti kötet 2007.10.31 15:33 Page 182 BOJAN DJURIĆ and 7 regional offices, in which 14 archaeologists are employed. It is financed by the Ministry of Culture. At the Ministry of Culture, the Directorate for Cultural Heritage (http://www.mk.gov.si/en/working_areas/cultural_heritage/; no archaeologist employed) is responsible for the real estate and movable heritage as well as the archives. The Directorate also incorporates the extremely important Heritage Information and Documentation Centre (http://www.mk.gov.si/si/delovna_podrocja/kulturna_dediscina/indok_ center/; with 1 archaeologist in a junior position) with its Register of real estate (non-movable) monuments. Supervision of the performance of statutory and regulative provisions in the area of culture (and media) is provided by the Inspectorate of the Republic of Slovenia for Culture and Media, a body incorporated within the Ministry. In the last decade, four private archaeological companies were established working exclusively in the area of field research, and circa 20 freelance archaeologists are engaged in different field or other research activities. 182 Legislation concerning preventive archaeology There is no specific archaeological legislation in Slovenia and preventive archaeology is included into the general legislation on cultural heritage protection. Some principles of the European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage (hereinafter Valletta Convention) (ratified in 1999) were observed in the specific Cultural Heritage Protection Act adopted in 1999. This Act is still in force and it defines: the concept of cultural heritage (and archaeological heritage within it), heritage protection and its fundamental aims, its legal status, the activities of public services and public offices, and the defined execution of heritage protection activities; it also identifies the Institute for Cultural Heritage Protection as the sole legally competent institution for conducting preventive and rescue archaeology and enshrines the Polluter Pays Principle for (known) archaeological sites. The demand for the inclusion of specialist guidelines (issued by the Institute for the Protection of Cultural of Heritage) is particularly important as an obligatory part of spatial impact assessment in acts related to all planning legislation. The dependant executive act of this legislation (from 2000) is the Regulations for Issuing Permission for Archaeological Research. Permits are issued by the acting minister through a special commission composed of representatives of all four archaeological areas described above. For the implementation of preventive archaeology principles, the spatial/environmental legislation (Environment Protection Act – 2004, Spa- Regeszeti kotet:Regeszeti kötet 2007.10.31 15:33 Page 183 PREVENTIVE ARCHAEOLOGY AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SERVICE IN SLOVENIA tial Planning Act – 2003, Construction of Buildings Act – 2004) and the spatial legislation at the state, regional, and local levels (Spatial Development Strategy of Slovenia – 2004, Spatial Order for Slovenia – 2004, Spatial Order for Communities, state/communal location plan) are of crucial importance. Because of strong material interests, cultural heritage protection, still understood as an obstacle to development processes, is only slowly attaining an adequate position in this sector. Preventive archaeology In spite of the Valletta Convention having been ratified, preventive archaeology is primarily understood (1) as a fieldwork-research activity in non-archaeological conditions (salvage and rescue excavations) and (2) as a prevention activity in the sense of diverting developer interventions on known sites (a scale of three protection regimes is used for three different degrees of site protection). The general attitude towards the protection of archaeological heritage in the service is not proactive but passive. Today “preventive” archaeology covers more than 90% of all field archaeology activities and is understood almost exclusively in the sense of archaeological excavation. Salvage and rescue excavations were undertaken mainly by the museums until the mid- 1980’s, when the newly established service for the protection of cultural heritage took over the responsibility. Today the duties of the service comprise: On known archaeological sites (2,158), registered in the Heritage Information and Documentation Centre, diversion through protection regimes, salvage excavation prior to construction intervention, watching briefs and rescue excavation during construction, site scheduling and the formation of reserves and parks. I In the planning process the service has administrative duties (conditions and concordances to planning permission), documentation duties (updating site and monument records), and executive duties (excavations, surveys, watching briefs). I At the moment the planning legislation has a strong impact on the planning process, but there are attempts to slowly change this in the direction of the developers’ interests. A growing number of formal complaints against the conditions issued to planning permissions, which are settled favourably at the ministry, are a clear sign of the future negative development of the sector. It is also obvious that a mere 14 archaeologists cannot cope adequately with all the various duties resulting from the existing act. This creates at 183 Regeszeti kotet:Regeszeti kötet 2007.10.31 15:33 Page 184 BOJAN DJURIĆ least two main problems: (1) a growing number of unpublished archaeological archives (more than 1000 for the 1950-2001 period) and (2) a situation in which most of the registered archaeological sites are only vaguely defined and assessed (as a consequence, the quality of the information issued by the Heritage Information and Documentation Centre is questioned by the developers). Another problem that can be added to these two is that protection in terms of salvage and rescue excavations (on the basis of the European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage (London Convention) from 1969) generated and still generates work-intensive situations and conflicts in which normal working conditions are rare. 184 The system of this work-intensive activity cannot and does not keep up with methodological innovations in the realm of protection and is not familiar with the theoretical starting points for the changes in the field of prevention. This only takes place in the educational section of the academic sphere, which, however, does not have special education programmes. There is also no systematic orientation towards reserves or park protection, although isolated individual initiatives do exist. There is, however, a climate of general discouragement within the service, which gives privileged status to the standing building heritage. No identified archaeological remains It is well-known that almost all registered archaeological sites and areas are a result of various destructive actions and processes and not of planned and systematic field surveys prior to various development actions. Some academic projects of topographical character, conducted in the last fifty or more years, have their own priorities and are not concentrated on endangered areas. In terms of archaeological heritage policies, they can only be of supplemental character. Meanwhile in the service, dominated by art historians and architects, the prevailing general opinion is still that there is no need for a systematic assessment of the archaeological potential of areas under development. There is actually no legislative background for systematic archaeological surveying, no proposed partial strategies and no general strategy within the service for dealing with unknown unidentified archaeological remains. On the other hand, developer-funded impact assessment projects exist from at least 1994 in the motorway project as the first of such projects. The methodology of archaeological survey used on this project influenced most later projects (hydroelectric dams, state roads, mineral extraction areas, shopping and industrial zones, housing development areas, etc.). Its re- Regeszeti kotet:Regeszeti kötet 2007.10.31 15:33 Page 185 PREVENTIVE ARCHAEOLOGY AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SERVICE IN SLOVENIA sults not only indicate the biased nature of the existing archaeological spatial paradigm in Slovenia, but also show clearly that 100 newly identified sites in the 250 km long and 50 m wide corridor (=12.5 km2), extrapolated to two thirds of the surface area of Slovenia (20,254 km2 with 13,502 km2 of territory where settlement is possible) suggests the existence of at least 108,000 archaeological sites, of which only 2,158 are registered at present. The methodological innovations used in this project have brought about a dramatic increase in the number/density and extent of known sites, which the existing legislation and organisation of the service cannot handle without a new conceptualisation and reorganisation as well as changes in the methodological standards. On the other hand, it also resulted in a new awareness and resistance on the part of the developers to the changing standards of protection, perceiving the archaeological heritage as the cause of greatly increased development costs. At the moment, the service (together with the Ministry of Culture) has to make a specialist and political decision to either reorganise its structure and accept new theoretical and organisational concepts and methodological standards in preventive archaeology (diverting through planning against rescuing through excavation; separation of administrative and executive duties; systematic funding of spatial assessment; standardization of research methods and techniques) or to consciously retain the existing legislation, inadequate working structure and existing methodological standards at the expense of archaeological heritage so as not to burden the national economy. October 2007 185