The issue of publishing information in archeology
can be divided into two areas: sharing archaeol... more The issue of publishing information in archeology can be divided into two areas: sharing archaeological data from field research and publishing information on archaeological sites. Archaeological information implicitly reveals something about mankind in general, about its development, skills, cooperation, aesthetic feelings, and values. Similarly, it implicitly reveals something about society and its organization. The point is to interpret this implicit knowledge in order to express it explicitly in archeology to other relevant sciences to their benefit, but also to serve society through heritage practice. Sharing archaeological data contained in findings with other experts is a prerequisite for a successfully emerging field, not only from a historical but primarily from a scientific perspective. Arguments to the contrary lead to the negation of the meaning of archeology as the discovery of the history of mankind and turn archeology back from a scientific field into an art. In a society which declares that caring for archaeological heritage is in the public interest, it is difficult to keep archaeological sites secret from the public for the purpose of protecting them, unless such confidentiality is provided for by law. Instead, the problem of unauthorized excavations using metal detectors should be addressed, and a clear boundary should be defined between legal and illegal detector exploration. In order for the repression of illegal exploration to be effective, enabling the concerned public to participate in the protection of public archaeological heritage is essential, among other things through the publication of spatial data about archaeological sites. Archaeological finds, monuments, and sites are not just artifacts, meaning merely the items and the locations where these items are found. Objects are not simply objects – they have a deeper meaning. When an archaeologist carries out field research in a particular location, he/she contributes to the knowledge of the past in general and to the site in particular, or to both of them together. Archaeological research thus alters the environment which is not only material, but is also historical and meaningful, that is, in the human consciousness. It affects the minds of people living there. This creates a local environment that can become more attractive than before. Heritage archeology, respectively public archeology, brings something new to archeology as a whole, something that other disciplines cannot do so well. By publishing and, respectively, sharing relevant site information with the public (with those interested in this sharing), archeology contributes to the creation of the living environment, both in terms of substance and importance in the minds of people.
Almost forgotten paper from 1991, published shortly after the velvet revolution in Czechoslovakia... more Almost forgotten paper from 1991, published shortly after the velvet revolution in Czechoslovakia, which presents opinion of 10 specialist about "Celtic invasion". Paper in Czech represents broad spectrum of statements surprisingly very close to current studies of migration phenomenon. - Téměř zapomenutý článek - anketa, publikovaná krátce po sametové revoluci v Československu, která přináší názor deseti specialistů pro laténské období nebo archeologických teoretiků na problém "keltské invaze". Článek v čestině reprezentuje široké spektrum tehdejších názorů na problematiku migrací, která je opět v centru pozornosti současného bádání.
Publikace zpracovává aktuální problematiku péče o archeologické dědictví a hospodaření s ním. Roz... more Publikace zpracovává aktuální problematiku péče o archeologické dědictví a hospodaření s ním. Rozebírá platné právní normy relevantní pro archeologii a zabývá se jimi z hlediska archeologické praxe. Zvláštní zřetel je kladen na archeologický projekt, smluvní archeologii, ale také na srovnání domácí praxe se zahraničím.
Předmětem publikace je výzkum vesnic zaniklých po roce 1945 a archeologické transformace těchto v... more Předmětem publikace je výzkum vesnic zaniklých po roce 1945 a archeologické transformace těchto vesnic a jejich areálů v prostoru Novohradských hor a jejich podhůří. Sledované období je vymezeno na jedné straně rokem 1945 na druhé straně současností, respektive přibližně rokem 2011.
The topic of the presented paper finds itself on the border of archaeology, historiography and he... more The topic of the presented paper finds itself on the border of archaeology, historiography and heritage studies. We compare the circumstances of the complete or partial extinction of settlements in the former Czechoslovak borderland after 1945 in connection with the events that followed the end of World War II. The comparison concerns two areas that lie at opposite e nds of today‘s Czech Republic. The comparison is based on three North Bohemian settlements: Hohenwald (High, Vysoký), Hoffnungstahl (Valley of Hope, Údolí Naděje) and Strickerhäuser (Clearings, Mýtiny) located near the border with Poland. We compare them with villages in the Gratzener Berglands (Novohradské Mountains, Novohradské hory) in the very south of Bohemia near the border with Austria.
The Early Medieval settlement at Roztoky (Prague-west district, Central Bohemia) represents an ex... more The Early Medieval settlement at Roztoky (Prague-west district, Central Bohemia) represents an extraordinary case and, at the same time, a difficult challenge in terms of interpretation among sites of the Prague-type Culture (6th–7th century AD). Primarily, the high overall number of settlement features of the given culture is what makes this site unique and puzzling. To date, more than 300 sunken houses of this culture have been captured at the site (with an area size of min. 22 ha) and their overall number can be estimated as being at least double this amount. On the one hand, the site is specific also by its landscape setting (at the base of a canyon-like valley) and by its discontinuity in relation to the preceding and the following periods. On the other hand, the site lacks finds that would allow for a clear interpretation in terms of its function (e.g. production features, tools or waste materials, luxury goods, etc.). Finds of the Prague-type Culture were first discovered at ...
Papers presented at the Current Trends in Archaeological Heritage Preservation conference, Romani... more Papers presented at the Current Trends in Archaeological Heritage Preservation conference, Romania, 2013. This publication is meant to disseminate to an audience as wide as possible the latest work of those working in the field and to promote the latest trends in the protection and management of the archaeological heritage.
Úvod k publikaci příspěvků ze stejnojmenné konference se zabývá postavením archeologie v současné... more Úvod k publikaci příspěvků ze stejnojmenné konference se zabývá postavením archeologie v současné společnosti, otázkou archeologie jako prostředku obživy i vztahem záchranné archeologie a akademického výzkumu.
Krátký příspěvek se zabývá pojetím termínu "preventivní archeologie" v různých evropských zemích ... more Krátký příspěvek se zabývá pojetím termínu "preventivní archeologie" v různých evropských zemích a jazycích ve vztahu a tím, jak se tento termín používá v české archeologii.
Since 1995, when first call for new division of labour in Czech archaeology was published, the ta... more Since 1995, when first call for new division of labour in Czech archaeology was published, the task has not been resolved until today. In last nearly three decades of renewed democratic development, there was no attempt to establish in Czech archaeology something similar to British system “Curator – contractor – client – consultant” and separate those who makes decisions from those who realise them. Duties and responsibilities in archaeological heritage management hugely overlaps into contract archaeology mainly in cases of Archaeological Institute of the Academy of Sciences and National Heritage Institute. One can never be sure if decisions of the two mentioned institutions are made in the name of the public benefit or in the name of the benefit of those institutions themselves. In contrast, one of the above mentioned institutions, which are in the apparent clash of interests, the Archaeological Institute of the Academy of Sciences, labels pejoratively independent archaeological units as commercial archaeologists, although having it´s own commercial interests within the archaeology, and tolerates without dispute commercial interests of other public archaeological institutions as museums. The article´s main concern is to advocate independent archaeological units in the Czech Republic, which are registered entirely as non-profit charities, and their roots go back to 1990s. In that time Czech archaeological units reacted on the weakness and misconception of not yet reformed public archaeological institutions, with the aim to implement rapidly new and fresh ideas and approach in archaeological heritage management. Although the private sector in Czech archaeology went through it´s own development, and the situation nowadays is not the same as in 1990s, we argue that due it´s specific origins, Czech archaeological units are source of non-conform ideas rather than simply commercial companies.
The idea of the presentation of excavations in Prague Modřany came up from the developer´s enviro... more The idea of the presentation of excavations in Prague Modřany came up from the developer´s environment. The archaeological contractor Archeo Pro, public benefit company,has prepared the professional design of the project and participated in logistic and organisation. The project was labelled simply “Bronze Age”. Developer offered mainly project funding, although took part on the project designing as well. Third partner in the project has been the municipality of Prague 12 city quarter. Their engagement was focused on logistic, organisation and promotion. The project consisted from the exhibition of artefact´s replicas from the excavation in the picturesque newly reconstructed vineyard house from 18th century, school children competition on their view on Bronze age Modřany, opening festival on the ground of vineyard house and publication of the informational brochure on the topic of archaeology of Modřany in Bronze age and actual excavations. An artist imagination of the actually excavated Bronze Age site based on the archaeological record became an exhibition highlight as well as prehistoric like band Altsteinzeitliche Knochenklangbilder was a star of the Sunday afternoon opening feast. The project “Bronze Age” is an example of the community event for local people focused entirely on archaeology and based outside the museum.
Ochrana státní hranice v padesátých letech 20. století, 2017
Archaeological picture of the border zone in the Novohradské Mountains. The paper addresses the i... more Archaeological picture of the border zone in the Novohradské Mountains. The paper addresses the issue pf protection of the state border in the 1950´s from the point of view of archaeology of contemporary past. On several cases of extinct settlements in Novohradské Mountains and their foohills, the paper explores the consequences of the formation of the prohibited area and the border zone on the settlement pattern of the area. observed in the wider context of other historical events (in particular the expulsionl of the German-speaking population and the collectivisation of agriculure). At the end of the paper, a hypothesis was formulated on the basis of the monitoring of archaeologically documented demolitions, according to which the creation of the prohibited and border zones was motivated by propaganda. The aim of the communist propaganda was to manipulate historical consciousness and let people forget about previously lively and economically prosperous borders. However, this assignment does not appear in period documents. It is replaced by more rational arguments, including border surveillance.
This volume gathers most of the papers presented at the conference, and its publication is meant ... more This volume gathers most of the papers presented at the conference, and its publication is meant to disseminate to an audience as wide as possible the latest work of those working in the field and to promote the latest trends in the protection and management of the archaeological heritage. the international conference Current trends in archaeological heritage preservation: National and International Perspectives, which took place in Iași between the 6th and the 10th of November 2013. The event was organized by the Iași Institute of Archaeology in partnership with the European Association of Archaeologists, the ”Alexandru Ioan Cuza” University of Iași, the ”Moldova” National Museum Complex from Iași, and the National Museum of Romanian History from Bucharest. The conference was attended by over 50 experts in the protection and management of archaeological heritage from Germany, 10 Netherlands, Australia, USA, UK, Czech Republic, India, Azerbaijan, Portugal, Russia, Poland, Spain, Bra...
UNKNOWN AIR RAID SHELTER IN PRAGUE 6-BUBENEČ This article presents a recent archaeological find o... more UNKNOWN AIR RAID SHELTER IN PRAGUE 6-BUBENEČ This article presents a recent archaeological find of an unknown subterranean air raid shelter in Prague Bubeneč, with preserved original furniture and technologies including a filter device against fighting gases. This shelter was originally connected with a currently partially blocked corridor leading to a neighbouring house. Bulgarian graffiti from 1954-1972 were found on the walls. Among other artefacts, two unusual tin disc items were found, with Chinese signs. Interpretation of the archaeological finds, based on an extensive archive research, enabled to give a date of the origins and use of the shelter to the period of the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia.
In March and April of 2008, the company Archeo Pro o. p. s. carried out a development led excavat... more In March and April of 2008, the company Archeo Pro o. p. s. carried out a development led excavation in Sokolovská Street 11, in the western part of the cadastral area of Karlín in Prague 8, parcel of land no. 201/2 (after the completion of the building, the parcel of land got a new number – 201/1), where house no. 204 stands. The excavation revealed a remarkably well-preserved situation representing an insight into the historical development of Špitálsko or Zábransko, the territory of the suburbs of the New Town of Prague, right behind its gates (Fig. 1–4). The first archaeologically noticeable traces of human presence in this area date from the close of the Middle Ages, from the second half of the 14th to the first half of the 15th century. The territory was then not very intensively but continuously exploited until the early 17th century. Three development horizons have been identified based on archaeological findings for the period from the second half of the 14th to the early 17th century (Fig. 18). The genesis of layers from all post medieval and early modern chronological horizons cannot be determined and the interpretation of sunken features is also uncertain, perhaps with the exception of one cesspit from the chronological horizon of the 16th/early 17th century. The sunken features are simple pits. Some of them can be interpreted as waste pits, simply based on a larger quantity of ceramic and other material (bone plates with holes) in them. Organic materials have not survived due to the nature of the subsoil (sand). The intensity of use and the nature of the layers and sunken features thus testify to the use of the lot as a farmyard (hinterland for various agricultural and residential activities) or possibly a garden. However, there is no evidence of its real residential function during the early modern period, which is quite logical as the excavation area is situated deep in the lot and not next to a road (today’s Sokolovská Street), where activities associated with housing are to be expected. There are no proofs of the use of the lot from the early 17th to the end of the 18th century. This might have been caused by the fact that the top layers of the preserved surface had been removed in later periods (19th century), but the most probable explanation is based on historiographical sources. It can be deduced from written and iconographic sources that Zábransko was desolated during the Thirty Years’ War – it was pillaged at its very beginning. Houses in the excavation area were not rebuilt after that and the first small building next to the street line is documented as late as 1842.
Glasfunde aus der letzten Forschungsphase der Siedlung bei St. Peterskirche in der Strasse Na Po... more Glasfunde aus der letzten Forschungsphase der Siedlung bei St. Peterskirche in der Strasse Na Poříčí in Prag
The issue of publishing information in archeology
can be divided into two areas: sharing archaeol... more The issue of publishing information in archeology can be divided into two areas: sharing archaeological data from field research and publishing information on archaeological sites. Archaeological information implicitly reveals something about mankind in general, about its development, skills, cooperation, aesthetic feelings, and values. Similarly, it implicitly reveals something about society and its organization. The point is to interpret this implicit knowledge in order to express it explicitly in archeology to other relevant sciences to their benefit, but also to serve society through heritage practice. Sharing archaeological data contained in findings with other experts is a prerequisite for a successfully emerging field, not only from a historical but primarily from a scientific perspective. Arguments to the contrary lead to the negation of the meaning of archeology as the discovery of the history of mankind and turn archeology back from a scientific field into an art. In a society which declares that caring for archaeological heritage is in the public interest, it is difficult to keep archaeological sites secret from the public for the purpose of protecting them, unless such confidentiality is provided for by law. Instead, the problem of unauthorized excavations using metal detectors should be addressed, and a clear boundary should be defined between legal and illegal detector exploration. In order for the repression of illegal exploration to be effective, enabling the concerned public to participate in the protection of public archaeological heritage is essential, among other things through the publication of spatial data about archaeological sites. Archaeological finds, monuments, and sites are not just artifacts, meaning merely the items and the locations where these items are found. Objects are not simply objects – they have a deeper meaning. When an archaeologist carries out field research in a particular location, he/she contributes to the knowledge of the past in general and to the site in particular, or to both of them together. Archaeological research thus alters the environment which is not only material, but is also historical and meaningful, that is, in the human consciousness. It affects the minds of people living there. This creates a local environment that can become more attractive than before. Heritage archeology, respectively public archeology, brings something new to archeology as a whole, something that other disciplines cannot do so well. By publishing and, respectively, sharing relevant site information with the public (with those interested in this sharing), archeology contributes to the creation of the living environment, both in terms of substance and importance in the minds of people.
Almost forgotten paper from 1991, published shortly after the velvet revolution in Czechoslovakia... more Almost forgotten paper from 1991, published shortly after the velvet revolution in Czechoslovakia, which presents opinion of 10 specialist about "Celtic invasion". Paper in Czech represents broad spectrum of statements surprisingly very close to current studies of migration phenomenon. - Téměř zapomenutý článek - anketa, publikovaná krátce po sametové revoluci v Československu, která přináší názor deseti specialistů pro laténské období nebo archeologických teoretiků na problém "keltské invaze". Článek v čestině reprezentuje široké spektrum tehdejších názorů na problematiku migrací, která je opět v centru pozornosti současného bádání.
Publikace zpracovává aktuální problematiku péče o archeologické dědictví a hospodaření s ním. Roz... more Publikace zpracovává aktuální problematiku péče o archeologické dědictví a hospodaření s ním. Rozebírá platné právní normy relevantní pro archeologii a zabývá se jimi z hlediska archeologické praxe. Zvláštní zřetel je kladen na archeologický projekt, smluvní archeologii, ale také na srovnání domácí praxe se zahraničím.
Předmětem publikace je výzkum vesnic zaniklých po roce 1945 a archeologické transformace těchto v... more Předmětem publikace je výzkum vesnic zaniklých po roce 1945 a archeologické transformace těchto vesnic a jejich areálů v prostoru Novohradských hor a jejich podhůří. Sledované období je vymezeno na jedné straně rokem 1945 na druhé straně současností, respektive přibližně rokem 2011.
The topic of the presented paper finds itself on the border of archaeology, historiography and he... more The topic of the presented paper finds itself on the border of archaeology, historiography and heritage studies. We compare the circumstances of the complete or partial extinction of settlements in the former Czechoslovak borderland after 1945 in connection with the events that followed the end of World War II. The comparison concerns two areas that lie at opposite e nds of today‘s Czech Republic. The comparison is based on three North Bohemian settlements: Hohenwald (High, Vysoký), Hoffnungstahl (Valley of Hope, Údolí Naděje) and Strickerhäuser (Clearings, Mýtiny) located near the border with Poland. We compare them with villages in the Gratzener Berglands (Novohradské Mountains, Novohradské hory) in the very south of Bohemia near the border with Austria.
The Early Medieval settlement at Roztoky (Prague-west district, Central Bohemia) represents an ex... more The Early Medieval settlement at Roztoky (Prague-west district, Central Bohemia) represents an extraordinary case and, at the same time, a difficult challenge in terms of interpretation among sites of the Prague-type Culture (6th–7th century AD). Primarily, the high overall number of settlement features of the given culture is what makes this site unique and puzzling. To date, more than 300 sunken houses of this culture have been captured at the site (with an area size of min. 22 ha) and their overall number can be estimated as being at least double this amount. On the one hand, the site is specific also by its landscape setting (at the base of a canyon-like valley) and by its discontinuity in relation to the preceding and the following periods. On the other hand, the site lacks finds that would allow for a clear interpretation in terms of its function (e.g. production features, tools or waste materials, luxury goods, etc.). Finds of the Prague-type Culture were first discovered at ...
Papers presented at the Current Trends in Archaeological Heritage Preservation conference, Romani... more Papers presented at the Current Trends in Archaeological Heritage Preservation conference, Romania, 2013. This publication is meant to disseminate to an audience as wide as possible the latest work of those working in the field and to promote the latest trends in the protection and management of the archaeological heritage.
Úvod k publikaci příspěvků ze stejnojmenné konference se zabývá postavením archeologie v současné... more Úvod k publikaci příspěvků ze stejnojmenné konference se zabývá postavením archeologie v současné společnosti, otázkou archeologie jako prostředku obživy i vztahem záchranné archeologie a akademického výzkumu.
Krátký příspěvek se zabývá pojetím termínu "preventivní archeologie" v různých evropských zemích ... more Krátký příspěvek se zabývá pojetím termínu "preventivní archeologie" v různých evropských zemích a jazycích ve vztahu a tím, jak se tento termín používá v české archeologii.
Since 1995, when first call for new division of labour in Czech archaeology was published, the ta... more Since 1995, when first call for new division of labour in Czech archaeology was published, the task has not been resolved until today. In last nearly three decades of renewed democratic development, there was no attempt to establish in Czech archaeology something similar to British system “Curator – contractor – client – consultant” and separate those who makes decisions from those who realise them. Duties and responsibilities in archaeological heritage management hugely overlaps into contract archaeology mainly in cases of Archaeological Institute of the Academy of Sciences and National Heritage Institute. One can never be sure if decisions of the two mentioned institutions are made in the name of the public benefit or in the name of the benefit of those institutions themselves. In contrast, one of the above mentioned institutions, which are in the apparent clash of interests, the Archaeological Institute of the Academy of Sciences, labels pejoratively independent archaeological units as commercial archaeologists, although having it´s own commercial interests within the archaeology, and tolerates without dispute commercial interests of other public archaeological institutions as museums. The article´s main concern is to advocate independent archaeological units in the Czech Republic, which are registered entirely as non-profit charities, and their roots go back to 1990s. In that time Czech archaeological units reacted on the weakness and misconception of not yet reformed public archaeological institutions, with the aim to implement rapidly new and fresh ideas and approach in archaeological heritage management. Although the private sector in Czech archaeology went through it´s own development, and the situation nowadays is not the same as in 1990s, we argue that due it´s specific origins, Czech archaeological units are source of non-conform ideas rather than simply commercial companies.
The idea of the presentation of excavations in Prague Modřany came up from the developer´s enviro... more The idea of the presentation of excavations in Prague Modřany came up from the developer´s environment. The archaeological contractor Archeo Pro, public benefit company,has prepared the professional design of the project and participated in logistic and organisation. The project was labelled simply “Bronze Age”. Developer offered mainly project funding, although took part on the project designing as well. Third partner in the project has been the municipality of Prague 12 city quarter. Their engagement was focused on logistic, organisation and promotion. The project consisted from the exhibition of artefact´s replicas from the excavation in the picturesque newly reconstructed vineyard house from 18th century, school children competition on their view on Bronze age Modřany, opening festival on the ground of vineyard house and publication of the informational brochure on the topic of archaeology of Modřany in Bronze age and actual excavations. An artist imagination of the actually excavated Bronze Age site based on the archaeological record became an exhibition highlight as well as prehistoric like band Altsteinzeitliche Knochenklangbilder was a star of the Sunday afternoon opening feast. The project “Bronze Age” is an example of the community event for local people focused entirely on archaeology and based outside the museum.
Ochrana státní hranice v padesátých letech 20. století, 2017
Archaeological picture of the border zone in the Novohradské Mountains. The paper addresses the i... more Archaeological picture of the border zone in the Novohradské Mountains. The paper addresses the issue pf protection of the state border in the 1950´s from the point of view of archaeology of contemporary past. On several cases of extinct settlements in Novohradské Mountains and their foohills, the paper explores the consequences of the formation of the prohibited area and the border zone on the settlement pattern of the area. observed in the wider context of other historical events (in particular the expulsionl of the German-speaking population and the collectivisation of agriculure). At the end of the paper, a hypothesis was formulated on the basis of the monitoring of archaeologically documented demolitions, according to which the creation of the prohibited and border zones was motivated by propaganda. The aim of the communist propaganda was to manipulate historical consciousness and let people forget about previously lively and economically prosperous borders. However, this assignment does not appear in period documents. It is replaced by more rational arguments, including border surveillance.
This volume gathers most of the papers presented at the conference, and its publication is meant ... more This volume gathers most of the papers presented at the conference, and its publication is meant to disseminate to an audience as wide as possible the latest work of those working in the field and to promote the latest trends in the protection and management of the archaeological heritage. the international conference Current trends in archaeological heritage preservation: National and International Perspectives, which took place in Iași between the 6th and the 10th of November 2013. The event was organized by the Iași Institute of Archaeology in partnership with the European Association of Archaeologists, the ”Alexandru Ioan Cuza” University of Iași, the ”Moldova” National Museum Complex from Iași, and the National Museum of Romanian History from Bucharest. The conference was attended by over 50 experts in the protection and management of archaeological heritage from Germany, 10 Netherlands, Australia, USA, UK, Czech Republic, India, Azerbaijan, Portugal, Russia, Poland, Spain, Bra...
UNKNOWN AIR RAID SHELTER IN PRAGUE 6-BUBENEČ This article presents a recent archaeological find o... more UNKNOWN AIR RAID SHELTER IN PRAGUE 6-BUBENEČ This article presents a recent archaeological find of an unknown subterranean air raid shelter in Prague Bubeneč, with preserved original furniture and technologies including a filter device against fighting gases. This shelter was originally connected with a currently partially blocked corridor leading to a neighbouring house. Bulgarian graffiti from 1954-1972 were found on the walls. Among other artefacts, two unusual tin disc items were found, with Chinese signs. Interpretation of the archaeological finds, based on an extensive archive research, enabled to give a date of the origins and use of the shelter to the period of the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia.
In March and April of 2008, the company Archeo Pro o. p. s. carried out a development led excavat... more In March and April of 2008, the company Archeo Pro o. p. s. carried out a development led excavation in Sokolovská Street 11, in the western part of the cadastral area of Karlín in Prague 8, parcel of land no. 201/2 (after the completion of the building, the parcel of land got a new number – 201/1), where house no. 204 stands. The excavation revealed a remarkably well-preserved situation representing an insight into the historical development of Špitálsko or Zábransko, the territory of the suburbs of the New Town of Prague, right behind its gates (Fig. 1–4). The first archaeologically noticeable traces of human presence in this area date from the close of the Middle Ages, from the second half of the 14th to the first half of the 15th century. The territory was then not very intensively but continuously exploited until the early 17th century. Three development horizons have been identified based on archaeological findings for the period from the second half of the 14th to the early 17th century (Fig. 18). The genesis of layers from all post medieval and early modern chronological horizons cannot be determined and the interpretation of sunken features is also uncertain, perhaps with the exception of one cesspit from the chronological horizon of the 16th/early 17th century. The sunken features are simple pits. Some of them can be interpreted as waste pits, simply based on a larger quantity of ceramic and other material (bone plates with holes) in them. Organic materials have not survived due to the nature of the subsoil (sand). The intensity of use and the nature of the layers and sunken features thus testify to the use of the lot as a farmyard (hinterland for various agricultural and residential activities) or possibly a garden. However, there is no evidence of its real residential function during the early modern period, which is quite logical as the excavation area is situated deep in the lot and not next to a road (today’s Sokolovská Street), where activities associated with housing are to be expected. There are no proofs of the use of the lot from the early 17th to the end of the 18th century. This might have been caused by the fact that the top layers of the preserved surface had been removed in later periods (19th century), but the most probable explanation is based on historiographical sources. It can be deduced from written and iconographic sources that Zábransko was desolated during the Thirty Years’ War – it was pillaged at its very beginning. Houses in the excavation area were not rebuilt after that and the first small building next to the street line is documented as late as 1842.
Glasfunde aus der letzten Forschungsphase der Siedlung bei St. Peterskirche in der Strasse Na Po... more Glasfunde aus der letzten Forschungsphase der Siedlung bei St. Peterskirche in der Strasse Na Poříčí in Prag
DIE MATERIELLE KULTUR DES SIEDLUNGSKOMPLEXES BEI ST. PETER AUF DEM PORITSCH (PRAG) IM HOCH- UND S... more DIE MATERIELLE KULTUR DES SIEDLUNGSKOMPLEXES BEI ST. PETER AUF DEM PORITSCH (PRAG) IM HOCH- UND SPÄTMITTELALTER ANHAND DER GRABUNG 1988-1990. KNOCHEN-, BRONZE-, UND GLASFUNDE, KERAMIKFIGUREN.
The paper is analyzing the development of priorities in the archaeological fieldwork since 1818 t... more The paper is analyzing the development of priorities in the archaeological fieldwork since 1818 to recent days in regions of Czech Republic. The way of national archaeology from rescue or emergency excavations to preservation in situ is highlighted.
Článek představuje několik případových studií vývoje národních politik péče o archeologické kultu... more Článek představuje několik případových studií vývoje národních politik péče o archeologické kulturní dědictví. Každá ze zemí, jejichž politika a strategie péče o archeologické kulturní dědictví je v tomto příspěvku popisována, představuje v rámci tzv. starých zemí Evropské unie buď typický příklad určitého systému (Francie, Velká Británie), nebo případ vykazuje určité podobnosti ať už geopolitické, hospodářské, vývojové nebo odborné s Českou Republikou (Irsko, Nizozemí). Srovnávání národních archeologických politik a strategií s sebou nese i problémy terminologické. Některé termíny jsou těžko přeložitelné nebo vůbec nemají v češtině ekvivalent, u jiných je zřetelný významový posun. Srovnávání pak vyžaduje jak určitou míru zobecnění, tak pokud možno přesně vymezenou terminologii, v jejímž rámci lze srovnání realizovat. Příspěvek se proto definováním některých nových nebo nezažitých termínů pokusil vytvořit předpoklad pro efektivní srovnávání. V textu jsou kupříkladu charakterizovány typy archeologického výzkumu ve vztahu k zahájení prací ohrožujících lokalitu. Dále článek definuje prevenci v péči o archeologické kulturní dědictví a v souladu s jejím rozdělením v jiných odvětvích člení prevenci na primární, sekundární a terciální.
Uploads
Papers - Theory by Michal Bures
can be divided into two areas: sharing archaeological
data from field research and publishing information
on archaeological sites.
Archaeological information implicitly reveals
something about mankind in general, about its
development, skills, cooperation, aesthetic feelings,
and values. Similarly, it implicitly reveals something
about society and its organization. The point is to
interpret this implicit knowledge in order to express
it explicitly in archeology to other relevant sciences
to their benefit, but also to serve society through
heritage practice. Sharing archaeological data
contained in findings with other experts is
a prerequisite for a successfully emerging field, not
only from a historical but primarily from a scientific
perspective. Arguments to the contrary lead
to the negation of the meaning of archeology as
the discovery of the history of mankind and turn
archeology back from a scientific field into an art.
In a society which declares that caring for
archaeological heritage is in the public interest,
it is difficult to keep archaeological sites secret from
the public for the purpose of protecting them, unless
such confidentiality is provided for by law. Instead,
the problem of unauthorized excavations using metal
detectors should be addressed, and a clear
boundary should be defined between legal and illegal
detector exploration. In order for the repression
of illegal exploration to be effective, enabling
the concerned public to participate in the protection
of public archaeological heritage is essential, among
other things through the publication of spatial data
about archaeological sites.
Archaeological finds, monuments, and sites are
not just artifacts, meaning merely the items and
the locations where these items are found. Objects
are not simply objects – they have a deeper
meaning. When an archaeologist carries out field
research in a particular location, he/she contributes
to the knowledge of the past in general and to
the site in particular, or to both of them together.
Archaeological research thus alters the environment
which is not only material, but is also historical and
meaningful, that is, in the human consciousness.
It affects the minds of people living there.
This creates a local environment that can become
more attractive than before. Heritage archeology,
respectively public archeology, brings something
new to archeology as a whole, something that other
disciplines cannot do so well. By publishing and,
respectively, sharing relevant site information with
the public (with those interested in this sharing),
archeology contributes to the creation of the living
environment, both in terms of substance and
importance in the minds of people.
Books by Michal Bures
Papers by Michal Bures
Sokolovská Street 11, in the western part of the cadastral area of Karlín in Prague 8, parcel of land no. 201/2
(after the completion of the building, the parcel of land got a new number – 201/1), where house no. 204 stands.
The excavation revealed a remarkably well-preserved situation representing an insight into the historical development
of Špitálsko or Zábransko, the territory of the suburbs of the New Town of Prague, right behind its
gates (Fig. 1–4).
The first archaeologically noticeable traces of human presence in this area date from the close of the Middle
Ages, from the second half of the 14th to the first half of the 15th century. The territory was then not very intensively
but continuously exploited until the early 17th century. Three development horizons have been identified
based on archaeological findings for the period from the second half of the 14th to the early 17th century (Fig. 18).
The genesis of layers from all post medieval and early modern chronological horizons cannot be determined
and the interpretation of sunken features is also uncertain, perhaps with the exception of one cesspit from
the chronological horizon of the 16th/early 17th century. The sunken features are simple pits. Some of them can
be interpreted as waste pits, simply based on a larger quantity of ceramic and other material (bone plates with
holes) in them. Organic materials have not survived due to the nature of the subsoil (sand). The intensity of use
and the nature of the layers and sunken features thus testify to the use of the lot as a farmyard (hinterland for
various agricultural and residential activities) or possibly a garden. However, there is no evidence of its real
residential function during the early modern period, which is quite logical as the excavation area is situated
deep in the lot and not next to a road (today’s Sokolovská Street), where activities associated with housing are
to be expected. There are no proofs of the use of the lot from the early 17th to the end of the 18th century. This
might have been caused by the fact that the top layers of the preserved surface had been removed in later periods
(19th century), but the most probable explanation is based on historiographical sources. It can be deduced from
written and iconographic sources that Zábransko was desolated during the Thirty Years’ War – it was pillaged
at its very beginning.
Houses in the excavation area were not rebuilt after that and the first small building next to the street line
is documented as late as 1842.
can be divided into two areas: sharing archaeological
data from field research and publishing information
on archaeological sites.
Archaeological information implicitly reveals
something about mankind in general, about its
development, skills, cooperation, aesthetic feelings,
and values. Similarly, it implicitly reveals something
about society and its organization. The point is to
interpret this implicit knowledge in order to express
it explicitly in archeology to other relevant sciences
to their benefit, but also to serve society through
heritage practice. Sharing archaeological data
contained in findings with other experts is
a prerequisite for a successfully emerging field, not
only from a historical but primarily from a scientific
perspective. Arguments to the contrary lead
to the negation of the meaning of archeology as
the discovery of the history of mankind and turn
archeology back from a scientific field into an art.
In a society which declares that caring for
archaeological heritage is in the public interest,
it is difficult to keep archaeological sites secret from
the public for the purpose of protecting them, unless
such confidentiality is provided for by law. Instead,
the problem of unauthorized excavations using metal
detectors should be addressed, and a clear
boundary should be defined between legal and illegal
detector exploration. In order for the repression
of illegal exploration to be effective, enabling
the concerned public to participate in the protection
of public archaeological heritage is essential, among
other things through the publication of spatial data
about archaeological sites.
Archaeological finds, monuments, and sites are
not just artifacts, meaning merely the items and
the locations where these items are found. Objects
are not simply objects – they have a deeper
meaning. When an archaeologist carries out field
research in a particular location, he/she contributes
to the knowledge of the past in general and to
the site in particular, or to both of them together.
Archaeological research thus alters the environment
which is not only material, but is also historical and
meaningful, that is, in the human consciousness.
It affects the minds of people living there.
This creates a local environment that can become
more attractive than before. Heritage archeology,
respectively public archeology, brings something
new to archeology as a whole, something that other
disciplines cannot do so well. By publishing and,
respectively, sharing relevant site information with
the public (with those interested in this sharing),
archeology contributes to the creation of the living
environment, both in terms of substance and
importance in the minds of people.
Sokolovská Street 11, in the western part of the cadastral area of Karlín in Prague 8, parcel of land no. 201/2
(after the completion of the building, the parcel of land got a new number – 201/1), where house no. 204 stands.
The excavation revealed a remarkably well-preserved situation representing an insight into the historical development
of Špitálsko or Zábransko, the territory of the suburbs of the New Town of Prague, right behind its
gates (Fig. 1–4).
The first archaeologically noticeable traces of human presence in this area date from the close of the Middle
Ages, from the second half of the 14th to the first half of the 15th century. The territory was then not very intensively
but continuously exploited until the early 17th century. Three development horizons have been identified
based on archaeological findings for the period from the second half of the 14th to the early 17th century (Fig. 18).
The genesis of layers from all post medieval and early modern chronological horizons cannot be determined
and the interpretation of sunken features is also uncertain, perhaps with the exception of one cesspit from
the chronological horizon of the 16th/early 17th century. The sunken features are simple pits. Some of them can
be interpreted as waste pits, simply based on a larger quantity of ceramic and other material (bone plates with
holes) in them. Organic materials have not survived due to the nature of the subsoil (sand). The intensity of use
and the nature of the layers and sunken features thus testify to the use of the lot as a farmyard (hinterland for
various agricultural and residential activities) or possibly a garden. However, there is no evidence of its real
residential function during the early modern period, which is quite logical as the excavation area is situated
deep in the lot and not next to a road (today’s Sokolovská Street), where activities associated with housing are
to be expected. There are no proofs of the use of the lot from the early 17th to the end of the 18th century. This
might have been caused by the fact that the top layers of the preserved surface had been removed in later periods
(19th century), but the most probable explanation is based on historiographical sources. It can be deduced from
written and iconographic sources that Zábransko was desolated during the Thirty Years’ War – it was pillaged
at its very beginning.
Houses in the excavation area were not rebuilt after that and the first small building next to the street line
is documented as late as 1842.
Srovnávání národních archeologických politik a strategií s sebou nese i problémy terminologické. Některé termíny jsou těžko přeložitelné nebo vůbec nemají v češtině ekvivalent, u jiných je zřetelný významový posun. Srovnávání pak vyžaduje jak určitou míru zobecnění, tak pokud možno přesně vymezenou terminologii, v jejímž rámci lze srovnání realizovat. Příspěvek se proto definováním některých nových nebo nezažitých termínů pokusil vytvořit předpoklad pro efektivní srovnávání. V textu jsou kupříkladu charakterizovány typy archeologického výzkumu ve vztahu k zahájení prací ohrožujících lokalitu.
Dále článek definuje prevenci v péči o archeologické kulturní dědictví a v souladu s jejím rozdělením v jiných odvětvích člení prevenci na primární, sekundární a terciální.