Back in 2016, Klim Zhukov and “Goblin,” whom many remember from his interesting translations of foreign films, filmed an interview/dialogue/conversation on our topic – namely: instrument search, search with a metal detector, cop, call it what you want. It would seem that it’s 2016, how much water has passed under the bridge, but no, the topic was recently raised again on the pages of the community on Klim Zhukov’s VK, raising from the bins another portion of ridiculous comments and a notable buhurt from the respectable public.
Naturally, we, as the largest portal and blog about instrumental search in Russia, could not ignore this burning topic and prepared our response to the insults received at us, but which we will not reach and will not go down to, but will consider the problem in more detail , with knowledge and understanding of the matter.
In response to Klim Zhukov from black diggers.
Dear Klim Zhukov, I have great respect for your creativity and activities in terms of popularizing national history. But I’ll go straight to the essence of my address to you, skipping a couple of paragraphs of reverence and noble scraping. I’ll tell you straight, you have taken a one-sided and absolutely straightforward position regarding such a phenomenon in our country as amateur archeology, or whatever you want to call this hobby. It is always like this: when studying some complex phenomenon, the easiest way is to find the simplest answer and, without bothering, build logic according to this accepted point of view. If you are interested, you can discuss this topic separately, but for now I want to note that, despite all his apparent correctness, not one of the most respected archaeologists in our country has yet dared to engage in direct dialogue or debate with those whom you call black diggers. And the point here is not that archaeologists have nothing to say, but that their position and arguments will be initially losing from the point of view of not only logic, but also historical experience.
I suggest you briefly examine the four main problems of modern archaeology, the preservation and study of archaeological monuments and the free circulation of historical objects.
- Everyone who digs something with a metal detector is equally and without exception recorded as a criminal. This is the biggest mistake when studying the phenomenon of amateur archeology. I assure you that more than 90% of instrument search enthusiasts dig exclusively in plowed fields and gardens of the private sector. I will try to explain why this activity is not a crime, not only within the framework of the legislation of the Russian Federation, but also according to the conviction of the majority of certified professional archaeologists. The fact is that in archaeological science, it is not the archaeological object itself that is of value, but the environment or, as is commonly called, the cultural layer in which this object was discovered. Therefore, the legislation of the Russian Federation provides for punishment not for the removal of a historical object from the ground, but for the destruction of a cultural layer. All professional archaeologists are told from the very first year of training that a historical object located outside the cultural layer has no archaeological value. Why? Yes, because there is no idea how and when this item could have gotten to this place. This is difficult to understand at first, but with a minimal study of archeology as a science, everything quickly becomes clear. Plowed fields are of no value to archaeologists. If I'm wrong, can you give an example of field archaeological work carried out in plowed fields.
- The most important problem of modern Russian archeology is the lack of established cadastral boundaries of archaeological sites. According to the AKR, there are more than ten thousand identified archaeological sites in any region of the Russian Federation. However, there is no information anywhere about the boundaries and exact location of these most protected objects. In European countries, the basis of state protection of archaeological monuments is the principle of cadastral registration of land plots. In Britain or Estonia, or even Poland, every land owner knows whether or not there is an archaeological site on his land. If there is one, then he knows the boundaries and security zones of the archaeological site. Therefore, the owner enters into security obligations with the state and monitors the safety of the property. In our country, 99.99% of land owners have no idea whether or not there are identified archaeological sites on their land. Accordingly, there are no security obligations or liability on the part of the owner himself. There are no boundaries, no information at all. Therefore, a significant part of the archaeological sites discovered in Soviet times are destroyed not by black diggers, but by land owners for economic purposes. For example, good clean sand from a Bronze Age settlement is sold as a building material. But, as you can understand, the problem is not even with the owners of the land, but with the fact that none of all the active citizens who are concerned about the preservation of the archaeological heritage want to deal with the accounting and systematization of archaeological monuments with the establishment of cadastral boundaries. Archaeologists believe that regional ministries of culture should deal with this, the ministry of culture believes that the land committee should deal with this, and the land committee would be happy to assign this responsibility to municipalities.
- Lack of a competent and fair reward system for donated treasures. Everything is simple and clear. In the small Baltic country of Estonia, just last year amateur archaeologists handed over to the state more than twenty treasures of clothing and money. Including many unique archaeological and historically significant items. The statistics are approximate and taken from open sources, including that individual valuable items are also considered treasures. So here it is. In Russia, over the past year, citizens handed over treasures to the state, how much do you think??? And a few, not at all. Why do you think? Probably because small but smart Estonia has long understood that you have to pay for treasures handed over. And they realized this when, according to statistics, only one treasure was handed over to the state in ten years. Exactly the same statistics on treasures handed over per year are available in Britain. And there they also achieved such results only after they legislated a legal norm that all archaeological objects in the land belong not to the crown, as before, but to the owner of the land. And also, as legal practice has shown, in our country an administrative or criminal case can be opened against a citizen for voluntarily donating a treasure or valuable historical object to a museum.
- And finally – the worst thing. According to scientific statistics in European countries, archaeologists carry out 95% of their work per year within the framework of rescue archeology at construction sites within urban areas. Accordingly, more than 90% of archaeological discoveries in Europe are urban archaeology. Here in Russia it’s the other way around. 95% of the work is archaeological field work. And only about 5% is work on large-scale urban construction projects. As for example it happened in Zaryadye. Now let’s try to figure out why it’s like this for them and different for us. After all, the cultural layer of Moscow is no less cultural than in London or Paris. And it's all about a lot of money. No, not like that, but here’s how – VERY!!!! BIG!!! MONEY!!! We have a law on archaeological examination of construction projects. Before building another shopping center, for example within the city of Moscow, the developer invites certified archaeologists from an expert center to the foundation pit. Only recently an expert’s visit to the site cost 700,000 rubles. Only on the basis of this figure can we guess how much a certificate costs that states that no signs of a cultural layer were found at the construction site. Klim, you can check for yourself the scale and volume of destruction of archaeological sites by simply asking where and how many archaeologists worked on construction sites in Moscow before construction began. Take an interest, think and count, and then you will really become not only afraid for the archaeological heritage that you decided to protect from black diggers. You will feel truly terrible when you realize that black diggers are children in a yard sandbox. Against the backdrop of what archaeologists themselves are doing, allowing hundreds of archaeological sites to be rolled into asphalt and poured into concrete and thousands of archaeological objects to be transported to landfills as part of dump soil.
Dear Klim Zhukov, if you are really concerned and concerned about the topic of destruction of the archaeological heritage of our country. If you really want to do something and show real citizenship, try to raise and discuss these topics with the big bosses in the field of archeology or with the officials supervising this activity. And I'm sure you will encounter such massive and hysterical resistance that you will feel uneasy. And the hysteria fanned by individual experts on the topic of damage from amateur archeology is just a screen and a smoke screen so that inquisitive people like you do not ask unnecessary questions, but rush like a bull to a red rag.
In conclusion, I will say that the topic of the reasons for the real destruction of the archaeological and historical heritage of Russia is a large and multifaceted material with different points of view and the truth that each opponent will have his own. But I personally want to wish you only one thing – understanding. Why did you decide to touch on the topic of the destruction of archaeological sites and preserving the history of our country? Just to promote yourself and your channel, raise hype, get likes? Or do you, as an active citizen, really want to do something important and necessary? If the latter, then invite any official archaeologist or, better yet, a relevant official for an interview and ask him the topics I have voiced, it will be interesting what they answer.
Sincerely, the digger of “poop” from the plowed fields, “grave digger and looter.”
