Council of Europe Conseil de I'Europe ^*^

* * PUBDG1V038

* * * * ***

Archaeological sites in Europe: conservation, maintenance and enhancement

)c K

i Jicjo-ro

II

?^

^^

<ro*^c-ri/cJL

Architectural heritage

Archaeological sites in Europe: conservation, maintenance and enhancement

European colloquy jointly organised by the Council of Europe and the Institute Portugues do Patrimonio Cultural
Conimbriga, Portugal, 18-20 October 1990

Architectural Heritage Series, No. 22

Council of Europe Press, 1992

French edition: Sites archeologiques en Europe Conservation, entretien et mise en valeur ISBN 92-871-2046-3

Strasbourg, Council of Europe, Publishing and Documentation Service ISBN 92-871-2047-1 Copyright, Council of Europe, Strasbourg, 1992 Printed in Belgium

- i -

S U M M A R Y

Page

FIRST SESSION : TECHNIQUES FOR ON-SITE CONSERVATION

- Care and protection of archaeological sites: the examples of Aosta, Grenoble and Geneva
by Charles BONNET (Switzerland) - Restoration of preserved passage-graves in Denmark by Torben DEHN and Svend HANSEN (Denmark) " Recent examples of conservation of archaeological sites in Styria by Bernhard HEBERT (Austria) 3 11

17 21

- Restoration work in Knowth, Boyne Valley

by Paul McMAHON (Ireland) SECOND SESSION : JOB TRAINING FOR YOUNG PEOPLE IN CONNECTION WITH SITE ARCHAEOLOGY

- Training of staff for the conservation of archaeological sites: the Portuguese experience by Adelia ALARCAO (Portugal)
THIRD SESSION : ACCESS AND PRESENTATION TO THE PUBLIC

27

- How to present an archaeological site to the public by Roel W. BRANDT (Netherlands) - The royal Viking cemetery at Borre, Norway How to present a national monument to the public
by Bj0rn MYHRE (Norway)

35

39

- The necropolis of Puig des Molins (Ibiza): a project of an archaeological park open to the public
by Benjamin COSTA, Jorge H. FERNANDEZ and

Salvador ROIG (Spain) - Archaeological parks and cultural tourism: a report on the Malta workshop
by Anthony BONANNO (Malta)

45

57

- Site conservation and public access to some archaeological sites in Iceland by Gudmundur OLAFSSON (Iceland)

61

- 11 - Access and presentation of Ireland's archaeological sites and museum collections by Patrick F. WALLACE (Ireland) - The presentation of antiquities and historic sites in Finland by Tuula HAIKKURINEN-MONTELL (Finland) CLOSING SESSION CONCLUSIONS by Geoffrey J. WAINWRIGHT (United-Kingdom) APPENDIX List of participants 89 83

73

75

- 1-

FIRST SESSION : TECHNIQUES FOR ON-SITE CONSERVATION

- 3CARE AND PROTECTION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES; THE EXAMPLES OF AOSTA, GRENOBLE AND GENEVA by Charles BONNET (Switzerland)

Twenty years of co-operation have enabled medievalists to establish a methodological approach to historical sites in several Alpine regions. The archaeologist conducts his research in the substructure of medieval buildings, but also has to widen his analysis to take in wall elevations. Hence he can pave the way to the restoring of certain monuments by providing the architect or engineer with the information they need. A scientific study is accordingly a vital preliminary phase which adds to an understanding of a building, while at the same time mapping out certain choices linked with the enhancement or protection of its historical substance. This co-operation has also induced various groups concerned, known as "restoration craftsmen", to expand their field of activity by caring for archaeological sites. Without intending to recite a string of principles at this point, given that each example creates new problems, it seems useful to say a few words about the presentation of three ensembles associated with the earliest periods of Christianity. May I make it clear right away that the quality and interest of archaeological remains shown to a wider public are closely dependent on previous research. It is an illusion to assume that ruins speak for themselves, and that fragments of sculpture or painted decor are sufficient to generate enthusiasm. Visitors need a documentary basis in pursuing their own investigations or simply pondering over their past. Hence a message has to be put across, and only a detailed study of the structures or layers which have been preserved will provide the framework in which to formulate such a message. A site represents a mass of data, and only a part of it has lent itself to interpretation; consequently, it also constitutes a scientific storeroom for future generations. A definition of this kind clearly demonstrates the limits to any intervention which should always be reversible and should steer clear of excessive on-the-spot reconstruction, given that the public has a right to authentic antiquities. Modern additions, both as regards protection and didactic adjuncts, will therefore be resolutely contemporary. A dialogue also has to be established between the archaeologist and the architect responsible for the project, who will be expected to adopt a comparatively humble approach towards the ruins, notwithstanding their professional attributes.

The town of Aosta in Italy, the Augusta Praetoria of antiquity, has retained some remarkable evidence of its Roman past. Moreover, the medieval town centre is one of the most impressive in the Alps; consequently, doubts might arise in connection with the initial quasi "disappearance", historically speaking, of the urban centre during the so-called dark ages, an obliteration generally attributed to successive incursions of barbarians after the fall of the Empire. However, this city was a stronghold in the defences of the northern Italian population and the abandonment of this territory did not seem very plausible.

- it The excavations conducted by the Superintendent's offices from 1972 onwards in the Saint-Ours district and subsequently under the cathedral, soon brought to light the wealth of buildings erected between the fourth and the tenth centuries. The cruciform church of Saint-Laurent demonstrated the close links existing between this valley and Milan, where its architectural models were to be found. The discovery of the original cathedral and its two baptistries constituted evidence of early Christianisation which warranted highly elaborate arrangements. After the study of Saint-Laurent church and the various stages it went through had been completed, a restoration and enhancement programme was drawn up. In an initial phase, the construction of two sheets of concrete and a gallery enabled visitors to have a view of the west and north apses, constituting the ends of the arms of the cross. Only the ground plan of the sanctuary is still in evidence and the bird's eye view from a height of 3 metres encompasses its main characteristics. A few vast tombs also supply some information about the functions of the church. A place of worship which is still in use today occupies the central part of the cruciform construction. To preclude deconsecration, the ruins are sealed off by a paving stone, providing direct access to the upper storey. The substructure was more complicated to make out in this sector, as certain walls had to be propped up while at the same time it was essential to preserve an unimpeded view along the two axes ending in the apses. Huge areas were opened up under the foundations of the present church so as to reveal the cruciform shape of the earliest monument. Even if the liturgical equipment, situated at the centre and towards the east had been damaged by later diggings, the remains still in situ were sufficiently apparent to justify the reconstruction of a presbytery bench, a podium and a golea. On the other hand, the layout of this presbyterium continued to be unclear. Expanded polystyrene covered with a coat of paint and brick superstructures was used to indicate the lie of the tombs in formae and a part of the floor. The liturgical equipment has thus been fully restored without any damage to the still existing remains. In this case, it is clear that the intention was to distinguish the reconstructed parts from the authentic elements. In the cathedral, the purpose of the current excavation is to connect up the Roman cryptoporticus with the paleochristian remains accessible under the flooring of the building. A route is also planned under the roofs, where there are exceptionally well preserved llth century murals. A circuit has already been opened in the substructure, where catwalks are laid round the central area of the nave of the first episcopal sanctuary in Aosta. A substantial effort has been made to clean up the architectural fragments and flooring, as this type of enhancement not only contributes to a visual impact but also focuses the visitors' attention. The paving of the cathedral is laid on interconnected metal props and held up by a large number of square supports. Dark paint and the lighting system partially compensate for the lack of height. It was not possible to provide access to the main baptistry situated over against the west facade without pulling down certain partitions. A decision was therefore taken to make the cruciform font visible from the nave of the cathedral behind an extremely discrete plate of glass. Worshippers can thus renew their links with their Christian background as soon as they enter the sanctuary.

- 5In Grenoble, the late medieval fortifications have modified the topography of the hill next to the Church of Saint-Laurent, which has now become an archaeological site. Hence the architect has decided to provide public access across a raised catwalk connecting the ramparts with the top of a Romanesque belfry. The entrance is along a metal gallery from which the overall view of excavations in the nave is most impressive. This is a vast ensemble, originating with the construction of several large mausoleums. A rectangular building and a number of graves bear witness to the rapid expansion of the burial area, where an amazing construction with 11 apses was soon erected, later transformed by the addition of a cruciform crypt. There are several passages giving access to various levels. By dint of an outside staircase, the architecture of the Romanesque church is clearly distinguished from the remains spreading out at the foot of the vertical walls, thereby conveying an impression of remarkable continuity in the occupation of this privileged site. Furthermore in view of the decision to preserve the decor painted during the last century and to leave the choir in its original state with its paved flooring, choir stalls and decorative altar, the visitor is enabled to grasp the full historical impact of this site. Here, the architect managed to make the best possible use of a building which had been divested of its original purpose. Despite the fact that this is a protected site, the visitor is continually aware of the importance of links with the past, since extremely ancient sarcophagi are associated with the church of more recent date and the crypt, which is still a place of prayer and meditation, is also included in the tour. The gallery overlooking the remains of the nave and the catwalks or stairs are contemporary in style and are clearly delineated against the medieval structure. The use of metal, glass or concrete is entirely in keeping with what is needed. The programme to restore the Cathedral of Saint-Pierre in Geneva was launched 15 years ago. In the light of archaeological research, which was consistently undertaken throughout this lengthy period, documentation of great interest was amassed, requiring appropriate presentation. The enhancement had to encompass both the investigations which were still under way and the complex results already obtained. Moreover by a continual redefinition of working hypotheses, some flexibility was introduced into the progress of work. The site was only made accessible to the public 10 years after the initial excavations, but information was provided to visitors and the authorities concerned by holding several open days. The remains of the episcopal group of buildings, the earliest of which date from the 4th century, undoubtedly constituted the main feature of the site. Technically, it was possible to present the baptistry, the two cathedrals and the bishop's residence providing access by a circuit running underneath the floor of the present cathedral, a gothic chapel and round outside the buildings. Lengthy discussions then took place between the archaeologists and the architect to work out a route for visitors and decide what structures were necessary to protect the ruins. The project was therefore only established after discussion had taken place as to how the scientific results should be conveyed. Certain sectors not previously excavated had to be added to the areas which were given priority during work involving restoration, of the

- 6installation of heating as well as water and electricity systems. Furthermore it proved necessary to uncover some of the ruins belonging to the original cathedral, so as to gain a better understanding of the various functions of the buildings concerned. For financial reasons, the project was devised in several stages spread out over a period of about 10 years, while other more ambitious plans were also contemplated in the longer term. Great care was taken with the didactic material made available to the public: eg tape recorded commentaries for visitors, audio visual presentations, various publications, a sketch plan on the entrance tickets. Coloured lines discretely traced on the stonework are used for dating, and these colours are also included on the explanatory boards showing the architectural evolution of the various buildings and their chronology. The drawings and models highlighting reconstruction are also a useful adjunct. The sober architecture of the catwalks, the clear-cut lines of the show cases and the handling of the flagstones resting on metal props have all made a significant contribution to the success of the site. The architecture has managed to retain its originality, without interfering with the works of art. Some of the finds are exhibited in a small museum installed half way round the circuit, in what used to be the forge, excavated in the 19th century. From a metal and glass bridge, one has an excellent view of the models and cross sections. There is no doubt that the sum of the experiences acquired in connection with those three archaeological sites, inter alia, is going to be instrumental in improving presentation. It would however be pointless to attempt to lay down a set of principles, as each site has its own specific characteristics. Perhaps one should guard against turning these places into consumer paradises and, a contrario, try to stimulate the curiosity of the public. With this aim in view, it seems that information should ideally be confined to essential facts, so that each visitor is free to approach the ruins as he sees fit. The study of the archaeologist is fascinating, and constitutes an adventure which visitors would like to experience for themselves or see confirmed. It is to be hoped that these protected sites will provide each and every one of them with the information needed to pursue an study into the origins of Christianity to as great a depth as seems desirable!

Brief bibliography Ch. BONNET, Geneve aux premiers temps Chretiens. Geneva, 1986. Ch. BONNET, R. PERINETTI, Aoste aux premiers temps Chretiens, Musumeci, Quart (Aosta - Italy), 1986. R. COLARDELLE, Grenoble aux premiers temps Chretiens; Saint-Laurent et ses necropoles. Guides archeologiques de la France, Imprimerie nationals, Paris, 1986.

- 7-

PHOTOGRAPHS

Geneva. Archaeological site of the Cathedral of Saint-Pierre 1. Reception room of the bishop (Vth century) 2. Baptistries 3. Central museum 4. Roman well

Photograph 1

Photograph 2

./

>* ><~.
X.

Phot'

Photograph 4

- 11 RESTORATION OF PRESERVED PASSAGE-GRAVES IN DENMARK by Torben DEHN and Svend HANSEN (Denmark) This paper presents some of the results of seven years intensive restoration and maintenance work on monuments from the prehistoric period - that is, in the Scandinavian countries, the period from the viking period up until about a thousand years ago. During the seven years, my colleague, conservator Svend HANSEN, has managed the work. I myself have only participated in the last four years. The reason why I use the word "we" should emphasize that this paper is a result of united efforts. Both of us come from the National Forest and Nature Agency, which is a part of the Danish Ministry of the Environment. During the last few years, physical work on the conservation of prehistoric monuments has been concentrated on Denmark's approximately 2,500 preserved megalithic graves - that is dolmen and passage-graves from the Stone Age. The reason why it is now necessary to concentrate on the maintenance of the megalithic graves has relation to the decades around the turn of the century. In this period, a great number, especially passage-graves, were excavated and restored - often because destruction of different kinds threatened or had started. During the old excavations, the grave layers in the chamber and in the passage were investigated. There was very little interest in investigating the construction and the traces of the methods of building - on the other hand restoration of the passage-graves did take place when the excavation was finished, in order that the public could visit the monuments. Fallen boulders and replaced capstones were set up as well as possible. If something looked menacing, the local smith set up a brace of iron. He also mounted a gate with a lock. Then visitors could get the key, a candle and a folder from a neighbouring farm. On some sites this arrangement still works. A lot of these old restorations are not secure anymore. The braces of iron are rusty, not only on the surface, but corroded all the way through the material. Sometimes the big stones have moved just a few centimetres. This, however, is enough to make the construction unstable and there is a risk of collapse. Such small movements are the results of insufficient tightening during the restoration. In a few cases it has been necessary to close some passage-graves to visitors because of the risk of collapse. We estimate that some sort of restoration is required within the next few years on one hundred out of 500 passage-graves. Therefore the National Forest and Nature Agency next year begins a ten-year megalithic campaign. The purpose of this campaign is an attempt to stop this decay. However, we have already been working with these monuments for some years and to illustrate this, we have chosen to show you slides from two large restoration projects from 1988 to 1989 To give you an impression of the problems, we will first present the two projects. In total, we have been involved in about ten projects of this kind.

- 12 -

The first project was on a passage grave called "Jordeh0j". Here you have a big intact passage-grave inside a very big mound. The problem was that two of the capstones had fallen partly down into the chamber and lay on two modern pillars of stone. Above one of these fallen capstones was a cavity so big that a child could climb into it. From time to time, materials of different kinds fell from the cavity into the chamber. In order to lift up the capstones again we dug a ditch in the mound. During this operation there was an exceptional possibility to study the construction outside the chamber. In this case the damage was - as an exception - not caused by activity in modern times, but by a mistake, already made in the Stone Age. The biggest capstone had, -at the building of the passage-grave, already partly fallen into the chamber and lay quite safe - you couldn't just see that from within the chamber. The second capstone, on the other hand, had lain on a flagstone hanging out. It hadn't been thick enough and had broken under the weight of the capstone. When this happened, we don't know. On the next slides you can follow the rest of our work. First we lift up the capstone - and from inside the chamber you see the stone placed on a stronger foundation. Afterwards we re-established the constructions outside the chamber and finally we used an excavator to fill up the ditch. The second project we will present to you is a thorough restoration of a very decayed passage-grave, which is situated at a very popular site for picnics, and there are many children among the visitors. The site is named "Knudsskov". This passage-grave was excavated and restored there has been bad decay since. in 1917, but

The chamber was partly covered by earth and several boulders and capstones had been missing as long as we know the monument's history from written sources. The passage had partly collapsed and was filled up with earth. Because of the many visitors and the position under two enormous beech trees, there was no vegetation on the surface of the monument and, as a consequence of this, there had been so much erosion that it was dangerous to enter the grave. In this connection, you must remember that our climate in the winter can be very nice but it is very destructive for buildings, which are not heated. Through a whole 1 winter the temperature alternates a great many times between frost and thaw and each time a little destruction takes place. In the project Knudsskov we chose - in addition to restoring the dangerous spots - to rebuild the chamber and the passage and then cover the whole construction with a new mound. This solution was chosen, because, while working, we found out that three of the four missing stones lay in a big hole at the end of the chamber. Probably in the last century someone has penetrated into the chamber in this way. These three stones were replaced and the fourth stone, which was still missing, was added. The result was a real, closed passage maintenance for many years will be minimal. grave, where the

- 13 This restoration project in Knudsskov illustrates the fundamental principle in our work. The main purpose is to preserve the monument by disturbing the old constructions as little as possible. When we choose which monuments we are going to restore, we must mainly consider the security. After that it is very important to choose monuments, which the pubic has a possibility to visit. In our opinion, it is very important that the monuments appear safe and informative to the public. Half seriously and half as a joke we have a motto: "Bigger and better monuments". As you have seen on the slides, we sometimes have to disturb the original constructions in order to preserve and restore the monuments. When this happens, we of course always do a normal archaeological excavation. But this archaeological excavation is directed by what is necessary in the restoration-work. Whenever possible, colleagues from other institutions, for example the National Museum, participate. These excavations have given us some interesting information about the construction and the building methods of the passage-graves. This information is used in the restoration work and later on. Here we shall give you some of this information. The most important thing in the construction of a passagegrave is that it is 100% tight. If intrusion of water or animals is possible, this will sooner or later result in an erosion, which subsequently will make the big stones unstable. In the Stone Age they knew this too. The passage-grave Jordeh0j demonstrates this clearly. To keep oozing water out from the chamber, this was - inside the mound - covered by overlapping flagstones in two layers. The lower layer lay in a sort of mortar, made of chalk, mixed with water. The same sort of mortar was used in the construction of what we normally name drystone walling. This walling consists of flagstones stacked on each other in the purpose of filling up the spaces between the big boulders. Here in Jordeh0j an extra securing with mortar was made. In fact this is not real "dry" walling. Just behind the drystone walling and in the spaces between the big boulders lies flint in large quantity. The chamber is so to speak wrapped up by crushed flint. The wrapping can be so thorough that a little ditch filled up with flint is dug below the level of the floor the whole way round the chamber. The purposes of this wrapping by crushed flint may be several. The thousands of flintpieces will no doubt have a draining effect, if water for some reason should ooze to the chamber. Another explanation could be that the small flint pieces, which lie in the smallest cracks between the capstones, could counteract if the big stones for some unforeseen reason should move a little. At last you must remember, that the passage-graves in use for the original purpose, have also been attractive store-rooms for small animals of every kind. In Denmark it is an old trick, where you have a risk of rats to cement broken glass in foundations. The crushed flint behind the drystone wallings is carefully held in position by clay or stone packings. The rest of the mound is built of what is found naturally in the area, that is stone, clay or sand, and nearest the chamber often turf. On some mounds the whole surface has been covered by a carpet of stones and surrounded by kerbstones with drystone walling. In a few cases we have seen mounds with a terraced construction.

- 14 These were a few remarks about details of construction. The restoration work has given us some information of the building methods too. At all times people have wondered how primitive man in the past was able to lift the enormous stones. The Danish work for passagegrave, "jaettestue", gives expression to this. It means a room, built by giants. The Danish king, Frederik the Seventh, was so interested in this question, that in 1857 he made a paper of the building method of the passage-graves. Here you see one of the drawings from the paper. In our opinion his idea was basically right. We think that the first stage was setting up the chambers' boulders. Then the drystone walling was made, while it was possible to work inside and outside the chamber. After crushing the flint behind the drystone walling, this was secured with clay or smaller stones. Then the mound was built to the level of the top of the boulders. At this level the mound was shaped as a wide platform with a sloping ramp. This platform was important when the capstones were put in their place. This has no doubt been the most difficult stage in the working process. When the capstones were in place, they were tightened with flint and roof flagstones. Then the rest of the mound was built up. How the construction of the passage fits into this working process we don't know exactly, [drawing n 1] Not only archaeological investigations are made, when the restoration work goes on but scientific investigations are also made. Here we should like to mention Svend Thorkild Andersen from the Geological Survey of Denmark, which is also a part of the Danish Ministry of Environment. Svend Thorkild Andersen makes pollen analysis from samples taken in the soil horizons in the mounds. This is a smaller part of a project working with the ecological development since the introduction of farming in Denmark. Under the passage-grave Jordehoj we saw the marks of ploughing with an ard (1). From the pollen analysis we have a picture of the landscape around the passage grave. In the area were fields and grazed glades. Unique is the evidence of swidden (2) cultivation. For instance it can be seen that the pollen are damaged by heating. In the restoration work we of course make documentation of the state before the work starts. The drystone walling, in particular, is described. In the restoration we don't change the original drystone walling, but add quite new flagstones, which look like the old ones. However, on closer inspection, you can see the difference. We shape the flagstones one by one. Behind them we tighten with mortar, which is not visible from inside. When setting up boulders and capstones it is important to use the Stone Age construction. For example boulders must always stand in a sloping inwards position with stone packing on the back. At the top the capstones must be firmly fixed between the sloping boulders. When you yourself work with these big stones with their natural and original shape, you get a tremendous respect for the Stone Age constructors and builders. They were able to see the possibilities in each separate stone and the building must have been planned in detail before it was started. Only in this way can the result be so perfect. (1) A primitive plough

(2) "svedje"

- 15 If possible, we use the same materials as in the Stone Age, but there are some exceptions. Sometimes we make use of modern products in the construction. The security of the visitors in a stonebuilt grave is our responsibility and we do not always trust the Stone Age technique completely. For instance we sometimes set up braces of stainless steel because it is very expensive to dig through the mound to a "sick" stone in a chamber in order to repair it in the real way. Sometimes it is not suitable to reconstruct a covering mound over an open-air chamber. In this case too it can be necessary to make use of braces instead of repairing in the real way. We think that it must be possible for people, who do not like entering a closed passage-grave, to visit such chambers. As a roof inside the mound we have used a product called Volclay Panels. It consists of a thin layer of volcano ash between two pieces of cardboard. This material extends when wet and pressed, and makes a membrane, which drains off oozing water, but nevertheless absorbs moisture. As mentioned earlier the purpose of our work is the preserving of the monuments, but almost as important is the possibility for the public to visit the monuments and learn about the past. Therefore the last stage in a restoration project is setting up an information board, which tells generally about the megalithic graves and especially of the monument in question. What has been found? and why does the monument look as it does? As a sort of conclusion we shall show you a Stone Age snap shot from the passage-grave in Knudsskov. But first we show you the chamber as it looked when we arrived. Then you can see the same chamber when we had finished the restoration and at last as our illustrator imagines the same chamber in use [drawing 2 ] .

1. Drawing from a reformation board illustrating the method ot building a passage-grave

2. Drawing from a reformation board showing the now restored passage-grave "Knudsskov" in original use

- 17 RECENT EXAMPLES OF CONSERVATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES IN STYRIA by Bernhard HEBERT (Austria)

I am very grateful for the opportunity to present the problems and peculiarities of an Austrian region that is very rich in archaeological sites and monuments. Working as archaeologist at the Austrian Federal Office of Monuments (Bundesdenkmalamt), I am concerned with the protection and maintaining as well as with the research and conservation of monuments within Styria. This region of about 16,000 km2, occupied partly by the Alps partly by a hilly landscape with flat valleys, is known for some finds of European rank, as the Charriot of Strettweg, a fine bronzework of the Hallstatt-period. Unfortunately realised archaeological work and inventarisation are in no scale to both richness and necessarities caused by proceeding damages due to farming and building activities. Only three employed archaeologists are working in Styria today, two of them at the regional Museum (Landesmuseum Joanneum); to these colleagues, Mr Hudeczek and Mr Kramer, and to their and my assistants I am very indebted for giving information, plans and pictures. Therefore restricting myself to my own sphere of action I am not able to show large Austrian projects such as Carnuntum at the Danubian limes near Vienna or the Magdalensberg in Carinthia, both Roman settlements with wide areas excavated and conserved and further recent projects of restoration and reconstruction. Thus I intend to present some smaller objects that were rescued and conserved during the last two years in Styria. Two of the most prominent archaeological sites in Styria are the prehistoric settlement and the necropoles of GroBklein/Burgstallkogel and the Roman town of Flavia Solva. Legal protection was given to most of the settlement and the more than 700 hillgraves of the Hallstatt-period in GroBklein in western Styria. Further activities were set not in the sense of restoration - the monuments, only partly excavated, sometimes damaged by digging for treasure, are quite well preserved - but by posting information boards around the sites and building paths for both pedestrians and bicyclists through the wide archaeological area. By these means we hope not only to establish a widerspread understanding but also a protection from destruction due to ignorance and from unauthorised digging in hillgraves. The forests in GroBklein around the Burgstallkogel, on which the fortified settlement was located, represent a rare "prehistoric landscape"; the maintaining of these fascinating 2500 years old burial places is a special aim, more than any further excavation unless it is not enforced by certain circumstances threatening the monument. A local museum was founded in the nearby village, showing documentation, plans, a schematic reconstruction of a hillgrave and several finds; the most prominent pieces are still kept in the regional museum at the capital Graz, as the armour from one of the

- 18 richest hillgraves (Pommerkogel), where a princely person must have been buried. The remains of this only partly excavated hillgrave are situated in an agricultural area and therefore threatened by extensive ploughing. The use of this land as farmland instead of meadow was forbidden; negotiations about the future of the huge remains presumably still covering a lot of finds and being a real landmark of prehistory are in process. In Flavia Solva, a Roman town at the river Mur, established as municipium by emperor Vespasianus, problems arose due to uncontrolled building activities since the Second World War. This change of land use caused much damage and loss; rescue excavations could not always be done in time. In the last two years legal protection was given to a large area, possessed by more than a hundred owners, with whom proceedings had to be taken. For this purpose old records and documents had to be checked and special surveys had to be made. To gain a conspectus of all relevant dates a special computer programme was established which enables us to plot up-to-date plans containing geographic coordinates, borders of real estates, status of preservation, the plan of the ancient town as far as known and so on. Some years ago an excavation was started on a real estate to enable scientific documentation before the already planned building activity started; then this estate was bought by the government and determined as an archaeological museum. The excavated part of an insula - Flavia Solva is a regular town - was conserved; the several periods of the building are shown together, differing in the height of walls as given by excavation. A room with a hypocaustum is now protected by a special roof, designed by a young architect who shared the excavations for a long time. In the adjacent industrial building which had damaged the western part of the insula years ago, a museum with finds from the site was established. Conservation of excavated walls causes many difficulties and not yet fully solved problems due to the rough climate and long frosts. One of the best examples, if one considers the duration, is a Roman temple at Frauenberg near Flavia Solva. This hilltop at Frauenberg served as sacral area for the town Flavia Solva, but also as fortified settlement in prehistoric as well as late antique periods. The Roman temple was excavated and conserved thirty years ago; new conservations, the last one a year ago, had only to provide minor repairs. A rather unconventional path was followed in Ratschendorf, a small village at the southern border of Styria. Out of a group of approximately 25 hillgraves, two smaller hills had to be excavated partly due to former damaging, partly due to scientific research necessary for the legal protection of the monument. After the excavation it seemed impossible to enable in situ conservation of the more interesting hillgrave, consisting of earth, layers of charcoal, ashes and burnt bones as well as several metal finds and pottery. On the original site the hillgrave was reconstructed in earth in the form given before excavation was done. In a nearby small house, completely adapted as local museum, a model was built in the scale 1:1 under use of special materials imitating the colouring of earth in order to provide a visual impression of the structure of the hillgrave and the several burials in their unusual combination. The model shows the hillgrave as if excavation were in progress, but the objects are replicas and the original finds are posted in show cases along the walls. This museum was financed by a local culture club and is gaining special resonance by visitors.

- 19 The last example is the medieval castle of Deutschlandsberg, a prominent stronghold in western Styria, which was for a long time possessed by the archbishops of Salzburg and is now owned by the city. Due to adaptations and building activities in a great ruinous room, archaeological excavations were started which eventually lasted over two years with interesting results for local medieval pottery and the history of the castle. A part of the excavated walls (e.g. the apse of a romanesque chapel) remained visible without any alteration or addition, protected by a newly built vault in the original forms of the last baroque period of the room, to which also the floor of stone slabs belongs, which are characteristic for this region. The finds are partly presented right at the place where they were found. I hope to have given a summary of the most remarkable projects in Styria, which are surely not of singular prominence but nevertheless show the widespread activities of local interested people as well as the authorities. I do not dare to conceal that the greater part of aims has not yet been achieved.

On the following side, up: plan of Flavia Solva with areas destroyed by activities of the 20th century and the place of the conservated insula; by courtesy of the survey-project "Archaologische Landesaufnahme" at the Landesmuseum Joanneum, Graz. Down: map of Styria with the places cited.

- 20 -

MUNICIPIUM FLAVIA SOLVA

Zerstoerungsgrad

* insula XXII, now museum

iasioote floshai Stootbegwrg

j^V<."> T^rrv \ \
> < ( "

J^//^a?^ >.. . / ~^\ /./ ( ..-'' --^ \ii.

""

^/)

ft

1 Deutschlandsberg 2 GroSklein/Burgstallkogel 3 Frauenberg 4 Flavia Solva 5 Ratschendorf

- 21 -

RESTORATION WORK IN KNOWTH. BOYNE VALLEY by Paul McMAHON (Ireland) The large tumulus at Knowth has long been known as one of the great sites of the Boyne Valley Passage Tomb cemetery. Archaeological excavations, directed since 1962 by Professor Eogan of University College Dublin, have established that this mound was constructed in an elaborate fashion, that it covers two massive tombs and that in its immediate vicinity a cemetery of at least seventeen satellite passage-graves was constructed. The extensive excavations have also found evidence for other periods of settlement at the site -Iron Age, Early Christian and Medieval. Conservation and restoration is being carried out by the Office of Public Works in Ireland, under my direction, and is based on the archaeological evidence and interpretation. The project team also acknowledged the experience gained from previous restoration efforts notably at the nearby passage tomb in Newgrange. 1. THE MAIN TUMULUS The purpose here is to provide a structure orthostats and capstones of the passage in order to: a. allow inspection on the sides normally covered by earth, b. relieve the passage of any earth pressures which cause it to collapse, and c. provide support to the passage. The passage is surrounded with a reinforced concrete portal designed to carry the weight of the restored mound to foundations set in original ground each side of the passage orthostats. This structure consists of walls and a roof slab monolithically jointed. Design criteria There are a number of design criteria which must be borne in mind or further investigated before arriving at a solution, these are as follows: a. The nature of the subsoil for foundations. Trial pits must be opened and samples tested. b. The minimum/maximum clearances. 1.0m clearance each side of the passage and 1.8m above the capstone. c. Differential settlement between the new structure and the existing passage must be minimised. d. The passage should have "flexible" props back to the R.C. structure. The capstones or orthostats should not be built into or rigidly connected to the structure, as differential settlement may result in undesired loads on the passage structure. around the

- 22 -

e. Durability of the structure must be ensured by the use of high quality concrete (30 N20 grade or better) with a minimum cement content of 360 Kg/m3. The possibility of using large concrete covers or corrosion resistant reinforcement should be considered. f. The quality of water percolating through the mound should be established in order to determine its effects, if any, on the concrete. g. The structure will require protection on its external surface to prevent gross penetration of water from the mound. In addition to this protection there will be a drainage layer placed outside the concrete which will be channelled away to the main drains. 2. THE KERB The purpose is to provide a structure, in order to: a. retain the mound material; b. allow inspection on the rear side normally covered by the mound; c. provide protection to the kerbstones from the weather. A cantilevered precast concrete slab was erected over the kerbstones and attached to a continuous line of self-draining structural gabions. 3. THE SATELLITE TOMBS Two different forms of presentation have been used.

a. Reinstatement of the mound, kerb and passage - mainly where decorated stones require protection. b. Reinstatement of the kerb and passage without the full cairn. The positions of missing orthostats are marked in concrete. 4. DECORATED STONES Knowth contains the largest recorded collection of prehistoric carved stonework in Europe - 261 have been discovered to date. Following petrographic and chemical analysis the stone types were classified as: a. Compact massive sandstone/grit; b. Laminated sandstone; c. Fine grained micaceous stone showing undulose cleavage. The conservation measures include: a. Better protection of the kerbstones in terms of runoff water. b. Consolidation of the carved detail of both free standing and engaged friable stonework. c. Replication and indoor display of vulnerable stonework.

- 23 d. Measurements are being made to determine whether or not further settlement/subsidence is occuring. e. Measurements are being made to relate the number of visitors to change in environmental conditions, salt movement and biological activity within the interior. f. Computerised "weather stations" have been established to monitor both external and internal environments. ACCESS TO VISITORS The approach to the presentation of Knowth differs from that at Newgrange. Severe height limitations at Knowth restricts visitor movement throughout the passage and entrance to the chamber. Archaeology also introduced the complication of a multi-period site into the already complex task of planning the engineering programme. A flexible approach was demanded on the part of the archaeologist, who had to accept, for example, that an Early Christian souterrain could not always remain in situ to be worked around by the steel fixers and pourers of concrete. Such features can often be best and most clearly interpreted by models and drawings displayed both on-site and within a visitor centre. With over 100,000 visitors a year, erosion of the monument and overcrowding at Newgrange has led to strict control on access to the tomb. The archaeological landscape of the Boyne Valley is currently the subject of a special study by the Office of Public Works to find new and appropriate ways of displaying and interpreting it, and highlighting the problems connected with managing the exploitation of the heritage.

- 25 -

SECOND SESSION : JOB TRAINING FOR YOUNG PEOPLE IN CONNECTION WITH SITE ARCHAEOLOGY

- 27 TRAINING OF STAFF FOR THE CONSERVATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES; THE PORTUGUESE EXPERIENCE

by Adilia ALARCAO (Portugal) Although some of the solutions put forward are highly controversial or would be regarded as counter-productive in the light of modern concepts, in the last quarter of the 19th century, Citania de Briteiros in the north east of Portugal was regarded as a model where conservation and of the use of an archaeological site for training were concerned. It was not until the 1950s, when the Portuguese authorities began work on a similar project at Conimbriga, that the example it set, of marking out and protecting the site, entrusting it to a permanent custodian and using it for training purposes - which was due to the work of an intelligent and cultured amateur - bore fruit. The enormous programme of strengthening and restoring excavated structures and of conserving mosaics in situ, entrusted to the National Monuments Directorate, called for the recruitment and training of staff from among local masons and pavers placing them under the direction of a contractor who was a good draughtsman and had experience of public works contracts. The creation in 1962 of the Monograph Museum with its conservation laboratory and workshop brought about a change in the methods as well as the techniques and materials used in this type of operation. As the older craftsmen retired and young people from the region were trained, the museum gradually built up a technical frame-work for carrying out important work, such as the up-keep of archaeological sites (controlling vegetation and preserving archaeological remains in general), conserving and restoring excavated structures and objects, providing technical support for other archaeological sites and organising training programmes for archaeologists, conservationists and restorers and auxiliary archaeological and museum staff. One of the most important contributions of the Conimbriga experiment was to enable the problems of archaeological sites and the best ways of dealing with them to be discussed in detail. Basically, there are two kinds of problem: - damage caused to excavated structures by environmental factors and/or human or animal agents, - the lack of the technical skills needed for preventing and controlling such damage. The means for solving or at least limiting these problems involves training technicians and developing a coherent policy for applying and using the resources available. Specialised training in the preservation of archaeological sites is necessary in three areas of activity: that of archaeologists and auxiliary on-site staff; architects, engineers and conservationists-restorers and those responsible for the management of the archaeological heritage.

- 28 Conservation is not part of the university curriculum for the licentiate in archaeology, history, architecture or civil engineering. Experience to date would seem to show that the most appropriate time for this training to take place is at postgraduate level. A complementary method which has produced good results consists of on-site training, seminars and intensive courses. The large number of young graduate students attending these courses in Portugal and abroad has, in recent years, made a significant contribution to archaeology in Portugal. The profession of conservation technician (conservador, conservateur-restaurateur) was established by law in Portugal in 1980 (Law 245/80). Since then two types of training courses have been introduced: 1. A three-year course, run by the Portuguese Cultural Heritage Institute, which provides professional qualifications, but without academic recognition. This course was held twice in Conimbriga - in 1981-83 and 1987-89. 2. A higher course, which is equivalent to "A" level standard, run jointly by the Institute and the Ministry of Education. The course lasts four years and has been under way since 1989 in Lisbon at the recently created Escola Superior de ConservagSo (Law 431/89). The course offers specialisation in the area of archaeological assets and leads to higher academic degrees. The training of archaeological technicians, which was officially approved by the Ministry of Education will begin for the first time at the professional school of archaeology which is currently being set up and which is directly linked to the Northern Region Archaeological Service attached to the important archaeological site at Freixo (Marco de Canavezes) which is attached to a village currently being restored. This school, which draws on the experience gained from earlier projects intended for young people within the framework of the CPC (Conservacao do Patrim6nio Cultural) set up by the Institute of Employment and Vocational Training and by the European Social Fund marks a profound change in the training of middle-level managerial staff for achaeology on whom the future of the archaeological sites principally depends. The training given is mainly theoretical and general since the value of the training the programme provides has been diminished by improvisation where infrastructures and teaching staff are concerned and by the fact that there is no diploma at the end of the course enabling students to embark on a professional career. Neither the official bodies nor the private undertakings responsible for conserving the architectural heritage have a tradition of hiring specialised technical workmen or technicians in the field. Consequently, the new strategy adopted by the archaeological services which are responsible to the IPPC has been aimed at integrating vocational training into the general curriculum. After the ninth year of compulsory schooling, young people take a three-year fieldworkoriented training course leading to the diploma of assistant archaeological technician which is equivalent to the 12th year and which enables those who wish to do so to go on to university to study history, archaeology or conservation etc.

- 29 Assistant technicians are qualified to carry out certain kinds of archaeological fieldwork and to help in the protection, preservation and development of sites. Except where a local museum with a sufficiently large and diversified technical staff exists, archaeological sites need more than the traditional custodian. They should be entrusted to persons who in addition to acting as custodians can take part in excavations, ensure the maintenance of the site and help visitors to understand and respect it. Saving archaeological remains is above all a cultural problem which requires education.

- 30 -

PHOTOGRAPHS

1. Conservation of archaeological objects. The student learns the advantages of examining with a microscope before any further intervention. 2. Restoration of roman mosaics. Trainees removing the grass from a mosaic which has been exposed for ten years on an unprotected site. 3. Two young restoration workers reinforce the lintel in situ of a recess inside a badly ruined megalithic monument.

- 31

- 33 -

THIRD SESSION : ACCESS AND PRESENTATION TO THE PUBLIC

- 35 HOW TO PRESENT AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE TO THE PUBLIC by Roel W. BRANDT (Netherlands) (Integral text of the communication of Mr BRANDT as presented the colloquy and accompanied by 21 slides) during

Ladies and gentlemen, if this could be Holland, how happy we would be. A monument like this - a temple for Apollo from the fourth century BC in Didyma in Turkey - will in a manner of speaking present itself to the public. In the Netherlands however, the only archaeological monuments made from stone are these megaliths, built in the third millenium before Christ in the northern part of the country, here with the ongoing restoration of the floor. And they need a lot of presentation. Other visible archaeological monuments are barrows like this restored one. The wooden posts around the foot of the mound, which must have formed an integral part of the layout of the barrow, have been brought back. However most of our archaeological monuments are invisible in the landscape, only to be detected by using a coring device or other non-destructive techniques. In most cases what is left over from a Dutch prehistoric site is only a layer with archaeological remains, as here shown in the slide. Often these layers contain information of great scientific value, for example about the remains of a settlement. Most of our settlement sites and cemeteries have become archaeological monuments, not because they are pretty to look at, but because of the archaeological information they contain. This information must be preserved for later generations of archaeologists to investigate with new techniques etc. In the Netherlands to date, about 1640 sites are protected by law and have so become archaeological monuments. A large number of these monuments cannot be detected without special instruments and techniques. This makes them very difficult to protect against destruction. A department of the National State Service for Archaeological Research in Amersfoort is responsible for the protection of all these monuments. In a special programme archaeological monuments that are in need of it, are restored. Sometimes this is done by the State Service, sometimes by private companies. From the sites that have been excavated, some can be used to show the general public what their remains looked like. We expect the more the public knows about archaeological sites, the information they contain on historic lifestyles, etc, the more they may be willing to leave these sites alone.

It is important therefore to present to the public our knowledge about archaeological sites. Therefore, we have to consider ways to present visible and especially non-visible archaeological sites to the public. There are several problems that have to be taken into account in doing so. In the latter part of my paper I shall address these. First of all it is very important to take into account the knowledge of, and the ideas about archaeology by the general public. I must stress the word general here. There are many people that know a lot about archaeology. I am not discussing them. I am talking about people that are interested but have very vague notions on what

- 36 archaeology is. What archaeologists consider to be archaeology is often very different from what the public at large considers archaeology to be. In general one can say that the public has a much more romantic and materialistic view of archaeology than archaeologists do. Most modern insights in prehistoric social and economic behavior, regional research topics, and modern palaeo-genetic research, to mention some topics in recent literature, have not yet reached the interest of the general public. How does one get an insight into their level of knowledge? As we live in a world in which advertisements play an important role in shaping men's ideas about this world, I have chosen this medium as my way into this matter. I have collected over the years advertisements that use archaeological images as symbols for the product or the information on that product that is advertised. I expect that people that design advertisements will only use ideas which they are sure the public will understand and relate to. These advertisements then can give us a quick insight into the knowledge base on archaeology of the public in general. It is also very interesting to see what archaeological elements are used as carriers of information in our society and the changes through time. In this context I cannot go into this. First of all, most people have no idea of time. Time depth is very shallow. Everything that is more than 50 years old, is considered prehistoric. When something is primitive, often so called barbarians with long hair and with almost no clothes on, using stone implements like hand axes are used to symbolise this. In contrast with this, when something is well advanced and complex the Egyptian civilisation is often used as the metaphor. The Egyptians are in general considered to be the most civilised people of the past. Other civilisations like the Hittites or that of the Indus valley, the Euphrates or the Incas are hardly ever considered to be useful in these contexts. There is a Dutch advertisement from a large undertaking business which claims that people of today know more about the funeral customs of the ancient Egyptians then they know about their own funeral. The Vikings are used to represent something that is strong, and often adventurous. In a more local European context Asterix is the best example of the use of archaeological symbols in an everyday context. Time is too short to show you more but these advertisements are representative of the general idea. As you can see, the picture that emerges from this makes clear that at its best the knowledge is very fragmented. In general one can say it is certainly without the nuances and details archaeologists like to use when they present their work. It is very important to keep this in mind and not over-estimate the knowledge of the public in general of archaeological periods and phenomena. A second problem we are confronted with when we want to present an archaeological site of which all remains are buried is the problem of scale and dimensions. According to research most people have problems reading a map. Even worse is their understanding of a groundplan; a plan in which everything has been reduced from three dimensions into two. Many people even have great problems understanding a plan of their own home. In that respect it would be unfair to expect them to understand plans of structures they have never seen. Still this is exactly what a lot of us do. Let me give you an example.

- 37 This is a plan of a number of structures dating from the Iron Age and roman times that have been excavated in the seventies. The original wooden building has been enlarged and rebuilt a couple of times. Finally in roman times, it has been transformed into a villa-like building with stone walls and other roman phenomena like roof tiles. If you are not an archaeologist by profession it takes some imagination to understand that different colours represent groundplans of different buildings and that these buildings have been erected one after the other and after the preceding structure had been demolished. As I said, not a big deal for archaeologists, but a lot of understanding for a layman. At the site of the excavation this plan has been built at a scale of 1:1 using concrete and wooden posts. Different bricks and the use of other material represent the different uses of space in the structures. Despite how well everything is executed, the message is missed by the public. And the public cannot help this. First of all the complexity of the plan at a scale of 1 to 1 is too large to grasp for a layman. But what is more important is the failure to realise that most people are not trained to transform in their mind a plan like this into a spatial reality. This is another problem. In general this is difficult, in this particular example it is impossible because - if one does not have inside information - there is nothing to relate to. One needs outside information to make these mental models. One sees sometimes in churches and cathedrals that the original - often smaller - groundplan of the church is shown in the pavement with stones of another colour. Trier is a very good example. Here one does understand what is going on. But here one has the existing church-building as a kind of framework to help to scale and imagine the earlier building. But in the case of this roman site one has not; there is nothing to relate to. One does not know what the original buildings or buildings of the same kind looked like. In general this is true for most plans of prehistoric buildings that are shown in pavements. And in a lot of situations it is also true for these type of displays. These displays in bronze are used by the State Service to give information about the site, on the site. In most cases however people are unable to make the perceptual steps in their mind in order to transform a two-dimensional plan into a spatial reality. Research that has been done on the subject makes this clear. Grown-ups and children were asked to describe what they had seen. In most cases they had not understood the implications of the plan. So how do we overcome these problems of little archaeological knowledge and inability of spatial imagination of the general public? In my opinion one has to use three-dimensional models; to scale or 1 to 1. Let me show you these examples: this is not really threedimensional but it shows in reality where a modern road crosses a roman road. It is examples like this - you are all familiar with them that do the trick. This is a reconstruction of a medieval house. Originally an invisible groundplan, uncovered by archaeologists and transformed into this three-dimensional reality. You can walk around

- 38 it, into it and see the dimensions for yourself. One only has to think of the tremendous success of the real world reconstructions at the Viking exhibition in York in the United Kingdom to know how the public appreciates these kinds of transformations. Even if some guess-work is inevitable, it is still better to built the model than to wait until the problems are solved. It is very difficult and often impossible to reconstruct for example a prehistoric farmhouse if only the groundplan has been left. Endless discussions have been going on in the literature about the way roofs were built and the angle of these roofs. The public at large however will only remember whether the roof was flat or not. But do not misunderstand me; I am not asking you to be careless in your reconstructions. My concern is with the public. The more they see and hear about archaeology, the better this is for archaeology. Archaeological phenomena are nowadays an endangered species in this world. The more we make the public realise this, the less they will destroy our sites. For visible archaeological monuments one can also make these kinds of transformations as this design in the next two slides will show you. Next to a group of barrows this model will be built. The model will have the same size as the surrounding barrows and will be built of concrete and be covered by dirt. Through it runs a kind of footpath. The sides along this path will be used to give information on the built up of the mound, the central grave and later depositions and burials. In this manner visitors will get an impression of the inside of a burial mound while the original monuments will stay preserved. To answer the question in the title of my paper: simple, make it three-dimensional or otherwise don't do it. keep it

- 39 THE ROYAL VIKING CEMETARY AT BORRE. NORWAY HOW TO PRESENT A NATIONAL MONUMENT TO THE PUBLIC by Bj0rn MYHRE (Norway) The lecture is mostly on the theoretical side of and on theory's implication for the presentation of monuments for the public (1). archaeology prehistoric

During the last decade, structuralistic and poststructuralistic theories have been a challenge to archaeology. According to structuralistic theory, material culture can be compared with signs, signals and symbols, like a written text that can be read by the archaeologists if they know the code. The landscape is studied not only as an economic, functional environment, but also as a mental landscape that people formed according to their norms and ideas. The monuments have to be considered as part of an ideological landscape. The poststructuralistic theory represents a break with the positivistic archaeology. It indicates that objective knowledge about the past is impossible to reach. The archaeologists are basically governed by their own values and experiences, and when we interpret the material remains, we often transfer these values to prehistory. The scientific, value-neutral researcher is an illusion. We have to accept that there is not only one prehistory, but many, according to who writes the story. The poststructuralistic theory is an enormous challenge to those of us who have to present the past to the public. We have to consider very carefully what picture of the past we want to create, why we choose a particular picture and the consequence of our choice for the public. "Who controls the past, controls the future: who controls the present, controls the past", said George ORWELL in his book "1984". We can learn from the Eastern World these days, how important it is to rewrite not only the recent history, but also the prehistory. We may ask: Who owns the past? and Who has the right to write about the past? The Borre site, the subject of this lecture, is found in SE Norway, 100km south of Oslo. It has a special name in Norway's early history. It is mentioned in the Sagas as the burial place of the early kings of the royal dynasty which managed to unite the petty kingdoms of the Viking period and to create the first Norwegian State in the 10-llth centuries. Their large mounds can still be seen on the site that today is a national park. It has been called the cradle of Norway. But there are other national symbols as well: a special medieval church, the monument of those who fell during the two World Wars and the grave monument of an industrial magnate who was one of the founders of the modern Norwegian industrial nation. (1) The lecture was prepared together with my wife Lise NORDENBORG MYHRE. We have published a Norwegian version in the journal Nicolay no. 55, p. 4-10. 1991: Borre en formidlingsteoretisk utfordring.

- 40 During the 1940s the Norwegian Nazi party with Quisling as its leader used Borre to legitimize their position with annual meetings and parades. After the war it became the centre of local celebrations of our National Day, the 17th of May, a day when we also celebrate the freedom after the Nazi regime. Strangely enough the building that today functions as a service house in the park, was originally built by the Nazis. The foundation stones of Quisling's speaking chair can still be seen close to the large mounds. The monuments of past ideologies are still with us. So the Borre area may be seen as a symbol of Norway as a nation, from its foundation to this century, and it is possible to illustrate this history through the material remains in the landscape. A planning committee has been set up to work out a plan for presenting this area to the public. It is not only a question of telling a story to the public but to decide which version of the story we shall tell. "Winners" write their own history, we are used to saying. But "winners" also erect their own monuments and leave their material remains or symbols in the landscape. These monuments are perhaps more powerful than written words, because they are part of our daily life and of the landscape we live in, and after a while we get so used to them that they nearly become a part of nature. In this way, the "winners" influence us and try to convince us that their ideas and ideologies are the best. They do so not only by building their own monuments, but also by hindering the "losers" or the competitors from erecting their symbols, or by destroying older monuments. At Borre we have localised not only the monuments and the settlements of the upper classes, but also the houses and marginal farms of the crofters and the tenants from the viking period, the medieval period and from the 17~l8th centuries. It is not so easy to see the monuments of the defeated Viking kings, the destroyed, heathen symbols, or the monuments of the Nazi-Germans or the Norwegian Nazi party from the 2nd World War. But they are there somewhere, and as archaeologists we are trained to find them, even if they are covered by thick soils. As archaeologists, we have the possibility to find also the "losers'" story and material remains of the dark sides of history. We can also find the sites of the slaves or the poor farmers who built the king's mounds, or the workers who spent their lives in modern industries. Shall we tell the "winners" history by their monuments which are so visible in the landscape, or shall we tell the "losers" or the poor people's history? An exhibition or presentation of the Borre area can easily be controversial and be taken as a participation in the political debate of the present. We, the archaeologists or the historians, are also political beings with our values and meanings. We must ask ourselves if we can tell an objective story of Borre's history. Since the 2nd World War little has been done to present the national park to the public, partly because of the misuse by the Norwegian Nazi party during the war, when they used the National park as their ideological centre. Today the park is a calm, peaceful place that locals use for Sunday walks or for jogging. They are pleased with the mystique of the gravemounds and the present lack of knowledge. They don't want the tourists to take its special calmness away from them, and most of all they don't want us to rip up the story of the Nazis at Borre.

- 41 Other local groups have plans of a Vikingland close to the park with reconstructed houses, mounds and vikingships and with an experimental viking farm. Other groups dream of a tourist centre with thousands of visitors. And some plan a centre for folkdances and saga-plays to keep up the national folkloristic image of the site. My personal idea is that we at Borre have a special opportunity to show the public that the past is not something alien or strange, but part of our own present life. We could try to convince the visitors that the past is not a closed matter, but open for discussions, and created by ourselves according to our own values and ideas. The archaeologists and the historians can try to be open minded and to present different versions of the past, .. also the controversial and the shadow parts, but we must also invite other groups to contribute with their stories, even if they hurt. Therefore, I would like to include not only the "winners" monuments and their ideology, in the presentation, but also the "ordinary" people's monuments in the area; even the Nazi-monuments which are still there. Then the presentation would not be rhetoric or monolithic, but pluralistic and open, and invite to a political debate not only over how the past was, but also over how the past and the present should be.

42 -

qp fl

Fig. 1: Important sites from 6-8th centuries in Northern Europe contemporary with Borre in East Norway

- 43 -

c sI If | 1

i f-*

tt> ro ro

> 0

IS

^"S-S o -S&'gS' t-i e >-i

CO 1 (0 D O <U U

m ^a

M -H 3 W H >

g . ^
Q) 0) .C _
>-i
C? 4-> ^ -P

"8_ ^

to o m <u ^ -P E u t : x: d) Q) x: -P 4-1 U) ^4 -P <4-l

-H O TO 00 Q) <U 0)

J-i C

- 44 -

10

Fig. 3: Guilded objects from a horse trapping, finely ornamented in Borre style, about 900 AD. Found in a destroyed viking ship grave in mound 1.

- 45 THE NECROPOLIS OF PUIG DBS MOLINS (IBIZA); A PROJECT OF AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL PARK OPEN TO THE PUBLIC by Benjamin COSTA, Jorge H. FERNANDEZ and Salvador ROIG (Spain)

1. THE SITE

The necropolis of Puig des Molins is located in the city Ibiza (Baleares, Spain), on the island of the same name. It was urban cemetery of the city during Antiquity and presently it is only the island's largest archaeological site, 7but possibly also most important Phoenician-Punic necropolis actually in existence the entire western Mediterranean.

of the not the in

This archaeological site is situated on the northern slope of a small hill 47 metres high, named after the abandoned old mills that rise at its crest (since Puig des Molins in Catalan means "Windmills Hill"). It is located about 500 metres West of Dalt Vila, the old city delimited by an imposing walled enclosure dating from the sixteenth Century. Since Antiquity until our days, Puig des Molins has been a peri-urban area which, together with the city itself and its port, delimits all the extra-mural installations and outbuildings: the artisan district of pottery workshops during the Punic era, or the modern growth of the city in the present. The importance of this site, whose excavation began in 1903. was quickly recognised and declared as National Monument of ArtisticHistorical value in 1931 through Decree of June 3- Paradoxically, however, as its boundaries were unknown at that time, they were not specified in the Decree. The result was that a portion of the modern expansion of the city - especially during the 1960s and 1970s - were constructed over it, leaving most of its northerly portion, at least 25% of the site, under modern housing blocks and streets (Plate 1). In 1985, with the application of Law 16/1985 of the Spanish Historical Heritage of June 25, the until now Historical-Artistic Monument was legally defined as a Property of Cultural Interest (P.C.I.). At a later date, in 1987, according to the disposition of the new Law, its definite demarcation was approved through the Royal Decree N 1274/1987 of November 10, which establishes that, previous to the any removal of the underground in said area, archaeological excavations must be undertaken to avoid not only the destruction of the site but also the loss of data of extreme interest for the research. Also, in the revision of the General Plan of Urban Ordinance of Ibiza, undertaken that same year of 1987, Puig des Molins is considered a study unit - the number 21 - subject to a Special Protection Plan. The present condition of such an extensive site is uneven, since an important portion of it has been totally built upon, and another, property of the State and properly enclosed by walls, is acceptably maintained. Thus, within the present P.C.I. Puig des Molins two areas can be found:

- 46 1 - The built-up zone, comprised in the modern expansion of the city, with a completely consolidated character, whose detrimental effects to the site are already irreversible. 2 - The preserved zone. State owned, ximately 50.000 square metres. walled and measuring appro-

Within this zone, there are also two other distinct areas: a. that of the Ministry of Culture (about 35-000 square metres) b. that which is under the title of Ministry of Defense (about 12.000 square metres), but declared Transferrable Property pending integration with the remainder of the site. There is also a small strip of land situated at the crest of the hill, adjoining Lucio Oculacio street, divided into four ownerships: one part owned by the municipality and three owned by private parties.
2. MUSEUM ENDOWMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE

Present museum endowment and infrastructure in the of Puig des Molins are as follows: 1 - The Monografic Museum,

necropolis

located in the lower part of the hill.

2 - A group of six hypogea, open to visitors in the 1950s, constituting the only portion of the site to which visitors presently have access. 3 - A peasant house dating from the end of the last century, located in the high portion of the hill, as a witness to the agricultural use of the area in the last few centuries. But, since the Museum's installations could be improved, the hypogea have their original characteristics altered, and the wide possibilities of the remainder of the site and the peasant house are actually wasted, this present infrastructure does not adequately carry out its functions, so it should be renewed and adapted to the new needs. 3- THE PROJECT 3-1. Procedure The Project of the Archaeological Park of the Necropolis of Puig des Molins, promoted by the Spanish Ministry of Culture, arises from the need to comply with the dictates established under Article 20.1 of the existing Law of Spanish Historical Heritage, issued in the 1987 revision of the General City Planning, which establishes that the municipality is charged with drawing a Special Protection Plan for the entire P.C.I.

Herein we present an advance of said Special Plan which we want to emphasize was arrived at jointly by archaeologists and architects who, starting from the points of view peculiar to their respective fields of specialisation, have been working together to reach a synthesis.

- l\l An initial limiting factor this Proposal had to face is the city's own urban evolution. In fact, during less than a century, due to a continual process of growth, Puig des Molins has gone from a rural situation surrounding the city itself, to becoming part of the same city's urban area. During this process, as we have seen, the original site was divided into two areas: the preserved one, and the one which has already become part of the city, now consolidated right over the necropolis, causing irreparable damage and profoundly altering the visual unity of the city and the geography of the wholei On the other hand, the essential enclosure of the preserved area, as well as the lack of means to make this space available to the use and enjoyment of the city, has caused the isolation of Puig des Molins from its environs. Nevertheless, we feel that the determining factor of the criteria to be considered, regarding the action to be taken about Puig des Molins, is precisely the acknowledgment of the present urban character of the site, with the objective of reinforcing the relationship between city and necropolis. Thus, this Plan can be the moving force drawing a total reorganisation of the area, benefitting information and understanding of the city itself while serving as restructuring factor of what has been a chaotic urban development. Therefore, the basic considerations to be taken into account should be the following: a. The protection, conservation and redemption of the archaeological site on its preserved area as well as its urban zone. b. Conversion of the site in a urban asset so that, with due limitations, it can be enjoyed by the citizens themselves as a living reality. c. Enabling the existing buildings and infrastructures to the new functions and creating new installations presently inexistent, although necessary. d. Continuation of the study and investigation in the site, either in the field work as in the study of materials dug in previous campaigns, enabled by new existing structures and work conditions. e. Use of the Archaeological Park as a centre for cultural dissemination regarding the site itself as well as in the wider fields of History, Archaeology, etc. through programmes of cultural, didactic and pedagogical activities. f. Conservation of the ecologic and scenic values of the site which presently constitute a place of a certain bio-ecological interest with the presence of some endemic flora species. 3.2. Project description In order to undertake the project herein proposed, areas must be acted upon: 1 - Intervention upon the urban area of main objectives: four basic

the P.C.I.: Has two

- First, to act on the urban development surrounding the site to facilitate access from the city to the necropolis.

- 48 - Second, application of mechanisms which will guarantee the protection of the archaeological remains which may be found in the subsoil of the buildable lots remaining within the perimeter of the P.C.I. In order to achieve the first objective, a series of concrete actions is suggested, such as the enlargement of the sidewalks and planting trees in the principal streets, and conversion of Leon street to a footpath connecting Avenida de Espafla with the necropolis (Plate 2). For achieving the second objective, in accordance with the directives of the existing Law of Spanish Historical Heritage, in the buildable places remaining within the P.C.I, area, the building permit will be conditioned to the results of previous excavations that allow the evaluation of the archaeological remains that may exist in the subsoil. 2 - Intervention over the southerly border of the P.C.I.: Has the objective of enhancing the Lucio Oculacio street's qualities as an urban walkway situated along the crest of the hill, becoming a great observation terrace of the whole necropolis and Dalt Vila (Plate 3), thus creating public equipment that would intensify and facilitate the connection between Puig des Molins and the historical part of the city. 3 - Intervention on the preserved area of the site: Direct actions on the site are those more concretely proposed for its conversion into a public archaeology park, adapting it to its new functions and needs, and thus recuperating this important space as an urban space for the city (Plate 4). However, in order to develop this project, it is essential to incorporate the military zone and the non-state properties that still remain unincorporated, so that the total area can be treated as a unit. Three main steps can be emphasized as essential this programme: a. intervention on the perimeter of the preserved area; b. intervention on the existing buildings; c. intervention on the preserved area of the site. The intervention on the perimeter requires the construction of a new, more adequate wall, as well as a new, more representative main access to the enclosure, symbolising the connection between the city and the necropolis. The intervention on the existing buildings has the main objective of decongesting the Museum where at present all functions are crowded, so that the different activities can be facilitated and developed. Our proposal concerning the Museum itself is that it becomes exclusive head of the permanent exposition, as well as of the acts and cultural activities that may be developed. All administrative offices, workshops, laboratories, library, etc. should be moved to the military zone, in new buildings substituting the old existing ones, whose construction will be carried out in the same location and surface, designed in accordance with the functions and activities they are meant to house. to develop

- 49 The peasant house should be restored. We propose that it be incorporated to the visiting circuit of the site, converted into a permanent display, housing the ethnographic material kept in the Museum. The intervention on the preserved area aims to increase the value of the site as well as equip it for civic urban use, to facilitate its enjoyment by the citizens. Thus we propose to establish properly marked foot paths allowing pedestrian use of the entire site; adequate consolidation of the remaining archaeological punic, roman and muslim structures recently uncovered and preserved in situ on the Northeastern sector, including them within the visitor's circuit; to adapt some graves for public accessibility in such a manner that its basic structure and use can be perfectly understood by the visitors; and, finally, to establish a public park, in its literal sense, in the esplanade next to Joan Planells street, in the eastern part of the area, with leisure installations, cafeteria and restrooms. 4 - Complementary actions: As a complement to the main interventions, we propose some complementary actions such as: a. Create touristic-cultural itineraries connecting Puig des Molins with Dalt Vila. b. Execute an urban signaling plan showing the principal ways of access and the route to follow, but also the points of historical and scenic interest. c. Study, protect and conserve the buildings of architectural and historical interest existing in the area, such as the windmills. 3.3 Management and financing It is obvious that for the execution of a project of this scope, as well as for the maintenance of the future park once it is executed, co-operation among the different public administrations is essential, since no one of them has sufficient capacity to run and finance the project by itself. Thus it is essential that the agreements between the different divisions of the administration are established in order to guarantee the co-operation and co-ordination in the actions and inversions of the different departments. The reality and the very existence of the park depend on this. In this regard, the initial negotiations and research so far undertaken have demonstrated an optimistic goodwill toward participation. As for the necessary investments, they should be based upon annual budget estimates and, although the ones of greater value should be undertaken by public entities involved - Spanish Ministry of Culture, Autonomous Community Government, Insular Council and Town Council - the participation of other entities should be encouraged in order to stimulate a greater social implication in the objectives of this Special Plan. k. CONCLUSION The present situation of P.C.I. Puig des Molins into an urban context, although this environment has been very harsh for the site, must serve now as an enhancing factor in the relations between city

- 50 and necropolis (Plate 5K In fact, we believe that the present condition of the site - inside a city, near one of the most important touristic areas of the island, with a museum endowment and some visiting infrastruc- ture, though they have to be improved - favour the greater social and cultural projection of the archaeological park. To break the actual isolation of such an important space in order to integrate the site in its citizenship context, becoming an important focus for the island's culture spreading and for the reorganisation of a chaotic urban development, is the main aim of our project.

- 51 -

- 52 -

ID

to a;

in OJ i, rQ

|j OJ

|
i:

(i

i:
0

!i:'!

OJ

i: i.'

(i,
Oxl

OJ 4J

03
rH O,

- 53 -

}.'
f

OJ 4-' H

m
CL>

,c

4-i

4-1 O
ro

2 re
s-i <u

I en

f4f-V<> - I *;|flv. '/ L

-'-% >"V;nl -~t .

I
4->

mv m g^,^t.-^ -,i ^ : :
- *^u. f ; prrr I v <

-,,

a 3
-H -|J C

C O

VpsC; 55*4tS5
-*

<D
!-i

a> *j
0)

m o
rH

a,

I a
fl'
-c*-^-,^,ivr,--- :'':,f:t^-'^,-.
. , .JC'*T-4' >...-... t . ->.,.-*-.',;,, !a

' -

.'-

1. -.-.

v s'>%%

- 54 -

-H W 0)

A: -p
'! : O

r^ 1 >
M QJ

rfl 0)

N, CD 5 S
c I'
I |J
I 1 J

i!
H

c
0)

'' 'I I

I'

fO
r

BJ l a!

ro

- 55 -

o<

- 57 ARCHAEOLOGICAL PARKS AND CULTURAL TOURISM; A REPORT ON THE MALTA WORKSHOP

by Anthony BONANNO (Malta) As one can deduce from the programme I am here on this occasion very much in the role of a substitute. Dr Tancred GOUDER, Curator of Archaeology in the Museums Department of Malta, who was supposed to be addressing you at this very moment, is on the point of taking over the directorship of the same Department from his predecessor. As a result, important meetings and other administrative commitments have prevented him from coming to this meeting. He, therefore, kindly asked me to take his place; but he did not consider his paper complete enough to be read in his absence. In this respect I would like to express my gratitude to the Council of Europe, in the person of Mr Daniel THEROND, for kindly extending to myself the invitation to attend this colloquy. I am also grateful to Mr Fernando REAL, on behalf of the Istituto Portugues do Patrimonio Cultural, for the warm hospitality. As I felt it my duty to make a contribution, however modest, to this meeting, I chose to put together some thoughts, rather hurriedly, and share them with you, on the Council of Europe Workshop held in Malta last month (13th - 15th September) and organised in collaboration with the Foundation for International Studies and the Mediterranean Institute of the University of Malta. That international workshop was attended by a considerable number of participants coming from most European and Mediterranean countries, from Great Britain and Finland to Tunisia and Greece, from the Canary Islands to Israel. There were also participants from the Iberian Peninsula, some of whom I see here with us. The theme of that international workshop, entitled "Archaeological Parks and Cultural Tourism" was in many ways related to the present one, in particular in its fundamental objective on which I, as academic adviser in the organisation, insisted, namely, the preservation, presentation and enhancement of archaeological sites. As the title clearly suggests, however, the workshop dealt with this problem from one particular angle: the inter-relationship and mutual impact between the archaeological sites (archaeological parks, to be precise) and cultural tourism. In the next few minutes I would like to take stock, very briefly, of the major topics and points of discussion raised in that workshop and share with you a few reflections thereon. As I am not a tourist operator, but an archaeologist (a teacher of archaeology, at that) my primary concerns are those related to the protection and enhancement of the archaeological monument. My priorities are, therefore, the following: 1. the preservation in the best possible condition of the archaeological site, a condition as near as possible to its original, pristine one; 2. the evaluation of the archaeological site both as an individual monument and as an integral component of the national heritage, as well as of the common universal heritage of mankind;

- 58 3. the elaboration of the archaeological site and its contents into an organic, comprehensive picture of the history of human development through scientific analysis, research and publication; and 4. its presentation to the public for educational purposes, as a source of pleasure and enjoyment and as a source of personal and cultural enrichment. Consequently, the tourist component is, as far as 1 am concerned, a secondary one. Nevertheless, it is one that cannot be ignored. One has to come to terms with it and turn it, as much as possible, to one's advantage. I consider the culturally motivated tourist, the more discerning tourist as distinct from the nondescript member of a busload of unmotivated tourists herded by tourist guides through and around our major temple sites - I consider the cultural tourist as the consumer of the product I listed under 4. above, namely, the display, the presentation of the monument which needs to be stimulating, enjoyable and enriching. It should also be tourism, as distinct from if properly managed, can namely the preservation of borne in mind that this type of up-market mass tourism, if properly managed, and only be a source of funds for priority no. 1, the site itself.

In short, we must strive to bring about a happy marriage between the two components. The only snag is that in a happy marriage there has to be a lot of give-and-take on both sides. And I, as an archaeologist, am not disposed to concede a lot..., not anything that might jeopardise or compromise the healthy state of the archaeological monument. The Malta workshop was designed very much on the lines of the above philosophy. The programme was based on four sessions with the following themes. The first session dealt with "Archaeological parks and the protection of the cultural heritage" and was intended to investigate in what ways archaeological parks could promote (or, indeed, hinder) the protection of the cultural heritage. On this theme we had very informative contributions, backed by long years of experience, from Marisa MASTROROBERTO of the Soprintendenza Archeologica of Pompeii, Italy, Antonio MAS-GUINDAL LAFARGA from the Departamento de Monumentos y Arqueologia of Madrid, and Avner UZI from Israel. JoAnn CASSAR et al. (from Malta) and J. BRUNET and P. VIDAL (from France) spoke on the deleterious effects of the influx of tourists in artistically decorated caves and underground monuments and on the conservation measures being taken to prevent this damage. In the same session my colleague, T. GOUDER, presented his Department's plan to turn the area of two of the most important and spectacular temple sites of Malta, Hagar Qim and Mnajdra, into a heritage park in order to better protect the megalithic monuments and to enhance their presentation. The theme of the second session was "Archaeological parks and cultural identity". It investigated the role (real or potential) of archaeological parks in promoting cultural identity (both national and international) through information and education leading to a better awareness of one's "roots" and a greater sense of belonging to a nation and to the international community. Xavier BALLBE', from the Centre Europeu per la Sensibilitzacio Envers el Patrimoni Cultural of Barcelona, proposed a strategy for archaeological parks for education

- 59 and public awareness, while Anthony FRENDO, from the University of Malta, investigated the role of Archaeological Parks in education in general, and in research in particular. Open-air architectural museums on the lines of the Frilandsmuseet of Denmark were also proposed by Mario BUHAGIAR. In this session we also had a valid contribution from a Portuguese participant, Filomena SANTOS BARATA. Theme three of the Malta workshop investigated the interaction between Archaeological Parks and Cultural Tourism: in the first place what the expectations and demands of the culturally motivated tourist were (Joseph INGUANEZ, Malta), and secondly how Archaeological Parks could satisfy these demands and expectations and at the same time generate financial means to better preserve and present the same heritage (Terry STEVENS, U.K., and V.P. MEGA, Greece). Most enlightening in this respect was the experience of the two archaeological centres of York, England, given by Peter ADDYMAN. Gabi MAZOR co-ordinator of the project of Bet She'an (Israel) seemed to favour the traditional presentation of extensive Greek and Roman cities, rich with buildings still partly standing and with a multitude of surviving artistic objects. The fourth theme brought together the ideas (old and new) and the experience of planners and managers of Archaeological Parks to promote a better management of the cultural heritage. Denis De LUCCA (University of Malta) considered the problem of planning and design in archaeological parks while Frans SCHOUTEN (Holland) dealt with the psychology of the visitor in relation to exhibit design. In this context I cannot possibly afford not mentioning the contribution by Susanna CORREIA and Antonio Carlos SILVA of the Service Regional de Arqueologia do Sul, Beja, in Portugal on the Archaeological Parks in Alentejo. Finally, Antonio TAMBURINO (Italy) talked on the Italian contribution in this field over the last century. The concept of archaeological parks, open spaces where people, both specialists and lay, could appreciate in a somewhat informal atmosphere, the archaeological heritage - very much like the one with which we are surrounded here, in Conimbriga - the concept of archaeological parks is quite an old one in certain countries. Perhaps the two best known examples are the Roman Forum in Rome and the ruins of Pompeii; but there are many others distributed throughout Europe. In other countries, like mine, Malta, it is indeed a very novel one. We cannot boast of even one such park. In Malta, it is now, after about thirty years of mere exploitation of the archaeological heritage for mass tourism, without re-investing any of the income generated by it into its preservation and more adequate presentation, it is now that a political disposition is apparent to enhance and protect the archaeological heritage of the Maltese islands through various measures, including the setting up of archaeological parks. It is for this reason that a paper on the Maltese experience in this field would have been impossible unless it was future oriented, as in fact T. GOUDER's paper "A conservation plan for Malta's prehistoric temples" must have been. But even in countries where the idea of archaeological parks is not a new one, one can detect new approaches, new dimensions, application of new methods. Perhaps the most successful implementation of this new approach, certainly from the points of view of the number of visitors and of the income generated, is the Yorvik Viking Centre in York, where the simulation of a tenth century town appeals to most senses, including that of smell. The idea seems to have been liked by

- 60 many, and several centres like Yorvik are cropping up not only in York, not only in Britain, but also in other European countries. I think we in Malta would have willingly experimented in a similar venture had we been in a position to afford the original outlay in terms of financial and human resources. On this aspect, however, I should register some disagreement among the participants of the Malta workshop. There were some who thought it unnecessary, even undesirable, to resort to such "gimmicks". They believed in the traditional, purist, academic presentation of archaeological sites; they insisted on more information, visual and written, by way of labels and publications. A new dimension of archaeological parks which was discussed perhaps for the first time in Malta is the marine archaeology one: the setting up of underwater archaeological parks. On this theme Elisha LINDER spoke on the experience of one such project in Caesarea (Israel); Anthony PARKER proposed diving experience on marble wrecks while a short unscheduled paper by Alessandro FIORAVANTI revealed the success of an experiment of this type off the small island of Ustica (Italy). Although one participant queried the cost-effectiveness of the Workshop, especially if it were not followed up with concrete action, all participants showed satisfaction that it was, overall, a rewarding and fruitful experience. Most participants expressed the desire of having the proceedings published. For my part I have already offered my editorial services provided that the availability of funds for publication is secured beforehand. I am pleased to announce that funds are now available and that it is aimed to have the papers published by the end of 1991.

- 61 SITE CONSERVATION AND PUBLIC ACCESS TO SOME ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES IN ICELAND by Gudmundur OLAFSSON (Iceland)

The title of this presentation may be somewhat misleading, as it gives perhaps the impression that much has been done in Iceland in site conservation and public access to archaeological sites. Unfortunately, as I will come to later, very little has in fact been done in order to make it easier for people to get access to or understand archaeological sites. The history of Iceland reaches back only about 1100 years, when it was discovered by Norse settlers in the middle of the 9th century. Iceland was the last country in Europe to be settled and is, accordingly, without prehistorical remains. been main Through centuries, Iceland's rich litterary Saga tradition has considered to be its most important cultural heritage and the source of information about its settlement and early history.

It was first in the late 19th century, with increasing nationalism and struggle for independance and a need for proof of an heroic past, that a general interest in archaeological remains developed. An archaeological society was formed in order to investigate the ruins of the Saga times, and a considerable number of archaeological observations and investigations were made. Although the investigators were perhaps lacking in critical skills, they compensated with enthusiasm, and they have left us with extremely valuable archaeological information. According to Iceland's previous antiquity law, a selected number of about 800 important archaeological sites were protected, many of which were farms from the first centuries of settlement. Since January 1990, however, all ruins that are older than 100 years old are protected by a new antiquity law. And since approximately 100,000 ruins are believed to exist in the country, dating from the days of the first settlement up to this century, we are dealing with a serious problem when it comes to site conservation and public access to these sites. A systematic archaeological survey has only recently been started in Iceland, and we therefore have very limited knowledge of the true number, location and conditions of the majority of the country's archaeological sites (fig. 1). Until the 19th century Iceland was in many ways still an Iron Age society consisting of farms spread around the country, with no urbanisation. The Icelanders lived in houses with walls made of turf and stone, building materials with only a very limited lifetime, maybe 30 - 60 years in general. Through the centuries Icelanders developed a unique turfhouse architecture, adjusted to the Icelandic climate (fig. 2). Today remains of those turfbuildings form a large part of our archaeological heritage. Gradually the ruins melt into the surroundings to appear in the landscape like a group of large or small hummocks or mounds (fig. 3)

- 62 The protected sites in Iceland are often located in sensitive and rather remote environments. A site like B6dm6dstunga, in SouthIceland, is of great archaeological and cultural importance and can serve as an illustration of the problems linked with conservation and public access of the archaeological sites in Iceland (fig. 4). In spite of the importance of these sites, no steps have yet been taken to offer visitors any site information. No signposts indicate where they are; you will have difficulties finding them on tourist maps, and, if you eventually find your way to one, nothing tells you what it is you are looking at. In other words, you need a special guide if you are interested in visiting and learning anything about the archaeological sites. This is of course not encouraging from a public access point of view, but on the other hand it serves in a way as a protection for the sites. Some attempts, however, have been made to conserve archaeological sites and make them more accessible, and here two different projects in this field will be presented. One is at SttJng in Thjdrsardalur, South Iceland, a farm from the Commonwealth period, (930-1262), and the other is at Thingvellir, the site of the old General Assembly of Iceland. StOng in Thjdrsardalur The farm at StOng was destroyed with the rest of the local settlement, when Iceland's most famous volcano, Mount Hekla first erupted historic times in 1104 and covered the valley with a thick layer of volcanic ashes, the so-called Tefra (fig5) The farmhouse was excavated in 1939 by a group of Scandinavian archaeologists. It is by far the best preserved ruin of the Saga times that has ever been excavated and it was decided that it should be left open for public access. About 35 years ago, a shelter was built over the ruin of the farmhouse to protect it from the rough climate. At the time, the site was extremely isolated because of its location far inland, but with better communications, the site became a popular tourist goal. Now, the tourists have become an even more serious threat to the site than the Icelandic climate, with an increasing number of them visiting and walking on top of the old farm ruin (fig. 6). In 1974, when Iceland celebrated 1100 years of settlement, a full scale reconstruction of the ruin of StOng was made nearby in attempt to visualise a typical farmhouse of the Saga time (fig. ?) It was also believed that the reconstruction would relieve the pressure of tourism on the old ruin. Unfortunately this has not been the case. Once people have seen the replica, they also want to see the original site. Now the number of tourists visiting the site has increased to the extent that it is markedly damaging for the ruin. Thingvellir, the old General Assembly site Thingvellir, now a National Park, is the site of the old Althing, the General Assembly of Iceland (fig. 8). Founded in the year 930 by the chieftains of Iceland, it was the national assembly where Icelanders met for two weeks every summer, primarily to make laws and settle disputes. For almost 900 years, all main events in Iceland history are associated with Thingvellir. It is looked upon by Icelanders as a National Shrine.

- 63 The central point of the Althing in the Saga times was the Law Rock. It was the place where the Lawspeaker recited the law, published decisions of the "Law Council" (the Law Council being the supreme legislative authority during the Commonwealth) and made other legal announcements. Every year, thousands of people visit Thingvellir to enjoy the spectacular scenery and study the ruins of the buildings belonging to the attendants of the old assembly. Unfortunately the ruins of turf and stone are now threatened by all the wear and tear of the thousands of visitors walking all over the site, leaving small paths behind them. As Thingvellir has remained unspoiled from almost all modern buildings and settlement, it is extremely sensitive to man-made changes. In order to save the site from destruction, and without modernising it too much, landscape architects were hired by the Thingvellir Committee to develop a conservation plan for the site, in close co-operation with the National Museum. An archaeological survey was made of the site that unveiled a much more complicated group of structures than was known about before. Accordingly, it was then decided, among other things, that a series of organised paths should be made across the site to underline the importance of the ruins and make them stand out better. The first step in this rescue plan was to have a wooden bridge build around the most exposed part, the old Law Rock, and around the structures, one that would harmonise with the landscape, be strong enough to resist the heavy winter storms of Iceland and be big enough for 200-300 people to gather there at the same time. As it was feared that people would get very upset if they thought that drastic changes were being done to the most sacred spot in Iceland, it was important that the bridge was so neatly planted down that it could easily be removed without leaving any marks, in case of negative public reaction. Therefore the posts of the wooden bridge were fastened on top of iron clamps. Small holes were drilled into the lava rock, and the iron was cemented into the holes. In June 1990 the bridge was declared open, in the presence, among others, of the Prime Minister and members of the organisation for the disabled, who for the first time could visit the Law rock! The wooden bridge has already become a tremendous success, and visitors have got an easy non-damaging access to the Law-rock, enabling them to see the ruins in a new perspective (fig. 9)Also it is planned to put up information boards along the wooden bridge and the paths, with historical and archaeological facts about the site. Apart from a few smaller restorations of excavated sites, these two sites, Stong and Thingvellir, reflect the only major attempts that have been made in Iceland so far to conserve and provide public access to the country's archaeological sites.

- 64 Conclusions The conclusions we can draw from each of these very different ones. attempts, are

It has become obvious that the arrangements at the site of Stong have failed. The site will be destroyed if nothing is done about it soon. It should be closed down until actions have been taken in the direction of alternative protection. The new arrangements at Thingvellir seem to be working fine. The total plan for the site is also very ambitious and well worked out, and hopefully there will be more projects of the Thingvellir model in the future. It combines site conservation and public access to the archaeological remains in a way that is too rare in Iceland.

FIGURES:

Fig. 1 : Map of Iceland with location of sites mentioned in the article. 1. Keldur; 2. Kotlutun; 3. Bodm6dstunga; 4. Stong; 5. Thingvellir; 6. Reykjavik. Fig. 2 : Keldur, a turfhouse farm in South Iceland around 1900. A wooden panel marks the entrance at the front. A wooden framework is inside the sheltering turf walls. In Iceland, the lack of suitable timber was an important factor for the choice of turf as building material. Old timber was used again and again when new buildings replaced the old ones. Photo L&pr. 763. Fig. 3 : KBtlutun in Myrasysla. Ruins of a turfhouse building that may be medieval. Phot G. Olafsson. Fig. 4 : Bddmodstunga is a Viking-age farmsite in the south of Iceland. The walls of the main farmhouse and the barns and byres are clearly visible on the surface, indicating a typical Viking-age hall. To get to this site, one has to know where to look for it. No path or signs leads to it (Photo Th. Magnusson). Fig. 5 : Stttng in Thjdrsardalur with its shelter. A site destroyed in 1104 by a volcanic eruption. Photo G. Olafsson. Fig. 6 : A view from inside the shelter at Stong. Photo G. Olafsson. Fig. 7 : The reconstruction of the farmhouse Stong. Photo G. Olafsson. Fig. 8 : Thingvellir. Alraannagja is to the left. The booths of the attendants were located below the slope. The Lawrock is seen by the flagpole in the distance. Photo G. Olafsson. Fig. 9 ' The opening ceremony of the wooden bridge at the Law-rock. Photo G. Olafsson.

- 65 -

Figure 1

- 66 -

N 0)

67

Figure 3

- 68

- 69 -

Figure 5

Figure 6

70 -

Figure 7

Figure 8

- 71 -

Him
Figure 9

mKaiJmmmHmKsmKiHSI^fSamX^SSf

::

'*.*?: III y"??f~-'

- 73 ACCESS AND PRESENTATION OF IRELAND'S ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES AND MUSEUM COLLECTIONS by Patrick F. WALLACE (Ireland)

My purpose today is to outline for members from other countries the variety and richness of the archaeological heritage of Ireland in terms of monuments above ground and especially of deposits and artefacts which await excavation underground and with the difficulty of describing and bringing to life the results of archaeological excavation and survey in indoor/museum displays as well as of the danger of going too far at bringing exhibitions "to life". I wish to emphasise the importance at all times of the primary artefacts the real evidence - rather than the reconstructed evidence and ..to highlight the danger of allowing reconstructions or "reconstructs" (as current English usage would have) to the detriment of real monuments and real artefactual evidence. Although Ireland has been populated from Mesolithic times (about 7000 B.C. onwards) it is only with the Neolithic Age that our stock of monuments begins. There are several hundred Megalithic tombs in Ireland. These fall into a number of basic types and gradually the importance of the related environments and field systems which accompany them is being recognised in the field. The challenge for Museums now is to present this evidence at its fullest and most accurate indoors without allowing the technology to overshadow the ancient evidence. Although the number of graves is very great, the evidence for settlement is sparse in the succeeding Bronze Age period. It is during this phase that the Museum collections come into their own. Such exhibitions fill out the way of life for the centuries for which no monuments and few settlement sites have been found. Although Ireland is celebrated as a Celtic country and the Early Iron Age survives in the memory of our earliest mythology and folk literature the archaeological evidence for settlement in the Iron Age is only just now being recognised with the surveys of hill forts. The early historic phase from about 500 A.D. up to the 12th century is the richest of our records in terms of the enormous stock of field monuments (principally of the ringfort and stone cashel type but also of early monastaries) and in terms of museum collections particularly those in the National Museum which is celebrated for the great treasures of Early Christian Ireland, the floruit of which reached its height about the 9th century. The Viking Age and our first towns have received a lot of excavation attention in recent decades particularly in Dublin, Wexford, Waterford and latterly Limerick and Cork. The excellent preservation of these often waterlogged deposits and the necessarily large scale of the excavations means that our information of urbanisation and the architecture and layout, as well as the artefactual evidence of these periods, has been substantially increased. Hundreds of often intact foundations of buildings as well as thousands of artefacts and environmental samples have been recovered from such sites. Archaeological excavation is also going on in the 12th century and later levels of our towns. Archaeological work in advance of conservation has been undertaken in several of our Medieval castles and later monastic sites.

- 7k The relative richness of Ireland in architectural and archaeological remains has meant that it is possible only for some monuments to be taken into State care and even at these it is not always possible to have either resident caretakers or site reception/shops selling guide books etc. The Office of Public Works has built expensive and very effective new interpretation centres at great monastic sites such as Glendalough and have refurbished existing old buildings on sites such as Carrick-on-Suir Castle and Cashel to accommodate audio-visual and other visitor facilities. This is a most welcome trend but also most expensive. Although the National Museum of Ireland - the main repository of the portable artefacts of our archaeological heritage - houses one of the finest collections of ancient prehistoric gold in Europe, as well as probably the finest collection of Early Christian treasures anywhere and is endowed with a very fine collection of archaeological items from all periods of our prehistoric and early historic past, its record in respect of the fullest educational exploitation of such collections has not always been as good as might be expected. Sometimes artefacts have appeared to have been shown out of context with little attention paid to the monument types, environments and social context from which they derived. This problem of displaying artefacts in context has been highlighted by the rich topographical evidence now being unearthed at urban and crannog (lake dwelling) sites. The primary purpose of the Museum in respect of archaeology has always been to show things; bringing in too much site detail either for reconstruction or reproduction in model or full scale form reduces the space available for display of small items. There are also the difficulties and expenses of bringing indoors organic remains such as was attempted at the Feddersen Weirde site in North West Germany. Such a site with its surviving organic evidence is much more difficult to reproduce in a museum than say a Classical pavement. Although the importance of primary material must at all times be emphasised, attempts have also to be made to bring to life ancient events in what is a television age. There is a danger of going too far in this area and the whole "heritage business" which originated abroad is now about to engulf Ireland if we are not careful. Archaeological theme parks, reconstructions, "events" and "happenings" of all sorts which are loosely based on the past are now about to sprout up as tourist attractions in different parts of Ireland. The great danger here is that they will present a possibly slightly distorted version of the past, that money will be spent in them because of their tourist magnetism which might otherwise be more profitably in the long term put into monument conservation or artefact conservation and display in our Museum. A way around this whole dilemma which would allow visitors to museums a feeling of greater immediacy of contact with the past might be to explain methods and processes of conservation and discovery and to let the public behind the scenes. There is no way that we as archaeologists or Museum Curators can afford to ignore the "heritage business" and to hope that it will pass us by and that the monuments and artefacts for which we are responsible will be untouched by it all. We must emphasise the centrality of realism and the necessity of the input of our expertise in such undertakings but we must also ensure that the central significance of real material is not overlooked. The "heritage business" may be a passing fad but our ancient monuments and museum collection will always be with us and must not give way to imitations of them. Our motto must be in the words of the old salesman's cliche - "Original is best".

- 75 THE PRESENTATION OF ANTIQUITIES AND HISTORIC SITES IN FINLAND by Tuula HEIKKURINEN-MONTELL (Finland) Discussed in the following paper are antiquities and sites protected under the provisions of the Antiquities Act and buildings of cultural-historical value, protected by special legislation and mostly maintained by the National Board of Antiquities. 1. Protection of antiquities

In the Nordic countries legislation concerning the protection of antiquities is over three hundred years old. The first rulings on antiquities were passed in Sweden in the 1660s, when antiquities and other antiquarian monuments were placed under the protection of the state. These rulings also applied to Finland, which was a part of the Swedish realm at the time. Finland's present Antiquities Act, from 1963, is mostly based on an act passed in 1883 concerning the protection and preservation of "monuments from ancient times". In 1884, the Archaeological Commission was established to serve the purposes of antiquarian administration. This body was reorganised in 1972 into the present National Board of Antiquities (NBA). The Board is responsible for the protection, research and care of antiquities and sites of a related nature. In this connection, the NBA works on a nationwide level with respect to the care and conservation of antiquities and prehistoric sites, among other concerns. The NBA is the sole body empowered to care for or study such sites, and is the only authority permitting other institutions or bodies to carry out such measures. 2. Antiquities and prehistoric sites in Finland

According to the present legislation, antiquities and prehistoric sites are protected as the remains of the earlier settlement and history of Finland. They are automatically protected under the Act, and thus do not require separate protection measures. The antiquities and sites in question include dwelling sites, working sites, sacrificial sites, cairns, prehistoric cemeteries, rock paintings and ancient hillforts. The Antiquities Act does not contain chronological provisions, and may apply to sites dating from the earliest prehistoric times to historically recent ones. In practice, the youngest sites falling under the provisions of the Act are fortifications dating back to the First World War. However, most of the sites and antiquities are of prehistoric date, beginning from the period following the Ice Age approximately 10,000 years ago. The Stone Age extended from 8000 to 1500 BC, followed by the Bronze Age from 1500 to 500 BC and the Iron Age from 500 BC to 1100 AD. At present some 10,000 prehistoric antiquities and sites have been recorded, and new ones are being discovered continuously in surveys. At present, there is no nation-wide inventory of sites and antiquities from historically documented times, but there are most probably thousands of these as well.

- 76 3. Conservation and presentation of antiquities

According to the provisions of the Antiquities Act, the NBA is entitled to mark sites and antiquities and to carry out necessary conservation and related measures. In order to ensure the protection of sites, the authorities have sent land-owners notifications of protection since the 1940s. For the same reasons, sites have been marked since the 1950s. The Archaeological Commission, the predecessor of the NBA, undertook the marking of certain sites and antiquities, such as cairns and sacrificial stones with small copper plaques, with a text informing the reader that the site in question is protected by law. Since the 1970s the NBA, together with local planning authorities, has drawn up lists of protected sites mainly for the needs of authorities and planners. In 1983. the NBA published a list of protected sites of nation-wide significance. In connection with protection measures, prehistoric sites and antiquities have been marked on the 1:20,000 scale basic survey maps since the 1960s. The maps cover the whole area of Finland. Apart from referring to the Antiquities Act, the copper plaques, mentioned above, do not contain any other information. The need for signs and plaques of a more informative character has been recognised for some time, and the marking of individual sites and antiquities dates back over a hundred years in Finland. This, however, has mostly been based on local interests. In the 1980s the NBA began the systematic marking and presentation of nationally significant sites and antiquities, with either one or several signs (see picture hereafter). At present, the NBA prepares the texts and illustrations of the signs, arranges their printing and erects them together with local authorities. In some cases, the local municipalities have taken part in the printing costs. Significant sites are also marked with special signs along the main highways, which are erected by the road authorities. Sites of major importance are also marked in road maps. The NBA does not have any separate unit responsible for the care and marking of sites and antiquities. The prehistoric sites are under the administration of the Section for Prehistory, and sites from historically documented times are supervised by the Section for Restoration of the Department of Monuments and Sites of the NBA. The required measures are carried out alongside other work. The care and maintenance of sites and antiquities, directly related to their presentation and marking, has been started in many parts of Finland under public employment schemes. Available funds have made it possible to employ five archaeologists as so-called regional planners, with the task of preparing maintenance and marking plans for the significant sites of their respective areas. The plans are made on a yearly basis. This is a temporary arrangement, and in the long run the NBA is developing an extensive and flexible regional organisation that will meet both administrative requirements and the needs of the local authorities. Also planned is a separate inventory of sites requiring care and maintenance, which is to be kept alongside the nation-wide register of sites and antiquities. Government employment measures have provided a gradual start in the long process involving the care and restoration of a number of significant antiquities as sights of public interest. These sites are often of natural value as well, and the needs of archaeology and nature conservation are combined. Care and marking always require research, training on various levels and expertise in nature conservation.

- 77 A good example of a large protected area and its related problems is Rapola in Southern Finland, which has been proposed as an addition to UNESCO's World Heritage list of sites. At Rapola, the needs of antiquarian protection and nature conservation are combined. The area consists of a complex of sites and antiquities extending in time from the Early Iron Age to historically documented times. Included are an ancient hillfort, cemeteries of different type and age, sacrificial stones and dwelling sites as well as a nearby Medieval stone church and the manors of Rapola and Voipaala. In addition, two nature conservation areas have been established within the area. All of these varied sites and locations are located close to each other. The Voipaala mainor is at present the art centre of the local municipality, and the prehistoric sites and antiquities are on the land of the Rapola manor, a private farm. The crest area of the hillfort at Rapola has traditionally been a popular scenic site. Its natural beauty and impressive scenery have been praised by various writers since the 19th century. However, the forested land of the Rapola manor is also located in this area. Because of the prehistoric antiquities, the land-owner has not been able to carry out effective forestry measures, and at present the area is partly grown over. In 1988 the NBA initiated conservation measures by preparing a forestry :plan for the hillfort area. This plan has now been carried out for a period of two years under public employment schemes. Damage to the forest is compensated to the land-owner from state funds. This part of the Rapola complex is again in presentable condition. A parking area with two information signs has been laid out at the foot of the hillfort. A trail, approximately one kilometre long, with signs has been laid out in the crest area. Some of the sites and antiquities of the area are in the fields of the farm, where traditional arable farming is permitted under the law. The land-owner, however, has given up farming and the fields and their surroundings are now growing over. Accordingly, the formerly typical field and pasture environment with its specific flora is now disappearing. A possibility for preserving the milieu would be the use of the area as pasture, requiring compensation to the landowner. However, the Antiquities Act does not provide for compensation of this kind. It has not been possible to lay out a marked route leading to the sites in the fields as the antiquities are situated close to dwellings and visitors would thus disturb the land-owner. The NBA has arranged presentations of sites only with the permission of the land-owner. In order to ensure the protection of this significant area and to solve the problems of care and conservation, the NBA - together with the Ministry of the Environment - has begun to investigate the possible purchase of the area by the state. The NBA has a small yearly appropriation for the purchase of prehistoric sites. Thus so far, these sites are few in number and they are of small extent. Information signs have been erected and some of the sites include marked trails. The care and conservation of these sites has been carried out in co-operation with local authorities or other bodies.

- 78 As pointed,out above, the NBA has the main responsibility for the marking of sites and antiquities, but also provincial museums and local bodies have been involved in the work. With only one exception, it has not been possible for the NBA to present prehistoric sites with the aid of reconstructions. However, experiments of this kind have been carried out by a number of local museums. For example, in Central Finland a local museum has erected a Stone Age village. Guided tours of sites are still rare, and they have been organised by local bodies. Examples include boat tours of rock engravings at Hauensuoli at the southernmost tip of Finland on Hankoniemi Cape and guided tours of the Lapp cult site of Uko'nsaari in Lake Inari. Booklets presenting prehistoric sites have been prepared through the initiative of local authorities. Presentations of excavations have often been arranged for the public, and sometimes smaller exhibitions have even been staged presenting previous finds and research at the sites concerned. Over the decades, individual researchers have given lectures and guided tours, as well as writing numerous works on local prehistory and newspaper articles. 4. Historical buildings of significance mainly under the supervision of the National Board of Antiquities Due to their different nature, significant building monuments, such as castles, forts and churches, present a somewhat different situation than prehistoric sites. The former are more visible; they are mentioned in written sources, and are locally known. Castles and some forts have been restored, marked and presented to the public already in the 1880s. Finland's medieval castles and forts dating back to the 18th century are owned by the state. In Finland there are three medieval castles of national significance - the castles of Turku, Hame and Olavinlinna. Each has a caretaking board named by the Council of State, consisting of representatives of the NBA and the local cities or municipalities. The various tasks of the boards include decisions concerning the presentation of these monuments to the public. The NBA publishes a booklet in three languages on castles and museums supervised and maintained by the board. The booklet includes a brief presentation of the monuments concerned, their visiting hours, entrance fees and guided tours. In the above-mentioned castles major restoration projects have now been completed and they are open to the public all year round. In two of the castles are tourist secretaries or officers employed by the NBA. In the Castle of Turku the presentations are arranged by the City of Turku. The secretaries or officers are in charge of training guides, arranging tours, renting out premises to outsiders and active contacts with the tourist authorities of the cities and municipalities. The three castles are visited by an average of 100,000 tourists yearly. The NBA is also in charge of a few manorial castles, open to the public in the summer. An example is the Baroque castle of Louhisaari from the 17th century. Two sites of castle ruins may also be mentioned in this connection: Raasepori and the former bishop's castle of Kuusisto. Thorough conservation measures have been carried out at Raasepori by the NBA with routes for visitors.

- 79 Guided tours of Raasepori are arranged in the summer months by a local private association, which has carried out this "heritage work" since the 19th century. Entrance fees are voluntary. The NBA has constructed a stage and seats near the castle. A local theatre group stages performances there in the summer. The first conservation work on the Kuusisto ruins was carried out in the 19th century. At present, the ruins are being restored by the NBA. The ruins are presented with the aid of information signs prepared by the NBA. Finland's most significant fortress is Suomenlinna, located on the islands outside the harbour of Helsinki. This fortress has also been proposed for the World Heritage list. The buildings of the fortress are owned by the state and they are maintained with state funds. A private body concerned with the history of the fortress arranges tours and presentations in the summer months. Other Finnish fortresses include a chain of forts built in southeastern Finland in the 18th century during the reign of Catherine the Great. The NBA is involved in the restoration of these forts with public employment funds. Some of the sites have now been restored and are open to the public. Information signs by the NBA are also provided. The numerous medieval stone churches of Finland are presented to the public by the local congregations.

- 80 -

INARIN UKONSAARI

=3

nM*rl * I )" I Mr I ft klrkcMrl IM l*v* ) p*r*il > korkM. wl*t* ltttllt**n UkoAMtrHt* *! tin*'**"*** nmt Upl* ktpiMt t*l t4tU l4Mittr** tftn**i kMkllt. MlU MlnlttakoM JMX* r*llH, T . I . IUMMM ) Mil P>wthrlti. tntlwitllilFwi *rkMlat mit Arthur I*MM Uvl aitanu*r*IU VUMWM !. van* lrl tfirlliMlwi *^ilt* tttrwtAkcU r*vnn*r*ltt. )** lt *( uwtlpwriin uHtl* t*ll* kuln r*u JOAWM* ich*ftrwuHNi L*vponlB*iokin *** <M Itctir- ty*'** **** ! kuHn** ^*r*iin'iiu> ran k*ll tvttiM MIU< DUw* lln* ^*l*li M* Mnt*lt*t*in Mrwln, l*T kor k*i Mt] I ItlntM ! M*U k*lifc.llMn ). rill^ronlt*lMn MMr*MM*>. )** M *! 1*1 krtMlMn !. VMtMVMitnrpplkU rwuit* t Iwy^imyt 1tfV> it* ] M )!*** l00*lv<Mll. On U Mhaol 1IU

iwtlun llk*t*l ffUMU. UUenan < i*Mlil*tn Mrkl )IMU ) fM " MrkitUvlMUt* p*lvont*p*uol*t* all *!.! t*M-l*n !* IwiMttlln Ii-rli. MM k*Mvu4MM UUoen Illtt|rvU ttrlnoU* ) Mnl tt kontMn kwwl*lliMt*. wilHll*vl* wlto} Ukotl p*rl l*r*fi ) tl** *v*tllt litHll*.

l U , BtU UUW* * lMrl*M flMt* 1* !)! VlM^tlu )0

Vkwwurl Ml !! ) MliM >! rv*Uulplln lulluil*lM* UlvMilMM, hln*lttMliw* wu c^KitlM Irtty.

klllAM MlMli)4tnntt ) MlMU)**mn*kaltn. rIU mliiaImn ) k*v|*to* Uk* >* UlrlrtpilMn ki.l-

Bie sign .of Ukonsaari Island in l^ke Inari, the most important shrine of the Lapps

- 81 -

CLOSING SESSION

- 83 CONCLUSIONS by Geoffrey J. WAINWRIGHT (United Kingdom) This Colloquy has been concerned with the problems of managing our common European heritage within the context of an emerging nationalism and I wish to touch on this subject at the outset of my summary of the proceedings. Professor MYHRE asked us the question whose past is it anyway? What picture of the past are we presenting and why do we present it from a particular perspective? All nations have monuments which they regard as reflecting their national identity - Tara, Borre, Mont St Michel for example and we present these to the public against the backcloth of the sinister Orwellian aphorism that those who control the past control the future. The past belongs to all of us and we have the responsibility of presenting that past to the public and thus influencing their perceptions of the past and of the future. This is a large responsibility to be exercised with the utmost discretion and care. When cultivating national identity we must always remember that we are doing so within the framework of a common heritage, the management of which presents us with common problems and the solutions to which are best sought together. This is the value of international collaboration in a Colloquy such as the one we have just concluded. I propose to present the conclusions of the Colloquy within the framework of the Management Cycle of the archaeological resource. This begins with the identification of the monuments and moves to the protection - by whatever legislative means is available in our respective countries - and involves a phase of understanding. without which neither proper protection nor management is possible. The management of the monuments comes next in that cycle and finally, the archaeological information needs to be recorded if it is to be unavoidably destroyed. As archaeologists our first concern should be to protect the monuments and to manage them effectively - it is this management phase of this cycle that was the subject of our Colloquy. The question of identification was not mentioned in our proceedings - although it is clearly a problem in Iceland with its building tradition of turf-walled houses. There was general agreement that the best protection for the archaeological heritage was enhanced public awareness and sympathy - it is not possible to legislate for this - and the means by which this is to be achieved provoked lively debate. Problems of protection and public presentation in towns was touched only in the contribution on Ibiza and I sensed a general feeling in the discussion that the only possible response to the threat of development was to excavate the sites before they were destroyed. More thought needs to be devoted to this problem if the evidence for the past of our historic towns is to survive for future generations. The solutions advocated in Ibiza show us the way is collaboration with all the authorities that have within the framework of a management plan that has the reconciling the legitimate tensions that exist between forward. This an interest, objective of the need to

- 84 conserve the archaeological resource and the pressure for economic development. It must be possible to arrive at compromises that will allow some of the priceless archaeological information about our urban past to survive into the future. The understanding of the archaeological resource is essential both for the conservator and for the presentation of that information to the public. No conservator would begin a repair programme on a monument without understanding its history and structural phasing. Similarly it is necessary to obtain scientific knowledge about a monument in order to present that data to the general public in an enjoyable and informative manner. The importance of achieving that understanding was emphasised in several papers and the means of obtaining this is by excavation and recording of standing structures. There was some suggestion in the discussion that too much excavation has taken place in the past and that it has no place in the future management of our heritage where our first priority - quite rightly is to preserve and manage. This is not so. We are not advocating a doctrine in which excavation is viewed as an anachronistic technique to be used only when all attempts at protection have failed. It is an essential tool in our attempts to understand what it is that we are protecting and managing which produces information that is made available to historians, archaeologists, conservators and the general public. It is right that our first priority must be to protect and manage - but not at the expense of understanding. A number of papers drew attention - if not explicitly - to the question of authenticity - and this produced an important debate. One may pose the question as to whether monuments such as Newgrange and the Danish Megaliths - after their current restoration programme preserve for Europeans important manifestations of a pan-European phenomenon in early prehistoric times - or are they designed and conserved to give visitors a megalithic experience? The megalithic tombs in Denmark will undoubtedly achieve their primary objectives of being safe and informative but will they be authentic? There is no simple answer to this debate except the application of the principle "conserve as found". This is the only way that one can ensure the authenticity of what is handed on to future generations. That simple principle may not be appropriate under all circumstances but it is certain that authenticity gives that sense of place that reconstructions and replicas can never reproduce. The schoolchild in Coimbra is fortunate in being able to walk along the stone pavements of his Roman town rutted with the chariot wheels of 2000 years ago. No reconstruction could substitute for that sense of place - not to be confused with some romantic idyll - that only the genuine heritage can provide. A number of papers considered how best to present the past. It was agreed that it was necessary to inform and entertain the general public in order to convert opinion to the need to preserve their heritage. Mr BRANDT reminded us that our audience was the general public not just the cultural tourist and it rapidly became apparent that as interpreters and presenters we have no idea of the public perception of their past. This is surely an area for some market research. We are all aware of the romantic views of prehistoric astronomers and the time distortions that confront Palaeolithic man with Dinosaurs but how widespread are these perceptions. We need to know the answer to these questions before we can do our job properly. There was general agreement that plans of monuments alone were an

- 85 inadequate means of presenting the past and that reconstructions whether full-scale, models or as drawings - were important in conveying a message in an informative and entertaining way. Various matters arose from this: - that the reconstructions should not be built on the site of the original so as to destroy the latter; the building of a reconstruction or replica close by the original can take visitor pressure off the original, but a case study from Iceland indicated that the reverse can be true; how authentic should the reconstruction be and matter? that attack evaporated? how does one arrest the processes of decay and vandalism many such structures after the first interest has does this

With these reservations it was agreed that reconstructions were a commonly used and effective technique of conveying information to the general public. The role of museums in this connection was touched on by Mr WALLACE and it is clear that museums have yet to find a role in the field of mass communication and need to move forward with a purpose if they are not to become simply expensive depositories for the ever increasing quantity of data being derived from excavations. The Colloquy also considered the effects of popularization and the problems of visitor management. The general conclusion was to propose restricting public access to over-visited monuments at a time when some countries are under pressure to maximize income from entrance fees and sales. It is clear - as at Newgrange and Lascaux that the point comes when the general public are excluded for the well-being of the monument. This is a difficult decision both financially (for some) and in terms of a popular perception that the public is being excluded from the monuments of a past that belongs to all of us - not just to its custodians and interpreters. Such decisions require courageous and sensitive handling if the public is not to be alienated from what is rightly theirs and the alternative arrangements require careful thought and public debate. Two questions arose from the debate: Is there genuine as opposed archaeological sites? to contrived pressure on

- What are the most appropriate visitor management techniques on "soft" monuments and how may these be quantified. In both areas there is a need for research. The question of the training of conservators gave rise to some lively discussion. It was made clear in a number of contributions that experience in conservation is built up over a long period of time the ancient monuments legislation in Finland for example is 300 years old. The extension of this accumulated experience into training schemes is a complex matter and best done through in-service training or apprentice schemes. In terms of inherited experience there is no adequate substitute for a directly employed labour force with a properly resourced apprentice scheme. Similarly, for graduates who

- 86 wish to enter conservation work, a period spent working with the principal bodies both nationally and in other countries should be essential training. Finally, Professor BONNET defined the principal loyalty of archaeologists as being to science and not to marketing. In truth, our responsibility is to both. To achieve an understanding and effective management of our archaeological heritage and in addition to market that resource so as to inform and entertain the general public and convert their opinion to the protection, proper management and provision of resources for that purpose. If we neglect either our common heritage will suffer and we will all be the poorer for it.

- 87 -

A P P E N D I X

- 89 -

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS / LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS

AUSTRIA / AUTRICHE Dr. Bernhard HEBERT, Landeskonservatorat fUr Steiermark, Sporgasse 25, A-8010 GRAZ, AUTRICHE Ministerialrat Dr. Hans HORCICKA, Bundesministerium flir Wissenschaft und Forschung, Minor!tenplatz 5, A-1014 WIEN, AUTRICHE BELGIUM / BELGIQUE M. Patrice DARTEVELLE, Conseiller f.f. a 1'Administration du Patrimoine Culturel de la Communaute francaise, 7 rue J. Stevens, B-1000 BRUXELLES, BELGIQUE CYPRUS / CHYPRE Mr Andreas DAVERONAS, Senior Town Planning Officer, Department of Town Planning and Housing, Ministry of the Interior, CY-NICOSIA, CHYPRE DENMARK / DANEMARK Mr Torben DEHN, Ministry of the Environment, The National Forest and Nature Agency, Skov-og Naturstyrelsen, Slotsmarken 13, DK-2970 H0RSHOLM, DANEMARK Mr Svend HANSEN, Konservator, Skov-og Naturstyrelsen, Slotsmarken 13, DK-2970 H0RSHOLM, DANEMARK Mr. Carsten LUND, Head of Section, Skov- og Naturstyrelsen, Slotsmarken 13, DK-2970 HORSHOLM, DANEMARK FINLAND / FINLANDE Dr Torsten EDGREN, Director of Research Department, National Board of Antiquities, BP 913, SF-00101 HELSINKI, FINLANDE Mrs Tuula HEIKKURINEN-MONTELL, Researcher, National Board of Antiquities, Box 913, SF-00101 HELSINKI, FINLANDE FRANCE M. Pierre CULAND, Conseiller Technique & la Caisse Nationale des Monuments Historiques et des Sites, 62 rue Saint-Antoine, F-75004 PARIS, FRANCE M. Marc GAUTHTER, Inspecteur General de 1'Archeologie, Ministere de la Culture et de la Communication, Direction du Patrimoine, Sous-direction de 1'Archeologie, 4 rue d'Aboukir, 75002 PARIS

- 90 GERMANY / ALLEMAGNE Dr Heinz CUPPERS, Rheinisches Landesmuseum, Ostallee 44, D-5500 TRIER, ALLEMAGNE GREECE / GRECE M. Charalambos PENNAS, Head of the Department of Byzantine Archaeological Sites and Monuments, Ministry of Culture, Aristeidou 14, GR-ATHENS, GRECE IRELAND / IRLANDE Mr Paul McMAHON, Senior Architect, Office of Public Works, 51 St. Stephen's Green, DUBLIN 2, IRLANDE Mr Patrick F. WALLACE, Director, National Museum of Ireland, Kildare Street, DUBLIN 2, IRLANDE ICELAND / ISLANDS Mr Gudmundur OLAFSSON, Head of Department, National Museum of Iceland, PO BOX 1489, IS-121 REYKJAVIK, ISLANDS ITALY / ITALIE Dr Renato COSTA, Capo FF. Servizio Giuridico, Minister per i Beni Culturali e Ambientali, Via di San Michele 22, 1-00153 ROMA, ITALIE Mme Clelia LAVIOSA, Ispettore Centrale, Minister per i Beni Culturali e Ambientali, Via Savoia 29, 1-00198 ROMA, ITALIE Dr Walter PAGNOTTA, Archeologo, Via Roma 18, 1-06061 CASTIGLIONE DEL LAGO, ITALIE LIECHTENSTEIN

Dipl.Arch. ETH Walter WALCH, Vorstand des Hochbauamtes und der Stabsstelle fUr Landesplanung, Stadtle 38, FL-9490 VADUZ, LIECHTENSTEIN
MALTA / MALTE

Prof. Anthony BONANNO, Head of the Department of Classics and Archaeology, Faculty of Arts, University of Malta, MSIDA, MALTE
NORWAY / NORVEGE

Mr Bjorn MYHRE, Professor, Universitetet i Oslo, Institutt for arkeologi, Kunsthistorie og Numismatikk, Frederiks Gate 3. N-0164 OSLO 1, NORVEGE

- 91 NETHERLANDS / PAYS-BAS Dr. Roel W. BRANDT, Stichting Regionaal Archeologisch, Archiverings Projekt, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Postbus 1347, NL-1000 BH AMSTERDAM, PAYS-BAS Prof. W.J.H. WILLEMS, Director, Rijksdienst voor Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek, Kerkstraat 1, NL-3811 CV AMERSFOORT, PAYS-BAS PORTUGAL M. Rafael ALFENIM, I.P.P.C., Service de Arqueologia do Norte, Rua Antonio Cardoso 175, P-4100 PORTO, PORTUGAL Mme Adilia ALARCAO, Museu Monografico de Conimbriga, P-3150 CONDEIXA, PORTUGAL M. Pedro ALMEIDA, I.P.P.C., Departamento de Arqueologia, Palacio Nacional da Ajuda, P-1300 LISBOA, PORTUGAL M. Francisco ALVES, Museu Nacional de Arqueologia, Praca do Imperio, P-1400 LISBOA, PORTUGAL M. Clementino AMARO, I.P.P.C., Departamento de Arqueologia, Palacio Nacional da Ajuda, P-1300 LISBOA, PORTUGAL M. Jose ARNAUD, I.P.P.C., Departamento de Arqueologia, Palacio Nacional da Ajuda, P-1300 LISBOA, PORTUGAL Mme Filomena BARATA, I.P.P.C., Departamento de Arqueologia, Palacio Nacional da Ajuda, P-1300 LISBOA, PORTUGAL Mme Manuela BARATA, I.P.P.C., Direccao Regional, Rua Pedro Monteiro 100, P-3000 COIMBRA, PORTUGAL M. Gaetano BEIRAO, Rua Augusto Filipe Sim5es 2, P-7000 EVORA, PORTUGAL M. Fernando Carlos BELOTO, Museu Monografico de Conimbriga, P-3150 CONDEIXA, PORTUGAL M. Mario BRITO, Museu D. Diogo de Sousa, Av. Central 32, P-^700 BRAGA, PORTUGAL Mme Jacinta BUGALHAO, I.P.P.C., Departamento de Arqueologia, Palacio Nacional da Ajuda, P-1300 LISBOA, PORTUGAL M. JoSo Carlos CARDOSO, I.P.P.C., Departamento de Arqueologia, Palacio Nacional da Ajuda, P-1300 LISBOA, PORTUGAL M. Joao Luis CARDOSO, Centre de Estudos Arqueologicos, Camara Municipal de Oeiras, P-2780 OEIRAS, PORTUGAL M. Virgilio CORREIA, Museu Monografico de Conimbriga, P-3150 CONDEIXA, PORTUGAL M. Artur CORTE-REAL, I.P.P.C., Service de Arqueologia, Rua Pedro Monteiro 100, P-3000 COIMBRA, PORTUGAL Mme Maria Rosario COSTA, Museu Municipal Hipolito Cabaco, Camara Municipal de Alenquer, P-25oO ALENQUER, PORTUGAL

- 92 Mme Isabel COSTEIRA, I.P.P.C., Departamento de Arqueologia, Palacio Nacional da Ajuda, P-1300 LISBOA, PORTUGAL Mme Ana Leite CUNHA, I.P.P.C., Servigo de Arqueologia, Rua Pedro Monteiro 100, P-3000 COIMBRA, PORTUGAL M. Lino Augusto DIAS, I.P.P.C. Servigo de Arqueologia, Rua Antonio Cardoso 175, P-^100 PORTO, PORTUGAL Mme Ana Luisa DUARTE, Museu Municipal do Seixal, P-2840 SEIXAL, PORTUGAL Mme Maria Alexandra ESTRONINHO, I.P.P.C., Departamento de Arqueologia, Palacio Nacional da Ajuda, P-1300 LISBOA, PORTUGAL Mme Maria Teresa FERNANDEZ, I.P.P.C., Servigo de Arqueologia, Rua de Santa Catarina 3, P-7000 EVORA, PORTUGAL. Mme Susana Correia FONSECA, I.P.P.C., Servigo de Arqueologia, Rua de Santa Catarina 3, P-7000 EVORA, PORTUGAL Mme Cristina GARCIA, Area de Paisagem Protegida Sintra-Cascais, Rua Alves Rogadas 10 1, P-2710 SINTRA, PORTUGAL M. Mario Varela GOMES, Museu Municipal de Arqueologia, P-8300 SILVES, PORTUGAL Mme Anabela LEBRE, I.P.P.C., Servigo de Arqueologia, Rua Antonio Cardoso 175, P-^100 PORTO, PORTUGAL Mme Ana MARQUES, Camara Municipal de Tomar, P-2300 TOMAR, PORTUGAL M. Jos6 Maia MARQUES, Universidade Portucalense, Av. Rodrigues de Freitas 3^9, P-4000 PORTO, PORTUGAL M. Artur MARTINS, I.P.P.C., Departamento de Arqueologia, Palacio Nacional da Ajuda, P-1300 LISBOA, PORTUGAL M. Manuel MATIAS, Museu Monografico de Conimbriga, P-3150 CONDEIXA, PORTUGAL M. Jos6 Luis MATOS, I.P.P.C., Departamento de Arqueologia, Palacio Nacional da Ajuda, P-1300 LISBOA, PORTUGAL Mme Maria Filomena MONTEIRO, Camara Municipal de Grandola, P-7570 GRANDOLA, PORTUGAL M. Jos6 Beleza MOREIRA, I.P.P.C., Servigo de Arqueologia, Rua Pedro Monteiro 100, P-3000 COIMBRA, PORTUGAL M. Jo5o Bairrao OLEIRO, I.P.P.C., Palacio Nacional da Ajuda, P-1300 LISBOA, PORTUGAL M. Paulo OLIVEIRA, I.P.P.C., Departamento de Arqueologia, Palacio Nacional da Ajuda, P-1300 LISBOA, PORTUGAL M. Antonio Cavaleiro PAIXAO, I.P.P.C., Departamento de Arqueologia, Palacio Nacional da Ajuda, P-1300 LISBOA, PORTUGAL Padre Joao PARENTE, Camara Municipal de Vila Real, P-6110 VILA REAL, PORTUGAL

- 93 M. Rui PARREIA, I.P.P.C., Service de Arqueologia, Rua de Santa Catarina 3, P-7000 EVORA, PORTUGAL Mme Maria Isabel PEREIRA, Museu Municipal Dr. Santos Rocha, Av. Saraiva de Carvalho, P-3080 FIGUEIRA DA FOZ, PORTUGAL M. Miguel PESSOA, Museu Monografico de Conimbriga, P-3150 CONDEIXA, PORTUGAL Mme Clara Vaz PINTO, Museu Francisco Tavares Proenca Junior, P-6000 CASTELO BRANCO, PORTUGAL M. Fernando PINTO, I.P.P.C. Service de Arqueologia, Rua Antonio Cardoso 175, P-^100 PORTO, PORTUGAL Mme Maria La Salete PONTE, Escola Superior de Tecnologia de Tomar, Av. Candido Madureira 13, P-2300 TOMAR, PORTUGAL Mme Maria RAMALHO, I.P.P.C., Departamento de Arqueologia, Palacio Nacional da Ajuda, P-1300 LISBOA, PORTUGAL M. Fernando REAL, Director do Departamento de Arqueologia, I.P.P.C., Palacio da Ajuda, P-1300 LISBOA, PORTUGAL M. Miguel RODRIGUES, I.P.P.C., Service de Arqueologia, Rua Antonio Cardoso 175, P-4100 PORTO, PORTUGAL Mme Maria Helena ROMERO, Escola Superior de Tecnologia de Tomar, Av. Candido Madureira 13, P-2300 TOMAR, PORTUGAL Mme Maria Jose SAMPAIO, Museu Nacional Machado de Castro, P-3000 COIMBRA, PORTUGAL M. Panagiotis SARANTOPOULOS, Camara Municipal de Evora, P-7000 EVORA, PORTUGAL M. Antonio Carlos SILVA, I.P.P.C., Servigo de Arqueologia, Rua de Santa Catarina 3, P-7000 EVORA, PORTUGAL M. Fernando SILVA, I.P.P.C., Service de Arqueologia, Rua Pedro Monteiro 100, P-3000 COIMBRA, PORTUGAL Mme Maria Isabel SILVA, Museu D. Diogo de Sousa, Av. Central 32, P-4700 BRAGA, PORTUGAL M. Orlando SOUSA, I.P.P.C., ServiQo de Arqueologia, Rua Antonio Cardoso 175, P-4100 PORTO, PORTUGAL Mme Ivone TAVARES, I.P.P.C., Departamento de Arqueologia, Palacio Nacional da Ajuda, P-1300 LISBOA, PORTUGAL M. Joao Ines VAZ, Universidade Catolica, Centre de Viseu, P-3500 VISEU, PORTUGAL SPAIN / ESPAGNE Mr Benjamin COSTA, Curator at the Archaeological Museum of Ibiza, Via Romana 31, E-07800 IBIZA (BALEARES), ESPAGNE M. Xavier DUPRE i RAVENTOS, Calle Girona 11, 3 planta la puerta, E-43003 TARRAGONA, ESPAGNE

- 94 M. Jose FERNANDEZ MORENO, Junta de Castilla y Le6n, Delegaci6n Territorial, E-SORIA, ESPAGNE M. Julio IGLESIAS GIL, Universidad de Cantabria, E-390?l SANTANDER, ESPAGNE M. Jose Luis PEREZ-SANCHEZ, Arqueologo, Departamento de Ciencias Historicas, Universidad de Cantabria, E-39071 SANTANDER, ESPAGNE M. Julio Manuel VIDAL ENCINAS, Archaeologist, Servicio Territorial de Cultura, c/ Sierra Pambley 4, E-24071 LEON, ESPAGNE M. Esteban VIDAL, Centro de Estudios del Romanico, Monasterio de Sta Maria La Real, Agilar de Campoo, E-PALENCIA, ESPAGNE SWEDEN / SUEDE Mr Bengt EDGREN, Archaeologist, Central Board of National Antiquities, Box 5405, S-114 84 STOCKHOLM, SUEDE Dr. Gustaf TROTZIG, Head of the Archaelogical Heritage Department, Swedish Central Board of National Antiquities, Box 5405, S-114 84 STOCKHOLM, SUEDE SWITZERLAND / SUISSE Prof. Charles BONNET, Archeologvie cantonnal, 17 Chemin du Bornalet, CH-1242 GENEVE-SATIGNY, SUISSE TURKEY / TURQUIE Mr Metin GOKER, Directeur general adjoint des affaires culturelles au Ministere des Affaires Etrangeres, Mesrutiyet Caddesi, n" 27 Kizilay, TR-ANKARA, TURQUIE UNITED KINGDOM / ROYAUME-UNI Mr Geoffrey J. WAINWRIGHT, Chief Archeology Officer, English Heritage, Fortress House, 23 Savile Row, GB-LONDON W1X 1AB, ROYAUME-UNI

ORGANISATION OF THE COLLOQUY / ORGANISATION DU COLLOQUE Council of Europe / Conseil de 1'Europe Directorate of Education, Culture and Sport / Direction de 1'Enseignement, de la Culture et du Sport M. Daniel THEROND, Principal Administrator, Division for Cultural Heritage / Administrateur Principal, Division du Patrimoine Culturel Mile Claudine NONNENMACHER, Secretariat, Division for Cultural Heritage / Secretariat, Division du Patrimoine Culturel

- 95 Instituto Portugues do patrimonio Cultural (IPPC) Mme Filomena BARATA, IPPC, Departamento de Arqueologia, Palacio Nacional da Ajuda, P-1300 LISBOA, PORTUGAL Mme Isabel COSTEIRA, IPPC, Departamento de Arqueologia, Palacio Nacional de Ajuda, P-1300 LISBOA, PORTUGAL M. Paulo OLIVEIRA, IPPC, Departamento de Arqueologia, Palacio Nacional da Ajuda, P-1300 LISBOA, PORTUGAL M. Fernando REAL, IPPC, Departamento de Arqueologia, Palacio Nacional de Ajuda, P-1300 LISBOA, PORTUGAL Museu Monografico de Conimbriga Mme Adilia ALARCAO, Museu Monografico de Conimbriga, P-3150 CONDEIXA, PORTUGAL Administrative and technical support / Assistance administrative et technique M. Fernando Carlos BELOTO, Museu Monografico de Conimbriga, P-3150 CONDEIXA, PORTUGAL M. Virgilio CORREIA, Museu Monografico de Conimbriga, P-3150 CONDEIXA, PORTUGAL Mme Ana Leite CUNHA, I.P.P.C. Service de Arqueologia, Rua Pedro Monteiro 100, P-3000 COIMBRA, PORTUGAL M. Manuel MATIAS, Museu Monografico de Conimbriga, P-3150 CONDEIXA, PORTUGAL M. Miguel PESSOA, Museu Monografico de Conimbriga, P-3150 CONDEIXA, PORTUGAL Mme Ivone TAVARES, I.P.P.C., Departamento de Arqueologia, Palacio Nacional da Ajuda, P-1300 LISBOA, PORTUGAL

Sales agents for publications of the Council of Europe Agents de vente des publications du Conseil de ('Europe
AUSTRALIA/AUSTRALIE Hunter Publications 58A, Cipps Street AUS-3066 COLLINGWOOD, Victoria AUSTRIA/AUTRICHE Gerold und Co. Graben 31 A-1011 VIENNA 1 BELGIUM/BELGIQUE La Librairie europeenne SA 244, rue de la Loi B-1040 BRUSSELS CANADA Renouf Publishing Company Limited 1294 Algoma Road CDN-OTTAWA ONT K1B 3W8 CYPRUS/CHYPRE MAM The House of the Cyprus Book PO Box 1722 CY-NICOSIA DENMARK/ DANEMARK Munksgaard Book and Subscription Service PO Box 2148 DK-1016 COPENHAGEN K FINLAND/FINLANDE Akateeminen Kirjakauppa Keskuskatu 1 PO Box 218 SF-00381 HELSINKI GERMANY/ALLEMAGNE Verlag Dr. Hans Heger HerderstraBe 56 Postfach 20 13 63 D-5300 BONN GREECE/GRECE Librairie Kauffmann Mavrokordatou 9 GR-ATHENS 106 78 ICELAND/ISLANDE Bokabud Mais og menningar Laugavegi 18 IS-REYKJAVIK 101 IRELAND/IRLANDE Government Stationery Office Publications Section Bishop Street IRL-DUBLIN 8 ITALY/ITALIE Libreria Commissionaria Sansoni Via Duca di Calabria, 1/1 Casella Postale 552 1-50125 FLORENCE LUXEMBOURG Librairie Bourbon (Imprimerie Saint-Paul) 11, rue Bourbon L-1249 LUXEMBOURG MALAYSIA/MALAISIE Library Building University of Malaya PO Box 1127 Jalan Pantai Baru 59700 KUALA LUMPUR NETHERLANDS/PAYS-BAS InOr-publikaties PO Box 202 NL-7480 AE HAAKSBERCEN NEW ZEALAND/NOUVELLE-ZELANDE GP Publications Ltd 33 The Esplanade PO Box 33-900 Petone NZ-WELLINGTON NORWAY/NORVEGE Akademika, A/S Universitetsbokhandel PO Box 84 Blindern N-0314 OSLO PAKISTAN Tayyab MS Commercial Services PO Box 16006 A-2/3, Usman Ghani Road Manzoor Colony PAK-KARACHI-44 PORTUGAL Livraria Portugal Rua do Carmo, 70 P-1200 LISBON SPAIN/ESPAGNE Mundi-Prensa Libros SA Castello 37 E-28001 MADRID Llibreria de la Generalitat Rambla dels Estudis, 118 E-08002 BARCELONA Llibreria de la Generalitat de Catalunya Gran Via Jaume I, 38 E-17001 GIRONA SRI LANKA Centre for Curriculum Advancement 78 Eachamottai Road CL-JAFFNA SWEDEN/SUEDE Aktiebolaget CE Fritzes Regeringsgatan 12 Box 163 56 S-10327 STOCKHOLM SWITZERLAND/SUISSE Buchhandlung Heinimann & Co. Kirchgasse 17 CH-8001 ZURICH Librairie Payot 6, rue Grenus CH-1211 GENEVA 11 TAIWAN HONG KONG SINGAPORE/SINGAPOUR Mappamundi Taiwan 7 Fl. 258, Nanking E. Rd. Sec. 3 Taipei TAIWAN ROC TURKEY/TURQUIE Librairie Haset Kitapevi AS 469, Istiklal Caddesi Beyoglu TR-ISTANBUL UNITED KINGDOM/ROYAUME-UNI HMSO Agency Section 51 Nine Elms Lane GB-LONDON SW8 SDR UNITED STATES and CANADA/ ETATS-UNIS et CANADA Manhattan Publishing Company 1 Croton Point Avenue, PO Box 650 CROTON, NY 10520 STRASBOURG Librairie Kleber 1. rue des Francs-Bourgeois F-67000 STRASBOURG

rganised jointly by the Council of Europe and the Institute Portuges do Patrimonio Cultural, the colloquy "Archaeological sites in Europe: conservation, maintenance and enhancement" was a contribution to the Council of Europe's cultural heritage programme and to the work of the committee of experts responsible for drafting a revised European convention on the protection of the archaeological heritage. The colloquy considered different topics concerning the identification, protection, understanding and management of the archaeological heritage. With regard to the effects of popularisation and the problems of the tourist trade, one question arose from the debate: what are the most appropriate visitor management techniques for "soft" monuments and how may these be quantified? There is a need for further research in such areas and proposals have been made for a follow-up within the cultural heritage committee programme.

o,

Council of Europe Press

ISBN 92-871-2047-1