CONCEPTUAL CHANGES IN ALBANIAN ARCHAEOLOGY
However, this brings us to the major prob-
lem: who is going finance archaeological work
in Albania in the future? Previously this was
entirely the role of the totalitarian state. State
financing will doubtless continue, but not as
it did before. There will be a need for relation-
ships not only with the state but also with pri-
vate enterprises and local government institu-
tions, which are empowered to link economic
development with archaeological work under
the existing legislation. Thus, it would be pos-
sible for the districts of Durres or Butrinti to
relate archaeological investigations with
tourist development.
The Albanian archaeological heritage is suf-
fering greatly at the present time from looting
of sites and illicit export of archaeological
material. This has been made possible by the
lack of judicial protection, the opening up of
the country's borders, and a general break-
down of public order. This contraband trade
in archaeological and art treasures is cata-
strophic for the country's cultural heritage. No
such problem existed during the totalitarian
Archaeology in Bulgaria
V. VELKOV*
Modern Bulgaria, which includes regions both
north and south of the Haemus mountains
(Stara Planina) as well as part of the western
shore of the Pontos Euxinos (Black Sea), is a
country with a rich archaeological heritage
from the Palaeolithic down to the late
medieval period.
This poses serious difficulties in organizing
research - that is, in the provision of special-
ists for each of the archaeological periods
(pre- and protohistory, classical a n d late
antiquity, and the Middle Ages) and in the
provision of an adequate research institute to
carry out archaeological investigation.
The National Archaeological Museum was
founded as early as 1892 and over the years it
has developed into a remarkable treasure-
house of monuments a n d finds from all
* Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. Rut. 7 Noeiiivri 7 . BG-1040 Sofia. Bulgaria
AN'I'IQLIII'Y 67 (1993):125-29
125
period, since the country's borders were firm-
ly closed. However, responsibility for the pre-
sent state of affairs should not be laid at the
door of democracy. The need has arisen for a
new conceptual approach in order to combat
it, not just through Interpol but also by creat-
ing respect for the legal protected status of
monuments and objects and for the country's
cultural values. Modern techniques of protec-
tion must be introduced, and at the same time
the national conscience and public opinion
must be influenced so as to condemn this traf-
fic in our country's heritage.
These are the challenges that confront
Albanian archaeologists and society as a whole.
The present time is a transitional period, when
democracy is still a tender plant and democrat-
ic institutions are still in the process of being
created. We are confident that these develop-
ments, leading to economic and social stability,
will bring about a spiritual and material renais-
sance for archaeology, the worthy discipline
that is essential for understanding and appreci-
ating the world's cultural history.
periods. The numismatic collection alone
contains hundreds of thousands of coins, all
found in Bulgaria. In 1921, Professor Bogdan
Filov founded the Archaeological Institute,
created by statute. Until World War 11, the
members of these two institutions, though few
in number, were responsible for archaeologi-
cal excavations, assisted by the staff of mus-
eums in Varna, Plovdiv, Shoumen, Stara
Zagora, Kiustendil, Burgas and Razgrad.
The imposition of the Communist regime in
Bulgaria after 1944 led to a reorganization of
all scientific research, including archaeology.
The Bulgarian Academy, founded as early as
1869, was reorganized on the Soviet model
and along socialist lines. This new Academy
included institutes for the humanities and for
the natural sciences and the number of insti-
126 V. VELKOV
tutes continued to grow - to the extent that,
by 1990, the Academy was responsible for as
many as one hundred!
During this reorganization, the two inde-
pendent institutions, the National Museum
and the Archaeological Institute, were com-
pulsorily united into a single body, renamed
‘The Archaeological Institute and Museum’.
The consequence of this decision was that the
Archaeological Museum became the base for
the Institute and its role as a museum suf-
fered. On the other hand, the Archaeological
Institute lost its financial independence
which until then had provided adequate
resources to fund its own research activities.
Thanks to endowments, the Institute had pos-
sessed its own building and also a number of
important funds, the interest from which cov-
ered all its expenses. During this reorganiz-
ation, these funds were confiscated by the
state, and the members of the Archaeological
Institute and Museum henceforth received
their wages from the general budget provided
for the Academy of Sciences. The Academy
undertook to ensure that funds were also pro-
vided to carry out excavations. These academ-
ic and financial arrangements only lasted a
few years, when the system was changed
again. Under this second arrangement, the
state guaranteed to provide funds for excava-
tion on an annual basis, but they were to be
made available through the Ministry of
Culture, which allocated funds through local
administrative authorities (the counties), each
of which had sections responsible for the cul-
tural heritage.
Under the law on museums and cultural
heritage of 1969 (which covered the archaeo-
logical heritage) the Archaeological Institute
was given the primary responsibility for orga-
nizing excavations throughout the whole
country while another organization, the
National Institute of Cultural Monuments,
was responsible for the conservation of stand-
ing archaeological remains. Section 15 of this
law stated that ‘archaeological excavations,
trial digs, underwater research, geophysical
and other forms of activity within the bound-
aries of Bulgaria for purposes of research on
the cultural monuments will be organized by
the Archaeological Institute, attached to the
Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, but the con-
solidation, restoration and conservation of
these monuments shall be carried out by the
National Institute of Cultural Monuments,
attached to the Ministry of Culture’. This law
guaranteed the academic side of archaeologi-
cal excavation and research because the
Institute had the sole right to determine that
only its own archaeologists could conduct
excavations and staff the archaeological muse-
ums. It also meant that all archaeologists had
to report to the relevant sections of the
Archaeological Institute on the results of their
excavations. They were required to present a
copy of their documentation to the
Archaeological Institute, and this was then
filed in the Institute’s archive. At present, the
Archaeological Institute contains an archive
which has a full documentary record of all
excavations carried out in the country since
1970, when this new law came into force.
Every year, the Institute of Archaeology, in
collaboration with the Ministry of Culture,
organized a National Archaeological Congress,
which included lectures detailing the major
results of research and discussion of theoreti-
cal and practical problems. Up to April 1992
36 such national congresses were held.
The organization described above had a
number of favourable consequences. In theory,
the Archaeological Institute was given exten-
sive powers as organizer and co-ordinator of
archaeological activity for the whole country.
In practice, however, this role was obstructed
by the State’s regional bureaucracies, who
controlled the funds for excavation. Thanks to
the fact that local authorities were stimulated
by local patriotism and the desire to display
as many sites as possible within their locality,
these authorities usually provided the neces-
sary resources. At the same time, many diffi-
culties arose in the conservation of excavated
remains, a problem which was entangled in a
complex bureaucratic system. There were
sometimes insufficient specialists available to
carry out the work, and i n some cases the
local authorities lacked the necessary funds to
pay for it. During this period, there was no
private sponsorship of excavations.
When the State was involved in national
celebrations, inspired by political motives,
which required archaeological excavations,
the State directed the Archaeological Institute
to carry out the work and made large financial
budgets available. For example, in connection
with the celebration of the 1300th anniversary
of the foundation of the Bulgarian State i n
 ARCHAEOLOGY IN BULGARIA
1981, funds were already being provided as
early as 1970. This allowed large-scale excava-
tions to be carried out in the medieval capitals
of Bulgaria (Pliska, Preslav and Turnovgrad)
(FIGURE 1).The same applied in connection
with the celebration of the 800 years since the
foundation of the second Bulgarian Kingdom.
In these and other cases the Archaeological
Institute was instructed to carry out excava-
tions, irrespective of the fact that, from the aca-
demic point of view, there were other sites
which had greater claims for excavation.
The Archaeological Institute was also
responsible for carrying out rescue excava-
tions where building work uncovered remains
of archaeological importance. Such problems
were encountered in all the large Bulgarian
cities during rebuilding of the city centres.
Excavations were also needed in advance of
other projects, such as the building of reser-
voirs a n d large factories. Article 1 8 of the
1969 law regulated the relationship between
construction teams and archaeologists. The
Ministry of Finance was required to provide
additional financial resources to the organiza-
tion which carried out the building so that
archaeological excavation could be funded.
Under this law, after the completion of such
research, a specialist commission decided the
fate of the remains that had been uncovered -
either destruction after full documentation or
conservation in situ, with consequent reloca-
tion of the building.
127
As a result of this important article remains
in the centre of the capital, Sofia, were exca-
vated and conserved, including parts of the
fortification wall and the eastern gate of the
Romano-Byzantine city. The ancient theatre
in Plovdiv and a significant part of the centre
of the ancient city, including its forum, were
also excavated a n d conserved. An entire
Thracian city, Seuthopolis, west of the city of
Kazanluk, was excavated, although it was sub-
sequently submerged beneath the reservoir
then under construction (FIGURE2 ) . When
during the construction of a reservoir, the
remains of a Roman villa were found near the
town of Ivailovgrad in southern Bulgaria, with
well-preserved floor mosaics and architectural
decoration, building was stopped a n d the
planned reservoir was built on another site.
The remains of the villa were then conserved
and the site opened to the public. There were
also several burial tumuli which were fully
excavated under the same arrangement.
However, this law also introduced problems
which endangered archaeological monu-
ments: in all cases, the archaeologists were
forced to work fast, which affected the quality
of their documentation a n d their on-site
observations. In a socialist country, all build-
ing work was carried out according to a strict
timetable: the builders had to follow their
instructions to the letter. There were many
instances where the builders hid the discov-
ery of finds, so as not to interfere with their
FIGLJRE 1. The
archbishop's court of
the monastery by the
Great Basilica at Pliska
[the first Bulgarian
capital, 8th-Yth
centuries AD).
128 V. VELKOV

schedules. Such activities became known but University of Saarbrucken excavated the settle-
often at a very late stage. The penalties for ment mound near the village of Drama, and the
breaking the law were minimal. University of Paris I excavated a Neolithic set-
Until 1976, international projects, in the tlement near the village of Kovachevo.
form of joint excavations, were carried out The recent political changes which
only in the Soviet Union, East Germany and occurred in the former socialist countries,
Poland. By law, foreign archaeological expedi- including Bulgaria, resulted in changes in the
tions could only be permitted by decision of the organization and financing of archaeological
Cabinet of Ministers. From 1976, on the initia- excavation and new legislation. A new law is
tive of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences and being prepared covering museums and
the Ministry of Culture, archaeological teams archaeological sites.
from western Europe and Japan were permitted The dominant role of the State in control-
to excavate in Bulgaria, which was the first ling archaeology was immediately weakened
country, and for a long time the only one because state funding for archaeology has
amongst the former socialist countries, that been reduced. Funds for excavation will in
undertook such collaborative work. In many future have to be provided by the appropriate
respects, this collaboration proved very fruitful municipalities. Sponsorship has assumed
in developing Bulgarian archaeology: it led to considerable importance and a new law is
the introduction of new methods and tech- envisaged which will encourage firms and
niques, previously denied to Bulgarian archae- private individuals to give funds for excava-
ologists. It also provided the means whereby tions. The Archaeological Institute will main-
Bulgarian archaeologists could visit western tain its role as a national co-ordinator and
countries, to see sites and to gain access to aca- organizer of excavations throughout the
demic literature. Excavations were carried out country, a n d will have the opportunity to
at Ratiaria with the University of Bologna. strengthen its international activity by attract-
Collaboration was started with the University of ing more foreign expeditions.
Nottingham in Great Britain and excavations A serious problem now exists in publishing
were carried out on the site of Nicopolis ad archaeological literature. It was formerly carried
Istrum, under the auspices of the British out with state finance, mainly through the pub-
Academy. The University of Salzburg started lishing house of the Bulgarian Academy of
excavations on the settlement tell near the vil- Sciences. At the same time there was strict con-
lage of Karanovo, Tokai University and the trol over publication, enforced by a complex
University of Amsterdam excavated the settle- system of supervision and review. Material sent
ment mound near the city of Nova Zagora. The for publication abroad was also strictly cen-

FIGURE 2. The Thrncian

town of Seuthopolis,
4th-3rd centuries BC.
Now at the bottom of
the lake.
 CZECHOSLOVAKIA: THE LAST THREE YEARS
sored and controlled. This system has been
abolished. However, archaeological literature
must now be paid for from the Institute's own
funds, with the help of sponsorship and by pri-
vate agreements with publishers. Honoraria
will no longer be paid by publishers.
In March 1992, Parliament passed a new law
on property ownership. The Soviet model of
collective ownership of land has been abol-
ished and land is to be returned to private own-
ership. This poses serious problems for the pro-
tection of monuments found on privatized
property. In Bulgaria there are ten archaeologi-
cal sites of national importance. If under the
new law some or parts of these sites are to be
returned to private ownership, local authorities
must retain control of them and compensate the
owners for the loss. The law provides special
protection for archaeological monuments that
will in future be on private property. At the
same time. the academic staff of the
Czechoslovakia: the last three years
I feel somewhat uneasy in writing about
Czechoslovakia, which no longer exists.
However, the problems encountered by its
two archaeological successors are more or less
similar, although some divergence may be
expected in the future.
The disintegration of Czechoslovakia into
two parts is hardly comprehensible to foreign-
ers, and in the beginning the attitude of the
Czechs (who inhabit the western part of the
former Czechoslovakia) was the same. They
felt that the longing for independence was
exclusively a Slovak affair; most Czechs were
of the opinion that the idea of separation was
a crazy one. The situation changed somewhat
when the general election of 1992 brought
left-wing parties to power in Slovakia whilst
the Czechs voted for the right.
Czechs and Slovaks certainly have much
more in common than, for example, Germans
from southern and eastern Germany. Their
* Archeologickg ilstav, Lctcnska 4, 118 01 Praguc 1, The Czech Rcpublic.
ANI'IQ~JITY
6 7 (1993): 129-34
129
Archaeological Institute, together with their col-
leagues in the museums, are starting work on
an archaeological map of Bulgaria: all archaeo-
logical monuments will be recorded and the
data computerized, to produce a national regis-
ter. This will take two or three years as it must
await the arrival of modern technical equip-
ment, when it can be used to document the rich
archaeological heritage of Bulgaria.
Bibliography
Full bibliographical details on archacological rcsearch in
Bulgaria, the activities of its museums, information on the
legislative dccisions end other mattcrs for t h e years
1879-1966 arc to be found in s. GEORGIEVA & V . VELKDV
(cd.). 1974. Bibliography of BU@-iflII Arrlioeology, 2nd
edition. Sofia. For the pcriod after 1966, regular biblio-
graphical details havc been p u b l i s h e d i n thc journal
Arlieologiycl, published by the Archaeological Institute.
Translation from Bulgarian by A.G. Poulter.
similarity is not limited to language: Czech
and Slovak are in fact a single language with
two variants. To relate the problem more
specifically to the interests of ANTIQUITY
readers, the archaeology of the two nations is
the same from both the theoretical and the
methodological points of view (although
Slovakia has been only slightly affected by
developments within the Anglo-Saxon archae-
ological communities and their allies in the
theoretical field over recent decades). In my
view, Slovak archaeology has been one of the
most successful constituents of Slovak national
culture, since in this field Slovaks have been
equal partners with other nations of central
Europe.
Separation has now become a reality. It has
created the Czech Republic, with some 1 0
million inhabitants, and the Slovak Republic,
with some 5 million: neither is a very large
state. The most serious problem that this has