P. Shydlovskyi, PhD in History, Associate Professor
Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Kyiv, Ukraine
PREHISTORIC SITES: A PUBLIC BENEFIT OR A WASTE OF INVESTMENTS?
The article examines the current state of protection of archaeological sites of prehistoric epoch in Ukraine and discusses the need for their conservation as a cultural heritage of all humankind. Using the principles of international protection of immovable heritage, we considered the human, national and economic dimensions of archaeological sites in the modern society. Prehistoric sites are the most vulnerable to anthropogenic influence in terms of preservation and neglecting by the administrative structures. Instead, prehistoric archeology raises lively interest from the international community: it carries information about the origins and development of culture, the emergence of labor, the formation of the specifics of human behavior, explains the origins of civilizational history, demonstrates the adaptive capacity of the human species in general. The interaction of science and society can be realized on the basis of archaeological heritage objects which can be not only a subject of study of sciences of cultural and natural diversity, but also the means of communication, education, entertainment, enriching the cultural experience. The way out from the situation of inadequate protection of monuments can be found in presentation of scientific research to the public and in creation of a mechanism of promotion of cultural heritage at a national level. An obligatory scientific expertise of the areas with the considering of the potential public benefit of particular archaeological sites are neccecary to keep public interested in national cultutral heritage preservation.
Keywords: cultural heritage, monuments, prehistoric archeology, monument protection legislation, scientific expertise.
Full text PDF
References
1. Deklaratsiia Mekhiko pro polityku v haluzi kultury. (1984) Kultura. 3, 77–84.
2. Konventsia pro okhoronu vsesvitnioi kulturnoi i pryrodnoi spadshchyny. (2008) In: Mizhnarodni zasady okhorony nerukhomoi kulturnoi spadshchyny: zbirnyk mizhnarodnykh normatyvnykh dokumentiv. Kyiv: Fenix, pp. 10–18.
3. Metodyka hroshovoi otsinky pamiatok. (2011) In: Zbirnyk normatyvno-pravovykh aktiv sfery okhorony kulturnoi spadshchyny. Chernihiv: Desnianska Pravda, pp. 573–588.
4. Mizhnarodna khartiia pro upravlinnia arkheologichnoiu spadschinoiu. (2008) In: Mizhnarodni zasady okhorony nerukhomoi kulturnoi spadshchyny: zbirnyk mizhnarodnykh normatyvnykh dokumentiv. Kyiv: Fenix, pp. 86–89.
5. PARATSII, V. M. (2002) Poniatiinyi kompleks natsionalnoho pamiatkookhoronnogo zakonodavstva: factory termino-etymologichnoii nevidpovidnosti. Mizhnarodnyi dosvid okhorony kul'turnoi spadschyny ta pamiatkookhoronne zakonodavstvo Ukrainy. Kyiv: Stylos, pp. 119–124.
6. Rekomendatsia schodo okhorony krasy ta kharakteru landshaftiv i mists. (2008) In: Mizhnarodni zasady okhorony nerukhomoi kulturnoi spadshchyny: zbirnyk mizhnarodnykh normatyvnykh dokumentiv. Kyiv: Fenix, pp. 35–39.
7. Rekomendatsia schodo ubezpechennia kul'turnykh tsinnostei, iakym zagrozhuiut' suspil'ni abo pryvatni roboty. (2008) In: Mizhnarodni zasady okhorony nerukhomoi kulturnoi spadshchyny: zbirnyk mizhnarodnykh normatyvnykh dokumentiv. Kyiv: Fenix, pp. 40–46.
8. Khartiia pro interpretatsiiu ta prezentatsiiu vyznachnykh mists' kul'turnoi spadschyny. (2008) In: Mizhnarodni zasady okhorony nerukhomoi kulturnoi spadshchyny: zbirnyk mizhnarodnykh normatyvnykh dokumentiv. Kyiv: Fenix, pp. 127–132.
9. SHYDLOVSKYI, P. S. (2013) Doslidzhennia ta problemy zberezhennia Mezhyrits'koho poselennia myslyvtsiv na mamontiv. Pratsi Naukovodoslidnogo instytutu pamiatkookhoronnykh doslidzhen. 8, 567–581.
10. SHYDLOVSKYI, P. S., KHOPTYNETS, M. O. (2011) Problemy doslidzhennia ta okhorony arkheologichnoho kompleksu pamiatok "Velykyi Dyvlyn". Pratsi Naukovo-doslidnogo instytutu pamiatkookhoronnykh doslidzhen. 6, 537–547.
11. SHYDLOVSKYI, P.S. (2012) Problemy zberezhennia pamiatok archeologii livoberezhzhia Nyzhnioho Podesinnia. Pratsi Naukovodoslidnogo instytutu pamiatkookhoronnykh doslidzhen. 7, 587–599.