Predatory excavations as a factor of archaeological heritage loss: the current state in the Republic of Bashkortostan

Gizzatov Dim Zamirovich Chief Specialist; Department of Archaeological Heritage; State Budgetary Institution Scientific and Production Center for the Protection and Use of Immovable Cultural Heritage Sites of the Republic of Bashkortostan 450007, Russia, Republic of Bashkortostan, Ufa, Artezanskaya St., 13, sq. 7 arhnpc@mail.ru

The possibility of reconstructing historical processes based on written sources from vast regions of Russia covers an insignificant chronological range, starting from the Middle Ages and becoming more frequent in Modern times. Meanwhile, a significant layer of the "pre-written" history can be reconstructed only with the help of archaeological data. Thus, archaeological sites are the most important sources accumulating the memory of thousands of years. However, the issue of the physical preservation of immovable archaeological heritage sites today arises not only in the context of economic development and development, but also in the rapidly emerging problem of predatory excavations that have engulfed Russia in the last two decades.

The so-called "black diggers", "lovers of instrument search" or "treasure hunters", for the purpose of sale, collecting, with their predatory actions, remove archaeological artifacts from the cultural layer, while hunting mainly for individual spectacular objects, usually made of non-ferrous metal, thereby violating the integrity of the monument, ignore the context of the localization of artifacts, limit or they deprive the possibility of scientific interpretation of an archaeological monument. For example, the removal of metal products from the territory of a settlement monument practically leads to the disappearance of information about the life, crafts, social level and well-being of the ancient population, leaving products made of clay, bones (shells), glass and stone. Thus, the illegal actions of the "black diggers" who abandoned the monument deprive researchers of the possibility of historical reconstruction of the material and spiritual culture of the ancient population, falsifying history.

Research on the activities of "black diggers" has developed as the destructive activities of "cop lovers" have expanded in response to the damage being done to the archaeological heritage. Mostly, these studies are covered in separate articles, and special monographs are not exceptions ^{[14, 23]}.

Thus, the identity of the subject of the crime against archaeological monuments is reflected in the publications of N.V. Ryazanova ^{[15, p. 153]}, S.L. Baghramyan ^{[2, p. 31]}, V.A. Shebalov ^{[28, 29]}. The subculture of the "black diggers" is considered in the works of S.S. Seleev and O.A. Molyarenko ^[17], the structures of the "treasure hunters" groups are highlighted in the studies of S.A. Vasyutin, A.G. Marochkin, P.V. German and others ^{[6, p. 310]}, S.L. Baghramyan ^{[1, p. 63]}, E.M. Gilmanov and Y.A. Grigoriev ^{[8, p. 374]}. Online associations of communities of fans of "black diggers" in social networks are considered in a series of works by A.I. Tuzbekov ^{[19, 20]}.

Articles by N.A. Makarov ^{[11, p. 15]}, A.V. Engovatova ^{[31, p. 46]}, I.I. Bakhshiev ^{[4, 5]}, N.V. Volkodava, G.G. Davydenko are devoted to the problems of the current state of archaeological monuments in the context of their destruction under the influence of the activities of "black diggers" ^{[7, p. 52]}, Vasyutina S. A., Marochkina A. G., Hermana P. V., Sizeva A. S., Gorlyshkina N. E. ^{[6, p. 310]} and others.

Studies on the legal basis for suppressing the illegal activities of "black diggers", the difficulties of recognizing archaeological sites as an object of crime, qualifications and signs of crimes under Article 243.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are considered in the works of A.N. Panfilov ^{[12, 13]}, I.A. Khalikov ^[22-26], L.R. Klebanov ^[10], L.S. Baghramyan ^{[1, p. 64]} and V.A. Shebalov ^{[30, p. 25]}.

In the territory of the Republic of Bashkortostan, according to the data of the Office for the State Protection of Cultural Heritage Sites of the Republic of Bashkortostan, 5,777 cultural heritage sites were recorded at the end of 2024, of which 3,963 were archaeological heritage sites (hereinafter referred to as OAN), among which 1,256 OAN from the list of the Unified State Register of Cultural Heritage Sites (hereinafter referred to as USROK) and 2,707 OAN from the list of identified cultural heritage sites (hereinafter referred to as OCS), as well as 1,814 architectural monuments, including federal, regional, municipal and identified ones.

Dozens of previously unknown OAS are recorded annually on the territory of the Republic of Bashkortostan. So, in 2020, 62 OAS were identified, in 2021 – 26, in 2022 – 32 OAS, which indicates a high archaeological saturation of the region.

Planned measures to control the state of the OAN carried out in accordance with clause 2.14 of Article 33, Federal Law No. 73-FZ dated June 25, 2002 "On Cultural Heritage Sites (Historical and Cultural Monuments) of the Peoples of the Russian Federation", from clause 2.14 of Article 20, Law of the Republic of Bashkortostan dated November 7, 2005 No. 224-The Law "On Cultural Heritage sites (historical and cultural monuments) of the peoples of the Republic of Bashkortostan", based on the Order of the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation dated April 20, 2016 No. 876, as well as the Decree of the Government of the Republic of Bashkortostan dated June 21, 2022 No. 712-r, annually cover 21.3% of OAS under state protection, thus, covering all the monuments included in the Register for a five-year period.

Conducting reconnaissance studies to assess the state of the OAS included in the EGROC was preceded by an archival and bibliographic analysis, which included work with scientific reports, scientific reference literature in order to determine the intended localization of the OAS. The descriptions of the monument's location and its features, indicated in scientific reports, were also compared with the data of the subordinate acts of the monument's acceptance for state protection. The objects recorded in the register with the names "kurgan", "parking lot" without description and topographic reference, only with territorial localization in the municipal area, were considered not to be positioned and excluded from the planned survey.

Reconnaissance studies were conducted, as a rule, by two reconnaissance detachments. Traces of predatory digs, pits, and excavations found on the territory of the monuments were recorded on a camera with a large-scale slat. The results of the OAN survey were displayed on the technical inspection reports.

Thus, for the analysis, the results of monitoring the technical condition of the OAS included in the register were applied, the surveys of which were carried out by archaeologists of GBU NPTS RB together with specialists from the Department for State Protection of Cultural Heritage Sites of the Republic of Bashkortostan, from 2017 to 2023. Thus, the results of the survey of 623 OAS, reflected in the acts of technical condition, standing under state protection (included in the EGROKN), were involved. Completely lost (destroyed, explored) monuments are excluded from the total number of surveyed monuments, as well as those that have not been found due to weak topographic mapping or its complete absence.

The results of monitoring the technical condition of 623 monuments included in the sample demonstrate the following data: the condition of 33.39% (208 units) of monuments is defined as satisfactory, 32.42% (202 units) as unsatisfactory and 34.19% (213 units) as emergency. A comparison with the results of the 2010 inventory is interesting here, where the condition of 9% of monuments was assessed as good, 44% as satisfactory, 25% as unsatisfactory and 4% as dilapidated, the rest being undiscovered and lost monuments ^{[5, p. 80]}. Thus, we observe the dynamics of deterioration of archaeological monuments and their preservation, especially expressed in the categories of unsatisfactory and dilapidated, with a concomitant decrease in the percentage of monuments with satisfactory preservation.

Among the anthropogenic causes of threats to the physical preservation of monuments, the most common are: trampling by cattle (257), field highways (183), annual plowing (167), etc. The most common natural causes of deterioration of the physical preservation of OAS include: coastal erosion (42), tree roots (22), burrows of earth-moving animals (19), etc. Thus, the types of activities related to agriculture are the most common factor in the deterioration of the physical safety of OAS, but not the most destructive.

For example, after plowing a monument, even a centuries-old one, information about the depth of the archaeological artifact is lost, but the spatial occurrence of the artifact is not lost ^{[9, 98-104]}. In contrast to the predatory seizure of artifacts, which is comparable to the damage or falsification of the entire historical source, which is an archaeological monument ^{[31, p. 46]}.

The surveyed monuments are located on the territory of 44 municipal districts of the Republic of Bashkortostan, while in 23 districts, signs of predatory excavations were recorded at the sites of 75 archaeological sites, which is 12.04% of the total sample. This figure is interesting in comparison with the results of the 2010 inventory, where the destructive activity of "black diggers" was recorded on 10 monuments out of 742 ^[4-5], which was 1.35% of the total. The revealed discrepancies in the indicators demonstrate the depressing dynamics of an increase in the activity of "black diggers" at archaeological sites by almost 9 times.

A similar trend was observed in certain areas of Karachay-Cherkessia, according to estimates for 2002, demonstrating a sevenfold increase in looted mounds over 8 years ^{[18, p. 37]}.

In 2004, no data reflecting the conduct of illegal predatory excavations on the territory of the Republic of Bashkortostan was recorded ^{[11, p. 16]}, and in 2013 their number corresponded to 20 units ^{[31, p. 44]}.

An analysis of the recorded 75 monuments with traces of predatory digs, pits, wells and large excavations demonstrates that all types of archaeological sites are under the influence of "black diggers". In particular, domestic–type monuments such as settlements (1), settlements (3), parking lots (8), and mounds (17) are subject to predatory excavations; funerary–type monuments include dirt burial grounds (5), single mounds (14), burial mounds (26), and metallurgical complexes (1).

The correlation of the types of monuments subject to predatory excavations with their dates (in those cases where they are known) reveals the relationship between single mounds, burial mounds from the Early Iron Age, as well as mounds and sites from the periods of the early, developed and late Middle Ages. The monuments of the Stone and Bronze Ages are less affected by the "black diggers" than others. The recorded rare cases of damage to monuments of the stone and paleometallic eras are associated with their multilayeredness and a pronounced "hunt" for metal products lying in the cultural layers of subsequent periods. The revealed trends are obviously directly related to the reliance of the "black diggers" on the method of using metal detectors as the main tool for searching for archaeological artifacts.

Fig. 1. Traces of predatory excavations at the sites

archaeological heritage in the Republic of Bashkortostan

The traces of the "cop" are represented by small so-called "burrows" corresponding to the width of a bayonet shovel, pits of various sizes of amorphous shapes, large trenches and similar excavations up to 4-6 m in length, as well as "pit wells" found in the mounds of mounds. In all cases, except for the "pit wells" in the mounds and individual "dumps", the excavated earth is not completely removed into the dump, but partially remains within the excavated pits.

Also, the signs of the work of "black diggers" include the selective collection of archaeological material with fragments of ceramics and osteological material left in the dumps of predatory digs, as they have no material value. Such a marker of the behavior of "black diggers" is typical not only for the territory of the Republic of Bashkortostan and is obviously common when objects of no value to "black diggers" are thrown away right at the excavation site ^{[7, p. 53]}.

In addition, pinpoint localization of illegal activities is recorded within the residential districts of the concentration of monuments, where all monuments are looted, including monuments that do not have pronounced external signs (be they ramparts or embankments). Obviously, the latter feature correlates with the subjects of crimes from organized groups of "black diggers" who possess not only a metal detector and an interest in history, but also professional knowledge, information about the location of monuments and their coordinates, pursuing slightly different goals than replenishing a personal collection of antiquities. This feature is recorded on a number of monuments of local archaeological districts in Krasnokamsky, Mechetlinsky and Gafuriysky districts of the Republic of Bashkortostan.

Among the 623 monuments surveyed, there are no monuments of the XVI-XIX centuries, the period of Modern Times, which correlates with the data for 2019, when out of 2457 OAS included in the list of identified cultural heritage sites, only 3 were attributed to the designated period, which is generally due to the episodic nature of the study of monuments of Modern times in the territory of the Republic of Bashkortostan. ^{[22, pp. 65-66]}. Since the monuments of the archaeological heritage are objects that have crossed the century-old threshold, the scale of destruction of the OAN by black diggers is probably many times greater than the picture observed today.

The detected activity of "black diggers" on the territory of the Republic of Bashkortostan, with a pronounced increase in the scale of illegal excavations over the past five years, is partly due to the wide representation of historical stages in the region from the Stone Age to the beginning of the last century. The observed trend correlates with the increase in the number of subscribers identified by A.I. Tuzbekov in the specialized communities of "treasure hunters" in the Republic of Bashkortostan ^{[19, p. 123]}.

Fig. 2. Map of the concentration of predatory excavations in the Republic of Bashkortostan

The construction of a cartographic model of the surveyed monuments and the heat map reflect the uneven destructive activity of the "black diggers", localized in five distinct regions of Bashkiria: in the Bashkir Trans-Urals, in the Abzelilovsky, Baymak, partially Khaibullinsky districts; in two central regions covering the territories of Aurgazinsky, Gafuriysky and separately Ishimbaysky districts; in the lower reaches of the Belaya River, in the north-in the western part of the republic, in the Ilishevsky and Krasnokamsky districts; in the northeastern part, within the Duvan and Mechetlinsky districts.

If the areas in the Bashkir Trans-Urals and in the northwestern part of the republic are characterized by a high concentration of OAN, covering a wide chronological range, which could be due to the close attention of the "black diggers", then the remaining identified local regions are characterized by medium and low concentrations of identified and state-protected OAN. It is possible that the detected localization is related to the geographical proximity to the place of residence of instrument search enthusiasts.

Taking into account the limited number of objects surveyed, the scale of illegal activities of "black diggers" in the territory of the Republic of Bashkortostan cannot be reflected in specific quantitative indicators, however, an analysis of the results of the OAN technical inspections in comparison with the results of the 2010-2011 inventory makes it possible to track the dynamics of destructive activities of "black diggers", demonstrating a nine-fold increase.

An analysis of the largest Internet resources of the bases of judicial law enforcement practice "ConsultantPlus" and "Sudact", reflecting court decisions and regulatory documents, demonstrates the complete absence of the fact of bringing persons to criminal responsibility under Article 243.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on the territory of the Republic of Bashkortostan.

At the same time, the illegal predatory activities of black diggers in the Republic of Bashkortostan in a single case are reflected in judicial practice under art. 7.15 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. So, in 2014, the Baymaksky District Court of the Republic of Bashkortostan adopted a resolution on bringing to administrative responsibility for the illegal seizure of archaeological artifacts using a metal detector under Part 1 of Article 7.15 of the Administrative Code in the form of a fine of 1,500 rubles, with the seizure of finds and a metal detector. When considering the complaint, the decision of the justice of the peace canceled the confiscation of the metal detector, but left the responsibility under Part 1 of Article 7.15 of the Administrative Code unchanged^[1].

The revealed trend of law enforcement practice in the qualification of crimes against archaeological sites is typical for other regions of Russia ^{[15, p. 149]}. In total, only 18 sentences have been passed in the Russian Federation under Article 243.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation since 2013-2018 ^{[22, p. 65]}. As A.I. Khalikov notes, "it is almost impossible to prove the involvement of the "black diggers" in the illegal search for archaeological objects if they did not stay at the illegal excavation site, and objects extracted from the cultural layer of the archaeological monument were not seized" ^{[26, p. 88]}.

An analysis of the monitoring results of 623 archaeological monuments included in the Unified State Register of the Republic of Belarus in comparison with the indicators of the results of the 2010-2011 inventory revealed an increase in the number of monuments whose preservation is assessed as unsatisfactory and in disrepair, by 7.42% and by 30.19%, respectively. A comparison of the results of the inventory of the OAS included in the register in 2010-2011 with the current result of monitoring the technical condition of archaeological sites has demonstrated a nine-fold increase in the number of monuments looted by "black diggers" in the Republic of Bashkortostan.

Given the small sample of surveyed monuments that do not include those dating back to the Modern period, as well as an extensive cluster of "identified" monuments that were not included in the survey, it is highly likely that the damage caused to the archaeological heritage by predatory excavations is on a larger scale than the recorded indicators. This assumption is supported by the results of research by A.I. Tuzbekov, specialized online communities of "treasure hunters", which revealed the predominance of interest of users of these communities in finds and monuments dating back to the XVI - early XX centuries ^{[19, 21]}.

Cartographic analysis of the activities of the "black diggers" has demonstrated the existence of separate local areas of interest of the "treasure hunters", one way or another covering the territory of the Republic of Bashkortostan, which are not always associated with cumulative areas of concentration of monuments. The greatest concentration of "black diggers" activity zones was found in the Bashkir Trans-Urals and in the northwestern part of the region, in the lower reaches of the Belaya River.

Despite the pronounced dynamics of the increase in predatory excavations, no cases of criminal prosecution under Article 243.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation have been identified in the region, which generally reflects the all-Russian trend associated with "uncertainty, inconsistency and inconsistency of legal norms governing relations in the field of state protection of cultural heritage sites in the Russian Federation" ^{[13, p. 94]}.

Maintaining the status quo in the future is fraught with a catastrophic distortion of the cultural stratum of a significant part of the United Arab Emirates. The permanent illegal seizure of archaeological artifacts by robbers leads to the destruction of the context, which increases the risk of complete loss of the archaeological monument.

^[1] The decision of the Baymak District Court of the Republic of Bashkortostan dated 06/19/2014 in case No. 12-47/2014. Requirement: Cancellation of acts on bringing to administrative responsibility under Article 7.15 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation (conducting archaeological field work without permission)