The meaning of the past in this land is contested. Not only by Israelis and Palestinians, but by different factions among them, and by the three monotheistic religions and their offshoots worldwide. It would be a fine and noble thing to reconcile the different views and to find common ground between and within Israeli and Palestinian societies ("Partitioning the Past," by Neil Asher Silberman, Haaretz, April 18) - indeed a task for the ages. But that is not the question that was taken up by the group of professionals who drafted the recommendations on the future of archaeology published earlier this month. Ours was a less ambitious, but more practical one: In the event of the realization of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict - a solution viewed by Silberman as passe, but one that is embraced internationally and by a majority within both societies - what is to be the fate of archaeological sites and artifacts? When borders are drawn and the landscape divided into two national territories, how will archaeology fare?
We had two objectives: to inform future negotiators of the state of affairs on the ground, given the fact that the main actor in the field of West Bank archaeology, the Staff Officer for Archaeology in Judea and Samaria, has never revealed the full extent of work undertaken on his watch; and to provide a professionally devised framework for any future agreement, and thus to help remove one small obstacle from the path of possible peace.
True, the agreement reached is in many ways but a formula for containing disagreement. How could it be otherwise, considering that Israelis and Palestinians, by and large, have different concepts regarding the significance of the past? For Israeli Jews, the evidence of a Jewish and Biblical past resonates deeply with the present; our language and culture are uniquely tied to the ancient history of the land. For Palestinians, the same evidence is but a chapter among many in the history of the land, stretching from the dawn of human existence to the present; they are legitimate heirs to all of that history. What was needed was a set of ground rules that would ensure the preservation of as much of the archaeological heritage as possible, despite the different values attached to it; by accepting these rules, archaeological remains would no longer be perceived either as a tool of occupation and permanent disenfranchisement (by Palestinians), or as a threat to legitimacy and identity (by Israeli Jews).
Advertisement
Where there are deep divisions, codes and conventions permit coexistence. Such codes constrain behavior, so each side's deep-seated values are protected. Codes and conventions cannot be imposed unilaterally; they must be adopted by mutual consent. Such consent is only possible between equals - hence, any agreement on the future of antiquities had to be based on the assumption of parity between two states. Sovereignty was thus a prerequisite for the acceptance, by both sides, of a series of constraints on their behavior with regard to antiquities. Sovereignty implies borders, the division of the landscape between Israel and Palestine, and with it the physical division of the archaeological heritage. It also implies responsibility. Many of the agreement's provisions deal with the issue of sovereignty and the responsibility of states to follow international codes, conventions and best professional practice. These have been established by such international bodies as Unesco, Icomos (International Council on Monuments and Sites) and by widely respected professional associations in both Europe and the United States.
It is equally true that any hope of long-term reconciliation requires that both sides begin to accept the legitimacy of alternative views of the past. The agreement lays the foundation for such reconciliation by stating that "the national territories of Israel and Palestine constitute a unified archaeological landscape"; by recommending unlimited access to sites and unilateral protection regardless of perceived ethnic or religious affiliation; by calling for the establishment of a permanent bilateral committee on antiquities; and by calling for future cooperation on issues of access, fieldwork and possible long-term loans of artifacts. At the core of all these recommendations is the recognition that regardless of the location of the final borders, both sides will continue to maintain an interest in sites and artifacts situated on the other side. Moreover, the task of negotiating the presentation and interpretation of the past and of educating the public to accept alternative views is an ongoing one within each society.
A colleague from the Hebrew University, Dr. Ilan Sharon, has described the joint recommendations as "a milestone, inasmuch as many of the other intractable 'core issues' [such as refugees, water, Jerusalem and the holy places] share the same basic conundrum." "That a joint position paper could be drawn up," he adds in his letter, "even if it only represents the opinions of a limited group of professionals in the cultural heritage preservation business, is a good omen."
Old-fashioned as they may be, nation-states continue to embody the hopes and aspirations of societies around the globe. Archaeology is one way of putting these states in historical perspective, offering people a way to cope with modern borders by appreciating a shared past.
Dr. Raphael Greenberg, a senior lecturer in archaeology at Tel Aviv University, was a member of the Israeli-Palestinian Working Group on Archaeology. His views do not necessarily reflect those of the other members of the group.
Haaretz.com, the online edition of Haaretz Newspaper in Israel, offers real-time breaking news, opinions and analysis from Israel and the Middle East. Haaretz.com provides extensive and in-depth coverage of Israel, the Jewish World and the Middle East, including defense, diplomacy, the Arab-Israeli conflict, the peace process, Israeli politics, Jerusalem affairs, international relations, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, the Israeli business world and Jewish life in Israel and the Diaspora.
