More of this Feature • Part 1: The Gap

Related Resources • Section 106 • Public Archaeology

But the real gulf in understanding exists in the definition of what is "worth saving" as used by preservation professionals and misunderstood by members of the public.

What the public doesn't often understand is that the decision to save a site almost always boils down to integrity; in other words, the value or "sacredness" of a site is established not on its importance to people or a particular set of people, but whether the site contains enough intact information to justify its protection. This is a fundamental gap, because to most normal people (once upon a time I was one, so I can say this), "physical integrity" has nothing to do with "sacredness."

The problem is, "sacredness" is not measurable; and successful federal laws can only be made over the measurable. Successful science, in fact, must rely on the measurable. But--is this what preservation laws were meant to do? Until we can bridge the gap between "sacred" and "valuable", either by clear explanation of what we are preserving and why, or by some magic process figure out how to measure the unmeasurable, this gap will continue to exist.

Previous page < The Gap < Page 1, 2