On behalf of all congress participants I should like to thank our wonderful hosts for all they did to make the XVth International Congress of Classical Archaeology successful. This deep feeling of gratitude is also extended to the Conference office of the University of Amsterdam and all those who usually do not appear in the official programs, but without whose help the congress could never have been carried through: all those friendly and diligent helpers and assistants who prepared loudspeakers and operated microphones, who wrestled with reluctant slide-projectors, who xeroxed hand-outs and info-sheets, who manned coffee-shops and provided delicious cookies, who stayed until late in their offices typing, who managed all sorts of telephone calls before the congress started, and who guided lost foreign participants to lecture halls, meeting-points and restaurants, to bookshops and hotels, etc.
These thanks are extended to all of them - from the international community of classical archaeologists, a community spread over whole the world, at the moment presided by a Norwegian professor and including university teachers and museum staff from the Antipodes.
After an exhausting, but stimulating week the time has come to reflect for a moment on what we have accomplished - and what we have failed to accomplish.
"Classical archaeology towards the third millenium", - that was the general theme set for our conference by AIAC, the Associazione Internazionale di Archeologia Classica, and by the optimistic and forward looking organizing committee in Amsterdam.
We were invited to consider - in a retrospective view - the developments in the field of classical archaeology during the twentieth century and at the same time to prepare and to offer - in a prospective view - the perspectives for a new generation of students and scholars. The program encouraged everyone "to evaluate old and new methods of investigation, while also focusing on the archaeological material itself." And, finally, we were urged to reconsider, how "classical" classical archaeology still remains by the end of the second millenium.
This invitation was not taken up by many speakers; even so we had the opportunity to listen to many interesting lectures, about 210 in all, on subjects ranging from art theory to iconology, to iconography, art and religion, architecture, landscape archaeology and space. New models of semantics and semiotics were put forward, as well as on the understanding of the historical processes that shaped the past and thereby our present world.
Many papers discussed the use of natural and computer sciences in our field of study. In fact, modern technology is increasingly being applied and has already started to modify and change our scientific approaches. Other papers discussed the principles of artifact display for the general public, and the restoration of ancient monuments in open air settings, while some also evaluated how the acquisition of antiquities will be viewed and judged in the future.
Looked at in terms of the challenge of a coming century or a coming millenium, my personal impression is that the XV Congress of Classical Archaeology achieved its aim. Listening to many of the high quality papers I am quite convinced that classical archaeologists are scientifically and professionally well prepared to face the new millenium and that they will continue to perform their works and studies according to the high scientific standards already set in our discipline.
However, there were few papers offered on the urgent problems we will be confronted with in the future, or in deed are already confronted with. One topic was raised by Prof. Niels Hannestad, who reminded us of the Babylonian confusion of tongues in our field, at a time when a unified Europe is ready to embark on a common currency. This is a topic which I could easily go on about for a while, because it also opens up other related reflections. For instance the question of how to make classical archaeology understood on a general level by the coming generation. No papers confronted this problem or tried to establish new paradigms on education. We have to be aware that future generations, without doubt, will receive less classical and humanistic education than any generation since the fall of the Roman Empire.
I furthermore missed papers discussing the increasing responsibility, not only of classical archaeologists, but of archaeologists in general, as keepers and mediators of past knowledge. This regards first and foremost the material culture with which we are dealing, since, with our society's extensive use of pictures, I dare to foresee that this kind of material very soon will be the only authentic material of the past used to instruct school children about Antiquity.
Seen against such a challenging situation, and compared with the programs of meetings over the past 30 years, this congress appeared rather factual and conventional. The papers were confined to professional topics, topics one is accustomed to within professional circles. This is foremost a positive remark, insofar as professionality necessarily will always be first priority and the basis from which to part both in popularization and in education. - In any event, the focus on traditional topics - and the topics on which we have been focusing can really be considered traditional, even if innovative lenses were used - is not the fault of the organizing committee - which chose the stimulating theme of the conference - , nor that of AIAC, but it is the responsibility of the speakers in their choice of topics presented.
Classical archaeology, as already stressed, holds an important responsibility in the preservation of the cultural heritage of the European and Western mankind - this ought to be a topic for a future meeting. This kind of responsibility, by the way, has already lead to the foundation of an international society for the Promotion of the Classical Heritage in the United States. - This new responsibility for the past obliges every nation and many an international body to support adequately our discipline and to provide free access to that cultural heritage for any kind of scientific research and education. It is we ourselves, and it is AIAC, that has to make them understand and accept their duty.
Let me add just one other admonishing word: I found quite a lot of papers - about 15 out of a total of 210, which equals roughly 7% - on Etruscan matters, the Etruscans evidently belonging very much to the history of the Mediterranean. I found but two or three dealing with that thoroughly Mediterranean civilization of the Phoenicians and Carthaginians, only two or three on so called Dark Age problems; and I found absolutely none on Minoan or Mycenean topics.
I find these figures discouraging. If, indeed, classical archaeology and archaeology in general - apart from their essential contribution to the historical knowledge of mankind - are entrusted with an educational mission for the general public in the future, I think we should be careful to present a panorama of our discipline as complete and complex as possible.
And - without prejudice to mainstream investigation - we should be anxious not to forget those „smaller" archaeologies, many of them strong in their own rights: Etruscan and Iberian, Near Eastern and Punic, Biblical and Christian, Byzantine and Medieval. Let me remind you of Prof. Maria Bonghi Jovino's stimulating words the first day of the congress: we should beware of polarity or even multipolarity in our discipline, instead we should favour multidisciplinarity and convergence, that is, if I may quote, "l'apertura ai vari campi di ricerca".
With this in mind then let us enter the next lustrum, the next five years of studies and research, and after some meditation about general matters let us meet again at the XVI International Congress of Classical Archaeology sponsored by AIAC. And if there is a feeling of a debt due to AIAC - of a debt due to classical archaeology - and of a debt due to our society, this congress has achieved its aim. Let us promise next time to be better prepared to answer those questions we are confronted with already at the turn of the third millenium.

Prof. H.G. Niemeyer