The Future of Studying Hobbyist Metal Detecting in Europe: A Call for a Transnational Approach

Suzie Thomas 1
  • 1 Department of Philosophy, History, Culture and Art Studies, University of Helsinki, Helsinki FI00014, Uusimaa, Finland

Abstract

Much research on hobbyist metal detecting has either focused on the archaeological impact only, conflated hobbyism with criminal activity (namely looting and illicit trade), or generalized the motivations and drivers for metal detectorists. Studies to date have targeted specific countries and regions, with only limited reference to metal detecting activities elsewhere. This has meant that the transnational aspects of metal detecting – such as the international trade of metal-detected objects, and transnational movement of metal detectorists themselves (for example through touristic activities) – has mostly been overlooked or merely speculated upon. Much debate has revolved around assumptions, stymied by perceived ethical barriers and accepted attitudes which limit deeper engagement with the metal detecting community. Approaching the study of hobbyist metal detecting at a trans-European level would encourage greater understanding of the scale of hobbyist metal detecting and the world views, activities and contact and trade networks of metal detectorists. This may challenge traditionally-held perspectives concerning what should be valued as cultural heritage and who is entitled to make use of it. In this paper I set out our current state of knowledge, and propose directions for future research.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Altschul, J. (2015). From the President. The SAA Archaeological Record 15(2), 3-4. http://www.saa.org/Portals/0/SAA/ Publications/thesaaarchrec/March2015.pdf (accessed 9 February 2016).

  • Becker, E. (2009).The Legislative Position of Metal Detector Use at South African Archaeological Sites. In S. Thomas & P. Stone (Eds.), Metal Detecting and Archaeology, 25-31. Woodbridge: The Boydell Press.

  • Bland, R. (2005). A pragmatic approach to the problem of portable antiquities: the experience of England and Wales. Antiquity 79(304), 440-447.

  • Bland, R. (2009). The development and future of the Treasure Act and the Portable Antiquities Scheme. In S. Thomas & P. Stone (Eds.), Metal Detecting and Archaeology, 63-85.Woodbridge: The Boydell Press.

  • Brockman, A. (2014). New “Nazi War Diggers” allegations. http://thepipeline.info/blog/2014/10/01/nazi-war-diggers-riskedgoing- out-with-a-bang/ (accessed 8 February 2016).

  • Brodie, N. (2015). Syria and its Regional Neighbors: A Case of Cultural Property Protection Policy Failure? International Journal of Cultural Property 22(2-3), 317-335.

  • Campbell, S. (2013). Metal detecting, collecting and portable antiquities: Scottish and British perspectives. Internet Archaeology 33. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.11141/ia.33.1

  • Cornelison, J. & Smith, G. (2009). Archaeology, Metal Detecting, and the Development of Battlefield Archaeology in the United States. In S. Thomas & P. Stone (Eds.), Metal Detecting and Archaeology, 33-50.Woodbridge: The Boydell Press.

  • Darvill, T. & Fulton, A. (1998). The Monuments at Risk Survey of England 1995, Bournemouth, London: School of Conservation Sciences, Bournemouth University and English Heritage.

  • Deckers, P. (2012a). “Productive” Sites in the Polders? “Griffin brooches” and Other Early Medieval Metalwork from the Belgian Coastal Plain. Medieval and Modern Matters 3(1), 21-43.

  • Deckers, P. (2012b). EverbeekRoman Silver Hoard. http://traffickingculture.org/case_note/everbeek-roman-silver-hoard (accessed 29 February 2016).

  • Dobat, A. (2013). Between Rescue and Research: An Evaluation after 30 Years of Liberal Metal Detecting in Archaeological Research and Heritage Practice in Denmark. European Journal of Archaeology 16(4), 704-25.

  • Dobat, A, & Jensen, A. (2016). “Professional Amateurs”. Metal Detecting and Metal Detectorists in Denmark. Open Archaeology 2(1), 70-84. doi: 10.1515/opar-2016-0005

  • Dunnell, R. & Simek, J. (1995). Artifact size and plowzone processes. Journal of Field Archaeology 22(3), 305-319. Ferguson, N. (2013). Biting the bullet: the role of hobbyist metal detecting within battlefield archaeology. Internet Archaeology 33. doi: 10.11141/ia.33.3

  • Fowler, P. (2007). Not archaeology and the media. In T. Clack & M. Brittain (Eds.), Archaeology and the Media, 89-107. Walnut Creek: Left Coast.

  • Hardy, S. (2014). Virtues Impracticable and Extremely Difficult: The Human Rights of Subsistence Diggers. In A. González- Ruibal & G. Moshenska (Eds.), Ethics and the Archaeology of Violence, 229-239. New York: Springer.

  • Hardy, S. (2015). Is looting-to-order “just a myth”? Open-source analysis of theft-to-order of cultural property. Cogent Social Sciences 1(1), doi: 10.1080/23311886.2015.1087110

  • Hart, S. & Chilton, E. (2015). Digging and destruction: artifact collecting as meaningful social practice. International Journal of Heritage Studies 21(4), 318-35.

  • Herva, V.-P., Seitsonen, O., Koskinen-Koivisto, E. & Thomas, S. (2016). “I have better stuff at home”: Alternative archaeologies and private collecting of World War II artefacts in Finnish Lapland. World Archaeology 42(2).

  • Hollowell, J. (2006). Moral arguments on subsistence digging. In C. Scarre & G. Scarre (Eds.), The Ethics of Archaeology: Philosophical Perspectives on Archaeological Practice, 69-93. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Karl, R. (2011). On the highway to hell: Thoughts on the unintended consequences for portable antiquities of § 11 (1) Austrian Denkmalschutzgesetz. The Historic Environment 2(2), 111-133.

  • Kobyliński, Z. & Szpanowski, P. (2009). Metal detector users and archaeology in Poland: The current state of affairs. In S. Thomas & P. Stone (Eds.), Metal Detecting and Archaeology, 13-24.Woodbridge: The Boydell Press.

  • Koskinen-Koivisto, E. & Thomas, S. (2016) (in press). Lapland’s Dark Heritage: Responses to the legacy of World War II. In H. Silverman, E. Waterton & S. Watson (Eds.), Heritage in action: making the past in the present. New York: Springer.

  • Lewis, M. (Ed.). (2013). The Portable Antiquities Scheme Annual Report 2013, London: Department of Britain, Europe and Prehistory, British Museum.

  • Lewis, M. (2016). A Detectorist’s Utopia? Archaeology and Metal-Detecting in England and Wales. Open Archaeology 2(1).

  • Mackenzie, S. & Davis, T. (2014). Temple looting in Cambodia: Anatomy of a statue trafficking network. British Journal of Criminology 54(5), 722-740.

  • Matsuda, D. (2005). Subsistence Diggers. In K. Fitz Gibbon (Ed.), Who Owns the Past? Cultural Policy, Cultural Property, and the Law, 225-265. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.

  • Moreau, T. & Aldeman, D. (2011). Graffiti Hurts and the eradication of alternative landscape expression. Geographical Review 101(1), 106-124.

  • Moshenska, G. (2010). Portable Antiquities, Pragmatism and the “Precious Things”. Papers from the Institute of Archaeology 20, 24-27.

  • Palmer, N. (1981). Treasure Trove and the protection of antiquities. The Modern Law Review 44(2), 178-187.

  • Pitblado, B. (2014). An argument for ethical, proactive, archaeologist-artifact collector collaboration. American Antiquity 79(3), 385-400.

  • Polk, K. (2014). The Global Trade in Illicit Antiquities: Some New Directions? In L. Grove & S. Thomas (Eds.), Heritage Crime: Progress, Prospects and Prevention, 206-223. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Portable Antiquities Scheme. (n.d.). Code of Practice for Responsible Metal Detecting. https://finds.org.uk/getinvolved/ guides/codeofpractice (accessed 19 July 2016).

  • Rasmussen, J.M. (2014a). Securing cultural heritage objects and fencing stolen goods? A case study on museums and metal detecting in Norway. Norwegian Archaeological Review 47(1), 83-107.

  • Rasmussen, J.M. (2014b). Reply to Comments from Suzie Thomas, Martin Mesicek, Raimund Karl, Mads Ravn, Maria Lingström. Norwegian Archaeological Review 47(2), 212-217.

  • Redmayne, T. & Woodward, K. (2013). The Metal Detecting Forum - an online community. Resource, education and co-operation. Internet Archaeology 33 http://dx.doi.org/10.11141/ia.33.6 (accessed 29 February 2016).

  • Reeves, M. (2015). Sleeping with the “Enemy”: Metal Detecting Hobbyists and Archaeologists. Advances in Archaeological Practice 3(3), 263-274.

  • Renfrew, C. (2000). Loot, legitimacy and ownership: The ethical crisis in archaeology, London: Duckworth.

  • Robbins, K. (2014). Portable Antiquities Scheme: A Guide for Researchers, London: British Museum. https://finds.org.uk/ documents/guideforresearchers.pdf (accessed 20 August 2016).

  • Smith, L. & Waterton, E. (2012). Constrained by commonsense: The authorized heritage discourse in contemporary debates. In R. Skeates, C. McDavid & J. Carman (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Public Archaeology, 153-171. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Stebbins, R. (1996). Volunteering: A serious leisure perspective. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 25(2), 211-224.

  • Stine, L.F. & Shumate, D. (2015). Metal detecting: An effective tool for archeological research and community engagement. North American Archaeologist 35(4), 289-323.

  • Taylor, B. (1995). Amateurs, professionals and the knowledge of archaeology. The British Journal of Sociology 46(3), 499-508.

  • Temińo, I.R. & Valdés, A.R. (2015). Fighting against the archaeological looting and the illicit trade of antiquities in Spain. International Journal of Cultural Property 22(1), 111-130.

  • Thomas, S. (2012a). How STOP Started: Early Approaches to the Metal Detecting Community by Archaeologists and Others. In G. Moshenska & S. Dhanjal (Eds.), Community Archaeology: Themes, Methods and Practices, 42-57. Oxford and Oakville: Oxbow Books.

  • Thomas, S. (2012b). Searching for answers: A survey of metal-detector users in the UK. International Journal of Heritage Studies 18(1), 49-64.

  • Thomas, S. (2015a). Collaborate, Condemn or Ignore? Responding to Non-Archaeological Approaches to Archaeological Heritage. European Journal of Archaeology 18(2), 312-335.

  • Thomas, S. (2015b). Multiple-role actors in the movement of cultural property: Metal-detector users. In S. Musteață & Ș. Caliniuc (Eds.), Current Trends in Archaeological Heritage Preservation: National and International Perspective (British Archaeological Reports S2741), 117-124. Oxford: Archaeopress.

  • Tsirogiannis, C. (2015). Mapping the supply: usual suspects and identified antiquities in ‘reputable’ auction houses in 2013. Cuadernos de Prehistoria y Arqueología 25, 105-142.

  • Wilson, J. (2012). The Cave Who Never Was: Outsider Archaeology and Failed Collaboration in the USA. Public Archaeology 11(2), 73-95.

  • Winkley, F. (2016). The Phenomenology of Metal Detecting: Insights from a Unique Type of Landscape Experience. Papers from the Institute of Archaeology 25(2). Art. 13. http://www.pia-journal.co.uk/articles/10.5334/pia.496/ (accessed 29 February 2016).

  • Worrell, S. (2010). The Crosby Garrett Helmet. Papers from the Institute of Archaeology 20.30-32. http://www.pia-journal. co.uk/articles/10.5334/pia.338/ (accessed 29 February 2016).

  • Worrell, S., Egan, G., Naylor, J., Leahy, K. & Lewis, M. (Eds.). (2010). A Decade of Discovery: Proceedings of the Portable Antiquities Scheme Conference 2007(BAR British Series 520). Oxford: Archaeopress.

OPEN ACCESS

Journal + Issues

Search