The European Public Finds Recording Network is still hammering away at collaboration with collection-driven exploitation of the archaeological record, now: Social and cultural aspects of metal detecting (workshop conference 27.-28. April 2023 Aarhus University/Moesgård Museum). This is the final in a series of three workshops needed to justify their grant money (it is not clear if there will be three publicatins too). This one is titled ‘From Treasure Hunters to Citizen Scientists’ (funded by the Joint Committee for Nordic Research Councils in the Humanities and Social Sciences (NOS-HS)) with the explicit aim of "bringing together citizen scientists, heritage professionals and researchers in the field of public archaeology, in order to discuss archaeological metal detecting in the Nordic Countries". Previous workshops considered the phenomenon from the perspective of heritage management organizations (University of Helsinki, June 2022) and research (Bergen University Museum, October 2022).
Program:I can't help but think the organizers (Andres Dobat and Pieterjan Deckers) are taking a rather shallow approach to the idea of discussing "social and cultural aspects of" a phenomenon. Take a random selection of parallel topics: "Social and cultural aspects of digital technology" ("Social and cultural aspects of teachers' digital competencies"), "Social and cultural aspects of organ donation in Asia", "Social and cultural aspects of language proficiency", "Social and cultural aspects of economic development" etc. Would these be treated as anything like a full treatment of the subject if considered only from the viewpoint of the topics covered by this meeting? One is puzzled by why in 2023 a conference speaker (Lewis) is talking about "digital technology" as something that is innovative that produces "challenges and opportunities" not available in the 1990s. Much of this meeting seems to be about "teaching" artefact hunters (Abrahamson, Moilanen, Kangert) and exploiting artefact hunters as a source of information for archaeological use (Rundkvist, Axelsen) - see my earlier 'Artefact collecting: creating or destroying the archaeological record?' for some thoughts on this.
Thursday: Session 1: Walking with detectorists
10.15 Suzie Thomas, University Antwerp: '15 years of progress in collaborating with detectorists'.
10.45 Kristen Nedergaard Dreiøe, detectorist: 'The Danish Metal detector community today'.
11.30 Stephen Humphreys, AVAR: 'The American Veterans Archaeological Recovery (AVAR)' (virtual).
12.00 Irmelin Axelsen, University of Oslo: 'Collaboration and communication between hobby metal detectorists and archaeologists in Norway'.
12.30 Sophie Flynn, Treasure Trove Scotland: 'Treasure Trove in Scotland: The Social Landscape of Metal Detecting'.
14.00 Mette Maes Jensen, Aarhus University: 'Attitudes and Values among Danish Metal Detector Users'.
14:45 Panel talk with detectorists from Denmark and Sweden, followed by: Open discussion.
Friday: Session 2: Training of detectorists and future archaeologists
09.30 Ulla Moilanen, University of Helsinki: 'Education for metal detectorists - Experiences from Finland'.
10.00 Glenn Abrahamson, detectorist and vice-chair of Harja (DK): 'The HARJA approach to training newcomers to the hobby on Fynen'.
10.45 Nele Kangert, Tallinn University: 'Training metal detectorists in Estonia'.
11.15 Master students at the Aarhus University MA program in archaeology: 'Training (future) archaeologists about detecting'.
Friday: Session 3: Research cooperation
13.15 Gitte Kragh, Aarhus University: 'Citizen Science: method and theory'.
14.00 Benita Clemmensen, Østjyllands Museum: 'Co-creation with detectorists - opportunities and challenges for a regional Danish museum'.
14.45 Martin Rundkvist, University of Łódź: 'A mutually beneficial relationship. 20 years of research collaboration with Swedish metal detectorists at Aska in Hagebyhöga and other sites'.
15.15 Michael Lewis, Portable Antiquities Scheme/British Museum: 'Recording Detector Finds in the UK - challenges and opportunities provided by digital technology'.
15.45 Discussion/closing remarks
The notion ‘From Treasure Hunters to Citizen Scientists’ seems to belie the concept, propagated by metal detector users since the 1970s that they are "not interested in the money, but doing it to learn about history". Fifty (!) years on, the Helsinki-based European Public Finds Recording Network seems to imagine (or represent itself) as in some way initiating this attitude and leading the way. And their public grant-giving bodies are swallowing the narrative. However, it can be argued that what is happening under the guise of 'recording schemes' is less 'citizen science' than exploitation.
What however seems to be a basic assumption is that metal detector users are taken as being "society", and it is enough to "interact" with them in order to be "engaging the (wider) public" (Flynn, Lewis). This of course is not true. Most of the public of the "Nordic countries" and Europe generally do not go artefact hunting or buying artefacts to collect from the antiquities market. Yet they are surrounded by messages encouraging them to do so, and to look up to the people that do. Archaeologists "engaging with the public" but ignoring this, and ignoring the need to help the public see these messages in a wider context (and especially in terms of resource conservation) are not doing their job.
I would also raise the perfectly pertinent question of the need to take a holistic and realistic view of the (real) social and cultural aspects of artefact collecting (and the related commercial issues).
.jpg)
4 comments:
Why do you keep hammering yourself into a corner from which there is no escape? Detecting is here to stay, legal or illegal. Why not use your energi in a productive way and help guide detectorist into adopting responsible methods rather than knocking on a wall. In my own country Denmark the situation is remarkably better than you seem to anticipate, but yes there is room for improvement. DIME has a problem that not all artifacts are validated by an expert, so in general the given ID must to some degree be considered an suggestion, but all artifacts of importance are validated by the local museums and later the National Museum. That much said DIME is a potent tool because it ensures that many more artifacts are recorded including gps coordinates. The National Museum has a list describing proper care when handling found artifacts and if the local museums showed a more unified approach to what they see as minimum, good and excellent care the general bar among detectorists could be raised.
"Arne Hertz has left a new comment on your post '"Social and Cultural Aspects" of Artefact Collecting Seen from Aarhus"', yes he has, but it seems he simply did not see that.
My text was about a handful of archaeologists who used research money they had received to organize an academic conference about "Social and Cultural Aspects of Artefact Collecting", and that is what I was writing about.
Mr Herz however embarks on the usual blinkered "defence of my hobby" that is about the only thing metal detectorists seem able to do. The usual rose-tinted specs and "what ifs". I'll reply to them here: https://paul-barford.blogspot.com/2023/04/arne-hertz-has-left-new-comment-on-your.html
Yes I chose to comment more generally about your conquest, that does little but ridicule yourself. There is plenty of room for criticism of the way we as detectorists act. More in some countries, less in others, but like I said the hobby is here to stay whether legal or not. Your our job as an archaeologist should be to inspire and guide detectorists how to perform the hobby in a responcible way. But no, you prefer to sit in the corner being spewing sour comments. That is getting old!
Get out in the open and help improve the way we detect.
And just for the record I am just as appalled to see how hoards etc. are spilled into Tesco bags without proper documentation, but contrary to you I try to inspire others to do better rather than act like a chained dog.
Yes I chose to comment more generally about your conquest, that does little but ridicule yourself. There is plenty of room for criticism of the way we as detectorists act. More in some countries, less in others, but like I said the hobby is here to stay whether legal or not. Your our job as an archaeologist should be to inspire and guide detectorists how to perform the hobby in a responcible way. But no, you prefer to sit in the corner being spewing sour comments. That is getting old!
Get out in the open and help improve the way we detect.
And just for the record I am just as appalled to see how hoards etc. are spilled into Tesco bags without proper documentation, but contrary to you I try to inspire others to do better rather than act like a chained dog.
Post a Comment