"Britain's Secret Treasures" Drinking Game

.
In order to make the parade of the remains of archaeological contexts dismembered by metal detector wielding treasure hunters and artefact collectors on ITV1 next week more palatable, Portable Antiquities and Heritage Issues has devised a drinking game to accompany the programme.

THE “BRITAIN’S SECRET TREASURES” DRINKING GAME*

A game that gives you a good reason to get drunk and argue about archaeology!

Preparation:

Assemble a group of friends in front of the TV just before “Britain’s Secret Treasures” begins.  Before they arrive, make sure that all the necessary equipment is present. You will require:

• alcohol -- strong spirits have the best results, but beer or cider are more authentic (note to continentals: the beer in Britain is the warm-fermented type, and is served at room temperature…);  
• assorted mixers, ice cubes and snacks (for sustenance and variety);
• glasses; 

Ensure that everyone is seated comfortably at a safe distance from the television. Ascertain before the game starts that nobody came by car (those that did they are automatically disqualified from participation, but can act as impartial adjudicators).

The Game:

Everyone must have a drink to hand.  The general rules of this game are no different from any other drinking game. A drink is either a shot or a good gulp from a beer (or cider). Different events call for different numbers of drinks and all you do is watch the programme and play along.

 

Take 1 drink if:

• You hear the phrase "only in it for the history",
• Someone says "the money is not important, and I never sell my finds",
  
• sweeping generalisations are made,
  
• Nylon trousers, strap-on kneelers, baseball caps or camo gear are seen.   
• A metal detecting club's own "code of conduct" is referred to by a metal detectorist (two more if it is mentioned by an archaeologist).
• Someone says "we hate nighthawk[er]s/ nighthawk[er]s are not real metal detectorists" (it does not matter whether said by a detectorist, archaeologist or presenter).
• David Lammy or "unsung heroes of the heritage" are mentioned,
• There is a comment about the Treasure Valuation Committee or the speed and/or fairness of the 'Treasure Process'. 
• Hughes does her 'google-eyed' look.

Take 2 drinks if:

• You hear the phrase “revolutionizes our understanding of history”,
• you hear the word “context” (four if it is a metal detectorist that says it),
• The find being discussed is not of metal,
• resistivity meters or magnetometers are shown,
• people solemnly waving metal detectors over an excavation to no obvious end are shown,
• an historical re-enactment group are shown,
• Computer generated graphics and 'bright historic haze effects' are shown,
• The display of an object on the screen is accompanied by a 'leap of imagination' story, trite, dumbed-down and baseless narrativisation,
• The name of a member of the British royal family (dead or alive) is dropped into the conversation (those based on Geoffrey of Monmouth etc do not count). One drink if the ruler is foreign. 
• "Roman soldiers" are invoked (two more if there is a re-enacter in full armour shown on the screen at the time)

Take 3 drinks if:

• Mention is made of “agrichemical and plough damage”, 
• Preservation in situ is referred to as “left rotting in the ground”,
• A metal detectorist (or archaeologist) does silly stunts on camera like licking jellyfish or cross-dressing, 
• Interpretations involve human sacrifice, strange 'ritual' acts or gory deaths,  
• there is product placement (a metal detector brand is identifiable, or a metal detector producer’s logo is visible in the shot) - look at the clothing as well as equipment, 
• The object discussed is of iron.  
• The NCMD Code of Conduct is referred to by a metal detectorist (two more if it is mentioned by an archaeologist),
• Cotton gloves are not used while handling artefacts,

Take 5 drinks if:

•  A landowner has waived his "reward money".
•  eBay is mentioned by a detectorist,
• The Code of Practice for Responsible Metal Detecting in England and Wales is referred to by a metal detectorist (none if it is mentioned by an archaeologist, three more drinks however if is shown being presented to a landowner),
• Any mention is made of a metal detectorist's personal artefact collection,

Take 7 drinks if:

•  A metal detectorist has waived his "reward money".
• The completion of a full publication of one of the discussed finds is mentioned (two more if it actually shown on screen),
• Any health risks from metal detector use (electromagnetic radiation, harmful nanovibrations etc.) are referred to,
• There is any mention of international conventions,
• There is any mention of any of the theoretical literature on heritage issues, from either side (White Hat Guys, Gill, Renfrew, Elia, SAFE etc. or the Dark Side - finds identification manuals, coin catalogues and price guides do not count).

If all goes well, you should all be so drunk by the end of the programme that you will not be able to fire off a strongly-worded letter of complaint to ITV about the misrepresentation of the nature of archaeology. Hopefully the next morning you will have forgotten what you saw.

Happy Drinking!

* Inspired (obviously) by ‘The Time team Drinking Game’ http://www.assemblage.group.shef.ac.uk/4/4drink.html (see also http://www.ringthis.com/tvdrink/tv.php)
Vignette: : Keith Morris/Alamy

Britain's Secret treasures, ITV 1 16th-22nd July 2012

Focus on Metal Detecting: American Digger

.
Artefact hunting American style, New York, NY, February 15, 2012:

SPIKE TV HUNTS FOR BURIED HISTORICAL TREASURES IN NEW ORIGINAL SERIES “AMERICAN DIGGER”
Unscripted Series Travels Around The Country Uncovering Hidden Treasure Found In The Backyards Of Everyday Americans
Series Following Former Professional Wrestler, Ric Savage And His Team Of Relic Hunters Premieres Tuesday, March 20 at 10:00 PM, ET/PT

Spike TV ventures around the country in search of historical treasure buried in the backyards of unsuspecting citizens in the new unscripted original series, “American Digger.”
Premiering Tuesday, March 20 at 10:00 PM, ET/PT, “American Digger” follows the American Savage team, led by former professional wrestler-turned-modern- day relic hunter Ric Savage as they scour target-rich areas, such as battlefields and historic sites, in hopes of striking it rich by unearthing and selling rare pieces of American history.
In the US, there are millions of historical relics buried in backyards just waiting to be discovered and turned into profit.

The press release (dated August 11th 2011) is even more explicit:

There is treasure buried in the backyards of everyday Americans but they just don’t know it… until now. “American Digger” follows former professional wrestler turned modern day relic hunter Ric Savage, as he and his team from American Savage target areas such as battlefields and historic sites in the hopes of striking it rich and capitalizing on unearthing and selling bits of American history. The only thing standing in their way are the homeowners themselves, who Savage must convince to allow them to dig up their property using high-tech ground penetrating equipment and one very large bulldozer. What artifacts they find, they sell for a substantial profit, but not before negotiating a deal to divide the revenue with the property owners.

For the broader background, see Heritage Action's comments here. This programme has even got US metal detecting lobbyists worried that its giving the game away a little too much. No "history hunters" here, but people openly out to find the collectably-rare and saleable artefacts. But at least there is a fresh honesty about what these people are doing. As Nigel Swift notes:

God Bless America, where an entrepreneurial or vandalistic spade is called just that, where people dig destructively for money or self and make no bones about it, where archaeologists object to them doing so and make no bones about it and where detector manufacturer Minelab has just donated $41,000 to fight attempts to prevent the destruction and makes no bones about it.

How much less morally repugnant that is than the public hypocrisy that blights Britain – where detectorists all claim they report all their finds even though most of them don’t, where archaeologists pretend to believe them despite knowing the statistics show it’s not true and where not Minelab but you the taxpayer pays not $41,000 but £1,500,000 a year to sustain the activity in its current unacceptable form. And to employ a battalion of archaeologists who, whenever the subject arises, tell your hapless fellow citizens it’s just fine to let absolutely anyone (including ex-professional wrestler Rick Savage – why not?) onto their fields so long as they say they’re “responsible“!

Vignette: "only in it for the history".

Focus on Metal Detecting: A Landowners’ Guide to “Finds Agreements”

.
One would have thought that the Portable Antiquities Scheme, a publicly funded body would be out there giving the public advice on the treatment of portable antiquities and giving them proper archeological outreach on issues connected with collecting and the antiquities trade. Of course as we know, the reality is different, they have their heads down concentrating in the task of building the biggest database they can of taken heritage so they can do their "wotta lotta stuff we got" press releases. Anything that detracts from that effort takes second place. So its a good job we have public spirited organizations like heritage Action to do their job for them (costing the public a lot less than the thirteen million they pay for the dubious privilege of the PAS passively documenting the plunder of the past).

In a post (Metal Detecting: A Landowners’ Guide to “Finds Agreements”) they annotate a typical example of the sort of agreement that arteffact hunters thrust under landowners' noses asking them to sign away the collectable elements of the archaeological record for them to take away and profit from. As they point out, the wording of these agreements "have big implications for both you and any hidden archaeology".

As there’s no official guidance available you’ll be reliant on the detectorist alone to explain it. You may feel that’s not ideal so here are some points to consider. (The most frequently used agreement is shown but our comments apply to most others).

A LANDOWNERS’ GUIDE TO METAL DETECTING FINDS AGREEMENTS

Note here once again the use of the NCMD Code of Practice, despite the existence since 2006 of one agreed with most of the relevant national bodies and totally ignored by the majority of artefact hunters as they are not willing to abide by its definition of responsible behaviour. The NCMD code contains no such definitions and is mainly about shutting gates and not scaring sheep, important, but hardly related to the preservation of archaeological information.

There is no mention here either of what "value" is being shared, the total value of artefacts removed from the farmer's property, those items that a collector keeps for himself, those he sells or swaps, as well as the metal he takes to be melted down for scrap? The conditions of the division of the spoils surely need further definition in a document of this type.

Who is to determine the value of non-treasure items taken away and added to the finder's personal artefact collection (thus increasing its value)? If the agreement is signed by an absentee landlord, is the tenant farmer qualified to negotiate the sum the detectorist should pay for each day's haul of non-Treasure collectables? On what basis?

No mention here is made of the obligation of the finder to declare to the landowner everything they find and take away to allow its full market value to be assessed, or what happens if the landowner finds they have not.

On what basis is ownership transferred? No mention is made of any kind of paperwork proving that an object was added to a collection of metal detected finds by legal and mutually agreed means. this becomes important when latter those finds are disposed of.

There is no mention here of the "value" of the photographic rights. As we have seen here, one detectorist has revealed what most of them try to keep quiet, that a detectorist can get five hundred pounds for each digital shot of even very common and mundane artefacts (with no scale even). Obviously if detectorists are taking away even half a dozen finds each time they visit, the revenues from such sources add up over a few seasons, so where is the mention of this in this agreement? Why is the farmer being kept in the dark over this? Despite metal detectorists' efforts to silence whistle-blowers, this certainly needs wider publicity to avoid landowners getting ripped off to the extent of lost earnings of several thousands of pounds yearly by these people.

Rally Entrance Fees, Artefact Hunting and Landowners

.
If each artefact hunter attending the Bishop's Burton Commercial Artefact hunting rally spent on the weekend event 46 pounds each (my earlier post 'How much for the heroes?'), why are detectorists up in arms about a landowner who wants them to pay 70 pounds for a licence to enter his land to "metal detect" for a whole year? Indeed, why are so few landowners applying this solution, a licence and an agreement to abide by the national 'Code of Responsible Metal Detecting in England and Wales' and share the profits on the sale of artefacts and the reproduction rights of photos of objects taken from their land? Since so many hundreds of artefact hunters are willing to pay out for a limited right of access to landowners' property, why are not landowners charging all of them a proper fee, commensurate with the actual commercial value of all the artefacts (and "scrap metal") they remove? How many of them would still be collecting all those artefacts if they had to actually pay more for them than merely the battery money for their detectors? The PAS and heritage organizations would be doing everyone a service as part of a more rounded "outreach" circulating to landowners scans of a few of those "how much your finds are worth" sections of the hobby magazines and the books on the subject to inform landowners just what they are missing, saying in effect "take what you want boys".

Punishing Illegal Artefact Hunting in England and Wales

.
This is what happened to the car of a metal detector user caught red-handed illegally looking for artefacts on a site protected by law. A court ruled his motor was to be crushed following his sentencing. A Judge at Cloud Cuckton Crown Court ordered that the Audi A3 belonging to defendant 21-year old Barry Thugwit, of Lower Darkmess, Barsettshire be forfeited when he was sentenced to three years in prison last month. He had previously admitted metal detecting on protected sites using the car on three occasions between June 21 and 24 of this year. The vehicle, which was seized following his arrest, was handed to the police after the order from court and a decision was made to crush it. Detective Inspector Lancelot Goodguy, who ran the operation that led to the arrest of Mr Thugwit, said: “This car was used to facilitate the metal detecting and was forfeited to the police by the judge. By crushing it we are sending out a very clear message to others that we will not tolerate culture crime Barsettshire".

Source: Bedfordshire on Sunday, 'Ever wondered what happens to a drug dealer's car? Judge sends out a clear message that this is a crime that will not be tolerated',20/11/2011 (slightly amended).

Meanwhile in wilder Wales, metal detector users seem more prone to use other methods to deal with the 'black sheep' in the metal detector-using artefact hunting community. Such is their feeling of a bond with 'their' sites, that they declare publicly that they are willing take the law into their own hands to punish offenders without involving law enforcement. According to one "Detecting Wales" list member, people were suspected to be artefact hunting a hoard findspot by night and without the permission of the (hunting-shooting-and-fishing) landowner:

They were spotted by the game keeper who has night vision glasses. I think I will join him on a night time hunt, see who it is. I should be able to spot them, in the light of their burning car.

The use of violence among metal detector using artefact hunters in competition for access to 'productive sites' is an aspect which I wonder if Felicity Winkley will be covering in her NCMD-backed survey of the attitudes of metal detector using artefact hunters "to landscape and objects' findspots".

.

Sent to the BBC

.
Among the comments to the "Inside Out" text on illegal metal detecting (so-called 'nighthawking'), the first four selected by the BBC are of note:

night flyer

you do everything by the book, does it work, no. Do you get a pat on the back, NO. You mention that you are a detectorist you are a condemned man , you have to wait years for your finds to be recorded and then if they have not been lost , you get half of what they are worth.

Steven

i have just started doing metal detecting and i think you should be able to go anywhere to do it. The way to control it is by having some sort of licence that costs a few pounds. If you are caught detecting without this licence you are liable to prosecution. People that are caught nighthawking are banned from getting this licence and if they persist in doing it they are charged with theft.

The finds should belong to us all if you buy a detector and spend the time to find then they should be yours. Some of the items being found have been deposited before these people owned the land so what gives them the right to own them. Finders keepers loser weepers.

John

Night hawking is my one and only hobby and I absolutely love it. I got into metal detecting 2 years ago and basicly I am too late in the game to find any decent land in the day, so I have to night hawk.

Russ

I dont condone nighthawking, but people like Tony Robinson have potrayed detectorists in such bad light, that gaining permission from farmers is getting harder and harder, and so is the introduction of the stewardship scheme. So detectorists that were once as honest as the day was long that they detected now find themselves detecting later than they expected.

So, basically according to these metal detector owners, it's everybody else's fault, not theirs that there is illegal activity going on. It takes too long to get yer reword munny payed en' then it's not enuff and nobody thanks you for ripping the artefacts out. The landowners have no right to what their land contains, all property is theft, artefact hunters should be allowed to "go anywhere to do it" (I'm not quite clear how "Steven" defines nighthawking or how many times people should get away with it before eventually being charged with theft). All the decent land has been taken buy other artefact hunters. It's all Tony Robinson's fault and landowners don't want to let artefact hunters on their land, so they go there anyway to take things without their permission.

These comments were posted in March 2003. How much have attitudes been changed in this milieu by a further eight years of PAS "outreach"?

Another Way UK Landowners Can be Cheated Out of More Money by Artefact Hunters

.

A while back a British metal detectorist was demanding from a blogger a copyright fee for some pictures that he or she had used. The sum requested was surprisingly high for some scrappy artefact shots with poor lighting and no scale. He was demanding £500 each for them, and justifying this by claiming that this was the price he had routinely been getting from magazines for this type of photo.

This raises the question of whether landowners are aware of this when they sign finds agreements with metal detectorists. Most of these documents do not go into much detail about the financial responsibilities of the artefact hunter after he takes the collectables home. Heritage Action has pointed out that these agreements seldom contain clauses concerning division of the profit should a collector subsequently sell an item received as a gift from the landowner (whose property it is). This is significant when a single Roman brooch or buckle is valued in the "what's it worth?" page of metal detecting magazines at several tens of pounds, let a detectorist sell six or eight of them and he can pocket several hundred pounds a sale. Surely it is clear that the landowner should be aware of the profit the detectorist is making on items he took away for next to nothing and their own rights in the matter.

Now an additional factor is added to the equation. If a detectorist who does not sell the finds taken makes photos of them and then charges magazines and others £500 for the use of each one of them, even for non-commercial purposes, then obviously these proceeds should be being split with the landowner too. By such means a landowner somewhere should be getting £250 for each photo of an artefact which appears in a metal detecting magazine or newspaper article, and probably also for each shot of a metal detectorist on his land. Do they? If landowners make so much money from the photographic rights sold by finders, why does this source of income not figure on a single 'model landowners' agreement' published online? Are metal detectorists maintaining a silence about the profits they make in this area in the hope that landowners never find out?

British metal detectorists loudly protest that they are "not in it for the money", but it is quite clear that some of them waste no opportunity to find ways of making money from their hobby, what however is disreputable is when it seems this takes place with the wool being drawn over the eyes of landowners. The more detectorists who try to take advantage of a landowner's ignorance of the true market value of the finds they release and their goodwill, the more suspicious landowners will become towards the motives of the milieu as a whole. Probably with good reason in certain cases.