Non-Material Aspects of Artefact Collecting

A British metal detectorists gets spiritual and new Agey: The Spiritual Connection of Metal Detecting Archi: Archaeological Sites & Historical Maps Jan 13 2025

Have you ever felt an almost mystical connection when unearthing an ancient artefact? It’s as if these objects, buried for centuries, are calling out to be rediscovered—inviting us to reconnect with the people who once held them. I believe these artefacts serve as more than just links to history; they are spiritual bridges between the past and the present, carrying the voices and energy of their original owners.
This belief resonates with traditions from indigenous cultures worldwide, where it is often thought that objects, places, and even landscapes carry a spiritual essence or consciousness. In many forms of animism, for instance, objects are seen as living connections to those who made or used them, acting as messengers from the past.

Religions and spiritual practices around the world also echo these ideas:
🌟 In shamanism, artefacts can act as conduits for communicating with ancestors or the spirit world.
🌟 In ancestor veneration, practiced in traditions like Shinto or African spirituality, objects are honored as sacred links to those who came before us.
🌟 Hinduism and Buddhism teach that encounters with meaningful objects could be karmic, a destined moment tied to a greater purpose.

For me, who has had the honour of disovering the incredible golden records accompanying this post, metal detecting is not just about finding historical treasures—it’s a deeply spiritual journey.
Each find feels like a gift from the earth, chosen to remind us of the lives, struggles, and dreams of those who came before us.
As you trudge through the mud on a cold Winter's day, remember you are part of something bigger—a living connection between history and the present. Each find is a call to listen, learn, and share the stories of those who came before us.
What about you? Have you ever felt a special connection with a find, as though it was meant for you to discover? Let’s share our experiences and celebrate the incredible spiritual and historical bond we have with the past.

And how, precisely, is having some artefact pocketed by an artefact hunter and later ending u in a skip or on eBay when they stop collecting a way to "share the stories of those who came before us"? Serious question. Archaeological investigations end in a publication and dissemination of the information. What are artefact hunters doing to pass on that non-material part of the legacy intact? Also hoiking single loose artefacts out of the ground, out of a site or assemblage means leaving part of teh "story" in the ground, inaccessible, alienated from what was removed. How is that a good thing, "spiritually"?

Pre-Clovis In US Arrowhead Collecting

I think this https://projectilepoints.net/ webpage is an excellent and thought-provoking resource about arrowhead collection (my project for 2025). I find its presentation of the typology very enlightening, and am particularly taken with the coverage of raw materials.* I have a question.

If one is an "arrowhead" hunter/ collector in the USA, what are the type names given to the "paleo" points that are pre-Clovis?

On US collectors' websites like this, am I mistaken in seeing that points of the 'Clovis 'cluster' seems to be the earliest types listed?

 If so, is this a persistence of the "Clovis First" model here? Do not US collectors aspire to be "independent thinkers trying to make sense of the past" like the British "metal detectorists" (laughably) claim to be? Is there any literature on this? (I mean the US, not the Brits)  



*The site is unattributed to a group of authors/moderators/creators - does anyone know who's behind it? 

Diffusion of Archaeological Content on Social Media

 
                                           "Looks like"                                
 

Comfort from Nature:
Bonacchi, C., Krzyzanska, M. and Acerbi, A. Positive sentiment and expertise predict the diffusion of archaeological content on social media. Sci Rep 15, 2031 (2025).  

Abstract
This study investigates the dissemination of archaeological information on Twitter/X through the lens of cultural evolution. By analysing 132,230 tweets containing the hashtag #archaeology from 2021 to 2023, we examine how content and context-related factors influence retweeting behaviour. Our findings reveal that tweets with positive sentiment and non-threatening language are more likely to be shared, contrasting with the common negativity bias observed on social media. Additionally, content authored by experts, particularly those with archaeological or historical expertise, is more frequently retweeted than content from popular figures lacking domain-specific expertise. The study also challenges the notion that pseudoarchaeology spreads rapidly and caution against overestimating its impact. Our results align with other studies on the spread of misinformation and “toxic” behaviour on social media, showing that the sharing of negative and hostile content by a vocal minority of users is mediated by other factors pertaining to the context of the communication. These insights underscore the nuanced dynamics of archaeology communication, emphasizing the importance of expert-led and positively charged narratives in engaging the public on social media.

There is a problem of the methodology here, only texts actually written to contain the hashtag #archaeology were considered. But the majority of discussion on social media has no such defining feature included by the author (it is not assigned by the application automatically when it senses that archaeology is being discussed). It cannot therefore be used to assess the entirety of the social media discussion with reference to the discipline, nor the interpretation of archaeological evidence. In particular, in the case of tweets in "English", a substantial portion of the archaeology content on social media will also be generated by artefact hunters and collectors (UK and USA - where both are common, socially acceptable and in the case of the UK, government supported). Yet in few cases will they be marked by an #archaeology hashtag. This would skew the authors' figures for the "professional" aspect (and dealers in archaeological artefacts?). I was puzzled by this: 

Our findings [...] challenge the notion that pseudoarchaeology spreads rapidly and caution against overestimating its impact".

Whoah. Is trhat really so? The conclusions need more vigorous testing using other labels ("Gobekli Tepe", "Giza", "Maltese Temples", "Megalithic", "ancient", "Clovis" [and "pre-Clovis"], "Younger Dryas", "Easter Island" for example)

Our results align with other studies on the spread of misinformation and “toxic” behaviour on social media, showing that the sharing of negative and hostile content by a vocal minority of users is mediated by other factors pertaining to the context of the communication.

The issue is that any mediation (really?) takes place OUTSIDE the echo-chambers that propagate and disseminate the negative and hostile content about "where archaeologists have got it wrong/are misleading the world/covering up the secrets", where there is little to no penetration. The authors seem not to have taken the context of discussions properly into account.

These insights{..] emphasiz[e] the importance of expert-led and positively charged narratives in engaging the public on social media.

So, this is where we get the main genres of archaeological outreach to the public through the media:

1) The ubiquitous posts: "look at this gorgeous... [glass bead, brooch, bit of coloured woollen fabric, etc...] / funny [phallic amulet or figure [tee hee], whimsical bronze mouse figurine, etc.].../ mysterious [Roman bronze dodecahedron, bâton de commandement/ percé, strange symbol in a graffito etc....]/ touching moment in time [fingerprints in ceramic vessel base, cat prints on a roman tile etc..], etc . [object-centric].

2) The infamous OTD ones beloved of Britain's Portable Antiquities Scheme, "on this day the emperor Squantius Maximus and his troops crossed the river at Rheims... here is a coin of Squantius Maximus". These embody a mixture of dumbdown as well as assumed superiority of the gatekeeper - exhibiting the artefact and (under the guise of benign educator) issuing some crumbs of ex cathedra wisdom for the forelock-tugging hoi polloi who did not have a classical education "like wot I did". [object-centric].


3) Then the trophy hunter, discoverer of this, the "biggest", "oldest", "best-preserved", most valuable/richly-decorated [= desirable] ones of these ever found... ["yeah, other museums have dodecahedrons, but OURS is the...."]. [object-centric].

4) continuing the "Discoverer" theme, we've cleverly/luckily found ("stumbled across") one of these [Roman villa, Hillfort, site with celtic metalwork/Slavic pottery etc] where nobody has ever found anything like that before or would never believe could be found here.

5) The spooky past wuuuuu [good Halloween story link] - "vampire grave", "were they buried alive?", a "witch bottle", "traces of mysterious rites".

6) Celebrity value. King Henry VIII's second cousin's personal seal matrix found in a field ("how did it get here? Perhaps [insert romantic speculation]") [often object-centric, and used to illustrate a history known from the written records].

7) An example of ... a thousand and one types of objects mentioned in the written records, and here, is an actual example of a [hawker's bell, Roman strigil, gaming dice, sherd with a gladiatorial scene, gem showing armour of the Homeric period, wadjet eye amulet etc etc...] [often object-centric, and used to illustrate a history known from the written records].

There are several more. The point is that NONE of them actually enlighten the reader on the nature of archaeology and its methodology(ies). The latter surely is the fundamental purpose of publoic education about archaeology - NOT simply lazily presenting it as merely digging up and making publicity/stories out of old things found. No matter how "positive". 

Collector JP Morgan

                  J.P. Morgan                

Every picture of collector JP Morgan published in his lifetime (and thus nearly every picture published since) was heavily retouched. This is what he actually looked like.

Illegal Metal Detecting in Butts Close: he got away with his lies

The scene, Butt's Close, Hitchin, North Hertfordshire

(Tony Riley FRIENDS OF BUTTS CLOSE AN OCCASIONAL NEWSLETTER June 2023)

[...] The Detectorist
Not the TV series, but a lone chancer on the Close. He had been approached, separately, by two Friends of Butts Close and he gave them lies about his having authorisation. NHC does not give permission to metal detectors on Council land, in common with almost all local authorities. I sent an email to you all on 5th May asking for any sightings. I did get a call, saw him operating myself, and called 999 to report ‘a crime in progress’. I was thanked for the information and the call was deprioritised – but the Police did contact NHC.
The Council has just two Environmental Crime Officers for the whole district, but one, David Furr, happened to be driving near the Close and advised the man that he did not have permission to operate there. He wouldn’t give his name, but he trudged off – and has not been seen since.

Metal Detecting may seem a fun and harmless hobby, and the organisations that promote it have careful Codes of Practice, but he obviously wasn’t following them. Further, he had been digging many holes to search for, identify or retrieve objects. He replaced the divots but these were not regrowing, and this was leaving shallow and potentially dangerous holes, hazards for adults and kids alike. Since he wasn’t following the Code of Practice there might also be doubt as to whether he would have reported anything relevant to the Local Finds Officer (Matthew Fittock, Verulamium Museum), which would be a loss to local archaeology. But for me there was one useful outcome. I found that there is a ‘Heritage Watch’ scheme, part of the Neighbourhood Watch initiative. I joined, and I now get regular updates from the Police on related (and alas unrelated) matters.

Hmm, so the Norgth Hertfordshire police 'watch', but don't do anything when they catch somebody acting antisocially and illegally?

Metal Detectorists in Russia

Sam Hardy has calculestimated that there are some 75,158 illicit detectorists in Russia (2016,pp. 217–19 but I believe a fresh estimate is coming) and I was looking at an anti-war Twitter ('X') exchange and this information came to mind. 

The tweet is this: 

Bricktop_NAFO @Bricktop_NAFO 
A Reminder For Russia.
Don't talk about Nukes so much when your population density looks like this.

2:53 AM · Jan 11, 2025 · 4,636 Views

followed by this:

Clair Cognizant @CarolynGarman5 · 4h
One big boom, one small boom; that's it. Light's out.

The consequences of nuclear war and the Mutually Assured Destruction do not bear thinking about. As one assumes the first strike would be an all-out attack by the madmen in the east (who at the moment almost daily recklessly threaten the west with it [RTV]), the fact that we could probably eliminate further threat and take the whole country back to the Late Bronze Age by a less environmentally damaging limited number of strikes is poor consolation.

Mutually Assured Destruction pic.twitter.com/s3yRul9hXe

— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) September 14, 2024

A more down-to-earth conclusion if that this map probably represents where the metal detectorists are in the country. These areas are also the main centres of wealth of citizens (metal detectors are rather a luxury item for most hobbyists - though not professional looters). They are also what might be termed (or at least before the brutal Feb 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine when things changed) centres of western influence. Its where the main western shopping centres, services were based. 

So this is where the Russian archaeological heritage was being ripped up for the gratification of collectors. 

Hardy, S. A. 2016, ‘Black Archaeology’ in Eastern Europe: Metal Detecting, Illicit Trafficking of Cultural Objects, and ‘Legal Nihilism’ in Belarus, Poland, Russia, and Ukraine. Public Archaeology, 15(4):214–237, October, 2016.

"Viking silver pendant"

On an AncientArtifacts forum near you (jani.mccutcheon@uwa.edu.au   Jan 8 #102776):

Viking silver pendant 
Hi esteemed group. I am interested in buying this pendant for my daughter's birthday.  It is being sold by artemission. Does it look genuine to any experts here? I have no knowledge of these kinds of things. Thanks

The "experts" reacted by showing a (single photo of a) totally different type of pendant that it was claimed was authentic, because the seller is a "very friendly man and extremely knowledgeable expert.  I'll not comment on that second item beyond saying typologically that item is problematic and in terms of the surface condition... IMO it's a caveat emptor. 

As for Jani's lunula, because that's what this is, I am not at all a big fan of Artemission for a number of reasons. 

The type is not specifically "Viking" (but "Viking" sells well) but part of a horizon of silver items that occur singly and in hoards across a wide area of central and eastern Europe (with outliers in Scandinavia) going down the Volga in the central Asian area. My colleague Władek Duczko knows more than me about that. So not "Viking". 

But as lot of the ones on the market would have the granules cast - some are authentic ancient, the bulk are not. But this one is actual granulation. Somebody's put a lot of work into this one (and it IS a lot if you know the technique - look it up). That's a plus.

Typologically and stylistically it is OK. That's not a negative (its not a plus, as a copy could be a slavish copy, but there is nothing here about the type or - more importantly - style to raise an issue). [caveat, the granules might be a little on the large side and suspiciously even]

There are no pockets of pitting where two metals with different potential were in contact in the ground. No visible corrosion in the undercuts and recesses. So if it was there, it's been totally stripped out by harsh (electro-?)chemical methods. Or perhaps it was not there. That's a minus.

Its very shiny, but typically silver objects on the antiquities market tend to be - patina is not valued on silver or gold, they have to shine. Even if an already chemically-stripped object has tarnished from lying in a drawer untouched since the 1990s, dunking it in all sorts of nasty stuff will bring the shine back in a few seconds. So, not a minus (though I think collectors should value patinated ancient silver more).  

On the back you can see the metal structure has been altered by the granules on the other side and something has lightly etched out those differences. That might be a plus - see above. 

The loop and edges of the object show wear and damage. This could be artificial 'distressing', but doers look convincingly done/convincing. A plus. There is a "Westminster" group of really well-constructed fakes of early Medieval metalwork going round at the moment [seller: you KNOW who you are...] that tick all the boxes, but fall down on this one. The first ones were better but now they are getting sloppy. On stylistic grounds, I do not think this is a "Westminster" fake.

There is ZERO mention of any documentation of legal excavation (number of permit, landowner permission etc) or legal acquisition (most countries in the region have legislation vesting ownership of archaeological items like this in the state) or legal export (most countries in the region restrict this, there should be an export licence). No mention of any documentation explicitly clarifying the legal situation is a HUGE MINUS.

I would like this to be a fake, but this one ticks too many boxes. I think if the lady from the Australian educational institute wants to contribute to the looting of the European archaeology heritage  ("acquired in 1990s from an East European collection" apart from being orientalist, is NOT a provenance legitimating this item), she'd have what she's looking for. But personally 700USD could be better spent than on financing the looters and smugglers and the dodgy dealers (I think I know where this was obtained)  that rip up Europe's past so some doting mum can 'give that special gift' [oh and it might well have been obtained by grave-robbing, nice, eh?]. 

So, as always, caveat emptor. This one looks authentic... but has a highly shaky legal situation. 

I'd write this for Jani over there, but I am banned from using the AncientArtifacts forum. Their loss.