Tuesday 2 November 2010

A UK Artefact Hunter's Collection: "Stubble Hunter" comes clean

.
I came across the website of one "Stubble hunter" (John Feenan) while looking for something else. He has been artefact hunting with a metal detector for two years, after a break of 20. What is interesting is he admits the equipment he is using is not top-of-the -market, so may be considered as typical of many UK detectorists. This seems an interesting source of information about finds rates, with regard to the ongoing discussion about how many reportable finds are disappearing without record as a result of artefact hunting. The website owner clearly has an interest in finding "hammies", medieval hammered silver coins. He writes:
My finds rate has really upped in the last 6 months too but perhaps that is because I am 'sneaking out' to the fields more often that I should ! Also I know my machine much better now so I know what to 'listen for'/'when to dig' - more crucially I sweep much slower with the head brushing the ground. Looking back before I found my first hammered coin I would not have dreamed that I would have found 30 odd in such a short space of time.
With regard the finds rate question:
To those just starting out... I should advise that for every day I may have success on (such as a hammered) there are 20 corresponding days when I will come home empty handed. Patience IS a virtue.
Well, let's have a look at some of what he is showing, there is a lot more "Old Timey" stuff shown on the website, interesting in its own right (both archaeologically and as social history collectables), but I am more interested in the PAS-recordable material. See the home page for notes on what detecting partners are finding alongside him.

Have a look through the following categories: Celtic/Iron Age coins, Iron Age artefacts, Roman coins, Roman artefacts (excepting coins), Fasteners, Viking and Saxon artefacts, Medieval 'hammered' silver coins, Rings/Jewellery, Tudor, Buckles


I make that 76+ items that are PAS-recordable. So that is more than the Heritage Action Erosion Counter predicts for an individual "average" detectorist over a two year period. Examination of this modest collection however also reveals information of another type. What is notable is that this individual has spent two years walking over sites where these artefacts are found and it is clear that his choice of items brought home has been very selective. Almost all the finds presented are of metal, many of them are coins. There is no trace here of any of the sites he explored (exploited) containing pottery, building material (brick, tile), slag, lithic material, animal remains (one token oystershell depicted). The collector found no pin shanks and bracelet fragments to accompany the Roman fibulae, which is an odd skewing of the typical site assemblage. More to the point the past cultures examined by this collection activity seem only to have known four metals, gold, silver copper and lead alloys. They seem never to have discovered iron and the vast number of useful tool and equipment types that can be made of it. It is these that tell us so much about the economic activities taking place on the sites explored, but UK artefact hunters really do not want to collect ancient ironwork, they want the nice patinated non-ferrous "partifacts". The collector is not collecting to investigate or even illustrate a whole range of ancient lifeways, or even produce a sample of the assemblages of the sites from which these items come, these are wholly subjectively selected items, chosen as collectables. This means (a) these people are not "doing archaeology" and the results of their searches and selective carrying away and selective reporting cannot be used as such, (b) they are digging up and then discarding very large quantities of archaeological evidence in the search for pretty geegaw collectables.

How many finds has "Stubble Hunter" reported to the PAS? We don't know because the PAS keeps such data a secret (we can't have the hoi polloi whose cultural heritage is being eroded away to fill these people's collections seeing how responsible individual detectorists are, can we?). He does however "record" his finds with the private pirate recording site UKDFD. Here there are 21 "look what I have found!" items showcased, most of them coins. According to the relevant field of the UKDDatabase, just three of these items have been "reported elsewhere" (15%, the three that have are two unusual coins and a gold mourning ring). Two of these items are not PAS-reportable, but many of the objects he shows on his website are not "recorded" on UKDFD and most probably this means that the majority are not recorded by the PAS either. In other words, the activities of this collector correspond to the picture presented by the Heritage Action model in full.

It seems there will be other cases of UK metal detectorists presenting their collecting "achievements" on the Internet against which we may test the HA model and form an opinion of how many reportable artefacts are being removed from the British archaeological record without any corresponding information being made available to the public in mitigation.

UPDATE:
In another context I heard "offline" from a metal detector using collector who proudly told me that recently he had visited his FLO with a box of "1000 coins and 500 artefacts" (interesting ratio) and dumped them on her desk. This was the result of "25 years" of previous metal detecting. Even if we assume that many of the coins would have been Georgian and other non-PAS-recordable ones, this is another case (60 artefacts a year) which shows that the Heritage Action figures are not only plausible, but a little on the low side. How many detectorists with boxloads of thousands of artefacts kept have not yet visited the FLO? What happened to the artefacts they did not keep?

6 comments:

john said...

Paul,
I feel 'honoured' that you have looked at my web site and appreciate your comments. Your opinions are noted and without getting too defensive I should add that 'all' my finds will find their way onto the UKDFD database. Unfortunately one is only allowed to submit one find daily so, yes, I have been selective on my submissions up till now. I will be seeing my local Finds Liaison Officer this week and seeking his advice regarding what I should be submitting to the PAS site. I should state that everyone of our club members finds (ferrous and non ferrous) are 'shown' at our bi monthly meetings to which our FLO is always present.
I appreciate your stance on our hobby and wish there would be more 'sharing of information' and 'closer ties' between archeologists and the metal detecting community in general. It has improved but the gap still exists.
I should state that I have a protective love of our countryside and if I thought I was damaging it in any way I would cease this hobby forthwith.
Kind regards, John Feenan

Paul Barford said...

Hello, that's a quick turnaround, nice to see some UK detectorists read this stuff.

"'all' my finds will find their way onto the UKDFD database." Well, why "record" with the pirates at all? What is this "record" for? Why not be a responsible artefact collector and go to the multi-million pound PAS with the PAS-recordable finds?

"I should state that everyone of our club members finds (ferrous and non ferrous) are 'shown' at our bi monthly meetings to which our FLO is always present." Eh? EVERY single one? What does that "showing" achieve? Surely if detectorists are stripping sites of artefacts then that needs to be replaced by a FULL record, not somebody qwwaving a boxfull of bits under an FLO's nose saying "take your pick, which ones d'ya want fer the database?"

Unlike you I do not think "sharing of information" is what this is (should be about), but "best practice" - in the absence of that, then "close ties" are impossible. PAS has put the cart before the horse in that, I feel.

Yes John, you are damaging the countryside as surely as if you were picking rare orchids for the vases in the spare bedroom, nicking Osprey eggs for omlettes, you are stripping it of its soul, its history, but don't let me saying so stop you, think it out for yourself (and please don't quote the "plough/fertiliser damage" crap to me). The "hobby" is erosive, irresponsible, self-centred and unsustainable. Since you come over as a reasonable sort of bloke, why not Stop Taking Our Past?

john said...

Well, I 'WILL' quote the "plough/fertiliser damage" crap to you... Without exception we detect on ploughed fields and if you were any sort of a farmer you would know how far a 'disc' goes down... Far deeper than the old fashioned horse and plough.
The University of Reading on "Agricultural Threats" quote "Increased ploughing depth and subsoiling operations enhance the potential for soil erosion etc etc"
Yes - modern farming methods have come on quite a bit since then - surely this must be a nice diversionary target for your good self and, though I am sure you would have addressed this somewhere deep in your many blog entries - I have no intention of wading through them for evidence.. As for 'taking our past' well on a winder front I think archeologists started that off with Tutankhamun and the Elgin marbles ! Enjoy your crusade - I will enjoy my hobby (and not just for finding 'one more hammered coin') with a clear conscience.

Paul Barford said...

Points not answered:
1) why "record" with the pirates at all? What is this "record" for? Why not be a responsible artefact collector and go to the multi-million pound PAS with the PAS-recordable finds?

2) if detectorists are stripping sites of artefacts then that needs to be replaced by a FULL record, not somebody waving a boxfull of bits under an FLO's nose saying "take your pick, which ones d'ya want fer the database?"

3) why not Stop Taking Our Past?

Paul Barford said...

"Without exception we detect on ploughed fields" well, that is, to use a technical term, nonsense. There are a lot of detectorists who detect grassland, up around Crosby Garrett for example.

"we detect on ploughed fields" Well, also what the Americans call "systematic pedestrian survey" and we call systematic fieldwalking does too. It stands to reason that an army several thousand strong people going out in those fields looking for the same sites and taking away with or without records of greater or lesser accuracy and trustworthiness many of the diagnostic finds such surveys need to understand the results, is damaging the surface record. This is all the more galling when this is shown by projects incorporating responsible metal detectorists - such as the VASLE project. It seems the latter simply do not learn from such collaboration what the problem is.

There are many techniques by which archaeology obtains information without digging down below the surface, there is a huge bibliography of "archaeology of the ploughsoil" which remains unknown to the UK artefact hunter information - should not the PAS be engaged in introducing them to it in their "outrteach"?

Actually talking of "plough/ fertiliser damage crap" I had in mind another favourite but false argument of the UK detectorist, but never mind.

"this must be a nice diversionary target for your good self". No it is the detectorists who use it to justify what they do. I have examined those arguments in the spirit of enquiry and open discussion and concluded that they are false and ask the detectorists and their supporters (like the PAS) to tell me where my reasoning is mistaken - so far they can't quite seem to step up to the plate.

"I have no intention of wading through them for evidence" Ah. Well that's it isn't it? You can come out with glib one-liners but when there is any trace that the matter might not be that simple... "we can't be bothered to think about it in detail" is the crux of where the problem with antiquity collecting lies isn't it? Yes, you can do whatever you like "with a clear conscience" if you shut out from your mind the wider context and the deeper consequences.

"Can't be bothered" however is NOT responsible detecting - ask the PAS.

Paul Barford said...

"As for 'taking our past' well on a wider front I think archeologists started that off with Tutankhamun and the Elgin marbles !

Really? I suggest you consider where those items are, what role they fulfil. Then have a think about the Crosby Garrett helmet and the Sevso Treasure.

 
Creative Commons License
Ten utwór jest dostępny na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa-Bez utworów zależnych 3.0 Unported.