The Impact of Metal Detectors: Preservation Lessons from the Battlefield (original) (raw)
1996, Society for Historical Archaeology Conference on Historical and Underwater Archaeology
We all know that metal detectors have had an adverse impact on historic sites of all types, including battlefields. In addition to diminishing the number of metal artifacts present, the activities of metal detectors may have skewed the patterns left on sites either in terms of disproportionately removing certain classes of artifacts from the site, or by disproportionately removing artifacts from certain areas of a site. Because Civil War detectorists typically collect all metal, battle-related artifacts, these sites present the opportunity to examine spatial skewing that may have resulted from differential land access and from the tendency of metal detectors to focus on "hot spots." Information derived from archaeological distribution studies and information from metal detectors informants are used to assess the affects of differential access to land and the "mining" of hot spots have had on remaining patterns at the Mine Creek, Kansas, and Honey Springs, Oklahoma, Civil War battlefields.
Sign up for access to the world's latest research.
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Related papers
Biting the bullet: the role of hobbyist metal detecting within battlefield archaeology
Internet Archaeology, 2013
In the UK battlefields are becoming more frequently associated with the label 'heritage at risk'. As the concept of battlefield and conflict archaeology has evolved, so too has the recognition that battlefields are dynamic, yet fragile, archaeological landscapes in need of protection. The tangible evidence of battle is primarily identified by distributions of artefacts held within the topsoil, such as lead projectiles, weapon fragments or buttons torn from clothing; debris strewn in the heat of battle. Much of the battlefield therefore remains as a faint footprint, and where it survives, may provide valuable information, if recorded accurately. The unrecorded removal of artefacts from battlefields and other sites of conflict is a key issue in the management and conservation of this unique archaeological heritage. With a particular focus on current doctoral research, this paper aims to address the role of metal detecting in the UK as an important factor in this equation, having both a positive and negative impact to battlefield archaeology. Furthermore it will also consider the nature of metal detecting on UK battlefields; the perceived value of battle related artefacts; the quality of information available for the recording of material from such sites, and what may cooperatively be achieved.
The 2014 metal detecting investigations demonstrated the value of metal detecting as a complement to the earlier park-wide pedestrian survey. Metal detecting has minimal impact to archeological deposits or archeological integrity. The metal detecting efforts confirmed certain site distribution patterns and identified a wider variety of historic trash disposal areas than appear on the surface. The metal detector survey also confirmed archeological structural areas that have little or no surface manifestation by the presence of datable metal artifacts.
Testing Metal Detector Methodology in Archaeology
2020
This thesis focuses on testing metal detector methodology at the eighteenth-century colonial site of Hobcaw North on the coast of South Carolina. In recent decades metal detectors have become an accepted part of the archaeological toolkit, yet their use is generally limited to the role of site discovery and delineation. With the goal of broadening the role of metal detector use, several research questions were designed to test what other methodological approaches can be utilized. These questions build upon the foundation of an intensive, full-coverage metal detector survey previously conducted at Hobcaw North. The first question looks at the utility of screening soil to recover non-metallic artifacts when excavating the targeted metallic object. The next question compares the full-coverage metal detector survey to two versions of a less intensive metal detector survey and a shovel test survey in order to see what differences there are in any revealed artifact patterning between these methods. The final question looks at whether a metal detector survey can reveal information about artifact patterning, how the inclusion of non-metallic artifacts alters interpretations, and if the results can be used to effectively guide test unit placement. The results of this study show that there is room for innovation in metal detecting methodology.
The Archaeological Impacts of Metal Detecting
Open Archaeology, 2019
In a comment on two recent articles on the archaeological impacts of metal detecting, this paper advocates clearer and more valid measures of those impacts and more nuanced classification of the legal and cultural environments in which metal detecting takes place. The need to rely on open-source, online data for transnational analysis makes the former challenging but not impossible. Using the example of Canada, the paper shows that jurisdictional and other complexities make simple "permissive" and "restrictive/prohibitive" dichotomies unhelpful, and suggests using multivariate analysis that accounts for such factors as presumption of ownership, locations of metal detecting, availability of finds reporting, and whether heritage legislation concerns artifacts or only sites. This is essential for development of sound, evidence-based policy on the metal-detecting hobby.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.