Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wg55d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-14T02:47:36.947Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sleeping with the “Enemy”

Metal Detecting Hobbyists and Archaeologists

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2017

Matthew Reeves
Matthew Reeves*
Affiliation:
The Montpelier Foundation, 13384 Laundry Rd., Montpelier Station, VA 22957 (mreeves@montpelier.org)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In 2012, the Archaeology Department at James Madison’s Montpelier began an experimental program with Minelab Americas to encourage metal detectorists to become more involved in the scientific process of archaeological research. Specifically, the program is designed to be a week-long experience in which archaeologists and metal detectorists work together to identify and preserve archaeological sites at the 2,700-acre Montpelier property. In the process, the metal detector participants are taught the importance of site preservation through background lectures and hands-on field training in which they use their metal detectors as a remote sensing device. Participants learn how gridded metal detector surveys are conducted and the importance of proper context and curation of recovered objects. The team-based approach of our program has resulted in a co-creation process whereby metal detectorists bring to the table their skills in using their machines to identify subtle metallic artifact signals and archaeologists bring the skill of systematic survey techniques to map and record archaeological sites. In the end, teamwork encourages open and frank discussions regarding the interface between metal detecting and the archaeological communities and has gone a long way toward reconciling differences between these two groups who have a long history of strained relations.

En 2012, el departamento de arqueología de James Madison Montpelier dio inicio a un programa experimental con Minelab Americas para alentar a los usuarios de detectores de metales a que se involucren de manera más cercana con el proceso científico de la investigación arqueológica. Específicamente, el programa que se ha diseñado se lleva acabo en una semana, durante la cual, los arqueólogos y los usuarios de detectores de metales trabajan juntos para identificar y preservar los sitios arqueológicos que se ubican en los 2,700 acres que comprende la propiedad de Montpelier. Como parte de este proceso, a los usuarios de detectores de metales se les enseña la importancia de la preservación de sitios a partir de conferencias en donde se les plantean los antecedentes y se les proporciona capacitación para usar sus detectores de metales como instrumentos de prospección remota. Los participantes aprenden como desarrollar recorridos reticulados con el detector de metales, así como la importancia del contexto y de la curaduría de los objetos. El enfoque del trabajo en equipo ha resultado ser un proceso de creación en colaboración mediante el cual, los usuarios de detectores de metales ponen sobre la mesa sus habilidades en el uso de estos instrumentos para identificar las señales metálicas sutiles que emiten los artefactos y los arqueólogos aportan el potencial de las técnicas del recorrido de superficie sistemático para mapear y registrar sitios arqueológicos. Finalmente, el trabajo en equipo fomenta discusiones abiertas y directas en torno a la interfase entre los usuarios de detectores de metales y las comunidades de arqueólogos, lo que representa un gran avance hacia la reconciliación de las diferencias existentes entre estos dos grupos que han mantenido relaciones tensas por mucho tiempo.

Type
Research Article
Information
Advances in Archaeological Practice , Volume 3 , Issue 3: Special Issue: Co-Creation , August 2015 , pp. 263 - 274
Copyright
Copyright © Society for American Archaeology 2015

References

Balicki, Joseph 2014 The Fall 1863 Bivouac of the 14th Connecticut Infantry. In From These Honored Dead: Historical Archaeology of the American Civil War, edited by Geier, Clarence R., Scott, Douglas D., and Babits, Lawrence E., pp. 159–176. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Bryan, Corle, and Joseph, F. Balicki 2006 Finding Civil War Sites: What Relic Hunters Know, What Archaeologists Should and Need to Know. In Huts and History, edited by Clarence, Geier, Orr, David, and Reeves, Matthew, pp. 55–73 University of Florida Press, Gainesville, Florida.Google Scholar
Espenshade, Christopher, and Severts, Patrick 2013 Metal Detecting: One Step to Better Consideration of African American Resources. In African Diaspora Archaeology Newsletter 1(2):1–6.Google Scholar
McDavid, Carol, and Brock, Terry P. 2015 The Differing Forms of Public Archaeology: Where We Have Been, Where We Are Now, and Thoughts for the Future. In Ethics and Archaeological Praxis, edited by Gnecco, Cristóbal and Lippert, Dorothy, pp. 159–184. Springer, New York.Google Scholar
McGuire, Randy 2006 Marxism and Capitalism in Historical Archaeology. In A Cambridge Companion to Historical Archaeology, edited by Hicks, Dan and Beaudry, Mary C., pp. 123–142. Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
Reeves, Matthew B. 2004 Asking the “Right” Questions: Archaeologists and Descendant Communities. In Places in Mind, edited by Chambers, Erve and Shackel, Paul, pp. 71–81. Routledge Press, New York.Google Scholar
Reeves, Matthew B. 2013 Field Guide for Archaeological Metal Detecting. Report on File, Montpelier Foundation. Electronic document, http://www.montpelier.org/files/mds-methods, accessed March 12, 2015.Google Scholar
Reeves, Matthew B. 2014 Home Is Where the Woods Are: An Analysis of a Civil War Camp Complex in Virgnia. In From These Honored Dead: Historical Archaeology of the American Civil War, edited by Geier, Clarence R., Scott, Douglas D., and Babits, Lawrence E., pp. 141–158. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Reeves, Matthew B., and Clark, Scott 2013 Open Minds, Clearer Signals—Metal Detectorist and Archaeologist Cooperation Takes Another Step. Blog for the Society for Historical Archaeology. Electronic document, http://www.sha.org/blog/index.php/2013/04/open-minds-clearer-signals-metal-detectorist-and-archaeologist-cooperation-takes-another-step/, accessed February 22, 2015.Google Scholar
Reeves, Matthew B., Schweikart, Eric, and Higbee, Jeanne 2014 Archaeological Investigations of Periphery Sites at Madison’s Montpelier. Montpelier Archaeology Department. Submitted to National Geographic Society, Research and Exploration Grant #9411-13. Copies available from the Montpelier Foundation Archaeology Department.Google Scholar
Rodgers, Bradley 2004 An Archaeologists Manual for Conservation. Plenum Publishers, New York.Google Scholar
Scott, Douglas D. 2013 Uncovering History: Archaeological Investigations at the Little Bighorn. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman.Google Scholar
Simon, Nina 2010 The Participatory Museum. Museum 2.0. Electronic document, http://www.participatorymuseum.org/read/, accessed April 29, 2015.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Reeves supplementary material

Supplementary Table S1

Download Reeves supplementary material(File)
File 79.2 KB