|
Issue 106May / June 2009ContentsnewsBreton hoard of stone axeheads is first for UK Flint finds point to Scotland's first people Antiquities Scheme unearths second Roman pan featuresBeneath the Sea Special: Part 1 Beneath the Sea Special: Part 2 THE BIG DIG: Wallingford The Nighthawing Report spoilheapProud of all humanity – and Homophobic (Latin or Greek?) on the webRecommended websites lettersCBA CorrespondentGill Chitty introduces some recent examples from the CBA's advocacy files
ISSN 1357-4442 Editor Mike Pitts |
featuresThe Nighthawking ReportPeople who use metal detectors in search of the past were once dismissed by archaeologists with a mixture of prejudice and fear. Now their positive contributions are clear, but nobody is perfect. Pete Wilson considers tackling the rogues. Archaeologists and detectorists now work together, to everyone's benefit. In England and Wales detectorists abide by the Treasure Act, report their finds to the Portable Antiquities Scheme and follow the code of practice for responsible metal detecting. Others may follow the new Historic Scotland guidance (Metal Detecting Yes or No?, PDF 268KB), the English Heritage guidance (Our Portable Past, PDF 1.12MB), or the codes of practice from the National Council for Metal Detecting and the Federation of Independent Detectorists. And then there are the nighthawks. They trespass, or detect on sites such as scheduled monuments where it is illegal. Not only do they steal our common past, but they bring metal detectorists into disrepute. Quite simply, nighthawking is theft. In 2006 English Heritage, in partnership with others (see end note), commissioned Oxford Archaeology to inquire into the scale of the problem in the UK and Crown Dependencies, and suggest how it might be addressed. The only previous comparable study (Metal Detecting & Archaeology in England, Council for British Archaeology 1995, with funding from English Heritage), focused more narrowly on excavations and scheduled monuments. Information on the clandestine activities was naturally as hard to come by as it had been in 1995. Many metal detectorists saw the survey as a smoke screen for new legislation restricting their hobby. In fact, it concluded that none was required, except regarding the antiquities trade where the UK has a relatively very lax regime. The existing Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act (1979), Treasure Act (1996) and legislation protecting sites of special scientific interest and other categories are important: but the key to dealing with nighthawking is the Theft Act (1968). The problem
The quantity of scheduled monuments reported as being attacked has fallen since 1995 from 1.3% to 0.4%. Archaeological consultancies reporting nighthawking have fallen from 74% to 28% (affecting 3–6% of excavations). However, the national survey may significantly under report the problem. Oxford Archaeology wrote to a sample of farmers in the East Midlands with scheduled monuments on their land: of those that responded, 17% had suffered from nighthawking. Additionally, many "honeypot" sites continue to be raided. At Icklingham, Suffolk, the findspot of the infamous Icklingham bronzes, 40–50 prosecutions have failed to stem the theft of our common heritage. At the launch of the nighthawking survey at the Society of Antiquaries in London on February 16, the site owner, John Browning, spoke eloquently about his experiences over 30 years of trying to combat nighthawks. Despite support from the police and prosecutors this site, which has produced key evidence for Roman-period Christianity in Britain, continues to suffer. Icklingham is in the arable east of England – a band from Kent through the Midlands and East Anglia to Yorkshire that bears the brunt of illicit metal detecting. It is also the area that is most productive for responsible detectorists who, particularly through their cooperation with the Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS), have added much new and important data on many periods of our past. However, the problem extends further. For example at Corbridge, Northumberland, English Heritage has had to employ security guards, working with the local police, to patrol the scheduled arable fields that surround the guardianship area. Fencing and a security guard did not prevent a nighthawk attempting to attack open trenches at the English Heritage excavations on the scheduled Roman villa at Groundwell Ridge, Swindon, directed in 2004 by the writer! An understandable response by some landowners faced with raids on their land and damage to crops, is to ban all metal detectorists. Yet the information gains from fully reported detecting can be immense – PAS data have been used in many degrees and publications. The remarkable Viking age cemetery at Cumwhitton, Cumbria, was discovered by detectorists who reported their finds to the PAS. The subsequent investigations were a model project in which archaeologists from Oxford Archaeology (North) worked closely with detectorists to investigate this site with funding from English Heritage (feature, Nov 2004). Nighthawking's negative effects are equally easy to demonstrate. In 2005 a late bronze age hoard – cited as being found in Buckinghamshire – was purchased in the Netherlands. The transaction was reported to the Buckinghamshire finds liaison officer. Under the Treasure Act (Designation) Order 2002, all prehistoric base metal objects from the same find, if two or more are found together, are deemed treasure, so the coroner initiated a police investigation. The sellers in the Netherlands were acting on behalf of the finders, who could not be traced. The buyer allowed the material to be donated to Buckinghamshire County Museum, but the findspot has not been identified and the crucial archaeological information on context has been lost. We are left with a wonderful collection of bronze age material, but not the story that it should be able to tell us. The survey has shown that, with honourable exceptions, the same issues are encountered across the country whatever the intensity of the threat:
The efforts of the Portable Antiquities Scheme, many other archaeologists and organisations such as the National Council for Metal Detecting, to make members of the hobby more aware of the heritage value of metal detecting and the need for proper recording, are clearly paying dividends. But not even all detectorists who work within the law report their finds, denying the rest of us the benefit of the knowledge. Some detectorists report locations only to parish level, which is of limited value. What now?The nighthawking survey made seven recommendations:
Exceptionally, Kent Police have devised measures to deal with nighthawking that provide a model of good practice that could be adapted to other areas:
In the short-term, nighthawking incidents can be reported to Oxford Archaeology Nighthawking. English Heritage will be looking to develop longer term reporting mechanisms, as will other partner organisations, and discussions are already in hand with the Association of Chief Police Officers and Kent Police about developing training for all concerned in the reporting, recording, detection, policing and prosecution of nighthawks. Integrating detecting more fully into the archaeological process may well require further "hearts and minds" work on some people in both camps, but the bottom line is metal detecting is simply another survey technique. The fact that the technique is abused by a small minority of thieves does nothing to invalidate that fact. Even closer cooperation between archaeologists and metal detectorists may help us to move to a position where nighthawking is as unacceptable as collecting birds eggs. The trick will be to ensure that people undertaking legitimate and legal detecting are not hounded. The answer, at least in part, might be a variation of the Kent Police use of neighbourhood watch and similar schemes – local people who know the landowners or tenants, and are familiar with who has permission to be on their land. A tougher nut to crack may be the trade in illicit or poorly provenanced antiquities that fuels nighthawking. The PAS has made inroads into the trade in undeclared treasure through its monitoring of eBay, but it would help considerably if everyone who came into contact with treasure had to report it, not just the finder. More stringent monitoring of antiquities offered for sale on eBay, as has been introduced in Germany, Switzerland and Austria, would help stop artefacts being sold illegally. The report, Nighthawks & Nighthawking, can be found at www.helm.org.uk/nighthawking. It was produced by Oxford Archaeology for English Heritage, with partnership funding from Cadw, Historic Scotland, National Museum Wales and the Portable Antiquities Scheme and in-kind support from Guernsey Museums Service, Jersey Heritage Trust, Manx National Heritage, National Museums Scotland and the Northern Ireland Environment Agency. Pete Wilson is head of research policy (Roman archaeology) at English Heritage. |
CBA web:British ArchaeologyJan/Feb 2005Mar/Apr 2005 May/Jun 2005 Jul/Aug 2005 Sep/Oct 2005 Nov/Dec 2005 Jan/Feb 2006 Mar/Apr 2006 May/Jun 2006 Jul/Aug 2006 Sep/Oct 2006 Nov/Dec 2006 Jan/Feb 2007 Mar/Apr 2007 May/Jun 2007 Jul/Aug 2007 Sep/Oct 2007 Nov/Dec 2007 Jan/Feb 2008 Mar/Apr 2008 May/Jun 2008 Jul/Aug 2008 Sep/Oct 2008 Nov/Dec 2008 Jan/Feb 2009 Mar/Apr 2009 May/Jun 2009 Jul/Aug 2009 Sep/Oct 2009 Nov/Dec 2009 Jan/Feb 2010 Mar/Apr 2010 May/Jun 2010 Jul/Aug 2010 Sep/Oct 2010 Nov/Dec 2010 Jan/Feb 2011 Mar/Apr 2011 May/Jun 2011 Jul/Aug 2011 Sep/Oct 2011 Nov/Dec 2011 Jan/Feb 2012 Mar/Apr 2012 CBA BriefingFieldwork CBA homepage |