Searching for something: dualisms in metal detecting Jess Moorhouse 13084100 MSc Cultural and Social Anthropology (Visual) Graduate School of Social Sciences University of Amsterdam Master thesis (Discussion Paper) Supervisor: Milena Veenis Word count: 6629 12th of March 2021 Amstelveen, the Netherlands Table of Contents Plagiarism declaration .................................................................................................................................... 2 Summary ......................................................................................................................................................... 3 Searching for something: dualisms in metal detecting .................................................................................. 4 References ....................................................................................................................................................20 Bibliography ..................................................................................................................................................23 1 Plagiarism declaration I have read and understood the University of Amsterdam plagiarism policy http://student.uva.nl/mcsa/az/item/plagiarism-and-fraud.html?f=plagiarism. I declare that this assignment is entirely my own work, all sources have been properly acknowledged, and that I have not previously submitted this work, or any version of it, for assessment in any other paper. Signed, Jess Moorhouse 12th of March 2021 Amstelveen, the Netherlands 2 Summary Searching for something is my master’s thesis about metal detecting. I aim to understand the motivations behind the hobby and why detectorists are so passionate about this pastime. My thesis is divided into two parts, and each part tackles the motivations behind metal detecting from a slightly different angle. This essay tries to answer the question ‘why metal detecting?’ and uses Daniel Miller’s concept of the dualism between transcendent and transient values to explain the paradoxes that make metal detecting so meaningful for its practitioners. I argue that the motivation for metal detecting is the search for something. ‘The search’ encompasses a relaxing, destressing sensorial experience with nature and the past which reflects transcendence. Transience is reflected in the possibility of ‘something’, the excitement and tension that detectorists feel while anticipating a find. In my film I also argue that the motivation for metal detecting is the search for something, and touch on the anthropological concepts, but the focus of the film is an exploration into what it is to search for something. I reflect on my own process of learning how to be an anthropologist and on personal challenges I faced having to dig into a topic so deeply, while also exploring the parallel experience of metal detecting. 3 Searching for something: dualisms in metal detecting Sitting in the middle of a freshly cut wheat field, digging in the dry soil searching for whatever piece of metal my borrowed metal detector indicated was there. The wheat is stabbing into my legs, I did not come in the appropriate clothing. I set my camera down to try and get some shots of me finding something, but it is hard to get the framing quite right, so I just leave it pointing vaguely in my direction. It is boiling in the sun. I think it is almost 34 degrees, or that’s what my weather app predicted when I checked while sitting on the train at 5am this morning. I’m frustrated and tired. I can feel the tension leave my body when I finally find what it was that was causing the detector to beep. But after closer inspection I find that it is only some lead. No one will be interested in hearing about my chunk of lead. I stay sitting for a while catching my breath, looking out at all the many people gathered in this field, contemplating what it is that draws them to this hobby and why I am here with them. When picking topics for this master’s thesis I almost randomly stumbled upon metal detecting from a throwaway comment I made during a class. When doing this research, I was often asked the question ‘why metal detecting?’ by friends and detectorists who were wondering how I decided on such an uncommon topic and I never really had a good answer. I didn’t know exactly what brought me to the topic but maybe I unconsciously liked the idea of doing something exciting yet relaxing outdoors. But that question ‘why metal detecting’ ended up guiding my entire project. Why do people go metal detecting? Why this hobby? What about metal detecting makes it special and keeps people coming back day after day in the wind and rain? To answer that question, I first have to explain a little bit about the hobby. Metal detecting is a hobby where people known as metal detectorists use machines that detect the presence of metal, called metal detectors, to search for metal. Metal detectors for public use started becoming widely available 1960s and the hobby has become increasingly popular since the 1990s (Thomas 2016) (Dobat et al 2020: 372). Additionally, some have suggested that the coronavirus pandemic may have led to an increase in the popularity of metal detecting as it was one of the few activities not impacted by any of the lockdowns (Schinkel 2020). Before becoming legal in July 2016, metal detecting was often 4 practiced in the Netherlands illegally but not often prosecuted (Vos et al. 2018: 13). Metal detecting is an international hobby, with people crossing borders to search in unique locations (Thomas 2016). Each country has its own metal detecting laws which change how detectorists practice the hobby. For this research project I have focused on a small group of Dutch detectorists who, due to the Covid-19 pandemic, have been confined to the Netherlands during the period of my fieldwork. According to the official data collection centre for small archaeological finds PAN (Portable Antiquities of the Netherlands), there are between three and seven thousand active metal detectorists in the Netherlands (PAN 2020), however some of my informants suggested that the active number of detectorists may be much larger. Metal detecting is a largely, but not completely, male activity with estimates from the UK suggesting that around 90% of detectorist identify as male (Thomas 2012: 50) which aligns with the gender spread of my participants. In this essay I am choosing not to unpack the complexities of why metal detecting is a predominantly male activity. Gender in metal detecting is an enthralling topic. For example, recently there has been an increase of young attractive women who wear make-up and care about their appearance starting metal detecting Instagram accounts. In response some of my informants contacted me, incensed that their hobby was being corrupted by sex. To me this is fascinating, and to do the topic justice I think it should be left to fill an entirely new thesis and therefore is beyond the scope of this essay. In the Netherlands there are separate terms for people who go metal detecting in different landscapes. Land and field metal detectorists are known as ‘akkerzoekers’. People who go metal detecting on the beach are ‘strandzoekers’. People who fish for metal in water with magnets are ‘magneetvissers’. People who specifically look for military items on old battle fields are known as ‘militariazoekers’. For my research I mostly spent time with ‘akkerzoekers’ and for the purpose of this essay this is the only type of metal detecting I will refer to. From here on I shall simply refer to ‘akkerzoekers’ as metal detectorists. The majority of academic writing on metal detecting comes from an archaeological perspective. Archaeologists have written extensively about the ethics and legalities surrounding private individuals discovering and claiming ownership over what is viewed as 5 public heritage artefacts with polarising opinions on the topic and subsequently on metal detectorists themselves (Gundersen, Rasmussen and Lie 2016) (Ferguson 2016) (Thomas 2016). Traditionally metal detecting has been “vilified by many archaeologists as an uncontrollable threat to the proper study of the past” (Schriek and Schriek 2014: 240). “Some heritage practitioners and scholars seem to perceive all private artefact collecting and commerce as unsavoury, and all who engage in either or both as morally and ethically bankrupt” (Thomas and Pitblado 2020: 1060), and for a number of archaeologists the metal detector has become synonymous with looting (Connor and Scott 1998: 76). This extreme dislike of metal detectorists has been met with resistance from other researchers who argue that working with metal detectorists can be beneficial to archaeology (Thomas and Pitblado 2020). Suzie Thomas, an archaeologist and one of the key writers in the field on hobbyist metal detectorists, is cited frequently when discussing detectoring. She did her PhD on the relationship between archaeologists and metal detector users (Thomas n.d.) and just last year co-authored an article summarising almost every academic account of metal detecting ever written even including unpublished PhDs (Thomas and Pitblado 2020). Although she has other areas of interest, metal detecting is something that has spanned her entire academic career. She is one of the driving voices in trying to get academia to listen and work with nonprofessional artefact searchers. One-way Thomas has done this is by arguing against the simplistic assumption that metal detectorists are only searching to make money. Thomas