At the risk of crucifixion on this fine Easter Sunday, I feel compelled to raise a few contrarian positions on the relic hunter issue.

Having looked at both sides for some years, I wish I were seeing archaeologists bringing the level of sociological sensitivity we apply in the interpretation of our data to the evaluation of the phenomenon of relic hunting. 

The often heard claim that "relic hunters just want to loot sites and put the loot on ebay" is as reductionistic and misguided as the relic hunter commonplace that "archaeologists are in it for the money, CRM contracts and such." 

The realities in both practices are much more subtle than looking at the cash flow would suggest.  Money is involved on both sides, but not the key factor for either project. 

Relic hunters, for the most part, sincerely believe that they are rescuing history and so do archaeologists, so isn't that a point for further discussion?

What if Civil War relic hunters articulated their interests in terms of membership in descendant communities? This is what I hear a lot of relic hunters saying, even if they don't have 
the jargon to put it that way.
 
Basically what we have here is a "heritage war" as described by the historian David Lowenthal. At a high level of abstraction it resolves to an issue of private property rights vs. government control, as it is being played out, but ratcheting the dialogue up to that basis is no starting point. 

Where is the call for cooperation and mutual education between archaeologists and relic hunters?  From what I have seen, relic hunters will respond to archaeologists if they are met on the common ground of interest in history. 
 
Archaeology can benefit from many forms of knowledge in the relic hunting community, having relic hunters serve as our "eyes and ears" out there in the field, and partners in research projects.
 
Relic hunters should be viewed as a priority in our public archaeology outreach efforts, not a target for Draconian legislative efforts.

I'd like to see a model of cooperation extending beyond occasional and isolated participation by relic hunters in "official" archaeological studies. Look at the UK.
 
Any dialogue would be more productive than the dug-in stance both parties are taking now.  

Illegal looting is just that. Throw the looters in jail. This kind of activity is ALREADY illegal.

However, demonizing the activities of people who are engaged in LEGAL pursuits who see themselves as connecting with their past, doing something healthy and good, is missing out on an opportunity to educate and create beneficial partnerships.

There are a lot of good, decent, law-abiding folks in the metal detecting hobby. These people should be our audience, maybe even partners, not our mortal enemies!

In short, I think there is more to be gained via stepped-up PR efforts than through anti-metal detector advertising. We are talking past each other instead of with each other.

Does this sound reasonable--or am I being too idealistic? 

Joe Roberts
[log in to unmask]