Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 5

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  metal detector
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

Metody geofizyczne w procesie poszukiwania ukrytych zwłok

100%
Adamiec J., Zdeb K.
Nowa kodyfikacja prawa karnego
|
2020
|
vol. 56
191-200
EN
In this article, the author presents how to use geophysical research to look for corpses. During the search, the following methods can be used: GPR, magnetic and metal detector, which assists in the detection of graves and mass graves. Research can be conducted as part of forensic archaeology and prosecutor’s proceedings. This article presents the possibilities and limitations of these methods.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Raz jeszcze o poszukiwaniu zabytków w Polsce. Między teorią i praktyką

75%
Trzciński M.
Wiadomości Archeologiczne
|
2017
|
vol. LXVIII
|
issue 68
33-43
EN
The problem of illegal detecting for artefacts was first diagnosed in Poland in the 1990s. Today, destruction and depredation of archaeological sites continues to be one of the most serious threats to the archaeological heritage. Sadly, actions taken over the last two decades aimed on combatting this harmful practice have not been successful. Searching for archaeological and historical objects using metal detectors has been a highly controversial subject, made worse at present now that additionally to criminal activities recognized in the past new forms have appeared, e.g., metal detecting on battlefields, death camps and POW camps. The large and polarized detectorist community has been complaining about the repressive law, accusing archaeologists of negligence in running archaeological investigations and disregard for issues which are of a major interest to amateur detectorists. Non-compliance with legal regulations is widespread owing to the negligible success rate in persecuting illegal treasure hunting. This is compounded by the low level of awareness of the need for heritage protection among the general public, the archaeological record in particular. This situation should be blamed to some extent on the State, its failure to implement long-term and comprehensive education projects designed to raise public awareness about the specific nature of the archaeological heritage. As a result, illegal metal detecting has been perceived as a harmless hobby. All attempts made to regulate this phenomenon are increasingly being met with a public resistance. Responding to proposals of improving the relations between detectorists and the archaeologist-conservator community the article presents a number of strategies which could solve some of the diagnosed problems. One solution might inviting a group of detectorists selected from among their large and mostly anonymous mass to pursue their hobby openly, only along new rules, in close, and more importantly, regular cooperation with professional archaeologists, involving them in making discoveries relevant for the progress of history and archaeology research. Other possibly useful measures: 1) modifying the currently enacted legal definition of archaeological artefact; 2) changing the terms of issue of permits to detect for buried or lost artefacts; 3) we permit a group of specified amateurs to make searches with metal detectors.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

The Minice Hillfort and its Hinterland. Putting the Archaeological Data Together

75%
Čisťakova V., Tušlová P. T., Slabina M.
Studia Hercynia
|
2020
|
vol. 24
|
issue 2
9-38
EN
The present study aims to put together the archaeological data known up to date about the Minice hillfort and its immediate hinterland. Archaeological sites, pottery scatters and single objects found within a four- -kilometre perimeter of the hillfort were collected and their approximate location marked on the GIS based map together with refined excavation plans from the 1970s and 1980s. The current knowledge of the site was further extended by a small -scale field survey and metal detector prospection on and around the hillfort, with the preliminary result of season 2015 and 2016 included in the text.
4
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Archeologia landu Szlezwik-Holsztyn a archeologia detektorystyczna

63%
von Carnap-Bornheim C., Ickerodt U., Siegloff E.
Wiadomości Archeologiczne
|
2017
|
vol. LXVIII
|
issue 68
13-18
EN
Volunteer involvement in archaeology has a long and fruitful tradition in Schleswig-Holstein. In the past, this mainly consisted of the collection and recording of stone or pottery artefacts. Recently, however, it became necessary to further develop the integration of volunteers as the easy availability of metal detectors has created a whole new group of interested amateurs who then often tried in vain to contact the appropriate authorities. Since 2004, the so-called ‘Schleswig Model’ has been implemented as a new approach to the problem in Schleswig-Holstein. This aims at integrating volunteer metal detectorists in heritage protection activities and academic research. The volunteers are therefore given theoretical and practical training and are, of course, informed about the relevant legal framework. After completing the curriculum, they are certified by the State Archaeological Office, which is the responsible state authority. One of the basic legal provisos for the success of this model is the fact that the illegal use of metal detectors is punishable by law, and that so-called ‘Treasure Trove’ means that all archaeological finds of historical significance are declared the property of the Federal State of Schleswig-Holstein. Subsequent experience has shown that the model has produced mainly positive results. Regular contact and communication with the volunteer detectorists have meanwhile become an indispensable tool in regional archaeological research. Moreover, ‘enemy’ stereotypes on both sides have dissipated and been replaced by mutual respect and recognition. However, the subsequent work required, especially for the processing of the large quantity of finds (registration, restoration), had been greatly underestimated. Important new prospects have opened up with the development of scientific projects that include systematic surveying with metal detectors, while the publication of the first groups of finds has, in some cases, fundamentally changed our view of the Metal Ages in Schleswig-Holstein. All in all, the author is fully convinced that, given the overwhelmingly positive results of the ‘Schleswig Model’, which is based on cooperation, the solution of the problem of the recognition of metaldetector archaeology as a heritage-conservation and scientific tool at the interface between amateurs and professionals must lie in clear legal and ethical structures – and this before it is too late and the system has got completely out of control.
5
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Biskupin... i co z tego? Wiedza totalna w kontekście rozwoju prospekcji

51%
Wroniecki P.
Studia Lednickie
|
2020
|
vol. 19
59-80
PL
Over the past two decades, archaeologists have been steadily opening up with regards to the use of metal detectors. However, there is still debate about who, when, where and on what terms should they be allowed to be used. Reflecting on this issue, it is impossible to resist the impression that this problem is only one of many symptoms of a certain unfinished, broader discussion about approaches to recognising archaeological monuments. In this process the use of metal detectors already has an established role. The methodology of their application has been refined over years of practice and adapted to the nuances of archaeological fieldwork. So, when looking for a place for detectors in archaeological research, we are really discussing the role of metal detectors as one of the methods in the holistic archaeological cognitive process known as archeological prospection. In practice archaeological prospection involves a search and documentation procedure that is based on the overarching principle of the application of various imperfect methods that complement each other. In the context of prospection in Poland, the currently dominant and common archaeological documentation is based on single method recognition, namely field-walking, as part of the Archaeological Picture of Poland (AZP) programme. Although the creators of the AZP themselves were aware of its imperfections and limitations, currently the perception of this documentation has undergone a severe primitisization. From my perspective the problem around AZP is the uncritical use of this data. For example, it was somehow forgotten that what was marked in the AZP records are not de facto “archaeological sites”, but a positive record of places where it was possible to observe finds on the surface (mostly pottery and flint), thus leading to an extremely biased and incomplete record. The incomplete recognition of archaeological monuments has a number of consequences that are difficult to accept. They are worsened by the fact that the effect of the single method AZP has customarily become the official record of monuments. Something that was inherently incomplete became the “objective” foundation for administrative decisions. This is manifested, for example, by accidental – costly – discoveries or, the even more harmful, complete omission and destruction of monuments during various construction investments. The problem of knowledge based on one method and competing specialisations does not only apply to archaeology. This phenomenon has been described by V. Frankl, an Austrian philosopher, who noticed the harmful effects of the fragmentary view of specialists on human nature. Thus the key problem is not that we have not yet decided which method is the best, but the view that only one method is appropriate. As long as archaeologists believe that all potential knowledge can be acquired through one ideal method, it will be difficult to take a step forward. We are stuck in an unsolvable and idle dispute. AZP, excavations, metal detectors or geophysics, are just one of many ways to explore the past elements of a larger whole in which archaeological prospection plays a fundamental role.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.