Archaeological Responses to 5 Decades of Metal Detecting in Austria

Raimund Karl

doi:10.1515/opar-2016-0020

Archaeological Responses to 5 Decades of Metal Detecting in Austria

Raimund Karl

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

586 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Since metal detecting started in Austria in 1970, the National Heritage Agency (BDA) has focussed too much on prohibiting metal detecting. The strategy chosen, increasingly restrictive legislation, has turned out to be a failure. Rather than improving the protection of archaeological heritage from ‚unauthorised‘ metal detecting, the ‚hobby‘ has grown steadily. Yet, the changes to the law have made protecting archaeology more difficult and are restricting civil liberties, quite possibly making the law itself illegal. Five decades on, Austrian archaeology isn‘t better off, but considerably worse, and it is mainly our attempts to prevent metal detecting that are to blame.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	278-289
Number of pages	12
Journal	Open Archaeology
Volume	2
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1515/opar-2016-0020
Publication status	Published - 5 Dec 2016

Keywords

Austria
Archaeology
heritage law
metal detecting
Denkmalschutzgesetz

Access to Document

10.1515/opar-2016-0020Licence: CC BY-NC-ND

[Open Archaeology] Archaeological Responses to 5 Decades%0Aof Metal Detecting in AustriaFinal published version, 1.01 MBLicence: CC BY-NC-ND

3 Other contribution
1 Book
1 Article
1 Web publication/site

Rechtswidrige Denkmalpflege: Eine (nicht nur österreichische) Realsatire über archäologische NFG-Pflichten; deren gesetzliche Grenzen; und die staatliche Denkmalpflege
Translated title of the contribution: Illegal Heritage Management: A (not just Austrian) reality satire on archaeological field research permit requirements; their legal limits; and state heritage managementKarl, R., 30 Jun 2019, Bangor: Archäologische Denkmalpflege. 446 p. (Archäologische Denkmalpflege, Sonderbände; vol. 2)
Research output: Book/Report › Book

Open Access
File
The ‚artefact erosion estimation‘-fallacy: Another response to papers by Samuel A. Hardy
Karl, R., 19 Feb 2019, 71 p. Archäologische Denkmalpflege.
Research output: Other contribution

Open Access
File
Ein Vorschlag für neue archäologische Denkmalschutzbestimmungen für Österreich.
Translated title of the contribution: A proposal for new archaeological heritage legislation for AustriaKarl, R., 8 Feb 2018, 10 p.
Research output: Other contribution

Open Access
File

Cite this

@article{6b9cd914336c464c9aa3f0fc4d05be00,

title = "Archaeological Responses to 5 Decades of Metal Detecting in Austria",

abstract = "Since metal detecting started in Austria in 1970, the National Heritage Agency (BDA) has focussed too much on prohibiting metal detecting. The strategy chosen, increasingly restrictive legislation, has turned out to be a failure. Rather than improving the protection of archaeological heritage from ‚unauthorised{\textquoteleft} metal detecting, the ‚hobby{\textquoteleft} has grown steadily. Yet, the changes to the law have made protecting archaeology more difficult and are restricting civil liberties, quite possibly making the law itself illegal. Five decades on, Austrian archaeology isn{\textquoteleft}t better off, but considerably worse, and it is mainly our attempts to prevent metal detecting that are to blame.",

keywords = "Austria, Archaeology, heritage law, metal detecting, Denkmalschutzgesetz",

author = "Raimund Karl",

year = "2016",

month = dec,

day = "5",

doi = "10.1515/opar-2016-0020",

language = "English",

volume = "2",

pages = "278--289",

journal = "Open Archaeology",

issn = "2300-6560",

publisher = "De Gruyter",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Archaeological Responses to 5 Decades of Metal Detecting in Austria

AU - Karl, Raimund

PY - 2016/12/5

Y1 - 2016/12/5

N2 - Since metal detecting started in Austria in 1970, the National Heritage Agency (BDA) has focussed too much on prohibiting metal detecting. The strategy chosen, increasingly restrictive legislation, has turned out to be a failure. Rather than improving the protection of archaeological heritage from ‚unauthorised‘ metal detecting, the ‚hobby‘ has grown steadily. Yet, the changes to the law have made protecting archaeology more difficult and are restricting civil liberties, quite possibly making the law itself illegal. Five decades on, Austrian archaeology isn‘t better off, but considerably worse, and it is mainly our attempts to prevent metal detecting that are to blame.

AB - Since metal detecting started in Austria in 1970, the National Heritage Agency (BDA) has focussed too much on prohibiting metal detecting. The strategy chosen, increasingly restrictive legislation, has turned out to be a failure. Rather than improving the protection of archaeological heritage from ‚unauthorised‘ metal detecting, the ‚hobby‘ has grown steadily. Yet, the changes to the law have made protecting archaeology more difficult and are restricting civil liberties, quite possibly making the law itself illegal. Five decades on, Austrian archaeology isn‘t better off, but considerably worse, and it is mainly our attempts to prevent metal detecting that are to blame.

KW - Austria

KW - Archaeology

KW - heritage law

KW - metal detecting

KW - Denkmalschutzgesetz

U2 - 10.1515/opar-2016-0020

DO - 10.1515/opar-2016-0020

M3 - Article

SN - 2300-6560

VL - 2

SP - 278

EP - 289

JO - Open Archaeology

JF - Open Archaeology

IS - 1

ER -

Archaeological Responses to 5 Decades of Metal Detecting in Austria

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Research output

Rechtswidrige Denkmalpflege: Eine (nicht nur österreichische) Realsatire über archäologische NFG-Pflichten; deren gesetzliche Grenzen; und die staatliche Denkmalpflege

The ‚artefact erosion estimation‘-fallacy: Another response to papers by Samuel A. Hardy

Ein Vorschlag für neue archäologische Denkmalschutzbestimmungen für Österreich.

Cite this