The influence of the Treasure Act and the wider reporting of metal-detected finds in England and Wales via the Portable Antiquities Scheme on our knowledge of the past has been the focus of much recent discussion and research. The impact of the Treasure Act and more broadly the continuing popularity of metal detecting as a hobby on collecting in English archaeology museums has provoked less attention. Through the example of a collection of metal-detected finds donated to the Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology (MAA), University of Cambridge, this article examines the differences, in terms of their potential for knowledge, between Treasure acquired by museums and other items collected by metal detectorists but currently in private hands. It also considers the possible impacts if, like MAA, museums concentrate on acquiring Treasure rather than collecting other material found by metal detectorists.

This paper presents an analysis of how the national monument of Great Zimbabwe has been politically used during the period 2000–2025, and it examines how archaeology and the cultural heritage of Great Zimbabwe have been used by political organizations for different purposes within the framework of nationalism, during the period studied. Thus, the paper focuses on the use of Great Zimbabwe during the economic downturn in Zimbabwe. The article applies a theoretical perspective based in Critical Heritage Studies, and it is stressed that during the period examined the national monument was used in the creation of a Zimbabwean identity, an identity built on the ideals of the governing ZANU-PF party, its leader President Robert Mugabe, and his successor President Emmerson Mnangagwa. The paper presents a detailed analysis of the on-site use of the monument by ZANU-PF, Mugabe, and Mnangagwa during this period in the form of case studies presenting and examining four political and public events that took place at the monument. It is argued that the monument was actively used for strengthening the party through nationalism, as well as promoting the hegemony of the party and its leader during a period of economic problems.

Moshe Dayan remains a popular personality who devoted most of his life to the Israeli state and whose military contributions have overshadowed his illegal activities in the field of archaeology. This article offers the first examination of Dayan’s impact on archaeology in the West Bank during his tenure as Israel’s defence minister (1967–74). Dayan moulded the military government in the West Bank in its early years and was involved in appointing the staff officers charged with managing civil affairs. His approach of granting rights to the Palestinians also found expression in his administration of the military government, and most workers in archaeological contexts were Palestinians. However, in parallel to his establishment of local order, Dayan conducted illegal excavations in plain sight of local residents and illegally acquired antiquities in the region. Upon catching antiquities thieves in the Hebron Hills, he purchased their findings and encouraged them to continue excavating, undoubtedly contributing to the high number of illicit excavations. During its early years, the antiquities department he established sought to reduce these thefts; however, Dayan, who held overall responsibility for its operations, sometimes acted in direct contravention of this policy, creating local anarchy whose impact is still felt today.

This paper investigates the expression of historical thinking by students in the school and museum environment, based on the study of the past through archaeological remains. The empirical investigation was carried out in five schools in Athens, four state and one private, and included a total sample of 189 middle and high school students (12–13 and 15–16-year-olds). The students were exposed to archaeological remains in three different forms, actual physical objects, printed images of the objects, and digital representations thereof. Data was collected from written responses to a questionnaire and from their responses during a semi-structured interview, as well as from observations by the researcher during the whole process. Based on an analysis of their responses, it was clear that most of the students had grasped the historical significance of the archaeological remains they had studied. They referred to them in relation to their historical context, based on their recollection of pre-existing historical knowledge or the use of relevant information given to them. However, the expression of interpretative historical thinking in several responses appears to be influenced by the historical or non-historical character of each question or task, as well as the type of archaeological remains they had studied. Parameters such as age, gender, and socio-cultural background also appear to have influenced their expression of historical thinking.

This paper presents the potential for folklore to enrich studies of, and participation in, public archaeology. Referring to the varied approaches to public archaeology in the United Kingdom, and focusing on sites and landscapes, it will lay out the current status of folklore in five key areas of public archaeology: the history of archaeology, multivocality, historical consciousness, the archaeological imagination/representation, and heritage management. This paper will explore how key thoughts and approaches in folkloristics might not only contribute to these areas, but can radically enhance how we look at public archaeology historically, dialogically, and interpretively. Alongside this, those countries with well-developed folkloristic and ethnological research departments might consider ways of expanding their approaches to public archaeology, and engage in cross-disciplinary research investigating the complex and multi-faceted relationships with and representations of the past in the present.

This article refers to:Sites of Existential Relatedness: Findings from Phenomenological Research at Stonehenge, Avebury and the Vale of Pewsey, Wiltshire, UK

Artefacts deriving from mortuary contexts form a unique group among the vast numbers of unstratified portable antiquities found every year in England and Wales. Such finds, usually discovered by hobbyist metal detectorists, have great potential to tell us about the character, state, and preservation of the mortuary environments from which they derive. Yet, unlike the situation regarding the discovery of human remains, the reporting of unstratified grave goods is not compulsory. This presents a strange paradox in view of contemporary theory in mortuary archaeology and practice in indigenous heritage overseas, where funerary objects are usually regarded as a fundamental aspect of the archaeological deceased, if not an inalienable part of it. At present, grave goods — whether found on the body or dislodged from it — are normally the property of the landowner and as such can be lawfully privately owned or traded on the antiquities market. This paper outlines the current ethical and legal status of unstratified grave goods sourced from England and Wales, and explores current trends in their discovery and subsequent sale on the antiquities market. Throughout the paper, consideration is given to the question as to whether mortuary-derived antiquities should be given some form of enhanced legal or ethical status; however, the discussion reveals a range of complexities that present significant challenges.

Public participation in archaeological research is interpreted in various ways in different European states. Even though public participation is promoted by international organizations (e.g. UNESCO and Council of Europe) and the academic community, the extent to which the practitioners can implement these ideas is a matter of what is allowed (or encouraged) by cultural heritage legislation in every country, and of archaeologists’ attitudes towards public engagement. This paper considers the English and Italian systems, and in particular the consequences that legislation has on fostering or forbidding public participation, especially in relation to archaeological field research. It will start with a brief comparison of the relationship between the state, archaeological management, and public participation in both countries, then it will examine the legislation regulating archaeological research in England and Italy, to compare the strengths and weaknesses of both systems.

Archaeological heritage is seldom fixed in time. Heritage-making is an ongoing process deeply entwined with social/cultural memory and identity formation. These processes are traced through an archaeological monument, located in the Sundarbans, in the South 24 Parganas district of West Bengal, India. The monument, named ‘Jatar Deul’, is a brick tower, stylistically labelled as a rekha deul — a curvilinear tower with a cruciform ground plan —belonging to the Orissan architectural style. Its exact chronology is unknown, as is its creator, although it is stylistically dated to the thirteenth century ce. It has survived more in myths, legends, and local tradition than in historical sources. This paper explores how the monument becomes a site of memories and how multi-vocal identities are forged around the locus of the site, now revered as a sacred place of Shaiva worship. The Postcolonial State has only a marginalized presence and the main stakeholders remain non-professional archaeologists, local schoolteachers, and the local population living in close vicinity. Identity work at the site is no longer the archetypal Bengali/regional identity seen in the pre-independence context, but reflects sub-regional cultural/religious affiliations. This paper is the result of ethnographic research, particularly interviews, of select sections of the local community, focusing on the recent organization of an annual fair at the site, which has thrown up questions on archaeological tourism. On the whole, this study examines how an archaeological monument is shaped and formed in the present in contemporary South Asia.