Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Ancient and ArchaeologyΒ  permalink

Metal Detectors

• Message 1.Β 

  Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Saturday, 22nd July 2006

  To introduce myself, I know nothing about Archaeology except what is shown to me by Time Team, Two Men in a Trench and Battlefield Detectives.
  
  So, why the down on metal detectors? Time Team hate them (it appears), Two Men in a Trench use them with caveats and Battlefield Detectives (Isandlwana and Little Big Horn programmes especially) love them.
  
  It is an ill informed post, so please tell me why archaeologists seem to hate metal detectorists and use them?
  
  Cheers AA.
  (priscilla, making good on my promise).

  Link to this forum: Metal Detectors

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by Plancenoit (U1237957) on Sunday, 23rd July 2006

  In ye dayes of olde, when every Tom, Dick and Reginald wanted a Metal Detector for their Birthday/Christmas, there was a bit of problem with people arriving at night, to see what goodies they find on sites of historical/archaeological significance, undercover of darkness and without permission or supervision by the interested landowner or relevant authority.
  
  Some people even had the cheek to get close enough to some very notable sites and cause damage by digging up ring pulls from drinks cans, and silver paper and other useless objects. Occasionally, (it's believed) people did find items of interest, but by removing from the ground without recording exact position, depth etc, any historical significance was lost. The law was very fuzzy on this subject, and thus the Metal Detectorist became the enemy of the Historian/Archaeologist.
  
  In recent years, Metal Detectorists have become (generally speaking) much more responsible, and by forming various clubs and organizations that adhere to a 'Code of Conduct', the need to go moonlighting in areas of interest has decreased significantly, as you could quite easily find yourself falling foul of the law.
  
  Some excavations will allow detectorists on site, providing they stick to certain areas and report any finds. Metal detectors can also be quite useful for checking spoil heaps for things which may have been missed, and for getting into those awkward, overgrown spots at a site.
  
  Your comparison of 'Time Team' and 'Two men in a Trench' is a good example of how the 'old school' adhere to the tried and tested method, whereas the 'new school' are happy to integrate something which was previously frowned upon, into their method.
  
  Hope that helps a bit.
  
  All the best,
  Dan

  Link to this forum: Metal Detectors

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by DL (U1683040) on Thursday, 27th July 2006

  AA!
  
  Lots of reasons why archaeologists of the "old school" don't like amateurs with metal detectors wandering around!
  
  The main reason IMO is that metal detectorists can be defined into those who are honest and respect the need to preserve archaeological context, and properly record finds in place, and those who find a nice find (say a coin hoard), dig it up, take it home and then sell it on Ebay! Just look on there for the number of auctions for "uncleaned coins straight from the ground", and there are hundreds. Admittedly many of these auctions are legitimate sales, and most are not even UK found, but imported in bulk, but there are significant numbers of UK found ones up for sale.
  
  To the archaelogist, the context and location of the find is often equal in importance to the find itself, where as to someone looking to sell their finds, they are only interested in profit. It is this which annoys professional archaeologists. Things are greatly improved these days though, as previously stated, with a code of conduct for detector use in place, but there is still plenty of abuse of this code out there.
  
  Before you ask, I have always logged and reported finds myself, although where I live, almost all the archaeology has been destroyed by farming, and despite the area being littered with finds (mainly early Roman occupation, 100-200AD), they have been confirmed by local archaeologists as being of no historical value, since the area has been changed beyond recognition since then.
  
  So basically, that sums it up. From an archaeologist's perspective, nothing could be worse than a couple of blokes (or women) with a spade and a metal detector stumbling onto an undiscovered site and taking out all the goodies.
  You have to see they have a point.
  
  Cheers
  

  Link to this forum: Metal Detectors

  Report message3

• Message 4

  , in reply to message 3.

  Posted by generallobus (U1869191) on Thursday, 27th July 2006

  Just to add on to the previous messages. A friend of mine works for Devizes museum in Wiltshire and she deals, pretty much exclusively, with finds brought in by metal detectorists. The prev. messages are correct in saying the major prob. is the lack of context that occurs with most metal detectorists. I think the overriding feeling at the mo' is to try to educate as much as possible and to get these people on board to record as much contextuaral evidence as possible.

  Link to this forum: Metal Detectors

  Report message4

Back to top