Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
"Stealing" Archaeology
#11
Quote:quote:Originally posted by vulpes

'course if you were talking about metal objects this would be a legitimate hobby and therefore no problem. Have you thought about maybe complying with the relevant metal detecting code of practice. Oh, and as the law stands there is no problem doing this on scheduled sites (so long as you have the landowner's permission) - unlike metal detecting which is illegal under the act. The new HP bill seeks to criminalise removal of objects from sites which may constitute part of the site's special interest. Sounds like a harmless hobby to me.:face-stir:


Are you trying to suggest that collecting bags of post-med pottery isn't a legitimate hobby? I'll get me coat!

I always thought that removing items from a SM was illegal, whether via a metal detector or not. After all, it's not the waving a bleeping stick over the site that does the damage, and it's a short step from casually picking something up off the surface to digging it out of the ground.
Reply
#12
You have a site that has been machine stripped. All the archaeology has been done to the highest standards. You are happy that the job could not have been done better. When the D8 dozer starts moving the spoil you notice some bits of pot or flint. You stop the machine to investigate. Coming from the topsoil spoil they are unstrat or at best marked up as (1000). As such their "value" is limited. Picking out these sherds before they get trashed and lost for good cannot bad.
How often are bags marked "Unstrat" put straight in the bin without anything more than a cursory look? Personally, in my tool box I have several bits of pot and flint that have come from spoil heaps. I don't have trouble sleeping at night. Having these bits of unstrat allow me to say to newbies (who maybe know a lot about hairdressing or working in a call-centre but not a lot about digging) "This is what we are looking for...have a look, have a feel"

Archaeology is a precious resource but sometimes we can be too precious about it. Keeping a few sherds of pot which no longer have a strong stratigraphic reference (and which in all likelyhood not even warrant a mention in the report) is nothing compared to the industrialised destruction of sites that we see on a daily basis.

Just my Euro's worth



Just give me a cold Becks
Reply
#13
Nice one Beir!

absolutely...

and :face-stir: away vulpes... Big Grin The issue only arises if the person who removes from the topsoil an artefact that would never have been found anyway... does not let people know.... However.. imagine the joy of being rung up every 3 seconds...
I have found a fragment of 19th century pottery.
I have found a fragment of 19th century pottery.
I have found a fragment of 19th century pottery.
I have found a fragment of 19th century pottery.
I have found a fragment of 19th century pottery.
I have found a fragment of 19th century pottery.
I have found a fragment of 19th century pottery.
I have found a fragment of 19th century pottery.
I have found a fragment of 19th century pottery.
I have found a fragment of 19th century pottery.
I have found a fragment of 19th century pottery.

ad infinitum.... aiiiiiieeeeeeeee

or
I found a nail
I found a nail
I found a shotgun cartridge
I found a tractor part
I found a nail
I found a shotgun cartridge
I found a tractor part
I found a tractor part
I found a tractor partI found a tractor part

etc.............


I would expect people who find either significant metallic finds... OR significant scatters of pottery (that may represent subsurface stratified archaeology that is currently being mixed up) to let us know... I can cope with a tiny loss, if it represents a major gain.

WinkWink

"I don't have an archaeological imagination.."
Borekickers
Reply
#14
The original question implied that the pottery is already out of situ by being surface finds or on a footpath.
If its in a field-then it might get picked up in a field walking exercise (or not, as the question stated "they are so numerous") or on a path then it will just get ground underfoot and lost anyway.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Computers taking archaeology jobs away pdurdin 14 9,928 30th August 2015, 11:10 AM
Last Post: barkingdigger
  Are Standards in field Archaeology Slipping Wax 90 35,237 23rd June 2015, 12:41 PM
Last Post: Dinosaur
  Wessex Archaeology Recruits a Teddy Bear BAJR 10 9,151 24th December 2014, 06:41 PM
Last Post: monty
  Tay and Fife Archaeology Conference Doug 16 10,131 15th November 2014, 01:04 AM
Last Post: Doug
  Archaeology in Schools Dirty Boy 8 4,899 28th September 2014, 09:04 PM
Last Post: vulpes
  Jobs in British Archaeology 2013-14 Doug 24 11,812 24th July 2014, 03:25 PM
Last Post: P Prentice
  Who would BAJarites award a "Queen's Birthday" honour to for services to archaeology? Wax 13 6,818 19th June 2014, 01:51 PM
Last Post: P Prentice
  Complete University Guide 2014 - Archaeology kevin wooldridge 2 2,495 14th May 2014, 03:00 PM
Last Post: pdurdin
  Blogging Archaeology eBook- FREE Doug 1 2,198 26th April 2014, 05:19 PM
Last Post: Doug
  WAC-7 Resolution on Community Archaeology BAJR 1 1,788 20th March 2014, 09:57 AM
Last Post: BAJR

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)