14th December 2005, 06:41 PM
Quote:quote:Originally posted by Post-Med Potterer
...and the bickering between the two of you showed quite clearly that any form of cohesion in the metal detecting world is a long way off indeed.
And only serves to emphasise the point that to try to 'enforce' a code of practice without some form of leverage would be a waste of time.
Quote:quote:
A metal-detector is a geophysical survey tool and can be used to great effect as part of an archaeological project. However to me the most irritating aspect of metal detecting is the emphasis on 'bling' at the expense of non-precious metals and context.
In some ways I would agree with you on this. One of the reasons why many people take up Metal Detecting is because of the 'bling' factor in programs like 'Hidden Treasure'. If the world of archaeology puts so much emphasis on the finding of 'treasure', then what chance do we have of persuading people to record the ferrous material they find. If you were to see my 'scrap box' you'd realise that the average detectorist does pay attention to non-precious metal.
The people who are only interested in the 'bling' factor of finds are the real 'treasure-hunters'. They tend to be, as stated, people who saw it on telly or read about it in the local rags. After a few weeks of finding 'scrap metal' they tend to give up, and the detector ends up in placed like the attic.
Quote:quote:
A scattering of nails and bolts might betray the location of an old house or fence, a large lump of iron might be the base of a bloomery or smithy.
Or the large lump of iron could be (and usually is) a plough share. I don't know anyone who sells the items they find, unless it is of some value of which half is given to the landowner. So I can't completely agree with the view that we are only interested in the 'bling factor'.
What I would like to see, and I know Hostie is of a similar mind, is a field survey carried out, with archaeologists and detectorists working together. The techies would mark out find spots with coloured flags, the archies would then plot, dig, and record the item found. After lunch, the archies could have a go at teching, and the techies would plot, dig and record the finds. Each getting experience of the others method of working.
I have suggested earlier that one of the best ways to protect a site from 'nighthawks' is to carry out a similar type of survey. If anyone knows of any such site and is willing to put a crew of archaeologists together, I'm sure I could convince a few techies to do the same.