JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for BRITARCH Archives


BRITARCH Archives

BRITARCH Archives


BRITARCH@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

BRITARCH Home

BRITARCH Home

BRITARCH  September 2010

BRITARCH September 2010

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Archaeology as a finite resource

From:

Peter Twinn <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Wed, 1 Sep 2010 10:48:21 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (42 lines)

There is certainly an argument that can be made that the popularity of metal detecting is bound to have some effect on the resource. I can't see anyone being able to make a case against this point, in fact I would certainly go as far as to say this was one of the basic tenants of forming the PAS (Portable Antiquities Scheme). The more detectorist that take from the ground (and this is an unquantifiable amount) the faster it will obviously diminish (stating the obvious I know), but the numbers that are joining the hobby during these past years is exponentially more than is leaving the hobby or just taking a break.

My concern has always been that if that resource is not recorded with the PAS to high enough national grid references then we are creating a black holes in the historic record. This is already the case where either some large rallies have been held, or more erosive, where some detecting clubs have detected for decades on the same land with no find-spot information at all, as has happened in south Gloucestershire that I know of. Of course there are those who do record and they should be applauded, but the phrase you'll hear more than anything from those who choose not to record their finds is that the PAS is 'voluntary!'

This may well be the case, but personally I don't think it's responsible when people fail to record their finds, indeed in many cases they'll refuse to do so because 'that's their right', so up yours! This attitude is rooted in the 1980's with the war of words that revolved around the 'Stop' campaign. Unfortunately we have some detectorist around today who went through all of that and they are determined to pass the baton on to newer members of the hobby; trying to stir up old arguments about how the 'Archie's are out to get us." Well maybe some are, but in my experience of 30 years as a detectorist and now an archaeology undergrad at Bristol, I can only say that my experience of working with archaeologist has been a positive one. For me understanding what the resource is and how we can best record and curate such things has been my aim and the aim of many many others within the hobby of metal detecting.

Do I feel that those within the hobby do enough to record this diminishing amount of material at a time of increased interest due to 'treasure' being found, or others just joining due to an interest in history, then a resounding no. Not only do we have material that is over 300 years old being taken from the ground (the age at which the PAS will record it), but we have a massive amount of material that is under 300 years of age that will not be recorded at all (except a small amount of material through the UK DFD), which means in future a whole group of artefacts won't even be around to be recorded as they were considered as 'too much work' for the FLO's who already have their hands full with the older finds. We are in fact creating an historical hiatus for the future at some point where small metal finds are concerned.

Just my thoughts, but this is a particular issue I have a very real fear for and although it's another metal detecting topic, it's one that we should all take note off and have an opinion about.

Regards

Pete

-----Original Message-----
From: British archaeology discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Peter Clark
Sent: 01 September 2010 10:08
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [BRITARCH] Archaeology as a finite resource

Dear All,

A quote from Nigel Mills’ ‘Buckles 1250–1800: A collectors’ Price Guide’:

‘Although buckles remain one of the commonest of artefacts from the medieval period, the supply of fresh material from the ground found by metal detectorists is dwindling’

Are we really approaching the end of this particular ‘finite resource'?

Best

Pete

Canterbury Archaeological Trust Limited
92a Broad Street, Canterbury, CT1 2LU

01227 462 062
http://www.canterburytrust.co.uk
Canterbury Archaeological Trust Limited is a company with limited liability registered in England No 1441517, a registered Charity No. 278861 and is registered as an archaeological organisation with the Institute of Field Archaeologists.

This email is only for the use of the addressee. It may contain information which is legally privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient you must not copy, distribute or disseminate this email or any enclosures to anyone other than the addressee. If you receive this communication in error, please advise us by telephone immediately.

While Canterbury Archaeological Trust Limited will attempt to ensure that all e-mail is virus free, Canterbury Archaeological Trust Limited will accept no liability for any damage caused by virus transmitted by this e-mail.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JISCMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998


WWW.JISCMAIL.AC.UK

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager