>First of all, areas where these finds are made, may have been detected for
quite some time previously, or will be thereafter.. leading to wealth of
finds being recorded, or not if they are not present.
The notion that since artefacts have been removed for a long time that makes
iot OK to continue is niot a sustainable response.
>If the finds made by detectorists lack any useful information, then why is
the PAS expending so much energy and spending so much money to record these
Accepted that the finds, if properly reported with accurate grid references,
are not wholly useless. But they could be of a lot more use. PAS is an
attempt to salvage what information is available - and provides a good
halfway house. But it is only as good as the information provided - and I
fearthat many finds are never reported, or even worse may be given a
>Secondly if the 'treasures' found by detectorists, such as the
Anglo-Saxon hoard cause so much excitement with claims comning from eminent
archaeologists that it will rewrite what is known about this period, and why
did these same archaeology write a book all about it?
The Anglo Saxon hoard is an odd exception - even after extensive
archaeological investigation there appears to be no real context other than
a random pile of burials... It makes littel sense for either side to use
this as an example.
>Thirdly, if detecting finds are so useless, why all the bloody fuss from
lot about them?
Um - probably because they fail to provide the information they could. I
thought that what the "fuss" actually was.
>Finally, why do you state that these finds are out of context as, when it
suits the argument thrown against us when we try to use that claim to
justify that we are not disturbing finds in context, is that the disturbed
topsoil does constitute a context worthwhile exploring and that we should
not be depleting.
Find in the plough soil are out of stratigraphic context, as are finds made
by archaeologists fieldwalking. Fieldwalking turns up all sorts of finds,
metal detecting largly turns up only metal finds. The contextual information
that is missing is the detail and geopgraphic spread of other material - and
indeed information about commonplace metal objects tha are simply chucked
back as of no value.
If metal detectores took the time and trouble to record all artefacts that
they saw, and provided decent grid refs - say down to 10m square, or even
larger, as field walking does the it may be of great value.
Responsible detectorists can be a good thing - but sadly there seem to be
many more less responsible ones interested soley in treasure.