Time Team and Ainsbrook Hoard

[garybrun]

quote:Originally posted by garybrun

quote:i]Originally posted by tom wilson[/i]

Gary, I don't think I have misrepresented you by quoting only parts of your posts, so I'll continue. It's common practice.

You missed off "All" meaning they that don’t utilize the skills available to them to get out the maximum of understanding of the given project from a resource of volunteers who offer their services for free...

quote:'You do owe the heritage record the "full record" whether it be practical or not.'
Amen to that. Unfortunately, what we are allowed to do on developer-funded projects gets called sampling, by which the powers that be mean not digging everything. Bang goes the full record right there, and if you visit any site that the county archaeologist has signed off you will see half excavated features all over the place, and ditches typically with only 10% dug. No-one likes this much, but that's how much convention decrees is enough to get a good idea of what was going on, and a reasonable cost to ask of the developer.

'I say again... what can be done to bring skills and experiences together to enhance the heritage record'.
Well, you could give us a detectorist's view of how last night's program represented/reflected your (unpaid) (pre-)occupation and those involved in this specific case. Letting those of us not involved in detecting know that might be very insightful (and therefore constructive). I have asked twice already though, so I'll go to bed now.

And that's criminal. I think archaeologist need to get their house in order before they start preaching to everyone else about the righteousness of recording to archaeological standards.
Seriously... why do archaeologists feel so badly done too when I question your motives or ways and call you to account but its ok for you to question mine. Its like being a lamb in a lions den

I will answer you Tom in full honesty when I have digested the program and its contents



Website for responsible Metal Detecting
http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording Our Heritage For Future Generations.

Website for responsible Metal Detecting
http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording Our Heritage For Future Generations.

[garybrun]

quote:The idea that there is a class distinction between archaeologists and detectorists is something that I find highly offensive, it's an idea that clouds genuine working class struggle.

Tom it may be offencive to you... but its true.
Maybe you dont frequent the circles I do and see it.
I will put up a pole on one of the detecting forums... would you accept the results???

I have already done quite a few things to bring various people to the attention of various authorites. I stated in a previous posts thet certain people were dismisssed. I will not name names on this forum as I keep telling you. So you can just forget it.



Website for responsible Metal Detecting
http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording Our Heritage For Future Generations.

[BAJR Host]

Please remember folks... that this is BAJR... and we talk tough and do things... yes actually do things...

Oz... Yes ... I have folders full... No really..BAJR Hotline is not just a name!

As to the middle classness.. welll.... I would guess that many many are indeed from that 'class' and look at the archaeologists at the 'top' a whiff of tweed... ? (again... pointless as it si a bit of a broad brush) But I like you was an archaeologist of the 80s and 90s... and got about.. across the UK - So I have to say there are a lot of Pips and Lucys .. etc.

This however is not about class.. its about attitude.



I expect it to be rough... and awkward... it does not need us to take stances.

There is no reason for archaeology to bend over backwards and get nothing back... neiher is there a reason for detectorsits to bend over backwards and get nothin back...

I spend a lot of time on both this and detectorist forums (as do a couple of others here) I see the same on both... just interchange the names.

We are here for solutions... now perhaps we are passionate about what we are involved in? perhaps thats why it matters to us both... and why passions run high.

Question?
Is archaeology perfect? Does it have all the answers? Are we so arrogant that we can't stand the thought of other 'non-professionals' actually knowing things.??

Question?
I Metal Detecting perfect? Does it have a moral high ground? Are they so defensive that they can't stand the thought that archaeologists might know quite a bit about what they are doing?

Lets answer No to both.................

So... As Tony says ... and coming from Tony Rodbinson this is a big swallow for him... Metal Detecting is not going away... Archaeology needs to adress its stance NOW.............

to quote the great Yoda... and I am serious here.

"Fear is the path to the Dark Side;
fear leads to anger. Anger leads to
hate. Hate leads to suffering."

Lets rest... think... talk.

This BAJR Forum is it :face-huh:

I am off to bed... so would love this to begin tommorrow with fresh minds.. and some real thoughts about how to achieve ....?

please?

"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu

[BAJR Host]

ps I would not allow names to be named... AUP and all!

night night all

"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu

[BAJR Host]

Morning All.... a loverly Wednesday..

To move this on ... Hw do we start the process of trust

I don't think we have to work together 24/7 like an old married couple, but just acknowledge and respect each other...

So what would you want to see (in realistic way) coming from detectorists? Serious and sensible

"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu

[tom wilson]

Gary, first please for goodness' sake pay a bit more attention to whom you are replying. Austin and I have been making very different points.

Second, I did not misquote you, and I certainly didn't seek to misrepresent you. I expect you don't realise that it's rather insulting to suggest that I did. I quoted you as saying:
I accuse all archaeologists in my view of professional negligence.

In full, the paragraph I quoted said:
I accuse all archaeologists in my view of professional negligence. "All" meaning they that don’t utilize the skills available to them to get out the maximum of understanding of the given project from a resource of volunteers who offer their services for free. Where many prefer to wear blinkers than face reality.
I accuse many in my view of professional jealousy and using class and degrees as a crutch to justify their motives. I accuse many in my view of stubbornly digging in their heals and not recognising there are others out there who can add to the archaeological knowledge and are stuck in their dinosaur ways. I accuse many in my view all who fail to recognise the work that is being done to promote good practise within the detecting community of being irresponsible. I have also given evidence on certain negligence and bad pratise and have had those people removed from their position.

That is not defamation or misrepresentation. It is a perfectly valid quote. Perhaps you didn't quite mean what you wrote, perhaps you regret writing it (in which a statement to that effect might be constructive), but don't pretend you didn't say what you said by casting aspersions against my name. That [u]is</u> my name, the one I use in my professional life, where honest writing is very important.

Third, please, please for goodness' sake drop the class card. It is an irrelevant, totally inaccurate smokescreen. To answer your question directed to Austin but in my name, a poll on the detectorist forums about what class archaeologists are would only tell you what detectorists assumed about archaeologists. It wouldn't tell you what class archaeologists are unless you consider being an archaeologist automatic qualification to the middle classes.

Finally Gary, any chance you could answer my question about the detectorists on Time Team now?

Oz, drop the campagn to name names. Gary referred to an isolated incident and no-one wouldn't acknowledge that there have been [u]at least</u> a couple of instances of bad practice in the past. In the context of this debate, it's totally irrelevant, an old style defense from the detectorist camp of 'look, look: one of your lot did something bad once too!'. Not helpful.

[gumbo]

OK, ill throw my thoughts into the ring. In my experience, co-operation between metal detectorists and archaeologists is improving. I would make a distinction between metal detecorists and treasure hunters here. The distinction I make (my definition only) is that metal detectorists (what some people on the forum have now termed amateur topsoil archaeologists)report their finds be it to the portable antiquities scheme or a local government archaeologist. In my experience (as an informed outsider) is that the Portable Antiquities scheme has started created a swell of opinion where many responsible metaldetectorists see it as responsible to report finds. However, there are still many treasure hunters legally working on land who do not report their finds (im not getting into nighthawking here as that is another matter again).

However, I am well aware that there is also opinion in the MD community (as exampled in the Ainsbrook programme) that the information that they produce is spirited away not to be seen again. I think this is untrue in that we have the PAS database and there is good feedback of information at club meetings etc. that FLO's attend (and also the wrtten information that they provide for funders). However, I have come accross this perception. This is for me a key area where relationships between 'archaeologists' and 'amateur metal detectorists' needs to be improved (please I accept that I am generalising here and in practice some people are both).

So the two key problems for me given the state of play in this country are: 1. How do we all get more finds to be reported/recorded. 2. How do archaeologists (an I think responsibility is with professionals on this one)make detectorists feel more involved in the history of their findings.

I havent thought about the answers in detail too much. But to start thinking about my point 1. I think the 'trust' issue that we have been talking about needs to be worked on, and secondly perhaps there could be incentives for responsible detectorists. Perhaps grants for handheld GPS' could be made available to prolific finders (Im aware that this also enters a whole new problem in that the PAS is feeling a financial pich at the moment and evrything comes down to if there is money available).

The solution to my second point I think is a lot harder. I think I would like there to be a move away from the PAS dealing mostly with the history of objects and bring the interest back to the finders sites as a way of making non-archaeologists feel more empowered in the archaeological process. Of course, the artefacts in themselves are vast datasets for very many facets of research, as Mr Hosty reminded me after a drunken outburst. BUt I would like to see PAS finds be used more in field survey, detcor surveys etc etc. so that the archaeology of the site where objects were found becomes the interesting thing and not the objects themselves. Im aware that MONEY is a huge problem and that this would be a long process, but the rare examples where this has taken place sucessfully, for example placing hoards into context (im not talking about Ainsbrook here!), suggests to me that this is the next opinion swell to tackle. I would like to see a detectorist community using and contributing data to the Historical Environment Record as much as the PAS database.

Please dont flame me, as these are only my thoughts and I dont claim to have the answers, and Im also generalising about interest groups, these are just observations from my research experience

[tom wilson]

double post removed

[tom wilson]

quote:Originally posted by tom wilson

Gary, you wrote in response to my explanation of resource constraints in field archaeology:

[quote]Originally posted by garybrun
And that's criminal. I think archaeologist need to get their house in order before they start preaching to everyone else about the righteousness of recording to archaeological standards.

Just a quick point, but you must realise by now that we don't make the rules: the planners do. If you think greater proportions of archaeological features should be excavated as standard practice, please do write to your local MP.


PS in case I sound like I'm talking down to you, I'd like to point out that's not my intention: just to explain what are quite simple points from our side of the fence. I wish you'd do the same (Time Team? Public perception of detectorists?).

[BAJR Host]

PLEASE - REMEMBER... CAn we return to topic.



"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu