15th December 2005, 01:18 PM
It would appear that there areas upon which archeaologists and detectorists can fully agree. I, for one, would like to see a system in place that would allow for the recording of all items found in the ground. On a practical level, very few detectorists actually take not of everything that is found. This is not down to laziness or the 'bling' factor as PMP puts it, but down to a lack of education on the importance of artefacts that are detected.
The message is getting across to detectorists, if slowly, that there is as much information to be gained from where an item was found as to what item was found. I realise this doesn't help with items that are found now, but, (in the same manner that present day archaeologists cringe at the methods of their predecessors) future detectorists will, I am sure, look back at how we dealt with finds, and cringe at our methodology.
I am not apologising for how things are, merely pointing out that there have been mistakes made, IMO, by both 'groups' which have led to the divide between archaeologists and detectorists. I know this because I was in the thick of it back in the dark and distant days of the late 70's and 80's. Had more of a dialogue been opened then, the story today would, I am certain, be completely different.
Archaeologists and Detectorists are working together up and down the country. Mutually respecting each others 'philosophy' and methods. A working partnership that has been forged through experience and a willingness to be open-minded enough to share each others skills.
That is where I think we should start this 'dialogue' from. Common ground that has been worked and proven, and on which a future working relationship can be encouraged and developed.
If this sounds a bit far-fetched, or pipedream-ish, then I am ready, and willing, to listen to any alternatives to how we should be working together.
The message is getting across to detectorists, if slowly, that there is as much information to be gained from where an item was found as to what item was found. I realise this doesn't help with items that are found now, but, (in the same manner that present day archaeologists cringe at the methods of their predecessors) future detectorists will, I am sure, look back at how we dealt with finds, and cringe at our methodology.
I am not apologising for how things are, merely pointing out that there have been mistakes made, IMO, by both 'groups' which have led to the divide between archaeologists and detectorists. I know this because I was in the thick of it back in the dark and distant days of the late 70's and 80's. Had more of a dialogue been opened then, the story today would, I am certain, be completely different.
Archaeologists and Detectorists are working together up and down the country. Mutually respecting each others 'philosophy' and methods. A working partnership that has been forged through experience and a willingness to be open-minded enough to share each others skills.
That is where I think we should start this 'dialogue' from. Common ground that has been worked and proven, and on which a future working relationship can be encouraged and developed.
If this sounds a bit far-fetched, or pipedream-ish, then I am ready, and willing, to listen to any alternatives to how we should be working together.