22nd December 2005, 08:58 PM
Your requirements look a lot like English Heritages' "Guidelines for the preparation of published reports".
From this I assume the only level of recording that is acceptable to you both would be a full archaeological survey etc.
At present, I can't see any lone detectorist carrying out a full field survey. As most detectorists don't own a GPS either, I think it would be unlikely that accuracy of find spots you require would be forthcoming. On the other hand, having searched through what Archaeological Reports that I can access, I see very few of them follow these guidlines either.
So, taking everything into consideration, if all archaeologists are of the opinion that the level of recording being carried out by 'responsible detectorists' is unacceptable, then organisations like PAS are a waste of time, and the FLO's are not doing their job correctly.
I am under the impression that not all archaeologists think like this, but please correct me if I'm wrong. I do, believe it or not, sympathise with the desire to see all finds recorded in such a manner that access to the information is both easy and complete. However, under the circumstances, being realistic, I don't see how any detectorist will be able to satisfy your requirements with regard to recording, other than taking part in a full archaeological survey.
From this I assume the only level of recording that is acceptable to you both would be a full archaeological survey etc.
At present, I can't see any lone detectorist carrying out a full field survey. As most detectorists don't own a GPS either, I think it would be unlikely that accuracy of find spots you require would be forthcoming. On the other hand, having searched through what Archaeological Reports that I can access, I see very few of them follow these guidlines either.
So, taking everything into consideration, if all archaeologists are of the opinion that the level of recording being carried out by 'responsible detectorists' is unacceptable, then organisations like PAS are a waste of time, and the FLO's are not doing their job correctly.
I am under the impression that not all archaeologists think like this, but please correct me if I'm wrong. I do, believe it or not, sympathise with the desire to see all finds recorded in such a manner that access to the information is both easy and complete. However, under the circumstances, being realistic, I don't see how any detectorist will be able to satisfy your requirements with regard to recording, other than taking part in a full archaeological survey.