21st July 2006, 09:12 PM
I have to say though, if there is to be a archaeological prescence at this dig, does this go some way to allaying any fears or concerns?
Well, as i say, the upside is highly speculative - how will the recording habits of hundreds of people spread over a thousand acres be significantly changed? Hardly a convincing promise is it, bearing in mind Steve, and no offence meant to detectorists in general, these WON'T be "model detectorists" will they, else why the heck would they be there?
On the other hand, the downside is certain - David's presence will be represented as justifying the venue, and other rally organisers will think "ah, so anything goes, nothing could be remotely as inappropriate as detecting next to Thornborough Henges". And they'd be entirely right.
So on balance, the downside is worse IMO. But what really gets my goat is David's intention to actually detect the Thornborough setting himself. That seems so utterly unnecessary to what he says are his motives and such a slap in the face for those that have been battling against quarrying up there it's beyond my comprehension. And beyond explanation, evidently.
This came at an unfortunate time. Tarmac relaunched their bid to quarry yesterday. So we have both detectorists and them having a go at the landscape. I never ever thought we'd have an archaeologist as well. I suspect this will be dragged up for years on the forums by the less than archie friendly detectorists - how dare you suggest we shouldn't detect at X or Y - at least we don't detect next to T'boro henges like archeos do. You know them Steve. That's exactly what some of them will say for the next few years isn't it? A perfect retort for all situations.
Well, as i say, the upside is highly speculative - how will the recording habits of hundreds of people spread over a thousand acres be significantly changed? Hardly a convincing promise is it, bearing in mind Steve, and no offence meant to detectorists in general, these WON'T be "model detectorists" will they, else why the heck would they be there?
On the other hand, the downside is certain - David's presence will be represented as justifying the venue, and other rally organisers will think "ah, so anything goes, nothing could be remotely as inappropriate as detecting next to Thornborough Henges". And they'd be entirely right.
So on balance, the downside is worse IMO. But what really gets my goat is David's intention to actually detect the Thornborough setting himself. That seems so utterly unnecessary to what he says are his motives and such a slap in the face for those that have been battling against quarrying up there it's beyond my comprehension. And beyond explanation, evidently.
This came at an unfortunate time. Tarmac relaunched their bid to quarry yesterday. So we have both detectorists and them having a go at the landscape. I never ever thought we'd have an archaeologist as well. I suspect this will be dragged up for years on the forums by the less than archie friendly detectorists - how dare you suggest we shouldn't detect at X or Y - at least we don't detect next to T'boro henges like archeos do. You know them Steve. That's exactly what some of them will say for the next few years isn't it? A perfect retort for all situations.