25th August 2006, 01:20 AM
It's a shame to hear so many pro's in the business of archaeology slagging of the metal detectorists. Lets not forget, it's not that long ago that many "so called archaeologists" where often a bunch of well to do (amateurs) plundering and digging up the heritage of England and abroad, for their own social gain and status.
With little (if any)knowledge of the science of archaeology and what they were doing. They where quite happy to dig up any old grave or ancient site with no one to challenge their reasoning for destroying these sites without being fully recorded for future generations. Since then as we are all aware of, we now have a responsible, well organised body of people we have come to respect as archaeologists.
So why it there is not more support for the detectorist, more cooperation between the two bodies? Simply because they are seen as the amateurs of yesteryear, damaging and removing historical objects for their own collections or financial gain. So where's the difference!
Perhaps there should be a new degree course, on the use of metal detectors in the field, an understanding of British history, artifact recording etc at least it may remove the image that all detectorists seem to be tarred with.
Surely it's good to see that we now have the PAS and the FLO's that are prepared to share their knowledge and time to coordinate the finds which are bing made today. A step in the right direction some will say.
But the way forward is for archaeologists and detectorists to work together, conflicts don't get you anywhere you either win or lose.
I think with more time the two can work together as a team, and that has to be better for all concerned.
For the benefit of those reading this, I'm not a professional archaeologist, but would love to have been. I have always been facinated by archaeology within the UK, but you don't hear me slagging the profession off.
Yes I am interested in metal detecting as well as archaeology, and enjoy researching the landscape environment and it's past. I also enjoy discovering local history just as much as the Roman history.
I'm also involved in a field-walking study group, run by archaeologists, recording the field scatter of pottery and flints, so who says detectorists don't know what to look for.
So when I hear people slagging detectorists off, think again, we still do our historical research, a lot do record their finds and some are pretty knowledgeable on historical subjects.
Therefore it only seems right that we should all be sailing in the same boat, with the same goal in mind, to understand, record, and lastly to share the enthusiam the past with others.
With little (if any)knowledge of the science of archaeology and what they were doing. They where quite happy to dig up any old grave or ancient site with no one to challenge their reasoning for destroying these sites without being fully recorded for future generations. Since then as we are all aware of, we now have a responsible, well organised body of people we have come to respect as archaeologists.
So why it there is not more support for the detectorist, more cooperation between the two bodies? Simply because they are seen as the amateurs of yesteryear, damaging and removing historical objects for their own collections or financial gain. So where's the difference!
Perhaps there should be a new degree course, on the use of metal detectors in the field, an understanding of British history, artifact recording etc at least it may remove the image that all detectorists seem to be tarred with.
Surely it's good to see that we now have the PAS and the FLO's that are prepared to share their knowledge and time to coordinate the finds which are bing made today. A step in the right direction some will say.
But the way forward is for archaeologists and detectorists to work together, conflicts don't get you anywhere you either win or lose.
I think with more time the two can work together as a team, and that has to be better for all concerned.
For the benefit of those reading this, I'm not a professional archaeologist, but would love to have been. I have always been facinated by archaeology within the UK, but you don't hear me slagging the profession off.
Yes I am interested in metal detecting as well as archaeology, and enjoy researching the landscape environment and it's past. I also enjoy discovering local history just as much as the Roman history.
I'm also involved in a field-walking study group, run by archaeologists, recording the field scatter of pottery and flints, so who says detectorists don't know what to look for.
So when I hear people slagging detectorists off, think again, we still do our historical research, a lot do record their finds and some are pretty knowledgeable on historical subjects.
Therefore it only seems right that we should all be sailing in the same boat, with the same goal in mind, to understand, record, and lastly to share the enthusiam the past with others.