30th June 2008, 12:13 PM
Some context might be helpful. The quote that Hosty has put up is actually an extract from the latest post in a rather lengthy and as usual very polarised debate on Britarch originally entitled 'what is the difference between archaeologists and treasure hunters'. In effect this is a continuation of the endless and utterly tedious metal detecting debate which has been going on since about 1992.
Nick Boldrini's entire post can be read here. His reply also includes coments by Gary Brun (pro-detecting) and Paul Barford (pro-archaeology). Both have also posted on this forum in the past. The archive of the full debate is here. (Actually in an earlier post, Hosty's efforts at Water Newton were praised by both sides - although they have got him into hot water in other contexts).
It is worth pointing out that the request by North Yorkshire HER is to send [u]information</u>, not actually physical stuff, and in reality we should all be doing this anyway as professional archaeologists (shouldn't we?).
This specific post was made after some considerable debate about the relative value placed on various finds. As far as I understand the Britarch debate it seems (as ever) to be polarised over the notion of value.
Metal detectorists seem to place monetary value on all their finds, consequently finds which have no intrinsic value (eg. objects which aren't decorative or worked items in non-ferrous metals) are usually discarded - or collected and sold for scrap. This material includes iron nails and other material. As a group, metal detectorists also tend to place a high value on individual freedoms, preferring to celebrate the English tradition of slightly eccentric anti-establishment libertarianism.
Archaeologists on the other hand place cultural and historical value over monetary worth. They prefer all finds, regardless of their nature (so including things like slag, dross, bent nails etc. which metal detectorists ignore), to be placed in their proper stratigraphic context, and for the record of that context and its contents to be properly archived in a publicly accessible place. As a group, archaeologists tend to place a high value on society and community, preferring to celebrate the English tradition of developing slightly eccentric systems for a hazily defined public benefit.
Because of these two value systems in operation in English society, the debate will never be 'won' by either side. It will just go on for ever and ever and ever. One side is arguably middle class and Guardian reading, the other side is arguably working class and Daily Mail reading. Of course the extremists in both camps fail to take into account the notion of working class Guardian readers and middle class Daily Mail readers. Hopefully someone will do a proper anthropological study.
Nick Boldrini's entire post can be read here. His reply also includes coments by Gary Brun (pro-detecting) and Paul Barford (pro-archaeology). Both have also posted on this forum in the past. The archive of the full debate is here. (Actually in an earlier post, Hosty's efforts at Water Newton were praised by both sides - although they have got him into hot water in other contexts).
It is worth pointing out that the request by North Yorkshire HER is to send [u]information</u>, not actually physical stuff, and in reality we should all be doing this anyway as professional archaeologists (shouldn't we?).
This specific post was made after some considerable debate about the relative value placed on various finds. As far as I understand the Britarch debate it seems (as ever) to be polarised over the notion of value.
Metal detectorists seem to place monetary value on all their finds, consequently finds which have no intrinsic value (eg. objects which aren't decorative or worked items in non-ferrous metals) are usually discarded - or collected and sold for scrap. This material includes iron nails and other material. As a group, metal detectorists also tend to place a high value on individual freedoms, preferring to celebrate the English tradition of slightly eccentric anti-establishment libertarianism.
Archaeologists on the other hand place cultural and historical value over monetary worth. They prefer all finds, regardless of their nature (so including things like slag, dross, bent nails etc. which metal detectorists ignore), to be placed in their proper stratigraphic context, and for the record of that context and its contents to be properly archived in a publicly accessible place. As a group, archaeologists tend to place a high value on society and community, preferring to celebrate the English tradition of developing slightly eccentric systems for a hazily defined public benefit.
Because of these two value systems in operation in English society, the debate will never be 'won' by either side. It will just go on for ever and ever and ever. One side is arguably middle class and Guardian reading, the other side is arguably working class and Daily Mail reading. Of course the extremists in both camps fail to take into account the notion of working class Guardian readers and middle class Daily Mail readers. Hopefully someone will do a proper anthropological study.