Metal Detecting Q&A

[troll]

Greetings all.Am probably about to upset a few peeps here but here goes.

Yes, detecting is a controversial subject.There are those who view the bad guys as nothing short of sexually handicapped muppets who wave sticks about in fields as an attempt at getting close to being Indiana Jones.There are the rapists who enjoy nothing more than marauding over land on "rallies".There are the "nighthawks" who frankly are in desperate need of some manners.Guys-I`m way beyond giving a monkeys over who sits in what camp. Here`s my view if anyone`s remotely interested.....

Metal detecting has an important role in partnership with the heritage profession.Without that partnership, metal detecting is nothing short of heritage rape.Please don`t imagine that a set of re-vamped guidelines will suddenly put the world to rights.The IFA has had guidelines and standards for years but this has not stopped the rampant incompetence of some "professional" heritage workers.There really is no point in setting up some "governing body" or institute. A group of people producing guidelines and standards is a pointless waste of air. The heritage profession on the whole requires legislation on the Statute books.In the same way, metal detecting also requires the same.Under the current system, "professional" archaeologists can do virtually as they please unmolested.Similarly, detectorists can do as they please too. It matters not how many guidelines/standards there are or, who writes them. The guidelines/standards are not law. That, ladles and jellyspoons, is what really does place coleoptera in my sphincter.I agree with Mr Hosty that this subject should be discussed at the conference but before we do, please be aware that as a member of the public, I am equally disgusted with both heritage professionals and detectorists. I stand firmly in the camp where national legislation on the nations heritage is desperately needed. I`m sick to death of hearing people regurgetate line after line of standards or guidelines.They make no difference.At all. On the latest threads, yes, people do talk testicles on here from time to time.It`s called having an opinion.Please-lets continue this thread in the spirit that it was first offered.

[john1504]

Steve-B wrote:

quote:
Not really John, because you are talking absolute bollocks, that displays a distinct lack of understanding of even the basics of the hobby or the technology invloved... but in usual fashion you, on behalf of your masters will undermine any real laison that individuals attemp.

I've been trying to work out what point is being about made here about my understanding (or lack thereof)...is it?

a. Detectors do not have the capability of detecting items at a depth of up to 15".

b. Neither Steve-B nor GaryBrun are capable of giving technical information about the existance of a machine that is rumoured to reach greater depths.

c. Real liason that individuals attempt...(which individuals?)

d. That I have a master???

Please be more explicit. And I will be waiting with baited breath for your reply to Troll's recent post...[8D]



Troll wrote on another thread:

quote:This in itself is an open admission that monitoring of standards has been, and still is, virtually impossible to carry out nationwide to an acceptable standard.

Which is what I have been saying regarding the expecting detectorists to adhere to a set of guidlines which have no authority. If they can't be enforced then the reliance is upon the 'member' to be vigilant in maintaining those standards.

With regards to your most recent post. I am probably more interested in how your opinion was evolved. What circumstances or experiences have occured to cause you to equate detectorists with rapists? And if you are of the opinion that the entire country should be put under a Law making it illegal for anyone to dig his/her garden without first consulting an archaeologist. Or that archaeologists are the only people who have the right to dig anything out of the ground.

Now let me take a different stance from detectorist for a moment. What right do you have, to tell a farmer that he isn't allowed to plough certain parts of his land. There may be an ancient monument on his land, but so what. It's his land....not yours. No more than he has the right to go to your home and tell you that you have to paint your door a certain colour, or that you're not allowed to hang washing out to dry, or park your car in the driveway.

My point? The inference here is that only the archaeologists have the right to say what should or should not be done with regard to the land. That no-one has the right to dig for anything without the permission of an archaeologist. The 'heritage' I hear you say? That isn't going to put bread on a farmers table. It isn't going to feed and cloth his children. Therefore you have to rely on the government to pay him for the loss of income from not farming the land where there is an ancient monument. A payment that is made up of money paid to the government by people like myself as tax-payers.

I, for one, do not believe the heritage of this country is the sole responsibility of the archaeological community. The only reason there is any interest in heritage is because a large number of people, who are not archaeologically minded, have an interest in history. An interest which varies between "oh, I wonder how they built Stonehenge" to people like yourselves, for whom it becomes a vocation. But, in the great scheme of things, history takes a backseat to putting food in the shops etc.

So, it may be that, because I enjoy going on the occasional rally, you perceive me as a 'rapist'. That is your opinion, and you are entitled to it. But don't expect detectorists to fall into line and tip their collective forelocks as you pass them by.....Nor is it an opinion I'd be too quick to repeat to the detectorists who have volunteered to work on the site you are excavating...

Petethedig has told of his experiences in dealing with archaeologists, and the aparent lack of interest shown. Perhaps someone can explain to us just what the consensus of opinion is regarding who should be approached with information regarding the protection of a site.

Like Steve-B, I didn't come on this forum to create, or get involved in, an argument. But I do think equating me with a rapist is a bit close to the wind, and that I have the right to put the record straight.

[mercenary]

To put it into a bit of context I think Troll equates some archaeologists as heritage rapists as well.

Come to think of it I do too. It's not a MD's vs. Archs. argument. It is responsibleMD's and Archs. vs. the rest.

[BAJR Host]

Well said.

though I would add responsible MDs and reponsible archaeologists v the rest

Another day another WSI?

[john1504]

OK Mercenary, I can go with that.

This is an example of how the argument between detectorists and archaeologists developed initially. Had there been more explantion about what was meant, I believe there would have been much more co-operation taking place, and far less friction.

[Steve-B]

quote:GaryBrun or Steve-B could give you more information on these machines.

quote:b. Neither Steve-B nor GaryBrun are capable of giving technical information about the existance of a machine that is rumoured to reach greater depths.

Make up your mind dickwad, which one is it... can we or cant we... ?

[john1504]

Steve-B. You obviously failed to read the posts (again) so in I'll try to explain it as simply as I can for you..

1st quote: I was telling the people on here that you or GaryBrun would be better able than I to answer technical questions about detectors.

2nd quote: I was asking if you were stating that you (or GaryBrun) are not capable of answering any technical questions about detectors.

Simple enough for you?


I won't apologise for Steve's method of posting. He is an adult and therefore responsible for his own actions/posts. But I do hope that nobody believes that all detectorists are like him, throwing tantrums when they don't get their own way.

Hosty. I've tried not to breach the AUP here, but if I have then I apologise.

[sniper]

Steve, watch the AUP will you. This forum is not there for you, or anybody to make personal insults to other posters. Grow up or stop posting...

++ i spend my days rummaging around in dead people ++

[troll]

Ok.to be precise-my negative descriptions involving both heritage workers and MDs were offered in the terms "there are those who believe that..". I still maintain that a grown-up approach to heritage and protective legislation is the way forward all round. I have absolutely no interest in watching two grown-up MDs go for an all-out "my dads bigger than your dad" thing on BAJR. I also don`t particulary care who occupies what branch in the social tree.What I do care about is that for the first time, I have been able to have an open dialogue with an extremely informative MD on here.This was before some sort of diplomatic rift erupted between two of them.I am a simple archaeologist so please-just for me...no more of that-lets just discuss! 1504-steve-B..... please, can we start again guys? 1504- you have quite rightly posed a number of questions for me and I will provide you with a response some time over xmas.You also make a number of statements that I look forward to expanding upon.Lots of good stuff to be discussing in an open environment...good will to all bipeds!

[Post-Med Potterer]

john-1504 wrote (on another thread)..

quote:the invisible man wrote:

quote:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To me, a metal detectorist is an archaeologist that specialises in the use of a particular non-intrusive shallow depth technique.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I am curious to know if this is this the general view of detectorists as held by archaeologists?

Not as far as I am aware. A metal-detectorist is a metal-detectorist. He stops being non-intrusive (and therefore stops having the sympathy of archaeologists) as soon as he puts his spade in the ground and removes a metallic artefact from its context without stratigraphic recording.