BAJR at Water Newton

[Jammy Johnny]

The Rally at Water Newton was a well organised and properly run event and in my opinion, A complete success.
It was great to be part of such an event with both Archaeologists and Metal Detectorists working as a team. :face-approve::face-approve:

Many good finds were unearthed from the plough soil and recorded for future reference, I managed to get a few finds myself which included.....
1. Venetian Soldino early 15th century.
2. nice wee Roman Bronze of Constantine.
3. Henry short cross penny.
4. French Jetton 16th century.

they were all recorded by the very helpfull onsite Archaeologists.

So I would just like to say thankyou to everyone who contributed to making the Raly happen :face-approve::face-approve:

Best Wishes
Jammy Johnny.

http://www.fish-and-detect.co.uk

Dum Spiro Spero

[BAJR Host]

and thanks to you too...

we are currently going through 600 ish finds and coins... plotting and recording.. etc etc... there does seem to be a pattern and sense to the items recorded... and have jsut looked at your jeton! thanks for getting involved and for letting us get involved.. it was a cracking time (and I did enjoy the hospitality of your tent.... and coffee.. even if it did make me go all funny ! )

thud ..............

"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu

[Steve-B]

I spoke to a customer today who was at the water newton rally and was a bit put out that not a lot of feedback on the finds was given while he was at the event (according to him).

I explained that it would have been impossible to assess all the information so quickly.

David, is there time table for the release of the information from the finds found and what will be the format for it?

I can then pass this on when the subject arises again.

Cheers

http://www.detector-distribution.co.uk

If a job is worth doing, then its worth doing it tomorrow!

Homer (Simpson)

[wombat]

It seems there has been a generally positive response to this ambitious project to date. There are however a number of concerns I have before I can feel fully satisfied with the success of this project.

Firstly, where did the 250 or so metal detectorists come from? Did someone involved in the project personally vet them, were they all from respected and well known metal detectorist clubs? Were they fully briefed on the methodology and their responsibility to report all finds? Even if every single one of the metal detectorists was well known and trusted, projects such as this are an excellent advertisement for the more unscrupulous members of the hobby to come and pillage the site when the rally was over. How did the organisers prevent this from happening?

I am also concerned about how they were monitored in the field. With the high ratio of metal detectorists to archaeologists, FLOs etc. it would be very easy for the odd coin or brooch to ‘go missing’. With this in mind, I also need to ask why the number of registered finds was so low? ‘600 ish’ finds from 250 metal detectorists over three days works out as less than one find per detectorist per day. If I was detecting on a rally where so little was turning up I would be very tempted to pack up and go home. It seems surprisingly few finds for such a potentially rich site.

Please do not think this an attempt to denigrate what this rally was trying to achieve, or to have a go at metal detectorists. I have been involved in similar projects on a smaller scale with great success, and I have met and worked with plenty of excellent dedicated and responsible detectorists over the years.

The reason I ask is because of my own personal experience of a less successful such attempt, which I fear may have been repeated on a much larger scale at Water Newton. A few years ago myself and a colleague provided our free time to help a local archaeology group carry out a community field walking and metal detector survey of a field on the outskirts of a Roman town, providing finds identification advice and GPS surveying. It was my job to locate the detector finds by GPS, but after very little time it became clear that several of the detectorists were pocketing finds rather than bagging and marking, pretending they had not understood me when I explained that all finds were to be located and recorded. I had to ask several of them to turn out their pockets and give me what they had found - the result being dozens of finds being unlocated. When we found a very productive area of the field producing Roman coins aplenty, the detectorists converged on the area and pillaged the finds, forgetting the transects they were supposed to stick to. At the end of the day, we had to ask them to stop and get off the site, and had to wait around until they had all gone home, as several were hanging around waiting for us to leave. Even so, locals reported seeing them in the field the next day without permission. It appeared some of them had travelled several hundred miles to get to the site, for the express purpose of making some money it seems.

The project was an unmitigated disaster, and this was with no more than a dozen detectorists. I was not involved in the setting up of the project so I do not know how or where they were recruited, but it just raises some pertinent questions in relation to this recent project.

[BAJR Host]

Steve…. Quite right about the timescales… as I am doing this in spare time… it could be November before I have completed the report… and then it will be available to all… I would (like you and others) have prefeered a map of both the fields available and what was found… including a finds of the day type display… that’s a question for Norman I fear. J But good point.


Wombat… the vetting is not really an issue … ( when was the last time archaeologists were vetted on a pipeline job for example… ?? ) Yes I met the full range of people at the rally… lets leave it at that. J I prefer the glass half full scenario… and this was a unique event… with lots to learn.. So you may say the odd brooch went missing… (which could be seen as an unfounded accusation) I could see it as hundreds of finds recovered with archaeological value that would never have been found ever… if you see what I mean. Did it work… yes it did… where could it have been better… that can only be found out when it is done….

The briefings unfortunately people at the back suffered from the Monty Python ‘Blessed are the Cheesmakers..’ scenario… (SOLUTION: on the next rally at Corfe, everyone will be provided with a sheet detailing the How, Why and what happens next. A week before the event)

All bags will be numbered by me before… I already have Pinflags, I have the pens with me as well.

A map of where can and cannot be detected is provided.

77% of finds had locational data … though if I implement tweaks to my system I could achieve over 90%

Trying to control with transects and squares is OK on an archaeological project, but not at a Rally…. There I had to remember I was invited in rather than the other way around… that’s why the system was flexible… yes people pocketed finds, but recorded others… usually due to just thinking that we would not be interested… sometimes I had a bag of coins given one number… All these were ‘my fault’ for not explainging myself clearly enough… something I have learned from…

I realise that If I can do this with xxx number people I can scale it to fit most situations… though I must be frank and say that the numbers involved were a strain… and I do not honestly think I could cope with any more.

Like you it was a case of try… and I can say… hand on heart, it was a success because more people recorded than normal, the data recovered is of archaeological value, the lessons and templates for future events have been learned and can be transferred.

I am sorry that you feel you had a disaster… you had some experience of the range – some come to get finds, others to help, others to have a walk in the country, some know their finds others don’t, same is true for us all… I soon learned that trying to control… results only in the opposite … Its not up to me to control, its up to me to aid. I had a larger team than you, and even then they were stretched.. but the results spoke for themselves…

You made me smile though about the clustering… all I had to do was stop for a second and talk to a detectorists, before the people in a hundred meter radius start homing in J

Whether it’s a digger hacking through a series of post holes or a detectorists popping grots in the finds pouch… we all need both a bit of slack a realisation that perfection is not achievable and that given time and explanation, attitudes change…

Think about it this way…. Recently on a site in xxxxxxxxx detectorists were brought in to scan the spoilheaps … they have so far found scores of finds and coins… most pristine.. (I have seen them) - the company does not want them, as they are unstrat… your unlocated finds were also that… but you now know which field they come from… which is one up on the company, who did not want them, as it would just cost money to conserve them …….

More and more we are working together … and that’s the best way…. Talking one to one….

Again, you brought up valid questions, so no offence taken.


"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu

[Steve-B]

Some interesting pionts there wombat and as a detectorist I dont see any reason to take offense either.

As to Vetting I think David has answered this adequately, however as to 'were they all from respected and well known metal detectorist clubs? ' this does not make a detectorist any more credible, the majority of detectorists are independants as I am, I dont feel this has made me any less 'responsible'.

I do wonder though, that if a rally is advertised as being a 'recording' rally, if a ' promise to record' form could be signed by the attendees before they are let in?

OK, I know it is not legally binding and in no way enforces recording of all finds, but it may just help as a reinforcer of the idea.... what do you guys think?

Its a crying shame that your experience was so bad, especially as the hobby is keen to encourage archaeologists to make use of what they have to offer.

As to the number of finds recorded.. it has to be remembered that it really is a misconception that a detectorist will make xxx amount of recordable finds in xxx amount of hours. I myself have gone weeks and put in many hours detecting without a single recordable find coming to light.. and no this doesnt put me off the hobby as I am sure any number of 'dry' sites would not put you off archaeology.

My last batch of recordable finds which have just been returned to me by Liz Wilson (FLO for Sussex) consists of:

1 x small iron cannon ball ( C. 1600 - 1850 AD)
1 x buckle forked spacer (C. 1300 - 1600 AD)
1 x lace chape (C. 1350 - 1750 AD)
1 x Copper Alloy Pot mend (C. 1500 - 1750 AD)
1 x Chichester Trade Token (C. 1600 - 1750 AD)
1 x Incomplete Annular Buckle (C. 1350 -1650 AD)
1 x C.A. Trade Weight (half of) (C. 1500 - 1800 AD)
2 x Musket ball (C. 1600 - 1850 AD)

This represents total recordable finds made over 3 detecting trips. (all recorded with accurate map references.

I have talked to several attendees of the Water Newton rally and in several of those cases most of their finds were indeed non recordable, in that they were mostly modern finds, but they still enjoyed the experience immensely.



David many thanks for the reply, I will pass the info on.



http://www.detector-distribution.co.uk

If a job is worth doing, then its worth doing it tomorrow!

Homer (Simpson)

[wombat]

all good points Steve. I definitely think a 'promise to record' form is a very good idea. It may serve to nudge the conscience of those who may be tempted to pinch a find or two.

Mr Host, I am not sure what you mean about most archaeologists who work on pipelines not being vetted. They are vetted by means of a CV/job application and checking their references, after which they are subjected to an exhaustive Health and Safety briefing and induction before being allowed on site. In the area where I work, curators have started asking for CVs of all staff on a given project. Vetting of the personnel involved in such a project is an issue of the utmost importance i think. If archaeology is trying to head towards some kind of nationally recognised accreditation system, then perhaps detectorists should follow their lead?

[garybrun]

Quote "If archaeology is trying to head towards some kind of nationally recognised accreditation system, then perhaps detectorists should follow their lead?"


Why should they???

Website for responsible Metal Detecting
http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording Our Heritage For Future Generations.

[BAJR Host]

"They are vetted by means of a CV/job application and checking their references"

perhaps in theory... now I ain't saying that anyone is bad or ought.. I am jsut saying that vetting, of the sort you are suggesting is not really happening.

I agree about briefings etc... but we have to look at the reality of it.

gary does have a point, (though I suspect it is half- tougue in cheek) I don't think detectorists should follow archaeolgoists.. as that would be like saying that all local societies must follow contract archaeology as well.. etc... they are an independant group, quite capable of producing their own "standards". Though please let it not take as long as archaeology ) They are after all a hobby, and can't be controlled with the employment rules that archaeology must abide.

etc....

"No job worth doing was ever done on time or under budget.."
Khufu

[Steve-B]

[img]If archaeology is trying to head towards some kind of nationally recognised accreditation system, then perhaps detectorists should follow their lead?[/img]

I can only echo David, metal detecting is a hobby not a vocation and is not a part of archaeology, although as david once again says 'quite capable of setting their own standards' there is an awful lot of room for improvement in how the organisations representing the hobby promote minimum standards of responsibility.... merely putting your name to a Code of Practice in my opinion is only playing lip service to this.



http://www.detector-distribution.co.uk

If a job is worth doing, then its worth doing it tomorrow!

Homer (Simpson)