Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Metal Detecting Debate. Keep all your MD questions and querys here!

1457910

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,747 ✭✭✭mdebets


    Maudi wrote: »
    a little bit of searching on the net will show the true facts..irish and english museums are full of beautiful objects and hoards that are on view to the public because of metal detectorists ...put all back in to the ground and what have we got?not a lot...mding deserves its recognition...(i dont own a md)but can see the position of both sides .

    All these beautiful objects and hoards are next to worthless in regards to knowledge if they are not properly excavated. You can't tell why they were put where they where found and when, unless you perform a proper excavation, recording all the context and related finds in the area. This is the real importance of an object, not that it looks good in a museum. All this gets destroyed if someone with a metaldetector just digs a hole, because the md indicated that there might be a treasure.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,700 ✭✭✭Mountainsandh


    What if a Metal Detectorist found a brooch, in the middle of a field where no one would have thought of looking, brought the brooch to a museum, along with notification and exact location of the find ?
    A 50 cm hole may have been dug in a much wider area that is now known to archeologists to further investigate.
    So, a possible spoiling of a ... say, square meter area, for the investigation of a potentially important site.

    Either that or ... farmer ploughs and transfers soil from A to B, and no one will ever ever know about the brooch, and potential site.

    ... or ... someone buys said site, digs test holes (see my previous posts), upturns the entire area to engineer drainage, and septic tank, and build a bungalow on it. Brooch and potentially interesting site gone. (We did just that in our site, in the middle of nowhere, wish I'd have had the Metal Detector then_ and known how to use it). What do you know ? There could have been something on our site, and now it's gone for everyone.

    ... or ... this area of field is unscathed, for no one to discover, since there are no meaningful signs of its existence above ground. No one's the wiser. No damage done, no brooch to show our descendants either.

    I'm sorry but to me it's like the phrase "un mal pour un bien" in French. No one can deny there will be unscrupulous metal detectorists, and that some damage may be done. However it all boils down to percentage of what may be gained, to percentage of what may be lost. And to my absolutely untrained mind, there is more to be gained.

    Should the law not concentrate more on punishing those who deal with or hold on to the treasures afterwards ? Someone selling an old coin on Ebay should be able to trace it back to where it came from. Causing hassle for treasure dealers might discourage some.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    What if a Metal Detectorist found a brooch, in the middle of a field where no one would have thought of looking, brought the brooch to a museum, along with notification and exact location of the find ?
    A 50 cm hole may have been dug in a much wider area that is now known to archeologists to further investigate.
    So, a possible spoiling of a ... say, square meter area, for the investigation of a potentially important site.

    Either that or ... farmer ploughs and transfers soil from A to B, and no one will ever ever know about the brooch, and potential site.

    ... or ... someone buys said site, digs test holes (see my previous posts), upturns the entire area to engineer drainage, and septic tank, and build a bungalow on it. Brooch and potentially interesting site gone. (We did just that in our site, in the middle of nowhere, wish I'd have had the Metal Detector then_ and known how to use it). What do you know ? There could have been something on our site, and now it's gone for everyone.

    ... or ... this area of field is unscathed, for no one to discover, since there are no meaningful signs of its existence above ground. No one's the wiser. No damage done, no brooch to show our descendants either.

    I'm sorry but to me it's like the phrase "un mal pour un bien" in French. No one can deny there will be unscrupulous metal detectorists, and that some damage may be done. However it all boils down to percentage of what may be gained, to percentage of what may be lost. And to my absolutely untrained mind, there is more to be gained.

    Should the law not concentrate more on punishing those who deal with or hold on to the treasures afterwards ? Someone selling an old coin on Ebay should be able to trace it back to where it came from. Causing hassle for treasure dealers might discourage some.
    You have to make a distinction between the accidental uncovering of an artefact through activities like pilot holes or development works and deliberately going out with a metal detector to find buried treasure.
    The intent is different.
    There might well be some folks who would go out with an md (you might be one of them) and who would scrupulously record every necessary detail, and pass this information and the find, on to the right place.
    But how do you prevent the unscrupulous ones?
    If you legislate against the dealers, it is too late, the damage has already been done.

    These are very tough times for archaeology and this country's heritage. There might have been a time when funding was available to investigate random finds - that funding is gone, so is the possibility of investigating potentially new and interesting sites.
    The chances of a site being excavated on the strength of a random md find are slim.
    So should we encourage lots of 50cm square, well recorded, random holes all over the country - which are not going to be investigated? We should think about these artefacts, not as 'lost', but as 'safe' - underground.

    And then we come to the grey area.
    What to do with spoil heaps where the context has been destroyed by excavation for building etc.
    My personal opinion is that interested and informed folk would be doing us all a favour by investigating these heaps and holes, recording their exact location, and giving any finds to the National Museum - who will be delighted to receive them, by the way, and will offer advice.
    But forget about the metal detector; they don't identify pottery sherds, bone, stone, glass or charcoal, and if your eye is trained, you will spot the metal anyway.
    These are the real finds. They are of no value to the treasure hunter and get damaged or discarded in the frantic search for valuable metal. These non-metal finds are the really informative objects which tell us so much about the people who lived there.

    How often are ancient pieces of charcoal, or bone, or fragments of glass, or pottery sherds offered for sale on Ebay?


  • Registered Users Posts: 154 ✭✭RollYerOwn


    What if a Metal Detectorist found a brooch, in the middle of a field where no one would have thought of looking, brought the brooch to a museum, along with notification and exact location of the find ?
    A 50 cm hole may have been dug in a much wider area that is now known to archeologists to further investigate.
    So, a possible spoiling of a ... say, square meter area, for the investigation of a potentially important site.

    A perfectly reasonable question and I shall do my best to answer. Let's for argument's sake assume the law was changed and it was no longer illegal to metal detect in Ireland.

    Archaeologists don't usually "think of looking" however. There is a misconception that archaeologists are on the hunt for new stuff to find when the reality is quite the opposite. There have been so many excavations that took place prior to development destroying the sites that there is no need to go out looking for sites that are not under threat. Assume at this stage that they are protected - they have been there for hundreds or thousands of years to this point.

    This is a completely made up but cvompletely feasible example of what can happen. A metal detectorist goes into a field nearby - he's interested in the local history and hopes to find something interesting. He has the best of intentions. He takes something from the site (identifying a new site as opposed to metal detecting a known one) and is scrupulous enough to hand the piece over to the museum.

    Is he a trained surveyor with a GPS with accuracy to less than that half a metre hole he dug through the site to record the find spot? Let's assume he is (otherwise that 50cm hole could be anywhere within a few metres or more). Now we have the exact find spot of a piece that is now in the possession of the museum. Lovely. What happens now?

    Is he going to pay for an excavation to take place? I doubt it. Is the landowner? No. So the site remains as it was - except for the missing find (now conserved by - and at cost to - the museum) and the now presumably backfilled hole where once there was an undisturbed archaeological feature.

    Is that the end of the story? No. He will return to look for more. Maybe he'll find more. Other metal detectorists will learn of the find spot and come to do the same. Now the museum gets worried because a number of other finds are being reported by the same man and his friends - so they go in to "rescue" excavate a site that was previously not threatened. It turns out to be an Iron Age burial ground that was unusually rich with a couple of Iron Age fibulae and some spear heads have been grave robbed. The exact context of those grave-goods are hopelessly lost. A whole host of questions that might have been answered and knowledge that might have been gained about Iron Age burial practice would have to wait until a site came up that WASN'T due to being pillaged by a metal detectorist.

    Either that or ... farmer ploughs and transfers soil from A to B, and no one will ever ever know about the brooch, and potential site.

    The vast majority of Ireland's farmland is in pasture which poses no threat to the underlying archaeological finds and features. If it's been ploughed it's likely that it's been ploughed for centuries. If farmers spot things they often report them to the museum - they have nothing to hide, they are doing nothing illegal. Admittedly the context of finds from ploughed lands are much diminished, but there remains the threat of further digging, further exploration by metal detectorists that will do more damage to features that haven't yet been destroyed. But again - let's say that a new site is found... what of it?


    ... or ... someone buys said site, digs test holes (see my previous posts), upturns the entire area to engineer drainage, and septic tank, and build a bungalow on it. Brooch and potentially interesting site gone. (We did just that in our site, in the middle of nowhere, wish I'd have had the Metal Detector then_ and known how to use it). What do you know ? There could have been something on our site, and now it's gone for everyone.

    Unfortunately planners are frequently very poor at determining archaeological potential and obviously we have no knowledge of the majority of archaeological sites that exist undisturbed to date. Which is why it is so important that council's employ archaeologists within their own departments - but heritage is not seen as being important enough. Even so, many developments, even one-off housing in the middle of nowhere have archaeological conditions attached - and many archaeological testing and monitoring jobs demonstrate that there is nothing to be found on many sites.

    However, yes, it is of course possible that developments take place with no archaeological conditions attached and a site is destroyed. I'm sure it has happened in thousands of cases - no-one can know though.

    Yes it is also possible that if a metal detectorist was to go on a site and there happened to be something metal there (most archaeological sites have no metal associated with them whatsoever), they could find the metal artefacts. Then what? If you had done this would you have forestalled your own house-building and paid for the excavation of the site? No? In fact with teh discovery of a new archaeological site it is likely to cause problems for your development and you would proabably keep shtum. So the site would still have been lost. But yes, a coin, or a brooch might have been retrieved.

    So metal objects will be retrieved very very occasionally and archaeological sites will still get destroyed and no-one will know anything about them.

    ... or ... this area of field is unscathed, for no one to discover, since there are no meaningful signs of its existence above ground. No one's the wiser. No damage done, no brooch to show our descendants either.

    The vast majority of archaeological sites that have been excavated over the past decade have been done without anyone knowing of their existence before hand, with no features above ground to give them away. We have other ways of detecting archaeological sites that are implemented prior to their destruction if there is a threat to them. If you think we lack in things to show our descendants, get to the National Museum! Believe me they have a damn-site more than is on display - but the best bits that are on display are 'kin amazing.
    I'm sorry but to me it's like the phrase "un mal pour un bien" in French. ... it all boils down to percentage of what may be gained, to percentage of what may be lost. And to my absolutely untrained mind, there is more to be gained.

    I hope to have argued the opposite.. that there is more to be lost and little to be gained from the use of metal detectors.
    Should the law not concentrate more on punishing those who deal with or hold on to the treasures afterwards ? Someone selling an old coin on Ebay should be able to trace it back to where it came from. Causing hassle for treasure dealers might discourage some.

    I honestly don't know what measures the museum takes to prevent trade in stolen heritage, but I believe it is taken very seriously indeed, has been made illegal here and under the Valletta agreement member states in the EU also have to take measure to prevent illicit trade in heritage.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    RollYerOwn wrote: »






    I honestly don't know what measures the museum takes to prevent trade in stolen heritage, but I believe it is taken very seriously indeed,
    The museum has an active, though currently under-resourced, section dedicated to the monitoring of stolen heritage.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,676 ✭✭✭dr gonzo


    I havent read this full thread so apologies if this point has been made numerous times. Essentially what this all boils down to is a clear dichotomy in mindsets. As much as metal detectorists would like to think that their hobby is ultimately to the benefit of archaeology and national heritage, the simple fact is that it is not. At this point I should point out that Im speaking purely about amateur detectorists and preserved contexts.

    Firstly, as others have mentioned, metal is only one of a number of highly important, informative archaeological materials. Archaeologists see no more intrinsic value in it then a piece of wood or bone.

    Secondly any object removed from its original context by a person who hasnt been trained in practical excavation techniques is a lost object. From an archaeological point of view its next to useless.

    Thirdly the argument that metal detectorists identify sites is a weak one. They may in fact identify post neolithic sites alright but that doesnt mean that its to the benefit of the site. Perfect example is the relatively recent anglo-saxon hoard find in England. It was discovered entirely by a metal detectorist, he gets full credit for that site. However he also pulled at least 4 box fulls of early medieval, enamelled metalwork out of the ground before calling the Portable Antiquities Scheme. After the find archaeologists had less of a substantial site on their hands and more a salvage operation.
    What he did was entirely legal and he was even paid for his troubles but nearly all archaeologists (Ireland and Britain) would agree that as impressive as the find was, its far safer in the ground then being pulled out by an excited detectorist with no concern context or stratigraphic relationship.

    Unless MD people are examining spoil heaps, beaches or other scenarios when materials would already be out of context then they are more a hindrance then a help. Just my two cents.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,700 ✭✭✭Mountainsandh


    RollYerOwn wrote: »
    Is he a trained surveyor with a GPS with accuracy to less than that half a metre hole he dug through the site to record the find spot?
    Ahem... marking a spot is not that hard now in fairness.

    Is he going to pay for an excavation to take place? I doubt it. Is the landowner? No. So the site remains as it was - except for the missing find (now conserved by - and at cost to - the museum) and the now presumably backfilled hole where once there was an undisturbed archaeological feature.

    Ok so now let's simply swap the brooch for a skeleton complete with warrior gear or something, or heck it's very boggy and we'll say, a mummified man. Would the farmer or myself still have to pay for the excavation ? Would the site still be left unchecked, for others like me to pillage ?
    A lot of what you are saying is very depressing, like nothing will be done anyway, we have enough, shop closed, we don't want to know.
    But if the outlook is that hundreds of "small finds" are going to be left in the ground to remain undiscovered, for lack of funding or interest, well then, who can blame a treasure hunter for wishing them on their mantlepiece, or in their glass cabinet ? It's pretty likely that a person collecting "treasures" would actually show their discovery too, online, in person ... So is the brooch better in the ground, for ever and a day, or in a man's cabinet, to be shown to his friend, family, like minded people online ?

    If really things are as depressing as you say, well then it tilts me more in favour of treasure hunters, who at least salvage some admittedly isolated, and possibly spoiled artefacts.

    If there are not going to be excavations, if sites are going to be destroyed by anyone wishing to build a bungalow, well then, it's probably a good thing to let metal detectors loose on the case. They won't do a good job, but they will do "a" job, as opposed to all this remaining snuggly underground.

    Is that the end of the story? No. He will return to look for more.
    I don't think I would return for more if I was told the site was indeed interesting and important. I don't think I would divulge the location either. Again that is assuming most MDetectorists to be "bad". You know, I'm sure hunters would tell you too, that poachers are giving them a bad name, when in fact most hunters are law abiding. Should their hobby be made illegal then ?

    So metal objects will be retrieved very very occasionally and archaeological sites will still get destroyed and no-one will know anything about them.
    So what's better, nobody ever knows anything, or somebody's nephew is wowed by the brooch uncle Tom found with his metal detector, and develops a lifelong interest in archeology ?

    If you think we lack in things to show our descendants, get to the National Museum! Believe me they have a damn-site more than is on display
    So what, is it a wrap ? We have enough ? All done and dusted ? No need for more ?

    edit : I forgot : if something had been found on my site, I would probably have had lengthy discussions with archeologists to determine what would be the speediest, and most convenient way, to save said site, while not stalling construction for too long. Archeology is not something that I would expect to pay for, since like hundreds more, I pay taxes, a portion of which should be spent on preserving and protecting our heritage.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,700 ✭✭✭Mountainsandh


    ... and I want to say, I argue, but I do understand what you are saying, deep down... I suppose for anyone not involved in archeology (like me), it is hard to take the reality/mundanity of it, that's all. There are some things like funds/budgets that as outsiders appear like something you should be idealistic about, and push aside. :rolleyes: at myself.
    But at the same time, I still see my point about the MDs. ;):p Better in Uncle Tom's glass case, than in old Paddy's field for no-one to see.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    Imagine for a minute that this technology could only detect broken pottery, not metal. I am pretty sure there would be next to no broken pottery detectorists around. This is because broken pottery is of no monetary value.
    But it's one of the most valuable piece of evidence an archaeologist can find. Few other finds date the stratum so clearly.
    Allow the treasure hunters a machine which is capable of detecting something underground of potential value (monetary or otherwise) and the temptation is just too much.

    ... So is the brooch better in the ground, for ever and a day, or in a man's cabinet, to be shown to his friend, family, like minded people online ?
    It's much better off in the ground, with all the information that surrounds it.

    This is where archaeology differs from metal detecting/treasure hunting. The primary function of legitimate archaeology is to provide knowledge about the past through physical evidence. The secondary function is to conserve this evidence for the benefit of mankind.
    Metal detecting/treasure hunting destroys information about the past.
    Metal detecting/treasure hunting is an act of complete self satisfaction.
    You know, I'm sure hunters would tell you too, that poachers are giving them a bad name, when in fact most hunters are law abiding. Should their hobby be made illegal then ?
    This argument is irrational.
    If hunting were to be made illegal because of poaching, then it follows that archaeology would be made illegal because of metal detecting.
    So what's better, nobody ever knows anything, or somebody's nephew is wowed by the brooch uncle Tom found with his metal detector, and develops a lifelong interest in archeology ?
    A lifelong interest in metal detecting/treasure hunting, is more likely.
    Archeology is not something that I would expect to pay for, since like hundreds more, I pay taxes, a portion of which should be spent on preserving and protecting our heritage.
    I happen agree with you on this.
    In an ideal world, the state would have enough archaeologists to form a kind of rapid response unit in the event of the discovery of something significant which is under threat from the JCB, or whatever.
    The reality is that archaeology costs money, and someone has to pay it.
    That's the grim reality, folks dig a hole, see archaeology and realise that they will have to pay out and face delays.
    The hole gets filled in pretty quick and not a word is spoken about it.


    The more I read this thread, the more I realise how crucial the laws on metal detecting are.
    The laws are there because there is a history of destruction and theft of antiquities on this island.
    All I see from those in favour of metal detecting is a blunt, stubborn failure to understand that their activities benefit only themselves, and that their activities destroy archaeology. They have a blunt, stubborn failure to understand that if an artefact is left undisturbed, underground and within its context - it is not 'lost', it is safe.
    When an artefact is hauled out of the ground, not only is the real story lost, the artefact itself is lost. It becomes merely a trinket, a bauble, not a piece of evidence.
    Metal detectorists are like children on Christmas eve. They see all those lovely presents sitting wrapped under the Christmas tree - the temptation is just too much to bear. They can't resist. They tear them open when their parents are asleep, and then wonder why Christmas day is so miserable.

    I'll ask you a question.
    I have 'found' an unrecorded site which has between three and five well preserved ring barrows. These barrows are most unusual because they almost overlap each other and are of an identical size.
    They are in a field which has never been ploughed and is unlikely to be.
    So what should I do?
    Get a metal detector and see if I can find anything?
    Or should I do my best to have them looked at by a state archaeologist who would determine if they need to be listed and protected?


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,700 ✭✭✭Mountainsandh


    slowburner wrote: »
    Imagine for a minute that this technology could only detect broken pottery, not metal. I am pretty sure there would be next to no broken pottery detectorists around. This is because broken pottery is of no monetary value.
    Again Slowburner you are assuming the motives and intentions of MDorists. I know plenty of people who would indeed have interest in bones, pottery, charcoal, wood, flint... As has been said, because they probably are harder to spot to the untrained eye, they remain unfound, that is all. You cannot just blame an entire group of people for the motives of a minority. And you cannot assume they are after monetary gain, when in fact they may not be.

    I'm French but have been living here a long time, and I always find it very touching, how the people in my area collect all the white stones they come across in their (stone) walls, or fields, and exhibit them for all to admire on top of piers, or in their garden. Did you ever notice that ? There is no monetary value in this, people do it because they like these stones, and they like to share what they think is interesting or beautiful. People are not necessarily as venal as you think. Self gratification yes, but not always exclusively, the desire to share is well and truly there too.

    My analogy to hunters and poachers was not expressed properly. I was not placing the archeologists in that equation, archeologists are the professionals, therefore in my analogy they would be the local rangers, the people who are paid to know most about the subject. The hunters would be the good metal detectorists, who wish to abide by the rules, and not cause any damage to the ecosystem/site, and thus follow the rangers/archeologists recommendations. The poachers are those who, although they also aim to kill animals, do it without care for rules and regulations, and without respect for said ecosystem/site. These are the "bad" metal detectorists, with monetary or self gratification intent.
    I hope this is clearer.

    I'm sure lots of examples of good and bad metal detectorists can be found abroad. Societies of MDs who work in a manner that will least destroy, and most help, in identifying sites, and who then do not hesitate to let professionals take over.
    And the bad ones examples like you said, are all over Ebay, and in the articles linked above in this discussion.
    It's much better off in the ground, with all the information that surrounds it.

    This is where archaeology differs from metal detecting/treasure hunting. The primary function of legitimate archaeology is to provide knowledge about the past through physical evidence. The secondary function is to conserve this evidence for the benefit of mankind.
    But when the artefact remains in the ground, there is no knowledge gained about the past through physical evidence. The evidence is not conserved for the benefit of mankind, since it is still in the ground, in an unidentified, unknown of location. No one is the wiser, end of.
    And I have seen mentioned that a lot of land being for pasture, most sites are safer underground. I live in amongst pasture land, and the fields are either ploughed, or cleared, on a regular basis. Drainage work takes place, banks are desconstructed and reconstructed, holes are dug, soil is moved from A to B, all year round.

    In an ideal world, the state would have enough archaeologists to form a kind of rapid response unit in the event of the discovery of something significant which is under threat from the JCB, or whatever.
    Agreed. Possibly the best placed people to ring alarm bells are archeologists. It has been done and whenever I hear an archeologist outlining such problems in the media, I fully support them.
    All I see from those in favour of metal detecting is a blunt, stubborn failure to understand that their activities benefit only themselves, and that their activities destroy archaeology. They have a blunt, stubborn failure to understand that if an artefact is left undisturbed, underground and within its context - it is not 'lost', it is safe.
    Again assuming people's motives etc... Ad nauseum ;)
    Artefacts are not safe underground, unless they are in a national park or something. As I said, I am well placed to witness ground being tended by farmers, absolutely legally, on a daily basis, and ground being prepped for construction, absolutely legally, on a daily basis.
    That's not safe.
    Pretending things are safe in such situations is just a way to bury your head in the sand.

    And yes, 100% agree, call the archeologist. But first, all these funding issues better be resolved. But if someone doesn't call quick, your newly discovered site is in real danger of being partially or entirely rearranged, pasture or not. Or sold, to build a house, complete with drainage and septic tank.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    We seem to have got into a pantomime - 'Oh yes it is. Oh no it isn't.'

    The thing is: if the activities of metal detectorists were respectable and beneficial we wouldn't need these laws. We could have a similar situation to the UK.
    We cannot have laws similar to the UK because of the history of metal detecting in Ireland
    The laws are there because of the history of metal detecting in Ireland.

    I don't think I'm making assumptions - the history is good enough evidence.


  • Registered Users Posts: 154 ✭✭RollYerOwn



    Ahem... marking a spot is not that hard now in fairness.

    (Trust me from experience, actually it is - lands get ploughed and sewn, cattle not only tread things into the ground but actually eat little flags and things out of interest - and sometimes I think sheer bloody mindedness :o)

    I forgot : if something had been found on my site, I would probably have had lengthy discussions with archeologists to determine what would be the speediest, and most convenient way, to save said site, while not stalling construction for too long. Archeology is not something that I would expect to pay for, since like hundreds more, I pay taxes, a portion of which should be spent on preserving and protecting our heritage.

    The problem here is another misconception. The national policy both here and abroad is that it is the "polluter" that pays for whatever mitigation measures are necessary to protect/recover the national heritage.

    Hundreds of thousands of homes have been built and endless kilometres of motorways, pipelines and other infrastructural development. Much of this has resulted in the thousands or tens of thousands of archaeological sites that have been found that were previously unknown prior to the last few years. Where these have been initiated by the State they have of course been paid for by the State, but do you really think the tax payer wants to fund yet another archaeological excavation because Joe Bloggs wants to build an extension to his large country house, or because Fred Bigs wants to construct a massive piggery to increase his business? What about Developer-Bob and his cohort of investors, who wants to build yet another block of 25 apartments on virgin land in suburbia?

    Its an impossible task to expect the State to pay for all of that and I think the people of this country should not be turned against their own heritage and history because the developer thinks someone else should pay for it.

    There is a large amount of heritage under the sod. Most of it not worth a penny, but still of cultural value (and how you put an actual value on that is beyond me).


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,516 ✭✭✭Maudi


    slowburner wrote: »
    Imagine for a minute that this technology could only detect broken pottery, not metal. I am pretty sure there would be next to no broken pottery detectorists around. This is because broken pottery is of
    Again Slowburner you are assuming the motives and intentions of MDorists. I know plenty of people who would indeed have interest in bones, pottery, charcoal, wood, flint... As has been said, because they probably are harder to spot to the untrained eye, they remain unfound, that is all. You cannot just blame an entire group of people for the motives of a minority. And you cannot assume they are after monetary gain, when in fact they may not be.

    I'm French but have been living here a long time, and I always find it very touching, how the people in my area collect all the white stones they come across in their (stone) walls, or fields, and exhibit them for all to admire on top of piers, or in their garden. Did you ever notice that ? There is no monetary value in this, people do it because they like these stones, and they like to share what they think is interesting or beautiful. People are not necessarily as venal as you think. Self gratification yes, but not always exclusively, the desire to share is well and truly there too.

    My analogy to hunters and poachers was not expressed properly. I was not placing the archeologists in that equation, archeologists are the professionals, therefore in my analogy they would be the local rangers, the people who are paid to know most about the subject. The hunters would be the good metal detectorists, who wish to abide by the rules, and not cause any damage to the ecosystem/site, and thus follow the rangers/archeologists recommendations. The poachers are those who, although they also aim to kill animals, do it without care for rules and regulations, and without respect for said ecosystem/site. These are the "bad" metal detectorists, with monetary or self gratification intent.
    I hope this is clearer.

    I'm sure lots of examples of good and bad metal detectorists can be found abroad. Societies of MDs who work in a manner that will least destroy, and most help, in identifying sites, and who then do not hesitate to let professionals take over.
    And the bad ones examples like you said, are all over Ebay, and in the articles linked above in this discussion.
    It's much better off in the ground, with all the information that surrounds it.

    This is where archaeology differs from metal detecting/treasure hunting. The primary function of legitimate archaeology is to provide knowledge about the past through physical evidence. The secondary function is to conserve this evidence for the benefit of mankind.
    But when the artefact remains in the ground, there is no knowledge gained about the past through physical evidence. The evidence is not conserved for the benefit of mankind, since it is still in the ground, in an unidentified, unknown of location. No one is the wiser, end of.
    And I have seen mentioned that a lot of land being for pasture, most sites are safer underground. I live in amongst pasture land, and the fields are either ploughed, or cleared, on a regular basis. Drainage work takes place, banks are desconstructed and reconstructed, holes are dug, soil is moved from A to B, all year round.

    In an ideal world, the state would have enough archaeologists to form a kind of rapid response unit in the event of the discovery of something significant which is under threat from the JCB, or whatever.
    Agreed. Possibly the best placed people to ring alarm bells are archeologists. It has been done and whenever I hear an archeologist outlining such problems in the media, I fully support them.
    All I see from those in favour of metal detecting is a blunt, stubborn failure to understand that their activities benefit only themselves, and that their activities destroy archaeology. They have a blunt, stubborn failure to understand that if an artefact is left undisturbed, underground and within its context - it is not 'lost', it is safe.
    Again assuming people's motives etc... Ad nauseum ;)
    Artefacts are not safe underground, unless they are in a national park or something. As I said, I am well placed to witness ground being tended by farmers, absolutely legally, on a daily basis, and ground being prepped for construction, absolutely legally, on a daily basis.
    That's not safe.
    Pretending things are safe in such situations is just a way to bury your head in the sand.

    And yes, 100% agree, call the archeologist. But first, all these funding issues better be resolved. But if someone doesn't call quick, your newly discovered site is in real danger of being partially or entirely rearranged, pasture or not. Or sold, to build a house, complete with drainage and septic tank.

    i wouldnt put the lack of other postings down to lack of interest...like myself probly more like the fact i feel bullied everytime i post..by the one or two self appointed archaeology police....fek sske ye have me afraid to look down at the soil when im walking...i did think this was a discussion forum??any hoo im going out in my big yellow metal detector (jcb)and im gona dig holes all over my land and nobody can do squat about it


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,541 ✭✭✭Gee Bag


    Maudi wrote: »
    i wouldnt put the lack of other postings down to lack of interest...like myself probly more like the fact i feel bullied everytime i post..by the one or two self appointed archaeology police....fek sske ye have me afraid to look down at the soil when im walking...i did think this was a discussion forum??any hoo im going out in my big yellow metal detector (jcb)and im gona dig holes all over my land and nobody can do squat about it

    Maudi,

    There are no self appointed archaeology police. All that myself and a few others have been doing in this thread is put forth the case why metal detecting is bad for archaeology, and hence, why it is illegal in Ireland (as it is in many other countries).

    Good luck with finding stuff with a JCB! I've spent months monitoring machines stripping topsoil while finding absolutley nothing!

    P.S. I see that you live in Charlesland. If it's Charlesland in Greystones you might be interested in the following excavation reports.

    Linkylink

    These pan pipes were found during excavation at Charlesland
    http://www.gaitadefoles.net/artigos/4000pipesenglish.htm


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    Maudi wrote: »
    i wouldnt put the lack of other postings down to lack of interest...like myself probly more like the fact i feel bullied everytime i post..by the one or two self appointed archaeology police....fek sske ye have me afraid to look down at the soil when im walking...i did think this was a discussion forum??any hoo im going out in my big yellow metal detector (jcb)and im gona dig holes all over my land and nobody can do squat about it
    Hopefully, you are being ironic when you say the above.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,516 ✭✭✭Maudi


    Gee Bag wrote: »
    Maudi wrote: »
    i wouldnt put the lack of other postings down to lack of interest...like myself probly more like the fact i feel bullied everytime i post..by the one or two self appointed archaeology police....fek sske ye have me afraid to look down at the soil when im walking...i did think this was a discussion forum??any hoo im going out in my big yellow metal detector (jcb)and im gona dig holes all over my land and nobody can do squat about it

    Maudi,

    There are no self appointed archaeology police. All that myself and a few others have been doing in this thread is put forth the case why metal detecting is bad for archaeology, and hence, why it is illegal in Ireland (as it is in many other countries).

    Good luck with finding stuff with a JCB! I've spent months monitoring machines stripping topsoil while finding absolutley nothing!

    P.S. I see that you live in Charlesland. If it's Charlesland in Greystones you might be interested in the following excavation reports.

    Linkylink

    These pan pipes were found during excavation at Charlesland
    http://www.gaitadefoles.net/artigos/4000pipesenglish.htm
    wudnt ssy i uncovered pipes but i saw them being taken out of the ground in chsrlesland


  • Registered Users Posts: 154 ✭✭RollYerOwn


    slowburner wrote: »
    The more I read this thread, the more I realise how crucial the laws on metal detecting are.
    ...
    All I see from those in favour of metal detecting is a blunt, stubborn failure to understand that their activities benefit only themselves, and that their activities destroy archaeology. They have a blunt, stubborn failure to understand that if an artefact is left undisturbed, underground and within its context - it is not 'lost', it is safe.

    Yeah I mostly agree BUT the real problem is that there is a failure to communicate what archaeologists do, how and why etc. As a previous poster has intimated, there IS a gulf between professional archaeologists and amateur enthusiasts and I think that needs to be addressed.

    I consider the majority of metal detectorists as amateur enthusiasts that are unaware of the issues involved. I hoped this thread might address that - I'm a bit depressed that I'm probably one of the posters considered by Maudl to be "self-appointed police" simply because my opinions and arguments are different to their's and because I have some knowledge of the legislation regarding MDs and the the effects upon the heritage resource. :(

    It is clear from many of the posters that they are well-intentioned and not interested in financial gain (a sensible approach as it's hardly going to be more lucrative than playing the lottery). Their interest is in discovery of something old that was previously unknown. I think that interest could be tapped and that metal detectorists could become ex-metal detectorists by joining a local archaeological society and learning about the heritage "industry" and the missing part that I think should be played by the volunteer sector.

    God knows that there are lots of projects that could be undertaken by people who have time to offer from looking after the sites that are in their local community to various types of surveys and even committing themselves to a local excavation projects. These don't need to be sites that are upstanding or sites that are known to be protected - initial surveys of most local areas are likely to identify sites that are at risk through ploughing, erosion by cattle etc that are not protected by planning legislation.

    What is clear is that there needs to be better communication between locals and their heritage and I know that in some areas individual archaeologists have done their bit to address this. A major requirement is to have county archaeologists in local government - and these that do exist are not guaranteed that they have jobs for long either as far as I'm aware. A heritage officer and at least one assistant heritage officer in each county should be mandatory and a local engagement programme a priority.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    I think you are absolutely right.
    If I have been guilty of making assumptions about the motives of metal detectorists and making statements to that effect, it is because the risks needed to be emphasised - I make no apology for doing so.
    Sure, some folks who metal detect might indulge their hobby in a sensitive way, and might even do the right thing with their well recorded, if ill gotten finds.
    However, I posted a straw poll some time ago in After Hours, to assess how people might react to finding valuables.
    It's not a valid poll from a valid sample population by any means, but it does hint at something.
    Almost 70% said they would keep/sell the finds.

    It would be useless to get into an argument about the motivation of metal detectorists - it would amount to nothing but speculation and personal opinion, we've seen this already.
    Are the posters here in favour of metal detecting a representative sample?
    I think not, I think most of the posters here have demonstrated a genuine concern for our heritage and are probably motivated by interest rather than greed - but again this is speculation, or making an assumption as Mountainsandh puts it.
    If the interest is there, why not channel it into helpful, non invasive investigations?
    This is a brilliant time of year, probably the best, for spotting and recording earthworks and features.
    Why not make a contribution by trying to find unrecorded sites, and making the locals and the landowners aware of them?
    Walk recently ploughed fields, with the landowner's permission, of course, and identify clusters of pottery sherds or building materials.
    Note the co-ordinates of any such clusters and anything else of significance.
    Photograph and write something about the results of your exploration
    There are plenty of contributions to be made without being invasive.
    That would be real treasure, that would be the best contribution any enthusiast could make.


  • Registered Users Posts: 102 ✭✭Jakub25


    What about it? :)

    "ALL DETECTORS INCLUDE Membership & photo ID card for the Amateur metal detectors association of ireland, Don't have your equipment confiscated , make sure you have your id card with you at all times AND understand the laws governing the use of detectors in Ireland!"


    http://www.donedeal.ie/for-sale/others/3070443

    http://amdai.weebly.com/


  • Registered Users Posts: 154 ✭✭RollYerOwn


    Jakub25 wrote: »
    What about it? :)

    As in..?

    What do you think? ;)


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    If you have an hour or so to spare, there is a very interesting albeit inconclusive, 'Time Team' show available to view on 4oD here.
    The show deals in a fairly toothless way, with some of the issues and effects around metal detecting.

    I felt somewhat proud of our legislation afterwards.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,065 ✭✭✭Fighting Irish


    slowburner wrote: »
    If you have an hour or so to spare, there is a very interesting albeit inconclusive, 'Time Team' show available to view on 4oD here.
    The show deals in a fairly toothless way, with some of the issues and effects around metal detecting.

    I felt somewhat proud of our legislation afterwards.

    "There will always be MDers"


  • Registered Users Posts: 154 ✭✭RollYerOwn


    "There will always be MDers"

    :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,065 ✭✭✭Fighting Irish


    RollYerOwn wrote: »
    :rolleyes:

    That's a fact, and the way the law is here, it makes everyone lose!

    Just saying :)

    Having something like this in the republic would be win win for everyone


  • Registered Users Posts: 154 ✭✭RollYerOwn


    Well, no. It wouldn't.

    These arguments have been made time and again in this forum and you have continually been unwilling to engage with any of the points raised.

    Let's face it, you have no intention of altering your activity whether illegal or not and whether it it is destructive to the heritage of this country or not.

    In short, your motives are entirely selfish with no regard to your own heritage.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    That is a voluntary organisation.
    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]What is the UK Detector Finds Database?
    The UK Detector Finds Database (UKDFD) is an initiative by members of the metal-detecting community to promote good practice within the hobby. It is an easy-to-use, friendly and supportive online facility for detectorists to record their finds and ensure that the information is both available for current research, and preserved for future generations.
    [/FONT]
    Why not start your own?
    It would be very helpful to see where Irish metal detectorists have been at work.

    They go on to state this:[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
    [/FONT]
    And even when a worthwhile find is made, it is frequently the case that recording would serve no useful purpose.
    ______________________________________________________

    Every ounce of this issue hinges on one question.
    Are metal detectorists motivated by the desire to make a contribution to the store of knowledge, or are they motivated by the desire to find things which they can keep or sell?

    How do we answer this?
    We look at the evidence.

    The evidence in Ireland has shown that metal detecting has been carried out by organised gangs and corrupt individuals motivated entirely by financial gain.
    That is why this legislation was introduced and that is why the legislation will not be repealed.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,549 ✭✭✭✭Judgement Day




  • Registered Users Posts: 1,516 ✭✭✭Maudi


    slowburner wrote: »
    That is a voluntary organisation.
    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]What is the UK Detector Finds Database?
    The UK Detector Finds Database (UKDFD) is an initiative by members of the metal-detecting community to promote good practice within the hobby. It is an easy-to-use, friendly and supportive online facility for detectorists to record their finds and ensure that the information is both available for current research, and preserved for future generations.
    [/FONT]
    Why not start your own?
    It would be very helpful to see where Irish metal detectorists have been at work.

    They go on to state this:[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
    [/FONT]
    And even when a worthwhile find is made, it is frequently the case that recording would serve no useful purpose.
    ______________________________________________________

    Every ounce of this issue hinges on one question.
    Are metal detectorists motivated by the desire to make a contribution to the store of knowledge, or are they motivated by the desire to find things which they can keep or sell?

    How do we answer this?
    We look at the evidence.

    The evidence in Ireland has shown that metal detecting has been carried out by organised gangs and corrupt individuals motivated entirely by financial gain.
    That is why this legislation was introduced and that is why the legislation will not be repealed.
    c'mon! slowburner ...the evidence points to to organised gangs???c'mon now ...your totally getting out of hand with those type of headline comments...organised gangs? from whom are you getting these comments?please dont quote that father and son duo as organised gangs...the vast majority of finds are from mders...or bits and pieces picked up after road crews have bulldozed thru a site....can you name a trained professional arch...who has gone out and dis anything?probly very few or none..they have been pointed out stuff by amateurs or developers.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,516 ✭✭✭Maudi


    so organised "gangs"are roaming around the country a gang being two or more and selling it for five euros on ebay..gangs?five euro? c'mon.. these organised "gangs" are to be feared and watched out for the might make ten or even fifteen euro on ebay...oh the ruination?meanwhile the roads authority bulldoze graveyards and throw a few scraps to the archs and wow they are great preservers of irish heritage ...dont make me laugh...and roll..the cash cow is gone...it wont be back..its ok to say what you really think


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,516 ✭✭✭Maudi


    so organised "gangs"are roaming around the country a gang being two or more and selling it for five euros on ebay..gangs?five euro? c'mon.. these organised "gangs" are to be feared and watched out for the might make ten or even fifteen euro on ebay...oh the ruination?meanwhile the roads authority bulldoze graveyards and throw a few scraps to the archs and wow they are great preservers of irish heritage ...dont make me laugh...and roll..the cash cow is gone...it wont be back..its ok to say what you really think


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement