The Metal Detecting Debate. Keep all your MD questions and querys here! - Page 2 - boards.ie
Boards.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more x
Thread Closed  
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
12-09-2009, 13:38   #16
Jakub25
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 98
Please, don't delete those quotations.
I have took them from.

http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.p...,prev.html#new


Quote:
I love the bit where they say you´re destroying the finds situation by removing objects in the first 12 inches, then come along with a bulldozer, and remove the top 40 inches before they start.


Tony Robinson say´s we´re taking the history out of context when we remove objects in the first 30 cms (12 inches) of ground, but then he and his Time T*ts come along with a JCB or Catapillar, and remove 3 to 6 feet before they start searching at all. Last time a gold coin was found (The best thing ever found by TT according to Robinson), but it was found by a local´detectorist, searching the spoil of the 6 feet deep hole that hab been removed by TT, not found by anyone from TT themselves.

yep i hear ya,,, i forgot that gold coin was found, yes i remember now... all they actually found was how the walls actually met up or dident, ie the layout of roman villas or pottery,,, and he was running around like a little kid all excited over a new trench going in lol Smiley.

they should make a series using a few detectorists on how they do it and what they do when they report the find to the local liason officer and do it properly and show that its then and only then that the archies get to know and they get there chance at it,, it would show that it is the m-d-er that actually finds the place and goods, and if it wasent for us they would find hardly jack sh*t and jack left town..... Grin

Yep...If i discover something fantastic there isn't a chance I'm going to damage it in any way,but if the "Govt" doesn't provide some recognition and fair compensation well there is no way I'm going to run and give it to them so they can shrug their shoulders and file it away in some museum's basement never to see the light of day.Professional looters are one thing but a lone detectorist who uncovers some lost artifact and gets a chill up their spine at the history and craftsmanship, I feel has as much right to ownership of that object as anyone.

Well, put it this way, Able_walker. If a MD'er or anybody for that reason, finds a chalice/treasure or something of great historical significance, if the law was there to compensate them of 50% of it's worth, give them the appropriate recognition and display the treasure for all of the world to admire in a museum, it's a hell of a lot better than hiding it under the bed or God forbid becoming one of those #@!$%#@!s on Ebay that sell their countries heritage to the highest bidder.


One of the biggest problems too, is that an MD´er finds something, but then when it´s given to the Archies, it´s them that´s suddenly found it, no mention of the MD´er :-(

It´s the same in a lot of Bundesländer (Counties) here in Germany, You find it, they take it, they get the fame, and you get a fine !!

If it so illegal to own/buy/use a metal detector in this great land of ours,then why is LEGAL for company's like ARGOS,MAPLINS to sell them in ireland,check out the new catalouge from argos,page 1473....also they seem to be showing kids how to break the law too on page 1646....surely there is some kind of mix up with the laws here....please reply with any thoughts on this .....mick

Let's see how many people there are interested in starting a club? A website can be easily set up..Think I am kinda handy with that, and see what we can achieve by talking to the museum and other sources. Like where I come from (Holland) we had a farely descent arrangement with the local Historians and the head office for archaeology. We could keep anything we found (unless it was of major historical importance) but we had to have everything checked/registered and logged. Which was not a bad deal.
If there are more people interested please let us know and see if we can start Ireland first (legal) MD club and do a test run in Navan..Which sounds like a nice idea!!

hi
i live in ireland.5 years ago i found a artifact of sorts with my md.i held on to it for 5 years because i was afraid to get into trouble by handing it up.then i sent a message to the dublin history museum.a women got back to me she seemed pleasent enough,she arranged for us to meet .when i met all she did was give me a bollocking for useing a md.she said you can not use them anywhere in ireland.she wasnt that interested about the find or where exactly i had found it.now she has all my details address and stuff.i am very bitter about that.our gorvernment destroys more archaeological sites every year bloody year,waterford viking site hill of tara ect.
So, you see what is the situation.
Most of them would like to give all artefacts back,
but they can get a fine or go to jail.
Destroing heritage, archeologists do the same when they
checking land for buldings and do maybe 2 holes
with not checking everything perfect.
Usually artefacts are on the top of the soil.


Quote:
Originally Posted by PJW View Post
Archaeologists are bound to produce a report for planning purposes where construction will take place in a archaeloly sensitive area, in most cases this is just a paper exercise.

e.g. 18mths ago in the centre of Dublin on a one arce site close to Chrischurch an Archaeologists was required to produce a report, this entailed 2 No. 5M slit trenches been dug by the builder. The Archaeologists spent the morning in the two holes and determined the site was good to go.

Throughout the course of constructing the basement / piles, alot of pottery and some coins where un-earthed by workers, if the site was metal detected prior to works I'm sure a lot more could have been found.
If you will invite metal detectorists to the land what was checked by archeologist.
You can save a lot of artefacts.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Grimes View Post
The ignorance of people on that treasurenet forum is amazing.Ive seen more logical debates on stormfront
I think the bigger problem is disregarding all of the people who are using metal detectors.
Grimes in Ireland is maybe 1000 people who are using metal detectors.

Last edited by Jakub25; 12-09-2009 at 15:03.
Jakub25 is online now  
Advertisement
12-09-2009, 16:57   #17
happyoutscan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,027
Are you an archaeologist? I'm assuming you are not as your discussion here is based on the (IMO) opinions of people who have no actual understanding of Irish archaeology, therefore disregarding the very simple reasons put forward against the use of metal detecting in this country by those perhaps better qualified to make these decisions. That you do not like or agree with that is fine, but coming on here and saying that 'most artefacts found etc etc' would be handed in is nonsense. As for your refusal to even acknowledge the simplicity of maintaining the stratigraphy, context and integrity of a site until such a time as scientific assessment and excavation may take place also reveals your interest in the 'artefacts' only and not its archaeological context.
happyoutscan is offline  
12-09-2009, 17:44   #18
Jakub25
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by happyoutscan View Post
Are you an archaeologist?
I'm not, but my knowledge in this subject is bigger
than normal person.

Quote:
Originally Posted by happyoutscan View Post
I'm assuming you are not as your discussion here is based on the (IMO) opinions of people who have no actual understanding of Irish archaeology, therefore disregarding the very simple reasons put forward against the use of metal detecting in this country by those perhaps better qualified to make these decisions.
I thinkin that some normal people (after training course)

http://www.earthsound.ie/geochemical.html

should be allowed to use metal detectors on the arable field away from monuments but it need to change the LAW
because in fact it's impossible to get license for using MD.
There is new NMI legislation being drafted.


Quote:
Originally Posted by happyoutscan View Post
As for your refusal to even acknowledge the simplicity of maintaining the stratigraphy, context and integrity of a site until such a time as scientific assessment and excavation may take place also reveals your interest in the 'artefacts' only and not its archaeological context.
Don't worry.
I will write a lot more about this.
I don't wont to disgrace others educated Archeologists.
Jakub25 is online now  
12-09-2009, 18:06   #19
Fighting Irish
Registered User
 
Fighting Irish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Carlow
Posts: 6,842
Garrett Ace 250 ftw
Fighting Irish is offline  
12-09-2009, 18:55   #20
Riamfada
Moderator
 
Riamfada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 9,328
Just so you are aware, archaeologists dont just go down to the licence shop and put a hole in the ground. There are serious regulations to allow an excavation to take place and even more licences for the use of GRP and Metal Detecting equipment to be used.
Riamfada is offline  
Advertisement
13-09-2009, 01:51   #21
Nebit
Registered User
 
Nebit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Cork
Posts: 301
i know the point that your trying to make jakub25. And yes using metal detectors may mean that we find metallic artifacts such as coins etc, but the point we're trying to make is that for you to say yes this is an archaeological site (and not just some miss placed camping hook etc) you would need to dig it up and provide this evidence.
Even if you turn it into the museum, in some sence it would only be half a find because as archaeologists we look at contexts, soils etc, which provides alot of useful information and a better way of dating artifacts. when you dig this up you aren't recording these and so it is lost forever.
thats the point i think we're trying to make.

for example recently i was on a dig with UCD and our job was to excavate a charcoal-making platform and although we found metallic objects what we were interested in was the soil contexts etc as this provided the evidence we needed to say that yes this is what happened here.

am i making sence lol
Nebit is offline  
Thanks from:
13-09-2009, 07:29   #22
Jakub25
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebit View Post
i know the point that your trying to make jakub25. And yes using metal detectors may mean that we find metallic artifacts such as coins etc, but the point we're trying to make is that for you to say yes this is an archaeological site (and not just some miss placed camping hook etc) you would need to dig it up and provide this evidence.
Even if you turn it into the museum, in some sence it would only be half a find because as archaeologists we look at contexts, soils etc, which provides alot of useful information and a better way of dating artifacts. when you dig this up you aren't recording these and so it is lost forever.
thats the point i think we're trying to make.

Ok, but look at this there is more than 10.000 artefact all founded
on fields(agriculture), pastures by people who were using MD.
So many artefcts with no context and it is legal.

http://www.ukdfd.co.uk/ukdfddata/index.php

I will ask now.Where is Irish database?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9b_klOB8cro

Is this item nothing worth for archeologists
only because a old woman find this.
In GB not.

Illegal is also using a MD for finding gold nuggets.

http://www.youtube.com/user/DesDunne.../2/OpOCm5XUmwA


What is my point.You see 1987 rules are to prevent destroing
archeological sites etc, but is this realy work?
People are using MD enyway.
How you can stop persons
who are using MD at Fields, Passtures?



Tighter controls on the users of metal detectors in Ireland.
Yes it is very simple solution.
It realy work in Poland, police looking in internet
for persons who are selling artefacts and they came to home.
Advertising of MD is legal but using not, only archeologists can use
(same situation what here is)
A lot of MD people something about 50.000.
A lot of websites. Very more than here in Ireland.
Now archeologists think nobady isnt coming to as with pots of gold
why because people hidding finds in homes (neighbour)
and weiting for legalization.


Maybe somebady already find a big treaure in Ireland.
So he will be judged, so who will came to you?

Or maybe Englih solution?
But then you will have a lot of items with no archeological context, etc.



Sorry for my english.

Last edited by Jakub25; 13-09-2009 at 08:19.
Jakub25 is online now  
13-09-2009, 13:32   #23
Nebit
Registered User
 
Nebit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Cork
Posts: 301
Its not that archaeologists aren't excited about things that people find with a MD, if you came into the museum tomorrow and said look i found a early medieval pin etc we would be very excited and it would be examined etc but half the information would be lost. because when we bag finds we need to know the exact area it was found for the records (so in the future we may excavate) and at what level it was found etc also the context can tell us more about the artifact than the object itself can, for example if we excavated the area and took contexts, soil examples etc we might discover that this pin was found in a man-made ditch next to a house etc which at the time people may have felt it was a form of protection to bury items or bones of ancestors next to the house.

we don't just look at cool items, we theorise how people lived and why they lived like that etc
I'm only a student of archaeology but for all my essays we talk only of how people lived and use artifacts as backup for this. context and soils etc is necessary for this.

when you dig items up like that women in the video you destroy the statigraphy, you may think oh it was only a small hole but there could have been a post hole there etc you never know and when people dig these items up we will never know
also the women could go out the next day and if there are no specific features to show where she found the item, like by a tree etc and your just looking in a bare field, your basically guessing where you found it.

Most of Ireland's good archaeological finds are actually in British museums or in peoples private collections due to a lack of legislation from previous years, and there is a serious lack of information about irelands past due to this (written sources such as the annals must be taken with a pinch of salt as many can be biased or over exsagerated)
thus we have this legislation to prevent artifacts being taken from their contexts so that we may properly excavate and gain much needed information. yes you could say we wouldn't have found it without the help of your MD but ultimatly if u dig it up and it has no context its like u never found it because you could forget where you found it whithin a field etc and it wouldn't hold up if we were to seek a license.

again someone correct me if im wrong i am only a student however great enphasis is put on context
Nebit is offline  
14-09-2009, 13:42   #24
Fighting Irish
Registered User
 
Fighting Irish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Carlow
Posts: 6,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebit View Post
i know the point that your trying to make jakub25. And yes using metal detectors may mean that we find metallic artifacts such as coins etc, but the point we're trying to make is that for you to say yes this is an archaeological site (and not just some miss placed camping hook etc) you would need to dig it up and provide this evidence.
Even if you turn it into the museum, in some sence it would only be half a find because as archaeologists we look at contexts, soils etc, which provides alot of useful information and a better way of dating artifacts. when you dig this up you aren't recording these and so it is lost forever.
thats the point i think we're trying to make.

for example recently i was on a dig with UCD and our job was to excavate a charcoal-making platform and although we found metallic objects what we were interested in was the soil contexts etc as this provided the evidence we needed to say that yes this is what happened here.

am i making sence lol
as far as i am aware most MDers only metal detect the top 6inches or so
Fighting Irish is offline  
Advertisement
14-09-2009, 18:46   #25
Jakub25
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebit View Post
Thus we have this legislation to prevent artifacts being taken from their contexts so that we may properly excavate and gain much needed information. yes you could say we wouldn't have found it without the help of your MD but ultimatly if u dig it up and it has no context its like u never found it because you could forget where you found it whithin a field etc and it wouldn't hold up if we were to seek a license.

again someone correct me if im wrong i am only a student however great enphasis is put on context
I know that you doing a lot of important work, all this for keeping more
information about leaving in the past.

Could you tell me is the soil contex still after this?

Cultivating of soil.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4jWn...eature=related

60cm of deep ploughing at top of soil.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGkOjqnWICc


Every year machines are getting better.

Here is also some informations.

Quote:
In the context of metal detecting, the ‘archaeological pool’ is the body of small man-made items in the ground, which have been lost, discarded or buried. Some of them have the potential to add to our knowledge of the past, but while they remain undiscovered they contribute nothing. It is only when they are recovered, whether by metal detectorists, archaeologists or members of the general public, that they provide any information at all. However, the great majority of items in this pool will only ever be discovered as a result of metal detectorists pursuing their hobby. Furthermore, while they remain in the ground they are exposed to a very severe risk of destruction. The emotive phrase, ‘depleting the archaeological pool’, is therefore entirely misleading, because it implies a net loss to our knowledge, as opposed to a net gain. Far from taking anything away, detectorists are adding to our knowledge by discovering and recording material that otherwise would have been lost forever. In fact, the reality of the situation is far better expressed, if the negative and propagandist, ‘depleting the archaeological pool’, is replaced with the more meaningful, ‘rescuing our material heritage’.


The vast majority of metallic objects that remain in the ground are condemned to certain destruction as a result of the intensive agricultural practices and land development that are associated with modern living. Agrochemicals, for example, will completely destroy a base-metal object within a few years of being in the ground. Many ancient coins and artefacts will have survived in good condition in the soil for nearly two millennia, only to be completely destroyed in the last fifty years.


Chemicals, however, are not the only threat faced by objects in the ground. The mechanisation of almost every aspect of agriculture makes long-term survival of any object within ploughsoil virtually impossible. Pre-historic stone implements and metallic objects are equally vulnerable. Even the smallest and lightest of items are cut to pieces, and any information they might have yielded is lost forever.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebit View Post
It has no context its like u never found it because you could forget where you found it whithin a field etc

I can use GPS systm and put it into map.



Quote:
Originally Posted by PJW View Post
Archaeologists are bound to produce a report for planning purposes where construction will take place in a archaeloly sensitive area, in most cases this is just a paper exercise.

e.g. 18mths ago in the centre of Dublin on a one arce site close to Chrischurch an Archaeologists was required to produce a report, this entailed 2 No. 5M slit trenches been dug by the builder. The Archaeologists spent the morning in the two holes and determined the site was good to go.

Throughout the course of constructing the basement / piles, alot of pottery and some coins where un-earthed by workers, if the site was metal detected prior to works I'm sure a lot more could have been found.

What kind of institution can help to prevent those situations.




What you think about all of this?

Last edited by Jakub25; 14-09-2009 at 19:08.
Jakub25 is online now  
14-09-2009, 21:33   #26
Nebit
Registered User
 
Nebit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Cork
Posts: 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakub25 View Post
I know that you doing a lot of important work, all this for keeping more
information about leaving in the past.

Could you tell me is the soil contex still after this?

Cultivating of soil.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4jWn...eature=related

60cm of deep ploughing at top of soil.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGkOjqnWICc


Every year machines are getting better.

Here is also some informations.









I can use GPS systm and put it into map.






What kind of institution can help to prevent those situations.




What you think about all of this?
when you find an artefact you don't just mark where you found it on a GPS, you must take soil contexts, the soil above, the soil below, the consistency of the soil, etc in fact after i found my first artefact on an excavation it took nearly 40minutes to regester it in ideal conditions.

Also if MDing was mad legal, where you may map it, most will not and there will be a influx of treasure hunters, something we don't need again.
you missed that point in my last message.

most of irelands archaeology that has been dug up, has been disgarded, melted down or snatched up by the british museum, we have little and need to preserve what we do have for excavation.

harvestors have dug up irish archaeology before (especially in bogs) but upon doing this it undergoes an achaeological investigation.
it is unfortunate but we need them to harvest our food lol so we get on with it whereas MDing is not essential and can help preserve sites and its stratigraphy and contexts.

also the information you provided was from the UK DFD, which i believe is frouned upon by many archaeologists, and i think non government funded because of this
Nebit is offline  
16-09-2009, 22:05   #27
Jakub25
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 98
How it could happen that in 1997 english goverment accepted
friendly law.England country with very very rich history
(roman empire, colonial empire etc)
Now they have lots lots of artefacts with no contex
and some on the ebay.

Why they had do that?

Here most of artefact is under new houses.Do they have contex?
(I'm talking about artefacts what could be founded with using MD)
Was big bulding boom here in Ireland.
It was impossible to check all of allotments.
Constructions must go on quickly.

In fact how many archeologists use MD in Ireland? 10?

What is better to have artefact with a half of contex or to have
artefact under new house?

Last edited by Jakub25; 17-09-2009 at 01:59.
Jakub25 is online now  
20-09-2009, 15:17   #28
Nebit
Registered User
 
Nebit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Cork
Posts: 301
i've already stated to you that Britain has alot of artefacts, and other archaeological evidence, and Ireland has very few, so much so that we have to compare many sites to that in britain instead of ireland.
thus the ban and need for proper excavation.
Britain in a sense can afford to lose it. < i dislike saying that but in comparison to ireland they can.

also archaeologists don't use them alot because as i previously stated, they are'nt accurate enough and do not hold up when applying for a licence to excavate.
Nebit is offline  
24-09-2009, 10:16   #29
Reoil
Registered User
 
Reoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Antrim
Posts: 625
Large Anglo-Saxon gold hoard found

Another fine example of why metal detectors should be encouraged.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/s...re/8272058.stm

Quote:
Originally Posted by BBC
The UK's largest haul of Anglo-Saxon gold has been discovered buried beneath a field in Staffordshire.
Experts said the collection of 1,500 pieces, which may date back to the 7th Century, was unparalleled in size.
Dr Kevin Leahy, who has been cataloguing the find for the Portable Antiquities Scheme, said archaeologists had been "awestruck" by its quality.
Terry Herbert, who found it on farmland using a metal detector, said it "was what metal detectorists dream of".
It may take more than a year for the gold, which is expected to be classed by a coroner as treasure later, to be valued.

The collection contains about 5kg of gold and 2.5kg of silver, making it far bigger than the Sutton Hoo discovery in 1939 when 1.5kg of Anglo-Saxon gold was found near Woodbridge in Suffolk.
Leslie Webster, former keeper at the British Museum's Department of Prehistory and Europe, said: "This is going to alter our perceptions of Anglo-Saxon England as radically, if not more so, as the Sutton Hoo discoveries.
"(It is) absolutely the equivalent of finding a new Lindisfarne Gospels or Book of Kells."

'Absolutely phenomenal'
Mr Herbert, 55, of Burntwood in Staffordshire, who has been metal detecting for 18 years, came across the hoard as he searched land belonging to a farmer friend. The exact location has not been disclosed.
"I have this phrase that I say sometimes; 'spirits of yesteryear take me where the coins appear', but on that day I changed coins to gold," he said.

"I don't know why I said it that day but I think somebody was listening and directed me to it.
"This is what metal detectorists dream of, finding stuff like this. But the vast amount there is is just unbelievable."
Duncan Slarke, finds liaison officer for Staffordshire, was the first professional to see the hoard which contains warfare paraphernalia, including sword pommel caps and hilt plates inlaid with precious stones.
He said he was "virtually speechless" when he saw the items.
"Nothing could have prepared me for that," he said.
"I saw boxes full of gold, items exhibiting the very finest Anglo-Saxon workmanship.
"This is absolutely phenomenal.
"It is a hugely important find - the most important one that I have dealt with, but this has got to rank as one of the biggest in the country."

'Truly remarkable'

The collection is currently being kept in secure storage at Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery but a selection of the items are to be displayed at the museum from Friday until 13 October.
A Treasure Valuation Committee made up of independent experts will then value the find.

Dr Kevin Leahy, who has been cataloguing the find for the Portable Antiquities Scheme, said it was "a truly remarkable collection".
"All the archaeologists who've worked with it have been awestruck," he added.
"It's been actually quite scary working on this material to be in the presence of greatness."
He said the most striking feature of the find was that it was almost totally weapon fittings with no feminine objects such as dress fittings, brooches or pendants.
"Swords and sword fittings were very important in the Anglo-Saxon period," Dr Leahy added.
"The Anglo-Saxon poem Beowulf describes after a battle a sword being stripped of its hilt fittings.
"It looks like a collection of trophies, but it is impossible to say if the hoard was the spoils from a single battle or a long and highly successful military career.
"We also cannot say who the original, or the final, owners were, who took it from them, why they buried it or when.
"It will be debated for decades."







Reoil is offline  
24-09-2009, 17:07   #30
PJW
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reoil View Post
Another fine example of why metal detectors should be encouraged.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/s...re/8272058.stm
Yes I was just reading a similar article....

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp...xbEFbjYdLvjIdg

... this is a very interesting quote from the Head of Portable Antiquities and Treasure at the British Museum, and this is another reason why ploughed fields, public parks and beaches should be exempt from the act as the soil statigraphy is already destroyed.

The treasures were found surprisingly close to the surface: some at such a shallow depth that they appeared to have been struck by a plough, in an area about 20 yards (metres) long in a cultivated field.


"I think what happened was that the plough just nicked the top of the deposit," said Roger Bland, the Head of Portable Antiquities and Treasure at the British Museum.
"I think if it had come back again the next year we would have seen quite a bit of damage."
PJW is offline  
Thread Closed

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search