4 ms·

My head-cannon is that both sets of artifacts reported in the story were sent in by the same person. The dude just loves metal detecting and he won't be stoppe

My head-cannon is that both sets of artifacts reported in the story were sent in by the same person. The dude just loves metal detecting and he won't be stopped! And it's better to preserve the finds anonymously rather than face stiff penalties. EDIT: Shout-Out for metal detecting in the UK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detectorists https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detectorists

blowski 2y ago
Part of it was filmed where I live, and there has been a huge increase in the number of "detectorists" out in the fields.
fnordian_slip 2y ago
"The dude just loves metal detecting and he won't be stopped!" As someone who used to be in that field, I never understood why people don't do any research before getting into metal detecting. It should be obvious after even a tiny bit of reading about it that most finds are mostly useless without the context in which they were deposited. This context is usually completely destroyed by digging without knowledge of how to properly document it (that's why so many archaeologists kind of hate Schliemann, even though it has been 150 years). And on top of that most laypeople don't even properly record the location of the find. But many people, once they have started, seem to develop a sort of identity around it, and from that point on, most are impervious to new information. I've often heard that "these greedy archaeologists / government officials want to take what's rightfully mine" or "they don't appreciate me, I'm just trying to preserve history". It's generally either total ignorance or "I didn't want to get fined" that lead to situations like the article. The latter is the same reason shady companies don't record where they disposed of chemicals in the woods, but somehow it's okay for you? Because you have convinced yourself you are "preserving history" by removing a bronze axehead from a location that has preserved it for over 2000 years? It's truly a shame. There are of course some who work with local archaeologists, have received a bit of training and know how to dig and document, and when to stop digging, but from what I've seen, they are a tiny minority. And even many of them do more harm than good. Some archeologists only work with them because they know that these people would dig or loot without them otherwise, and destroy much more in the process. But they can't say that openly, because in today's climate of anti -intellectualism, this would be seen as "ivory tower behaviour", and even more people would go detecting completely unsupervised. Just like rolling coal and the like, some people just really don't like being told what to do, no matter the disparity in knowledge about the subject. Sorry about the rant, it's just all rather frustrating sometimes. In my country, the laws surrounding excavations are so stupid that no-one is happy with them, but archaeologists don't have a lobby of course, so we'll just have to live with the status quo.
- Aurornis 2y ago
  > It's generally either total ignorance or "I didn't want to get fined" that lead to situations like the article. The latter is the same reason shady companies don't record where they disposed of chemicals in the woods, but somehow it's okay for you? Because you have convinced yourself you are "preserving history" by removing a bronze axehead from a location that has preserved it for over 2000 years? You’re heaping a lot of assumptions on to people who do metal detecting. What makes you so confident that these people went out with the goal of finding and destroying archaeological sites with their metal detector? Finding archaeological artifacts is an extremely rare edge case in metal detecting. I doubt these people had any idea they were digging up valuable artifacts until they were completely out. > It's generally either total ignorance or "I didn't want to get fined" that lead to situations like the article When the fine is on the order of a decent annual income, it should come as no surprise that people don’t want to get fined. It should also come as no surprise that anyone who discovers any artifacts like this would be highly incentivized to hide their origin. I don’t know what you expect. For someone to generously turn their probably accidental finding in and pay a massive amount of money for the privilege?
  - rozab 2y ago
    I've heard a bit about metal detecting in the UK from a relative who is into it. I assume the laws aren't too far off how it works in Ireland. I know that finding hoards of 1000+ year old coins is completely par for the course and is really the goal of the exercise. It may be different in the new world where ancient metal is uncommon, but that's how it works here. Groups like the one my relative is in get special permission to search on building sites before they lay the foundations. I believe the developers are obliged to allow this. Destruction of the archeological context isn't such a concern there because the site is being destroyed anyway, but detectorists are still legally obliged to report any treasures to the authorities and can be forced to sell them to a museum. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/feb/18/change-to-uk-treasure-law-will-keep-more-artefacts-in-museums https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/feb/18/change-to-uk...
- oldpersonintx 2y ago
  [dead]

blowski 2y ago

Part of it was filmed where I live, and there has been a huge increase in the number of "detectorists" out in the fields.

fnordian_slip 2y ago

"The dude just loves metal detecting and he won't be stopped!" As someone who used to be in that field, I never understood why people don't do any research before getting into metal detecting. It should be obvious after even a tiny bit of reading about it that most finds are mostly useless without the context in which they were deposited. This context is usually completely destroyed by digging without knowledge of how to properly document it (that's why so many archaeologists kind of hate Schliemann, even though it has been 150 years). And on top of that most laypeople don't even properly record the location of the find. But many people, once they have started, seem to develop a sort of identity around it, and from that point on, most are impervious to new information. I've often heard that "these greedy archaeologists / government officials want to take what's rightfully mine" or "they don't appreciate me, I'm just trying to preserve history". It's generally either total ignorance or "I didn't want to get fined" that lead to situations like the article. The latter is the same reason shady companies don't record where they disposed of chemicals in the woods, but somehow it's okay for you? Because you have convinced yourself you are "preserving history" by removing a bronze axehead from a location that has preserved it for over 2000 years? It's truly a shame. There are of course some who work with local archaeologists, have received a bit of training and know how to dig and document, and when to stop digging, but from what I've seen, they are a tiny minority. And even many of them do more harm than good. Some archeologists only work with them because they know that these people would dig or loot without them otherwise, and destroy much more in the process. But they can't say that openly, because in today's climate of anti -intellectualism, this would be seen as "ivory tower behaviour", and even more people would go detecting completely unsupervised. Just like rolling coal and the like, some people just really don't like being told what to do, no matter the disparity in knowledge about the subject. Sorry about the rant, it's just all rather frustrating sometimes. In my country, the laws surrounding excavations are so stupid that no-one is happy with them, but archaeologists don't have a lobby of course, so we'll just have to live with the status quo.

Aurornis 2y ago
> It's generally either total ignorance or "I didn't want to get fined" that lead to situations like the article. The latter is the same reason shady companies don't record where they disposed of chemicals in the woods, but somehow it's okay for you? Because you have convinced yourself you are "preserving history" by removing a bronze axehead from a location that has preserved it for over 2000 years? You’re heaping a lot of assumptions on to people who do metal detecting. What makes you so confident that these people went out with the goal of finding and destroying archaeological sites with their metal detector? Finding archaeological artifacts is an extremely rare edge case in metal detecting. I doubt these people had any idea they were digging up valuable artifacts until they were completely out. > It's generally either total ignorance or "I didn't want to get fined" that lead to situations like the article When the fine is on the order of a decent annual income, it should come as no surprise that people don’t want to get fined. It should also come as no surprise that anyone who discovers any artifacts like this would be highly incentivized to hide their origin. I don’t know what you expect. For someone to generously turn their probably accidental finding in and pay a massive amount of money for the privilege?
- rozab 2y ago
  I've heard a bit about metal detecting in the UK from a relative who is into it. I assume the laws aren't too far off how it works in Ireland. I know that finding hoards of 1000+ year old coins is completely par for the course and is really the goal of the exercise. It may be different in the new world where ancient metal is uncommon, but that's how it works here. Groups like the one my relative is in get special permission to search on building sites before they lay the foundations. I believe the developers are obliged to allow this. Destruction of the archeological context isn't such a concern there because the site is being destroyed anyway, but detectorists are still legally obliged to report any treasures to the authorities and can be forced to sell them to a museum. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/feb/18/change-to-uk-treasure-law-will-keep-more-artefacts-in-museums https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/feb/18/change-to-uk...
oldpersonintx 2y ago
[dead]