Metal Detectorists Discovering Treasures

Metal Detectorists 10, Archaeologists 0?

http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2013/11/metal-detectorists-10-archaeologists-0.html
by Peter Tompa

That's how some are pitching the latest statistics of treasure reported by the public and archaeologists in England and Wales.  But this sets up a false competition between the two groups when their efforts should instead be viewed as complementary.

Even worse, one voice in the archaeological blogosphere has taken all this to an extreme.  Indeed, he goes so far as to demand that what should be considered good news instead requires the resignation of the responsible Government Minister.

Rather than celebrating the knowledge that has come from these finds, he instead claims these artifacts are better better left in the ground for future archaeologists to discover.  But that is pure fantasy.  Archaeologists will always be few in number.  Their digs will always concentrate on significant sites, not the farmer's fields where most treasure is found.  And while we are waiting, it's much more likely that the artifacts themselves will be lost through deterioration and development.

Luckily, most real archaeologists in the United Kingdom have made peace with metal detectorists. They recognize that the Treasure Act, the Portable Antiquities Scheme, and the knowledge of and preservation of artifacts they bring benefits all.   So let's all celebrate the latest finds in England and Wales and salute the heritage heroes of the archaeological and metal detecting communities that have made it all possible.



****************
COMMENTARY
****************


The  "voice in the archaeological blogosphere" referred to by Tompa is of course the infamous Paul Barford, whose notorious PACHI blog this observer no longer reads.  It has become over-infested with "Barfy's blog bites" whose actual purpose is pursuit of propaganda points, not intelligently discussing issues and events of interest and substance.

Tompa observes:

"Rather than celebrating the knowledge that has come from these finds, he instead claims these artifacts are better better left in the ground for future archaeologists to discover.  But that is pure fantasy.  Archaeologists will always be few in number.  Their digs will always concentrate on significant sites, not the farmer's fields where most treasure is found.  And while we are waiting, it's much more likely that the artifacts themselves will be lost through deterioration and development." This observer could hardly agree more with that assessment.

Mr. Barford is by no means the only archaeologist who holds such irrational, ideologically purist views. Another such is Michael Mueller-Karpe, notorious for his anticollecting extremism, who has achieved the negative distinction of being severely rebuked as "detached from reality and unfit for any governmental position" by the judge in an important German trial involving cultural property theft charges, which ultimately resulted in the acquittal of the defendant.

Fortunately the UK public and the great majority of the UK archaeological community know a good thing when they see it. The PAS program and the Treasure Act have, together with the efforts of responsible British metal-detectorists, led to many important and valuable archaeological discoveries.

There will always be extremists who will howl about "artifacts being ripped from the ground" thereby "destroying their context" and "imperiling the archaeological record." It is becoming increasingly clear that these howls have little to do with reality or common sense, and that those voicing them are very far from being representative of the archaeological mainstream.


****************