So when someone goes to a field to just find coins or weapons or trappings, and they take them, they are removing them even more from their context.
This is a terrible argument. Ploughing a field where there is a site can wreck it, yes. But objects don’t go that far and often the site remains well enough below ground or visible from the air that keeping the objects in situ and reporting immediately is still best practicehttps://twitter.com/boggywood/status/1115342878283313155 …
-
-
Show this thread
-
There are plenty of laws to criticize, the one on metal detecting though exists for good reason.
Show this thread -
And people who desperately want to use metal detectors don’t care about archaeology or the sites, they want to find something cool, and possibly sell it.
Show this thread -
And the law is not perfect in the UK. Many report finds but then you have some fool like this https://metro.co.uk/2019/03/14/metal-detectorist-destroys-5000-year-old-tomb-digging-treasure-8902479/ …
Show this thread -
Also, telling archaeologists to inform everyone about the law is like telling shopkeepers to tell people it’s wrong to shoplift.
Show this thread -
The onus is not on them, and the law is easily found online within a 2 second google search.
Show this thread -
And these people know the law, and they know they are breaking it. They try their hardest to circumvent it.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
You seem a pains to misunderstand nearly all that I have said ,so I'll just wish you a great day
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
"Reporting immediately is best practice " is the main arguement from the IMDS group but the NMI will not engage. In the UK, Sweden, Denmark, etc. the authorities engage with detectorists. Why not here?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
& it's quite funny to see people using the same tired arguments that were used decades ago. I also said the vast majority of finds were small - not big hoards - it is frankly nonsensicle to treat a field that's been ploughed for a thousand years as