Saturday, 29 August 2015

Worlingworth Local History Wreckers


'istry? Arrr...
The people of Worlingworth village in rural Suffolk are hosting another Metal Detecting Day (read commercial artefact hunting rally)  in Worlingworth, Suffolk, on Sunday, 27 September 2015. Available, at £18.00 a head (max 100), is "a field of approx 85 acres, in close proximity to land where some evidence of Roman settlement has been found". "Participants must undertake to report all finds of any value or historical importance, both on the day and to the appropriate authorities afterwards". Like the last lot did (not) - according to the clunky old search engine, there were relatively few items reported from this rally.  So basically up to a hundred people will again be engaged in stripping a huge hole in the middle of the village's past - and who is behind it? "Cheques should be made payable to ‘Worlingworth Local History Group’ ..." no mention made of any insurance needed.

 

19 comments:

bob said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Paul Barford said...

It does not take a "vast" amount of knowledge to see that the coin (http://paul-barford.blogspot.com/2015/08/lockdales-and-komnenid-byzantine.html) DOES NOT occur in the PAS database which suggests that the Bloomsbury Boyz do not accept something about the finder's report. Anonymous "Bob" vouches for an anonymous finder finding it on an anonymous site. Forgive me for maintaining my scepticism.

There is nothing "unfair' about my comments on the Worlington grabfest. If history societies don't want to be criticised for involvement with pilfering the historical record, let them simply say 'no'. Simple.

The words you seek are "utmost" and "know".

rob obrien said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
bob said...

I apologise for the spelling mistakes but I have dyslexia and it took me a long time to write that post but I felt I had to say something .

Bill said...

Well said Bob if mr Barford thinks he is a archioagest well he needs to do some more research before spouting the rubbish I have just read I personally think the archy is gelouse that he never found the coin with his siv

Paul Barford said...

You need to apologise for something else. If you have something to say, you can put your name under it. Anonymous witness statements mean absolutely nothing and a waste of the "long time" spent laboriously writing them. The coin was not entered in the PAS database and is an unlikely find from where you say you saw it "found" by an anonymous finder. If he was where you say he was legally, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to hide his or her name, is there? If you think they are mixed up with 'laundering' illegal finds, then we could all understand hiding the names. As it is you do nothing to shed light on the circumstances I questioned.

Can you give the link to the forum where this coin was "shown off"?

Bill said...

Paul you need to contact the FLO at bury and stop this rubbish which you are writing it's not professional on your part at all hope you find the information you very much need kindest regards Bill

Paul Barford said...

Which part of "this object is not in the PAS record" do you not understand? Why does the finder not contact the FLO and sort out why it is not there if he or she reported it?

bob said...

I will find out why it hasn't been entered on the data base next month when the club meets again and you will see that every thing I have told you is correct . The reason I haven't put the name of the finder is simply because he has asked me not to but when I find out why it's not on there and they update it you will have all the answers you want .

Paul Barford said...

Has the horseless carriage come to your part of Suffolk yet? You know, we have things called telephones and emails, you can find out this afternoon if you wanted to. No need to wait for a "club meeting". Responsible artefact hunting is all about transparency, if he's doing nothing wrong and everything right he should be proud to have his name and reputation as a responsible detectorist associated with such an exceptional (for the UK archaeological record) find. I see no need for any secrecy at all. He's benefiting from the common archaeological heritage which belongs to us all, why does he want to keep that information from the rest of us?



bob said...

Finds number from the paper work returned from Bury St edmonds sf-3175a4 apparently due to the volume of finds it takes time to update the data base but it will be on at some point .

Paul Barford said...

Oh, good-oh. Just eight months' delay. The database is updated every day, 27 finds recorded this morning are already up https://finds.org.uk/database/search/results/createdAfter/2015-10-02

Nope, I think there is another reason this record made on Feb 17th and updated a few days later is ünavailable", what could it be? https://finds.org.uk/database/artefacts/unavailable/id/705127

bob said...

Iv just figured out why all the polish are coming to England it's obviously to get away from you you bell end

bob said...

It's no wonder all the polish are coming to England if you live there I'd want to be as fare as possible from you

bob said...

Thanks Google I didn't think you would publish that so I done it twice you obviously follow conversations and decided he deserved it .

Paul Barford said...

"Bob", with reference to your most recent comment which I am not going to post, can you spell "libel"? Can you?

bob said...

And for your information me and the good gentle men I detect with make a very comfortable living from dreaming of finding the good stuff and I would sell to Osama bin Laden if the price was right

Paul Barford said...

Mr "Bob", today's ambassador for UK metal detecting, I'm not approving that one either. I think that is enough of your crass vulgarisms, good day to you sir.

Paul Barford said...

It is quite interesting to see WHICH of the comments posted above "Rob" and "Bob" have just deleted. By the way chaps, they are stored forever in a comments folder attached to the blog which you do not have access to. It's all there, accepted, rejected and deleted comments. So, really you do need to be careful what you say. It's all on file and may be used against you.

 
Creative Commons License
Ten utwór jest dostępny na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa-Bez utworów zależnych 3.0 Unported.