If you want to see how collection-driven exploitation of the archaeological record really looks and what damnage it is doing, all you have to do is look at a 'metal detectorists' ' forum. Here is how irresponsible artefact hunting is targeting and despoiling known sites on a metal detecting forum near you. The thread starts off with a guy saying he'd signed a search-and-take agreement with a landowner for a piece of land with a known Roman site in it, "and the area also has links to Oliver cromwell and the knights templar". But "google maps dosnt show too much but was interested in the features thrown up by Lidar. the circled pattern is on the permission. any thoughts would be greatly appreciated::
Re: how accurate is lidar [?] Post by Phil2401 » Thu Apr 16, 2020 3:46 pmAnother one in the same thread:
To stick to the original question, Lidar can't show anything that isn't there, so when something appears that screams 'man-made', it's got to be worth investigating - people = artefacts! It will be interesting to see other stories of finds made as a direct result of Lidar 'indicators'.
Re: how accurate is lidar [?] Post by dig-dog » Thu Apr 16, 2020 3:04 pmSo basically the only piece of archaeological evidence for this part of the cultural landscape was hoiked out and is in dig-dog's pocket. That's not 'research', it's knowledge-theft and looting.
I’ve been using lidar for a few years now and I find it very handy. [...] Here’s an example of a bit of research that appeared to pay off. It was a club dig so having the details I did a lidar search of the fields. The only outstanding feature was this ring so at the start of the day me and my buddy went straight to it rather than starting at the beginning of the field. The second hole I dug produced a complete Roman armillae! [sic] The rest of the field was covered in aluminium scraps and very unproductive
2 comments:
Tragic.
"The only outstanding feature was this ring so at the start of the day me and my buddy went straight to it rather than starting at the beginning of the field. The second hole I dug produced a complete Roman armillae!"
Yet the blurb for the British Museum Research Publication "The Portable Antiquities Scheme and Roman Britain" says:
"The principal aim of this book is to assess the contribution that this resource can make to our understanding of Roman Britain. Bringing together vast quantities of SEEMINGLY RANDOM finds scattered across the English and Welsh countryside".
Detectorists always look for where their chances are greatest, i.e. archaeological sites. That's human nature and everyone knows it. PAS would have us think otherwise. How dare they? History will reveal the truth but by then it will be too late.
Well spotted !
Odd isn't it that all this money goes on supporting academic archaeology and outreach year after year, and all we get for it are the shallow and piss-poor witterings of the likes of Raimund Karl and the Ixelles Six/Helsinki gang and next-to-zero critical thought.
Post a Comment