Detectorists Decide How Reliably PAS Database Reflects what is Taken

Archaeology dumbdown

The discussion of artefact hunting goes on, all sorts of objections raised to metal detectorists doing the decent thing and allowing archaeologists to record what they are taking. Including this from a detectorist:

Paula Pennington @penns65 · 3 g. W odpowiedzi do @mutteringmadam @ArchaeoAnni i 11 innych użytkowników
Exactly, just how many crotal bells and buckles do you need to record. Fair enough if its a new detectorist recording a few items like this to get them in the swing of it. An explanation to what these items are and a date should suffice.

So explain to us again please your concept of "preservation by document". What should it mean? The PAS record should be what is being taken from sites and assemblages, not just selected highlights. That was the idea.

The problem (yet again) here is the PAS is simply failing to communicate any archaeological values to the British public (that pay for it), there is apparently a lack of clarity in the artefact hunting community (24 years after it's been going) WHY there is any recording at all. Things are not helped by the PAS producing popular science publications that basically concentrate on "fifty best finds from...", "Fifty best Roman finds..." rather than what archaeological information about the sites raided by artefact hunters they have.