Featured Have I struck gold?! Detector find

Hollyblue, as an avocational archeologist and a museum curator (retired) I'd be curious to know the details of your experience. Who was "we' and what were the circumstances of the dig? Perhaps I can shed light on their response by getting more details from my own experiences working with "finds" collections.
What many people do not understand is that the relationship of a find to its surrounding man-made and geographic features (context), is the single most important concept and discipline in an archeological investigation. This is where metal detecting and indiscriminate digging can cause the greatest harm, because the item is removed from it's context. An overly simplistic analogy would be if I tore one page out of a book and asked you use it to reconstruct the whole story. There are some circumstances; for eg: in disturbed, overploughed areas, wash outs or flood and tidal plains; where surface or detected finds can be very useful as a diagnostic tool for the archeologists.
I've posted a link to an article that describes context much better than I can. http://www.flpublicarchaeology.org/...res-the-importance-of-context-in-archaeology/
Well-trained and conscientious detectorists and field walkers have formed very beneficial partnerships with archeologists in recent years for the benefit of all. There is a time and a place for both. Education is the key!

 

A point that I think many are missing is that the item has been removed from the puzzle (context) and the puzzle (context) is unknown. Here's an article on the critical importance of archeological context. http://www.flpublicarchaeology.org/...res-the-importance-of-context-in-archaeology/

 

I'll just give my take on archaeology and finds. Where I live people with metal detectors often are looking for US Civil War artifacts. There can be a place for detectors in archaeology but generally it's frowned upon because so much potential to understand things is gone if dug up and carried away.

Archaeology is trying to understand humans that came before based on what they left behind and how those things relate to one another. What an item is only gives a small part of the story. In archaeology digging is done in layers based on changes in the soil. Everything is carefully recorded at each level including all finds at that level, soil color etc because they may relate to each other in the time record. Once dug, if not recorded....the ability to relate the items to each other in time based on the level they're found is usually lost. There are so many things they look at, pollen to know what plants existed, nut shell and bones etc to see what they might have been eating, even patterns left by the color changes in soil that may show where wood rotted etc.

So reporting where something was found may give an archaeologist an area to try looking for a campsite, a homestead, a fort, etc but that particular object will not be as much help as if it was left in place because it's actual location in 3-dimensional space is gone. If recovering a find documenting it's exact location can be helpful and certainly reporting it (if there are any authorities to report to) should be helpful also.

Off my soapbox

 

The area had an acorn grinding stone,people took walks in the area and children played in the rock.At some point ground squirrels dug up the area and shards were found. The area was slated to become a large golf course and one of the parents called the Museum of Man and UCSD and the response was they were not interested. A few people in the neighborhood decided to recover the shards and it became a community activity for several weeks.I think we had about two 5 gallon buckets of shards.

 

Here, that would trigger the county or borough achaeologist. We had a big underground reservoir dug not far away about fifteen years back. Potsherds were found, so a proper dig took place. Remnants of a first century high status Roman farm. No mosaic floors, sadly, but some wonderful contextual finds which showed it was occupied well after the Romans left. it's compulsory to have an archaeological desk report as part of almost any planning application, and if felt needed, a proper examination. And if you redevelope in Central London, then there's a dig.

 

Call me naive on the realities of life but that’s appalling.

 

I think most states have a State Archaeologist and many counties do as well so always worth trying to contact them if something is found. It may vary by location but around here (VA) projects for roads etc that take Federal funds are required to do an archaeological survey with testing. The state also has some requirements on certain property and some counties have their own archaeologists with requirements to so a survey before construction as well. (Not as comprehensive as I'd like but also not nothing).

 

Same here. Before work on an underground bicycle parking (Dutch ) in the centre of town, there was an archeological survey. They found the remains of a Medieval town gate and supports of wooden bridges. The remains of the gate are now on display in the parking.

 

This was a great excavation of the so called Woensel gate (a village next to the town of Eindhoven). This is an early drawing of the gate by Jacob van Deventer (around 1560).



One of the best finds of this excavation was a Landsknechts sword:


I did research on this sword years ago and I made a Youtube documentary of it (sorry, it is in Dutch).

 

I love it when they incorporate like that. I used to walk past, and touch, our Roman Wall every morning on the way to work.

 

Shush, don't tell branvan.

You make very nice documentaries, EL.

I think people can get English subtitles if they click on an icon at the bottom.

 

We are near Cirencester or Roman 'Corinium' so archaeology everywhere. Mosaics and villas documented locally and pot sherds easily found. In the town they did an archeological dig before putting up an office block and found a huge Roman cemetery. The most amazing find was a large headstone to a woman named 'Boudicacia' age 27. My kids LOVE the fact that it just *could* be the Boudica/Boudicca/Boudicea Celtic warrior they have learned about at school and in Horrible Histories!. How cool is it that she *could* have been buried in our town and she *could* have walked the same land. That's how archaeology should happen-finds that inspire our children to be interested in the people and the historical events, not how much money an item can put in their pockets.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-31610266

 

I think the legal detectorists and certainly the mud larkers do it for just that reason. A fascination with what went before. I do remember a gardening makeover programme some years back that suddenly turned into a Time Team,when they found a tesserae pavement a few feet down. I think that was down your way.

 

@BoudiccaJones

 

ME!!! That's ME!!!!!!

(it's not, of course ... the nearest thing to Bou's/mine grave was the Wetwang ( **chortle**) and that's much more likely to have been her/me.
No one would have allowed her/me to be buried with that amount ( ANY amount ) of Roman-ness on the Gloucester **I meant Cirencester good lord**) site ...nice to see my/her name though. Old version of Victoria)
... lovely link,thank you both Cuz and K xx

 

I don't know if the Wetwang IS her...but seems possible. Same age ( late 30s) battle scarred face...a chariot...a queen...tall...carbon dating is out by a hundred years or so but I don't place total faith in carbon dating.

A pic of the reconstructed skull found at Wetwang cribbed from the net...I think this totally fits Bou's/my face

Emend: some sources say carbon dating could be as much as 400 years out...I really don't know what I think

 

Too soon?

 

A lot more details would be needed for me to speculate, such as the land ownership status. Most privately-owned land in the US carries no cultural resource protection, unfortunately. We Americans are pretty touchy about our "Constitutional Rights" and Wrongs. Public lands are a patchwork of different regulations. It can get complicated.

 

Hi,
In the Commonwealth states you do not own your land only the area it may cover. Back in the in the early 19th century the states sold mineral rights to your land. If you had coal under your land a company could buy the mineral rights and dig up your land for the minerals. Even if you sold the land to other people the companies that had the mineral rights could just carve up the land and too bad for you or the fourth or fiveth owners of the land.
greg

 

That happened to friends of ours in Colorado. They owned a 5th generation ranch, then uranium was discovered there. They fought it in court for years, but finally had to sell out. The family was scattered like the wind.