Can someone in the archaeological field please explain..

The Wild Goose

I know the law regarding metal detecting in Ireland, but my question is WHY?

I know the background regarding their unregulated use in the'70's and 80's also, however I'd like to put forward the following:

a) There are over 130,000 monuments/places of historic importance in Ireland.

b) According to what I've read the archaeological profession is in disarray in Ireland, with reduced funding, archaeologists being unable to find work and in some cases in temporary employment at what amounts to minimum wage.

c) Again according to what I've read, a 4 year archaeological survey was completed at the Vinegar Hill site involving (I think) 4 different departments, and from what I remember the only discovery of note was that because a number of musket balls were discovered in a row it was presumed there was "possibly" a mass execution?

So, given the state of archaeology at present (b), when do you suppose Ireland's archaeologists are going to get around to those 130,000+ sites to examine them properly?

And given the length of time and resources attributed to (c) above, when will they be completed?

Would a reply of "not in our lifetime" seem appropriate?

But let's for argument say there's 130,000 sites, 100 archaeologists allotted exclusively to said sites, and each one spends 1 month alone per site (or two weeks for two etc.)

That's (130,000 / 100) / 12 = 108.33 years.

And that's presuming not one more site of interest is discovered in those 108 intervening years, correct?

However, and here's the important bit.... I'm not advocating someone with a metal detector should be allowed access to any one of those 130,000+ sites.

The archaeological and heritage people can hold exclusive rights to examine every single one of those sites, and Joe public not be allowed access with so much as a paper plate on the end of a stick.

In fact, you could advocate a 'shoot to kill' policy regarding those sites if you desired.

But what about the other 99.9% of Irish land where there are no sites of historical importance, both publicly and privately owned?

Should metal detectors be banned from every common field, hedgerow, pathway and riverbank in Ireland? If so, why?

Mickey Malarkey's field, like most of the other tens of thousands of fields in Ireland, has no evidence of settlements, no historical monuments and no evidence of battle.

Are you or a member of your group (or their descendants!) EVER going to set foot in Mickey Malarkey's field?

Whether you admit to it or not the answer is a resounding no!

Therefore the possibility of anything historically interesting ever being discovered in that field, as with the thousands of other fields, is as close to zero as it gets...

Unless of course it's ploughed up...oh and it's not mangled by machinery.. and it's noticed by the farmer...and he hands it up.

Apparently the authorities like those odds though, and would much prefer them to someone actually searching, carefully removing it from the soil and hopefully handing it up to the authorities, especially if there was some form of incentive for doing so (20% of market value for example? Or even the opportunity to have their name on a plaque n the National Museum might be incentive enough for some)

The attitude of the powers that be seems to suggest that they believe that if they don't discover artifacts then nobody should, and better to let them remain undiscovered or rotting away in the ground rather than someone other than themselves finding them.

And please, please, don't give me that old chestnut about "placement in relation to other objects", bone fragments, broken pottery and "layers of soil" being crucial. That's fine in relation to actual archaeological sites, but as you have no intention of ever setting foot in Mickey Malarkey's field it follows that you've less intention of examining it's soil layers!

Funny that Britain, an area roamed by Saxons and Romans and Normans and Celts, with a vastly superior population and therefore a vastly superior range of buried antiquities seem to have a much fairer and more sensible system in place.

And we, in one of the few areas where we don't follow British law, came up with 'an Irish solution to an Irish problem', a mish-mash of a law and a knee-jerk reaction to a chalice being discovered on a beach.

The 2004 act was brought into force by politicians in consultation with the heritage people. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but was that not the same combination of people who agreed to cover over one of the largest Viking settlements in Europe with two concrete slabs known as civic offices? Or the same combination who granted the electricity board permission to demolish part of the longest Georgian facade in Europe? Hmm, is our heritage really in safe hands?

And is a guy walking Mickey Malarkey's field, who at the end of the day has collected six rusty nails, three bits off a tractor and if lucky, an Irish hen penny really a threat to our heritage?

slowburner

The Wild Goose wrote: »

I know the law regarding metal detecting in Ireland, but my question is WHY?

I know the background regarding their unregulated use in the'70's and 80's also,

You have answered your own question.
The reason we have this enviable legislation is to prevent anything of that sort recurring.

however I'd like to put forward the following:

a) There are over 130,000 monuments/places of historic importance in Ireland.

b) According to what I've read the archaeological profession is in disarray in Ireland, with reduced funding, archaeologists being unable to find work and in some cases in temporary employment at what amounts to minimum wage.

This is your assessment of the profession and yours alone.
The situation has improved in recent years and is continuing to do so.

c) Again according to what I've read, a 4 year archaeological survey was completed at the Vinegar Hill site involving (I think) 4 different departments, and from what I remember the only discovery of note was that because a number of musket balls were discovered in a row it was presumed there was "possibly" a mass execution?

Not so. There were 578 artefacts recovered during the project.
Only 80 of these were musket balls.
The idea that such a conclusion was reached is a figment of your imagination and an insult to the profession.
The final report has not yet been published.

So, given the state of archaeology at present (b), when do you suppose Ireland's archaeologists are going to get around to those 130,000+ sites to examine them properly?

You need to understand that excavation is destruction.
We only excavate if there is a perceived or real threat to archaeology.
It is preserved by record if there is no alternative.
The preferred option is always to preserve in situ - or leave well enough alone.*

And given the length of time and resources attributed to (c) above, when will they be completed?

Never. See above.

Would a reply of "not in our lifetime" seem appropriate?

But let's for argument say there's 130,000 sites, 100 archaeologists allotted exclusively to said sites, and each one spends 1 month alone per site (or two weeks for two etc.)

That's (130,000 / 100) / 12 = 108.33 years.

And that's presuming not one more site of interest is discovered in those 108 intervening years, correct?

See above.*

However, and here's the important bit.... I'm not advocating someone with a metal detector should be allowed access to any one of those 130,000+ sites.

Good. If you were, your stay here would be cut short.

The archaeological and heritage people can hold exclusive rights to examine every single one of those sites, and Joe public not be allowed access with so much as a paper plate on the end of a stick.

Anyone can examine a national monument.
Study it. Read about it, Research it. Photograph it.
But do not damage it.
Digging or any other form of interference without good reason, the appropriate training, knowledge, skills and compliance with legislation is a crime.

In fact, you could advocate a 'shoot to kill' policy regarding those sites if you desired.

There is enough destruction around already.

But what about the other 99.9% of Irish land where there are no sites of historical importance, both publicly and privately owned?

So you think that there are Irish lands where there is nothing of historical importance.
That, more than most of your statements, demonstrates the remarkable depth of your ignorance of Irish archaeology.

Should metal detectors be banned from every common field, hedgerow, pathway and riverbank in Ireland? If so, why?

Yes, they should be banned.
Why?
Because the people that use them have demonstrated on innumerable occasions that they have no respect for the law.
They have already caused untold damage and the people who are currently using them illegally can and will never be trusted.

Mickey Malarkey's field, like most of the other tens of thousands of fields in Ireland, has no evidence of settlements, no historical monuments and no evidence of battle.

Are you or a member of your group (or their descendants!) EVER going to set foot in Mickey Malarkey's field?

Whether you admit to it or not the answer is a resounding no!

Therefore the possibility of anything historically interesting ever being discovered in that field, as with the thousands of other fields, is as close to zero as it gets...

As archaeologists, we set foot in Mickey Malarkey's field all the time.
We go into them to assess the archaeological potential.
We only excavate if there is no alternative. See above.*

Unless of course it's ploughed up...oh and it's not mangled by machinery.. and it's noticed by the farmer...and he hands it up.

Handing in of accidental finds happens frequently. https://www.museum.ie/Corporate-Media/News/June-2018/Donegal-gold-discovery

Apparently the authorities like those odds though, and would much prefer them to someone actually searching, carefully removing it from the soil and hopefully handing it up to the authorities, especially if there was some form of incentive for doing so (20% of market value for example? Or even the opportunity to have their name on a plaque n the National Museum might be incentive enough for some)

And there's the money shot.

The attitude of the powers that be seems to suggest that they believe that if they don't discover artifacts then nobody should, and better to let them remain undiscovered or rotting away in the ground rather than someone other than themselves finding them.

Again, see above.*

And please, please, don't give me that old chestnut about "placement in relation to other objects", bone fragments, broken pottery and "layers of soil" being crucial. That's fine in relation to actual archaeological sites, but as you have no intention of ever setting foot in Mickey Malarkey's field it follows that you've less intention of examining it's soil layers!

And metal detectorists will examine the soil stratigraphy as well as the relationships of everything in each stratum.
They will take and pay for rigorous scientific sampling.
They will accurately record everything that is excavated.
They will spend hours writing preliminary and final reports detailing the nature of the site.
Yeah right.
Again, see above.*

Funny that Britain, an area roamed by Saxons and Romans and Normans and Celts, with a vastly superior population and therefore a vastly superior range of buried antiquities seem to have a much fairer and more sensible system in place.

You are welcome to your opinion that Britain had a 'vastly superior population'.

And we, in one of the few areas where we don't follow British law, came up with 'an Irish solution to an Irish problem', a mish-mash of a law and a knee-jerk reaction to a chalice being discovered on a beach.

The legislation on metal detecting here is the envy of many other nations, Britain included.
Many British archaeologists have openly stated their regret at the introduction of the PAS incentive.
It is not too highly thought of here either because some ill-informed people believe that they have a right to go around the country digging holes and getting rewarded for doing so.

The 2004 act was brought into force by politicians in consultation with the heritage people. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but was that not the same combination of people who agreed to cover over one of the largest Viking settlements in Europe with two concrete slabs known as civic offices? Or the same combination who granted the electricity board permission to demolish part of the longest Georgian facade in Europe? Hmm, is our heritage really in safe hands?

Wood Quay happened in the seventies.
Fitzwilliam Street happened in the sixties.
Things have moved on.
We have improved legislation on conservation since then and we have learned from those mistakes.
Same goes for metal detecting.[/QUOTE]

And is a guy walking Mickey Malarkey's field, who at the end of the day has collected six rusty nails, three bits off a tractor and if lucky, an Irish hen penny really a threat to our heritage?

Yes he or she is. See above.*

Aelfric

Well said Slowburner. I couldn't have put it better myself. Ireland has one of the best heritage regulatory systems in Europe, if not the world. Sure, things were done badly half a century ago, but massive public outcry and protest marches at the bulldozing of Wood Quay ensured that what was left untouched was properly examined. And, it also meant that all surrounding developments since the 1970s have received the same attention to detail and meticulous recording.

In 1983, a metal detectorist tried to sell a chalice, platten, and several other items that he had 'found' in a bog adjacent to a National Monument. This lead, in part, to the requirement for the licensing of metal detectors in the 1984 amendment to the National Monuments Act of 1930.

Still today, we as professional archaeologists must submit a method statement and request a licence from the National Museum in order to go over our spoil heaps in search of metallic artefacts.

So no, metal detecting will never become openly legal for 'Joe Public', and thank the Gods for that!

robp

The Wild Goose wrote: »

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but was that not the same combination of people who agreed to cover over one of the largest Viking settlements in Europe with two concrete slabs known as civic offices? Or the same combination who granted the electricity board permission to demolish part of the longest Georgian facade in Europe? Hmm, is our heritage really in safe hands?

And is a guy walking Mickey Malarkey's field, who at the end of the day has collected six rusty nails, three bits off a tractor and if lucky, an Irish hen penny really a threat to our heritage?

It is pretty hard to preserve soil stains and wattle work in way that is interesting and captivating for the public. Wood Quays is one of the great myths of Irish recent memory.

Who will pay for all these archaeologists to survey all these sites? There isn't the money and nor is there enough money to professionally supervise amateurs doing metal detecting either.

The Wild Goose

I wrote a detailed response to the moderators replies to my comments, pointing out how impractical, unworkable and in some cases nonsensical his replies were.
However in attempting to post same I was informed I must first seek permission from the moderator?
It appears to me that the moderator not only wants a monopoly on our heritage, but also on the right of reply and free speech.
Welcome to the new world order

Wibbs

That's odd. Yes if anyone has fewer than 50 posts(IIRC) they can't post active links/pics and the like to cut out the spammers the site was plagued with, but outside of private forums, or forums that have an anonymous posting option, you certainly don't need permission from a mod to post. No "new world order" stuff going on. That's a tad paranoid. Hell, if you PM me your post I'll post it on your behalf with active links if that's the sticking point.

slowburner

The Wild Goose wrote: »

It appears to me that the moderator not only wants a monopoly on our heritage, but also on the right of reply and free speech.
Welcome to the new world order

'The moderator' does not want a monopoly on our heritage. Far from it. The moderator wants to ensure that our heritage is protected for everyone and not hacked at by unqualified people motivated by personal gain or reward.

The moderator is bound to play a part in ensuring that the appropriate people are involved with our heritage. That means qualified, trained, and experienced people with appropriate ethical standards.

If this implies issuing sanctions or removing statements made by unqualified people who demonstably do not have the appropriate ethical standards, then I will be doing my duty.
Your inability to post your detailed response was not my doing, but you are strongly advised to read the stickies on the landing page before you post again.

See here: https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=88616036&postcount=5

The Wild Goose

@ Wibbs

Unfortunately when I tried to post my responses to the moderators replies to my questions, the post disappeared and I was instructed to contact the moderator.
It contained no abusive or defamatory content, but was simply my responses to his replies. However it did challenge his stance in relation to retaining a monopoly on discovery of our heritage in a number of areas, and in particular to the impracticality of suggesting that a small group of people should hold the exclusive right to, and be capable of, closely examining 70,273 square kilometres of land.

It's possible that the quote below obtained from this forums 'stickies' which the moderator refers to above may explain more?

"This is a privately run and owned website, this means that you do not have the right to free speech here."

I have closed the thread as it has descended into trolling, I have reviewed the charter and there really aren't any grey areas, if you wish to contact a mod or leave feedback please do once it's somewhat constructive

Gremlinertia

Thread closed, anymore trolling etc will be actioned accordingly