Following last week’s report we revisited yesterday and it is evident that the recent intrusions on the western edge of the field are not the only ones. We think there are probably eight holes visible from outside the land including this one that can be seen from the south…
and this one (together with footsteps) that is easily visible from the north – and indeed stands out very clearly as you drive past the site on the main A5 so must have been seen by countless commuters.
Despite a notice indicating it is protected by a security company, access to the site can be gained pretty easily in places and here is the short inviting route from the road that those who dug the above hole almost certainly took –
Meanwhile, the holes on the western side that we highlighted last week are now surrounded by footsteps. Whether those were created by archaeologists or artefact hunters or both we can’t say. However, while the suspected “marker” in the form of a stone placed on top of one of the fence posts (spotted by Paul Barford) has disappeared, this belt has now been left….
In summary, the following points seem relevant:
1. The intrusions we saw were not remote from the area where Treasure items have been found, quite the reverse.
2. Detectorists don’t dig holes unless they get signals.
3. All the intrusions we saw have happened since the land was ploughed in November so the question arises: how many took place in the previous three years?
__________________________________________________________
More Heritage Action views on metal detecting and artefact collecting
__________________________________________________________
The Heritage Journal 
2 comments
Comments feed for this article
11/02/2013 at 16:47
MH
Think you’ll find “nighthawkers don’t dig holes unless they get signals” This has nothing to do with detectorists even though you wished it so!
12/02/2013 at 04:28
Nigel
The claim that “nighthawkers aren’t detectorists” is illogical and unconvincing as it implies that the much quoted detectorists’ mantra “there are good and bad in all walks of life” doesn’t apply to detecting. Unlikely. I intend to expand on this in an article very shortly as you have raised an important issue).