You are currently browsing the daily archive for 12/02/2014.

needs you1

If you’re here you probably like prehistoric sites and want to see them preserved. The Journal is for everyone that feels that way so why not join in? We’re always looking for contributions – news, views, pictures, you name it – anything that helps raise the public profile of these places. In addition we’re currently looking for 2 people who would like to join us on a more regular basis – ideally by producing short weekly articles on some aspect of prehistory. No pressure, just for fun – whatever subject you like whenever you like.

So you’re extremely welcome to contact us to offer one-off contributions or more regular involvement with The Journal at Next month it will be nine years old and while we haven’t run out of things to write about we’re sure there are lots of things we’ve missed that YOU could bring to everyone’s attention.

Currently we’re getting a spate of metal detectorist sockpuppetry aimed at this thread in particular, no doubt intended to  discourage recruits. We will delete them as we see them but if you do see any please disregard them. They are not representative of the vast majority of visitors here. Thanks.

It seems the above policy is being presented as “we won’t publish your comments unless you agree with us”. In one way that’s true. If you don’t agree the cultural damage caused by bad practice should be remedied by statutory regulation of the activity then no, we aren’t willing to give you a platform. Artefact hunters seem to have got it into their heads they have a right to speak in favour of not being required to behave and that they are to be negotiated with. That’s an error that can perhaps be laid at the door of PAS and their talk of “liaison” and “partnership”. Truth is PAS has no right to compromise the resource so there is no scope for negotiation, only for persuasion or compulsion. Simple really. Support control of the unacceptable actions of your colleagues and you’ll have a platform here. Support the idea of another 16 years of “persuasion” of them and you won’t”.

(If you don’t believe the above about PAS is true, ask them. Write to Dr Roger Bland and ask him: which part of the archaeological resource are you willing to see damaged in order for Archaeology to reach a negotiated settlement with Metal Detectorists?)


February 2014

Follow Us

Follow us on Twitter

Follow us on Facebook

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 10,808 other subscribers
%d bloggers like this: