by Nigel Swift
Here are two recent public statements by a prominent detectorist with many Youtube videos to his name. They’re worth highlighting, for reasons I’ll explain:
First, he says he records finds, “But not all with the PAS. I keep detailed records of all my finds in a book. Will hand these down my family.“ [Translated as: Dear Society, I’ve stolen your knowledge of your history but someone in my family might let you have it one day.]
Second, he says: “Today I’ve received a provisional valuation from the British Museum for my Roman Silver Hoard. I have to admit I found the offer totally offensive and will not only be telling them – and I may never volunteer any treasure trove again in the future.” [Translated as: Dear Society, never mind the history, I want every penny I can get out of you and incidentally I am thinking of becoming a criminal.]
Are you watching PAS? Or the Treasure Valuation Committee? Or ex-Culture Ministers Lammy and Vaizey? Or other detectorists? Or any of the many who declaim endlessly that outreach has worked well, everything in the garden’s lovely or improving and detectorists are nearly all heroes? Mr A***r is a nightmare for all of them because he doesn’t sing from the approved hymn sheet and he has many, many colleagues who don’t either (you’ll see both his sentiments constantly voiced on detecting forums). Worst of all, from the detecting apologists’ viewpoint, these things aren’t said by those convenient scapegoats “the tiny minority of nighthawks” but by legal detectorists, the Teflon group that they never criticise yet whose wrongdoers must surely far outnumber nigthawks.
Even more to the point: are landowners watching? Has Mr A***r or any who talk and act like him, people who must therefore have the brains and moral standards of pumpkins, been on your farm? Are any like him on your fields right now, proclaiming they’re there for everyone’s benefit?
So the question that Mr A***r’s two statements prompt is this: should the authorities be more honest about artefact hunting? It’s not just a case of “if they aren’t nighthawks they’re fine” for it’s demonstrable that a lot of legal detectorists are awful. Isn’t it time that official statements trumpeted that fact and shouldn’t farmers be taught how to be selective in who they allow on their fields? At present their only information on the need to preserve society’s knowledge for society’s benefit comes from detectorists at their doors – and that often means the likes of Mr A***r. That simply can’t be right. He and his ilk shouldn’t be allowed on any fields. everyone except he and his ilk are agreed about that, so why aren’t some simple steps taken to make it happen?
How come neither the Government nor the Portable Antiquities Scheme nor the National Council for Metal Detecting warn farmers that a proportion of legal detectorists are awful?
.
__________________________________________
More Heritage Journal views on artefact collecting
__________________________________________
The Heritage Journal 
9 comments
Comments feed for this article
17/11/2014 at 10:06
Peter
You lot just don’t understand irrespective of what’s found ,it’ was found ,you preffer it not to be found ,especially by citizen archaeologists useing a metal detector who do report there finds to the PAS ,as can be seen by reading the PAS treasure report ,or go and visit the Briish museam ,and many local museums that have items found by local citizen archaeologists .
There is know difference in paintings and fine art being acquired for nation ,from the public purse ,than acquiring a roman hoard found by a citizen archaeologist ,the valuation must be accurate .
17/11/2014 at 11:09
heritageaction
Bearing in mind that most detectorists don’t report most non-treasure finds it’s a reasonable bet that most detectorists wouldn’t report most treasure items if the treasure rewards weren’t available.
It follows that treasure rewards are a bribe to make irresponsible people act responsibly. That is not a matter for dispute.
That being so, for detectorists to complain about the AMOUNT of bribe is pretty outrageous.
PS, calling them “citizen archaeologists” when they search randomly and unscientifically and for their own personal satisfaction and profit is a joke. The scary thing is it is to be presumed that you refer to yourself as that to unsuspecting landowners.
17/11/2014 at 14:37
Paul Barford
This ‘better out than in’ may apply to a decayed tooth or inflamed appendix, it does not apply however to conservation, neither rhinos or hoiking from archaeological sites. I rather think it is the metal detecting “lot” that is lacking in understanding. There is a very clear difference between hoiked archaeology and a painting taken from a hook on one wall and placed on another. There IS however a parallel if this “fine art” is a head wrenched off a statue which itself forms part of a Cambodian temple, which forms part of a temple complex – part of a ritual landscape. There is a lot of such fragments in museums, the London ones not excluded.
20/11/2014 at 15:14
lilyklep
Reblogged this on Lily Does Archaeology.
20/11/2014 at 22:45
the scally handed heratage grabber
Talking of teeth Mr Barford i would really enjoy knocking your’s out.
24/11/2014 at 01:25
Stephen Robinson
Hi,
I’ve just read your post about A***r aka Mr d*****i.
He was a member of our site for quite some time and even recorded some of our digs.
We recently banned him due to questionable motives and the negativitity he was bringing to our site.
I was getting messages telling me people were refraining from joining because of the game hungry bafoon!
I just wanted to make perfectly clear he is not any part of the northern relic hunters and never will be.
Thanks
Stephen
Site owner
24/11/2014 at 05:00
heritageaction
Thanks. I take it your club’s mandatory code of conduct is the official one? It could hardly be otherwise as if your members aren’t bound by that you’d have no way of knowing or insisting that they recorded all their finds with PAS – in other words, that they are any better than Mr A***r.
24/11/2014 at 19:57
Erica Chapman
Mr Swift’s comments appear extremely biased in this article. He has placed his OWN interpretations onto this detectorist’s comments and used them to make sweeping statements and judgements about ALL detectorists, which hardly seems fair. He has not looked at any of the issues behind this person’s comments, especially why the person MIGHT be discouraged from acting legally in the future. I suspect Mr Swift has some ulterior motive to the post and that any argument put forward by an honest detecting enthusiast would be treated with distain – hardly objective reporting or discussion. Mr Swift has demonstrated an appalling attitude towards detectorists in general in his blog and his judgement and condemnation of all detectorists is ridiculous – he ignores the fact that archaeology itself began through the efforts of amateur enthusiasts with a passion for their hobby. He also forgets that some british archeologists did their fair share of pilfering of other country’s heritage for their own gratification and wealth in the early years (Egypt being a good example). I’m not saying that ALL detectorists are honest but it seems to me that the vast majority have a passion and dedication to their hobby, spending a lot of time on research and yes, I HAVE seen examples of finds being donated to museum’s or the community. Perhaps if Mr Swift’s ranting had offered a more balanced opinion his blog may have offered a valid opinion rather than this tirade of opinionated drivel – and no Mr Swift, I’m not a detectorist myself but I do have a degree in History!
25/11/2014 at 04:01
heritageaction
.
“his judgement and condemnation of all detectorists is ridiculous”
Trouble is, he never has.
“British archeologists did their fair share of pilfering”
Which has no bearing whatsoever on the matter.
I do have a degree in History!
Yet you are willing to be an apologist for historicide! How are the two consistent?