A damaged Monet. What has that got to do with it?
In 2014 we complained here and here about a detecting rally on the site of Weyhill fair, saying ….
“Sites really don’t come better than this!” said the organiser, and he was right ….. Everything dropped on those 60 acres forms an almost unique whole, a continuous record of social and commercial interaction in one small place over seven and a half centuries …… So it’s just crying out for a comprehensive archaeological field survey one day ……
Yet instead tomorrow (Sunday) it will be dug over by who knows whom from who knows where with a propensity to report amounting to who knows what, using no survey methodology but instead a totally random approach followed by irrational selectivity. So by Monday the site’s uniqueness will be gone forever as multiple holes will have been punched in the record and an unknown number of material and abstract components of history will have been respectively quietly pocketed or destroyed and hence put beyond the reach of science…… It’s a bloody shame really. I’m no archaeologist, just a no-account amateur, but I know when something irreplaceable is being needlessly destroyed….. It’s scandalous.”
But they’ve announced they’ll be back again in March (a third visit I think) and this time, for just £35 you can help yourself for the whole weekend! Well worth it, as it includes one field that was “very productive and everyone agreed had a lot more to offer.” Strange, innit. No-one’s allowed to come back and have a second bash at a Monet but you can go back and have multiple bashes at Weyhill Fair ’till it’s all gone!
.
“Sites really don’t come better than this!” Absolutely! 750 years of History, entirely unprotected by law. What’s not to like?
.
Update 11 Feb 2016 …. We have just been reminded by a correspondent that as a result of a very recent recent legislative change, if Weyhill Fair was in Wales then (in theory anyway) it could be scheduled and protected. It’s as if you are free to mess up a Monet in Minehead but not in Merthyr!
Update 6 March 2016 ….. It has been revealed that PAS “will be in attendance on Saturday only”. The implications for the site are clear. If the hero-attendees could be trusted to report what they find on Sunday there would be no need for PAS to attend on Saturday.
Update 14 August 2016 ….. Are they going back for a fourth bite in September? “Anton Rotary Club are pleased to announce their autumn dig on land a couple of miles north west of Andover, Hampshire and adjacent to the the fields that we detected last spring” and “Directions and post code will be emailed a few days beforehand”.
Seems possible, but that they realise what they are doing is profoundly wrong so this time they’re not boasting about Weyhill Fair or that “Sites really don’t come better than this!”
Self-centred acquisitive oiks knowing they’re doing wrong but doing it anyway? Surely not?!
PPS, and they say, as do most rally organisers, “As usual ALL profits will go to our chosen charities”. It’s a lie and a widespread one, a neat playing with words. What they find goes in their pockets, not to their “chosen charities”. Ask them.
__________________________________________
.
The Heritage Journal 
26 comments
Comments feed for this article
23/01/2016 at 08:39
Edwin Deady
Why can’t it be scheduled?
23/01/2016 at 09:00
heritageaction
We did ask EH. There need to be phsical remains, not just scatters and although there are some they are probably insufficient. We were invited to go through the (complex) hoops to apply but it was made pretty clear we’d have no chance.
The obvious solutions are for the British to institute laws in line with the civilised world or for artefact hunters to develop a modicum of decency towards history. Neither seems likely at present.
23/01/2016 at 09:20
sandyge
The current scheduling legislation makes it impossible to protect artefact scatters of any period. The Ancient Monuments Act makes it very clear that only works can be offered protection and therefore without evidence for structural remains scheduling is deemed inappropriate. This problem is acknowledged and was one of the many issues designed to be dealt with by the failed Heritage Protection Reforms. The only way that Weyhill Fair could currently be offered statutory protection would be to demonstrate that nationally important archaeological structures and features survive. If evidence could be found a compelling scheduling application could be submitted but without it scheduling is sadly not an option.
23/01/2016 at 13:49
Billy Buchanan
Well archaeologist know all about something irreplaceable being needlessly destroyed don t they.
23/01/2016 at 14:00
JMcL
Not sure what you mean Billy.
23/01/2016 at 15:01
Edwin Deady
I take the point but the rallies are likely to be destroying remains and traces of sheepfolds for a start. There were ancient booths across the road in a yard that might have been preserved but I am not sure as I haven’t been on foot in the area since I saw the old booths in 1972.
Likely to be traces of all the temorary structures associated with such fairs as well.
23/01/2016 at 15:03
Edwin Deady
Perhaps he means ISIS and Palmyra.
23/01/2016 at 15:35
heritageaction
Yes, we understood the physical remains weren’t likely to be sufficient to warrant scheduling. So there’s a gap in the protection legislation.
24/01/2016 at 09:21
roygoutte
So it’s not illegal then? Maybe you could cough up said £35 and wander about the site to see what the villainous scallywags are quietly pocketing then report back.
24/01/2016 at 10:13
JMcL
“So it’s not illegal then?”
Precisely.
“It’s legal, innit” ergo “it’s right”.
Except that it’s not. It’s profoundly wrong. But thanks for illustrating the hypocrisy.
24/01/2016 at 11:23
roygoutte
JMcL…it’s only wrong if important finds are found and not declared. And if something of importance is found and declared, then it adds further to our understanding. One should not pen articles that aim only at the villains when there are so many good guys about. Let the writer shell out the £35 and report back with the facts not just predict what might happen. If he wants the detectorists to play fair then let him do the same. I shall look forward to reading it.
24/01/2016 at 11:26
Paul Barford
roygoutte writes > you could cough up said £35 and wander about the site to see what the villainous scallywags are quietly pocketing then report back.<
Should we have to? Is that what "responsible artefact pocketing" is about in the UK?
What good would reporting back do, once it's gone it's gone. Preventing the erosion of heritage assets is surely what conservation is about. It's an odd version of "conservation" to sit and watch cultural property vanish, not doing anytjhing at all to stop a preventable cause of erosion, merely reporting afterwards "yes, I saw it go". That is not conservation its negligence.
In any case if we think selling off heritage assets to collectors to hoard in secret is not exactly an ethical way to treat it, then why would you be advocating putting money into their pockets? Or do you find it a bit hard on collectors to ask the poor lost souls to consider into whose pockets and why the money from portable antiquities collecting is going?
24/01/2016 at 12:20
JMcL
What uninformed nonsense. This is an important site that warrants scientific investigation along the lines laid out by EH not random picking by unqualified people that PAS says only report 30% of what they find. You haven’t a logical leg to stand on.
24/01/2016 at 12:29
heritageaction
Mr Goutte, we don’t want them to play fair, we want them to keep off. Is that so very hard to grasp?
24/01/2016 at 12:56
roygoutte
JMcL…This is not a Scheduled site and is not a site of SSSI. If it was of REAL interest it would have both on it so stop kidding yourself. All you want to do is get the knife into the detectorists (good or bad) yet again at any opportunity. I stand by what I said, the writer should cough up the money and PROVE what he is saying could take place on this site and has legs to it if he is witness to dirty deeds. If something of great interest is found he will be on site to read the riot act to the perpetrators should there be the slightest chance that they are up to no good. This is too good an opportunity for him to miss. He could face up to them rather than hide behind a computer screen on an almost daily basis. He would also meet up with some really decent folk who outweigh the bad guys 100 fold if he would care to look now and again!
24/01/2016 at 13:03
roygoutte
Heritage Action. It is you that are finding it difficult to take on board. What they are planning is not illegal and you have no right whatsoever to suggest they keep off. Until they actually break the law (on this site) you are just inciting others to take issue with innocent people enjoying their hobby.
24/01/2016 at 17:50
Edwin Deady
“it’s only wrong if important finds are found and not declared.”!!!!!!!!!!!!
Until the whole is examined and evaluated nobody and certainly unqualified detectors do not, know what is important. I am just so disgusted. At the very least all finds should be declared with their depth and coordinates.
If the hunt is the thing then take a clear bit of ground and seed it with bl…y prize tokens.
24/01/2016 at 19:35
heritageaction
You’re right to be disgusted Edwin. Roygoutte says decent folk outweigh the bad guys 100 fold, PAS says 70% of finds don’t ger reported. It’s pretty clear who is talking from a position of ignorance!
25/01/2016 at 03:38
heritageaction
Mr Goutte, we haven’t published your “I will be taking no further part in this discussion” message as this is the fifth time you have made a public exhibition of yourself here and on TMA and then flounced away dramatically when it became obvious. Please don’t come back this time.
25/01/2016 at 15:50
roygoutte
Of course you haven’t published my last post because you are cowardly and don’t like your readers to read the truth so just publish your snide reply to me about a post they are not going to see. How low can you get! If you haven’t got the balls to publish all replies and only what suits your argument then it’s time you handed the reins over to someone who can hack it.
I ‘flounce away’ as you childishly call it when common sense tells me that I am banging my head against the wall and up against a obsessive person who has lost the plot and can no longer rationalise in a discussion because of this obsession. You even involved an outside forum that has nothing whatsoever to do with this discussion. What a sad person you have become which I am sure has already been recognised by many other people.
25/01/2016 at 17:41
heritageaction
Please don’t come back.
26/01/2016 at 16:04
JMcL
Too polite. His behaviour on TMA was ridiculous.
26/01/2016 at 19:05
heritageaction
Now that he has thoroughly gone, it only remains to point out that claiming the 70% figure lacks evidence betrays a lack of knowledge of the matter, nothing else. Large scale surveys by an independent archaeologist, a detecting forum, EH and CBA have established what is found and PAS’s statistics show what is reported. Not rocket science or a mystery and something that has been widely known for a long time. His numerous uncouth attacks here and on TMA and elsewhere can’t make it otherwise.
27/01/2016 at 06:08
Nigel S
Mr Goutte is still sending us comments. The latest one says “don’t get paranoid as I am not attacking you” but saying I’m “cowardly”, “low”, “dishonourable” and “it’s time you handed the reins over to someone who can hack it” suggests otherwise.
He’s had his say and won’t be appearing here again.
31/01/2016 at 08:44
JMcL
Hey Nige, he’s bought himself a detector and is going on and on about you elsewere. Says you’re “sad and misguided” but have you seen his book about Silbury Hill and Avebury being a giant female earth figure? Jesus. 😉
31/01/2016 at 09:00
Nigel S
Yes, ludicrous. I think about that every time he attacks us. It puts it all into context.