Codename: Ainsbrook
A Time Team Special
First screened 14 January 2008

The metal detecting controversy

Metal detecting is one of the most controversial issues in archaeology today, and no archaeologist watching the Ainsbrook programme could feel anything but concern about the systematic stripping of the site of metal artefacts over many years. In total, as many as seven or eight thousand objects had been removed before Mark Ainsley and Geoffrey Bambrook, the discoverers of the 'Ainsbrook hoard', finally decided to reveal the location of their finds to a team led by Richard Hall of the York Archaeological Trust.

At least Mark and Geoff, who see themselves as 'bad detectorists turned good', kept relatively detailed records of their finds and where they made them over the years. So even though many of the finds had been sold and dispersed by the time archaeologists were called in, they could still reconstruct the pattern of distribution of the discoveries.

Some 'treasure hunters' keep no records at all; they are interested only in the objects themselves, and sometimes only for their monetary value. And of course few metal detectorists excavate finds with the painstaking attention to context and detail that characterises an archaeological dig. Many non-metal objects are discarded or missed altogether, and features in the ground of interest or importance to archaeologists may not be recognised or are ignored. It is not surprising, then, that archaeologists have tended to look askance at the metal detecting community – and in turn even responsible metal detectorists have often responded with suspicion or hostility towards people who they see as threatening their hobby.

Portable Antiquities Scheme
It was in an attempt to get detectorists and others to report their finds that the Portable Antiquities Scheme was established in 1997, initially as a pilot scheme and later nationally. More than 300,000 objects had been recorded by the scheme by the beginning of 2008, including many of national or international importance. Regional finds liaison officers cover the whole of England and Wales, offering advice on conservation and identification services as well as opportunities to record artefacts.

Together with other initiatives, the scheme has done a great deal to raise awareness of archaeology and the importance of cultural artefacts, and to bring together archaeologists and detectorists.

Metal detecting and Time Team
Time Team has always recognised the value of metal detecting as part of archaeological investigation. It first used metal detectorists to great effect at the 1997 Live, when detectorist Tim Hand found a wonderful Roman brooch and many Roman coins among the spoil; and they have featured, both on screen and behind the scenes, at many other digs since. Indeed, a number of Time Team programmes, such as the 2001 Live, which excavated an Anglo-Saxon cemetery in the New Forest, would not have taken place without detectorists having discovered the sites in the first place.

The Team now uses detectorists as a matter of course to check the excavation spoil on all its digs, and its members have supported various initiatives involving archaeologists and responsible metal detectorists throughout the country. Yet they remain concerned about the impact that the activity of the estimated 50,000 metal detectorists in Britain – not all of whom can be relied on to behave responsibly and to record and report their finds – is having on our archaeological heritage.

Mick Aston, for example, has long been outspoken on this issue. He feels passionately that we have to respect our past, and has little time for those who take the cavalier approach of hunting for 'treasure' and digging up artefacts that lose most of their potential meaning when removed from the context in which they are found.

'You often get people who own metal detectors purely to find treasure,' he says. 'The problem is they find things and dig them up without any recording. We end up with a lot of objects completely out of context and then it's the archaeologist who has to come in and sort out the mess.'

'Metal detectors should be licensed' – Tony Robinson
'Metal detecting worries me greatly,' says Tony Robinson. 'To be honest, I think we're pissing about. The reality, according to Phil, is that there are likely to be no metal finds at all in the first foot of Britain's soil within 20 years. The only way we can prevent that happening is by legislation. I think all metal detectors should be licensed and to get a licence they should be required to abide by a code of archaeological best practice.'

'Everything we find, wherever it is, should be scrupulously and systematically recorded within its archaeological context,' Tony insists. He says that the Portable Antiquities Scheme, which involves the voluntary recording of archaeological finds, is 'great, and I support the people who do it, but in a way it's a policy of despair because it's saying yes, all these people are going to plunder our archaeology but what we'll do is try to persuade the nice ones to tell us where they found it.'

Tony doesn't think legislation on metal detecting is too much to ask. It's about developing a critical mass of support to change hearts and minds on the issue. We don't allow people to collect birds' eggs any more, for example, he says. 'Yet this is worse than egg collecting. There will still be kestrels producing eggs until we get down to the last half dozen kestrels but once you lose archaeological remains they are gone forever.'

<< The Ainsbrook hoard :Previous    Next: Secrets, lies and videotape >>