Finds from Old Manila

[Doug[Manila]]

I have the opportunity to assist our our local archaeologist in a rescue dig. They have been digging excavation pits of four to six feet deep and getting workers and volunteer-detectorists to go thru the mountains of dirtpiles.
[attachment 67688 site2.jpg]

On the first day, I found the trigger guard of a Lee Enfield and picked up a European bottle. [attachment 67689 TriggerGuard.jpg] [attachment 67690 RogerampGallet.jpg]
Hit a better spot on the 2nd day and found a few gun parts and broken bottles. The site has yielded gun parts from Springfields, Krags, Browning and even Spanish Remingtons. The best find of the day was the only musketball found the same day.
[attachment 67683 Finds2.jpg] [attachment 67684 Musketball2.JPG]

Chanced upon a new excavation pit with the workers still taking out dirtpiles from the hole. I started to detect the new soil that was being brought to the surface and found this 1905 Filipinas nickel. [attachment 67686 AmericanEagle.gif]

Will post more pics...

 

[cubfan64]

I've always thought Archeology and metal detecting should be spending much more time working together than arguing and complaining about one another. Really exciting thing you're doing!!

 

[Macaco]

Government archaeologists are the ones who are killing a golden goose. We metal detector hobbyists are mostly just getting beat up and maligned by those same archaeologists. Talking about the USA of course.

If our governments (state and national) were smart (yeah, yeah I know) then state and federal agencies would have a system like Great Britain does where hobbyists are allowed to use metal detectors to find stuff. If something ancient/old is found then it has to be turned into the government. If the government decides they need it then they pay the detectorist the market value of the object.

If something ancient/old is found and the government doesn't think they need it for historical preservation purposes they give it back to the detectorist. It's a brilliant policy because it gets hundreds or thousands of hobby detectorists out in the field looking for historical objects but it doesn't cost the government a dime (or a farthing or whatever). Putting that many paid archaeologists in the field with metal detectors, for the same number of hours, would cost a fortune.

Please forgive the rant. I just think it's ridiculous that the national and state governments in the US prefer to leave historical objects in the ground (or underwater) where nobody will ever see them and where they will never add to a better understanding of our history.

Rant over.

 

[cubfan64]

and since I'm a detectorist and not an archeologist, I'm definitely on your/our side, however.... I can see their point of view as well (even if I don't like it). The similarity between detectorists and archeologists is that we're both out hunting for historical items of one kind or another (ours of course being metallic in nature). The vast difference comes in when the find is made - they bring me personal joy to look at, to collect and display. In some cases, I would have no problem donating things to a local museum if they have true historical significance, but in general I love finding things for the pure enjoyment of not knowing what I will get next and then looking at them and studying them for myself.

Archeologists have such a different approach to things like that - they are focused first on putting the item into perspective with it's surroundings. They take painstaking efforts to not disturb an item until they exhaust every measurement, data collection, photograph etc... of the item in it's natural state. It's only after they've covered everything they possibly can that they either collect the item (quite often to just be cataloged and tucked away on a shelf in some basement or back room).

We have similar interests, and yet we're so different in our approaches to finds that I think each side has a really difficult time understanding one another.

It's a discussion that could go on and on and probably has on various forums. The only thing I thought was near here, is that the two sides have at least collaborated on a project for a change

 

[Macaco]

There are some sites that need to be excavated with care to preserve the context and content of the site. Like a historical homesite or a market place.

On the other hand, guys in a big open field looking for musket balls and belt buckles are not disturbing a fragile "time capsule". They're just digging up the scraps of war.

I suppose that a Civil War belt buckle or a musket ball, recovered from such an area, could be of historical significance but how many belt buckles or musket balls are needed for museums anyway? Seems to me like the prohibition against taking objects like that is just capricious.

What gets me most is when the National Park System takes over a coastal area that has beaches and then proclaims that nobody can use a metal detector on the beaches anymore. Ocean beaches out here in California, for instance, that are part of the NPS are not archaeological sites by any stretch of the imagination.

A NPS ranger came and lectured me once because I was too close to the NPS side of a beach even though I was detecting on the county side of the beach. I asked him why the park beach was off limits anyway. He told me that it is to preserve the historical integrity of the area and he gave me the example of people using metal detectors to dig up musket balls on Civil War battle fields. I asked him how many Civil War battles were fought on the California coast. He responded by warning me to stay off the park side of the beach then he walked away. Even the ranger had no good answer for why someone can't detect there. I doubt anyone who makes the rules at the National Park Service does either.

 

[Doug[Manila]]

Thanks. You do know that we do not get to keep anything we find but that is okay to get the opportunity to hunt sites with 400 yrs of Spanish & American history.

 

[cubfan64]

A friend and I stopped last fall (well after the swimming season) at a State Park in Massachusetts to detect small swimming area. There happened to be a park worker there so we asked him if it was ok and he said sure - couldn't think of any reason why it shouldn't be ok.

30 minutes later he waves us over to the shore and tells us that his supervisor drove by and told him to come tell us it was illegal to detect there and that we had to leave. He was really apologetic about it and couldn't understand why since he'd seen other people doing it (who didn't ask permission first). My friend got a little heated by this time, so we went back to the car and he got the phone number for the regional park manager in that area and called him, explained what we were doing and that we didn't feel we were damaging anything and wanted to know if he would allow us to hunt there. He said sure, as long as we don't dig on land anywhere it was okay by him. It's pretty irritating when the people in charge don't even have the same knowledge of what the rules are!

I think what really ticked us off is that there were signs all around the park saying to be aware when hiking in the woods because the State Park was open to firearm hunting - like that's not way worse than metal detecting in the water of a swimming area????