Detectorists 2

close
more_vert
nigelswift N
nigelswift Oct 30, 2015 12:05:38
Replying to tjj

"If the sequence inspires any metal detectorists to start closely examining the land around fallen standing stones in the hope of unearthing such a rare object then they really are stupid."

Well newcomers would do exactly that, why wouldn't they. And a percentage of old hands already do it - loads of sites show evidence of digging as you know. And of course, all prehistoric standing stones (if such it was meant to be) are scheduled so the sequence was depicting a criminal act - at peak viewing time, and chortling about it.

Sorry to sound a spoilsport, it's a great programme, but my gripe is that the Beeb doesn't take proper archaeological advice, and should.

H Howburn Digger
Howburn Digger Oct 30, 2015 14:46:11
Replying to nigelswift

They didn't detect at the (non-standing) stone.

I'll repeat that. They didn't detect at the (non-standing) stone.

That the stone was shown in a flashback having once been erect was unknown to any character in the series. There was nothing to say or even infer that it was a "standing stone" in the series. It could have been a depiction of an old cattle rubbing post, a waymarker or a stump of a fieldgate.

That was what was so funny. Like the climax of series one where the shot tracked to the soil a little deeper below where they were detecting to reveal all the unfound Saxon Trinkets. It is a lovely gentle, harmless touch. Great intentions, commitment, self-taught historical knowledge and informed conjecture from two beautifully drawn, flawed characters - but they pack up for lunch a few yards from a pile of treasure.

Then don't go back. Brilliant.

T tjj
tjj Oct 30, 2015 14:51:31
Replying to nigelswift

It is good as comedies go, quietly funny rather than laugh out loud. Diana Rigg brought some acerbic style as the mother-in-law. I did wonder fleetingly if someone had passed exams in archaeology (as the Andy character said he had) would he really be messing about with a metal detector - probably not.

Edited.

S Sanctuary
Sanctuary Oct 30, 2015 15:21:05
Replying to nigelswift

[quote="nigelswift"

And of course, all prehistoric standing stones (if such it was meant to be) are scheduled so the sequence was depicting a criminal act - at peak viewing time, and chortling about it.

[/quote]

Actually I thought that but not so apparently. I was enquiring about uncovering the recumbent two stone circles at the base of Leskernick Hill, the Bronze-Age settlement in Cornwall, and was told by the HAR officer for the area that neither the hill or circles are Scheduled which staggered me! However, if I do get permission I could then apply for it to be all Scheduled on completion of the work!

N nigelswift
nigelswift Feb 4, 2016 08:57:52
Replying to nigelswift

nigelswift wrote:
"If the sequence inspires any metal detectorists to start closely examining the land around fallen standing stones in the hope of unearthing such a rare object then they really are stupid."

Well newcomers would do exactly that, why wouldn't they. And a percentage of old hands already do it - loads of sites show evidence of digging as you know. And of course, all prehistoric standing stones (if such it was meant to be) are scheduled so the sequence was depicting a criminal act - at peak viewing time, and chortling about it.

Sorry to sound a spoilsport, it's a great programme, but my gripe is that the Beeb doesn't take proper archaeological advice, and should.

Recent holes reported at both Boscawen-un and near Bocawen Ros. Thanks BBC4.