91Èȱ¬

Comments

• 1 comment
• 1. At 23:22 on 22 June 2010, Andrew Turner-Cross wrote:

  Metal detector finds are as random as the ways in which the objects came to the find site. We can imagine; the great and lasting reward of making such finds, how they came to that place. Finds specific to the habitation and era of their place fit neatly into place and develop the story of life over a narrow ribbon of time, or unfolding decades or centuries. Where there is no context to an objects presence, finds like this coin become the hide-and-seek of history. The imagery they evoke ranges from the purely romantic: visiting diplomats or a gang of French courtiers hunting our then more densely wooded landscape. The coin may have been in a belt purse that became detached. It is less likely that it was part of a payment because it would have been of high value,and open-air transactions may have been risky, although it is not clear if whether there were post- Roman dwellings in this instance. At the other end of the scale we should remember that many finds come through less attractive routes. There was a much different way of refuse disposal than today, which went on until the more organised sewerage and refuse collection systems we now know. "Night Soil" and general rubbish were manured and spread on fields as fertiliser. Even with a smaller national population this must have been quite an industry. The local population or even fairly modest townships, over hundreds of years could produce very large amounts of detritus. Much of this would then be transferred to rural locations. With discarded clothing and other possessions would have been brooches; buckles and buttons and all those other personal and household objects that detectorists inexplicably find in remote places. Such items may have been deposited long after their use or manufacture and may well include coins either secreted or casually left in clothing or other discarded belongings.
  
  Andrew