|
Title: Iron infested sites. Post by: Steve Morgan on November 16, 2011, 01:54:41 PM Hi there all. I was wondering if I could borrow some knowledge of some of the more seasoned detectorists who frequent this site.
Iv recently acquired quite a promising site near Cirencester (860 acres). The farmer has told me he's had detectorists there in the past but not for a good couple of years and has only started plough his fields recently. My first visit was last sunday which proved a good trip. I managed my first roman brooch and my detecting buddy Daz his first roman coin. Iv never really detected on ploughed fields before. Most of the land i have is all pasture. The first thing I noticed on arrival at the new ploughed field was there was a hell of alot of iron present. The threshold on my safari was nulling out left, right and centre. The only way I could think of setting up my detector was to drop the sensitivity put it into high trash and slow down my swing speed. My questions are: 1. Is there any other ways to get in between the trash? I was thinking maybe a smaller coil. 2. Do all ploughed fields contain alot of iron? As this seems to be my experience so far. Thanks Steve Title: Re: Iron infested sites. Post by: Steve Morgan on November 16, 2011, 01:58:32 PM Also. Is it possible to get a date on roman brooches? I wouldn't mind getting a date on the one I found on Sunday to get an idea if the amount of occupation on the site. Daz had his coin dated on here to 350ad. So I'm hoping my brooch is earlier. Il post a pic when I get back fr work.
Ta Steve Title: Re: Iron infested sites. Post by: handyman [Alan} on November 16, 2011, 02:54:45 PM well done Steve.
In respect of the finds i would thoroughly recommend that you make the effort to record the finds on the national database of the Portable Antiquities Scheme, through your Finds Liaison Officer Mark Lodwick. If you are a member of cardiff scan or rare, their members will tell you when mark is next at their club meeting. you can of course contact him direct. You will get a full report with the artefact when its returned. This documentation is useful provenance for your records and that of the national database. as for the iron bits -- well -- i'll leave that to those who know more about such things. cheers Title: Re: Iron infested sites. Post by: Chef Geoff on November 16, 2011, 02:58:03 PM Hi Steve, strange you should bring this subject up as a couple of us were discussing this very point yesterday. It does seem that newly ploughed soil does seem to heighten the iron response. I have some permissions that you can't go near until February as the iron signals are just a nightmare and the consensus seems to be that the geology of the site and how close the underlying rock is to the surface, all play their part.
An 8x6 SEF will cut down some of the blanking but obviously you will cut down some of the possible depth, which would be almost the same as lowering the sens with the Pro coil. Remember depth is never going to be great with the Safari on freshly ploughed soil in the same way that even the Etrac struggles for depth, FBS machines don't like freshly ploughed land. BUT remember that the beauty of arable is that you have more than one bite of the cherry, even if you lower your sensitivity to say 15 you are still going to get the same sort of depth on most low conductive targets and next year the soil will either be turned over again or will have settled so you will have almost a brand new canvas to detect on. One other thing to state is that to get the best from any FBS machine, you should be going slow all the time. As for the brooch, obviously the Romans used brooches for the whole period of nearly 400 years that they ruled here, but as a rule the vast majority, if they are bow or trumpet brooches, come from between 50-200AD with most bow types being from 50-120AD, later variations, Umbernate, Disk, Crossbow etc are all far rarer by comparison. Title: Re: Iron infested sites. Post by: romano-brit on November 16, 2011, 09:56:10 PM sounds good, ull be getting plenty of roman stuff from round there
wish i could get sum land round Ciri, love the area and its dead local Title: Re: Iron infested sites. Post by: markymark123 on November 16, 2011, 10:44:58 PM Well done steve :) i see ur trip turned out good mate !
Title: Re: Iron infested sites. Post by: Steve Morgan on December 05, 2011, 10:23:37 AM Sorry for the late reply one this one guys. What with work and what have you it totaly slipped my mind.
Quote In respect of the finds i would thoroughly recommend that you make the effort to record the finds on the national database of the Portable Antiquities Scheme, through your Finds Liaison Officer Mark Lodwick. If you are a member of cardiff scan or rare, their members will tell you when mark is next at their club meeting. I must admit Alan i have never recorded any of my finds, although I have made my own records.I plan on recording them as soon as I find out a bit more about the whole process. I plan on coming down to the next Scan Club meeting and hopefully finding out a bit more there.Thanks for the comments mate, ta. Quote Hi Steve, strange you should bring this subject up as a couple of us were discussing this very point yesterday. It does seem that newly ploughed soil does seem to heighten the iron response. I have some permissions that you can't go near until February as the iron signals are just a nightmare and the consensus seems to be that the geology of the site and how close the underlying rock is to the surface, all play their part. Ta Geoff, some good info there. Iv managed another trip since i first posted this thread and have another planned for next sunday. There was a definate drop in the iron response on the second trip and dropping the sensitvity down and slowing the swing speed down seems to be the way forward. Although i do feel a differant machine could do a little better. With the couple of finds me an my mate Daz have made, we can place about 300 years between the finds so im hoping for a few more. An 8x6 SEF will cut down some of the blanking but obviously you will cut down some of the possible depth, which would be almost the same as lowering the sens with the Pro coil. Remember depth is never going to be great with the Safari on freshly ploughed soil in the same way that even the Etrac struggles for depth, FBS machines don't like freshly ploughed land. BUT remember that the beauty of arable is that you have more than one bite of the cherry, even if you lower your sensitivity to say 15 you are still going to get the same sort of depth on most low conductive targets and next year the soil will either be turned over again or will have settled so you will have almost a brand new canvas to detect on. One other thing to state is that to get the best from any FBS machine, you should be going slow all the time. As for the brooch, obviously the Romans used brooches for the whole period of nearly 400 years that they ruled here, but as a rule the vast majority, if they are bow or trumpet brooches, come from between 50-200AD with most bow types being from 50-120AD, later variations, Umbernate, Disk, Crossbow etc are all far rarer by comparison Title: Re: Iron infested sites. Post by: Chef Geoff on December 05, 2011, 10:30:09 AM Well done Steve, nice little fibula you've got there and as I said before it's from 50-120A so nice going.
What is the ring made of? Title: Re: Iron infested sites. Post by: Steve Morgan on December 05, 2011, 10:30:36 AM Any info on the second pic would be a relief! It showed up on the second outing and has had me stumped ever since. It looks to have been gold guilded in places, Weighs in at a gram exactly and looks suspiciously like a ring. Defiantly not a mans ring though, its way to small.
Title: Re: Iron infested sites. Post by: Steve Morgan on December 05, 2011, 10:33:19 AM To be honest im not to sure! It looks gold in places. But i suspect its just a coating. Im going to take a closer look in work later.
Title: Re: Iron infested sites. Post by: Chef Geoff on December 05, 2011, 10:52:48 AM Well I felt it was probably modern but had a quick look on the PAS database and now I'm not so sure.
This one is awfully similar but don't get too excited just yet as obviously a ring is pretty generic and designs have been used time and time again, but that is definitely one to show the FLO. (http://finds.org.uk/images/thumbnails/167269.jpg)<acronym title="The Portable Antiquities Scheme">PAS</acronym> record number: HAMP-D3EDA5 Object type: Finger ring Broadperiod: Early Medieval County of discovery: Hampshire Stable url: <a href="http://finds.org.uk/database/artefacts/record/id/211641" title="HAMP-D3EDA5: a Early Medieval Finger ring">http://finds.org.uk/database/artefacts/record/id/211641 (http://finds.org.uk/database/artefacts/record/id/211641)[/url] Title: Re: Iron infested sites. Post by: Steve Morgan on December 05, 2011, 08:33:46 PM Brilliant Geoff, i'l get on the case. It looks like the puppy for sure. As soon as I get the chance i'l pass it on to the flo, hopefully I will get some info at the scan club as to the proper prosces. Thanks for your time m8
Steve |