IMAGINE two fields in late September near Stirling, the leaves are turning but there is still some warmth when the sun gets going and there is a hum of anticipation in the air and the smell of newly turned earth.

Both fields are full of volunteer metal detectorists keen to explore and discover Scotland’s amazing past, both feel they are contributing to our national story, both contain people who have travelled for the event and everyone is very excited.

Both events are insured, both organisers have spent time liaising with the respective landowner to ensure their fun doesn’t interrupt the farm’s business. All the finds from both events are subject to the Treasure Trove Process which governs how archaeological objects found in Scotland are reported to the authorities.

But that is where the similarity ends, in Field A the rally has been organised by an archaeologist and in Field B by a metal detectorist. The archaeologist is volunteering and not paid for his efforts, archaeology is his hobby as well as his profession, it is his vocation and he is proud to be there. In Field B the metal detectorist has charged each of the volunteers to take part and he will split the money with the farmer. I cannot speak to his state of mind.

READ MORE: Archaeologist calls for change in metal detecting rewards to stop 'profiteering'

Returning to Field A, the archaeologist will locate each find and assume the costs of analysis and reporting and will in due course publish the results, submit an archive and report the Archaeological Assemblage to Treasure Trove and it will end up in the Smith Museum and Art Gallery secure for the nation in perpetuity. Hopefully he will get some grants to cover the costs of analysis but this is not guaranteed and most likely any costs along with the petrol will come from his pocket.

He acknowledges this is perhaps naive, that he should wait to get the grant before starting the fieldwork, but grants are so hard to find these days and he’s happy to take the risk. But even if he gets a grant it will not cover his own time. The value of his time in managing and organising such projects routinely is £2000-3000, but to repeat this is his vocation and archaeology is the most fun he’s ever had.

(Image: Dr Murray Cook)

By contrast in Field B each individual metal detectorist (or to be more precise customer) is responsible for reporting their own finds and there is no one to check that they do, but they are undoubtedly all honourable men and women so of course they will. The disparate finds are individually reported (with no guarantee as to the accuracy of the grid reference), in a steady trickle to Treasure Trove where the dedicated and passionate officers of The Treasure Trove Unit add them to their growing workload and in due course will analyse and judge each individual find and determine if an ex gratia reward is appropriate.

All of this and of course any reward comes from the state’s coffers at a time when budgets for archaeology are at their lowest.

This situation puzzled the archaeologist. Surely the paid rally should be excluded from the ex gratia reward, surely the payment changes the nature of the event, surely natural justice would demand this? Why would archaeologists be punished for being ethical and why would the state subsidise a commercial undertaking, surely in an age of austerity this is an anathema? And so he contacted the King’s and Lord Treasurer's Remembrancer who oversee the Treasure Trove process to formally confirm the current position and received the following from some very nice people (quoted in full with their permission):

The current treasure trove Code of Practice differentiates between chance finds, including those found by metal detecting, and finds recovered through organised archaeological excavations.

While the current Code of Practice makes no specific reference to rallies, finds from metal detecting rallies are considered chance finds in these terms and so are eligible for ex gratia awards.

The purpose of ex gratia awards is to maximise the reporting of finds by acknowledging best practices. The recently published Treasure Trove Review recommends developing guidance for metal detecting rallies as part of the pending review of the Code of Practice.

(Image: Dr Murray Cook)

Ie: you can make money from organising metal detection, get a reward for your finds and get the state to cover any costs as long as you’re not an archaeologist. I might further add that the archaeologist’s finds are given to the museum for free and if they tried to claim that the finds from his metal detection rally was a normal rally rather than an archaeological rally they would most likely be committing criminal fraud.

And so the archaeologist (yes you’ve guessed it’s me) decided to try to influence the public debate regarding the forthcoming guidance for metal detecting rallies with a polemic about real events happening each month near Stirling. Thanks for your time.

I have no problem with pay to dig models and no problem with rallies (though perhaps beyond a certain size they too should contribute to the costs of the analysis), but the boundaries cannot be blurred.

My conclusion is that paid metal detector rallies must be excluded from the ex gratia rewards, if you make money from archaeology you should cover the costs.

A system designed to ensure that chance finds end up in museums, to reward the curious and to preserve and celebrate Scotland’s fantastic history was not designed to subsidise commercial exploitation by systematic rallies hoovering up our past without proper controls.

This practice sucks money from an already impoverished system and tarnishes the reputation of all metal detectorists, a great hobby that adds so much to Scotland and its amazing past. If you agree with me please let the King’s and Lord Treasure’s Remembrancer know by emailing them at enquiries@kltr.gov.uk.

A version of this article originally appeared on Dr Murray Cook's blog. You can find the full article here.