Find's Treasure Forums

Welcome to Find's Treasure Forums, Guests!

You are viewing this forums as a guest which limits you to read only status.

Only registered members may post stories, questions, classifieds, reply to other posts, contact other members using built in messaging and use many other features found on these forums.

Why not register and join us today? It's free! (We don't share your email addresses with anyone.) We keep email addresses of our users to protect them and others from bad people posting things they shouldn't.

Click here to register!



Need Support Help?

Cannot log in?, click here to have new password emailed to you

Changed email? Forgot to update your account with new email address? Need assistance with something else?, click here to go to Find's Support Form and fill out the form.

Battlefield detecting, Yes or No?

fenian13

New member
If we can ask the graveyard question, we can ask the battlefield question.

I have my own reasons why I don't do it.

Anyone able to kick it around without personal attacks and excessive sarcasm is invited to reply.
 
Dictionary version;

battlefield---- The terrain on which a battle is fought.

cemetery-----A place for burying the dead , graveyard.

No mention of casualties in battlefield wording.
 
Joel, I like any reply that has only facts. We can do without the rest.

In order to be clear on my position let me say that it is just not for me. I have my reasons not to, just as some have reasons that they do.

All this is about is why. From each persons perspective. Without judgement.

True, there are not always deaths upon a battlefield, that is without question. Sometimes soldiers only got crippled and maimed. (and may have considered themselves lucky, just because they were still alive.) but either way, blood was shed in most cases. But I will agree, not always.
 
Not to stir matters worse on cemetery hunting, (which I do not do) but not all the folks in a cemetery lived a life worthy of any respect.

So how much do they deserve in death, would be an interesting question.
 
Depends on whether you're talking about hunting private property or park property. I hunt about 100 acres of battlefield loaded with trenches and rifle pits that is private property and with permission. If it's park property, definitly a no go for obvious reasons.
 
If you have permission to hunt a battlefield area, sure, why not? The relics in the ground are not going to improve over time. And wherever you find relics, battlefield or not, there's a good chance someone died there. So if your concern is disturbing the dead, only metal detect in playground wood chips for clad. Can't even be sure then. On second thought, quit detecting.
 
Nothing wrong with a property owner having rights over his own land. Something wrong if the government tried to take that right away though.

If it were not for the feelings that hunting artifacts are certain to stir inside me, I would be thrilled to find simple artifacts from say, the Battle of Gettysburg.

I'll try to explain it this way.

My family goes back over 7 generations here. Starting with my super great grandfather who served our country in the Revolutionary War. Someone from my family has fought in every major conflict. My eldest brother was killed in Vietnam and my father was a 50% disabled WW2 Vet.

Now, imagine a battlefield from the civil war, a horrendous engagement where cannon loaded with double canister blew men and beast alike to shreds. Arms, legs, heads, hands, feet, and assorted gore covers the ground, intestines festooned in tree branches. Parts you could identify, small bits and large chunks that you could not. And the Blood. Pools and puddles, still coagulating. small splatter here, and large spray there. Nothing in the field of jigsawed men and boys did not have someones life-blood upon it.

I could never walk through that maze of tangled and torn bodies and pick up a bloody button blown off this mans chest, or pick up the still warm piece of artillery shell that decapitated private so and so.

I can not dig up something now that I would never have picked up off the ground when it was fresh.

Now comes the hallowed ground part. Unquestioned respect for Veterans was something I was simply raised to have. I need only to look at my disfigured father as a young boy to know real war was nothing like the game we kids played in the woods. I knew it every day I woke up and saw my father, and it was reinforced when I knew I'd never see my brother again. The ground men fight and die on I consider special, hallowed.

Would I like to hunt artifacts from a civil war campsite? You can safely bet I would. But the actual battlefields are just not for me.

I don't have a problem when a person has the right mindset and enshrines and cherishes his battle finds. But I do have a problem with disturbing these sites just to sell off the booty to the highest bidder.

If some can consider it to be grave robbing to hunt in a cemetery, then some can also consider it grave robbing when you dig up the buckle that belonged to Private smith, who lost it exactly where he died.
 
sure, why not hunt a battlefield? obviously, federally protected sites are off limits. i've hunted many a skirmish site, campsites, and parts of battlefields that are privately owned property with the owner's express permission in every case. if i can locate, dig, document and preserve relics and artifacts, and have a great time doing it, then i've done myself and the future generations a favor.

for instance, on a comparative scale, how do you know the coins you dug last week weren't part of a violent crime or the silver ring you dug last year wasn't burglarized from a man's home? you don't know, and never will.

as a long time man in this great hobby, i learned long ago to put aside all personal feelings and approach every hunt in the same way - to recover lost american history, and have lots of fun doing it.
 
I'm lucky enough to detect on the sight of a Saxon battle from the 7th century. Find are sparce but nevertheless it must have been the scene of horrific injuries and deaths. It doesn't deter me becaause what I do informs history and helps understand the past - good or bad.

Additionally, the area I live in saw probably one of the strangest agricultural practices I've ever come across. The unknown dead from the battle of waterloo (Early 19th century) had their bones ground up an transported back to England and spread upon the fields near where I live as fertaliser, apparently. Think about that!
 
I personally plan on doing so and I do think battlefields and grave yards are apples and oranges. The vast majority of those who die in battle end up in a grave yard. A battlefield is a sight with historic significance where people have died. A grave yard is a place where families go to bury their dead in a dignified manner. We've all heard the metaphor, "spitting on someone's grave", which is a clue that someone's grave site is considered sacred and desecrating and/or looting that site is considered the ultimate disrespect.
 
Is a grave "sacred" even if the person was a scumbag child molester?

Is Battlefield ground only considered "sacred" when someone famous like Stonewall Jackson gets maimed, or where Reynolds was killed. Would you dig those spots if law allowed or do you have too much respect for them because they were famous?

Is the place private Smith died not "sacred" too? Gonna dig up the place he died cuz he was a nobody, just cannon fodder?
 
Yes i would like to hunt a battlefield and while detecting i might find a bullet that
might have ended a young mans life.
I could respect the one who shot it as well as the one who it landed upon.
 
gmanlight said:
Yes i would like to hunt a battlefield and while detecting i might find a bullet that
might have ended a young mans life.
I could respect the one who shot it as well as the one who it landed upon.
At first this reads as a throw-away comment to be ignored, but it actually sums up how I feel about battlefield (At least ancient UK ones) detecting. I think that history is only useful if we remember it correctly. All war is horrible and battles are the epicentre of wars (usually). To find a civil war bullet in the USA is to remind yourself that a nation fought itself to do something right and that both good and bad people died doing what they thought was right. It also helps people to remember that it wasn't all hollywood, fake blood and romantic.

I think it's not unreasonable to lift bullets and cannonballs from a battlefield. It means something to your nations' history and isn't desecrating a graveyard. Lets face it, even if you did come across some human remains, you'd report it immediately and that person could be laid to rest properly. I can't see the bad side of doing it.
 
fenian13 said:
Is a grave "sacred" even if the person was a scumbag child molester?

Is Battlefield ground only considered "sacred" when someone famous like Stonewall Jackson gets maimed, or where Reynolds was killed. Would you dig those spots if law allowed or do you have too much respect for them because they were famous?

Is the place private Smith died not "sacred" too? Gonna dig up the place he died cuz he was a nobody, just cannon fodder?

The entire grave site is sacred, as it's where people go to bury their loved ones and say their final goodbyes. I've been in firefights in Iraq and I couldn't care less if someone searched those sites to find 5.56 or 7.62 brass or links. But I did lose a good friend, and if someone went searching around his grave site looking for loot I'd probably react in a less than dignified manner.
 
Top