The fight to save battlegrounds from invasion of metal detectors

They are sites that witnessed some of the seminal moments of British history, where the Wars of the Roses were won and lost, where the Cavaliers and the Roundheads battled over a nation's political future and where Henry V first displayed his military skills.

Britain's famous battlefields ­ with names as evocative as Bosworth Field, Culloden and Hastings ­ are as much a part of the historical canvas of the nation as Stonehenge and the Tower of London.

But many of these important sites are now under threat, according to archaeologists, from a new menace: metal detectors. The invasion of amateur treasure hunters is becoming such a problem that attempts to discover the truth about some of the most famous battles in British history are being jeopardised.

At least 10 important battlefields have been damaged by uncontrolled metal detecting and the unrecorded removal of thousands of objects, the Battlefield Trust ­ a Heritage Lottery Fund supported charity ­ said yesterday.

They include medieval England's largest battle (Towton, 1461), Edward IV's great Wars of the Roses victory at Tewkesbury (1471), the Civil War battles of Newark and Newbury, and Henry V's first great battle (Shrewsbury in 1403) ­ one of the first mass deployments of longbows.

The largest single metal-detecting operation on a British battlefield took place on the weekend of 13 September at an English Civil War battle site ­ Marston Moor in Yorkshire. At least 300 people with metal detectors discovered many objects, including dozens, possibly hundreds, of lead shot and other objects from the battle itself, the brass top of one gunpowder flask, the lead spout of another, four spur buckles, part of a halberd or pike, numerous pistol balls and two pieces of decorated bridle equipment. A dozen coins in circulation at the time of the battle were also unearthed.

The problem was that there was no co-ordinated strategy for trying to ensure that battlefield finds were fully reported and recorded. The two hard-pressed officials present from the Government's antiquities recording quango ­ the Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS) ­ were overwhelmed by dozens of finds from all periods, from Roman times to the 17th Century. Out of about 140 items officially reported to the officials, fewer than 10 were understood to be relevant to the battle.

The Marston Moor operation was a legal, family-oriented event on private land which was only recently identified as part of the battlefield. The rally raised more than £5,000 for charity.

But British archaeologists are furious. "What happened at Marston Moor was inexcusable," said the Battlefields Trust archaeologist Glenn Foard. "Metal detecting of this sort on nationally important battlefields destroys vital archaeological evidence of exactly how battles were fought."

Now English Heritage is planning to work with the PAS to provide more support. "English Heritage will seek to work much more closely with the Portable Antiquities Scheme to develop better recording methodologies and practices," said English Heritage's top battlefield expert, Paul Stamper.

Roger Bland, the national co-ordinator of the Scheme, said: "We did the best we could in the circumstances. Recording finds at large rallies is always difficult. However, it is important that all the voluntary and statutory agencies draw lessons from what happened at Marston Moor last weekend so that we can have a better response in the future."

Pioneering work in the US ­ particularly at the site of Custer's last stand ­ has shown that careful recording of battlefield finds, especially ordnance, can lead to the re-writing of history.

Archaeology at the site of the Battle of Little Bighorn proved that there was no determined last stand. Most of Custer's troops had been attacking when they ran into concerted Indian counterattacks, at which point the battalion collapsed like a row of dominoes

Robin Bush, who spent ten years as the historian for Channel 4's archaeology programme Time Team, said amateurs with metal detectors could play a vital role in excavating historical sites.

"Despoilation of sites is obviously insupportable," he said. "But many of these sites are never going to be excavated because there is such little funding. If you can get people into the mind set of reporting and recording their finds then they have an important role to play."

On battlefields, surveying has to be systematic and find spots have to be recorded to within two or three metres to be of use in reconstructing the ebb and flow of the battle. Properly weighed, measured ­ and with their exact find spots recorded with relatively cheap pocket satellite-linked Global Positioning System (GPS) equipment ­ lead shot finds can reveal previously unknown lines of fire and how they changed as the battle progressed. Discrete groups of broken equipment can even reveal for the first time in centuries the exact location of cavalry or infantry close combat. Field commanders' tactics ­ unrecorded in official histories ­ can gradually be revealed.

After the Marston Moor rally, the Government was asked in a House of Lords question what statutory protection it could introduce to prevent uncontrolled metal detecting on British battlefields.

The Government conceded that at present it had no powers to protect historic battlefields. "We have commissioned a review designed to bring together listing, scheduling of ancient monuments and other regimes, such as the register of historic battlefields, into a unified system," said Lord McIntosh of Haringey, a minister in the Department for Culture. "The protection status for those historic sites will form part of the review."

Battlefields have always been the Cinderella of the heritage industry rarely receiving the level of treatment afforded to hundreds of medieval castles, scores of major stately homes and dozens of Roman sites.

Only four have any reasonable visitor facilities at them ­ Bosworth Field, Hastings, Bannockburn and Culloden.

The problem is that they do not normally have any buried or standing structures. So (apart from human burials) they cannot be protected through the normal procedures used to protect historic buildings or conventional archaeological sites.

Britain has some 270 known battlefields ­ about 220 in England, at least 40 in Scotland and less than 10 in Wales. Only England has an official register of battlefields ­ compiled by English Heritage. But registration affords no statutory protection ­ and few resources are available to keep a watchful eye on them.

In Scotland and Wales, there are no official lists of battlefields ­ although discussions have recently started between the Scots and Welsh and the Battlefields Trust to address the problem.

The level of proper archaeological work on battlefield sites is also lamentably low. Of the 270 battlefields known in Britain, none has ever been comprehensively surveyed and investigated and only one, Towton, has been substantially investigated to modern archaeological standards.

This is despite the fact that battlefield archaeology is relatively inexpensive compared with large-scale conventional excavations. Ninety per cent of the work involves topographical and systematic metal detector surveys. They would also need to include documentary and palaeo-environmental research to determine land use and vegetation at the time a battle was fought.

Archaeologists estimate that a thorough, systematic investigation of a reasonable sample of battlefields ­ say six sites between the 10th and 17th centuries ­ could cost around £300,000.

Sites that might repay proper archaeological investigation would include the great Viking victory at Maldon, Essex (AD991), the Battle of Hastings, Sussex (1066), the defeat of the Scots at the Battle of the Standard at Northallerton, Yorkshire (1138), battles of the Wars of the Roses at Blore Heath, Staffordshire (1459) and Bosworth Field, Leicestershire (1485) and the defeat of Monmouth's rebellion at Sedgemoor, Somerset (1685).