+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Roman Military History & Archaeology (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: Detector find ethics (/showthread.php?tid=6582)
Pages:
1
2
Detector find ethics - Tarbicus - 08-21-2006
What's the opinion on these?
[url:3cppuadi]http://www.ukdfd.co.uk/ukdfddata/index.php[/url]
[url:3cppuadi]http://www.finds.org.uk/[/url]
They include clear guidelines for recording finds, and encourage a more responsible attitude amongst detectorists who, quite frankly, will never be disappearing.
Are there similar schemes in other countries? What do people think?
Re: Detector find ethics - Arthes - 08-21-2006
GreetingsTarby,
as you point out, this shows a responsible attitude and gives the items found a traceable background provenence. This is particularly important in the case of non treasure trove items, which legally have to be reported...although are obivously not at times...
I assume if the items are sold, a record is kept of the buyers....
This could be made a requirement for private digs and metal detectorists, those without Internet access could report the finds at the nearest museum or library...etc.
I can also appreciate that sometimes people will find an item that they dearly wish to keep - for the right reasons - so do not report it.
ie, the landowner neglects the archaeological history of a site and the finder of an artifact, which the landowner may claim as his and sell for financial gain, would love and cherish it or pass it to a museum
regards
Arthes
Re: Detector find ethics - Primvs Pavlvs - 08-21-2006
I am personally of the belief that if you find it that it should be yours to do with as you please. Provided you find them on your own private property.
I have scores of Native American artifacts that I have picked up since I was a kid.
Treasure Trove and Artifacts laws - Caius Fabius - 08-21-2006
I am in favor of making it a requirement to report any finds, and the EU could come up with one, reasonable standard, which might impose penalties for looters and rewards for people who find stuff. Looting is destroying significant sites and significant finds, but the lack of finances for official research makes it just as important for hobbyists and non-professionals to be allowed to help, if they are reporting what they find.
The low-life types who sneak about in the evenings and just dig and sell, are destroying sites all over the world. The holes dug in the ground in historical sites in Eastern Europe, that weren't there the day before, can turn even a non-archaeologist's stomach. You look at the holes and know deep down that the item(s) is/are never going to be recorded and are lost to the historical record.
I prefer to buy replicas, unless a museum is having a sale of excess materials, where I can get actual artifacts, and support a museum and further research. Private collectors have a place, IF they share their collections with the world, and keep good records. They also have a place if they hide their stolen treasures away.... the local prison. :twisted:
Re: Detector find ethics - Tarbicus - 08-21-2006
Are there statistics or even reports on the subject of looting, so there is actually some kind of idea of how big the problem is? Not hearsay, I mean actual documentation.
Re: Detector find ethics - Arthes - 08-21-2006
It depends on the category of lootings....
the situation I mentioned is a case where the artifact is actually safer with the so called looter. If you or I came across a Roman or Greek helm in perfect condition....we would be sorely tempted to keep it for a while but hand it to a museum with the provision that we can borrow it back occasionally... :wink: :lol:
If it was reported and the owner of the land it was found on was a ....yes, well you know what I mean....who would simply sell it on eBay for scrap if they made enough cash....is it really looting...or preservation of the artifact for the future?
The situation I am talking about is usually a permitted private excavation, where the finder witholds the reporting of artifacts out of concern for their safety(the artifacts that is)....or somebody who takes it upon themselves to rescue whatever artifacts they can from an owned site that is due for destruction/being destroyed without any proper archaeological surveys being carried out, or insufficient finds being rescued....It happens..!
These 'looters' are in a different category to the 'dig up, mess up and sell on the black market/through illegal channels' sort..although the poor who are just trying to support and feed their families cannot really be blamed..
regards
Arthes
Re: Detector find ethics - Robert Vermaat - 08-22-2006
Quote:Are there statistics or even reports on the subject of looting, so there is actually some kind of idea of how big the problem is? Not hearsay, I mean actual documentation.
Check eBay for the extent of looting.
Re: Detector find ethics - Robert Vermaat - 08-22-2006
Quote:What's the opinion on these?
[url:1q3h9m9l]http://www.ukdfd.co.uk/ukdfddata/index.php[/url]
[url:1q3h9m9l]http://www.finds.org.uk/[/url]
They include clear guidelines for recording finds, and encourage a more responsible attitude amongst detectorists who, quite frankly, will never be disappearing.
Are there similar schemes in other countries? What do people think?
Actually I'm torn about this.
On the one hand I abhor the irresponcible MD-ing (although many keep to the guidelines, it has to be said), especially when profit is the main reason. They destroy the find site so that it becomes impossible to get the context between object and site.
On the other hand, a Dutch archaeologist has assured me that due to modern environmental conditions the soil is actually changing, and the chance is very high that in less than 10 years, most metal finds still in the soil will have either disappeared or irrepairably damaged.
So that would mean - get it while we can? :oops:
Re: Detector find ethics - Tarbicus - 08-22-2006
Quote:Check eBay for the extent of looting.Not particularly scientific :wink:
Quote:Actually I'm torn about this.Check Ebay for how to save our archaeological heritage? :wink:
On the one hand I abhor the irresponcible MD-ing (although many keep to the guidelines, it has to be said), especially when profit is the main reason. They destroy the find site so that it becomes impossible to get the context between object and site.
On the other hand, a Dutch archaeologist has assured me that due to modern environmental conditions the soil is actually changing, and the chance is very high that in less than 10 years, most metal finds still in the soil will have either disappeared or irrepairably damaged.
So that would mean - get it while we can? Embarassed
Re: Detector find ethics - Robert Vermaat - 08-22-2006
eBay is a guru for all answers.... :wink:
Re: Detector find ethics - Tarbicus - 08-22-2006
Quote:eBay is a guru for all answers.... :wink:
You mean "Ask Seller a Question About This Item?"
Re: Detector find ethics - Primvs Pavlvs - 08-22-2006
Why is there such a flury over purchasing items found that are so common that most museums will not even consider cataloging and displaying these items?
I can fully understand the looting of a major find, but when someone finds a broken fibula, or a ring from metal detecting on private land I fell they should be able to throw it in the river if they want. They have done the work, and the land is thiers not the states.
Re: Detector find ethics - Praefectusclassis - 08-22-2006
We've been over this subject before, in a long discussion, but the archaeologists would say that that one fibula may indicate there's something else in the ground. And especially items that are very common can be used to date uncommon items, because there's a lot of similar material.
The trouble is also, of course, what is a major find? It's plain to see that a beautifully preserved helmet would be considered a major find by the members of this forum, but say that the complete groundplan of a wooden Roman auxiliary camp was in the ground, recognizable only by the discoloration of rotted poles in the soil? That would certainly be a major find, but in all likelihood only a trained archaeologist would know what's there to see.
Re: Detector find ethics - Tarbicus - 08-22-2006
***BUMP***
Are there statistics or even reports on the subject of looting, so there is actually some kind of idea of how big the problem is? Not hearsay, I mean actual documentation.
Just to illustrate why it's important: Dog-napping in the UK is estimated by dog associations to number annually 45,000. That's very alarming.
However, an independent charity (not for profit, unlike I believe the aforementioned) put the figure annually at 5,000.
Quite a difference.
Just to add, the reason for the disparity is because there are no official records, as dog theft is simple theft of property according to the law and is jumbled in with those theft statistics.
Re: Detector find ethics - Arthes - 08-22-2006
Greetings,
Quote:but say that the complete groundplan of a wooden Roman auxiliary camp was in the ground, recognizable only by the discoloration of rotted poles in the soil? That would certainly be a major find, but in all likelihood only a trained archaeologist would know what's there to see.and that is exactly the sort of major find that would be concreted over and built upon.....annoying all concerned except the builders and co.
If that site was disused after initial archaeological surveying that confirmed it as being a long lost Roman fort and the builders were moving in next weekend to totally destroy it, .....wouldn't you want to go out and see what could be found.....?
The pity is that artifacts can be safely removed...the insitu things cannot...well, they can sometimes, like at Abu Simnel (think I have the name correct) but at a cost and the sad fact is that an important ancient site, unless protected by the law, is victim to anybody who gets planning permission through the local council...and that can sometimes be flaunted.
A good example here in N Yorkshire, I found out about two days ago.....
ThornboroughHenges grrrh :evil:
So would locals who decided to do some careful 'looting' here, trying to save what they can, be in the wrong.....?
regards
Arthes