| Follow Ups - Post Followup - Current Messages - FAQ - Your Ad Here | |
|
Re: Why are archeologists like this? July 19, 2001 at 09:21:43 In Reply to: Why are archeologists like this? posted by Karl on July 18, 2001 at 10:34:32 I agree with much of what you say, but I feel that most of the objections you raise could be answered by simply requiring that finds be catalogued and reported: Precise gridding of metal detector finds is unnecessary, since the depth achieved by a detector rarely exceeds 30 cm. In every excavation I've seen here in Belgium, the top 50 cm of soil has been removed and placed to one side while the real excavation took place. This is because the uppermost portion of the soil has almost always been so disturbed by agriculture and other recent human activity that objects within it are already removed from their context. In this regard, GPS coordinates are probably sufficient to localize any finds. I'd propose the following system: any ancient object found within 30 cm of the surface is property of the finder, as long as the object is reported, properly catalogued to within 10m of the place found, and offered for scientific study, if requested, for a period not to exceed 90 days. A reward could even be offered (cheaper for investigators, in the long run, than hiring a bevy of grad students to do the digging) for reporting finds. This way, archaeologist would get to view far more material than they otherwise would, whereas those willing to actually expend the energy and trudge the fields would be rewarded for their efforts, thus everybody wins. I would argue that if indeed the archaeological establishment is truly interested in furthering scientific knowlege, then simply being able to examine finds for a period of 90 days should suffice. If, on the other hand, they insist on the exclusive right to such objects, then that suggests to me that other motives underly their actions As you suggest, 'site' type finds are more problematic. On one hand, I agree that having a large database to work from is important. On the other hand, when a treasure hunter does all the effort and research to locate a site, why should the archaeological lobby then be able to step in and have the site declared a "national treasure" and essentially steal the treasure hunter's work? All my grumbling aside, I have to say that I like the work that archaeologists turn out, and I enjoy occasionally lending a hand to these folks at their dig sites, finding the odd coin in the bottom of the trench or in the spoil heaps that they might have missed; I gladly hand over such finds that they may contribute to the overall picture of the site. With such cooperation, I've managed to earn the respect of at least a couple of archaeolgists who formerly saw detectorists only as predators. With a few compromises on both sides, surely some system could be arrived at that would benefit all concerned.
 Follow Ups:
Post a Followup
|