Turned off and burned by museums

[BosnMate]

Just wondering what experience you guys have had with museums. I've donated a couple of items to museums, and later gone back, and the items aren't there, and nobody has any idea what happened to them. In my youth I worked on a ranch in Nevada, and found a number of Indian relics. Donated them to a local museum, and they are all gone except for the grinding stone I donated, and that is credited to the university. Another time I found the location of a blacksmith shop, found hand made ox shoes, hand made chain and some other stuff. Donated that to the museum. They are long gone and nobody knows anything about them. My mother loaned a museum in California a hair wreath that was done with hair from all our family members, including my grandfather, back in Victorian times, when such stuff was popular. The family wasn't 49er's, but they are among the oldest families in the area, dating way back. The wreath is not on display, and the museum says they own it, and won't return it. Mom is gone, and there is no receipt that I could find, so now I guess they do own it. When I donated stuff, they were tickled to get it, and took my information, for what ever that was worth.

[bearbqd]

Haven't had any dealings with museums, but I don't think I would donate or lend anything unless I personally knew the owner or curator.

[Keppy]

Haven't had any dealings with museums, but I don't think I would donate or lend anything unless I personally knew the owner or curator.

I know i would not donate or lend any thing to a museum.... Or places like that even if i knew the curator.............. You could say i do not trust those places..... & The people that run them...And you would be right..

[Jason in Enid]

Sorry to hear about losing a family hierloom.

I have been telling people for years not to ever give or loan anything to a museum. Museums regularly sell items to other museum or collectors when they don't want it any more. Thefts by workers is so common as to be expected. Basements and back rooms are filled with items the public will never see.

Museums are nice to visit, but keep your collections in the family!

[U.K. Brian]

After I donated a smelters hoard which disappeared within two years I only ever loaned items and at least in Britain this does seem to protect them. If you give an item then its up to them what they do. Your 'to you' unique find they might well get several examples of in the next few months. If they get a better example of the same thing then the others will be sold on....hopefully to defray the running cost or buy other items but there's always a few rotten apples.

[goldentruth]

That is a real shame you are treated that way. I have heard of a county who wanted to claim a persons find but I was told people have rights too when it comes to what they find. Good luck with everything.

[lumbercamp]

I had someone tell me, who volunteers at a museum, "In the front door, out the back door".

[maipenrai]

Unfortunately, that seems to be the way it is. It would be so nice if we could still keep ownership, or the museum could keep it on loan, until they didnt need it anymore, then return it. I wonder if they even laugh at us, when we turn things in. Not only are we losing out, but the museum and public are losing out, because of this greed. There needs to be accountability. Maybe its the same with some charity organizations also. People carefully pack items, and take them to their favorite charity, then the employees, pick out the goodies, and the rest, hauled off to the dump!

[spartacus53]

BosnMate, oh boy, something for me to sink my evil teeth into

If they still have that "hair wreath", go to the local police department and file a stolen report on it.. Then report the museum to the authorities as having your property.. Tell the museum you are willing to cover the cost of a DNA exam and you'll own the museum when you're done with them

I bet that item will be returned pronto

If you want your other items back, send me details and I'll tell you how to rattle their cages...

I'm good like that

[limegoldconvertible68]

Exactly! A metal detectorist is considered nothing but a looter by the professionals. Of course, they themselves are entitled to anything they want for their personnel collections.......even if its supposed to belong to the people.

[DigginThePast]

Funny thing about museums and the internet. I've bought back unique items donated to a local museum from a dealer clear across the Country.

[Sandman]

Never ever loan items to a museum or historical society if you may wish to get it back someday. Once it is in their possession it is considered theirs. If they deem it unfit for display "has market value," it will be sold or added to an Archie's private collection. They don't care if you thought others might enjoy seeing it.

[rjw4law]

Museums are in it for themselves, as most businesses are. Almost need a a lawyer to draw up an agreement if you lend anything.

[johnedoe]

I think the key word here is "Donated" There is a big difference between donated and loaned.... if you donated something it is the museums to do with as they wish.... If you "Loaned" the museum something it had better damn well be there when you go to retrieve it.... Also anything loaned should have adequate written terms and conditions attached.

JMHO

[Graddick]

Unless it is a really tiny local museum, there probably isn't anything you have that they want. I did volunteer at a museum of classical antiquities for a while and we had WAY more stuff than display space. Museums aren't going to turn down people who want to donate because museums don't want to discourage the practice lest they lose out on a donation that they really DO want. Of course, there is no excuse for not properly crediting the donor on the item's info sheet. However, museums are much like any other organizations - they don't want to open up their files to anyone who walks through the door. They may have had some bad experiences with people making claims to their items or people causing trouble if their donations were not displayed or were sold. Perhaps they felt it was easier to feign ignorance than reassure you that yes, they do still have your donations.

I just think that people have ridiculously overinflated ideas of the value/worth of their stuff. I certainly see that all the time on TNet and other metal detecting sites. People rant and rave about "protecting valuable history" and point to half of a rusted belt buckle. No museum wants that unless it has some sort of important provenance or is part of a larger set of artifacts. It costs time and money to catalog, preserve and store items and museums, especially in this day and age, don't have the resources.

[Jason in Enid]

People rant and rave about "protecting valuable history" and point to half of a rusted belt buckle. No museum wants that unless it has some sort of important provenance or is part of a larger set of artifacts. It costs time and money to catalog, preserve and store items and museums, especially in this day and age, don't have the resources.

Good luck convincing the archie of that fact! To them, that half of a rusted belt buckle is enough to lock down the land and have it declared a cultural heritage.

[spartacus53]

You have made many excellent points, especially between donated and loaned items. If it were truly a loaned item, you do have the right to retrieve your property. None if it was indeed loaned and they won't return it, that is considered theft.. If it were donated, the museum would have the paperwork showing the transaction.

I would go for it and make their life miserable, then again, that's me You have nothing to lose

[Graddick]

People rant and rave about "protecting valuable history" and point to half of a rusted belt buckle. No museum wants that unless it has some sort of important provenance or is part of a larger set of artifacts. It costs time and money to catalog, preserve and store items and museums, especially in this day and age, don't have the resources.

Good luck convincing the archie of that fact! To them, that half of a rusted belt buckle is enough to lock down the land and have it declared a cultural heritage.

It's only worthless as history when it has already been removed from the ground. It would need "property of George Washington" engraved on it to have any worth on its own. Without the exact location of object's discovery (which include depth and orientation of the object) then the object has lost most of its value. Such items would account for 99.999% of what metal detectorists dig up.
It's not the object that the "archie" wants (very mature btw). Its the context that makes an artifact significant.

[Jason in Enid]

Graddick, since you seem to speak with the authority of an archie, please explain something to all of us unwashed, detecting rabble. What exactly is so important in these post-historical "archeological sites" that are only worthy of digging by an archie? For every shipwreck, battle site, etc.... what is to be learned that can change, alter or add to known history? I mean if we already knew that XXX country was sailing commercial ships or that 2 combatants fought at a location, what waste the dollars to lock off the land and perform an excavation? We would already have records of ship construction methods and the places they traveled too. WE would already have records of the beligerants, who commanded them, and what military units were contained.

So what is so precious at these sites that nobody else is allowed to dig?

[maipenrai]

Jason, that is the question I was going to ask. Another thing, is it really that important to know where an object was found, to the ½" and the direction it was pointed? By the time an artifact is found, it could have been moved and turned around a hundred times, especially something in the sea. Is there any reason to keep people out of a battle site, just because an archaeologist will someday want to dig there, in a thousand years? Will there be a difference in history, if there were 8 buttons found, or 20? If someone is really worried about history, then the relics can be photographed and logged, which would probably serve history better, than having the relics stored in the back room of a museum.

In the Baltic, we have hundreds, if not thousands of ship wrecks, and the museums want it all. If you find an unknown wreck, and inform the museum, you stand a good chance of never being allowed to dive it again. Even if you belong to a respected dive club, that doesnt help you either. On some wrecks, you can get permission to dive, be not many, and of course you will not be given permission to do any work for the museum. There are only a few museum divers in Finland, and it would take a million years to research all the wrecks there.
The fact is; there will never be enough time to research every item in the ground or in the sea. As someone pointed out, we always believe our own finds are a great discovery, but actually they are not much to the museum, or to history, only to the person that found it. But then why does the museum want to keep it, or prevent us from us "playing" with our detectors, in their "own" private areas. Will it come down to all land and sea, is historically important, and we will not be allowed to pick anything up? Although the relics we search for are old, the will not last Forever, would the archies be happier if the relics just rotted away, rather than anyone else finding them?

What about all the coins that are lost in the school yard, and tot lot? Wouldnt it be historical important, if we were not allowed to pick them up, then in a thousand years, we could study how people valued their coins? Also all the garbage could be studied, and I'm sure that would also tell a great story. Yeah, that is a bit stupid, but that is the way things are going.

End of Rant!