Archaeologist admits to destroying shipwrecks

[Au_Dreamers]

What's wrong with digging a grave site?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[RELICDUDE07]

This T-net site has a large Indian artifacts section with some great finds....I really don't think any of us like finding bones, but sometimes if you dig you do...I have worked on some government jobs & when excavating told please if you find any old bones or earthen ware.Just cover it back up or push it a side,the state could send a crew out here & shut the job down for ever..This was straight from the government officials so the blame game can go around...I think everyone has the power to search & discover-some just better than others,or have a little more power & better search area....

 

[fibberjibber]

ok here it goes i dont puncuate when i get going and here we go

so archies are so much better the mders huh well holy crap we use small trowls ice picks and small shovels and golf course hole cutter good lord they use back hoes and gas powered post hole diggers ron pastorie as one example i offered my help to a local archie group when we finally found the yankee fort here in my town i was told mders are historical rapists we have no idea what we are doing well i only forgot to tell him as a unschooled archie i have been on a few archiaeological digs and i know how to rope dig and stair step a a grid looking for history i even went on a few diggs in isreal with a well known archie while i was in college so i know my way around a pit well they messed up and didnt get to there sacred yankee fort is now owned by the city i live in and i have a city parks permit for mding and a signed letter from the city parks and rec enginierthat says i can md and remove what i find unless it is a significant historical find so i am gonna start going up there and md in a 10x10 rope grid and dig every signal and fill all my holes in just like the mders code of ethics say and then i will properly and safely clean and preserve them and put them in display cases and display them at every gun and antique show with in a 100 mile radius and not share them with any museum becuse they all say johnnie fry was the first pony express rider and bi;;y richardson was never the first pony rider nor was he even a pony rider i have photographs that prove it all wrong so that is nail 1and 2 in their dumba$$ box so should archies get that kind of authorityto say yes and no over our hobbies and means of family and company support HELL NO

OLEPOSSUM

Never said in any of my posts that archies are better than MDers so please do not misrepresent.
I think that is great you spent time on excavations. I think that should give you a similar background to me and you should agree with my posts then that there should be a more open line of communication between MDers and Archies. You should also see the merit in my proposal to bring more MDers on historical excavations because of their invaluable experience and ability to pinpoint metallic artifacts or site boundaries. Additionally, with your experience on several digs under different leadership, you should agree with my premise that not all Archies are close-minded and greedy. I think the city parks and rec engineer summed it up pretty well that you can collect what you find unless "it is a significant historical find". Question: who exactly determines that in this case?

I have never, never seen a backhoe on any excavation, but again I deal with almost exclusively prehistoric sites. If one was used, it was only to remove known backfill. I have heard three anecdotes of dozers used to remove the top foot or so of tilled farmland on top of a discovered site. The reason these methods were employed was because the fill or tilled land has almost no research potential value since any artifacts found would not be relevant or in situ. I do know that the overburden removed by the dozer was still sifted for artifacts. The posthole diggers remove inches at a time to see if a site exists before committing to a full excavation. Each layer is sifted. It is just faster than doing it by hand with a shovel. I can get into particulars about the risks involved with this method in another thread if someone wanted to understand more.
I think its great you show your finds. I think most do because its great to talk about them, the hunt, etc with people interested in your hobby. But most of your finds still end up sitting in your house in storage. Why? Because you dont have the room to display it all. Or some are not as significant as others. Or are repeats. Sounds exactly like a museum to me. Except for one thing: the museum has a catalog of all their artifacts which is publicly accessible and anyone can go in and view and handle them. I dont know what you have. I probably never will. So research potential is lost. This is another fine hurdle some professors and I are trying to overcome- the untapped research in private collections. Granted, the amount of information is limited compared to an in situ find, but there is still information valuable to research.

One more thing for those who think in situ is a joke. Entire battles at Gettysburg have been rewritten because of excavations of bullets in situ. So in some cases it matters. Think about it.

 

[Au_Dreamers]

"Except for one thing: the museum has a catalog of all their artifacts which is publicly accessible and anyone can go in and view and handle them."

I would tend to disagree with that statement "ANYONE" could go in and view and HANDLE them.

Also you assume private collectors don't catalog their artifacts. You also assume private collectors wouldn't allow "academia" access to their collections.

Again your posts slant towards the privilege of the archaeologist. Who determines site access? You write about Archaeologists "allowing/using" MD'ers. I don't see much of Private sector allowing/using archaeologists.

You have Archies in positions of control and authority with MD'ers subservient to them. Why?

This is why way back in another post I asked for you to go back and read your posts to see if you even realize they read that way.

I dunno maybe you do, maybe you don't intend it that way.
We do agree that Archaeologists and the private sector need a better "working work relationship.”

I have no problem differing to someone with more knowledge than myself to properly handle a situation but I do firmly believe that just because someone spent more time in a formal educational institution it does not make them more knowledgeable.

Some people go to college to learn how to do things, some people do things…

 

[cornelis 816]

An archaeologist . Just another person that followed a college education of some sort . I am all for archaeologist . But ........they can take pictures of gold bar or silver bars imprints or markings but they should not take these bars away from me . They can read all they want out of the pictures and do not have to have posession of the gold . Gold is only gold and has no antique value . I think that after I spent many hours on research and spent many hours diving , and equipping a salvage vessel ( plus the cost of fuel etc. etc . ) I should be rewarded with the result of my works . The archaeologist can write all he wants about my finds . He can take pictures of everything I find . Come to his conclusion . Report the findings to the State . Write a book about what I discovered and salvaged , but he should not take anything away from me . And if he has the state behind him , the state should repay me for the hours I used to work on this project ( at about $100 per hour ) plus the cost of running my salvage boat . Just my opinion . I rather stay a pirate than to trust any archaeologist I know . Cornelius

 

[Alexandre]

Cornelius,

The only treasure hunter that I know that comes close to doing good archaeology (and there are some pretty bad archaeologists out there, that are as destructive treasure hunters) is Robert Sténuit.

If you ever did excavate a wreck following good archaeological practices, then your statement would be much palatable.. but, as you know, that doesn't happen.

An archaeologist . Just another person that followed a college education of some sort . I am all for archaeologist . But ........they can take pictures of gold bar or silver bars imprints or markings but they should not take these bars away from me . They can read all they want out of the pictures and do not have to have posession of the gold . Gold is only gold and has no antique value . I think that after I spent many hours on research and spent many hours diving , and equipping a salvage vessel ( plus the cost of fuel etc. etc . ) I should be rewarded with the result of my works . The archaeologist can write all he wants about my finds . He can take pictures of everything I find . Come to his conclusion . Report the findings to the State . Write a book about what I discovered and salvaged , but he should not take anything away from me . And if he has the state behind him , the state should repay me for the hours I used to work on this project ( at about $100 per hour ) plus the cost of running my salvage boat . Just my opinion . I rather stay a pirate than to trust any archaeologist I know . Cornelius

 

[cornelis 816]

Robert Stenuit is nearly my neighbour . There are some good archaeologists , that want to work with you . However they are hard to find because most of them think they are holier than the pope . Cornelius

 

[diggemall]

I gotta throw my two cents in on this one as a few years ago the Wi State Archaeologist here in WI essentially declared ALL state lands off-limits to detectorists.

If we use my home state as an example, WI has 5,633,610 acres held by the State & Federal govt.
Assuming an excavation "pit" of 1 sq yd, that translates into 27,266,672,400 potential "pits". (That's 27+ BILLION)
Even if they were capable of excavating a single pit in only two days (I know - that's too fast) and IF they were able to work 1,000 pits simultaneously and continuously, 365 days / year;
IT WOULD TAKE OVER 149,000 YEARS TO EXAMINE EVERY SQUARE YARD OF STATE AND FEDERAL LAND (never mind County, municipal, and private land) IN THIS STATE ALONE !

Sorry, only a complete and total moron would think for even a heartbeat that it all has to be "protected" for "professionals" to exhume, when such a task is simply IMPOSSIBLE.

The arrangement they have in the UK is far more practical & expedient, IMHO.

Diggem'

Ok, so I have a question- specifically to Diggem, but all can chime in. I am curious where the lines should be drawn. Would you find it acceptable to dig a Native American burial site? Nevermind, only a- how did you put it?? "complete and total moron" would want to dig up a grave site. But what about a sacred site? What about a charred fire pit? Or an ancient trash pile? Or lets move to something more modern- what about along a 17th or 18th century portage trail in the American heartland?

Diggem is right. There are way too many protected acres in our state. Its senseless to ban it all. Ban known sites or potential sites with significance. I think most MDers would agree to that at the least. But to ban all waterfront areas and DNR controlled lands is ludicrous.
-Eric

Eric;

As someone who spent several decades excelling at a job normally "reserved" for "educated" persons (namely machine control systems engineering - i.e. automation technology) without the hinderances of said formal education, I am forever stuck with the characteristic of being first, analytical, and second, practical: If it simply can NOT be done in a practical, cost-effective manner, then there HAS to be a better way to achieve the objective. (Sorry about the self-effacement, but HAD to drive home the point that, in many cases, a formal education is but one (lousy) way to attain knowledge)

IMHO, the Brits have an excellent system. To my understanding, it pretty much operates as follows: KNOWN specific sites are off-limits. Otherwise, go ahead and MD to your hearts content. If you find something of potential historical value, you are COMPELLED to report it (penalties imposed for failure to do so). An official determines whether the find is significant, whether it is "wanted" for "public" ownership, etc. If so, a value is determined for the find and the finder is compensated for the object. If not, it is his to keep. I presume (although I've not seen any examples) that if the object indicates further archaeological investigation is warranted, there is an avenue for the "state" to pursue as well. (Any UK MD-ers please correct any incorrect assumptions on my part)

What could be better than that ? Largely unrestrained exploration and collaboration, pure & simple.

Diggem'

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Evening fibberjibber, Here is a re-post of somehing that I am having fun with here in TN. It concerns a dry land archaeological zone which while known, has not been investigated as far as I have found out. Why?

If I decide to investigate it with my Detector with an eye to profits, books, as well as archaeological discoveries, who is at fault? They for not going to the site for almost 100 years after being shown it, or even providing any protection, other than the old man on a pension that lives there? Or me, who attempts to do some research and investigation because it is fun, and since I finance it myself, would need try to make a bit of a living from it.
***************

I uncovered evidence that 'cannot be proven', yet, however in the early days, the King Of Spain had no idea of what he had. He needed it explored by competent explorers.

To do this by himself would cost too much, so his ministers came up with the idea of embellishing a story about the 7 Ciudades de Cibola.

This was ideal for the king, so he let the 'edited' story be leaked, then graciously allowed various explorations be made up with a charter to give the King part of what they found, and to have Royal Representatives with them to record the country encountered in their travels.

They had no problems equipping these expensive expeditions see -- from --> Full text of "A journal of American ethnology and archæology;"

at --> http://www.archive.org/stream/ajour.../ajournalamerica00expegoog_djvu.txt

Quote -- "that Mexico was then so poorly supplied with colonists, that any at- tempt to draw them towards another section of America was regarded as dangerous to the existence of the colony ; hence, that that colony afforded but a trembling staff to European domination. On the other hand, it proves that even among the scanty population of Europeans there was a crowd ready to engage in anything, provided it was new and striking. In other words, circumstances then were just as they have been in the Southwest but lately. As soon as anything new \& discovered, everybody rushes for it. With such a class of men, re- ports like those of Fray Marcos fell on fertile soil. The viceroy encouraged Coronado's expedition by all possible means. His main object was to eliminate from Mexico elements unfavorable to a steady progress of the country. He was afraid that if a leaven of a certain kind was left it would produce a fermentation detrimental to the interests of Spain and of civilization in general; for it should not be forgotten that Spain cherished then the same exalted ideas about its duties as the banner-bearer of progress as every other nation, including the American, has since.
overreaching, and the startling information secured by Fray Marcos and its effects upon the mind of the public did not escape his notice. He secretly caused an agitation in favor of the ^^ newly discovered country," in order to get rid of people who were a nuisance in New Spain, and with the faintest of all hopes that they might, perhaps, prosper in the far distant North."

The Royal Court was not composed of idiots as commonly believed he he.

There is a series of 7 villages etc in a large remote, off travel Braranca in the eastern borders of the present Sinaloa, extremely rough terrain, still basically unknown today. They apparently worshiped the Buffalo, since many, figures and drawings of them are to be found there, yet no Buffalo are known to have been in that that area.

The only way they could have known of the Buffalo was from second hand information - part of the migration path of the Aztecs? Or were they Aztecs that decided to stay there, instead of continuing on south?

They also found large deposits of iron pyrites stored there. Evidence suggests that they mixed them with the external coating of their homes with it, possibly for beauty, as well as possible reflective insulation. The effect would be that from a distance, they would appear to have homes made of gold.

Estaban on his journey south could quite possibly have passed near by them and saw the houses 'built of gold' and later reported this the Ones that rescued him.


So where were the elusive 7 Ciudades de Cibola? North, which was explored, or to the hidden barranca de Conijaqui in Snail, which was quite possibly on Estavan's journey, and not explored.

Don Jose de La Mancha

p.s. I might add that there is a large courtyard that was used for sports (?) which is very unique in that almost every sq meter of it has an 'INTACT' ceramic object. Notice that I said 'Intact', most cultures believed that ceramics had a soul and that it was required to break part of the object in order to release the soul of the object.

How could any Archaeologist not go there ? A dream project.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Digemal: If'n ya got it don't be shy, flaunt it, 'you' earned it. Remember a formal education merely gives you a base to work with, it cannot give you intelligence, on the contrary many times it actually is a trap against free thinking outside of the "box", so go, go and have fun.

Don Jose de la Mancha

 

[olepossum]

fibberjibber i think archeology is awesome. but when i am called a historical rapist and uneducated because we are just there to find ,dig ,clean improperly,incase and show off and or sell well them they can kiss the south end of me heading north. i keep logs of what when and where i find everything as long as it isnt modern trash. that is everything from broken glass ware to toys, square nails, jewelry to coins. i use a water pick turned down low with soap and hot water going through it to clean with, and i even do a little 9volt electrolisis and. then it gets photographed and then slabbed or in a neat little black vynil covered wood cases with quilting in it . ihave let a few musems borrow it for a month or so, with papers saying who rightfully owns it so they cant keep it saying that it is historical .and who has that call of being significant historical find ME because i found it and it is mine .i wanted to find vikings ,ndns,atlantis ,roanoke ,and all that neat stuff they are the basis of man kind so that means i dont believ we came from the sea or monkeys.and every sight i have been on we have used shovels never post hole diggers or backhoes .when the ground freezes and thaws stuff gets pushed up when a farmer tills the ground items get turned over and up .basicly yes we should work together but not as smart supervisor with a magnifyer dumb worker with a noise making machine , but as equal sometimes common sence holds more attention than a truck load of book smarts .my grandad always said all the books smarts and certificates in the world dont mean squat with out a measure of common sence.so by them calling a historical rapists and and night hawks and uneducated and financially based thers that shows grandads saying right there.look at melfischer yes he sold some of it be he has a museum that the bulk of ir has gone into for the world to see not to set in the dark basement of some college,university or government warehouse ,foer a price you get to see history and learn something .

 

[RELICDUDE07]

I can help with Roanoke -Virginia it's next to John Smith moms-------- Alice Smith's Sugar plantation

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

good morning . apol I had to modify my last post to Fibber libber about the 7 ciudades of cibola.

I also forgot to mention my Christmas present from a friend. It reminded me of Your statement on chicken bones which I thoroughly agree with.

Under the improvised tree I found a box with my name on it. I opened it only to find another box, and inside another box etc., etc.

The final box held a skull, a very unique skull. It was of an extreme flat head culture, it had been flattened from the eybrows back almost flat.

He said that he had found it in a cave, partially buried with sand. It was still covered with a nice film of body oil.

By coincidence there was a man and wife archaeological team in town from another of the North Easten Universities.

I took the skull to them. They were very enthusiastic and happy. They must have taken a hundred 35 mm pictures of it from every angle with comparitive size data.

I then asked them what can you tell me about it? They said it was from a young woman, about 21 or 22, that she had had two children. And since there were no known records of a flat head culture in that part of Mexico she either belonged to an unknown one, or was a captive or had been sold to the group.

They also explained to me about certain characteristics of her diet and how often she had eaten, depending upon the season.

They then explained to me how easy it was to determine the above, and a multitude of other bits of personal data..

I offered them her skull along with the commitment to retrieve the rest of her skeleton, as well as any other bones in the cave, in the interests of science. They told me that regretably, they could not accept it, since their charter in Mexico forbid removing anything from Mexico.

However the next time I went to the states, i sent it to them, but as usual, I never received an answer ?

So you see gentlemen, much can be learned from a chicken bone or an aboriginal sex pot 's skull.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[cuzcosquirrel]

Robert Sténuit is a good example of someone who found treasure for the sake of knowledge. His Treasures of The Armada is a book I have turned to time and again for reference and practical knowledge of wreck topography and artifact recovery. It has given me a greater insight into the wrecks I am interested in than many other people have. I too would like to someday find "gold under the sea," like Robert Stenuit (don't think it's going to happen though.)

How do you destroy a shipwreck anyway? The process of a shipwreck is just the first sharp blows until everything is gone and nothing more can be said or known about the past from the material at the site. It's a salvage of history, of knowing, understanding, and relating to the people of the past and the things that happened. People need to look at the stuff and know, "this is how it was." Sure you have to take the thing apart. It's a shipwreck. It's not like the archeologist is intentionally breaking plates over a barrel.

I don't think the guy's statement has a lot to do with, "there's a lot of gold and silver out there somewhere." It sure seems like it is a casualty of this type of thinking though. The history + loot aspect is too fused together to be reasonable about. It's not just salvagers and divers talking up about it, it is also governments talking down through treaties and funding practices.

 

[FISHEYE]

Don Jose de La Mancha,

A lot of men prefer women with flat heads.It gives them a place to set their beer.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

HI fisheye, You mean they sit alongside of you and watch and listen to you adoringly with yer booze perched on top of their pretty heads?

sigh

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Scar]

Depending on the poison and the ice or refrigeration as to the stimulus.