Help requested (Spain)

[seekerGH]

For your edification, holding any degree is not a requirement, you do not have to have a degree to publish your works. Submissions are blind-peer review, designed to exclude any factors other than the quality of the submission. Many works were published before there were degrees associated with those disciplines. In fact, there are so many journals out there begging for submissions, it is not difficult to submit. However, it is still subject for peer review prior to publication.

Ever hear of Albert Einstein?

Marx could have published if he had wanted to. While his research and stories are revered, his recovery documentation and conservation techniques left a lot to be desired.
What about Clive Cussler or E Lee Spence?

Note that the one and only paper that was published by OME (on artifact consevation techniques) was by a Master candidate, ie had a bachelors degree. Published.

Back to the topic at hand...

Duncan Mathewson III, Jim Sinclair, K.T. Jones, Syd Jones, Dr. Eugene Lyons, Malcolm Corey

Duncan Mathewson III- Ph.D. in Environmental Science
Jim Sinclair MA degree?
Dr. Eugene Lyons PhD
Malcolm Corey unknown (the Journal of the Mel Fischer maritime heritage Society?!?!?)

looking at this list, there are several people that have Doctorates, yet none of them have published works on the Atocha?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[ivan salis]

here is what folks need to know historically -- a frigging ship wrecked at a certain time and place scattering goods upon the ocean floor ...,likely most if not all the folks on the ship lost their lives during the wrecking of it ... likely it had some type of valuable cargo upon her when it sank ... which could be of use or value to currently living folks ... thus its cargo needs to be recovered by salvors to be put back into use by and for the living ,,instead of just lying on the ocean floor with the dead --modern day car wrecks that folks die in are removed off the roads and the metal of the cars recycled and used by the living---so why not old shipwrecks? A seafaring weather related ACCIDENT IS STILL JUST A ACCIDENT -- no matter when it occurred

AND FRANKLY WHY THE HELL IS IT SO DAMN IMPORTANT TO NOTE AND LOG DOWN WHERE EVERY FARTING LITTLE SCRAP OF CRAP WAS AT ON THE OCEAN FLOOR ? ... NOW I UNDERSTAND KEEPING A ACCOUNTING OF WHAT WAS FOUND AND BROUGHT UP ...SO THAT THE STATE GETS THEIR "PROPER CUT?" 20 % (ODDLY EQUAL TO THE KINGS CUT TAX BACK IN 1715--THE MORE THINGS CHANGE --THE MORE IT SAYS THE SAME -- LOL)

 

[Darren in NC]

Underwater archaeology didn't exist as it is today a few short decades ago. It cut its teeth and built its current existence on salvagers who loved history and shared it with the public. Now it bites the very hand that gave it it's existence. It cries "museums" and decries "profit," yet the general public still knows more because of salvagers.

If you give the gov't control of the desert, it would soon be out of sand.

 

[Blak bart]

Another shipwreck thread that has turned into another debate about archeology vs. treasure salvage !!! Geeeez......this is starting to sound like a broken record. Im sure this helps khayboub alot. Im going to drag the new mag. I got a main ballast mound to find. SADS 669 is right this is pointless. Every thread gets steered this way. Peace out theres treasure to be found.

 

[seekerGH]

Artifacts out of context are virtually useless. Just as a cob coin has a value, but in context, ie Atocha, the value is far more significant.

On the issue of context, a bunch of disconnected artifacts do not tell a story, the collection tells the story.

As an example, many people,come on to this website and ask what is this, showing a copper nail. What is the first thing you ask, where did you find it, etc. When they show a cob coin, what are the questions, lack of information =lack of value, right?

A artifact, out of context is just that, what are you going to tell them about that, or any other singular artifact?

 

[Old Pueblo]

Well I'm not planning to go down the piracy path, I think the historical and cultural significance is way more valuable than gold, you can't put price on it, it's priceless. Is there any lawyers specialising is shipwrecks....?

Good to hear that. I despise looters! Theyve stolen and melted down a lot of our Arizona history. And congrats on the find!

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

We are a treasure hunting forum, not an archeology forum, thread is not about archaeology, please put thread back on topic..

 

[Tom_in_CA]

For your edification, holding any degree is not a requirement, you do not have to have a degree to publish your works. ...

Thanx for the clarification. If the recovery folks who have worked on shipwrecks failed to go through the correct protocol to get their works defined as "published" and "peer reviewed", then in my minds eyes, that doesn't make the history they preserved, and the books they wrote, any less beneficial.

Sure, it would be nice if they were held to a certain standard, and "held a certain title". But as Ivan pointed out: A lot of the stuff "done right" can border on the ridiculous.

And to the extent there's great information done this super elaborate way, don't discount the "great information" by lay-men who simply dig an object up, and look at it.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

here is what folks need to know historically -- a frigging ship wrecked at a certain time and place scattering goods upon the ocean floor ...,likely most if not all the folks on the ship lost their lives during the wrecking of it ... likely it had some type of valuable cargo upon her when it sank ... which could be of use or value to currently living folks ... thus its cargo needs to be recovered by salvors to be put back into use by and for the living ,,instead of just lying on the ocean floor with the dead --modern day car wrecks that folks die in are removed off the roads and the metal of the cars recycled and used by the living---so why not old shipwrecks? A seafaring weather related ACCIDENT IS STILL JUST A ACCIDENT -- no matter when it occurred

AND FRANKLY WHY THE HELL IS IT SO DAMN IMPORTANT TO NOTE AND LOG DOWN WHERE EVERY FARTING LITTLE SCRAP OF CRAP WAS AT ON THE OCEAN FLOOR ? ... NOW I UNDERSTAND KEEPING A ACCOUNTING OF WHAT WAS FOUND AND BROUGHT UP ...SO THAT THE STATE GETS THEIR "PROPER CUT?" 20 % (ODDLY EQUAL TO THE KINGS CUT TAX BACK IN 1715--THE MORE THINGS CHANGE --THE MORE IT SAYS THE SAME -- LOL)

I have "peer reviewed" this "article" of Ivan's post #62, and found it to be very meritorious.

I lead tours at one of the California missions, and .... the "cliff notes" way you characterize what the general public wants to know, is accurate. When tourists come through the mission and enjoy the statues, artifacts, architecture, paintings, etc.... You're absolutely right: 99% of them are just dazzled by names, dates, synopsis of the history, etc..

Is that to say there's not value in some on the super studies archaeological digs that occurred there ? No. There's value in that too. (50 pages of notes on a single fish bone or shell bead dug in the garden). But the average tourist history enthusiast is just fine with the type info of a tour that lasts 1 hr.

And we have scores of dug artifacts, dug with sifting done during the 1930s initial preservation/reconstruction efforts. They just randomly dug and sifted vast quantities of dirt, during soil movement required in the re-shoring and re-construction of crumbling walls. Thus it probably "lacks context" in the cabinets they now sit in for display. Never once have I had any tourist complain to me, or ask how deep an object was, whether it lay adjacent to a square nail or not, etc...

So there is value in each discipline.

 

[seekerGH]

Underwater archaeology didn't exist as it is today a few short decades ago. It cut its teeth and built its current existence on salvagers who loved history and shared it with the public. Now it bites the very hand that gave it it's existence. It cries "museums" and decries "profit," yet the general public still knows more because of salvagers.

That is because now, with a more collective abilty to understand the imprtance of context, we now realize that much of the history was lost due to salvaging with no record of the recovery, or selling off every scrap.
As an example, look at the tombs in Eqypt. What knowledge was gained from the looting over the milennia? History may just consider the current treasure hunting efforts on the same note. ie why was this allowed?
Want a relevant example, the Spanish raided South America, took everything they found, carted it away and/or melted it down, erasing many hundreds of years of history. What is known about the artifacts, where they came from or even how they were made?
In the treasure hunting recovery adventures, what are you doing? Blowing a hole in the sand, finding artifacts, and selling them off. Forget the coins, but the other artifacts, what effort is made to collaborate and context the find? Show me a cllective database for all of these artifatcs for researchers to collaborate? When recoveries sold off as soon as possible, it negates the ability to collate and collaborate?

Looking at shipwrecks, fisherman have been dragging up artifacts for hundreds of years and selling them, (much the same as treasure hunters now) what knowledge has been gained as a collection?

What is the difference?

 

[Tom_in_CA]

That is because now, with a more collective abilty to understand the imprtance of context, we now realize that much of the history was lost due to salvaging with no record of the recovery, or selling off every scrap.
As an example, look at the tombs in Eqypt. What knowledge was gained from the looting over the milennia? History may just consider the current treasure hunting efforts on the same note. ie why was this allowed?
Want a relevant example, the Spanish raided South America, took everything they found, carted it away and/or melted it down, erasing many hundreds of years of history. What is known about the artifacts, where they came from or even how they were made?
In the treasure hunting recovery adventures, what are you doing? Blowing a hole in the sand, finding artifacts, and selling them off. Forget the coins, but the other artifacts, what effort is made to collaborate and context the find? Show me a cllective database for all of these artifatcs for researchers to collaborate? When recoveries sold off as soon as possible, it negates the ability to collate and collaborate?

Looking at shipwrecks, fisherman have been dragging up artifacts for hundreds of years and selling them, (much the same as treasure hunters now) what knowledge has been gained as a collection?

What is the difference?

Everything you're saying is technically true and to script.

But what about the counter-persuasion that points out that it is simply impossible for the "correct way" to be performed on every shipwreck worldwide, and every archaeological ground site world-wide.

Like with land sites, for instance: It takes them ... what ... a month to do a single 6 ft. x 4 ft. x 4ft. pit. At THAT rate it would take a million years to cover a single state park. Even the most well-funded aggressive university archaeological dept's and state-employed archaeologists will have budget enough to do a handful of pits per year. Thus simply impossible for them to merely scratch the surface of anywhere.

Thus md'rs should have no objection to the sacred monuments being off-limits (Bodie, Shiloh, etc....). But to jump from THAT truth to suggesting that ..... likewise .... ALL public land and ALL shipwrecks should likewise be off-limits (heaven forbid someone picks up an old coin), is to go to the other extreme.

 

[enrada]

If Archies starting cooperating and working with shipwreck salvers they could handle the context of these other artifacts and everybody would be happy. Unfortunately one group of people think they are elite and can't seem to bring themselves to work with salvers who do all the work and funding.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

If Archies starting cooperating and working with shipwreck salvers they could handle the context of these other artifacts and everybody would be happy. Unfortunately one group of people think they are elite and can't seem to bring themselves to work with salvers who do all the work and funding.

I can't speak for how it would work with such-a-cooperation in shipwreck salvage. But for land detecting, it has *sometimes* worked. There's been a few documented cases where hobbyists came out to locate bullets @ battlefields, which were then studied "in context", etc... And everyone was happy.

But this is rare that the 2 disciplines could mesh like that. Because whereas the average md'r gets a beep, digs the target, and simply looks at it, the archie doesn't do it that way. Nnneeeooo. The md'r flags the beep with a little colored wire flag. The archies come back the next day and spend an hour digging it up with tweezers and brushes . And find ....... drum-roll ...... a pulltab ! (or a nail or whatever).

So to most md'rs, they would find the archie way to be very tedious. And to be honest with you, while it may SEEM to be a wonderful hand-holding with each other, yet ...... there is an under-lying tone of condescension. Ie.: while that archie may condone what you're doing at the time you help them, yet .. in their mind's eye, you should never be allowed to detect without their supervision. Yup, even on private land they would bristle . The purist archies anyhow. I'm sure there's cool ones who ... as long as you stay out of their pits and aren't snooping at monuments, then ..... have no problem with the hobbyist in the sandbox angling for clad.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

I repeat, the thread is NOT about Archies or archaeology. Please put it back on topic.

 

[huntsman53]

While you can argue until the cows come home, it does not matter. There is a definition of a published scientific paper. Your arguments end there.

The original statement is still valid, there have been no scientific papers published on the Atocha and/or the Fisher et al groups.

[Duncan Mathewson III, Jim Sinclair, K.T. Jones, Syd Jones, Dr. Eugene Lyons, Malcolm Corey and many others.]

With all of those people writing articles and coffee table books, why have they not submitted anything to a relevant journal for peer review and publication?

Without publication and review, it is just a story. Sorry.

On a relevant note, look at the Odyssey Preliminary Assessment of Balchins Victory. On review by Wessex, it was destroyed, and Wessex noted that much of it had no foundation, and on other issues, the information that supported what the report stated, were refused. So much for peer review. http://www.wessexarch.co.uk/system/files/hms victory dba final version-web.pdf
Strange that many of the people that wrote the Odyssey report, are the same?

Anyone here correct me if I am wrong but these gentleman are Experts and Professionals with Degrees and some have Doctorates that need not write anything for peer review by anyone much less a bunch of over-educated, chair warming, know-it-all Scientists and Archaeologists, some of which are in the same field of work. They are not only highly respected in their fields but their' works are highly respected and sought as reference by many!


Frank

 

[Tom_in_CA]

I repeat, the thread is NOT about Archies or archaeology. Please put it back on topic.

Oh yeah. Doh! What ever happened to khayboub ? It started with a hypothetical question about "if I found a shipwreck". Then veered off route to DID you "find a shipwreck?" and now to archie concerns.

But in a roundabout sort of way: The discussion of archaeological concerns *was* a portion of the answer of "what happens next?" or "who gets the profits" . But you're right: A side issue

 

[enrada]

They don't want to be ostracized by the shipwreck salvers. They are not interested in being part of the publish or perish mob.
They have seen the light and enjoy working with the people that do all the work and actually find and salvage shipwrecks.

 

[Khayboub]

Tom_in_CA, I'm enjoying the conversation you guys are having and I have to say with a lot of appreciation that there's a lot to learn, in the meantime I'm keeping my cards close to my chest. Keep on the good work.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Tom_in_CA, I'm enjoying the conversation you guys are having and I have to say with a lot of appreciation that there's a lot to learn, in the meantime I'm keeping my cards close to my chest. Keep on the good work.

Good to hear from you again khayboub. If you *really* found a shipwreck laden with gold (versus a hypothetical question), then I suppose all the talk of govt. archies simply taking all of it, may make you think "why bother?"

 

[Khayboub]

Tom_in_CA, well, a little knowledge is dangerous, the richness and diversity of opinions are enlightening and eye opening especially for a person like me who's never been into metal detecting and treasure hunting but coincidence does wonders. Only time and headlines will tell.