The ethics of treasure hunting and burial sites vs archaeology

[Prime]

I was just reading a post about a treasure legend that involved burial sites, and buried valuables, and as I was reading it, I started pondering the ethics of anyone disturbing a grave site. I come from a background where even stepping on a grave site was a big no-no. This was out of a solemn respect for those who have died. The very idea of desecrating a grave was not even something that could enter one's head. It was unthinkable.

Therefore, I personally have a moral objection to digging up a burial site. I wouldn't want to think of myself as a grave robber either. But then, what's the difference between a Treasure Hunter removing valuables from an old burial site, vs an archaeologist doing the same thing? They go one step further and also remove the body and put it up on display.....isn't that much worse? Aren't archaeologists who dig up remains and take all the loot just glorified grave robbers? Sure, they don't keep all the loot, but they get paid to dig it up. The end results are the same, just for different reasons. So is that what this comes down to, "motives"?

Then again, dead people won't do anything with the treasure, it's still there, they sure as hell haven't taken it "to the other side", but then, where do you draw the line?

Ehh, maybe I'm just old fashioned, or full of crap. I'm also trying to find common ground between my stubborn conscience and the reality of our messed up world. Everything seems to be so relative these days, where the clear lines of days gone by seem to be blurred and everything is up for debate.

There is also the fact that I'm contemplating this from my computer chair, and not 2 feet away from a burial site. So this is just rhetoric at this point.

Prime

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[RGINN]

I don't believe it's happening quite the way you've presented it. Search up NAGPRA, which is federal law here in the US, and granted, only applies to archaeological ventures that receive federal funding. However, many states have enacted laws concerning native burial sites. We all know there are 'tomb raiders' out there, and some of them do get caught. The thing I wonder about in NAGPRA is it directs the return of 'cultural items' to the lineal descendants, if determined. So, I, being a lineal descendant, feel that all folsom and clovis points shown here on Tnet are cultural items. If any of the finders are receiving social security checks, I reckon they're federally funded, so I'm entitled to my cultural items being returned. An extreme example. It's a good law, but there are some possibilities for abuse.

 

[Prime]

That is interesting. I was looking at it in more broad, philosophical terms though. That said, I wonder if this return of items is only for Native items, or anything in general.

Prime

 

[NewsMan]

You will find few takers on this subject as I have found out. There are a number of people on this site that tacitly support it, if not all out are involved in such activity.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

"But then, what's the difference between a Treasure Hunter removing valuables from an old burial site, vs an archaeologist doing the same thing?"

Because they have a "degree" and you don't.

 

[NewsMan]

"But then, what's the difference between a Treasure Hunter removing valuables from an old burial site, vs an archaeologist doing the same thing?"

Because they have a "degree" and you don't.

They also properly catalog, interpret and then release their findings for all to see and for history to consider.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

"They also properly catalog, interpret and then release their findings for all to see and for history to consider."

Newsman, If you mean this about burials, bones, and human remains, then I guess I'd agree with you (very few graverobbers know much, or care about, the bones, what the deceased ate for his last meal, etc....)

But if you meant that for metal detecting in general (non-graves) then no, I would not agree with you. The private relic hunting community contributes more research, knowledge, and resources, than any archaeologists ever did/do. For example, when you look at the vast resources of written knowledge (books and so forth) on something as niche as buttons, or bottles, where do you (and the archies themselves) turn to, for reference? (like to date a button or bottle, ID where it came from, who it was passed out to, etc...) Do you think they go to archaeologist's works? NO. They turn to books and resources invariably written by the private hunter community. Like if you go to the deep south, and talk to dedicated hardcore CW site hunters, they'd would know MUCH more about the targets, items, buttons, etc... dug, than ANY CW -site archie.

And as far as "releasing their findings for all to see and history to consider", there are reams of stuff in museums right now, that were found by private hunters. So much so, that there simply isn't room for all to be displayed, nor any more useful information to be gleaned, by more displays. So added stuff sits and rots in museum basements.

 

[lostcauses]

Prime
Ask your self this:
What rules and ethics will you violate to find a reelic or artifact??
Will you go on property that is not yours, to remove such objects that you do not own??

So bones bother you. What does not

Some treasure hunters are such they will not violate ethics or laws. Most if they think they can get buy with it have or will. Yet they would not do such nay were else in their life knowingly.
This is a strange part of the relic artifact hunter..

 

[Frankn]

I don't consider human remains sacred, but then I would not touch a grave site either. To me, the soul has left the body, but the memory lingers on at the grave site. With the presant law even the archies are reluctant to touch a grave site. Frank

 

[kuger]

"They also properly catalog, interpret and then release their findings for all to see and for history to consider."

Newsman, If you mean this about burials, bones, and human remains, then I guess I'd agree with you (very few graverobbers know much, or care about, the bones, what the deceased ate for his last meal, etc....)

But if you meant that for metal detecting in general (non-graves) then no, I would not agree with you. The private relic hunting community contributes more research, knowledge, and resources, than any archaeologists ever did/do. For example, when you look at the vast resources of written knowledge (books and so forth) on something as niche as buttons, or bottles, where do you (and the archies themselves) turn to, for reference? (like to date a button or bottle, ID where it came from, who it was passed out to, etc...) Do you think they go to archaeologist's works? NO. They turn to books and resources invariably written by the private hunter community. Like if you go to the deep south, and talk to dedicated hardcore CW site hunters, they'd would know MUCH more about the targets, items, buttons, etc... dug, than ANY CW -site archie.

And as far as "releasing their findings for all to see and history to consider", there are reams of stuff in museums right now, that were found by private hunters. So much so, that there simply isn't room for all to be displayed, nor any more useful information to be gleaned, by more displays. So added stuff sits and rots in museum basements.

Well stated Tom,and VERY true!
Also IMHO very little can be obtained and if so must be purchased,such as site specific Archy reports.They make big promises but seldom is anything seen

 

[NewsMan]

Love how these topics always start with questions regarding burial sites and end up moving to general MD'n. I metal detect. I get it it. I just think people should stay out of burial sites, particularly indian mounds. I know people who have had their confederate graves dug up for the buttons. Do I really need to keep explaining this? I know it is hard to not be tempted when you know there are thousands of dollars worth of buttons (or intact native pottery) just below the surface but it is wrong, period. If you do it, you are a scum bag. Simple as that.

 

[nsdq]

Love how these topics always start with questions regarding burial sites and end up moving to general MD'n. I metal detect. I get it it. I just think people should stay out of burial sites, particularly indian mounds. I know people who have had their confederate graves dug up for the buttons. Do I really need to keep explaining this? I know it is hard to not be tempted when you know there are thousands of dollars worth of buttons (or intact native pottery) just below the surface but it is wrong, period. If you do it, you are a scum bag. Simple as that.

i argee graves of any aspect off limits ,,, even the ones in Egypt