|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » £2.3m for a Roman helmet |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
Rhiannon 5291 posts |
Oct 09, 2010, 12:24
|
|
I guess you're not reading the links very thoroughly (like me) because in the one I posted it says him and his father had been searching those fields for years. Probably if you've been doing anything for years, you will have read a few magazines or books or websites or met a few people interested in the same thing, so you've got a good chance of not being ignorant of the Issues. |
|
tjj 3606 posts |
Edited Oct 09, 2010, 14:28
Oct 09, 2010, 12:37
|
|
nigelswift wrote: "I don't blame him, he was just looking out for himself and the law is on his side unfortunately." Yes Jamie but these people were offered a social contract 13 years ago - "we'll let you carry on doing here what's criminal everywhere else but in return please voluntarily tell us what you find". If they won't even do that, which most won't, we've been taken for complete mugs. PS this bloke also thumbed his nose at us by failing to call in archaeos to do the excavation and just ripped it all out like an Iraqui looter. He knew that was wrong as the Code tells him what to do. Anyone that does that with Treasure has their reward reduced. As this wasn't Treasure he didn't stand to lose a penny by acting in that way - so he carried on. This man does NOT need wishing good luck or general rejoicing that he can pay his mortgage off. I should have gone out walking, then I wouldn't be tempted to get involved with this debate on any level but as you've made reference to my post Nigel I hope you don't mind too much if I answer. I made some mild mannered observations that this debate had proved useful yet again in helping the non-expert but interested in seeing all sides of the argument - which is why HD's valid point of view was essential to the discussion. I probably haven't read up on the background as much as I should have done so know nothing about the finder - but he doesn't deserve the 'Iraqui looter' comparison; unlike Iraq no person has been killed or physically hurt. |
|
|
Resonox 604 posts |
Oct 09, 2010, 13:17
|
|
So the long and short of it all is... This helmet is a 3-D bronze jigsaw that has been rebuilt to the design of unkown restorers, super-glued to keep it all in one piece, then laminated to stop any carbon-dating and doesn't really have any provenance....and some mug has paid a vast amount of money for it, on the off-chance it is actually valuable, because after it's "restoration" it is in better nick than any other of the same class(3 I believe)found to date???.....I'd say the museum that raised money to retain ownership have had a narrow escape by being outbid for this item...just hope they use some of the money to make their own copy for display...or is there a copyright on it too? |
|
juamei 2013 posts |
Oct 09, 2010, 16:57
|
|
tjj wrote: I probably haven't read up on the background as much as I should have done so know nothing about the finder - but he doesn't deserve the 'Iraqui looter' comparison; unlike Iraq no person has been killed or physically hurt. I disagree I'm afraid, he is in exactly the same league as Iraqi looters of museums. Both taking what morally doesn't belong to them for profit. The difference is the looters in Iraq are taking advantage of war, this guy is taking advantage of very lax laws. |
|
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Edited Oct 09, 2010, 18:44
Oct 09, 2010, 17:42
|
|
Both taking what morally doesn't belong to them for profit... Quite. There is a moral dimension to 'taking what morally doesn't belong to them for profit' - a dimension most clearly seen in the recent MP's expenses scandal. The MPs may have been acting within the letter of the law but they were scallywagging nonetheless. |
|
|
tjj 3606 posts |
Oct 09, 2010, 17:49
|
|
juamei wrote: tjj wrote: I probably haven't read up on the background as much as I should have done so know nothing about the finder - but he doesn't deserve the 'Iraqui looter' comparison; unlike Iraq no person has been killed or physically hurt. I disagree I'm afraid, he is in exactly the same league as Iraqi looters of museums. Both taking what morally doesn't belong to them for profit. The difference is the looters in Iraq are taking advantage of war, this guy is taking advantage of very lax laws. I'm not impressed - thousands of dead Iraquis and their Heritage plundered ... does that compare that to one roman helmet in a field - get real. |
|
|
juamei 2013 posts |
Oct 09, 2010, 18:27
|
|
tjj wrote: juamei wrote: tjj wrote: I probably haven't read up on the background as much as I should have done so know nothing about the finder - but he doesn't deserve the 'Iraqui looter' comparison; unlike Iraq no person has been killed or physically hurt. I disagree I'm afraid, he is in exactly the same league as Iraqi looters of museums. Both taking what morally doesn't belong to them for profit. The difference is the looters in Iraq are taking advantage of war, this guy is taking advantage of very lax laws. I'm not impressed - thousands of dead Iraquis and their Heritage plundered ... does that compare that to one roman helmet in a field - get real. You've completely missed the point! I am talking explicitly about the looters and the morality of their actions. They didn't kill the millions of people who died in the iraq war, they stole artefacts from museums. The war and insurgency in iraq has absolutely nothing to do with what I am talking about, beyond creating an environment where looting is possible. To be clear, no-one is saying metal detecting is equivalent to the atrocities of war. It is however morally equivalent to stealing from museums. Take a deep breath please and read what I wrote. |
|
|
tjj 3606 posts |
Oct 09, 2010, 19:39
|
|
juamei wrote: tjj wrote: juamei wrote: tjj wrote: I probably haven't read up on the background as much as I should have done so know nothing about the finder - but he doesn't deserve the 'Iraqui looter' comparison; unlike Iraq no person has been killed or physically hurt. I disagree I'm afraid, he is in exactly the same league as Iraqi looters of museums. Both taking what morally doesn't belong to them for profit. The difference is the looters in Iraq are taking advantage of war, this guy is taking advantage of very lax laws. I'm not impressed - thousands of dead Iraquis and their Heritage plundered ... does that compare that to one roman helmet in a field - get real. You've completely missed the point! I am talking explicitly about the looters and the morality of their actions. They didn't kill the millions of people who died in the iraq war, they stole artefacts from museums. The war and insurgency in iraq has absolutely nothing to do with what I am talking about, beyond creating an environment where looting is possible. To be clear, no-one is saying metal detecting is equivalent to the atrocities of war. It is however morally equivalent to stealing from museums. Take a deep breath please and read what I wrote. OK ... point taken. |
|
|
Littlestone 5386 posts |
Oct 09, 2010, 19:59
|
|
I am talking explicitly about the looters and the morality of their actions. They didn't kill the millions of people who died in the iraq war, they stole artefacts from museums. The war and insurgency in iraq has absolutely nothing to do with what I am talking about, beyond creating an environment where looting is possible. Absolutely! Fortunately however - "To date over 1,700 items have been returned pursuant to the amnesty program [but] there have been problems here, as well. Specifically, the problems were the perception among the Iraqi people of the museum staff's identification and association with the former regime and the Ba'ath Party. Time and time again when individuals would turn property over, they would make it clear that they were turning the property over to the U.S. forces for safekeeping until a lawful Iraqi government could be elected." Further more - "In order, therefore, to enlist the effective assistance of the art world, we recently and at the invitation of the British Museum presented the findings of this investigation to more than 300 of the world's leading ancient Near Eastern archaeologist professors and dealers, and provided them photographs of all items, toward that very end: to ensure greater cooperation between the art and law enforcement communities. "Indeed, I must commend the efforts of the staff of the British Museum and Professors Al-Radi; Bahrani, from New York; Henry Wright, from Michigan; and McGuire Gibson, from Chicago. They have afforded us... their assistance, through their expertise, and also showed the courage to go to Iraq, to go to Baghdad, to conduct assessments, to assess the museum, to assess various archaeological sites over the course of the last four and a half to five months. Very simply, we get paid to be shot at. They do not, but they went nonetheless, and they should be commended." Here here! Source in quotes - http://www.culturekiosque.com/art/news/baghdadmuseum.html |
|
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Oct 10, 2010, 11:28
|
|
Just to clarify, when I said he “thumbed his nose at us by failing to call in archaeos to do the excavation and just ripped it all out like an Iraqui looter” I was thinking of Iraqui site looters not museum ones. As a matter of fact I think what he did was actually worse than “morally equivalent to stealing from museums” as Jamie put it, as stealing from museums is merely artefact theft whereas this is also knowledge theft. I also think the comparison with Iraqui site looters was pretty accurate in moral terms. Apart from the fact it's legal here and illegal there how is the process different? Digging up national heritage for yourself and flogging it to the highest bidder? The only differences I can think of is that he got oodles and they get peanuts and they are driven by grinding poverty whereas he was on Jobseekers allowance! |
| Pages: 8 – [ Previous | 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 8 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
