Slashdot Mirror
Man Finds Roman Gold Coin Hoard Worth £100,000 With Metal Detector
An anonymous reader writes "A novice metal detector has found one of the largest roman gold coin hoards ever unearthed in the UK. From the article: 'National newspapers reported on Wednesday that the man, from Berkhamsted, had been sold a beginner’s metal detector from the town’s High Street-based Hidden History for £135. He is reported to have gone back with 40 of the “solidi” coins, dating to the last days of Roman rule in Britain, and asked: “What do I do with this?”'"
So basically, not finding items of historical value is better than finding them and destroying a bit of historically valuable surroundings?
Isn't the worth of historically relevant findings in the knowledge they provide rather than their existence? If that was the case, any dude coming up with this without totally destroying everything around the coins provides a net gain to our understanding of history. I can't help but think that would be better than never finding anything at all (which is very probable).
Also, NOW they know where to go look for another archaeological site, right?
Yes. They will still be there for a proper archaeologist to discover at some future time. Given how many artifacts were damaged or ruined by bungling explorers in the 1800's and early 1900's, I'd say it is prudent to leave the task to experts.
So basically, not finding items of historical value is better than finding them and destroying a bit of historically valuable surroundings?
Yes, in most cases.
Isn't the worth of historically relevant findings in the knowledge they provide rather than their existence?
No, because in archaeology, the context of a find is everything. Of course, valuable and beautiful objects make for
great exhibitions, but context is really the main part of what is interesting. You'll see an archaologist become much
more excited over an unusual and unexpected piece of wood than over "another roman gold coin. meh."
We have tens of thousands of roman gold coins already, and I doubt any of the coins this guy found are of
an unkown kind.
However, an amateur will not know to care for some fibres around the gold coins that may have been a
uniquely crafted bag, thereby proving trade contacts with $faraway_place. Of will discard a couple of shovels
full of dirt with bone fragments or plant seeds in them which would make this a unique and invaluable find.
If you find something, don't touch it and report it, but don't dig around yourself - you'll do way more
harm than good, and may even commit a crime.
Yes. They will still be there for a proper archaeologist to discover at some future time. Given how many artifacts were damaged or ruined by bungling explorers in the 1800's and early 1900's, I'd say it is prudent to leave the task to experts.
Amusingly many of those bungling explorers were the "experts" of the time. Also in order for archeologists to know there's anything worth digging up, someone has to make a chance discovery. Proper archeology takes a lot of time and resources, and thus sites are only excavated if there's reason to suspect there's something to look for in the first place.
Then I pay a lot less in rent than I would actually renting, so I'm still coming out ahead. And I have an asset I can sell. And if the gov't decides they want to rezone my neighborhood, they have to pay me fair market value for it. But go ahead and keep claiming owning land is just like paying rent. It's not, but you can claim that.
Common wisdom when my father was in road construction was that if you found a burial or other historical site when excavating, you quietly reburied it and told no one. Especially burial sites. Find one and you're instantaneously one year or more behind schedule.