Unearthed War Relics See Battle Again - Archaeologists decry History Buffs Dig (Civil War relics)

The Washington Post ^ | April 16, 2006 | Brigid Schulte

[XRdsRev]

The buzz began in the chow line. "Did you hear?" asked one relic hunter.

"Yeah. A Mississippi plate," said another. "Absolutely perfect."

The proud new owner of the Confederate belt plate embossed with an eagle held out his treasure on his dirt-caked palm.

[XRdsRev]

I was involved with this dig on private property. It has caused quite a commotion between relic hunters and some archaeologists who believe that nobody should dig artifacts besides them.

A relic hunter's discussion on the dig, the article and the conflict between metal detectorists and archaeologists can be found here.

http://www.mytreasurespot.com/forums/list.php?5

[Crawdad]

I live 3 miles from Kennesaw Mountain. I found a Minie ball while cutting my grass.

[Andy from Beaverton]

[Seruzawa]

"These digs are like reading a book, ripping the pages out as you read and setting them on fire," said Kathleen Kilpatrick, director of the state's Department of Historic Resources. "It's an outrage."

Translation: "You are hurting our bottom line!" I jusr love it when these people try to couch greed as some sort of noble purpose.

[SquirrelKing]

How many cars did you find?

=)

[ARCADIA]

Last year in the state's General Assembly, lawmakers considered a measure that would have required relic hunters to get written permission from landowners before digging, and to catalogue and report what they found. The bill also would have established that relics belonged to the state, not any individual. It was resoundingly crushed in committee.

The truth is that the best collections of historical artifacts tend to be owned and cataloged by collector rather then arhaeologists. Take the collectors out of the mix and nobody would care about the archeology. It is the collectors who are motivated to identify every last marking, every exoteric manufacturing technique, and every last scrap of historical documentation. Without donated collections our museams would have stood empty and largely ignorant.

[AnalogReigns]

Archeology had its birth in studying ANCIENT cultures--where we had little if any eye-witness written accounts of what happened.

The War between the States has an unending supply of written eye-witness accounts of what happened in every battle....why is archeology of belt-buckles, bullets and pot-handles important then?

[KarlInOhio]

The bill also would have established that relics belonged to the state, not any individual.

It was resoundingly crushed in committee.

Good news there. If the Union and Confederates decided they wanted to kill each other on my great-great-great...grandfather's farm, that shouldn't poison the land from my family's use forever. If they abandon their equipment there, then it belongs to me and my family. If the national park service wants the land, then buy it at or above its fair market value.

I appreciate the archaeologists desire not to have history dug up randomly. However, if they want it they should have to pay for it.

(This isn't a matter of personal profit for me. Morgan's Raid didn't even get this far north so the only Civil War artifact I would find is if some Union soldier dropped something while marching south.)

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Relic hunters are just undocumented archeologists.

There is a TV show called Battlefield Detectives that attempts to mix archeology with forensic science. It's mildly interesting sometimes.

The archeologists need to get behind the battlefield preservation movement before everything is paved over.

[Cold Heart]

"Relic hunters are just undocumented archaeologists"

I have so many licenses and certificates I never felt I was an "undocumented" till now.

[Fairview]

I agree with you that any relics on or under your land should belong to you, and not to the state. But by the same token they shouldn't belong to just anybody who sneaks onto your land and digs there without your permission. People who own farms on which historic events took place are constantly plagued by trespassers digging for Civil War artifacts. Sometimes people will even sneak onto the land and dig in the middle of the night. This is wrong. If it's on your land, it should belong to you, and anybody who removes it without your permission is a thief.

[johnny7]

Relic hunters are just undocumented archeologists.

I think of myself as a temporary, guest-archaeologist.

[Protagoras]

The War between the States has an unending supply of written eye-witness accounts of what happened in every battle....why is archeology of belt-buckles, bullets and pot-handles important then?

I'm glad someone corrected the author on the real name of this conflict. It surely wasn't a "civil war" by any logical description.

[brytlea]

Relic hunters are just undocumented archeologists.

LOL! I wish there was this much interest in preserving the Jewish artifacts at the Dome of the Rock (I think that's the correct mosque). susie

[GOP_Party_Animal]

What's a Minie Ball?

[Cannoneer No. 4]

[Little Ray]

Archeologists can drop dead. If the treasure hunters are not digging without the land owner's permission, its a good thing, not a bad one. If the archeologists want to dig, let 'em get permission and cut in the owner in on the finds.

[Adder]

"I don't understand why there has to be so much controversy."

"One day in the summer of 1863, a Confederate soldier from Mississippi left behind his prized belt plate, worn only by elite members of the state militia, in a camp on Brandy Rock Farm.

We will never know why."

And if the archaeologists had their way we wouldn't even know that much.

Friend of mine had an arrowhead knapping site on his land which he would allow you to explore. Lots of broken arrow heads and I found what appears to be a tomahawk stone or perhaps a "hammer".
No "context"
No archaeological interest.
Unless someone besides them explores the site.

[flying Elvis]

The War between the States has an unending supply of written eye-witness accounts of what happened in every battle....why is archeology of belt-buckles, bullets and pot-handles important then?

You are incorrect. When writing a history of a battle the ideal is to have at least one eyewitness account from each Confederate regiment, which becomes increasingly difficult and close to impossible for battles occurring after 1863. Very few contemporary Confederate accounts of Vicksburg exist at all. Archaeology, therefore, can tell us a lot about a battlefield.

While I hope there is a very special place in hell for looters, archaeologists and some historians overstate their objections at times. Most battlefields were significantly disturbed after the war and little can be ascertained from the locations of relics found within a foot of the surface. Farmers sought to reclaim their farmland, poor folks dug up shells and bullets for sale as scrap, and veterans attending reunions dug up relics as souveniers.

Both sides need to be a little more understanding and supportive of one another. Archaeologists need to lighten up and work with relic hunters, and relic hunters need to purge the looters from their midst, and they know who the looters are.

[alarm rider]

BTTT