The religion of archaeology...
Jack W - Advanced / Marine Surveyor
May 22, 2008 at 16:31:19
When archaeologists coment on suppossed activities a few things to keep in mind.
1) If you have proof of such action not just rumors then make your accusations. I think the article author should be sued for liable.
2) How old does a wreck have to be, to be historically significant?
3) Do archaeologists and museums have enough money to salvage and preserve all the artifacts? Absolutely not. Shipwrecks are not stagnent. They are constantly degrading. Collecting and preserving artifacts that would otherwise be lost is not a bad thing.
4) Not all shipwreck hunters make preserved artifacts personnal items. Some actually preserve artifacts and donate to museums. But they are not the right museums and the artifacts were not collected by the annointed.
There are laws of salvage which are older than the wrecks some people are protecting.
In general some wrecks such as the Monitor in the US need protecting and are true historic icons. Other wrecks are nothing more than collapsing remnents of WWII. Should evey single wreck from WWII be given the same protection as a historic icon?
We need to differentiate between truely historic which can provide scientific and historic information and not react on emotional level to the thousands of wrecks which populate worlds oceans and are slowly degrading into nothing.
Like anything else we need a balance. Extremes to either side of an argument are usually wrong. Archaeology is no different even if it has become a religion.