.
Two years ago the Portable Antiquities Scheme was busy entering data about thirty odd finds from the Malton Rally onto their database. For this, see here: ('Scam rally legitimised by PAS presence'). At the time the landowner was denying that he had given permission for a crowd of artefact hunters (a) to be on his land (b) to trample and dig up his crops and by extension (c) take away (ie steal) artefacts from his property. Can we assume that since these objects have been displayed on the PAS website for the past two years, that they have established beyond any doubt that the commercial artefact hunting rally which they attended was, in fact, conducted legally after all? Why is this information not given in the database?
Two years ago the Portable Antiquities Scheme was busy entering data about thirty odd finds from the Malton Rally onto their database. For this, see here: ('Scam rally legitimised by PAS presence'). At the time the landowner was denying that he had given permission for a crowd of artefact hunters (a) to be on his land (b) to trample and dig up his crops and by extension (c) take away (ie steal) artefacts from his property. Can we assume that since these objects have been displayed on the PAS website for the past two years, that they have established beyond any doubt that the commercial artefact hunting rally which they attended was, in fact, conducted legally after all? Why is this information not given in the database?
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment