A number of times it has been pointed out that the British system of second-hand recording of artefact findspots makes it possible for artefact hunters to obscure the origins of the material they hold simply by lying to PAS about findspots. As Heritage Action note:
If they want to nighthawk or to cheat on finds agreements with farmers they can simply launder finds by falsifying the findspot. But some FLOs deny it happens:If there’s something dodgy it’s usually immediately clear. We’re not amateurs at this. I repeat: we do not launder finds/artefacts” … “Plus there’s even a little info box we can fill in on the database if we’ve any spatial doubts”.
Yet the PAS database is a public resource created not with private money, but public money, so why can't the public that pay for it see this box? In fact why can't they and we see the three boxes that should be there?
What percentage of the million or so records would fall into the first group? The second? And the third?
How many finds on the PAS database have their findspots actually verified by the recorders?
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment