September 26, 2016

Dear Division 16,

This article describes the work of amateur archaeologists “mudlarkers”, who look for artifacts from the past in their neighbourhoods.

If you would like to read more, the whole article can be found here.

For your post today, please answer one of the following questions:

1. Have you ever found an artifact in the city that told you something about the past? Describe it! What did it teach you? (Don’t choose this one if the answer is “no”)

2. What do you think should be done with these artifacts found by amateur archaeologists? Should they be donated to museums or universities, or should finders be keepers? Explain your thinking.

I look forward to your responses.

Jody

46 comments

  1. KILIMANJARO

    #2 I think that its finders keepers because no one who spends their days doing hard grubby work should have some museum take credit for what they did. I think that if a museum wants to have city artifact mudlurked for them, they should employ people to do it. I also think this is good because it creates jobs

  2. lordofthepies05

    #2

    I think that the person who found them should decide what to do with them. If the mudlurker wants it in a museum than it should be in one, and if he/she doesn’t than it shouldn’t. Like KILIMANJARO said, I think it should be finders keepers

    • dickensdiv16

      I like how you connected to Kilmanjaro’s post, lordofthepies05! What if a mudlarker decides to keep something of historical significance? Do you think the mudlarker has a responsibility to share the knowledge about their find, if not the actual artifact?

  3. The Baconator

    #2
    I think that once an artifact is found it should be kept by the finder unless it is something that everyone has a right to see. I think this because it is the same with money, if you find a loonie on the ground and you don’t know who dropped it you can take it because it doesn’t belong to anyone. But if you find something and you who it used to belong to you have no right to keep it and it should be returned to that person

  4. Amythest

    2. I think that once amateur archaeologists find amazing historical artifacts, the artifacts should be put I a museum because then everyone can see them. In the museum I think that it should have to give the amateur archaeologist credit for finding the artifact. I think that mostly all of the artifacts should be put in a museum, but some of the artifacts should be kept just.

  5. Sushi Monster

    #2 I think that if an amateur archaeologist found an artifact. That as long as its legal to keep it you have 2 options. You can give it to the museum and they will probably put it in a glass case. You could be famous if its a really cool artifact but you will probably not get it back ever again. Or if you worked really hard to get it and you really want to keep it. You could keep it though you might not be as famous and probably not as many people will see it. I think you should do whatever feels right whether it’s keeping it or letting a museum have it.

  6. supercheesecake

    #2 Well I think that its their choice if they wanted to donate it to the museum its fine, but if they wanted to keep it we shouldn’t force them to hand it out because they are the finders and the museum did not communicate with the amateur archaeologist about the discovery. So like lord of the pie and Kilmanjaro said it should be finders keepers. Or the museum can set up a program to encourage people to donate their findings so that the museum can have more valuable piece of history.

  7. crazymemeslol123

    #2 I think they should share what they found so they can show the world what they achieved from metal detecting from old items like rings and other sorts of metals from long long ago they may even be able to find gears from world war 1 or 2 if they are lucky.so don’t keep it to yourself unless it costs more then a million dollars then keep it for your self.

  8. the Time traveler

    I believe that if you find something really cool underground that talks about your city’s history you should have two choices: either keep it and be happy you have it, or if you think it is an important relic, give it to a museum. If the thing that you find seems to have value to you and connects to your life but doesn’t really have historical value, then you should keep it. If the item has historical value and doesn’t really have meaning to you personally, you should definitely donate it.

  9. The Time Traveler

    New sidewalks should always be built around new buildings because it will be better for people trying to get in an out of the building. Sidewalks are pretty important. I have pretty much never gone to a place without sidewalks around it. The random sidewalk in the middle of nowhere thing – I don’t understand it. I don’t think it’s really needed. I do think it is kind of a cool art project because it has a sign that says, “the end is near” and then one that says, “the end.”

  10. flying giraffe

    2# I think that if you find an artifact you should be able to bring it to a museum but should still own it and can take it back when that person wants. But mostly I think that you should keep what you find and show your friends your artifact and then store it forever for you future family to keep. And then one day in the future it will be worth a lot of money and they could sell it. or those people in the future could keep it for the next generation to show those peoples friends and keep it until the end of time.

  11. purple pom-poms

    #2 I believe that it depends on the object that has been found and how important the person who found it thinks it is. Many items found are small trinkets that are common (like sea glass or bits of pottery) and if they were all given to museums then the museums would be full of trinkets that aren’t very important. If all those trinkets were in the museums then they would have no room for important artifacts. If the finder thinks the object found is rare, unique or very old then I believe it belongs in the museum. In the end it all depends on the finder and where he or she thinks it belongs.

  12. sparkle sloth

    2. I think it is important for archaeologists to give their findings to universities because then they can do more research so we can learn more about our ancestors. But at the same time I think some things could be really special and that culture might not want the public to see it unless it is a special occasion.

    • dickensdiv16

      Sparkle sloth, you’ve raised a very important point here. For many people, some objects are precious and private, and it may be inappropriate or insensitive to display it. I wonder how museums grapple with this issue?

  13. Flying Mandarin

    2 the university or museum could study the artifacts first, so they could learn the history of it. It should be returned once they are finish the research. The reason is that the person could keep the finding a secret and we would of not know about it. That is why I think it should be returned to the person who found it after they are finished with it.

  14. smeagaleater10

    2# The answer that I have is a compromise. The compromise that I am suggesting is that the person who finds it can choose to keep it or give it to a university or museum. But if they choose to keep it it has to be properly preserved so it doesn’t get ruined. If a school inside the owners city requests to see it for educational reasons the owner can do nothing but oblige free of charge.

  15. the engineer

    #2
    I think if someone finds a historical artifact they should donate it to a museum. Maybe even people could sell it to a museum for a price. That way they make money of the things they find. In fact some people unearth ancient artifacts for a living and they make money by selling things to museums.

  16. Arcticfox

    2# I think that it shouldn’t go to a museum. Because it would just be sitting there letting people look at it and it wouldn’t ever be known exactly what it is, where it actually came from or anything. I think it should be sent to scientist to be Identified then gave back to the person that found it. It was always truly theirs anyway its wrong to take something so special from someone.

  17. The Random Student

    I think it’s important that the archaeologists donate some artifacts to museums and universities, so other people would know about it too. And people could also know that who found it and what it is more clearly. But the archaeologists should also keep some artifacts if they really like it and they really want to keep it, or you took a long time to get it out and you feel really special about it.as long as it’s legal, I think both ways are good options.

  18. S.P.E.W

    2. I think that what the amateur archaeologists should do is when they find the artifact ,if it is not very old (fifty years) they should get to keep to themselves. If they find something that is extremely old (thousand years)then they should send it to the the University or the museum.

  19. Touchdown

    2. I think that they should donate it to a museum or a lab because one of those places might find out that people back then did something that we had absolutely no idea about it. But I also think that the person who found it should also get some credit too.

  20. Joaquin

    #2 I think that if amateur archaeologists find artifacts they should donate them museums because it mite have something to do with history or mite belong to someone.

  21. Soccerboy123ABC

    #1 I have found an old ink jar in my backyard when my did and I were digging anot her garden it was round on the bottom but flat also and there were stains of ink on the inside when we found it.The shape of it was sort of like one of those small plastic milk containers squished down.when I found it it reminded me of when there were no pens and you had to use a feather and some ink on the end and I think that when there was a house here that it was at the back of the property not at the front like it is now.

  22. Spamlington

    #2. I think that the people who have found the artifact should have reign over what happens with it. For example, if the artifact is something that tells something small about the past and isn’t incredibly valuable, the person who found the artifact is probably going to keep it, whereas with something more important, they might donate or sell it to the museum or something.

  23. Pink Pickle

    #2 I think these artifacts should be donated to museums because they are a remnant from the past and could be very valuable,and if people keep these artifacts at their house they could be damaged.

  24. balloongirl123

    2. I think that artifacts should be put in museums because the people who found them or something can make a lot of money. And also that thing is really important so a museum can make it safe.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s