Would you buy historical wreck artifacts?

[Brian Sharpe]

I was researching some ideas I have for a wreck diving road trip this coming summer when I came across the website of a well known wreck diver and author offering artifacts from the Andrea Doria and Empress of Ireland for sale.

In a way I found the notion of selling these items for profit offensive but another voice in my head suggested that it is merely a way of recovering the costs of expeditions and, in some ways, isn't really any different than profiting from the sale of books about these famous wrecks.

What are your thoughts on this practice?

[paddler3d]

The way I look at ship wrecks, especially saltwater, is that ultimately they are going to get claimed by the Ocean. By artifact hunting, one is actually preserving the wreck. Now tearing out the brass portholes and brass valves, I'm not so sure about that one.

With that, if it is something that you would find value and enjoyment in, why not?

[diddydidit]

I guess if there is nothing to be learned by archeology, it's not a war grave and it's not bolted down it's ok.

[diddydidit]

I came across the website of a well known wreck diver and author offering artifacts from the Andrea Doria and Empress of Ireland for sale.


Let me guess G.G.

[paddler3d]

I guess if there is nothing to be learned by archeology, it's not a war grave and it's not bolted down it's ok.

How about an option in the poll with something like the above?

Just curious...what would be the difference between a 'war grave' and simply a 'grave'?

[Walter]

As long as the wreck is not protected by law, I see no problem with it. I wouldn't personally buy any, but then I don't buy fossils either.

[Wookie]

I bought a cup and saucer as a fund raiser from the third class china from the Doria. It was a benefit for SUDS, and I will never dive the Doria. I have it on display, I make no false pretenses about it, and it's a cool conversation piece. It's a little weird to have an artifact that I didn't collect myself, but, then, I don't really believe in collecting artifacts anyway.

[noreastDIVER84]

I am not sure about it. My grandfather; who is the main reason I am a diver now; used to scrap ships and sink them as artificial reefs. Some were decommissioned Navy ships, some were old tankers, some were unknown. I do have a few old brass portholes, some brass and bronze ships lamps and some valves as well. I am very well aware of what I could "scrap" them for and would never do that. I even have a few 55 gallon drums filled with nuts and bolts made of a metal called inconel, it is a corrosion proof metal like stainless steel, but it gets big money when you cash it in. The nuts and bolts are more of a sentimental thing to me, but the portholes, lamps, and valves I just find to be "interesting" artifacts from the past.

Brent

[vintagediver]

When a wreck becomes one with the ocean then it should be fare game. As long as the remains of the dead remain with the wreck (including war graves), then all else should be available for salvage.
The law needs to be changed internationally.
If it is not recovered then it just becomes sediment. So...why not.

[Kingpatzer]

I would say it depends on the wreck. When it's a still standing wreck, it is a tomb, and in my mind should be respected as such. But once it reaches a point where it has naturally become more part of the ocean, than wreck, then artifacts are just that, artifacts can be useful as both archaeological data and as pieces of art.

[Brian Sharpe]

Just curious...what would be the difference between a 'war grave' and simply a 'grave'?

A distinction I'd wondered about too but I do think it's reasonable to show added respect for those who die serving their country.

[diddydidit]

Ya thats sort of the thinking I have. If men and women died for their country to protect us they deserve to rest in peace, the only reason I could see to do any penetration on a war grave would be to solve some kind of mystery such as the U-869. Dives such as the Doria where there was loss of civilian life are ok to dive IMO, and I dont see any reason not to take some artifacts such as cups and plates, things like the bell or whatever I would leave. I also wouldn't sell any pieces either but that is just me.

[Laurie S.]

I'm an archaeologist and I say it depends on the wreck. Hands off ancient and older historical wrecks, and respect military ships sunk in wartime. Too much information has been lost due to subsurface pothunting, especially in the Mediterranean. At the same time, I have no real problem with artifacts being sold from the Andrea Doria or more recent wrecks. If a wreck has been excavated in the proper manner with appropriate permissions and recording by professionally qualified staff, then again, I have no problem with the salvager selling items to recoup the costs, after everything has been documented thoroughly. It's all about the provenience of an artifact and how it was acquired.

[Brian Sharpe]

It's all about the provenience of an artifact and how it was acquired.

Good point!

[paddler3d]

I'm an archaeologist and I say it depends on the wreck. Hands off ancient and older historical wrecks, and respect military ships sunk in wartime. Too much information has been lost due to subsurface pothunting, especially in the Mediterranean. At the same time, I have no real problem with artifacts being sold from the Andrea Doria or more recent wrecks. If a wreck has been excavated in the proper manner with appropriate permissions and recording by professionally qualified staff, then again, I have no problem with the salvager selling items to recoup the costs, after everything has been documented thoroughly. It's all about the provenience of an artifact and how it was acquired.

Where would old wooden shipwrecks of the Caribbean and FL Key's fall in your spectrum, so to speak?

Here is what I'm getting at. Florida has pretty well said anything in its territorial waters are its property. If I'm out on my own dollar and I find a an old wooden wreck (no wood left, only ballast), I figure out what it is, (if I understand FL Salvage law correctly) I can't salvage it? The State gets to reap the rewards of my work.

[Laurie S.]

Are you talking about Spanish-period wrecks? If so, I would say they should be offlimits unless there is a professional archaeologist overseeing the operation and recovery. To archaeologists, the value is not in the artifact itself, but in how it is associated with other items and features (e.g., where it was located within the ship). Unfortunately, to many others, the artifacts have a monetary value, which has resulted in much lost history and data. Even if you only are taking an artifact because you would like it in your collection, it is another piece of the puzzle that is lost.

[Chris12day]

I would only collect an artifact from a wreck if

1) I was part of the discovery
2) The site excavation and evaluation of the wreck's history had been completed
3) No descration of the dead

Just my thoughts........

[Sas]

I have no interest in wreck artifacts, but have no real opinion on whether people collect them. I like looking at wrecks though, and would prefer things left on the wreck for me to see but understand that they will eventually break down and others might want to preserve them.

On the topic of war grave versus grave, I see no difference between the two. The death of a civilian is as tragic as the death of someone in the defense forces.

[PaulSmithTek]

There is a reason that artifacts from historical shipwreaks are not allowed to be listed on eBay!

[vladimir]

There is a reason that artifacts from historical shipwreaks are not allowed to be listed on eBay!What is it?

[PaulSmithTek]

What is it?
Governmental Regulations.

[mjh]

Leave the wrecks alone. I would like to see all the "artifacts" in their rightful place.