8 ms·

This article got me wondering...how is the law structured around this sort of thing? Generally speaking, it's highly illegal to dig up and open a grave since w

This article got me wondering...how is the law structured around this sort of thing? Generally speaking, it's highly illegal to dig up and open a grave since we generally have respect for a person's final resting place and this has been codified into law. So what are the rules surrounding this? I assume special legal approval must be granted similar to what is required, for example, when a body needs to be exhumed as part of an ongoing investigation?

candiodari 8y ago
In Europe, a burial site only is a burial site for 200 years. There are separate laws for archaeological digs.
- cbnotfromthere 8y ago
  As there is no political entity called "Europe", by definition there can't be such rule / law.
  - vorpalhex 8y ago
    This is a case where a snarky reply is unneeded, and you could simply do some basic research. It looks like there is official permission in London to exhume some graves for re-use after 75 years, and it's generally accepted that a grave is only owned for a 100 years (that seems to come from the Burial Act of 1857 in the UK). In general it seems that yes, given sufficient time, the tricky legal problems of exhuming become quite a bit more simple.
    - cosmon0t 8y ago
      The "no one cares anymore" solution to put it simply
    - antpls 8y ago
      I disagree. It doesn't make sense to say "in Europe" when talking about laws. Eventually "European Union", but the fact that the parent used "Europe" is a signal that it could be simply fake information or a misinformed claims. Saying "in Europe" is the result of lazyness OR misinformation. In both cases it results on an over-generalization, which can be dangerous. The "snarky reply" is being down voted while it is ACTUALLY TRUE and adds something to the conversation. For people without downvote right, the only way to disagree is to post a comment, which is then downvoted... See the problem there? It really makes you wonder how many facts, stories or anecdotes are voluntary or involuntary made up on HN.
      - grawprog 8y ago
        >It really makes you wonder how many facts, stories or anecdotes are voluntary or involuntary made up on HN. Or just anywhere in general?? I've always assumed 90% of anything I read in any comment section is possibly bullshit personally. I'd really like to know when I missed the 'suddenly everything on the internet is supposed to be true' boat. When did this happen. Because, i've always gone with the assumption that the internet is full of lies and nonsense.
close04 8y ago
It's an archaeological dig as such it is done under special circumstances. Basically the permit is granted before the dig is started and it will list the conditions that apply to that dig if they are not already regulated as standard by a law. If you dig on your own private property and find such artifacts you are most likely required to stop. Most countries consider historical artifacts to be owned by the state (just like natural resources) and the special conditions mentioned above will apply.
- ryanianian 8y ago
  In the US you do actually own the things in your ground (unless you gave away mineral rights, a thing that is kinda common in mining areas). (NPR did a thing on this a while ago about a farmer who ended up owning a huge T-Rex fossil.)
  - AlotOfReading 8y ago
    You own them as long as they don't fall under NAGPRA and there are no human remains. Even then, most states have laws restricting what you're able to do with a site.
    - close04 8y ago
      In many European countries finding a pot of gold buried in your back yard means you have to hand it over to the authorities and maybe get a "finder's fee". You're not allowed to keep or sell such historical artifacts regardless of their monetary value. I don't know what happens when human remains are involved. Common sense tells me that they would never become the "property" of the land owner. And of course there is a chance that some artifacts are treated differently than others. A T-Rex fossil is 100% naturally occurring while minted coins or a sarcophagus are not. They may have even been at some point property of the state and as such could be treated as national patrimony.
      - germinalphrase 8y ago
        I have been told that this is also true in my home state- Minnesota. Land owners do not automatically retain mineral rights when they purchase property.
onemoresoop 8y ago
Yes, in general there is a legal approval needed for exhumation, but in this case the identity of the bodies is unknown, so in order to put a name next to their remains and uncovering some parts of history, archaeologists are allowed to open the tombs and hence to exhume the bodies found inside.
nrjames 8y ago
For a Native American perspective on this happening in North America, check out the book God is Red, by Vine Deloria.
duxup 8y ago
Quite a few documentaries show or talk about the process in Egypt. Filing detailed reports on where and what you plan to do, what you do if you find things and so forth. Depending on what you want to do it can take a long time was the impression I got, particularly if the existing history or science doesn't support your theories. At least in the documentaries I've seen it seemed like Egyptian authorities in that area were highly knowledgeable and thoughtful. I hope those were accurate. They were willing to send things out of the country to be examined further provided they were returned and such. It seems like a good process there. I don't think that is the case in all countries who understandably have other problems to deal with :(

candiodari 8y ago

In Europe, a burial site only is a burial site for 200 years. There are separate laws for archaeological digs.

cbnotfromthere 8y ago
As there is no political entity called "Europe", by definition there can't be such rule / law.
- vorpalhex 8y ago
  This is a case where a snarky reply is unneeded, and you could simply do some basic research. It looks like there is official permission in London to exhume some graves for re-use after 75 years, and it's generally accepted that a grave is only owned for a 100 years (that seems to come from the Burial Act of 1857 in the UK). In general it seems that yes, given sufficient time, the tricky legal problems of exhuming become quite a bit more simple.
  - cosmon0t 8y ago
    The "no one cares anymore" solution to put it simply
  - antpls 8y ago
    I disagree. It doesn't make sense to say "in Europe" when talking about laws. Eventually "European Union", but the fact that the parent used "Europe" is a signal that it could be simply fake information or a misinformed claims. Saying "in Europe" is the result of lazyness OR misinformation. In both cases it results on an over-generalization, which can be dangerous. The "snarky reply" is being down voted while it is ACTUALLY TRUE and adds something to the conversation. For people without downvote right, the only way to disagree is to post a comment, which is then downvoted... See the problem there? It really makes you wonder how many facts, stories or anecdotes are voluntary or involuntary made up on HN.
    - grawprog 8y ago
      >It really makes you wonder how many facts, stories or anecdotes are voluntary or involuntary made up on HN. Or just anywhere in general?? I've always assumed 90% of anything I read in any comment section is possibly bullshit personally. I'd really like to know when I missed the 'suddenly everything on the internet is supposed to be true' boat. When did this happen. Because, i've always gone with the assumption that the internet is full of lies and nonsense.

close04 8y ago

It's an archaeological dig as such it is done under special circumstances. Basically the permit is granted before the dig is started and it will list the conditions that apply to that dig if they are not already regulated as standard by a law. If you dig on your own private property and find such artifacts you are most likely required to stop. Most countries consider historical artifacts to be owned by the state (just like natural resources) and the special conditions mentioned above will apply.

ryanianian 8y ago
In the US you do actually own the things in your ground (unless you gave away mineral rights, a thing that is kinda common in mining areas). (NPR did a thing on this a while ago about a farmer who ended up owning a huge T-Rex fossil.)
- AlotOfReading 8y ago
  You own them as long as they don't fall under NAGPRA and there are no human remains. Even then, most states have laws restricting what you're able to do with a site.
  - close04 8y ago
    In many European countries finding a pot of gold buried in your back yard means you have to hand it over to the authorities and maybe get a "finder's fee". You're not allowed to keep or sell such historical artifacts regardless of their monetary value. I don't know what happens when human remains are involved. Common sense tells me that they would never become the "property" of the land owner. And of course there is a chance that some artifacts are treated differently than others. A T-Rex fossil is 100% naturally occurring while minted coins or a sarcophagus are not. They may have even been at some point property of the state and as such could be treated as national patrimony.
    - germinalphrase 8y ago
      I have been told that this is also true in my home state- Minnesota. Land owners do not automatically retain mineral rights when they purchase property.

onemoresoop 8y ago

Yes, in general there is a legal approval needed for exhumation, but in this case the identity of the bodies is unknown, so in order to put a name next to their remains and uncovering some parts of history, archaeologists are allowed to open the tombs and hence to exhume the bodies found inside.

nrjames 8y ago

For a Native American perspective on this happening in North America, check out the book God is Red, by Vine Deloria.

duxup 8y ago

Quite a few documentaries show or talk about the process in Egypt. Filing detailed reports on where and what you plan to do, what you do if you find things and so forth. Depending on what you want to do it can take a long time was the impression I got, particularly if the existing history or science doesn't support your theories. At least in the documentaries I've seen it seemed like Egyptian authorities in that area were highly knowledgeable and thoughtful. I hope those were accurate. They were willing to send things out of the country to be examined further provided they were returned and such. It seems like a good process there. I don't think that is the case in all countries who understandably have other problems to deal with :(