5 ms·

Surprising that we can still find these things in 2020, and this site isn't buried at all

BurningFrog 6y ago
Argentina has had a few rough decades. Maybe archeology in this very remote corner hasn't been a big priority for anyone.
- mikeyouse 6y ago
  There's always the problem that Mexico has seen - it's not cheap or easy to protect ruins once they're discovered. In some places, there are tons of artifacts so once they're on the map, you have to expend resources protecting them. If they're not of academic/historical importance, it could be better to leave them 'undiscovered' so they're not pillaged.
  - AlotOfReading 6y ago
    In my experience, that's rarely a good idea. No documentation means no ability to do regular monitoring or tie records together over years, irrespective of funding. Simply put, not ideal. The way it's handled in the US is to simply require auth on the site databases.
londons_explore 6y ago
Having been to Peru, I can tell you that there are Inca ruins everywhere. A few are signposted and tourist attractions, but many many more are just abandoned in the mountains. There are enough that if you take a hike off the footpath, there's a good chance you'll just come across one.
- StavrosK 6y ago
  Same thing happens in Greece, where if you want to build a house in, say, Athens, you run the real risk of finding ancient artifacts when digging the foundation and having your build halted so archeologists can come in and take them.
  - detritus 6y ago
    Same thing all over and I know for a fact that construction companies in my home town would often simply destroy or bury artefacts they found, rather than risk a long and costly halt to a job.
    - kunfuu 6y ago
      That's terrifying, given so much of the ancient world is still unknown to us.
      - londons_explore 6y ago
        The London Crossrail project (underground railway) specifically disallowed any employee to look at the dirt they were digging, just incase they saw a bone or an ancient pot. They put extra covers and opaque screens in the conveyor belts for dirt so that none could be seen by accident.
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    Thessaloniki subway? :)
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - StavrosK 6y ago
      Hey, that'll be finished any day now! skeletonwaiting.jpg
- noobermin 6y ago
  Not quite the same level of antiquity as Inca ruins, but I have family in Peleliu which was the site of a major WWII skirmish between Allied forces and the Japanese (specifically). There are so many ruins everywhere that people don't think much of them at times. I once came across part of a plane wing just haphazardly buried on a beach and we just sort of marvelled at it for a moment and moved on. There are obviously designated areas and monuments (to both sides) and there is a museum but throughout the island it is scattered with remains everywhere that it isn't uncommon even know to run into things.
  - cafard 6y ago
    Skirmish? Wikipedia says it lasted two months, one week, and five days, with nearly 11 thousand casualties on each side. (The US casualties about 20% dead, the Japanese nearly 100%.)
    - noobermin 6y ago
      I was underplaying the severity of it. It was quite the site of battle. It was actually one of the two routes the US was planning to use to attack Tokyo, the other being the Philippines.

Argentina has had a few rough decades. Maybe archeology in this very remote corner hasn't been a big priority for anyone.

mikeyouse 6y ago
There's always the problem that Mexico has seen - it's not cheap or easy to protect ruins once they're discovered. In some places, there are tons of artifacts so once they're on the map, you have to expend resources protecting them. If they're not of academic/historical importance, it could be better to leave them 'undiscovered' so they're not pillaged.
- AlotOfReading 6y ago
  In my experience, that's rarely a good idea. No documentation means no ability to do regular monitoring or tie records together over years, irrespective of funding. Simply put, not ideal. The way it's handled in the US is to simply require auth on the site databases.

londons_explore 6y ago

Having been to Peru, I can tell you that there are Inca ruins everywhere. A few are signposted and tourist attractions, but many many more are just abandoned in the mountains. There are enough that if you take a hike off the footpath, there's a good chance you'll just come across one.

StavrosK 6y ago
Same thing happens in Greece, where if you want to build a house in, say, Athens, you run the real risk of finding ancient artifacts when digging the foundation and having your build halted so archeologists can come in and take them.
- detritus 6y ago
  Same thing all over and I know for a fact that construction companies in my home town would often simply destroy or bury artefacts they found, rather than risk a long and costly halt to a job.
  - kunfuu 6y ago
    That's terrifying, given so much of the ancient world is still unknown to us.
    - londons_explore 6y ago
      The London Crossrail project (underground railway) specifically disallowed any employee to look at the dirt they were digging, just incase they saw a bone or an ancient pot. They put extra covers and opaque screens in the conveyor belts for dirt so that none could be seen by accident.
- pjmlp 6y ago
  Thessaloniki subway? :)
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - StavrosK 6y ago
    Hey, that'll be finished any day now! skeletonwaiting.jpg
noobermin 6y ago
Not quite the same level of antiquity as Inca ruins, but I have family in Peleliu which was the site of a major WWII skirmish between Allied forces and the Japanese (specifically). There are so many ruins everywhere that people don't think much of them at times. I once came across part of a plane wing just haphazardly buried on a beach and we just sort of marvelled at it for a moment and moved on. There are obviously designated areas and monuments (to both sides) and there is a museum but throughout the island it is scattered with remains everywhere that it isn't uncommon even know to run into things.
- cafard 6y ago
  Skirmish? Wikipedia says it lasted two months, one week, and five days, with nearly 11 thousand casualties on each side. (The US casualties about 20% dead, the Japanese nearly 100%.)
  - noobermin 6y ago
    I was underplaying the severity of it. It was quite the site of battle. It was actually one of the two routes the US was planning to use to attack Tokyo, the other being the Philippines.