4 ms·

Discoverd in April 2018—what happened just now is that an academic article has been published about it. What a cool thing to find steps outside your house...

by mdeck_ 6y ago

cookieswumchorr 6y ago
I guess the farmer is not so happy about it
- heikkilevanto 6y ago
  As the article says, he can not farm that field, but the government is compensating him for it. Don't know how much, but this is Norway, so probably reasonably well. And they do take pride in their history, so the farmer might be proud to be part of this.
  - magicalhippo 6y ago
    > this is Norway, so probably reasonably well If you're a private citizen doing minor things to your own land then the government will cover the archeological survey[1]. However if the owner of the land is a commercial entity or you're making larger changes, the owner has to pay. And it can get quite expensive, as this couple found out when [2] they wanted to build a new barn and had to pay $70k for the archeological digs. It even affects the counties themselves[3], as the money goes to the central government. [1]: https://www.nrk.no/vestland/fryktar-kulturminne-gar-tapt-grunna-myte-1.13033407 https://www.nrk.no/vestland/fryktar-kulturminne-gar-tapt-gru... [2]: https://www.nrk.no/rogaland/bonder-ma-ut-med-700.000-kroner-etter-historisk-funn-pa-garden-1.14092886 https://www.nrk.no/rogaland/bonder-ma-ut-med-700.000-kroner-... [3]: https://www.nrk.no/nordland/kulturminner-gir-millionregning-1.8195611 https://www.nrk.no/nordland/kulturminner-gir-millionregning-...
    - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
      That seems like a great incentive to hire Ray Charles to run your backhoe. Something like "must list the find in <central location> and give interested parties <some reasonable set of options in some reasonable timeframe for investigating and possibly excavating>" seems like it would serve the interest of history/science much better.
      - magicalhippo 6y ago
        > That seems like a great incentive to hire Ray Charles to run your backhoe. There's also a law that if you own a sufficiently large forest you need to hire a "forest manager" which, in part, has to survey the forest for potential endangered or protected species and similar. Of course if the manager finds an area where some rare flower or bird lives then that area has to be preserved, and so you get a similar incentive where the land owner prefers managers with poor eyesight.
    - VoodooJuJu 6y ago
      That is completely absurd. How many artifacts are being destroyed or concealed because people either can't pay or refuse to pay for such archaeology "services"?
      - magicalhippo 6y ago
        Yeah the people in charge of this definitely didn't take any game theory at uni... There are quite harsh penalties for destroying artifacts etc but yeah, I'd rather take that risk than financial ruin.
        fdjhjsxkm 6y ago
        lol game theory what a load of crap. It really varies by jurisdiction. It is common in many european countries to have government-run archaeological services that pay for work on residential property, and charge companies at cost (as noted in a prior comment). In north america it is more commercial, and is generally associated with construction and contractor work, with lowest bids winning contracts. This is all traced through zoning records, and is factored into land taxes. Big companies tend to prefer to have all their ducks in a row, since its actually a highly competitive market and costs tend to be pretty low, keeping in perspective the revenue that will eventually be generated. Fines tend to be quite high for companies that neglect to do proper investigation, though arguably not high enough. But if it is on a residential property then there is literally no reason to not undertake archaeological investigation if the government will pay for it. Also you're missing the fact that this occurs in multiple phases, with thresholds for work of varying intensity (these thresholds are often arbitrary and nonsensical, to appease land developers, who hold lots of power on the process, depending on jurisdiction). For example, a surface survey that yields considerable results would move onto a test trench phase (literally a few 0.5 x 0.5 x 0.5 m holes) and if that yields considerable results then you move onto even more extensive results. If human remains are found, then all bets are off and a really intense excavation occurs. Generally speaking, it's not a zero sum game. There are certainly egregious cases where sites are knowingly destroyed. For instance, when rio tinto destroyed a 46,000 year old site in australia. There were consequences, but this only demonstrates the need for even more regulation, not less. https://www.npr.org/2020/09/11/911866159/a-mining-company-blew-up-a-46-000-year-old-aboriginal-site-its-ceo-is-resigning https://www.npr.org/2020/09/11/911866159/a-mining-company-bl...
willvarfar 6y ago
Have no idea about the situation in Norway, but in some other countries the archaeologists put stuff like this under embargo until the site can be 'secured' against treasure hunters (i.e. gone over with the best metal detectors to find and collect everything easily discoverable). Its really sad and says bad things about the world. The big news finally breaks when everything is done, or just before excavations that are hard to hide begin.
- fdjhjsxkm 6y ago
  More likely that it generally takes lots of time to do this work. Archaeological projects generally produce lots of material and call for work that can't be easily automated. On top of that, archaeological projects tend to be poorly funded, and if carried out by an academic institution then field research tends to be limited to summer months. The variety of materials recovered must be examined by various specialists, and then re-integrated, analysed and synthesized into summary reports. This takes time. Moreover, most archaeological sites are not secured. There is no room in the budget for that, unless the state sets aside funds for that kind of thing (very rare, though Norway might be a notable exception)
- mdeck_ 6y ago
  It was publicly announced in 2018. See for example: https://www.nrk.no/osloogviken/vikingskip-funn-gar-verden-rundt-1.14250085 https://www.nrk.no/osloogviken/vikingskip-funn-gar-verden-ru...

Discoverd in April 2018—what happened just now is that an academic article has been published about it. What a cool thing to find steps outside your house...

by mdeck_ 6y ago

Discoverd in April 2018—what happened just now is that an academic article has been published about it. What a cool thing to find steps outside your house...

cookieswumchorr 6y ago

I guess the farmer is not so happy about it

heikkilevanto 6y ago
As the article says, he can not farm that field, but the government is compensating him for it. Don't know how much, but this is Norway, so probably reasonably well. And they do take pride in their history, so the farmer might be proud to be part of this.
- magicalhippo 6y ago
  > this is Norway, so probably reasonably well If you're a private citizen doing minor things to your own land then the government will cover the archeological survey[1]. However if the owner of the land is a commercial entity or you're making larger changes, the owner has to pay. And it can get quite expensive, as this couple found out when [2] they wanted to build a new barn and had to pay $70k for the archeological digs. It even affects the counties themselves[3], as the money goes to the central government. [1]: https://www.nrk.no/vestland/fryktar-kulturminne-gar-tapt-grunna-myte-1.13033407 https://www.nrk.no/vestland/fryktar-kulturminne-gar-tapt-gru... [2]: https://www.nrk.no/rogaland/bonder-ma-ut-med-700.000-kroner-etter-historisk-funn-pa-garden-1.14092886 https://www.nrk.no/rogaland/bonder-ma-ut-med-700.000-kroner-... [3]: https://www.nrk.no/nordland/kulturminner-gir-millionregning-1.8195611 https://www.nrk.no/nordland/kulturminner-gir-millionregning-...
  - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
    That seems like a great incentive to hire Ray Charles to run your backhoe. Something like "must list the find in <central location> and give interested parties <some reasonable set of options in some reasonable timeframe for investigating and possibly excavating>" seems like it would serve the interest of history/science much better.
    - magicalhippo 6y ago
      > That seems like a great incentive to hire Ray Charles to run your backhoe. There's also a law that if you own a sufficiently large forest you need to hire a "forest manager" which, in part, has to survey the forest for potential endangered or protected species and similar. Of course if the manager finds an area where some rare flower or bird lives then that area has to be preserved, and so you get a similar incentive where the land owner prefers managers with poor eyesight.
  - VoodooJuJu 6y ago
    That is completely absurd. How many artifacts are being destroyed or concealed because people either can't pay or refuse to pay for such archaeology "services"?
    - magicalhippo 6y ago
      Yeah the people in charge of this definitely didn't take any game theory at uni... There are quite harsh penalties for destroying artifacts etc but yeah, I'd rather take that risk than financial ruin.
      - fdjhjsxkm 6y ago
        lol game theory what a load of crap. It really varies by jurisdiction. It is common in many european countries to have government-run archaeological services that pay for work on residential property, and charge companies at cost (as noted in a prior comment). In north america it is more commercial, and is generally associated with construction and contractor work, with lowest bids winning contracts. This is all traced through zoning records, and is factored into land taxes. Big companies tend to prefer to have all their ducks in a row, since its actually a highly competitive market and costs tend to be pretty low, keeping in perspective the revenue that will eventually be generated. Fines tend to be quite high for companies that neglect to do proper investigation, though arguably not high enough. But if it is on a residential property then there is literally no reason to not undertake archaeological investigation if the government will pay for it. Also you're missing the fact that this occurs in multiple phases, with thresholds for work of varying intensity (these thresholds are often arbitrary and nonsensical, to appease land developers, who hold lots of power on the process, depending on jurisdiction). For example, a surface survey that yields considerable results would move onto a test trench phase (literally a few 0.5 x 0.5 x 0.5 m holes) and if that yields considerable results then you move onto even more extensive results. If human remains are found, then all bets are off and a really intense excavation occurs. Generally speaking, it's not a zero sum game. There are certainly egregious cases where sites are knowingly destroyed. For instance, when rio tinto destroyed a 46,000 year old site in australia. There were consequences, but this only demonstrates the need for even more regulation, not less. https://www.npr.org/2020/09/11/911866159/a-mining-company-blew-up-a-46-000-year-old-aboriginal-site-its-ceo-is-resigning https://www.npr.org/2020/09/11/911866159/a-mining-company-bl...

willvarfar 6y ago

Have no idea about the situation in Norway, but in some other countries the archaeologists put stuff like this under embargo until the site can be 'secured' against treasure hunters (i.e. gone over with the best metal detectors to find and collect everything easily discoverable). Its really sad and says bad things about the world. The big news finally breaks when everything is done, or just before excavations that are hard to hide begin.

fdjhjsxkm 6y ago
More likely that it generally takes lots of time to do this work. Archaeological projects generally produce lots of material and call for work that can't be easily automated. On top of that, archaeological projects tend to be poorly funded, and if carried out by an academic institution then field research tends to be limited to summer months. The variety of materials recovered must be examined by various specialists, and then re-integrated, analysed and synthesized into summary reports. This takes time. Moreover, most archaeological sites are not secured. There is no room in the budget for that, unless the state sets aside funds for that kind of thing (very rare, though Norway might be a notable exception)
mdeck_ 6y ago
It was publicly announced in 2018. See for example: https://www.nrk.no/osloogviken/vikingskip-funn-gar-verden-rundt-1.14250085 https://www.nrk.no/osloogviken/vikingskip-funn-gar-verden-ru...