Museum Ethics, Treasure Hunting and Maritime Archaeology - Literature review Example

Museum Ethics, Treasure Hunting and Maritime Archaeology By Student’s Name Student Number Institution Course Code Instructor Date Museum Ethics, Treasure Hunting and Maritime Archaeology Ethical issues surrounding museums, treasure hunting and maritime archaeology has been profound with persistent disagreement pertaining to acceptable and unacceptable practices. The main topic of contest surrounds the issue of treasure salvage and the decorum of archaeologists’ involvement in the operations done to hunt for treasure submerged under water. Archaeologists have not held the aspect of treasure salvage and submerged wreckage in the same weight as land sites for the preservation of heritage (Gould 2011). The discussion brings up the need for ethical standards to establish effective operations in the treasure hunting as well as the operations of the archaeology as far as maritime heritage is concerned. Failure to effectively and equally address the issue of museum ethics surrounding maritime archaeology and treasure hunting, destruction of crucial submerged archaeological artefacts will continue (Khakzad 2014). This essay evaluates the ethical stands, touching on the aspects outlined as well as the debate pertaining to the part played by museums in displaying and acquiring artefacts within the Australian context. Ethics are very important in running organisations. The preservation of cultural and national heritage is a great phenomenon that has gained prominence since time immemorial according to Gould (2011), the need for increased preservation of cultural, national and marine heritage is necessary for future generations’ reference. Museums are involved with the preservation of cultural heritage as well as nature providing areas where people can experience unique and interactive occurrences. A museum is termed as a non-profit making institution established on a temporary or permanent basis to conserve the collection of artefacts and other objects that are of scientific, cultural or historical importance (ICOM 2009). Further, collections are made available for public viewing in respect to studying, education purposes as well as for leisure enjoyment. Museum acquires and keeps artefacts for posterity within a national global context (Taylor 2011). Nevertheless, there exist ethics of museums surrounding the acquisition, ownership and display of underwater cultural heritage. Consequently, discussions on the maritime law, UNESCO conventions and treasure hunting salvage, shipwrecking rooting are also live to the aspect of museum ethics. The need for standards and measures to promote cohesiveness in the preservation of marine heritage is inevitable. To equally address issues surrounding treasure hunting, museums ethics and marine archaeology, the need for ethical standards and operations within set norms and values is necessary. Codes of ethics for the museum are the principles that should guide the museum on how to handle collected artefacts (Code of Ethics 1999). The ethics include the fact that the body that governs the museum should have a constitution that ought to be put in public and have the goals and policies to be achieved, as well as clearly state its charter and role within the society. Some of the important ethics in running a museum include: transparency and effectiveness in the management of resources and artefacts under preservation. In context, museums are expected to have sufficient funds to conduct and develop their tasks and duties effectively (Rutledge, 2012). Financial sources are necessary for the operations involved in the acquisition and preservation of artefacts by the museums. The funds can be outsourced from the public or private sectors as well as income collected from the fee charged to the visitors upon being admitted inside the museums for viewing (Khakzad 2014). Finally, proper accounting procedures pertaining to the funds are paramount to ensure transparency and efficiency. Through effective management and transparency, improvement of the operations in the hunting of treasures and preservation of marine artefacts will be achieved. The collection of marine treasure is faced with tremendous debates with regard to how to establish archaeological sites or submerged artefacts and how to salvage them. The collection of artefacts is expected to follow a genuine process and the storage or housing process is supposed to be proper to bring down the chances of damage. The process of conservation ought to be carried out properly and documentation of all collections done effectively to ensure that the right procedures set out are followed (Askerud and Clement 1997). The only available aspect involves viewing whereby the artefacts are stored properly and displayed for effective viewing by the public. According to Taylor (2011), the museum should be well protected throughout to safeguard the artefacts from theft, damage from fire and careless handling since most of them are of high quality and are used to preserve history. Consequently, measures to protecting marine artefacts are necessary in order to preserve their natural heritage even prior to salvage or hunting. The staff of the museum should be well trained on how to handle the collections kept in the museum and should conduct themselves in accordance with the duties of their profession in areas they specialise like curatorial, technical staff, administration staff and the security personnel (Catsambis, Ford and Hamilton 2011). In respect to marine technology, there is need to come up with effective training standards pertaining to how effective marine archaeologists can be promoted to acquire high standards management qualities. Collection of marine artefacts requires critical care and further research on the objects to identify their historical aspect as well as the richness with respect to the background information that can be outsourced (Johnston 1993). The curators should ensure that they have documented findings as well as interpreted information pertaining to all the collections available and publish their findings (The World Heritage Convention 1980). Disposal of collections in case of any need to dispose of some of the collected artefacts requires effectively following the legislation touching on the disposal procedures. Acquisition involves a continuous addition of objects and artefacts to a museum’s collection, which, can be either permanently through gifts, purchase or temporarily through loans (Rutledge 2012). The steps followed in the acquisition process involves the review of the objects designated for transfer to the museum ownership as well as in the case of temporary initiation of a loan and all associated paperwork conducted appropriately. In the event objects are the objects are declined, the process is completed when the owner receives them back in one piece (Brezina 2009). The acquisition review process provides a chance to assess whether the objects should be acquired as well as establish whether they are appropriate to be placed in the museum premises for preservation and display. The museum should have a written statement of its acquisition policy that should be published, and should often be reviewed (ICOM 2009). Preservation of marine artefacts should follow due diligence and be in line with the jurisprudence of the nationality of the site of interest. In the Australian context, a museum should not acquire objects that are not approved and have not satisfied the governing body through either purchase or gifts. Marine materials or artefacts that are either biological or geological should not be acquired especially if they are deemed to cause a contravention of the international laws, for example in respect to wildlife protection or natural history conservation laws (Taylor 2011). The acquisition of all objects must comply legally and ethically with UNESCO standards. The museum is responsible to ensure that the marine objects within its host of collections meets the respected wishes of the ethnic or community groups where the objects are associated with or originates from, the reason national museum of Australia ensure that the indigenous remains and artefacts are returned to their ancestral custodians (Catsambis, Ford and Hamilton 2011). This is an ethical attribute within the museum settings involving strict ensuring of maintaining and preserving culture and respect. Marine heritage possesses great values and qualities of the ancient civilisation and development with respect to life in the sea and habitations around water bodies. It basically involves the underwater cultural heritage, which constitutes a significant human history whether in terms of transportation or settlements that may have been submerged under water bodies. Generally, the aspect of marine heritage mainly, refers to the remains of human existence that possess cultural, historical and archaeological value, and is found submerged under water for at least a century (The World Heritage Convention, 1980). The International Council on Museums and Sites states that it is understood as an archaeological heritage found in water has been removed from underwater or within underwater environment involving submerged sites and wreck sites and wreckages (ICOMOS 1999). Further, it is termed as a part of the humanity’s cultural heritage embedded in elements of peoples’ history, countries and their relations to each other in respect to their common heritage. Allowing public access to underwater cultural heritage helps to increase its appreciation and contribute to increased protection and recreational value as well as understanding of its significance and understanding (Gould 2011). Maritime law is a body of law that governs activities occurring in the seas and operation of vessels in oceans (Johnston 1993). Sea transport was among the ancient forms of transportation and hence, developed the need to have rules for resolving disputes involving maritime. The context of maritime law protects the heritage and preserves valuable historical, cultural and archaeological resources of the oceans and seas (Abbass 1999). The major attribute surrounding the convention aimed at ensuring critical measures addressing effective conservation of cultural and archaeological aspects of the world heritage. Looking at the aspects of treasure hunting and treasure salvage; treasure hunting involves prying shipwrecks that have sunk in oceans and retrieving artefacts that have a market value (Brezina 2009). On the other hand, treasure salvage involves the process of recovering a ship after shipwreck together with its cargo and other property (Johnston 1993). It mainly involves re-floating a ship that has sunk and then towing it onshore for further analysis and preservation. Treasure hunting has been commercialised hence becoming unethical (Taylor 2011). According to Khakzad (2014), professional archaeologists are not involved in the buying and sale of valuable artefacts. To effectively understand the aspect of treasure salvage, this paper looks into the Cooks Endeavour cannon as a case study analysis. The Cooks Endeavour cannon was discovered together with other artefacts on the east coast of Australia and belonged to Queensland in the event the guns were to be recovered in the year 1886 (Gould 2011). Due to the conflict of ownership, the Commonwealth Attorney General Department came up with solution pertaining to have the right to possess the cannon. The Queensland government claimed ownership following events of 1886, however; it had no validity in law. Thus, the Department of Attorney-General came up to the conclusion that the cannon were a property of the British government. Another problem that came up was where the cannon and other parts should go after it was restored (Gould 2011). Some cities of the Australia wanted parts of the cannon; the people of Cooktown had requested to have part of the cannon for the town museum. Nevertheless, the final verdict saw the Australian Government allocate the cannon and its part between different groups and for which was of great historic importance. National Maritime at Greenwich in England received one cannon, Commonwealth of Australia kept a cannon for itself, New Zealand was also given one cannon (Gould 2011). New South Wales received the fourth while the fifth was given to Queensland and the last one was given to Philadelphia Academy of Natural Science. The case study shows the controversies that surround maritime heritage and the legal tussles that can accompany treasure salvage. Thus, international laws and ethical standards are critical and necessary to improve efficiency and effectiveness of marine archaeology. In conclusion, the protection of cultural heritage is highly crucial for human civilisation and ensuring set ethics are followed hence conserving human history. Museums play a big role in displaying artefacts once they are found. Nevertheless, the ethical issues surrounding treasure hunting and marine archaeology requires critical consideration to come up with standards to establish necessary steps to be followed in the effective realisation of success in the preservation of marine heritage. The aspects of museums playing a crucial role in the maintaining and preservation of cultural heritage are in the public domain, and thus, the need for ethical standards and operations. This will enhance operations in the museum and archaeological sites, as well as promote heritage preservation. Reference List Abbass, D.K., 1999. A Marine Archaeologist Looks at Treasure Salvage. Journal of Maritime Law and Commerce. 30(2), pp. 261. Askerud, P. and Clement, E., 1997. Preventing the Illicit Traffic in Cultural Property: A Resource Handbook for the Implementation of the 1970 UNESCO Convention. Paris: UNESCO. Brezina, C. 2009. Treasure hunters. New York: Rosen Pub. Catsambis, A., Ford, B. and Hamilton, D.L., 2011. and. The Oxford Handbook of Maritime archaeology. New York: Oxford University Press. Code of Ethics, 1999. Museum Australia Incorporated. Code of the ethics for art, history and science museums. ACT: Museums Australia. Gould, R., 2011. Archaeology and the social history of ships. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Hosty, K., 1995. A Matter of Ethics: Shipwrecks, Salvage, Archaeology and Museums. Bulletin of the Australian Institute for Maritime Archaeology. 19(1), pp. 33-36. International Council of Museums (ICOM), 2009. Development of the Museum Definition According to ICOM Statutes (2007-1946). Accessed Online on May 15, 2015 from . International Council on Museums and Sites (ICOMOS), 1999. International Cultural Tourism Charter, Managing Tourism at Places of Heritage Significance. ICOMOS. Johnston, P.F., 1993. Treasure Salvage, Archaeological Ethics and Maritime Museums. The International Journal of Nautical Archaeology. 22(1), pp. 53-60. Khakzad, S., 2014. The Necessity of a Common Language for Coastal and Underwater Cultural Heritage. Journal of Anthropology and Archaeology. 2(1), pp. 17-31. Rutledge, S. 2012. Ancient Rome as a museum: Power, identity, and the culture of collecting. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Stanton, J.E., 2011. Ethnographic museums and collections: from the past into the future. In D. Griffin and L. Parosein (eds). Understanding museums: Australian museums and museology. National Museum of Australia. Taylor, K., 2011. Treasures Pose Ethics Issues for Smithsonian. The New York Times, April 24, 2011. The World Heritage Convention. 1980. Paris: UNESCO. Valmer, O., 1999. The case against the “Salvage” of the cultural heritage. Journal of Maritime Law and Commerce. 30(2), pp. 279. Read More

The ethics include the fact that the body that governs the museum should have a constitution that ought to be put in public and have the goals and policies to be achieved, as well as clearly state its charter and role within the society. Some of the important ethics in running a museum include: transparency and effectiveness in the management of resources and artefacts under preservation. In context, museums are expected to have sufficient funds to conduct and develop their tasks and duties effectively (Rutledge, 2012).

Financial sources are necessary for the operations involved in the acquisition and preservation of artefacts by the museums. The funds can be outsourced from the public or private sectors as well as income collected from the fee charged to the visitors upon being admitted inside the museums for viewing (Khakzad 2014). Finally, proper accounting procedures pertaining to the funds are paramount to ensure transparency and efficiency. Through effective management and transparency, improvement of the operations in the hunting of treasures and preservation of marine artefacts will be achieved.

The collection of marine treasure is faced with tremendous debates with regard to how to establish archaeological sites or submerged artefacts and how to salvage them. The collection of artefacts is expected to follow a genuine process and the storage or housing process is supposed to be proper to bring down the chances of damage. The process of conservation ought to be carried out properly and documentation of all collections done effectively to ensure that the right procedures set out are followed (Askerud and Clement 1997).

The only available aspect involves viewing whereby the artefacts are stored properly and displayed for effective viewing by the public. According to Taylor (2011), the museum should be well protected throughout to safeguard the artefacts from theft, damage from fire and careless handling since most of them are of high quality and are used to preserve history. Consequently, measures to protecting marine artefacts are necessary in order to preserve their natural heritage even prior to salvage or hunting.

The staff of the museum should be well trained on how to handle the collections kept in the museum and should conduct themselves in accordance with the duties of their profession in areas they specialise like curatorial, technical staff, administration staff and the security personnel (Catsambis, Ford and Hamilton 2011). In respect to marine technology, there is need to come up with effective training standards pertaining to how effective marine archaeologists can be promoted to acquire high standards management qualities.

Collection of marine artefacts requires critical care and further research on the objects to identify their historical aspect as well as the richness with respect to the background information that can be outsourced (Johnston 1993). The curators should ensure that they have documented findings as well as interpreted information pertaining to all the collections available and publish their findings (The World Heritage Convention 1980). Disposal of collections in case of any need to dispose of some of the collected artefacts requires effectively following the legislation touching on the disposal procedures.

Acquisition involves a continuous addition of objects and artefacts to a museum’s collection, which, can be either permanently through gifts, purchase or temporarily through loans (Rutledge 2012). The steps followed in the acquisition process involves the review of the objects designated for transfer to the museum ownership as well as in the case of temporary initiation of a loan and all associated paperwork conducted appropriately. In the event objects are the objects are declined, the process is completed when the owner receives them back in one piece (Brezina 2009).

The acquisition review process provides a chance to assess whether the objects should be acquired as well as establish whether they are appropriate to be placed in the museum premises for preservation and display.

Read More