As and when we come across artefacts in mines - and accepting that no self respecting or genuine explorer would ever remove an artefact - what are people's opinions on moving them?

Is this acceptable if they're in imminent danger of being lost e.g. due to collapse or flooding; or never acceptable, i.e. the loss of artefacts in this way is part of the natural decay of an abandonned mine?

---

Personally I strongly believe that these things should only be removed if destruction or loss is highly likely.
Or if being removed for restoration and placed in the public eye.
Moving to a safer place within the same mine is perfectly accepatable if it preserves it for longer
Anything else is theft

A lot of what would be considered as artifacts below ground become so much rusty characterless junk above ground. The only reasons for removing artifacts have been covered in the above posts, but if removal is the only option, rather than re-siting, then they should be placed where they can be most appreciated. Not in private collections or adorning someone window or fireplace. Museums are the best option, who will in most cases credit the donator.

---

I think things should be preserved, but at the last moment possible. What they did at Coniston was great though (finding an old tub, and then putting it on its own piece of track (in the mine))

---

I wouldn't suggest to Ian that the loco is stolen, it was BOUGHT from Grove Rake when it closed.
If you're referring to the explosive trucks' colour scheme, then that is the original 'artwork' with a fresh coat of paint! (I have a photo when it was still in Weardale).
It may be worth mentioning that dozens of other tubs were cut up on site for scrap by the owners of the mine - you won't see them again!!

Yes a shame most of the larger tubs were cut up.


I think there are sometimes circumstances where removing aretfacts is justified, but if they are removed then there is no excuse for not recording where they came from.
'Museums' that display large quantities of artefacts with no locality information or interpretation dont deserve to be called museums in my opinion.

---

Bit of an old chestnut this one, a subject for frequent debate. The NAMHO guidlines are very clear on this though and are well worth reading http://www.namho.org/ 

---

Eric |Holland had loads of artefacts whatever happened to them?

Truth of the matter even if there is a danger of collapse you need to be sure that it does not end up in a personal collection or left to rot on the surface or as Ironbridge has been guilty of in the past seeing as junk and scrapping and burning. Museums are awash with duplicates and stuff they don't want.

The sensible thing is possible to relocate within a mine and record details of its previous home. Although this should only apply to rare items. Drills, candles, hats and boots although not neccessarily commonplace are not exactly rare and should be left in place.

My personal preference is "take only photograhs and record as much as possible. Then make the information available to the community to which this website makes a major contribution"

Mike

Eric |Holland had loads of artefacts whatever happened to them?

Nothing 'happened' to them, they are where they always were. Unfortunately Eric is no longer with us and so he can not offer any comment on is collection or the circumstances under which it was amassed.

---

***** is a little out of place. For some reason he steals stuff rrom most of the mines he visits... he even has a B electric loco. Can anyone tell me why one of his wagons is painted like a packet of refresers?.. I've always been curious.

I think you'll find that the person you are referring to does not steal objects from mines, occasionally he removes items with permission from the landowners, for his collection which is often displayed to the public where a good location and room for information and annotation is availible. It was previosly at Threlkeld, but it was moved when they made their new lighting and explosives section. No doubt soon it will be back on public display.

***** is well respected, due to his excellent and well researched books, and his great contribution to the exploration and research of Lake District mines. I'm sure he wouldn't be too pleased of people posting accusations like this on the internet.

Well my opinion has now changed, I didn't actually mean they were stolen in a litteral sense, but as in that they were taken. Yes **** is much respected, by me included.

Oh ChrisP - when I posted that post it was the best part of a year ago, thus it would have probably crossed the minds of most people on this site (*most*) that I nolonger share that view! :tongue: 😠

---

Oh ChrisP - when I posted that post it was the best part of a year ago, thus it would have probably crossed the minds of most people on this site (*most*) that I nolonger share that view! :tongue: 😠

I dont think there is any doubt about at all 😉

---

Not being Psychic, myself, how is anyone supposed to know if anyone's written opinions are not updated, also in writing?

Equally, if he has purchased them himself, it is up to him, as onwer what he does with them. Be it paint them pink with yellow dots, modify them, keep them in his loft, etc etc.

Well my opinion has now changed, I didn't actually mean they were stolen in a litteral sense, but as in that they were taken. Yes ***** is much respected, by me included.

Oh ChrisP - when I posted that post it was the best part of a year ago, thus it would have probably crossed the minds of most people on this site (*most*) that I nolonger share that view! :tongue: 😠

Point 1- "For some reason he steals stuff rrom most of the mines he visits... " This is not an opinion, it is a statement.

Point 2- Despite it being a year ago, it was the first time I had noticed it, and I felt obliged to defend ***** seeing as you had left it looking to the casual browser of the site that ***** "steals stuff" from mines, whether this was the case or not.

Point 3- Even if you did not mean ***** steals from mines, in all due respect could I advise you to take more care choosing expressions on the internet, where the whole world can see it- a simple misunderstanding like that could cause an awful lot of trouble.

Point 4- I suppose your little dig at me at the end (*most*) suggests that I should know that within a year your opinion on a subject has changed. I don't, sorry, but neither would I have expected it to cross your mind that prehaps an opinion I had a year ago would have changed.

Not being Psychic, myself, how is anyone supposed to know if anyone's written opinions are not updated, also in writing?

Wel - I wasn't anticipating anyone was to know for sure, but as I said I would have thought it crossed peoples' minds when they read the post.

I appolagise for what I said, it's been deleted now anyway. Maybe my apolagie will earn me a little more respect.

anyhow - we need to get back on topic!

---

So where are Erics artefacts can they be seen?

On the subject of artifacts I think that the articfacts and the material contest of a mine/quarry legaly belongs to the owner.
And the owner can legaly do as he wants with them. But as we all know there are certain mine/quarry owner's who do not give a dam about historicaly valuble artifacts in their mine (no names mentioned). Also they would not know what most of the items were originaly used for, nor care for that matter. As we know artifacts in a certain mine is scattered all over the place even sold for scrap (you know where I mean I'm sure).
That situation is different to that of Cwmorthin, Rhosydd etc. etc. where you should look and not touch. I think some clear waxoil would help preserce some metal artifacts in this situation
What do you think???

---

So where are Erics artefacts can they be seen?

If you mean are they on public display somewhere, the no. But they never were. They were and still remain privately owned property. But I would add that it is not always tenable to apply current standards to past events and perhapse in time the collection will make its way into a museum somewhere.

---

So where are Erics artefacts can they be seen?

But I would add that it is not always tenable to apply current standards to past events and perhapse in time the collection will make its way into a museum somewhere.

I think that's an excellent point. When discussing/writing about anything historical it's vital to consider the context of the times. I doesn't necessarily make it correct but at least maintains the perspective. Social aspects of mining in the 19th century springs to mind. On a different, but similar, note, I believe the name of Guy Gibson's dog in the later edition of the 'Dambusters' was changed. Quite ridiculous; otherwise how are we to understand social evolution? :angel:

---

Guy Gibson's dog was called 'Blackie' if I recall.
:offtopic:

---