[HN Gopher] Denmark's Archaeology Experiment Is Paying Off in Go...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Denmark's Archaeology Experiment Is Paying Off in Gold and
       Knowledge
        
       Author : sohkamyung
       Score  : 198 points
       Date   : 2025-06-18 12:13 UTC (4 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.scientificamerican.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.scientificamerican.com)
        
       | wslh wrote:
       | https://archive.is/ra5se
        
       | countrymile wrote:
       | For anyone who hasn't seen the detectorists, it gives a very
       | British perspective on this sort of work, and is one of the best
       | British comedies of the last ten years:
       | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detectorists
        
         | atombender wrote:
         | Agreed, it's fantastic. It's not just a brilliant and warm
         | comedy, it's also apparently a really accurate and well-
         | researched depiction of the metal detecting world.
        
         | 4ndrewl wrote:
         | The British perspective on this is really the Portable
         | Antquities Scheme at https://finds.org.uk/ which has been
         | running for over 20 years.
         | 
         | You'll find details of research papers and the Staffordshire
         | Hoard, probably one of the largest collections of Anglo-Saxon
         | metalwork ever found
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staffordshire_Hoard
        
         | louky wrote:
         | So does Time Team, and they're back making new episodes.
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLtpbubYLW2fdf9ySyCS0f...
        
           | Nursie wrote:
           | Really? Amazing.
           | 
           | I loved time team back in the day and I've just started
           | rewatching some of them (one of the streaming services has
           | series 13-17 here in Aus).
           | 
           | Might not be the same without Tony, but I see he did pop in
           | for a cameo...
        
             | wswope wrote:
             | I think you'll be pleasantly surprised: There was an
             | awkward transition post-Tony, but the new hosts have
             | finally hit their stride.
             | 
             | Natalie/Gus/Hilde are far more serene presences than Tony,
             | but they let the rest of the cast shine through. Helen and
             | Derek in particular are the standout presenters right now,
             | and while they don't have the same manic/ADHD vibe, they're
             | both passionate and curious in a way that reflects Tony's
             | style and keeps the narrative intriguing.
        
         | jvm___ wrote:
         | Detectorist was the perfect "the world is a normal place" show
         | during the early days of the pandemic.
        
         | jl6 wrote:
         | This show is a great example of how good TV comes from good
         | writing, not high budget.
        
           | walthamstow wrote:
           | Succession had both and it was damn near perfect
        
         | ggm-at-algebras wrote:
         | Absolutely the best fictional story of the genre. Lovingly
         | made, with nuance and some sadness: Diana Rigg, real life
         | mother of Rachael Stirling, (who was cast as her daughter in
         | this series) died during its later series, reflected in plots.
         | 
         | The theme music by Johnny Flynn and Dan Michaelson is perfect.
        
         | ascorbic wrote:
         | Mackenzie Crook also made (and stars in) Worzel Gummidge, which
         | despite being a kids' show about a talking scarecrow, feels
         | like very much a partner of the Detectorists and is just as
         | lovely. Toby Jones appearing as every member of the bonfire
         | committee is a particular treat.
        
       | BurningFrog wrote:
       | Impressed that people turned in "1.5 kilograms of Viking Age gold
       | artifacts".
       | 
       | That gold is worth about $160k!
       | 
       | If I ran the program I would pay at least the metal value to
       | anyone turning artifacts in. To remove the temptation that
       | doubtless keeps some finds away from the science.
        
         | colechristensen wrote:
         | Once properly documented, I have some skepticism that it's
         | really necessary to hold every historical artifact found,
         | inside some museum archive basically never to be seen again.
        
           | AlotOfReading wrote:
           | It isn't, but it's impossible to know what will be useful for
           | research again in the future, so historical researchers make
           | an effort to preserve what they can and avoid excavating if
           | possible.
        
           | BurningFrog wrote:
           | You can probably do a detailed 3d scan and retain 95% of the
           | scientific value.
        
             | heikkilevanto wrote:
             | No, at some point they want to analyze the impurities in
             | the gold, or the isotopes, or something else we don't know
             | yet...
        
               | BurningFrog wrote:
               | Sure, that can be done together with the scanning.
        
               | fc417fc802 wrote:
               | It can't, because we don't know what yet unknown
               | questions we might want to ask in the future or what yet
               | uninvented technology might come to exist. Add a limited
               | budget and storage space and it becomes clear why the
               | preference is often not to excavate but instead to
               | restrict public access to the site and leave things in
               | the ground.
        
               | BurningFrog wrote:
               | We can measure impurities and isotopes extremely well,
               | which is what the post I responded to mentioned. This is
               | very mature technology.
               | 
               | You're right that we don't know what new branches of
               | science might be developed that could produce new
               | insights from old artifacts.
               | 
               | But remember the situation. My idea makes it possible to
               | record and analyze ancient finds that currently just
               | disappear. It only gets us 99% of what we want, but in
               | the current system we get 0%.
               | 
               | https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Nirv
               | ana...
        
               | fc417fc802 wrote:
               | The isotopes were just an arbitrary example. The
               | important bit was at the end "or something else we don't
               | know yet". Granted I'd guess that's fairly unlikely for
               | coins specifically.
               | 
               | > currently just disappear
               | 
               | They don't though. The preferences are as other comments
               | have described - to stash the artifacts away in storage
               | or to leave them in the ground for excavation in the
               | future.
               | 
               | Whether or not the laws and common practices are fair to
               | the people who discover the items is a separate matter.
        
               | rectang wrote:
               | Thank goodness you weren't in charge of the Herculanum
               | scrolls.
        
               | pbhjpbhj wrote:
               | We can produce 3D scans of the gold, do mass
               | spectroscopy.
               | 
               | Do you feel that vikings somehow embedded secrets in
               | their coin?
               | 
               | Scrolls have writing on, if we can't yet read them we'd
               | know that there was something else to discover (known
               | unknowns) and clearly wouldn't dispose of them.
               | 
               | Of course the Vikings might have embedded secret
               | extraterrestrial technologies in their coins, but I'd
               | take the bet that they haven't.
               | 
               | The downthread comment about leaving things in the ground
               | is right though -- it was, and is imo, the right thing to
               | do.
        
             | delusional wrote:
             | I'm pretty sure more than 5% of the scientific value is in
             | the actual physical material. You can't examine the physics
             | of the thing from a 3d scan.
        
           | southernplaces7 wrote:
           | What else should be done with the artifacts? And also why
           | not? It's like storing your data. If you can keep it
           | relatively inexpensive, why not keep it around just in case
           | some future need or curiosity makes it worthwhile?
        
             | colechristensen wrote:
             | If I find something without particular significance that's
             | not a part of an archaeological site, say a Roman coin in a
             | field somewhere, it's fine if there's a requirement that a
             | museum gets to take records and do any sort of scans it
             | wants. But unless it was some item of particular cultural
             | heritage or research interest, the museum should give it
             | back to me or buy it from me or give me something in return
             | like a fair tax break.
             | 
             | Lots and lots of stuff gets cataloged and archived and
             | basically never looked at again resulting in little
             | archeological value or any other public value and is kind
             | of just scientific hoarding.
        
             | neaden wrote:
             | I mean roman coins for example are so plentiful that they
             | are sold relatively cheaply, we have more then enough of
             | them for all the museums of the world if they wanted them.
             | I don't think viking era treasure is anywhere close to as
             | common but there comes a point where it's plentiful enough.
        
         | ambentzen wrote:
         | How would law abiding citizen Joe Random from Nowhere even know
         | where to offload that on the black market?
         | 
         | It's a bit like internet piracy, make it easy and convenient to
         | follow the law and most people will do it.
        
           | thrance wrote:
           | You'd be surprised of how easy it is for "Joe Random from
           | Nowhere" to sell their illegaly sourced priceless artefacts.
           | See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lava_Treasure
        
           | BurningFrog wrote:
           | Can't say I've tried, but I think it's pretty easy to find
           | buyers for gold.
           | 
           | Melting it removes the legal risk.
        
             | dwattttt wrote:
             | Melting it removes _a_ legal risk. I'm sure if someone
             | looks they can find a risk or two still there somewhere.
        
           | protocolture wrote:
           | >How would law abiding citizen Joe Random from Nowhere even
           | know where to offload that on the black market?
           | 
           | Considering the state of copper theft, the large number of
           | videos on facebook and youtube describing how to melt metals
           | into bar stock, and the low cost of the tools I dont know why
           | this would be considered specialist knowledge.
           | 
           | Maybe if they needed aqua regia or something.
        
             | TulliusCicero wrote:
             | This comment reminds me of discussion when weed gets
             | legalized in the states.
             | 
             | There's always people going, "psh, this won't make weed any
             | more accessible, it's already so easy to get, anybody can
             | do it!"
             | 
             | And yet, nevertheless, inevitably there are people who try
             | it only because it's now legal and openly sold in stores. A
             | lot of people simply don't want to do things they consider
             | shady, no matter how easy it is. Maybe it being legalized
             | doesn't make it any more accessible to _you_ , but you
             | aren't everyone.
        
               | protocolture wrote:
               | I see where you are coming from but not quite.
               | 
               | What I am saying is that the process is already legal and
               | available, so the process isn't a barrier to melting and
               | selling the gold. I don't take a position on whether
               | someone would simply not do it because its illegal.
               | 
               | The process of growing and selling weed was illegal, and
               | thus also a barrier to accessing weed.
               | 
               | If anything your line of reasoning makes me want to
               | legalise and protect melting gold you find and selling
               | it.
        
             | sandworm101 wrote:
             | It isn't that easy. Anyone paying money for a homemade bar
             | will test it first. The ancient gold will be very impure by
             | bullion standards. The fact that it was horde gold will be
             | found out very quickly.
        
               | protocolture wrote:
               | >Anyone paying money for a homemade bar will test it
               | first.
               | 
               | There's a pretty lively market in gold on ebay. Often
               | forged into bars or coins by end users.
               | 
               | I have personally dealt with retail gold buyers who
               | legally clear gold of all sorts with little question.
               | They pay based on purity and likely have a price for
               | whatever purity the horde gold is smelted at.
               | 
               | There's also that Singapore Gold Port at the Singapore
               | Airport. Even if they wont touch you directly, there are
               | IIRC, in person trades in the airport which can then be
               | deposited straight into storage.
        
         | kefal wrote:
         | It's Denmark, of course they will turn it in.
        
           | bazoom42 wrote:
           | Crime and theft happen in Denmark as in other countries. But
           | finders get compensated for the metal value so unless they
           | are collectors or have contacts to private collectors, there
           | is not a lot to gain.
           | 
           | I know a guy who found a gold treasure on a field and he was
           | contacted by a private collector after appearing in local
           | news (he turned them down). So who knows how often it
           | happens? But I don't think finds are common enough that
           | detecting and selling can be a lucrative business. It is
           | usually enthusiasts with an interst in history.
        
             | euroderf wrote:
             | Wasn't it Copenhagen where the biker gangs had RPGs ?
        
               | asjo wrote:
               | It was indeed - one was fired against a club house, in
               | 1996: https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niels_Poulsen
        
           | simonask wrote:
           | It's enthusiasts - hobbyists willing to invest in metal
           | detection gear, spending their free time doing this. If their
           | aim was to get wealthy, they would be doing basically
           | anything else.
           | 
           | Digging for gold artifacts and treasure is not a great
           | strategy to become rich - these people are obviously much
           | more interested in the history, and maybe the recognition. Of
           | course they will turn it in.
        
         | fudgybiscuits wrote:
         | Whether that's good or not really does depend on how much gold
         | was found though, could be that 10kg was kept for all we know!
        
           | southernplaces7 wrote:
           | >could be that 10kg was kept for all we know!
           | 
           | Doubtful. Finding such a hoard and reporting it to the
           | authorities for formal examination by default means showing
           | where you found it so the site itself can be examined by
           | archaeologists. They'd likely be able to tell if you'd found
           | more than you reported in the cache site. It's like
           | forensics, but for ancient artefacts and ruins, pretty
           | sophisticated at times.
        
         | tokai wrote:
         | The budget to pay for these finds is regularly exceeded
         | already. Paying the gold price would fleece the National
         | Museum.
        
           | BurningFrog wrote:
           | Understood. But it's also true that you get what you pay for.
        
             | tokai wrote:
             | In this case it bought the most productive amateur
             | archeology community in Europe :)
        
             | jopsen wrote:
             | Getting a cut is probably better.
             | 
             | Spending gold you can't document the origin of is most
             | decidedly going to be a hassle. Certainly not without risk.
             | And you probably don't have money laundering connections.
             | 
             | And you'll sleep better at night.
        
         | olalonde wrote:
         | If I understand correctly, they were paid $150k for it.
         | 
         | > Aagaard, Dreioe and their friend the late Poul Norgaard
         | Pedersen discovered nearly 1.5 kilograms of Viking Age gold
         | artifacts near the modern town of Faested, including armbands
         | that archaeologists have interpreted as oath bands [...]
         | Aagaard, Dreioe and Norgaard received just over a million
         | kroner for the oath ring treasure, the equivalent of about
         | $150,000.
        
           | BurningFrog wrote:
           | So they already have a system like I suggested!
           | 
           | I'm glad to hear it!
           | 
           | Less glad that I missed this fact reading the article :)
        
         | bazoom42 wrote:
         | You do get compensation for the metal value.
        
       | thaumasiotes wrote:
       | > Ginnerup dug up 14 glittering gold disks--some as big as
       | saucers--that archaeologists say were buried about 1,500 years
       | ago
       | 
       | > the real showstopper is an amulet called a bracteate with two
       | stylized designs: a man in profile, his long hair pulled back in
       | a braid, and a horse in full gallop. An expert in ancient runes
       | says she was awestruck when she finally made out the inscription
       | on top: "He is Odin's man."
       | 
       | > These embossed runes are the oldest known written mention of
       | Odin, the Norse god of war and ruler of Valhalla. Ginnerup's
       | bracteate, which archaeologists describe as the most significant
       | Danish find in centuries, extended the worship of Odin back 150
       | years
       | 
       | I don't think this is right. The first mention of Odin by a
       | Germanic source could date to 500 AD. But the Romans wrote about
       | the Germanic gods several centuries prior to that. They used the
       | equivalence we still use today, calling Odin "Mercury". But what
       | they say about the Germanic gods is compatible with what we know
       | from Germanic sources; there's no reason to believe there was a
       | change in the gods.
       | 
       | I note that the image on the bracteate features a pretty
       | prominent swastika. Maybe Hitler was accidentally on to something
       | after all.
        
         | tokai wrote:
         | It's the oldest mention of Odin in Denmark. The sciam
         | journalist lost that detail somewhere. That is why the find
         | pushed worship of Odin in Denmark back 150 years.
        
         | eesmith wrote:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odin#Roman_era_to_Migration_Pe...
         | says "The earliest clear reference to Odin by name is found on
         | a C-bracteate discovered in Denmark in 2020."
         | 
         | So, "written mention of Odin" seems to mean written as "Odin',
         | and not as "Mercury".
         | 
         | It also mentions some debate over if the Goths actually
         | worshiped Odin/Mercury, but I am too ill-informed to make sense
         | if that's relevant.
         | 
         | I did manage to find a scholarly reference to the topic at
         | https://helda.helsinki.fi/server/api/core/bitstreams/c11e69e...
         | ("Pre-print papers of THE 18TH INTERNATIONAL SAGA CONFERENCE
         | SAGAS AND THE CIRCUM-BALTIC ARENA. Helsinki and Tallinn,
         | 7th-14th August 2022")
         | 
         | > The problem of Mercury
         | 
         | > Despite lack of Germanic evidence for the existence of a cult
         | of Wodan/Odinn before the fifth (or perhaps even the sixth)
         | century, as presented above, many scholars maintain ancient
         | roots. For example, disregarding critical scholarship on
         | various individual sources, Schjodt reiterated that "taken
         | together, they strongly indicate that Odinn, although not
         | exactly the same as the god that we know from the Nordic
         | sources, has roots reaching far back in time, probably as early
         | as the Indo-European era (at least 3000 BC)" (Schjodt 2019:
         | 67). ...
         | 
         | > The reading of interpretation romana maintains that Tacitus'
         | famous description of Germanic deities, Deorum maxime Mercurium
         | colunt, should be understood to signify Wodan/Odinn. Of course,
         | it has already been shown by Karl Helm that this was a
         | historical trope copied from Herodotus, and/or Caesar's
         | Commentarii de bello gallico (Helm 1946: 7-12). The fact that
         | Caesar was talking about Celts, and his description of religion
         | among the Germani mentions worship of the sun, moon, and fire,
         | does nothing to secure the reliability of such 'historical'
         | sources. Either way, the argument that the foremost deity
         | interpreted by Tacitus as a 'Mercury-type' must be Wodan/Odinn
         | is a projection of the latter's supremacy in Old Norse material
         | onto a Germanic society several centuries older. This becomes a
         | circular argument and cannot be leading.
        
           | thaumasiotes wrote:
           | Tacitus isn't the only interpretation of the Germanic gods.
           | He is thought to refer to Thor as Hercules, but there are
           | other references where a Jupiter is mentioned. There is a
           | Roman complaint that the Germanic peoples see Mercury as the
           | father of Jupiter when it should be the other way around.
           | 
           | And while it's possible, it would be extremely surprising for
           | Odin to be a new addition to the Germanic pantheon when we
           | find him attested under that name in the 5th/6th century.
           | He's in charge of the whole thing! The norm is for gods - all
           | gods - to have very deep roots. Where we can prove that a god
           | is novel, we can also often show that it's a borrowing of a
           | foreign god with deeper roots (e.g. Adonis < Tammuz) or that
           | it is an explicit deification of a human (e.g. if you go to
           | the temple of the city god in Shanghai, there's an
           | informative plaque explaining that the city god was
           | posthumously appointed to the position by an emperor of the
           | Yuan dynasty).
           | 
           | I do understand that after cassava or maize was introduced
           | somewhere in Africa, anthropologists documented a new goddess
           | associated with the crop. Innovation exists. But pantheons
           | are very conservative overall. "Several centuries" is not an
           | amount of time where we expect to see pantheonic turnover.
        
             | eesmith wrote:
             | Were all gods worshiped?
             | 
             | By my limited understanding, the question isn't if Odin was
             | part of the pantheon, but rather if there was a specific
             | cult of Odin.
        
               | thaumasiotes wrote:
               | I don't understand your question. All gods are worshiped
               | by definition.
               | 
               | "The cult of Odin" would refer to anything and everything
               | related to Odin. See sense 1 here:
               | https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cult , or sense 3/4 here:
               | https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cult .
        
               | eesmith wrote:
               | I am a software developer with little knowledge of the
               | topic.
               | 
               | What do we call a personified supernatural being who is
               | not worshiped? Are there really no such entities?
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God informs me: "In
               | polytheistic belief systems, a god is "a spirit or being
               | believed to have created, or for controlling some part of
               | the universe or life, for which such a deity is often
               | worshipped". The "often" tells me that a god is not
               | always worshipped.
               | 
               | How should I make sense of this line from https://en.wiki
               | pedia.org/wiki/Odin#Roman_era_to_Migration_Pe... : "There
               | is no direct, undisputed evidence for the worship of
               | Odin/Mercury among the Goths, and the existence of a cult
               | of Odin among them is debated."
               | 
               | Definition 1 starts 'The veneration, devotion and
               | religious rites given to a deity'. What veneration,
               | devotion, and religious rites are attested?
        
               | thaumasiotes wrote:
               | > How should I make sense of this line from https://en.wi
               | kipedia.org/wiki/Odin#Roman_era_to_Migration_Pe... :
               | "There is no direct, undisputed evidence for the worship
               | of Odin/Mercury among the Goths, and the existence of a
               | cult of Odin among them is debated."
               | 
               | You should read "the worship of Odin" and "the existence
               | of a cult of Odin" as meaning the same thing. The
               | sentence wouldn't mean anything different if it said
               | "there is no direct, undisputed evidence for a cult of
               | Odin/Mercury among the Goths, and its existence among
               | them is debated", or "there is no direct, undisputed
               | evidence for the worship of Odin/Mercury among the Goths,
               | and it is debated whether he was part of their pantheon".
               | 
               | > Definition 1 starts 'The veneration, devotion and
               | religious rites given to a deity'.
               | 
               | There are two concepts here:
               | 
               | 1. Belief that a god or spirit exists.
               | 
               | 2. Rituals intended to communicate with, maintain good
               | relations with, propitiate, or placate a god or spirit.
               | 
               | "Worship", "veneration", and "devotion" all refer to both
               | of those concepts. "Religious rites" refer to the second
               | one.
               | 
               | (Compare https://www.merriam-
               | webster.com/dictionary/worship : "to honor or show
               | reverence for as a divine being or supernatural power".)
               | 
               | So a reference to belief in a deity is an attestation of
               | "worship", "veneration", and "devotion". For rites,
               | Tacitus mentions that Mercury receives animal and human
               | sacrifices while other deities only get animals.
               | 
               | > What do we call a personified supernatural being who is
               | not worshiped? Are there really no such entities?
               | 
               | In the ordinary sense, obviously not, because
               | acknowledging that something is a supernatural entity is
               | worshiping it. But even in the sense of particular
               | rituals, there are no such entities. All supernatural
               | beings receive prayers some of the time.
        
             | vintermann wrote:
             | > He's in charge of the whole thing!
             | 
             | But he may not always have been. In most European
             | mythologies, the thunder god is the most "in charge". In
             | Norse mythology, the thunder god is the son of the chief
             | god instead. My assumption is that Thor was the main god
             | until they syncretistically tried to incorporate new
             | beliefs about "the father and the son" and self-sacrifice
             | on a tree, which even by this super-early mention of Odin,
             | was over 500 years old.
        
               | thaumasiotes wrote:
               | > In most European mythologies, the thunder god is the
               | most "in charge".
               | 
               | Most? It's true of the Greeks. It's true of the Romans
               | after their mythology is unified with the Greeks, and
               | there's a good chance it was also true before.
               | 
               | But that's it, as far as I see. It's not true of Celtic
               | mythology and Slavic mythology is barely known.
        
               | vintermann wrote:
               | Slavic mythology isn't that unknown. We know that a
               | thunder god (Perun) was on top of it. In Finnish
               | mythology, it's pretty clear Ilmarinen (a sky/weather
               | God) is on top of it. Though it has a specific thunder
               | god (Ukko), they seem to think he came later and took
               | over thunder from the sky god.
               | 
               | Celtic mythology doesn't have a sky god on top, it's
               | true. But it has the same issue as Norse mythology: in
               | the form we know it, it's much younger (and probably
               | influenced by) Christianity.
        
               | jltsiren wrote:
               | Very little about Finnish mythology is clear. Pretty much
               | everything known about it was written down centuries
               | after Christianity had become established in Finland. And
               | the same applies to other Finnic and Uralic peoples as
               | well.
               | 
               | In some sense, talking about gods in Finnish mythology is
               | a mistake. The entities now understood as gods were not
               | the same kind of big important guys as Indo-European
               | gods. Finnish mythology was more focused on spirits, most
               | of which had narrow and/or local domains. "Gods" were
               | more like spirits with wider domains.
               | 
               | Then there is the confusion around names Ilmarinen, Ukko,
               | and Jumala, which possibly referred to approximately two
               | entities in total. And to make the matters worse,
               | "Jumala" and "jumala" in modern Finnish translate as
               | "God" and "god".
               | 
               | Or that could just be what people remembered centuries
               | after the pre-Christian Finnish society was gone. Very
               | little about that society is known. The traditional
               | treatment of Finnish history is mostly based on
               | archaeological evidence until the semi-mythical Swedish
               | Crusades.
        
               | Amezarak wrote:
               | Given the meaning of Jupiter and the extreme importance
               | of Jupiter even in the time of the Roman kings, I think
               | there's much more than a "good chance."
               | 
               | https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Jupiter
        
           | never_inline wrote:
           | > "taken together, they strongly indicate that Odinn,
           | although not exactly the same as the god that we know from
           | the Nordic sources, has roots reaching far back in time,
           | probably as early as the Indo-European era
           | 
           | A reader might be interested in Kris Creshaw's "The One-eyed
           | god" which reiterates Odin's similarities with other Indo-
           | european analogues, specifically Apollo and Vedic Rudra.
           | 
           | Indeed, much of the Odin's acts and characteristics find
           | similarities in the deeds of Rudra or Indra in Vedic myth.
           | The Vedics even had a conception of afterlife similar to
           | Valhalla, where the most excellent people and fallen warriors
           | reach Indra's realm, carried by Apsaras.
           | 
           | Indra is also god of sacred verse, "vipratamo kavinam", which
           | is similar to odin mastering the runes, giving a dual priest-
           | king and warrior king function.
           | 
           | The efficacy of "several great deeds" is emphasized for both.
           | Eg: The Havamal: "140. word following word, I found me words,
           | deed following deed, I wrought deeds.". The Rig Veda
           | (1.101.4) - Praised, he is firm at every deed of his.
        
             | thaumasiotes wrote:
             | > Indra is also god of sacred verse, "vipratamo kavinam",
             | which is similar to odin mastering the runes
             | 
             | That seems pretty tenuous; at the time Indo-Iranian
             | diverged from the European branch, runes didn't exist at
             | all, and most likely the proto-Indo-Europeans had no
             | writing of any variety.
             | 
             | For example, different families' words for writing:
             | 
             | - _write_ [English], from PIE * _wrey_ ;
             | 
             | - _scribere_ [Latin], from PIE * _(s)kreybk_ ;
             | 
             | - _graphein_ [Greek], from PIE * _gerbk_ ; (cognate with
             | English _carve_ )
             | 
             | - _likhati_ [Sanskrit], from PIE * _reyk(w)h2_ ;
             | 
             | - _neveshtan_ [Persian], from PIE * _peyk_ (cognate with
             | English _paint_ )
             | 
             | [all taken from wiktionary]
             | 
             | This doesn't look like a concept that was around before the
             | groups diverged.
        
         | ethan_smith wrote:
         | Roman accounts using interpretatio romana (equating Germanic
         | deities with Roman gods) aren't the same as direct written
         | evidence naming "Odin" specifically. The bracteate's
         | significance is that it contains the actual name in runic form,
         | not a Roman interpretation or equivalent.
        
           | thaumasiotes wrote:
           | Sure, but claiming that it pushes back the date of Odin's
           | worship back 150 years is wrong. It hasn't made any change to
           | our beliefs about when Odin was worshiped, or where, or by
           | whom.
        
             | tokai wrote:
             | >It hasn't made any change to our beliefs about when Odin
             | was worshiped, or where, or by whom.
             | 
             | Why state this so strongly over something that was
             | misconstrued?
        
               | thaumasiotes wrote:
               | Huh?
        
         | HK-NC wrote:
         | I'm not sure who decided that Hitler stole the swastika from
         | the Hindus, but it's false. The symbol appeared in the
         | decorations of his childhood church IIRC and wasn't an alien
         | symbol to germans elsewhere.
        
           | thaumasiotes wrote:
           | Where do you think he got the term "Aryan" from?
        
             | Reasoning wrote:
             | From contemporary ethnologists who used the term to refer
             | to the proto-indo-europeans? Because the term aryan is
             | common amongst the languages descended from the proto-indo-
             | european language (Arya, Iran, Alans, Arios)?
             | 
             | Nazi philosophy grew out of 19th century ethnology which
             | was heavily influenced by Darwinism. They believed the
             | proto-indo-european ("Aryan") homeland was in northern
             | Europe and that the spread of "Aryan" language was do to
             | "Aryan" immigration to those regions and that in ancient
             | times those regions were led by an "Aryan" "master race"
             | who ruled over the "lesser races" do to their natural
             | superior genes developed through generations of natural
             | selection in the harsh northern climate.
             | 
             | To be clear, I believe that is all BS but I wrote all that
             | to clarify that the Nazis didn't steal the term Aryan from
             | the Hindu, it's a term used by the Indo-Iranians to self-
             | designate which was erroneously misattributed to the proto-
             | indo-europeans by early European ethnologists.
        
               | thaumasiotes wrote:
               | So Hitler was jealous of the fact that the Romance
               | speakers had history and the Germanic speakers didn't.
               | And he solved that problem by appropriating the history
               | of India and claiming it was also the history of the
               | Germans. He used Indian symbols and Indian words.
               | 
               | But that doesn't mean that he took them _from India_?
               | That 's crazy. What else would you say he did? That they
               | were from India _was the point._ Without their Indian
               | identity, they would have failed to serve his purpose of
               | giving a history to the Germans.
        
               | versteegen wrote:
               | You are missing Reasoning's point (although I think
               | you're right about the Nazis needing to create or
               | appropriate some other people's heritage). 'Aryan' was a
               | linguistic term previously mistakenly used to mean Proto-
               | Indo-European. Hitler didn't personally invent Nazi
               | master-race ideology and look to India, it's a small
               | pseudo-intellectual extension of (European) 19th/early
               | 20th century ethnology and eugenics, and that's a very
               | important distinction to make, to understand how the Nazi
               | came to believe what they did through a product of many
               | often-plausible steps and all-too-common character flaws,
               | not through one man.
        
               | thaumasiotes wrote:
               | > You are missing Reasoning's point
               | 
               | Note that the comment here is from HK-NC:
               | 
               | >>> I'm not sure who decided that Hitler stole the
               | swastika from the Hindus, but it's false. The symbol
               | appeared in the decorations of his childhood church IIRC
               | and wasn't an alien symbol to germans elsewhere.
               | 
               | You're saying I shouldn't be reading this as a claim that
               | the Nazi swastika was an indigenous development,
               | unrelated to the Indian symbol despite the fact that it
               | symbolized an official ideology naming the Indians as a
               | sister tribe to the Germans and adopting the tribal name
               | of the Indians for the Germans, and the fact that it was
               | referred to by its Sanskrit name?
               | 
               | > Hitler didn't personally invent Nazi master-race
               | ideology and look to India
               | 
               | Why is this relevant? He is the one who adopted the
               | ideology on behalf of the German state.
        
       | wewewedxfgdf wrote:
       | "The swastika design next to the man's head predates the adoption
       | of this symbol by the Nazis."
       | 
       | 1,500 years ago!
        
         | WaitWaitWha wrote:
         | This saddens me that this had to be written.
        
           | Reasoning wrote:
           | Did it have to be written? Who's the hypothetical person who
           | is confused that a 1,500 year old gold disk is older than the
           | Nazi era.
        
             | necovek wrote:
             | Nobody is confused about that, but people are confused
             | about whether the swastika represents something similar to
             | Nazi ideology before the Nazis appropriated it.
        
       | roger_ wrote:
       | Do the detectorists get a certificate or something for their
       | honesty?
        
         | tokai wrote:
         | They get a payment and they get to be a part of the
         | archaeological process. I have a colleague that had a
         | significant find recently. Her and her "crew" did the dig,
         | cleaning, initial description and cataloguing, and surveyed the
         | area around the site. With supervision from professional
         | archaeologists. Without this system they would get to handover
         | any finds to the landowner.
        
       | biophysboy wrote:
       | Denmark has a fantastic maritime museum right by the Kronborg
       | castle with hundreds of model ships, wreckage artifacts and high-
       | quality underwater photos. Would recommend visiting on a
       | Copenhagen trip
        
       | trhway wrote:
       | how about hanging metal detector from a drone or just plain
       | autonomous RC car. I think once such massive de-mining starts in
       | Ukraine, the tech would trickle down into archaeology and the
       | like fields.
        
         | flemhans wrote:
         | Mount the equipment on the plows that anyway traverse the
         | fields
        
           | CrazyStat wrote:
           | Most farmers would probably not want to stop plowing to check
           | out whatever the detector pings on.
        
             | flemhans wrote:
             | Using a decentralized mesh network, the units could publish
             | findings in a blockchain for treasure hunters to
             | asynchronously react on.
        
       | comrade1234 wrote:
       | I live in Switzerland and I know an ancient forest where I go
       | every year and pull out about 20kg of chanterelle and 10kg of
       | toten trumpeten. These mushrooms come back every year,
       | potentially for thousands of years.
       | 
       | One year I found a big piece of a clay cooking pan in the area
       | where the chanterelles grow.
       | 
       | There are also tons of ravines, potential caves but I won't know
       | until I climb down the ravines, but about 20 km away there are
       | tourist caves where you can pay to enter them, part of the same
       | ridge system.
       | 
       | I wanted to see if I could use a metal detector to find treasure,
       | like in the article but it's illegal here. I suppose I could go
       | in at night with the equipment but it's probably not worth it
       | since while the Roman's were very active in Switzerland they
       | weren't in this very specific region.
       | 
       | But still, where did the clay cooking pan come from?
        
         | mhb wrote:
         | Why is a metal detector illegal?
        
           | timonoko wrote:
           | Or rather "what constitutes a metal detector"? I could have
           | such double-resonating circuitry in my shoe connected to
           | earplug via bluetooth.
           | 
           | "Officer, this equipment is for detecting needles in the
           | Geneva playground".
        
             | throw101010 wrote:
             | Ever heard of the principle of "good faith" in the context
             | of the Swiss law (Article 2 of the Civil Code)?
             | 
             | Sometimes I think it was a prescient concept of our law
             | makers and judiciary, many decades ago they knew they would
             | have to deal with this kind of reddit-tier smartassery...
             | if you have a device to detect metal, and you use it to
             | detect metal, it is a metal detector, no judge will give
             | you a pass because you thought you were _very clever_.
        
               | timonoko wrote:
               | You can surgically insert tiny piece of magnet in your
               | big toe. It is crazy good metal detector.
        
               | nl wrote:
               | As someone who worked on metal detectors I assure you
               | this isn't true.
               | 
               | Actual metal detectors can detect gold a meter down
               | through mineralized soil with metal scrap in between.
        
               | timonoko wrote:
               | Wasnt there somebody who did it with his finger? Results
               | were so amazing that almost wanted to do the same. Except
               | then you have to be very careful around powerful magnets.
        
               | bryanrasmussen wrote:
               | complicated murder horror plot involving luring fellow
               | into area with powerful magnets unbeknownst to them.
        
               | raverbashing wrote:
               | > Ever heard of the principle of "good faith" in the
               | context of the Swiss law (Article 2 of the Civil Code)?
               | 
               | This is HN, most discussions around laws fail to consider
               | the legal context and practices, especially as it relates
               | to (in general) Europe
               | 
               | Instead, people here think you can "Bazinga" the law to a
               | judge and that GDPR enforcement will drone them if their
               | website don't have a popup.
        
           | pjc50 wrote:
           | To stop amateurs finding antiquities.
        
           | fnordian_slip wrote:
           | Top stop people destroying the context, as laypeople can't
           | (or won't even know about the need to) properly document the
           | layers and non-metal finds around the metal. This makes
           | dating a lot harder, and often destroys 90% of the scientific
           | value of the find.
        
         | mycatisblack wrote:
         | One of the projects I intend to make some day is a metal
         | detector with 2 pickup coils(*), one in or around the sole of
         | each shoe. Instead of an auditory signal, a vibrating element
         | strapped to my leg or ankle. That way you can metaldetect
         | difficult terrain/non-stop/inconspicuously.
         | 
         | (*) they each work independently, like two metaldetectors. Not
         | the detector type with an RX and TX coil.
        
         | is_true wrote:
         | Can't you say you lost a ring or something?
         | 
         | Just cover holes properly. Please. With love, my ankles.
        
           | nkrisc wrote:
           | Does the law say it's permitted if you lost a ring? That
           | would be a useless law - everyone would be losing rings.
        
       | erk__ wrote:
       | There is also a version of Danefae for non-human made things
       | called Danekrae
       | 
       | https://samlinger.snm.ku.dk/en/danekrae/
       | 
       | There is a lot less specimens in that collection as it only
       | includes specimens that are deemed important in some ways, right
       | now there are 1054.
       | 
       | They can be viewed online here:
       | https://collections.snm.ku.dk/en/search?dataset=5b5305ae-35d...
       | 
       | (edit: That online collection only seem to contain biological
       | specimen, meteors and geological specimens are not included as
       | far as I can tell)
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-06-22 23:01 UTC)