Simple answer is: No idea. The problem stems from the fact that people collect items (anything - stamps, coins, matchboxes etc) because they are interesting. Very seldom does the source of the item come into question. I am sure there are a few people who take note of the details of everything they find/buy, but that will only be a very small percentage.
In our context, very little changes. One of the reasons why I think it would be a good idea for ALL collections to be registered is that, in the event of the 'caretakers' demise, the collection could be acquired by a relevant body (for a suitable reimbursment to the estate of the late caretaker), ensuring that the collection is a) kept intact. b) the items in the collection won't be recorded under another name.
 Reply | with quote | Posted by Cheshireman
3rd August 2005ce
12:10 |
Encouraging responsible metal detecting (Jane, Jul 27, 2005, 22:13)- Re: Encouraging responsible metal detecting (Ishmael, Jul 27, 2005, 22:23)
- Re: Encouraging responsible metal detecting (Pilgrim, Jul 27, 2005, 22:59)
- Re: Encouraging responsible metal detecting (nigelswift, Jul 28, 2005, 02:24)
- Re: Encouraging responsible metal detecting (Cheshireman, Aug 01, 2005, 13:20)
- Re: Encouraging responsible metal detecting (BrigantesNation, Aug 01, 2005, 13:30)
- Re: Encouraging responsible metal detecting (nigelswift, Aug 01, 2005, 13:38)
- Re: Encouraging responsible metal detecting (FourWinds, Aug 01, 2005, 13:39)
- Re: Encouraging responsible metal detecting (juamei, Aug 01, 2005, 14:17)
- Re: Encouraging responsible metal detecting (Pilgrim, Aug 01, 2005, 19:40)
- How about this? (FourWinds, Aug 01, 2005, 18:03)
- Re: Encouraging responsible metal detecting (FourWinds, Aug 03, 2005, 22:29)
|
|
Head To Head 
a question about personal collections (Rhiannon)