Talk:Treasure trove
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article incorporates text from the article "Treasure trove" by F.W.A. from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, now in the public domain. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. |
| Low | This article has been assessed as Low-importance on the assessment scale. |
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Archaeology, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the assessment scale. |
 |
A fact from Treasure trove appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on April 17, 2008. |
 |
 Archives |
Contents |
[edit] Treasure found at sea
The article, as currently written, neglects the important area of treasure trove law as applied to treasure found at sea. MrDroopy 07:44, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- The law of treasure trove does not deal with treasure found at sea. This topic is dealt with by the law of salvage which is a branch of admiralty law. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 16:57, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Confusion about definition of treasure
I think that there is some confusion in this article about the definition of what constituted treasure under the old Treasure Trove law. I believe the distinction was not between lost and deliberately deposited objects but hinged on whether there was an intent to recover (ie votive offerings or grave goods were deposited with no intention of recovery but hoards buried for safekeeping would have been intended for recovery). I do not have any reference to hand to confirm this but perhaps someone else could follow up and edit accordingly. 81.157.14.74 19:46, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] English translation of Latin terms
Hi, can someone help translate the Latin phrases "vetus depositio pecuniae" and "jus commune et quasi gentium" that appears in the article? Thanks very much. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 03:37, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
- ius commune et quasi gentium = "Common law, and, as if the people's".
- vetus depositio pecuniae = "old deposit of money".
- --Ioscius (talk) 03:37, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
- The legal meaning of "ius commune" is "common law" and "ius gentium" is "international law", so that the phrase can be construed as equivocating between the two. I would try to translate as "common law and/or quasi-international law". Such types of "law", despite the name law in english, are not actually laws in the sense of acts of legislation but the result of court tradition and common recognition of what is right in a particular case by the people. See also the english wiki article Roman Law--Rafaelgarcia (talk) 04:10, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
That's very helpful. I've updated the article accordingly. Once again, thanks! — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 05:09, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
-
- Now that I see the context from the article, I should also note that the primary meaning of the latin word "ius" is in fact "right" in the sense of "property rights". While I think it is fine how you phrased the translation in the paragraph taking the terms in a legal contex, an equally good rendering that is closer to classical latin, and perhaps closer to the intended meaning, would be "...his right to the treasure trove became jus commune et quasi gentium (a common and quasi-international right)."--Rafaelgarcia (talk) 05:29, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- Certainly Rafael is right. I confess I translated out of context, just from what was pasted in the Taberna. For the record, I think translating vetus as "ancient" is a bit excessive... They certainly had words for ancient: priscus, antiquus, etc., but they usually knew what they meant when they said it (a fact I have learned painfully, time and time again in school examinations).--Ioscius (talk) 05:55, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
-
OK, have tweaked the wording. I used "ancient" because that was the phraseology used by Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, but if you think "old" is a better translation of vetus let's go with that. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 13:21, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Nice article!
Hi i just have to say nice article!! -anonymous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.96.0.236 (talk) 03:41, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
