|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Metal detectorist unhappy with valuation |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
thesweetcheat 6213 posts |
Apr 13, 2014, 10:58
|
||
|
The finder of a Bronze Age axe and rings in Suffolk turns his nose up at the 'low' valuation, and suggests that finders will be discouraged from reporting finds and will get more on the black market. Grrrr. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-26992696
|
|||
juamei 2013 posts |
Apr 13, 2014, 11:01
|
||
|
Mr Walker said he would have to accept the £550 from the British Museum, which has been in possession of the hoard since he handed it in. I love a story with a happy ending!
|
|||
|
thesweetcheat 6213 posts |
Apr 13, 2014, 11:07
|
||
|
juamei wrote: Mr Walker said he would have to accept the £550 from the British Museum, which has been in possession of the hoard since he handed it in. I love a story with a happy ending! Yep, but next time he (and his MD mates) presumably won't bother.
|
|||
|
juamei 2013 posts |
Apr 13, 2014, 11:19
|
||
|
True. Though it seems they were declared treasure so he would be breaking the law selling privately without offering (and yes I'm sure 1000s do) iirc. It winds me up seeing people demanding "market" value when that few k he didn't get could make a difference by funding 5% or more of an archaeological dig. They shouldn't get anything imo, though I accept a token finders fee (say 10% market value) would be a nice gesture.
|
|||
|
thesweetcheat 6213 posts |
Apr 13, 2014, 11:24
|
||
|
juamei wrote: It winds me up seeing people demanding "market" value when that few k he didn't get could make a difference by funding 5% or more of an archaeological dig. They shouldn't get anything imo, though I accept a token finders fee (say 10% market value) would be a nice gesture. Agreed, that would strike a balance better between those detecting for financial gain only and the "gain" to the public of things being found away from actual monuments (i.e. fields with nothing apparently in them, where no dig will ever be funded unless a housing estate is looming).
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Apr 13, 2014, 12:30
|
||
|
"Unless changes are made, people aren't going to donate their treasure finds to the nation" said the ungrateful, annoying little scrote to the press. A lot did when I were a lad mate, and for free, and many do now. As do all amateur archaeos who find stuff during fieldwalking exercises and digs. You shouldn't assume everyone has your stinky morals. Oh, and they aren't YOUR finds, they're ours. So you don't "donate" them, you're obliged to hand them over. The money is ex gratia not an entitlement. And please call a spade a spade. "People aren't going to donate" actually means "steal". Tosser. Good morning everyone, lovely sunny day!
|
|||
|
thesweetcheat 6213 posts |
Apr 13, 2014, 12:48
|
||
|
nigelswift wrote: Good morning everyone, lovely sunny day! :)
|
|||
Howburn Digger 986 posts |
Apr 14, 2014, 19:17
|
||
|
I am not a metal detectorist. The finder Mr Walker handed the finds in to the British Museum (via SAS) and expected a fair price for his find. Suffolk Archaeology Service are backing Mr Walker and saying that the TVC valuation is wrong. The finder cannot afford to challenge the Treasure Valuation Committee in court and cannot afford to commission an expert valuation on his own. Strikes me of some high-handed tactics and slippery evasion on the part of the TVC. They are offering £550 for a Bronze Age Axe Head and four gold rings. This is about the interpretation of the gold rings. There have been recent decisions made by TVC to view gold rings as "ring-money" and therefore "coins" and not "treasure". In the TVC's strict view those (sometimes plain, sometimes ornamented) rings were simply tokens or "coins" to be traded. Nothing else. But using this interpretation so could sex or fruit. Indeed almost everything has been used as "money" over the years. The fact that these rings were probably used as personal ornamentation for hair, ears or clothes is ignored. The gold also has bullion value. If I found four gold rings I would think they were treasure. Metal detecting is not illegal. He was detecting with permission on private land and not on any scheduled monument. This man handed in these items in good faith. In December 2012 when he was waiting for the decision from the TVC he said... "As far as the Treasure Act is concerned, it should pay what the hammer price would be at auction, but Bronze Age gold rarely goes onto the open market. I've no idea what I'll get at the moment, it wouldn't be five figures, probably four figures. As long as I get a fair price, I'm happy with that - the true value is in the actual finding of the items." He sounds a fair man. This is the BBC report on his original find. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-20760897 I don't know why Mr Walker appealed to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport expecting any kind of support. Ed Vaizey trained as a lawyer not an archaeologist or historian. The more recent Culture Secretary Maria Miller pocketed herself over £45,000 over 4 years by overclaiming for her mortgage interest and Council Tax on her family home. That's £11,250 of fraud per year. She reluctantly handed back a total of only £4,500, gave a sneering apology and then she was forced to resign. Mr Walker didn't rip anyone off. He did the right thing handing his finds in and expected a fair market price for his treasure. I'm not surprised he thinks people will stop handing in their finds if this is what happens.
|
|||
|
thesweetcheat 6213 posts |
Apr 14, 2014, 19:43
|
||
|
Yes and no, I think. Fact is, it's his hobby. If he likes doing it, he's staying away from scheduled sites, finding things that otherwise will never turn up and every now and again he gets a modest amount of "reward", I don't have a huge problem with that, other than the usual concerns about loss of any archaeological context for the find. In fact, if that's his motivation then the money shouldn't really be an issue for him at all, he's done his thing, had a nice day out (presumably) and found something nice for the public to appreciate. Bingo. But if he's detecting expressly for financial gain, rather than looking for stuff to share with the public, for his own enjoyment and for the public's good, then he seems to be wanting a big payout for very little, in fact a big payout for going out and doing something he actually wants to do in his own time. It's not like he has a contract or anyone's forcing him to go out with his detector is it? If he doesn't like the ratio of effort to reward, he can always find another hobby.
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Apr 14, 2014, 20:49
|
||
|
The behaviour of politicians isn't relevant - we're all better than them! But for what it's worth Ed Vaizey says detectorists are heroes so he's unlikely to be behind a scam to fiddle them. Indeed, nor are the Treasure Valuation Committee who are prominent people, professor, dealers and a detectorist, whose minutes are now published, which is more than EH's mostly are. I dunno why the discrepancy but most detectorists are saying 550 is too low but also that Walker's figure is crazy. Funny business valuation, I did it for 30 years and I bet anythiing if and when their thinking and comparable evidence is published in a sober manner they won't look like crooks out to fiddle anyone. It might be on the low side but in an inexact science sometimes it happens. About 8% 0f finders or landowners renounce their rewards and in most countries the reward is far less, sometimes 10% or nothing. Both of those affect my view of it I suppose. Also, the "reward" has to come from a local museum, always skint, and often after a public appeal in which old ladies and schoolkids donate money and ...... this always drives me nutz .... the press story always says stuff like: ten thousand needed to save treasure for Leicester - when "save" means to stop someone being able to flog the thing legally on EBay. I can remember as kids we'd find stuff in the fields and take it to school and then to the museum because "that's where it belongs". I can't adjust to the modern habit of harvesting history for personal benefit. It's kind of Thatcherite, uncivilised, anti-society.
|
| Pages: 2 – [ 1 2 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
