|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Metal detectorist unhappy with valuation |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Apr 14, 2014, 20:58
|
||
|
PS, funding for every heritage sector has been decimated, archie faculties and departments and museums closed, but just one area of spending has been totally unaffected by the credit crunch years - treasure rewards. They are just the same. You might think a pro-rata reduction would be fair. It's been thought of. But that would trigger the seventeenth reporting strike threat by detectorists - they've said so - so it hasn't been done.
|
|||
thesweetcheat 6218 posts |
Apr 14, 2014, 21:03
|
||
|
nigelswift wrote: 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. Quite.
|
|||
Howburn Digger 986 posts |
Apr 14, 2014, 21:10
|
||
|
thesweetcheat wrote: 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. I think you are wrong to address the finder and his hobby as the problem. Perhaps you have a problem with metal detectorists who follow the rules and report finds. I don't. The problem is that the TVC had decided to wriggle round this section of the Treasure Act... "Any metallic object, other than a coin, provided that at least 10 per cent by weight of metal is precious metal (that is, gold or silver) and that it is at least 300 years old when found." They have decided to interpret the gold rings part of the find as "coin" methinks and ignored the next part of the guideline. It is a recent move and a new interpretation of these gold ring ornaments (and one without any archaeological basis) and one which has had a number of regional archaeology services groaning. It is purely a way of denying finders the monetary reward they are due. The TVC interpretation has little or no weight in archaeological circles. If I found one of those gold rings while out walking (perhaps it had been scooped out of a rabbit burrow) then I would either be faced with keeping it in a drawer or giving it over to the Portable Antiquities Scheme. If I chose the latter I'd want the value for finding a Bronze Age gold ring. I would want more than a couple of pounds for it. If I chose to keep it in my drawer maybe I'd end up getting my jeweller friend to melt it down to make a nice brooch for my OH. Who knows. I presume Mr Walker is going about his detection with a dream of finding something of value or some interesting nick-nacks. Why not? It is not against the law. Possible financial gain of a few thousand pounds? Sounds great to me. The British Museum gets a delightful looking Bronze Age axe head and four lovely gold rings. That is what Treasure Trove is (or was). It was to keep the good stuff Public. Not being melted for bullion. The Culture Secretary Maria Miller was defrauding us of £11,250 per year for the last four years. This guy should have been paid the proper rate. He's just a little guy who made a nice find, did the right thing and is being fleeced by National Cultural Bodies and Legal Loopholes who won't stump up the few grand he is due. How many other finders will this TVC move cause to think again about their finds? Many I would imagine. And I wouldn't blame them. I am sure he will continue his hobby and will think twice about doing the right thing next time. Good luck to him.
|
|||
|
thesweetcheat 6218 posts |
Apr 14, 2014, 21:28
|
||
|
Howburn Digger wrote: I think you are wrong to address the finder and his hobby as the problem. Perhaps you have a problem with metal detectorists who follow the rules and report finds. I don't. No, I don't. I have a problem with everyone wanting something for nothing. I'm very happy he followed the rules, I'm not so happy that he only did so because he thought he would gain a large(r) financial reward, rather than because it's the right thing to do.
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Apr 16, 2014, 00:48
|
||
|
The Treasure Valuation Committee.... Professor Lord Renfrew of Kaimsthorn. Chairman. Senior Fellow of the McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research. Dr David Dykes, former Head of the National Museum of Wales, member of the British Numismatic Society since 1954, expert on medieval coins. Mr John Cherry, Former Keeper of Medieval and Later Antiquities at the British Museum; Expert on Medieval artefacts Mr Peter Clayton, Long-standing consultant for Seaby Antiquities, writer and lecturer; expert on ancient archaeological artefacts. Dr Tim Pestell, Keeper of Archaeology at Norwich Castle Museum Professor Ian Carradice, formerly of University of St Andrews; expert on Roman coins Ms Hetty Gleave, Partner at Hunter's Solicitors and an expert in Cultural Property Law
|
|||
|
thesweetcheat 6218 posts |
Apr 16, 2014, 07:14
|
||
Impressive list, although it's perhaps a little surprising that it doesn't include a professional RICS-qualified valuer as well.
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Edited Apr 16, 2014, 08:27
Apr 16, 2014, 07:48
|
||
I think it's in transition. There's a detectorist Member too but he's in process of being replaced. The retiring one is Trevor Austin, Chairman of the National Council for Metal Detecting. How could that list, plus him, be accused of deliberately fiddling the valuations? Seems unlikely.
|
|||
|
thesweetcheat 6218 posts |
Apr 22, 2014, 19:08
|
||
|
From the Treasure Registrar's Twitter feed: "196 people waived their right to Treasure rewards last year, helping museums acquire finds at less expense. Here's 1: http://finds.org.uk/database/artefacts/record/id/519548" and from the Treasure Registrar website: http://finds.org.uk/database/artefacts/record/id/532283 "Disposition: The finders, from the Weald and Downland Metal Detecting Club, as well as the landowner, waived their right to a reward for the addenda coins to allow them to be acquired by Guildford Museum at no expense." Not all bad news :)
|
|||
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Edited Apr 23, 2014, 12:39
Apr 23, 2014, 12:38
|
||
|
thesweetcheat wrote: Not all bad news :) I guess not, though the fact it's mostly footling amounts that get renounced and 9 out of ten detectorists DO take the rewards needs to be born in mind too. Maybe Ed Vaizey should have said they were 10% heritage heroes and 90% grabby tossers. I'd have settled for that. ;)
|
|||
|
thesweetcheat 6218 posts |
Apr 23, 2014, 12:51
|
||
|
nigelswift wrote: Maybe Ed Vaizey should have said they were 10% heritage heroes and 90% grabby tossers. I'd have settled for that. ;) Ha ha ha!
|
| Pages: 2 – [ Previous | 1 2 ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
