PAS Treasure Report

[garybrun]

Out of 1257 treasure cases

Metal Detecting 1171 93.16%
Chance Find 30 2.39%
Archaelogical Find 53 4.21%
Reported by buyer 3 0.24%

I was surprised to to see only 30 for archaeological discovery.
I thought it would have been a lot more than that???



Website for responsible Metal Detecting
http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording Our Heritage For Future Generations.

[BAJR Host]

waits for a reply....

"I don't have an archaeological imagination.."
Borekickers

[gonetopot]

Not too surprising for the following reasons:

1. If archaeologists find 'treasure' during an excavation it will go, via their finds and archives procedures, straight to the museum, not via the PAS
2. Much metal detecting occurs on on farmland - which is not necessarily the same type of land earmarked for development and therfore investigated by archaeologists.

These are my main and serious comments on the PAS report, but if i'm being really cynical (I will now stand very far back with body armour)

3. Perhaps some of the treasure reported by metal detectorists (and i'm not aiming this at any one at all) actually came from sites that archaeologists are not allowed to investigate ie. protected. Change the cordinates, report to PAS and hey presto, its a legitimate find!

and before I get shot, I'd like to say that I do believe most metal detectorists are very responsible and do a great job.

[garybrun]

Who was talking about shooting anyone
Maybe Ive misunderstood.... don't all finds classed as treasure go through the system?
How do I find what archaeological finds where classed and reported as treasure.




Website for responsible Metal Detecting
http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording Our Heritage For Future Generations.

[BAJR Host]

This is what I was wondering myself...

I know that in Scotland - all things go through the TT panel... (believe me its a pain! -- 42 bags of 19th century pottery... tick 3 bits of Fe Obj... tick etc) However there is a different process for 'treasure' found in an excavation...but it still goes through the TT process - ergo... All finders are recorded.

see here for report http://www.treasuretrovescotland.co.uk/d...mplete.pdf

What I was unsure about.. (and perhaps I should ask...) is what happens in England...
As we all know, archaeologists are legaly disqualified from any finders fee... it is simply against the law. However.. where is it reported, the finds found on an archaeological site... such as the Prittlewell burial site at Southend...

The arguement might go... oh the PAS is only the place for people who are not archaeologists... but then... surely that removes a pile of people? Seriously though I am not sure myself...

I would expect to find the Pritwell assemblage on PAS... as it is treasure as much as anything...


So in England... is it


"I don't have an archaeological imagination.."
Borekickers

[gonetopot]

To be classed as treasure a find has to be brought in by a member of the public etc and assessed by the PAS (through its procedures), however finds from archaeological investigations that are part of the planning process have a requirement to be deposited with museums so will never pass in front of the PAS to be classed as treasure (and I imagine this accounts for the near entirety of material recovered by proffesional archaeological units).

As to which archaeological finds were classed as treasure, you'd best consult your local PAS officer (I don't know whats on their websire)

[gonetopot]

Sorry Mr host missed your last post,

As far as I am aware finds from archaeological sites in England do not become 'treasure' although I may be unaware of what happens when it has been deposited at a museum.

[RedEarth]

Couple of points that I am sure are not quite correct as far as I am aware. Please set me right if I'm not:

Treasure Trove objects don't have to be assessed by PAS, that just tends to be the way things happen these days. Treasure Trove did exist before PAS and items can be report to the coroner/local museums etc.

Is it true that archaeologists legally cannot claim treasure trove reward for items found on their projects? I would just assume it is simply not the done thing or because they work for an organisation they can't (just like you can't claim copyright of a context form that you filled in working on behalf of someone). I don't believe it is enshrined in law that archaeologists can't claim; would this still apply if an archaeologist found treaure on their day off?

Whether finds from archaeological sites can legally count as treaure I don't know but doesn't necessarily stop them effectively becoming treasure - the Roman tombstone from Lancaster sold by the developer (and therefore legal owner) to the local museum for several tens of thousands of pounds, for example. I always assumed archaeologists were expected to report treasure from sites.

Of course these things tend not to be as straight forward as I hope...

[garybrun]

Surley archaeologists are subject to the same law?

quote:What is the new definition of treasure?

The following finds are treasure under the Act (more detailed guidance is given in the Code of Practice):

1. Objects other than coins: any object other than a coin provided that it contains at least 10 per cent of gold or silver and is at least 300 years old when found. (Objects with gold or silver plating normally have less than 10 per cent of precious metal.)

2. Coins: all coins from the same find provided they are at least 300 years old when found (but if the coins contain less than 10 per cent of gold or silver there must be at least 10: there is a list of these coins in the Code of Practice).

An object or coin is part of the same find as another object or coin if it is found in the same place as, or had previously been left together with, the other object. Finds may have become scattered since they were originally deposited in the ground.

Only the following groups of coins will normally be regarded as coming from the 'same find': (a) hoards, which have been deliberately hidden; (b) smaller groups of coins such as the contents of purses, which may have been dropped or lost and © votive or ritual deposits.

Single coins found on their own are not treasure and groups of coins lost one by one over a period of time (for example those found on settlement sites or on fair sites) will not normally be treasure.

3. Associated objects: any object, whatever it is made of, that is found in the same place as, or that had previously been together with, another object that is treasure.

4. Objects that would have been treasure trove: any object that would previously have been treasure trove, but does not fall within the specific categories given above. These objects have to be made substantially of gold or silver; they have to have been buried with the intention of recovery and their owner or his heirs cannot be traced.

The following types of find are not treasure:

objects whose owners can be traced;
unworked natural objects, including human and animal remains, even if they are found in association with treasure;
objects from the foreshore which are not wreck.
If you are in any doubt, it will probably be safest to report your find.

What about objects found before the Act came into force?

You should report objects that come into the four categories just described if they are found after 23 September 1997. There is no need to report any objects found before that date unless they may be treasure trove (see 4 above).

PAS Summary of the Treasure Act

quote:What is the definition of Treasure?
The following finds are Treasure under the Act, if found after 24 September 1997 (or, in the case of category 2, if found after 1 January 2003):


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. If the object is of prehistoric date it will be Treasure provided any part of it is precious metal.
Any group of two or more metallic objects of any composition of prehistoric date that come from the same find (see below)
All coins from the same find provided they are at least 300 years old when found (but if the coins contain less than 10 per cent of gold or silver there must be at least ten of them). Only the following groups of coins will normally be regarded as coming from the same find:
hoards that have been deliberately hidden
smaller groups of coins, such as the contents of purses, that may been dropped or lost
votive or ritual deposits.
Any object, whatever it is made of, that is found in the same place as, or had previously been together with, another object that is Treasure.
Any object that would previously have been treasure trove, but does not fall within the specific categories given above. Only objects that are less than 300 years old, that are made substantially of gold or silver, that have been deliberately hidden with the intention of recovery and whose owners or heirs are unknown will come into this category.
Note: An object or coin is part of the ‘same find’ as another object or coin if it is found in the same place as, or had previously been together with, the other object. Finds may have become scattered since they were originally deposited in the ground.

The loophole in the act Ive put in bold type.
I'm quite surprised some of you dont know the law on these things.



Website for responsible Metal Detecting
http://www.ukdfd.co.uk
Recording Our Heritage For Future Generations.

[BAJR Host]

I found this on the CBA site... :

quote:rewards will not normally be payable when the find is made by an archaeologist;

http://www.britarch.ac.uk/cba/potant15.html

However... if you look at the legal doc ument itself.

http://www.ncmd.co.uk/docs/treasure%20act.pdf


A) the PAS are a repository for objects (whether treasure or not) found by people.. they are not the Treasure Trove which is a separate organisation..

B) the laws concerning treasure are the same for all... and it specifically states (p17)

quote:The duty to report lies with the individual who made the find and this duty to report applies to everyone, including archaeologists. However, in the case of an archaeological excavation or investigation, it may be convenient for one member of the excavation team to take the responsibility for ensuring that the coroner is informed about all finds of potential treasure made during the course of the excavation or investigation.

and here is the bit where I disagree with the CBA statement
I feel it catagorically states that an archaeologists cannot (while acting sa an archaeologist take an award. (it does however show up a recent confusion - as the landowner is still open to 50% of the value... even if the archaeologist is not... so an item valued at 60 grand... means 30 grand to the landowner and nought to the archaeolopgist.

(p42)

quote:81. Rewards will not be payable when the find is made by an archaeologist or anyone engaged on an archaeological excavation or investigation. In cases of uncertainty archaeologists are recommended to require any individuals for whom they are responsible, or to whom they have given, or for whom they have sought, permission to search, to sign a statement waiving their right to a reward. If there is doubt as to whether the finder was an archaeologist (or a person engaged on an archaeological excavation or investigation) the Treasure Valuation Committee shall decide. This will not affect any interest that the occupier or the landowner may have in any reward. The proportion of any reward payable to an eligible landowner (or occupier) is 50 per cent. (See also paragraph 52.)

Hope that helps.

"I don't have an archaeological imagination.."
Borekickers