PAS Treasure Report

[gonetopot]

As part of the archiving process in English commercial archaeology most finds officers send out 'ownership transfer' papers to the owners of the land so that any finds (treasure or not) are formally handed over to the relevent museum via the unit in question. The papers are sent after excavation so that the quantity of find/archives can be stated. But I am unclear whether at an earlier stage their is a requirement for them sign said papers.

I can see that in this process you could declare treasure but haven't come across it as common practice. It would be an interesting way to raise money for post-ex and reduce client costs.

I am greatly intrigued as to what is common practice and what the law/regulations explicitly state or require. The more I read this thread the less sure I am...

Does anybody know what the policy of those who set project specifications is? surely county archaeologists etc??

[Sparky]

Rachelintheoffice wrote

quote:I also know somebody who made an outstandingly good treasure find, and was told by the unit employing him that, while they couldn't prevent him from claiming the reward, they would see to it that he never worked in archaeology again if he did so. When he found out how much it was worth, he really regretted not calling their bluff... he could have set up his own unit with the proceeds

Sounds to me like your aquaintance hasn't come into archaeology with completely honest intentions.

'Mum!!! Can you get me the toilet roll, please!'

Noam Chomsky

[Silent Bob]

In my experience the owners of a small site are usually more than a little reluctant to sign over any valuable objects found during work. I have been on a site where they didn't give a toss about the pottery but kept the nice 970s Anglo Saxon penny and a few other metal bits. Irritatingly I found those. At least they were recorded in the report. They own the land so they do not have tro give the finds up (so I believe).

[gonetopot]

My unit experienced this once and the land owner was told in no uncertain terms that either he kept the whole archive or none of this, but I don't know if it was the unit or the county that decided this.
I've only known one client keep an archive and they were a big chemical corp who had all their own display cases designed (including humidity etc) and now have an amazing prehistoric display in their shiny new complex. This did include some very valuable finds which, as far as know, were never classed as treasure (even though they certainly could have been).

[Oxbeast]

"while they couldn't prevent him from claiming the reward, they would see to it that he never worked in archaeology again if he did so."

How? slag him off at a SCAUM meeting? Even people fired for stealing the finds manage to find jobs at other units...probably not this month though.

At the risk of sounding like Unitof1 (aargh), surely the landowner owns the finds, and it is up to them what to do with them.

[Austin Ainsworth]

quote:Originally posted by gonetopot

As part of the archiving process in English commercial archaeology most finds officers send out 'ownership transfer' papers to the owners of the land so that any finds (treasure or not) are formally handed over to the relevent museum via the unit in question. The papers are sent after excavation so that the quantity of find/archives can be stated. But I am unclear whether at an earlier stage their is a requirement for them sign said papers.

I can see that in this process you could declare treasure but haven't come across it as common practice. It would be an interesting way to raise money for post-ex and reduce client costs.

I am greatly intrigued as to what is common practice and what the law/regulations explicitly state or require. The more I read this thread the less sure I am...

Does anybody know what the policy of those who set project specifications is? surely county archaeologists etc??

gonetopot,

'Archaeological Archives' published by the Archaeological Archives Forum (AAF)in 2007 says, in Section 5.4 'Transfer of Title in England and Wales' (point 5)

"It is highly desirable that transfer of title forms be signed by the landowner at the planning stage of a project, although it is recognised that landowners may be reluctant to do this, and forms may therefore be signed when the archive is prepared for deposition."

[RedEarth]

quote:Originally posted by BAJR Host

... the quote from the Treasure Act ... so yes they are (while they are acting as archaeologists)

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.

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

Interesting possible scenario then - archaeologist working on site discovers a nice juicy piece of treasure with an obviously high value. Archaeologist, perhaps a bit jaded by this point, and aware of the fact that they're not allowed to claim the reward but realising they could virtually retire on the proceeds, stands up and shouts to all on site, making sure that anyone in charge can hear 'I quit, I am no longer an archaeologist', followed a few minutes later by 'oh, look at this lovely pile of treasure I, a member of the public, just happen to have stumbled across'. Quids in!

I do think it a bit mean that archaeologists can't claim.

[BAJR Host]

up but you are on an archaeological investigation... so would still be bound... and possibly gagged and thrown out!


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

[Dirty Dave Lincoln]

You mean death by a thousand trowels?

[RedEarth]

Sorry - computer went a bit mad while posting that one so it came up again.