Would you be tempted?

[Peter 615]

The following has been released in our local rag.

http://www.eadt.co.uk/news/essex_200_historic_coins_go_missing_at_metal_detecting_event_1_1143151

Would you be tempted?

How about if you found a hoard of anglo Saxon pennies....would you just keep a couple of nice ones?

It probably just took one of the detectorists to trouser one and then Oh dear.

I can't see how they could be historically important though.

[Colin G. 147]

The following has been released in our local rag.

http://www.eadt.co.uk/news/essex_200_historic_coins_go_missing_at_metal_detecting_event_1_1143151

Would you be tempted?

How about if you found a hoard of anglo Saxon pennies....would you just keep a couple of nice ones?

It probably just took one of the detectorists to trouser one and then Oh dear.

I can't see how they could be historically important though.

I know the guy who organised the charity event and should have been going myself

There were unexpected issues, and as usual a couple of idiots have undoubtedly created a lot of hassle for the organiser and land owner, and again given the hobby a bad name, but there is also a lot of media hype at the moment around the event. What the media neglect to mention is that those who found the coins legally have 14 days to report them to the coroner. I have a feeling this may run for a while

The historical importance is that they may be the result of a robbery, and I think it is just the way the legislation captures things which may not be of sufficient age, but could still be of substantial value.

Edited December 1, 2011 by Colin G.

[Generic Lad 25]

Though I'm not British, I've always been of the opinion that artifacts (or anything else) buried underground are the property of the landowner who should then be able to enter into agreements with detectorists on who gets to keep what. I think it is good for museums to record information that detectorists find, but it should be on a voluntary basis and museums should purchase (or get donated) their items on the open market, allowing for bids from both private collectors and public museums. Under this system, it is entirely likely that hoards would get reported in great detail (after all, a good hoard story makes the coins worth quite a bit more for the dectectorist and the landowner) and then it would go to whoever valued the hoard the most. But if someone doesn't want to report a find, so be it, after all, they are only harming themselves in the fact that it would sell for much higher had it had a well-known backstory.

[Peter 615]

Though I'm not British, I've always been of the opinion that artifacts (or anything else) buried underground are the property of the landowner who should then be able to enter into agreements with detectorists on who gets to keep what. I think it is good for museums to record information that detectorists find, but it should be on a voluntary basis and museums should purchase (or get donated) their items on the open market, allowing for bids from both private collectors and public museums. Under this system, it is entirely likely that hoards would get reported in great detail (after all, a good hoard story makes the coins worth quite a bit more for the dectectorist and the landowner) and then it would go to whoever valued the hoard the most. But if someone doesn't want to report a find, so be it, after all, they are only harming themselves in the fact that it would sell for much higher had it had a well-known backstory.

Even if it is treasure trove they will eventually get the market value.The publicity helps the finder should he wish to challenge the crowns valuation.

Most detectorists will sign a pre nup with the landowner.We/all have a duty to record decent finds so history can be pieced together.

Detectorists in the main are reliable and many important new historical sites have been identified through their co operation and honesty.

[azda 979]

Would i be tempted? I think it would depend, if you were alone, and dug up 200 Sovs i think the answer would be yes, with 30 others hanging around, the answer would be no. Reason i would, Sovs are in ample abundance, if we were talking Anglo Saxon or thereabouts then even if i were alone then i'd give it up.

[Accumulator 52]

Interestingly, if the find is declared as treasure trove and the Crown pay a cash reward there are no tax implications. If it is not deemed as treasure trove then CGT must be paid by whoever keeps the find (if it's value is over £6,000). In the case of gold or silver, presumably hidden for later retrieval by persons unknown (thus meeting the required tests for treasure trove) then it would almost certainly be best to report it unless the aim was to avoid sharing the proceeds with the landowner.

In the case of bronze though...

[moneyer12 0]

i have often wondered what i would do if i found a hoard, it's the time when the little angel and the little demon in your mind come into conflict.......should i/shouldn't i.

[scottishmoney 31]

I completely like the Treasure Trove Act and believe that as a result of it that many wonderful pieces have been documented and well researched as a result of it. I have a particular token from the 17th century that I had to get an export license for to take it out of Great Britain because of the nationality of the token, Irish, and the fact that it was found in rural Shropshire - far from it's home in Dublin. In essence the piece travelled long ago and is testament to a cross Irish sea trade that must have existed then. So as a result with the reporting, the export license etc I have a neat documentation of the piece from the moment it was found until it ended up in my clutches.

That aside, I would rather be paid a finder's fee than risk prosecution for non-reporting and whatever subsequently could result legally.