Detectorists, coin collectors, archaeology and stuff ..

[TomGoodheart 406]

Many of you will be aware of the current concerns in the US (and I believe Germany) about coins imported from Europe which are, or may be, covered by the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act (CCPIA). Namely that the collecting of ancient coins of historical interest will be severely affected by legislation designed to protect 'cultural property' by restricting the import of such items and allowing for the seizure and return to country of origin of the same.

There's been a fair amount of stuff posted on a number of coin collecting and dealers sites about this.

But in my internet wanderings I came across the blogs of someone called Paul Barford, an archaeologist. Now, Paul is not really one to pull his punches and appears to have little respect for those he calls 'coineys' ( .. um, I guess, us) and 'history plunderers' (detectorists) and needless to say his views are rather the opposite of what the collectors and dealers post. I found his views ... interesting.

Now, I have to say that, as a collector I find myself in a bit of a dilemma. I think that even if only a small part of what he says about UK detectorists is true, it's enough to worry me that historical information may be being lost, other less 'interesting' artefacts such as pottery shards or bone fragments are being disturbed or distroyed, and items are probably 'going missing' rather than being declared to the PAS.

On the other hand, it would be a very rare collector who would refuse to buy a coin off ebay if the seller couldn't explain exactly where it came from. Looking at my own collection, the information given to me about the few declared detector finds is mostly very limited. Only one (who was the finder) gave me a location and map of where the coin was dug.

And of course, we know that historically, such information hasn't been a priority. Few Victorian collectors kept information about their coins, unless it was provenance regarding previous owners, and the situation isn't much better today. Most of my coins can only really be traced back 20 years or so at most. Less really, since I don't have the budget to buy coins from major collections. Some only have the name of the person I bought from and, even where that's a known dealer, many seem unable or reluctant to pass on any pertinent details.

So I guess, I 'get' the gist of Paul Barford's concerns. But I'm not quite sure what I personally can or would do about this. And I also worry slightly (since my coins all originated in England and so aren't so threatened by the aspects of CCPIA that concern ancient coin collectors) that I'd find it difficult to provide much provenance for my coins if required.

Just some thoughts really. And I wondered what others here think?

[Peckris 579]

Many of you will be aware of the current concerns in the US (and I believe Germany) about coins imported from Europe which are, or may be, covered by the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act (CCPIA). Namely that the collecting of ancient coins of historical interest will be severely affected by legislation designed to protect 'cultural property' by restricting the import of such items and allowing for the seizure and return to country of origin of the same.

There's been a fair amount of stuff posted on a number of coin collecting and dealers sites about this.

But in my internet wanderings I came across the blogs of someone called Paul Barford, an archaeologist. Now, Paul is not really one to pull his punches and appears to have little respect for those he calls 'coineys' ( .. um, I guess, us) and 'history plunderers' (detectorists) and needless to say his views are rather the opposite of what the collectors and dealers post. I found his views ... interesting.

Now, I have to say that, as a collector I find myself in a bit of a dilemma. I think that even if only a small part of what he says about UK detectorists is true, it's enough to worry me that historical information may be being lost, other less 'interesting' artefacts such as pottery shards or bone fragments are being disturbed or distroyed, and items are probably 'going missing' rather than being declared to the PAS.

On the other hand, it would be a very rare collector who would refuse to buy a coin off ebay if the seller couldn't explain exactly where it came from. Looking at my own collection, the information given to me about the few declared detector finds is mostly very limited. Only one (who was the finder) gave me a location and map of where the coin was dug.

And of course, we know that historically, such information hasn't been a priority. Few Victorian collectors kept information about their coins, unless it was provenance regarding previous owners, and the situation isn't much better today. Most of my coins can only really be traced back 20 years or so at most. Less really, since I don't have the budget to buy coins from major collections. Some only have the name of the person I bought from and, even where that's a known dealer, many seem unable or reluctant to pass on any pertinent details.

So I guess, I 'get' the gist of Paul Barford's concerns. But I'm not quite sure what I personally can or would do about this. And I also worry slightly (since my coins all originated in England and so aren't so threatened by the aspects of CCPIA that concern ancient coin collectors) that I'd find it difficult to provide much provenance for my coins if required.

Just some thoughts really. And I wondered what others here think?

While I acknowledge the concerns, what the archaeologist says about disturbed material is disingenuous nonsense. I used to go on a lot of archaeological digs, and I remember well that we 'coinies' were allowed to raid the 'spoil tip' (i.e. excavated and dumped soil) for any coins, as they would no longer be 'in situ' and therefore of no value to the archaeologist. I found a good silver denarius of Julia Domna in this way, and after cleaning it came up between VF and EF.

The fact of the matter is this : if the place where the detectorist made a find wasn't a known archaeological site, then it wouldn't have been on their radar in the first place. Therefore the museums should be grateful that someone has pinpointed an area for fruitful further excavation. If the find was Roman, there's almost too many unexcavated sites to worry about. The only time a detectorist would be an absolute menace is if they haunted an actual ongoing dig, e.g. at night.

[Gollum 2]

Oh you have got me started now !. I despise most archeologists, as far as I am concerned they are nothing more than self serving hypocrits and egotists, their ardent belief in the fact that only they are intelligent or superior enough to preserve or catalogue a coin gets my back up, it is nothing more than to promote their own positions and perceived importance as the upholders of our natinal heritage ( many of such things having come from foreign lands so really aren't our heritage! ) they want it all for themselves and fame, one word comes to mind about most of them, it begins with w and ends with s. I recall a lot of the tricks they pulled in the 70's with leaflets calling detectorists thieves and how they were robbing the countryside and how you were asked to phone the police and report them or not let them onto your land. They are for want of a better description by myself and in my mind nothing more than detectorists without a detector, a plague on those who actually do do the work in the cold and wet out of their own pocket. They of course would not dream of going out on a cold wet day to do such unless they had a team of followers and a packet of money donated from some institute or rich person, they take what they proclaim ou heritage and hide it away, later to sell it to anyone who can bail out their failed museums or such. They are nothing more than leeches with a funny and recognised title from some educational establishment.

I agree with Peck, it's spot on. If it wasn't for those detectorists much of the "history" and national heritage those clowns called archeologists whine about would never have seen the light of day and they would never have had anything to write their fame seeking thesis about. I'm stopping because I am more angry than logical now and I am losing the plot !, arghhhhhh.

[Colin G. 147]

Paul Barford is a troll nothing more nothing less, he is detested by both the vast majority of archaeologists and detectorists alike. He manipulates and twists every quote on every subject to his advantage, and is very good at what he does, including removing comments from his blog that he does not agree with. It is not a forum for debate when one side can manipulate and remove comments made by the other, that is why it reads so convincingly. As for a true representation of current thinking on detecting and archaeology.......

Just look at the PAS database and see what percentage of finds in the last few years have been made and recorded by detectorists including the great Staffordshire hoard which would still not have seen the light of day. Yes there are those few within the hobby who carry out illegal activities but that is true of most if not all hobbies, and why should the innocent majority who are genuinely interested in amateur archaeology be punished.

The PAS database funded by the government is a nightmare, just try searching for records. Detectorists have taken to funding their own to run parallel - UKDFD, try searching that one in comparison!!

Be careful with Mr Barford Tom, he would have your collection in a museum drawer only to be looked at by the educated few quicker than a flash if he had his way

Sorry if this post seems a bit blunt but I have seen the damage Mr Barford can do!!

Edited January 20, 2012 by Colin G.

[bagerap 706]

Expect to hear a lot more from Mr Barford, he's got a book coming out late this year/early next and it's aimed at US amongst others. Unfortunately large sections of the shovelbum community are agreeing with him in general. Detectorists are their main enemy, but they want changes in legislation which would affect all collectors; and not just of coins.

[TomGoodheart 406]

Expect to hear a lot more from Mr Barford, he's got a book coming out late this year/early next and it's aimed at US amongst others. Unfortunately large sections of the shovelbum community are agreeing with him in general. Detectorists are their main enemy, but they want changes in legislation which would affect all collectors; and not just of coins.

See, I can quite understand that Iraq wants back the contents of the National Museum, Greece would like its marbles and tribes in Papua New Guinea want the remains of their people that were stuck in a display case somewhere. These are clearly culturally significant objects.

I can also see that countries can benefit if what artefacts are dug up in their soil stay around long enough to be catalogued, some research done and then financially if they as a nation rather than ..*coughentrepreneurealcough* .. individuals sell them on.

But as part of my normal research I regularly check both the PAS records and UKDFD for coins that interest me. And, quite frankly, there are very few there that are more than what I might call 'hobby' coins; ie those that undoubtedly give the finder a thrill to have discovered a bit of history, but that in collecting and numismatic terms are almost worthless. (Any detectorist who wants to disabuse me and show me the treasures Spink regularly buy from them, please do ..!)

And while I accept neither database is likely to be comprehensive, it seems to me that the sheer number of bent washers are going to be more of an administrative headache for any local museum than welcome additions to their collection. At best a hoard will sit in a display case. At worst, a handful of metal objects will be stuck in a box in the basement for "future cataloguing".

Maybe if for six months every single detectorist submitted their finds to the authorities for recording, pestered them for attribution details and asked regularly where their 'treasure' is to be displayed so they can bring Great Auntie Mabel to see the culturally significant items they have discovered for their nation, we might see some sense.

In fact if every detector asked for a PAS officer to visit to inspect their find site (followed no doubt by emails from irate farmers wishing to plough and builders wanting to carry on building) it might be admitted that the vast majority of stuff dropped in fields or even shoved up a chimney, is of little or no archaeological interest.

And there .. I wonder, might be the nub of it. Politicians see cases of gold bracelets in previously unknown artistic styles, or a sovereign of King Arthur and perhaps assume that the earth is teeming with such things. Of course they will want such treasures protected and rightly so. Perhaps what they don't see is the buckets of tat that come up from the average archaeological dig that has to be painstakingly photographed, numbered, identified, recorded and stored.

Who is going to do the work of recording and where are they going to put it all?

And then when stamps and letters and pieces of clothing and souvenirs become 'culturally significant' where will it end? Will I be prevented from buying a five year old toaster from someone in Wales until someone has decided whether it should instead be put into a museum of industry as an exemplar of design? Will the police come-a-calling to repatriate my Alessi juicer because a museum in Milan needs one?

Sorry. Too much coffee and having a joke, but ...

[Rob 3,185]

Talking about too much material in official hands, I was talking to someone at York who catalogued a 19th century hoard for a museum about a decade ago. When he called them recently to have a look at it, they denied all knowledge of having it and certainly couldn't/didn't want to find it. As far as they were concerned it didn't exist, despite the cataloguer knowing what he had done in the past. They simply have too much material and not enough interest to look after it responsibly on behalf of the public who are the ulimate beneficiaries.

Edited January 21, 2012 by Rob

[Gollum 2]

Talking about too much material in official hands, I was talking to someone at York who catalogued a 19th century hoard for a museum about a decade ago. When he called them recently to have a look at it, they denied all knowledge of having it and certainly couldn't/didn't want to find it. As far as they were concerned it didn't exist, despite the cataloguer knowing what he had done in the past. They simply have too much material and not enough interest to look after it responsibly on behalf of the public who are the ulimate beneficiaries.

Prime example of a museum / state dept "keeping national heritage safe!.

http://germanherald.com/news/Germany_in_Focus/2011-12-08/1142/Minting_It

Edited January 21, 2012 by Gollum

[Colin G. 147]

I agree with a vast majority of what you are saying Tom, treasure items take 18 months to 2 years to go through the process, and a vast majority of what is recorded has been recorded voluntarily and not because it needs to be by legislation. The trouble is if detectorists don't record then they are accused of stashing hoards of treasures away, and self interest and if they do record it becomes an admin nightmare. UKDFD does try to hit that middle ground and does not accept everything, whereas PAS records everything!!

Damned if we do and damned if we don't!!

Detecting gets a lot of bad press and a lot of it is undeserved.

[Gollum 2]

"The trouble is if detectorists don't record then they are accused of stashing hoards of treasures away, and self interest"

Yep and the archeologist does it with approval.

[HistoricCoinage 151]

I despise most archeologists, as far as I am concerned they are nothing more than self serving hypocrits and egotists...

I'm glad you said most. We're not all like that, I can assure you.

[Colin G. 147]

I despise most archeologists, as far as I am concerned they are nothing more than self serving hypocrits and egotists...

I'm glad you said most. We're not all like that, I can assure you.

That's the thing Clive, he does as much damage for the reputation of archaeologists as he does detectorists. As you can probably see the man has knack of winding folk up

[headsortails 8]

I despise most archeologists, as far as I am concerned they are nothing more than self serving hypocrits and egotists...

I'm glad you said most. We're not all like that, I can assure you.

That's the thing Clive, he does as much damage for the reputation of archaeologists as he does detectorists. As you can probably see the man has knack of winding folk up

There allways knocking detectorists,but they love to get there hands on what they find coin collectors and archeologists.There would be some bare shelves in musums if were not for this 99.5% of the time harmless hoby.Im would not condone any body that steals from digs but can you understand

why archeologists whould actively go out and scatter copper washers over the river embankment in london so to deture peaple finding what would be washed out to sea.Ill vote for common sense evey time.

[coin watch 1]

Am I right in thinking that if such legislation is introduced for English coins then as a collector I would have to prove where I acquired my coin? and if I cant do that then I would have to 'hand it over' or if kept loose its value?....Blimey 70% of my whole collection does not hold an immediate provenance.

I hope British politicians are coin collectors! If not then there goes another part of my freedom!

[TomGoodheart 406]

Am I right in thinking that if such legislation is introduced for English coins then as a collector I would have to prove where I acquired my coin? and if I cant do that then I would have to 'hand it over' or if kept loose its value?....Blimey 70% of my whole collection does not hold an immediate provenance.

I hope British politicians are coin collectors! If not then there goes another part of my freedom!

As far as I know the idea is to preserve the cultural history of a country. Essentially it applies to international trade, and primarily was aimed at looted material dug illegally and then shipped abroad for profit. I believe it does apply (assuming we're one of the signatories, which is likely) to British coins, but we aren't seemingly as interested in pursuing it as say the Greeks or Bulgarians, their antiquities.

Since our coins are British then I doubt there would be the concern unless we sold them somewhere like the US in which case the American authorities might question it. But at the moment the focus seems to be on Mediterranean /Middle Eastern . more exotic locations than western Europe.

We also have the added advantage of the Portable Antiquities Scheme. While not perfect it is in effect a recognition by the archeaological community of the interests of the numismatic and detectorists. While no doubt artefacts might be taken illegally or without reporting here, it's less likely. And so I think our authorities have less pressure on them (and less interest) in pursuing a few dug coins.

Obviously it's a good idea to keep records (including asking sellers where coins are from). But hopefully, in true British fashion, common sense will prevail and nobody will be claiming our coins only to stick them in a box for them never to be seen again. There is I think some benefit from having coins in the hands of collectors in that they are studied, preserved and stored by someone else. I doubt there are the resources or interest for 'the Government' to do it and if they will otherwise just sit in storage there's an argument it's better for them to be in proivate hands, no?

[coin watch 1]

The thing that worries me a little is the value in coins especially with recent increases in values. With money value (cash) being ever decreasing it seems more likely to me that cash will (one day) eventually cease to exist, which makes sense to me as I think the eventual goal by 'government' is knowing everyones wealth. So with coins being a material wealth that can be contained in a small area I cant help but think this sort of regulation will come our way (UK) if it proves a success with regards to more control!

Either I'm getting more paraniod as I get older or I just dont trust the 'powers that be'.......

[DaveG38 420]

Am I right in thinking that if such legislation is introduced for English coins then as a collector I would have to prove where I acquired my coin? and if I cant do that then I would have to 'hand it over' or if kept loose its value?....Blimey 70% of my whole collection does not hold an immediate provenance.

I hope British politicians are coin collectors! If not then there goes another part of my freedom!

As far as I know the idea is to preserve the cultural history of a country. Essentially it applies to international trade, and primarily was aimed at looted material dug illegally and then shipped abroad for profit. I believe it does apply (assuming we're one of the signatories, which is likely) to British coins, but we aren't seemingly as interested in pursuing it as say the Greeks or Bulgarians, their antiquities.

Since our coins are British then I doubt there would be the concern unless we sold them somewhere like the US in which case the American authorities might question it. But at the moment the focus seems to be on Mediterranean /Middle Eastern . more exotic locations than western Europe.

We also have the added advantage of the Portable Antiquities Scheme. While not perfect it is in effect a recognition by the archeaological community of the interests of the numismatic and detectorists. While no doubt artefacts might be taken illegally or without reporting here, it's less likely. And so I think our authorities have less pressure on them (and less interest) in pursuing a few dug coins.

Obviously it's a good idea to keep records (including asking sellers where coins are from). But hopefully, in true British fashion, common sense will prevail and nobody will be claiming our coins only to stick them in a box for them never to be seen again. There is I think some benefit from having coins in the hands of collectors in that they are studied, preserved and stored by someone else. I doubt there are the resources or interest for 'the Government' to do it and if they will otherwise just sit in storage there's an argument it's better for them to be in proivate hands, no?

The key to this would surely be the age cut off at which any such scheme would apply. To take a ridiculous extreme, how could anybody prove that they are the true owners of the coins in their pockets or purses? Do we get a signed paper from the W H Smiths till operator specifying the exact coins we were given in change? The idea is ridiculous. So when it comes to pre-decimal coinage, how would anybody be able to prove that the coins in your collection weren't simply picked out of change in a bygone era and have been handed down in your family or whatever? The problem for anybody when it comes to coins is that they circulated in the public arena and by historical precedent, finders were literally keepers, since it would be impossible to establish a chain of ownership from the mint to a collection.

The issue then becomes one of when a cut off date would apply and what provisions would be made for collectors at that point. Usually the legal position is that legislation isn't retrospective, so if applied to coin collections this would mean that what you own at the point of the introduction of a law would be deemed the starting point of ownership, and going forward people might have to then prove ownership. To introduce legislation retrospectively would introduce a nightmare of court actions as people seek to object to confiscation or whatever of their property, including no doubt Human Rights law, and what is a minor issue that doesn't need fixing suddenly becomes a major one that clogs the legal system up, all when government and the legal system has better things to do. And it isn't just coins. What about, he says in hushed, whispered tones, stamps (rinses mouth with soapy water)?? Or any other collectable?

[Peckris 579]

The thing that worries me a little is the value in coins especially with recent increases in values. With money value (cash) being ever decreasing it seems more likely to me that cash will (one day) eventually cease to exist, which makes sense to me as I think the eventual goal by 'government' is knowing everyones wealth. So with coins being a material wealth that can be contained in a small area I cant help but think this sort of regulation will come our way (UK) if it proves a success with regards to more control!

Either I'm getting more paraniod as I get older or I just dont trust the 'powers that be'.......

I think you're right, but for the wrong reason. The circulating coinage has represented a dwindling % of the money supply for near on a century, due to inflation. As inflation inexorably increases, the use for cash (coins, not notes) gets less and less. Eventually it will represent only small change and may be replaced by sweets as happened to small change in Italy as far back as the 1970s.