Hoard of Iron Age gold coins found in East Anglia

[Pang]

As I said, good metal detectorists are excellent. The few selfish ones are a destructive force that blights the historical record, and the past belongs to us all, not just a few thieving blighters.
It is true the past belongs to all of us, but so does the present. The individual has been stolen from enough by the real theives out there. so long as the banks can lose my money and landowners own vast swathes of the country for their own pleasure then any gold I find Im taking.

but for you to sell the gold, you'd proberlly have to melt it or find a dogdy gold/antiquities dealer who wou;d give you a crap price anyways

 

[firecrest]

Id feel sad at taking an item I knew had cultural value, but unfortunately the weight of everyday living would swing in favor of me keeping it for myself. If I find a purse with money and credit cards in, I always return it, but the keepers of the gold are long since dead, and nobody is any the wiser for what is in the ground now and will never be dug up, or what was dug up/buldozed or lost any other way. I saw a progame where a man dug something up on his own land and he had it valued at about £160,000. The treasury valued it about £20,000. he refused and they reassessed it and added more value to it, but with such a shocking mark down I don't know if Id even dare let authorities know I had something of value.

 

[firecrest]

but for you to sell the gold, you'd proberlly have to melt it or find a dogdy gold/antiquities dealer who wou;d give you a crap price anyways

True I suppose, life is very unfair!

 

[Pang]

Neither am I (a qualified historian), and I didnt think you had to be to hold an opinion . And besides I get the feeling that in some instances there are conflicting versions of events, or when there is revisionism for instance, to alter an accepted version so it can be perceived differently, to suit various religious or political motives and agenda's. Historians are human, and they each have their various personal convictions and preferences and it must be hard if not actually impossible to be truly impartial. As you said a while back Greg-we are all biased.....

yeah we see aot of biase, one only have to look at the japanese stance on it's ww2 war crimes, however i suppose it just shows the importance history has in modern day life. That people or insitutions place so much effort in changing/ "correcting" historical events, just so they can say i'm better then you. which lets be honest is wat alot of it's about, apart from the genuine history fans i suppose

 

[firecrest]

Toddy, I agree with you that learning how people lived in the past is much more valuable than actual treasures, thats why a treasure being sold wouldnt weigh on my conscience as much. When I think of something like the library of alexadria being burned or religions destroying the history of a native peoples it really makes me sad.

 

[mr dazzler]

Finding gold is not the value.
I excavated a broken saddle quern. Used daily to grind grain for their bread. Worn to shape by the work of someone working at it, day in day out. The context put that quern at around 2,500 bce. That means that someone made and used it four and a half thousand years ago.
It tells us other things too though; it means they were farming grain suitable for grinding for flour. It tells us that they were tilling the land, and they were trading, or otherwise in contact with a farming network that stretched from the Fertile Crescent all the way to rural Lanarkshire, for the grains are not native to the British Isles.
To have grain, they had health and resources enough to support a population capable of opening up the land for farming, a knowledge of the seasons the skills to make the tools that allowed them to plough, plant, cut and harvest their crops.

We found the evidences of their houses and their hearths, the pollen record showed the effects that their farming and lifestyles had on the surrounding woodlands. The few bones found in their site told us a little more about their husbandry, and their hunting. The flint scatters and the tiny flint cores told us about another trading network, flint is not native here either............so what did they have that was valuable enough to trade over distance to exchange ?

And the story goes on, and on.
Supposing this had been a hoard site, ripped apart for the few scraps of metal, for truthfully that's all gold is, and it's relatively common in the Earth's crust. We would have had none of the context that allows the details to be recorded, properly analysed. None of the undamaged stratigraphy.

As I said, good metal detectorists are excellent. The few selfish ones are a destructive force that blights the historical record, and the past belongs to us all, not just a few thieving blighters.

cheers,
Toddy

That all sounds very nice, and it evidently means a lot to you, it float's your boat so to speak. But it presupposes that we all revere and respect the so called historical record as much as you yourself evidently do because your industry depends on it-but the hard and true reality is that most of us dont have this reverence. As I keep saying, most people couldnt care less-the past might theoretically "belong to us all" as you claim, but it doesnt really mean anything to the majority outside the archeology trade. And if gold is just a few "scraps of metal", why has it had such a powerful motivating influence on peoples from so many different era's and cultures? Why have they fought wars, built empires etc in order to obtain and protect it? Why inded did they bother to make the stater coins to begin with? Gold has a timeless and universal human appeal, I dont know why. People are no different now than they were centuries or milleniums ago. I dont get this weirdly abstract notion that a rogue detectorist is somehow a robber committing theft-theft from all of us....I dont have any sense of ownership of the past whatsoever. Dont get me wrong, I dont condone breaking laws etc, Its just that I can see the point of view of those "blighters" who do ignore finds on a building site and leave them be, or decide to make a few extra quid selling some stuff they found. Why not? its no different than what our ancestors would of done given the opportunity. They werent averse to a spot of grave robbing. LOL a few years ago now they had to bring in a pair of rotweiler dogs at Nunhead cemetry to stop the exact same thing from happening, folk robbing the fancy victorian graves for the watches and jewellry etc theres nothing new under the sun.

 

[launditch1]

Im interested in what and how our celtic ancestors would have used these coins...Gold is is pretty but useless really,only good for ornament and coinage.I believe more importance and value would have been placed on iron for their tools,weapons and ploughshares.Prehaps this particular hoard was as an offering to a land deity,the genius loci if you like.Who knows.Not that it matters or its relavent!I found a gold stater about 10 years ago and i will never forget the feeling.I duly reported it under the treasure act and it was disclaimed and returned to me.Resposible detecting is something to be applauded because these individuals are adding to our knowledge all the time,especially numismatics and land usage in the past.There appears to be a 'finders keepers' mentality on here.Very sad.

 

[British Red]

A question for those with knowledgeof this subject. I know the Treasure Act in England & Wales covers only items of >10% precious metals (or more than one coin). Presumably all other items are the landowners possesions to do with as they will?

Are there any other acts that would force a landowner or developer to notify an archeological finds?

Red

 

[launditch1]

Only gold and silver coins and artefacts over 300 years old have to be reported.Usually the detectorists have an agreement with the landowner(usually 50/50 split).I know some that detect for the enjoyment of the fresh air and the history,the landowner has all the finds.Im not aware of any other acts...

 

[British Red]

Interesting - do you happen to know which bit of legislation covers "artefacts over 300 years old"?

 

[Toddy]

Good point

England and Wales have a different legal system to Scotland and I usually work up here.
I do know that if the site that folks want to develop is scheduled in some way, then at minimum an archaeological survey ought to be carried out. That survey can range from a search of documentary records, a walk over survey, to a full check the plans and excavate where any archaeology will be destroyed by the building works.

As for finds, it's very hard. A ploughed site may well contain a scatter, but is that scatter from an old midden heap........they literally ploughed all of their rubbish back into the land....... or is it from plough action on a buried site

I know also that without written permission from Historic Scoland I cannot so much as put a reference post into a scheduled site, yet I have geophysed over scheduled monuments that metal detectorists have been digging through just the night before, just in case they would find something before we could The idiots ripped apart a neolithic burial cairn..........what the hell they hoped to find there I do not know...........neolithic means stone age for a reason but the shattered pottery left in their aftermath was a crime.

The sad thing is many of the metal detectorists who do this are very experienced; they have an excellent knowledge of their finds (and their financial value )

I think that the only way around the problem of the disparity in value of treasure trove is for representatives of the metal detectoring community to be a part of the valuing committee. But then, I don't write policy, and these days I mostly teach the value of our heritage using examples such as those I already mentioned.

cheers,
Toddy

 

[launditch1]

Any artifacts that are made of gold or silver,i believe objects made of other metals(bronze,iron,ect..)can be classed as 'treasure' if they are found in association.

 

[firecrest]

Gold has always been seen as the most precious metal because it doesn't rust, discolour or age. I doubt tools would be worth more , they never have been - gold has always been the ultimate status symbol.

 

[w00dsmoke]

Gold has always been seen as the most precious metal because it doesn't rust, discolour or age. I doubt tools would be worth more , they never have been - gold has always been the ultimate status symbol.

Without reading/watching about history or about the findings of archaeology about our cultural history how would you know this?

:notworthy

 

[firecrest]

I might be wrong but an estimated guess!
The highest people in society do not work and they have the gold. Perhaps a new tool, like a new book would be almost priceless, but tools themselves were often turned into ceremonial peices made of gold and other material that made them impractical.
Id put my money on gold still being the most valuable commodity.

 

[gregorach]

Oh for pity's sake... This was supposed to be a completely uncontroversial thread, just a little "heads-up" about a remarkable find for anyone who might be interested. However, it seems that you can't say anything around here these days without somebody using it as an excuse to start an argument about some personal bugaboo.

Well, I'm sick of it, and I'm not playing any more.

 

[launditch1]

I might be wrong but an estimated guess!
The highest people in society do not work and they have the gold. Perhaps a new tool, like a new book would be almost priceless, but tools themselves were often turned into ceremonial peices made of gold and other material that made them impractical.
Id put my money on gold still being the most valuable commodity.

Yeah,that may be so now but what about in the iron age for instance?While these people are sitting fat on their pile of gold using it to pay the people working the land and cutting wood,building ect,ect.Tell me,what tool is made of gold?My point was that i think more importance would have been placed on iron as its more useful.I would rather have a pile of iron than gold.And if i had gold now??Id sell it to buy more tools!!Huuurrrumph!

 

[Toddy]

.And if i had gold now??Id sell it to buy more tools!!Huuurrrumph!

Now there's an opinion that'll go down well among us

cheers,
Toddy

 

[JohnC]

When I worked on digs over teabreaks we used to play a game of "what would you be buried with?"... as some (most) of the items we dug up caused questions...
I do like "history", we'd be poorer without it.

 

[firecrest]

If a tool is valuable, it just seems to me it is represented in ornimental form in gold rather than the working tool itself being carried by a rich person.

This gold and flint knife from egypt was never intended to be used as a tool. Its for ceremony and religious purpose only.
Im sure there must be examples of tools being more priceless than expensive gold items, I can think only really of swords by master craftsmen and suits of armour (later time period but they cost a fortune!) Perhaps iron weapons when they were first forged?