Public Consultation on Proposed Changes to UK's Treasure Act

The UK Government is considering changes to the Treasure Act.   Collector based organizations have supported the Treasure Act because it encourages the reporting of finds.  It also ensures the State pays fair market value for finds it keeps and remits back all others to the finder, who may sell them on the open market.  The coins that are recorded are then uploaded on a publicly accessible website.   This has led to the availability of coins on the numismatic market that can be identified as coming from specific, UK find-spots and hoards. 

 Most of the proposed changes appear non-controversial, but certain of the proposals that require permits to metal detect, that create a new offense for purchases of undeclared artifacts, and declare archaeological finds Crown Property, are potentially very problematic. 

 A permit requirement could be used to preclude detecting from “archaeologically sensitive areas,” which could mean everything.

 The proposed new criminal sanction could catch unwary buyers of objects that did not realize they were buying "treasure."  Moreover, collectors should oppose the proposal's efforts to shift the burden of proof in a criminal matter.

 Declaring all finds crown property may be a way to avoid paying fair market value for finds the State retains.

If you are a metal detectorist, an ancient coin collector, or just think the UK's current PAS and Treasure Act do a great job of bringing the public, museums and archaeologists together in a joint effort to record and preserve the past, please consider commenting.

 

Comments are due on or before April 30, 2019.

 

For more about the issue, see https://culturalpropertynews.org/uk-changes-treasure-act/

 

For a direct link to the consultation, see https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/revising-the-definition-of-treasure-in-the-treasure-act-1996-and-revising-the-related-codes-of-practice

PAS Under Threat?

This news should be of concern to everyone.   Due to budget pressures in the UK, the Portable Antiquities Scheme will be folded into another department at the British Museum and likely suffer budget cuts despite its popularity with both the public and many British archaeologists.   As a result, Roger Bland, who has run the PAS since its inception, will be leaving his post.   

The PAS has been instrumental in bringing archaeologists, metal detectorists and collectors together in a shared effort to help record the past.  So, perhaps it's not surprising that the BM states that the PAS is being placed in the Department of Learning, Volunteers and Audiences as part of an effort to help the BM with public outreach to help make it the "museum of the country" by working with partners outside of London. If so, CPO hopes that the BM will ensure this important asset remains adequately funded despite obvious budget pressures.  

For more, see here.  

Preservation or Repatriation?

As expected, the UN Security Council has approved a Russian resolution that appears calculated to buttress Putin's friend, Assad, as much as anything else.

The aim is purportedly to help cut into ISIS' funding by clamping down on sales of Syrian antiquities, but the result will be the repatriation of  undocumented objects that have been out of the country for years back to the exact same murderous regime that bombed the old city of Aleppo into oblivion, that has struck early Islamic sites and whose military is involved in looting in places like Apamea and Palmyra.

So what's next?   In the UK, the sensible Brits plan to focus on using existing law to address the problem.  And in the US?  Will the archaeological lobby again use the tragedy to resurrect self-serving legislation that will enrich itself?  Or, will they follow the example of their Syrian, Dutch and U. Penn colleagues and seek to address the problem at the source?

Monopoly vs. Better, Faster, Cheaper

A turf battle in France between public and private sector archaeologists has led to the Louvre being occupied by angry public sector archaeologists.  Meanwhile, in the nearby United Kingdom as interested amateurs publish thousands of finds, materials excavated by professionals languish in warehouses.

Of course, the situation is far worse in the favorite countries of the archaeological lobby-- Cyprus, Greece, Italy and Egypt,   There, amateur archaeologists are treated the same as looters for profit  while underfunded and corrupt archaeological establishments are poor stewards of even the most  important artifacts.

Perhaps, the answer is more competition.  Unleash the passion of private individuals and groups in community archaeology efforts.  And, of course, let them share redundant artifacts with the state and landowers.  As long as items are properly recorded, preserved and published, why not?

Archaeological Snobs Criticize Significant Reported Find

While the rest of the world is celebrating the discovery of a large hoard of Anglo-Saxon coins that was excavated with the help of a trained Portable Antiquities Scheme finds liaison officer, the archaeological snobosphere is going full out criticizing everything about the find.  Yet, the finders were detecting on private land with the permission of the landowner.  It's highly unlikely that any British archaeologists would have ever surveyed the site on their own and if the find were made in a country like Greece it's also highly unlikely any such find would ever have been properly reported much less recorded.

Taking Advantage of a Bad Situation?

The hard-line archaeological advocacy group Saving Antiquities for Everyone is applauding the UK's new regulations aimed at banning the import of artifacts illicitly removed from Syria during its civil war.

While CPO understands the need for vigilance, CPO questions whether SAFE and related groups intend to take advantage of the bad situation in Syria to further their anti-collecting agenda.  In particular, when they call for the US to act, will they once again lobby for any import restrictions to be imposed based on place of production in ancient times rather than find spot in modern times as required under the US governing statute, the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act?  Of course, any such restrictions will once again put many minor artifacts without solid provenances at risk for forfeiture though there is no evidence they are the products of recent looting.

And what of the CPIA's process for imposing import restrictions?  Any emergency request must come from the Assad government, not SAFE or the Archaeological Institute of America.  But if there is a valid request that is granted, should any artifacts that are forfeited go back to that murderous regime or should they instead be held in trust by US Institutions for the benefit of the Syrian people until such time the country is again at peace?  Presumably, if recent history is any guide, the repatriationist instincts of SAFE and related groups will demand the return of such artifacts to Assad now, no matter the facts on the ground or the equities of the situation.

But, if so, won't that only confirm that their ideology is more important than fairness or common sense?

Chutzpah

The Egyptian Military Dictatorship, fresh from demanding the US Government stop the legal trade in undocumented Egyptian artifacts, has now demanded that the Borough of Northampton stop the sale of an Egyptian artifact long in its possession.  Will British local government stand up to these imperialists against such meddling?  Surely so.  Will our US State Department also show some spine and stand up for US small businesses, collectors and Museums?  Sadly, probably not given indications that the MOU with Egypt  has already been pre-judged after some behind the scenes lobbying by politically connected archaeological organizations with a vested interest in the corrupt status quo in that troubled country.

BM to Determine Whether PAS Has Led to the Discovery of New Archaeological Sites

While the archaeological blogosphere has raised valid questions about the methodology of a new study that equates the passage of restrictive laws with declines in the discovery of archaeological sites, that study still asks an important question:  Do such laws work or do they just award a monopoly to a chosen few state-sponsored archaeologists and so ultimately discourage reported finds?

Or, stated another, more affirmative way, would a less restrictive approach that actually encourages the public to report their finds and work with professional archaeologists be a better way forward?

CPO suspects so and hopes that a British Museum own study  will help elucidate that issue.  According to the BM's website, that study asks the following:

Comparing the metal detected data with other forms of archaeological information, this research seeks to determine whether the information gathered by the Portable Antiquities Scheme can be used to tell us about previously unknown Roman sites, and whether it can add to our knowledge of those Roman sites that are already known.

PAS Maps Finds For All to See

The Portable Antiquities Scheme has unveiled this nifty tool to help visualize the distribution of coin finds from different periods within Britain and Wales.  When will the Italians, Greeks, Cypriots and Bulgarians come up with something similar?  Likely never.  Why not?  Simply because they have nothing akin to the Treasure Act and PAS that encourage the public to report finds so they can be recorded and used to tell us something about the distribution and use of historical coinage. But why don't they have such a system?  Well, perhaps because its not primarily about conservation for their cultural bureaucracies, but rather mostly about control.

They Are Out to Get You

Or, so it would seem from this report about a confab of cultural bureaucrats, academics and cops that took place back in September in the Hague.  There is nothing wrong with States seeking to protect their own archaeological sites and items of cultural significance.  But that should not be confused with draconian measures aimed at controlling everything old or targeting foreigners for dealing in the exact same cultural goods that are openly available at home.  Unfortunately, that's just what the "activists" commended in the report advocate.  Why not instead adopt a balanced but fair approach like that found in the United Kingdom?  CPO would rather have the UK seen as a model rather than the favorites of these activists, countries like Cyprus, Greece and Italy.

What's Wrong with Legal Exports of Cultural Goods?

Nothing, but you wouldn't know that reading archaeo-blogger Paul Barford's latest post about legal exports from the United Kingdom.  Mr. Barford also intimates that export permits for coins are required, but under UK Export Guidance that is not so for most numismatic items in trade, i.e., published types not "straight from the ground."  (Detector finds from the UK require export papers).

The UK is to be commended for a workable system of export controls and a PAS and Treasure Act that encourage artifacts found by the public to be properly recorded and retained where they of cultural significance.   If only countries like Cyprus, Greece and Italy were as reasonable, they would likely not be facing many of the same problems they have at present.

PAS and Treasure Act Records over 920,000 Archaeological Finds

Last week's news of the new Bulgarian and renewed China MOUs overshadowed good news coming out of the UK-  the Portable Antiquities Scheme and Treasure Act have now recorded over 920,000 archaeological finds.

It's thus too bad that our own State Department appears to be only interested in helping to prop up corrupt systems in places like Bulgaria and China that only benefit connected insiders.  Why not instead promote the system in place in our friend and ally, Great Britain, one that actually engages the public in helping to record and preserve the past?

The proof is in these numbers.  We know how many archaeological finds the public has reported in Britain and Wales.  How many do you think have been recorded in places like Cyprus, Greece and Italy?

It would be interesting to learn more about such figures from some of the "models" for the anti-collector archaeological establishment, but, of course, these are not readily available, if they are kept at all.

Archaeologists Need Not Report Finds to the Authorities?

Archaeoblogger Paul Barford apparently does not think that English and Welsh archaeologists have an obligation to report finds under the Treasure Act.  But the guidance to archaeologists seems clear on that point.  Presumably,  they should also voluntarily report finds that don't meet the definition of treasure-- only if they do so will the PAS database created with the help of the public be complete as possible.  Perhaps, there needs to be a study whether English and Welsh archaeologists report under the Treasure Act and the PAS and if not, why not?

Private Public Partnership Between Odyssey Marine and United Kingdom Strikes Gold with Silver Haul

Odyssey Marine's partnership with the United Kingdom has struck it big with a huge haul of silver from a World War II shipwreck.  Perhaps, bankrupt governments of places like Spain, Cyprus and Greece should take note.

PAS Harnesses the Power of the Public

The Art Newspaper has written favorably about the PAS and its efforts to record evidence of the past in Britain and Wales.  Of course, the PAS records coins and other artifacts, but this effort has fostered academic research as well.  As the article explains:

The information provided by members of the public over the last 15 years is available for all to see on the PAS database. This now contains around 810,000 items and spans objects dating from the Stone Age to Anglo-Saxon, Roman, medieval, and post-medieval times. Every entry includes archaeological information on the object in question, details of where it was discovered and often incorporates notes of scholarly interest. The database provides a historical snapshot of human settlement in England and Wales and is an awesome example of what can be achieved by harnessing the power of the public.

“It’s now a major academic resource,” says Bland. “There are 66 people using it for their PhDs and 140 other post-graduate students or undergraduates using it for their dissertations as well as around 12 major funded research projects [working on it], one of them with £150,000 from the Leverhulme Trust to allow us to analyse the factors underlying the data.”

Given these successes, it's hard to understand the hostility still shown it in parts of the archaeological blogosphere and the unwillingness to consider whether it can be adapted in some fashion in countries like Bulgaria, Cyprus, Greece, and Italy. 

The amounts spent on PAS would seem to give far more "bang for the buck" (or perhaps pound in this case) than many archaeological programs.  Perhaps the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and USAID should consider funding a pilot program in a source country like Bulgaria. The costs could be minimal compared to the amounts spent on archaeology in places like Iraq and Egypt.

PAS on Tour

Roger Bland of the PAS will be speaking about the PAS and Treasure Act before a number of AIA chapters around the country. See http://finds.org.uk/news/stories/article/id/233

Given the audience, the lectures will touch not only successes of the system but gaps in the system as far as archaeologists are concerned. See http://www.archaeological.org/lectures/abstracts/5775

No system is perfect, but hopefully the AIA grandees will also pause to consider how the system in Britain and Wales compares with the systems (such as they are) in places like Bulgaria, Cyprus, Greece, and Italy, when it comes to encouraging members of the public to report their finds.

Archaeology Acknowledges Treasure Act (Sort of)

Archaeology Magazine has publicized a newly discovered Viking coin type of a previously unknown Viking king reported under the UK's Treasure Act. See
http://www.archaeology.org/1203/artifact/silver_viking_coin_king_airdeconut.html

Though the circumstances of the coin's discovery are only briefly mentioned and the fact that it was reported under the Treasure Act is not mentioned at all, it is interesting that the AIA's Magazine is publicising the discovery of an artifact not found in professional archaeological excavations, and under a system of cultural preservation that has be criticised by elements within the archaeological community.

Another Triumph for the Treasure Act

A British Metal Detectorist has discovered and reported an immensely important hoard of Viking era coins and silver artifacts. See http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/culturenews/8955955/Viking-hoard-provides-new-clues-to-previously-unknown-ruler.html and http://finds.org.uk/news

The hoard contains a coin of a previously unknown ruler as well as coins from from far off Germany and the Middle East. More proof that even in the "Dark Ages" coins travelled long distances from their place of manufacture.

Although archaeological cranks may still find reason to criticize the Treasure Act and Portable Antiquities Scheme and the cooperation if fosters among members of the public, archaeologists, and museum professionals, how many such hoards are voluntarily reported in their preferred models of cultural heritage management such as Greece, Egypt, Turkey, Italy and Cyprus?

Anglo-Saxons at NATGEO

The National Geographic Society is hosting a fantastic exhibit about the Staffordshire Hoard. See http://events.nationalgeographic.com/events/exhibits/2011/10/29/anglo-saxon-hoard/ and http://www.staffordshirehoard.org.uk/

Archaeological fanatics will no doubt dislike the exhibit's heroic photograph of the metal detectorist who found the hoard, but without him, the Treasure Act and the Portable Antiquities Scheme, it is highly unlikely the hoard would ever have come to light.

This is not a conventional hoard of buried treasure. Rather, it appears to be a collection of battlefield spoils. The hoard was found spread about a farmers field near the site of an old Roman road. There were absolutely no other features to attract the interest of archaeologists, and it is highly doubtful the site would ever have been explored if the find was not reported.

The exhibit itself is by far the best ever I have seen at the National Geographic Society. Great care was taken not only to conserve the objects, but to place them in historical context with the use of reconstructions, videos and computer graphics. Kudos to National Geographic and the many groups that made this exhibit possible.

Germany Told to Save Europe

Europeans (and Americans) are looking to Germany to "save Europe" by doing more to prop up the bankrupt Greek economy and the ever more shaky Italian one. See
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d29da7fc-19ee-11e1-b9d7-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1f6othzXp

However, throwing more money at the Greeks and the Italians will only delay the inevitable. What is really needed is to break down the internal barriers in each country that have led to special interests strangling any chance for much needed economic reforms.

But this is a blog about cultural property issues. On that score, isn't it funny that self-righteous archaeologists hold up Italy and Greece as models for all to emulate? Meanwhile, rational systems like those in Germany and the United Kingdom that recognize the importance of collectors and the trade in cultural goods to the appreciation of ancient culture and its ultimate preservation, get little but scorn heaped on them, largely because they don't allow archaeologists to monopolize policy toward cultural property issues.

Archaeologists assume that government control over all cultural artifacts is the answer-- but how can this be, particularly in the current environment where these governments and their economic and cultural systems that favor the connected few are facing default?