Skip to main content

Crosby Garrett helmet: farmer comments

The Carlisle press has revealed the identity of the farmer associated with the so-called Crosby Garrett helmet (Thom Kennedy, "Fight on to keep Crosby Garrett Roman helmet in Britain", News and Star, October 9, 2010).
The farmer on whose land the helmet said he would have liked it to stay in Cumbria, but Eric Robinson remained tight lipped over whether he will receive any of the money raised from Thursday’s auction.

“It’s quite amazing [that it was worth so much],” he said. “I would have liked it to be kept in Cumbria but I can’t do anything about it.”

Mr Robinson said the man who found it had been coming to his farm for seven years and ‘hit the jackpot’ with this find.

He added: “I saw it when he found it. It looked very special, like it was pretty important.”
This raises several questions:
a. When did Eric Robinson see the fragmentary helmet? Does he remember the exact date?
b. Was Eric Robinson shown the fragments in situ? Or in bags? Or in trays? Were the pieces still covered in mud?
c. Is there a written agreement with the anonymous finder from County Durham? Why does Eric Robinson think that there is a possibility that he will not benefit from an object reported to have been found on his land?

Bookmark and Share so Your Real Friends Know that You Know


Mo said…
This helmet was found 10" below the surface.

I am no expert but I would have thought that when the field was ploughed it would have brought his artefact to the surface.

Given that the finder had been detecting on the farm for seven years it seems to have taken a long time for this item to be discovered.
Macrinus said…
So, it can be alleged that we have a finder making an agreement with a land-owner, who doesn't appear to know that he is the rightful owner of a non Treasure Trove object found on his land. It is he who should be calling the shots.

But then, we can further allege that the implication of his answers is that he is not in a position to call these shots - that he is the junior partner in this arrangement. This would imply that he is not the rightful owner and, therefore, not the owner of the land on which it was found. He is, however, the owner of the field in which it was said to have been found - which implies that it was found elsewhere.

If this allegation is correct, then a false provenance has been created,a PAS number obtained, further increase of the pedigree of the find by receiving BM identification (no one denies it was a real Roman helmet). The sum of all this, one can allege, has had the result of increasing its market value.

One further allegation can be made, therefore, that a fraud has been committed, on persons at the time unknown, through the sale of this falsely provenanced item at auction.

Perhaps someone locally should ask the local MP to contact the authorities to inquire whether a fraud has been committed.
David Gill said…
According to PAS the find was made in "Grassland, Heathland". See record.

Popular posts from this blog

Marble bull's head from the temple of Eshmun

Excavations at the temple of Eshmun in Lebanon recovered a marble bull's head. It is now suggested that it was this head, apparently first published in 1967, that was placed on loan to New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art (Tom Mashberg, "Met Museum Turns Over Another Relic With Disputed Past to Prosecutors", New York Times August 1, 2017 ). The head is reported to have been handed over to the Manhattan district attorney after a request was received from the Lebanese authorities.

It is suggested that the head may have been looted from an archaeological storage area at Byblos in the 1980s during the Lebanese civil war. Mashberg has rehearsed the recent collecting history:
The owners of the bull’s head, Lynda and William Beierwaltes of Colorado, say they have clear title to the item and have sued Manhattan prosecutors for its return.  The Beierwaltes bought the head from a dealer in London in 1996 for more than $1 million and then sold it to another collector, Michael …

The Toledo skyphos and a Swiss private collection

The Attic red-figured skyphos attributed to the Kleophon painter in the Toledo Museum of Art (inv. 1982.88) is now coming under further scrutiny following the research of Dr Christos Tsirogiannis. The skyphos shows Hephaistos returning to Olympos.

Tsirogiannis has identified what appears to be this skyphos in five photographs in the Medici Dossier. The museum acknowledged that the skyphos had resided in a 'private Swiss collection'. Tsirogiannis suggests that this is probably a reference to Medici.

Enquiries to the museum by Tsirogiannis elicited the information that the skyphos had been acquired from Nicholas Koutoulakis (although that information does not appear on the museum's online catalogue).

The curatorial team at the Toledo Museum of Art will, no doubt, be contacting the Italian authorities to discuss the future residence of the skyphos.

For further discussion of the Toledo Museum of Art on LM see here.

Tsirogiannis, C. 2017. "Nekyia: Museum ethics an…

Metropolitan Museum of Art hands over Paestan krater

In May 2014 I commented on a Paestan krater acquired by New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art after it had been identified by Dr Christos Tsirogiannis in photographic images seized from Giacomo Medici. Tsirogiannis published his full concerns in the Journal of Art Crime in 2014, but it has taken a further three years for the museum to respond.

The krater showing Dionysos in a hand-drawn cart was purchased in 1989 from the Bothmer Purchase Fund (details from the Museum's website, inv. 1989.11.4). The krater surfaced through Sotheby's New York in June 1989.

It is unclear who consigned the krater to Sotheby's New York.

It has now been revealed that the krater has been handed over to the US authorities after a warrant had been issued (Tom Mashberg, "Ancient Vase Seized From Met Museum on Suspicion It Was Looted", New York Times July 31, 2018).

It appears that the museum did make an attempt to resolve the case in December 2016. Mashberg notes:
The Met, for its par…