Paul Barford on East Anglia

Questions at UCS © David Gill

The UCS Heritage seminar welcomed Paul Barford to give a paper today. It was a good opportunity for me, and for those attending, to hear Paul articulate his views on the unrestricted hunt for portable archaeological objects. There appeared to be a mix of attendees from the archaeological service, the Portable Antiquities Scheme, museums, and the metal-detecting community.

My colleague Dr Ian Baxter and I were tweeting some of the key points. Here are some of them:

• lack of clear conservation policy for the archaeological record
• critical debate on artefact hunting missing from the archaeological community
• the forum paper for the Papers of the Institute of Archaeology
• under-reporting may be as high as 80% (though Norfolk may be as low as 25%)
• the development and methodology of the Heritage Action counter
• the disturbance of deep stratigraphy due to metal-detecting
• the increasing use of metal-detectors that detect deeper and in a range of conditions
• the intellectual consequences of loss of context

There was an extended time of questions, discussion and debate.

• What could be done to improve the situation?
• There seemed to be widespread dislike of the term 'treasure'. We were reminded that the focus is often on the metal rather than the archaeological importance.
• Is legislative change important? Should reporting be compulsory?
• Comparison was made with Greece where there are stricter controls and recording of finds. (This perspective was provided by Cambridge researcher Christos Tsirogiannis.)
• Is the legal framework now outdated where once it was world leading?
• 10% of archaeological sites in Suffolk known from metal-detecting.
• The importance of the 30 year relationship that had been developed between the archaeological and metal-detecting communities in East Anglia.
• The impact of potato crops on archaeological sites.
• Should PAS-style reporting be introduced for countries like Iraq?
• English Heritage advice on metal-detecting.
• Representative collections to be held by museums; acceptance of private collections.
• Where should financial resources be directed in the present financial climate?
• Positive media coverage of PAS.
• ITV's 'Britain's Secret Treasures'should be seen as 'entertainment' rather than a factual programme.
• The Crosby Garrett helmet and the failure to close loopholes in the present system.
• The amount of money paid for treasure finds (and apparent lack of transparency).
• The scheduling of archaeological sites (and areas around 'hoard' findspots). This led to a short discussion of the area where the Staffordshire Hoard was found.

These points should give a flavour of the paper as well as the subsequent discussion. They do not necessarily cover all of Paul's points or all of the questions.

I felt that the seminar brought together a range of positions in the debate. Paul offered a voice that is so often marginalised, overlooked or silenced. I very much hope that he will turn his notes into a published version.