Context Matters: Collating the Past

Context Matters is based on the twenty essays contributed to the Journal of Art Crime over its first ten years. They are supplemented by articles and review articles that were published alongside them. The chapters were written as museums in Europe and North America were facing a series of claims on recently acquired objects in their collections in the light of the photographic dossiers that had been seized from dealers in Switzerland and Greece. They engage with some of the recent debates over cultural property that include the Ka Ka Nefer mummy mask currently in the St Louis Art Museum, and the Leutwitz Apollo acquired by the Cleveland Museum of Art. Two of the essays reflect on the recent and controversial metal-detecting finds in England, the so-called Crosby Garrett helmet and the Lenborough Hoard. The volume contributes to the wider discussion about the appropriate due diligence process that should be conducted prior to the acquisition of archaeological material. 

Gill, D. W. J. 2020. Context matters: collating the past. ARCA. ISBN-13: 978-1734302615.

Responsible metal-detecting: a revised code of practice

© David Gill

The annual heritage day at the RSA earlier this month provided an opportunity to discuss the new Code of Practice for Responsible Metal Detecting in England and Wales (2017) on an informal basis.

The endorsements of the revised code are notable by the absence of certain organisations:

• Amgueddfa Cymru - National Museum of Wales / PAS Cymru, 
• Association of Local Government Archaeological Officers, 
• British Museum / Portable Antiquities Scheme, 
• Chartered Institute for Archaeologists, 
• Council for British Archaeology, 
• Country Land & Business Association, 
• Institute for Archaeology (University College London), 
• Historic England, 
• National Farmers Union, 
• Royal Commission on the Historical & Ancient Monuments of Wales, 
• Society of Museum Archaeologists.

The endorsement by UCL's Institute of Archaeology is interesting given the forum piece on metal-detecting that appeared in the Papers of the Institute of Archaeology (and that is largely uncited by members of PAS although is noted by archaeologists working in Spain).

We are reminded that "being responsible" means:

Working on ground that has already been disturbed (such as ploughed land or that which has formerly been ploughed), and only within the depth of ploughing. If detecting takes place on pasture, be careful to ensure that no damage is done to the archaeological value of the land, including earthworks. Avoid damaging stratified archaeological deposits (that is to say, finds that seem to be in the place where they were deposited in antiquity) and minimise any ground disturbance through the use of suitable tools and by reinstating any ground and turf as neatly as possible.

This is a timely reminder as we approach the third anniversary of the removal of the "Lenborough Hoard". Members of PAS could, perhaps, address the five points highlighted by the Lenborough case.

Metal-detecting and archaeology

Displays in Lincoln © David Gill

The recent archaeological survey work at the Anglo-Saxon vicus at Rendlesham in Suffolk has reminded me of the contribution of controlled metal-detecting on archaeological sites. But the account of the discovery of this significant site is partly due to the unauthorised activity of metal-detectorists on the site.

The archaeological community needs to be reminded that there is a difference between scientifically excavated material and finds that are scooped out of the ground and literally carried away in a supermarket carrier bag. Contrast the difference between the Lenborough Hoard (and see my discussion here) and the Beau Street Hoard. I was full of praise for the excavation of the Beau Street Hoard (e.g. "It is a good reminder of the amount of information that can be gleaned from a properly excavated, conserved and studied Roman coin hoard").

As we start 2017, would it be possible for there to be a sensible discussion of how the archaeological heritage of England and Wales can be protected from unauthorised disturbance?

Lenborough Hoard: appeal

Displaying the Lenborough Hoard at the British Museum
Photo: David Gill

Just one year ago the Lenborough Hoard was removed from a Buckinghamshire by less than scientific means. An appeal is now underway to raise money to buy the coins for the Buckingham County Museum: it has raised £12,000 ("Lenborough Anglo Saxon coin hoard pledges reach £12,000", BBC News 19 December 2015).

The money raised is hoped to persuade "funding bodies" to meet the balance, perhaps in the region of just under £1.3 million.

The account of the find raises several issues about the holding of "rallies" on sites that appear on the Historic Environment Record.

For further details see my: "Damaging the Archaeological Record: the Lenborough Hoard", Journal of Art Crime 13 (2015) 51-57 [academia.edu].

Bland on the so-called Crosby Garrett helmet and the Lenborough Hoard

Roger Bland has placed his paper on 'The Portable Antiquities Scheme and Treasure Act: the Current Situation' given at the Museums Association March 2015 Dig It: Museums and Archaeology Conference online.

I notice that he discusses two topics discussed on LM. The first is the so-called Crosby Garrett helmet. Bland notes:

This was found by a metal detector user who reported it to one of our FLOs who was able to establish exactly where it was found.

I have discussed this helmet in print elsewhere (available online). Bland does not draw attention to the fact that the two FLOs [not one!] were not shown the reported find spot for some three months (i.e. on 30 August 2010).

Bland then talked about the subsequent excavation:

This at least proved that the object had come from Crosby Garrett – some people commenting on the web had doubted that – and that it had a context, as it came from a so - called `native’ settlement. The immediate context of the helmet remains difficult to pin down: it seems to have been buried below a rough stone floor, though whether that belonged to a building, a road, or possibly a cairn is unclear.

I have discussed this investigation and I found that the evidence was not compelling.

Lenborough Hoard
Source: finds.org.uk (under CC)

At the end of the talk Bland turned to the Lenborough Hoard as an example of a hoard falling under the Treasure Act:

Four days before Christmas the Finds Liaison Officer (FLO) for the Portable Antiquities Scheme in Bucks was invited to record the finds made by detectorists at a metal detecting rally at Lenborough, just south of Buckingham. Within half an hour of arriving and setting up her recording table, news came that something interesting had been found! As the light went at the end of the day a hoard of more than 5,000 silver coins, wrapped in a damaged lead parcel, had been excavated. The coins had been piled onto a thin rectangle of lead sheet with cut edges. The longer edges had then been lifted and folded over on themselves and the ends pinched together to make an elliptical parcel. Through the damage on the upper surface a tightly packed, jumble of coins could be seen. They did not appear to have been laid in any order and there was no trace of, or room for them to have been in leather pouches. This was a rescue job and Ros, as our sole FLO at event with about a hundred metal detector users, did a heroic job in the circumstances and ensured that all the coins were recovered.

This hoard has been discussed on LM before. In particular there is the issue of the historic nature of the location where the rally was held. And what about the less than orthodox removal of the coins, in contrast to the Beau Street Hoard that was removed in a scientific way that has allowed detailed study and interpretation?

Bland has only placed his notes on line and not his refined final views. But his online presentation appears to overlook some of the key issues relating to both these 'finds'.

The Lenborough Hoard and loss of knowledge

The Lenborough Hoard
Source: www.finds.org.uk

I noticed that The Times (London has covered the Lenborough Hoard (Jack Malvern, "Metal-detector row led to £1m Anglo Saxon coin hoard", 11 February 2015). Much of the story recycles the British Museum press release but it includes a section on Paul Barford, an "archaeological blogger". The Times draws attention to the information that has been lost by the scooping of the coins into a carrier bag.

The Lenborough Hoard and the future of PAS

Lenborough Hoard
Source: finds.org.uk (CC)

The Lenborough Hoard is now featured on the BBC ("Hoard of Anglo Saxon coins largest discovered under Treasure Act", 11 February 2015). It is essentially a recycled press release (see here), and even includes a mention of the alleged "excavation".

We should also note that Dr Roger Bland has suggested that the future of PAS is far from certain.

However, the head of the antiquities scheme that funds the finds, Roger Bland, said the future was looking uncertain because of budget reductions. 

"I'm not sure whether we're going to be able to renew the contracts for nine of the 32 posts that we've got in the scheme from the 1 April. 

"I'm quite concerned but I also feel that we've been in difficult places before and we've managed to keep going," he said.

Meanwhile Dr Daniel Pett of PAS has tweeted me a message.

@davidwjgill your post stating that there was an error with the PAS site is incorrect. You were searching our backup server (no images.)
— Daniel Pett (@portableant) February 11, 2015

This was no doubt in reaction to my post yesterday. My search arrived at a page so that when you clicked on the link you just saw code - and the image was one of Lego. I can only presume that the BM has set up their backup server so that the public (and search engines) can see it. Perhaps that is a loophole that should be closed.

Lenborough Hoard: update

Lenborough Hoard
Source: finds.org.uk (under CC)

There appeared to be a curious blip on the PAS website earlier today that meant the normal record was unavailable. I have checked again this evening and it is now all there [here].

The circumstances provided on the website appears as "Weekend Wanderers Xmas Dig". (For further images see here.)

We also need to remember that under The Treasure Act (1996) 'the occupier of the land' can receive part of the reward.

The amazing archaeological hoard

I see that the Lenborough Hoard features prominently in the press release for the launch of the Treasure Annual Report 2012 [press release, "Largest Anglo-Saxon coin hoard tops list of latest nationwide treasure finds". 10 February 2015].

... the largest Anglo Saxon coin hoard found since the Treasure Act began is announced. This amazing archaeological hoard of around 5,200 coins was discovered in the village of Lenborough, Buckinghamshire. This discovery highlights the ongoing importance of the Portable Antiquities Scheme and Treasure Act in ensuring that the most important finds are secured for the nation.

Neil MacGregor also comments on the hoard:

More Treasure finds are being reported than ever before and unique objects are documented and conserved for study and public display, such as the recent find of the largest Anglo-Saxon coin hoard recorded since the Treasure Act of 1996. These achievements are a testament to the network of Finds Liaison Officers, who play a key role in ensuring archaeological finds found by the public are properly reported and recorded.

Is the Lenborough Hoard the best example to use of how FLOs are deployed in the field? Could some of the issues that arose have been anticipated by the FLO? Are archaeologists just interested in recording objects and creating databases? What about the careful excavation of coin hoards that we have seen elsewhere?

The finder Paul Coleman is also quoted in the press release:

'When I saw the first few coins I was really excited because I knew I had found a hoard, however the excitement grew and grew as the size and importance of the find became apparent. Ros Tyrrell, the FLO who was in charge of the excavation, was spot on when she said "now I know a little of what Egyptologist Howard Carter must have felt, when he first looked into the tomb of Tutankhamen."'

What is meant by 'excavation' here? Did Carter scoop up the Tutankhamun finds into a handy F&M pannier? (No doubt an informed reader of LM will have studied the packing materials of the excavation.)

Coleman has indicated that he is willing to turn down the reward ("Jobless man set to miss out on £1 million hoard reward", Buckingham Today 10 February 2015).

Mr Vaizey said: “I’d especially like to thank the finders and landowners who have graciously waived their right to a reward so that local museums can acquire treasure. 

“It is an initiative that the government has been keen to support and it demonstrates that metal detectorists have a genuine interest in the past, and are not just interested in archaeology for personal gain.” 

The coins are being showcased at the British Museum this morning with curator, Gareth Williams, discussing his research into the hoard but the eventual resting place of the coins is yet to be decided.

It is pity that the apparent rushed removal of the coins will have meant that valuable contextual knowledge was lost.

Unearthing the Lenborough Hoard

I have commented on the Lenborough Hoard before. Current Archaeology has a short account of the "discovery" in its March 2015 edition ("Unearthing the Lenborough Hoard", p.9) and the entry is partially posted on the PAS website (I suggest you visit to see the error message that I am sure will disappear shortly after this post goes up).

The CA report tells is, 'Attending metal-detecting events in order to ensure finds are properly recorded and their precise locations logged is all in a day's work for a Finds Liaison Officer'. So does that mean that the precise relationship of the coins one to another was retained? After all, the BM has published the model way to excavate and remove a coin hoard.

Earlier reports had suggested that the coins were found in a 'lead bucket' but Ros Tyrrell (FLO) is now quoted: 'The coins had been piled onto a thin rectangle of lead sheet, after which the longer edges were folded over on themselves, and the ends pinched together to make an elliptical parcel'. The parcel now appears as part of the description on the PAS database.

The report informs us that the coins 'do not seem to have been arranged in any particular order'. I presume that this is an observation made from the carefully controlled removal of the coins.

The PAS database states that Gareth Williams is preparing a report for the Coroner while the CA story states that 'a full archaeological report' is in preparation for the Coroner's inquest. What will it contain?

I am sure that there are lessons to be derived from the removal of the hoard.

The Lenborough Hoard

The BBC is now reporting on the finding of a major late Anglo-Saxon (to early Norman) hoard near Aylesbury in Buckinghamshire ("Thousands of ancient coins discovered in Buckinghamshire field", 2 January 2015).

Paul Coleman from the Weekend Wanderers Detecting Club discovered more than 5,000 coins buried inside a lead bucket two feet under a field near Aylesbury.

This has earlier been reported as a find made at Lenborough ("Silver coins worth £1m found on farm", Buckingham Today 31 December 2014). Paul Barford has drawn attention to the fact that the find was made at the location of a deserted medieval village, and a Medieval Manor House (see website of metal-detecting group: "Tons of history here, DMV site, Medieval Manor house and windmill site, Roman treasure found at adjacent village and much more....").

Two feet underground does not sound like a surface find. What stratigraphical and contextual information has been lost? (For a discussion of these issues see the forum article in Papers of the Institute of Archaeology 2010.)

The hoard will be considered under The Treasure Act. The FLO from the Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS) was present for part of the removal. The local paper reported:

Archaeologist Ros Tyrrell, the Finds Liaison Officer for Bucks, who is based at the Bucks County Museum in Aylesbury, was at the rally to record any finds made on the day, when the major hoard of more than 5,251½ Anglo Saxon silver coins was uncovered. Miss Tyrrell was immediately called over to help excavate the coins.

We look forward to seeing the publication of the excavation as well as the finds in due course.