English Teenager Finds Bronze Age Ax Using a Metal Detector | Hacker News Reader

English Teenager Finds Bronze Age Ax Using a Metal Detector

nytimes.com

59 pointspepys34 comments

It's not a 'government guidelines' it's law! For those interested https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasure_Act_1996

Yes! And the definition of Treasure given in the article is not only incomplete, but isn't the clause that would apply to these objects. (Bronze isn't gold or silver, but these are probably covered as multiple associated prehistoric base metal objects).

In fairness, the actual (slightly odd perhaps) phrasing is:

> When treasure is found, the finder does not own it, and it is illegal to try to sell it, according to government guidelines.

There could well be guidelines that say that, about the law ('it is illegal', as it says). HMRC has plenty of guidelines on what tax you owe and how to pay it etc. for example, but it also comes down to law at the end of it.

Huh, I wonder if they wrote that in after they looted dry their former colonies..

Why, what difference would it make? The law is that the crown (potentially) owns it, so assuming you're meaning that it's hypocritical... no not really? (Unless 'they' is 'the British people' who democratically/collectively looted and then later (or whenever it was) wrote laws?)

And it's law for a reason. While interested hobbyists are often appreciated by archaeologists, there are quite a few people who are small-scale Schliemanns (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Schliemann#Criticism). And with metal detectors being rather cheap, the damages these people cause do add up.

Quite funny they have this act considering they stole a lot of very rare and precious artefacts from India. Maybe they should return those too.

So what?! Finders keepers! Shut up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x73PkUvArJY

The NYT article is behind a paywall, but does the landowner gets something too?

Payments are ex gratia at the discretion of the Secretary of State, so in principle it's entirely up to them. There is a legally-guiding Code of Practice[0], though, which gives a starting point of 50% to the finder and 50% to the landowner. That proportion can change if there's an agreement about how to divide any spoils between the landowner and the finder in advance of the find, if there's misconduct on behalf of any party (e.g. trespass, failure to report in the legal time limits), etc. The occupier (e.g. tenant) is eligible too, sometimes.

[0]: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/treasure-act-1996...

For a light-hearted insight into the English metal-detecting scene,. I'd recommend the TV series "Detectorists" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detectorists

It is totally sublime.

I agree. It was lovely to watch, a good-hearted, entertaining, relaxed show with very likable characters and gorgeous photography.

And I will forevermore know to call people operating metal detectors "detectorists."

I'll pile on because I haven't seen such an interesting and lovely series in a long, long time. Wish the series would never end!

I was a little taken aback when they just, kept digging. It was clearly a significant find. To continue disturbing it without taking proper records was a little careless? Maybe when she becomes an archaeologist she will learn a better way.

https://archive.md/gMdLn

Not to be confused with a Swiss discovery of a bronze dagger, posted a few days ago:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29405696

(I'd thought this might be a dupe, it's not.)

have been thinking of taking up that hobby from time to time. somebody here with some insights into it? how would get started?

Do you have a metal detector?

If you are in the US, detectoring will be much more boring than in the UK.

Best way to get started would be to watch The Detectorists on Amazon.

unless you're into prospecting or meteorite hunting - in which case there's a lot of opportunities in the Southwest US on BLM and other federal land. https://www.detectorprospector.com/ is a decent resource

The Mojave nugget was found in California with a radio shack metal detector https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mojave_Nugget

I've been doing it for about 8 years. The best part for me is the research. Going through old maps and topographies and aerial photographs is good fun for me.

The hardest part is getting permissions from land owners, many of whom have no idea what you're trying to do and are therefore rightly suspicious. But I'm fairly outgoing and friendly in nature so that hasn't been too difficult.

As others have mentioned, if you're in the US, you're unlikely to find very old things like European and Asian hobbyists are able to, but finding 150 year old coins and war relics is satisfying enough for me.

TIL there is such a word as 'ax'.

Wait, the only picture is the one at the top of the article? That's absolutely a terrible picture of it.

Milly should be able to keep or sell what she found, if it was her land. If a museum or government wants these things, then they can go find them themselves on their own land. This socialization of individual efforts is maddening.

That's not really how archeology works... the idea is to preserve a shared history and ensure discoveries are properly recorded. Also worth pointing out if something is deemed treasure, an independent valuation is made. If the museums concerned choose to make an acquisition they pay the landowner and finder the value of the find. If they don't, it's returned to the finder or landowner.

I think landowner should get some compensation for a find, but I think it would be maddening if the landowner was entitled to anything found on their land. It is not like the Ax belonged to the landowner or was created by the landowner.

Why not? If a company buys land because they think oil is below it, are they not entitled to the oil? It definitely wasn't created by or previously belonged to the oil company.

That turns out to be a rather interesting rabbithole.

Land rights, mineral rights, and rule of capture are suggested terms for exploration.

Much of the law has firmer foundations in tradition than any consideration of science, empiricism, justice, or merits.

In the western US it is common for mineral, oil, and water rights to be separated from occupation rights to land.

That's not how land ownership works in many places. You don't literally own the land and anything placed upon it, you own the right to do specific things with the land.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com