This document discusses the ethics of ownership regarding archaeology and metal detecting. It addresses five properties of ownership for artifacts: title, financial value, contextual information, historical information, and delight in discovery. For each property, it examines who has ethical responsibility and ownership. The landowner generally has title and financial value, while contextual and historical information belong to the community. Delight in discovery is shared. The document outlines responsibilities of finders, landowners, and titleholders to record information and ensure artifacts are available to interested communities. It proposes structured community involvement and a single reporting scheme to improve current practices.

1. The Ethics of Ownership Richard Thomas

2. Archaeology vs Metal Detecting Current debate marked by conflict, not co-operation Feels a bit like this..... But at its heart is a set of important questions about the Ethics of Ownership

3. Owning the right to dig Metal detecting simply the structured searching of land by or on behalf of the owner or his/her agent In a free society, a landowner has the right to investigate and dig on his/her land in whatever way s/he wishes, unless there is an overwhelming reason not to, such as the presence of a scheduled monument S/he may therefore invite anyone to do so on his or her behalf This right is absolutely fundamental to land ownership, and is unlikely to be withdrawn

4. Owning the right to dig Recent legislation towards increased community use: Right to Roam (Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000) Village Green registration (Commons Act 2006) (House of Lords, Sunningwell Village Green) “The Crown Estate generally seeks to encourage access over, and responsible use of, the foreshore and as a result our consent for non-commercial metal detecting on the foreshore will not incur a charge.”

5. The Five properties of ownership Five properties of an Artefact, each of which can be separately owned: Title Financial Value Contextual information (Archaeological context) Historical information Delight in discovery

6. Ownership of Title This is rarely in dispute, and is covered by law. Unless it is Treasure, or it has been recently lost by someone who can prove title, it belongs to the land owner The land owner has absolute right to determine its disposal There are ethical constraints on disposal of title

7. Ownership of Financial Value Again, rarely in dispute Separate from legal title to the artefact Usually agreed by reference to collector market In the absence of superior claim, Landowner has right to full financial value Custom and practice suggest 50% split between Landowner and Finder (MD)

8. Ownership of Contextual Information Distinct from Title or Financial Value, this is illumination shed by the Artefact on the wider context of the find Properly belongs to the community, not the landowner or finder, and is part of ‘The Common Good’ It is also where many of the conflicts often begin

9. Ownership of Contextual Information Those who oppose structured searching of land by the landowner argue that it can destroy contextual information There may be partial destruction of contextual information on occasions – all excavation is planned destruction But this is usually outweighed by several factors

10. Ownership of Contextual Information Most MD finds have little or no contextual information to give Usually isolated finds. Single lost coins, crotal bells, and in my case mostly junk! Digging usually only in top few inches of soil. However, if the artefact is associated with an important site, the potential disturbance caused by discovery often outweighed by the find itself. Which most likely would not otherwise have been found, but destroyed or seriously degraded.

11. Ownership of Historical Information This is distinct from Title, Financial Value, or Contextual information It is a property of the artefact itself, rather than the illumination shed by the artefact on the site or other associated finds A single medieval coin may have no contextual archaeological information to give – it may be an isolated, unassociated find But it may have considerable historical information to give that relates to the local area or community. E.g., Unknown local moneyer

12. Ownership of Historical Information Historical information properly belongs to the local community, as part of ‘The Common Good’ Whilst in practice responsibility for reporting and recording both contextual and historical information is devolved to the finder, overriding ethical responsibility for ensuring reporting and recording rests with landowner

13. Ownership of Historical Information Ethical responsibility for providing an agreed means of reporting and recording both contextual and historical information rests with the community, as part of the Common Good If the artefact remains in private ownership then this responsibility becomes even greater Further work needs to be done to achieve a single, agreed reporting and recording scheme x

14. Ownership of delight in discovery Distinct from title, financial value, contextual or historical information Less tangible, but no less real Owned by all interested parties Finder Landowner Local and wider community

15. Ethical responsibilities attached to each property of ownership

16. Finder’s Responsibilities Always to inform landowner, and agree (or confirm) title To record and report finds To leave behind nothing but footprints If given or buying title, to provide interested community members with appropriate access

17. Landowner’s Responsibilities To ensure contextual and historical information recorded To agree financial value To decide on disposal of artefact according to the Common Good Which may involve setting conditions or determining limitations on future disposals (e.g., no Ebay transactions!)

18. Landowner’s Responsibilities Depending on the nature of the artefact, allowing it to be kept by finder, by local family, by local school or community group If of limited value, then local community ownership may better serve the common good than locking it away in a storage box in a museum A child, taking the artefact to show his friends, may do more for archaeology than museum

19. Titleholder’s Responsibilities To ensure that the artefact is kept together with its provenance If in a private collection, to ensure that on the death of the owner the artefact and its provenance are secure and location is known (This slide added following discussion)

20. Possible improvements Structured Community Involvement? Community displays of portable antiquities A single reporting / recording scheme? Privately or jointly run, grant aided Greater recognition of the contribution made by structured searching of land, and the consequent discoveries of important sites Recording of location of artefact. ‘Where is it now?’ (This point added after discussion)

21. Thank you for listening Questions?