Anglo-Saxon coin to fetch £200,000

User avatar
Saffron
Posts: 603
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2020 7:31 pm
Has thanked: 711 times
Been thanked: 728 times

An Anglo-Saxon coin discovered by a metal detectorist is set to fetch up to £200,000 at auction.

The Gold Penny, or Mancus of 30 Pence, was struck during the time of Ecgberht, King of the West Saxons between 802 and 839.

It was unearthed by a metal detectorist at West Dean, on the Wiltshire and Hampshire border, in March 2020.

More details, and high quality photos, in link below.

https://www.expressandstar.com/news/uk- ... t-auction/

Evan
User avatar
shaggybfc
Posts: 826
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2020 8:46 pm
Location: Warwick
Has thanked: 697 times
Been thanked: 780 times

Wow - what a find of a lifetime! :thumbsup: But, that would be such a bittersweet find. Knowing that it'll have to be sold, as you couldn't afford to pay the landowner their share to keep it....
Always carefully proof-read what you've typed to see if you've any words out.
Deus with 11" X35 and 9" HF coils. MI 6 pinpointer.
Pete E
Posts: 914
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:05 pm
Location: North Wales
Has thanked: 1073 times
Been thanked: 644 times

Saffron wrote:
Fri Jul 30, 2021 8:57 am
An Anglo-Saxon coin discovered by a metal detectorist is set to fetch up to £200,000 at auction.

The Gold Penny, or Mancus of 30 Pence, was struck during the time of Ecgberht, King of the West Saxons between 802 and 839.

It was unearthed by a metal detectorist at West Dean, on the Wiltshire and Hampshire border, in March 2020.

More details, and high quality photos, in link below.

https://www.expressandstar.com/news/uk- ... t-auction/

Evan
As somebody said in our club, they really should not have made the location public, even if it is fairly general...
mattjb
Posts: 279
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2021 6:27 pm
Has thanked: 47 times
Been thanked: 250 times

shaggybfc wrote:
Fri Jul 30, 2021 9:32 am
Wow - what a find of a lifetime! :thumbsup: But, that would be such a bittersweet find. Knowing that it'll have to be sold, as you couldn't afford to pay the landowner their share to keep it....
I’m sure 100k in the pocket would be sweet enough!
User avatar
Allectus
Posts: 352
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2020 9:05 pm
Location: Essex
Has thanked: 64 times
Been thanked: 475 times

shaggybfc wrote:
Fri Jul 30, 2021 9:32 am
Wow - what a find of a lifetime! :thumbsup: But, that would be such a bittersweet find. Knowing that it'll have to be sold, as you couldn't afford to pay the landowner their share to keep it....
Yeah, a right kick in the pants with 100k in your sky!! :roll: :roll: :lol:
Steve RC
Posts: 121
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2020 3:20 pm
Location: Cambridgeshire
Has thanked: 192 times
Been thanked: 137 times

The outcome of the auction will be interesting. This type of coin is one of the very reasons that a modification to the Treasure Act has been proposed under the recent Review to capture single Roman and Anglo Saxon gold coins as Treasure.

That suggests an intent to redress the issue of the last gold Mancus that came up for auction selling for an eye watering sum to a private buyer. To stop it going abroad an export ban was placed on it so that an institution or even an individual could buy it for the nation. In the end the British Museum had to pay up to keep it in the UK which meant also covering the original buyer premiums on top of the sale value. No doubt that put a serious dint in their purchase budget for a year or two.

So why capture them as Treasure ? Perhaps there is an expectation that the TVC would, if the Coenwulf Mancus had come before them as Treasure, have placed a lower value on it. Now there is a precedence and that may well reflect the price that this new example will make at auction.
Wardie1994
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2020 8:58 pm
Location: Lincolnshire
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 36 times

More to the point why haven’t the BM bought it ? I know they always under value items and they have t got the biggest of budgets but something as special as this which is likely to be a one time coin should have been snatched up
Pete E
Posts: 914
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:05 pm
Location: North Wales
Has thanked: 1073 times
Been thanked: 644 times

Steve RC wrote:
Sun Aug 01, 2021 11:18 am
So why capture them as Treasure ? Perhaps there is an expectation that the TVC would, if the Coenwulf Mancus had come before them as Treasure, have placed a lower value on it. Now there is a precedence and that may well reflect the price that this new example will make at auction.
I know the intent of the process is meant to be "fair" to the finder/owner, but there is no way the TVR can effectively determine the market value of rare items like these coins...maybe the Government should change the system and make the BM bid at auction for treasure items it wants, but make these treasure items subject to a purchase tax of say 20% (with the BM exempt)....Such a tax might dampen down the bidding a bit allowing the BM to be competitive and in instances where they still loose the auction, revenues from this tax could go to the BM to help finance future purchases....
User avatar
Oxgirl
Posts: 3354
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2020 4:21 pm
Location: Oxfordshire
Has thanked: 1961 times
Been thanked: 2496 times

For god sake what does a museum want with all these coins? Are they going to display them? Of course not.

How come antique paintings and furniture can be happily owned by private individuals but not coins? What can’t us ‘plebs’ be trusted to keep them safe and own them and touch and enjoy them. Why is it right for only a few academics to see them. They won’t ever be seen by any of us, the taxpayers, because they’ll be stuck in a drawer with the tens of thousands of other items in museum stores, never to see the light of day.

Surely HD photos and proper cataloguing is enough? They can’t analyse the gold properly without destroying it so why does the taxpayer need to fork out for a select few to look at it in their cotton gloved hands every few years.

It infuriates me - let it be admired and handled by someone. If you are going to fork out a fortune on the thing you are hardly going to not look after it very, very carefully.
chill…karma will fix it

Yes I really don’t like Roman coins, I’m not joking
User avatar
alloverover
Posts: 669
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2020 3:02 pm
Has thanked: 569 times
Been thanked: 763 times

Pete E wrote:
Sun Aug 01, 2021 10:57 pm
Steve RC wrote:
Sun Aug 01, 2021 11:18 am
So why capture them as Treasure ? Perhaps there is an expectation that the TVC would, if the Coenwulf Mancus had come before them as Treasure, have placed a lower value on it. Now there is a precedence and that may well reflect the price that this new example will make at auction.

I know the intent of the process is meant to be "fair" to the finder/owner, but there is no way the TVR can effectively determine the market value of rare items like these coins...maybe the Government should change the system and make the BM bid at auction for treasure items it wants, but make these treasure items subject to a purchase tax of say 20% (with the BM exempt)....Such a tax might dampen down the bidding a bit allowing the BM to be competitive and in instances where they still loose the auction, revenues from this tax could go to the BM to help finance future purchases....
Most auction houses already have a 20% buyers premium if not a bit more, do you suggest 20% on top of that ?
Pete E
Posts: 914
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:05 pm
Location: North Wales
Has thanked: 1073 times
Been thanked: 644 times

alloverover wrote:
Sun Aug 01, 2021 11:13 pm
Pete E wrote:
Sun Aug 01, 2021 10:57 pm
Steve RC wrote:
Sun Aug 01, 2021 11:18 am
So why capture them as Treasure ? Perhaps there is an expectation that the TVC would, if the Coenwulf Mancus had come before them as Treasure, have placed a lower value on it. Now there is a precedence and that may well reflect the price that this new example will make at auction.

I know the intent of the process is meant to be "fair" to the finder/owner, but there is no way the TVR can effectively determine the market value of rare items like these coins...maybe the Government should change the system and make the BM bid at auction for treasure items it wants, but make these treasure items subject to a purchase tax of say 20% (with the BM exempt)....Such a tax might dampen down the bidding a bit allowing the BM to be competitive and in instances where they still loose the auction, revenues from this tax could go to the BM to help finance future purchases....
Most auction houses already have a 20% buyers premium if not a bit more, do you suggest 20% on top of that ?
Somebody would have to sit down and look at the economics properly, but yes some sort "weighting," to encourage sellers to favour the BM...it might not be for every treasure item, maybe only those that are deemed to be particularly important to the nation....
Wardie1994
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2020 8:58 pm
Location: Lincolnshire
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 36 times

Oxgirl wrote:
Sun Aug 01, 2021 11:09 pm
For god sake what does a museum want with all these coins? Are they going to display them? Of course not.

How come antique paintings and furniture can be happily owned by private individuals but not coins? What can’t us ‘plebs’ be trusted to keep them safe and own them and touch and enjoy them. Why is it right for only a few academics to see them. They won’t ever be seen by any of us, the taxpayers, because they’ll be stuck in a drawer with the tens of thousands of other items in museum stores, never to see the light of day.

Surely HD photos and proper cataloguing is enough? They can’t analyse the gold properly without destroying it so why does the taxpayer need to fork out for a select few to look at it in their cotton gloved hands every few years.

It infuriates me - let it be admired and handled by someone. If you are going to fork out a fortune on the thing you are hardly going to not look after it very, very carefully.
I don’t disagree with you on that point but something as rare as this would surely be on display and not stuffed in a draw collecting dust, but can nearly guarantee they would have offered bugger all for the coin where as we all know it will fetch more than 200k at auction without a doubt
Pete E
Posts: 914
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:05 pm
Location: North Wales
Has thanked: 1073 times
Been thanked: 644 times

Oxgirl wrote:
Sun Aug 01, 2021 11:09 pm
For god sake what does a museum want with all these coins? Are they going to display them? Of course not.

How come antique paintings and furniture can be happily owned by private individuals but not coins? What can’t us ‘plebs’ be trusted to keep them safe and own them and touch and enjoy them. Why is it right for only a few academics to see them. They won’t ever be seen by any of us, the taxpayers, because they’ll be stuck in a drawer with the tens of thousands of other items in museum stores, never to see the light of day.
I don't think it's just coins that are the issue, it's any item that goes through the treasure process...

I heard of one detectorist who found a silver thimble dating back to the late 1600's...it went through the treasure process, the BM did not want it, but a local museum bought it for "their collection"....the guy was gutted and it seems the museum only bought because it was valued at a relatively modest price so they could afford it...

I truly believe items of "national importance" should be preserved for the public and be displayed for the public to see...But relatively common finds such as a few Eddie hammereds from a purse spill, or that thimble should be returned to the finder/owner once they have been recorded...
Spook
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2021 6:20 am
Been thanked: 4 times

I’ve never understood how they just take ownership of something that they no longer own.
As a nation they made it and sold it , how can they now take it off you a claim it ,
If the nation wants it, it should just offer to buy it, the current owner should decide if they want to sell it or not .
Regardless of their decision the coin once recorded should go back to the current owner .
But unfortunately that’s not the law
User avatar
Oxgirl
Posts: 3354
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2020 4:21 pm
Location: Oxfordshire
Has thanked: 1961 times
Been thanked: 2496 times

One thing we all have to remember (despite my views about museums acquired things they’ll never display) is that treasure items are automatically legally owned by The Crown - neither the finder or land owner has any legal ownership from the moment it is found. Obviously this single gold coin does not classify as treasure but if it was a treasure item then The Crown wouldn’t buying it from us, they are just giving the finder and land owner a reward. The reward should be based on market value but that can be difficult to gauge and I guess it is likely to be based on conservative estimates of value. Once a museum acquires it we’ll never know what it would have fetched at auction - it is the way it is.

But anyway, as I said before, this isn’t a treasure item and the BM have looked at it, analysed it and found out everything they need to know to build up a very detailed record for any researcher. Owning it adds no value to the nation so why waste £200k? I doubt any member of the public gives a monkey about seeing it in a glass case. If they did then doing an exact gold replica would cost about 1% of the real thing so do that and save £198k! After all lots of coins on display in museums are replicas anyway (and that’s a true fact!). If it was a Roman statue or stunning piece of jewellery that’s not the same.
chill…karma will fix it

Yes I really don’t like Roman coins, I’m not joking
Post Reply