Saturday, 24 October 2020

King Ring Found by Metal Detectorist

       Hawking in Angmering?
An interesting object apparently connected with a famous person. Timeline: Auctions, 24th November 2020,

LOT 0553 King James I's Personal Hawking Ring. Estimate GBP (£) 4,000 - 6,000 1603-1625 AD
A silver vervel or hawking ring used during falconry, comprising a flat-section hoop with legend in italic script 'Kyng James', and a waisted heater shield with quartered arms of the Stuart kings; the arms displayed are the royal arms used by the Stuarts (outside of Scotland) from the accession of James I to the British throne in 1603. 0.84 grams, 10.36mm (1/2"). Fine condition; edge of shield bent. An excessively rare ring, the personal possession of an important British monarch.

Provenance
Found while searching with a metal detector near Angmering, West Sussex, UK, on 8 November 2016; declared under the treasure act under reference number 2017 T10, subsequently valued at £4,000-£4,500, but disclaimed as no museum was in a position to acquire it; accompanied by a copy of the treasure report for H M Coroner, the official provisional valuation, letters from the British Museum, and a copy of the Portable Antiquities report number SUSS-D17951; this lot has been checked against the Interpol Database of stolen works of art and is accompanied by AIAD certificate number no.10233-167384.

Footnotes
[ a load of narrativising waffle about kings and falcons - wikipedia stuff...]
There is an interesting change in appearance in the ring (and look at the inscription) between the PAS photo and now. So if this was vetted by the PAS as being found by the nameless detectorist, at a particular place and a particular time, WHY is Timeline asking the Interpol Database?  I really do not see the logic in this action. Unless of course Timeline are saying "never trust a metal detectorist" - maybe (like me) they have some experience with this?

Nobody has explained why the shield of arms is bent round like that.

Now these metal detectorist chappies are always saying they are not interested in the money. So why is this one on sale when, mercifully, the museum could not raise the cash to buy it (did the museum too perhaps have doubts about it)? Nobody decided to donate it, but it got flogged off. The ring was, it seems, made before 1603, and why was it in Sussex?




No comments:

Post a Comment