Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Zoomorphic Big Cat Roman Brooch

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Zoomorphic Big Cat Roman Brooch

    Well this is my favourite Roman Brooch, it is classified as a zoomorphic animal type brooch and is usually referred to as a Leopard. This is not a common type, so a great detecting find.
    I found this about ten years ago very close to the line of a roman road from Venta Belgarum (Winchester) to Sorbiodunum (Salisbury).




  • #2
    Now that is cool! Are those some type of stones still remaining in the holes?
    Searching the fields of Northwest Indiana and Southwestern Michigan

    Comment


    • #3
      That is a very cool find Sunny WTG. :woohoo:
      Was this found before the PAS system came in to play in England?.
      Bruce
      In life there are losers and finders. Which one are you?

      Comment


      • #4
        gregszybala wrote:

        Now that is cool! Are those some type of stones still remaining in the holes?
          The coloured dots are enamel.  The Romans were very good at enamelling and did it to lots of their brooches.  I will add some more brooch pictures to show some of the colouration they used.
        Glad you enjoyed it
        2ndoldman wrote:

        That is a very cool find Sunny WTG. :woohoo:
        Was this found before the PAS system came in to play in England?.
          Yes pre-PAS.  But I don't think many detectorists get too fussed over the Portable Antiquities Scheme.  For one, you always get robbed of the true market value when they want it.  Time and time again the finders have to go to appeal and they never get the correct value. I have no problem with reporting - ordinary finds - if I still detected (can't say I won't ever get the bug again).  But say I found a unique anglo saxon coin would I report it? ....would I heck.  personally I would keep  it and enjoy it.  But when I die I would want my family to sell it and get the real value, not the insulting value the government would offer.
        There have also been instances of detectorists finding clusters of finds only to then get permission withdrawn by the landowner who has been contacted by the County Archaeologists. 
        Like I say, report the odd bit of lead, a very worn roman coin, but you would be a mug to report a great site; unless you wanted it placed out of bounds !
        If you are detecting on land that is scheduled for building work then the owners will truly hate you if you report the finds; as work is then prohibited until an archaeological excavation is conducted; which the developer has to pay for. Talk about adding insult to injury. It can cost the developer a fortune. So most building sites they wont let you on because they are afraid you will report finds.  I managed to get on one site that had an archaeological 'watching brief' (as they are called) and was only allowed to detect once the archaeologists had left for lunch or gone home.  The builder insisted on this agreement between us and I honoured it.  They would wait until the archy' had gone for lunch and then rush to dig or extend the footings -  hilarious !
        I blame the government.  If the County paid for the archaeologist then the builders would be more than happy to cooperate.  And if they paid the detectorists the true market value of the artefacts then tons more would get reported ....its cause -and- effect !
        If they can't afford the market value then tough, they can't have it.   But devaluing it to their purse is nearly state funded crime...imo
        I think their current approach is getting some information, but they miss out on so much because of their penny pinching.

        Comment


        • #5
          Very nice find. It’s incredibly similar to one of the examples in the British Museum, although the enamel spots on the body are exclusively red on their example, with small beads of yellow glass inlaid for the eyes. Yours is also female, like the museum’s example, as evidenced by the teats on the lower body.

          Fibula, Roman, 2nd - 3rd Century
          © Trustees of the British Museum
          The curator notes (Andrási 2008) read:
          “Plate-brooches in a variety of shapes, including zoomorphic forms, were probably intended as much for pure decoration as for use in securing garments. Of the examples present in this collection, the spotted panther or leopard is a well-known form, and is one of comparatively few zoomorphic designs which have an obvious symbolic meaning in the context of Roman religion: leopards, panthers and tigers were all animals associated with the god Bacchus. Many zoomorphic plate-brooches are completely flat, with large areas of solid enamel colour, but the leopards belong to a distinctive group which are more three-dimensional, the heads in particular being rendered completely in the round and the enamel taking the form of small spots in the metal background. The body spots are generally in two colours, e.g. black and red, but appear here to be in red alone.”
          I think that’s a pretty harsh assessment of the PAS, which essentially came into existence as a voluntary scheme to enable non-prehistoric base metal and non-metallic finds (ie things not covered by the Treasure Act 1996) to be formally recorded. The PAS itself was never designed to try and rob people of the value of their finds and, although registering a non-treasure find may expose you to museum pressure (usually to donate rather than sell), it’s still your choice. If there is a problem, it’s with the Treasure Act itself (in relation to the things it covers), but that’s the law rather than a choice you have.
          The Treasure Valuation Committee, charged with determining compensation value if the State is entitled to (and wants to) lay claim to the item, currently includes the editor of “The Searcher” (the leading UK metal detectorist magazine) among its seven members. In determining “what may be paid for an item in a sale on the open market between a willing seller and a willing buyer” and “based on hammer price, not what would be paid for an item on the private market”, the committee also receives written advice from auction house experts in Christies, Bonhams and others, as well as from leading coin dealers where appropriate.
          Not only is there a right of appeal, but the finder, and/or land-owner also has an opportunity to provide an independent valuation (at his own cost and by visitation only) during the process, providing it is on the same professional basis that the committee operates. That’s always going to create disgruntlement among “treasure hunters” who think their find is worth more, but there’s no mileage in reporting that a private collector has already offered you £5,000 for it… or whatever. That’s not a “valuation”.
          Whatever you think about the valuation process, it’s as fair and transparent as it could be and – in combination with the voluntary PAS for non-treasure, plus the relatively few restrictions on where you can hunt or dig in Britain – offers a much better relationship between amateur collectors and the archaeological community than our American friends suffer.
          I keep six honest serving-men (they taught me all I knew); Their names are What and Why and When and How and Where and Who.

          Comment


          • #6
            That is one of the neatest finds Sunny. Why did you stop detecting?

            Comment


            • #7
              paleo pete wrote: That is one of the neatest finds Sunny. Why did you stop detecting?
                Other projects and hobbies ....mostly fishing.  I fish through the summer and field walk for flints in the winter.
              I was very passionate about my detecting and will likely get back in to it.  It makes your heart miss a beat when you unearth a great find and for me that is medieval English hammered silver coins. 
              But when the sound goes off in your ears you have no idea what you have found....that's the attraction.
              Maybe this winter )

              Comment


              • #8
                painshill wrote: Very nice find. It’s incredibly similar to one of the examples in the British Museum, although the enamel spots on the body are exclusively red on their example, with small beads of yellow glass inlaid for the eyes. Yours is also female, like the museum’s example, as evidenced by the teats on the lower body.

                Fibula, Roman, 2nd - 3rd Century
                © Trustees of the British Museum
                The curator notes (Andrási 2008) read:
                “Plate-brooches in a variety of shapes, including zoomorphic forms, were probably intended as much for pure decoration as for use in securing garments. Of the examples present in this collection, the spotted panther or leopard is a well-known form, and is one of comparatively few zoomorphic designs which have an obvious symbolic meaning in the context of Roman religion: leopards, panthers and tigers were all animals associated with the god Bacchus. Many zoomorphic plate-brooches are completely flat, with large areas of solid enamel colour, but the leopards belong to a distinctive group which are more three-dimensional, the heads in particular being rendered completely in the round and the enamel taking the form of small spots in the metal background. The body spots are generally in two colours, e.g. black and red, but appear here to be in red alone.”
                I think that’s a pretty harsh assessment of the PAS, which essentially came into existence as a voluntary scheme to enable non-prehistoric base metal and non-metallic finds (ie things not covered by the Treasure Act 1996) to be formally recorded. The PAS itself was never designed to try and rob people of the value of their finds and, although registering a non-treasure find may expose you to museum pressure (usually to donate rather than sell), it’s still your choice. If there is a problem, it’s with the Treasure Act itself (in relation to the things it covers), but that’s the law rather than a choice you have.
                The Treasure Valuation Committee, charged with determining compensation value if the State is entitled to (and wants to) lay claim to the item, currently includes the editor of “The Searcher” (the leading UK metal detectorist magazine) among its seven members. In determining “what may be paid for an item in a sale on the open market between a willing seller and a willing buyer” and “based on hammer price, not what would be paid for an item on the private market”, the committee also receives written advice from auction house experts in Christies, Bonhams and others, as well as from leading coin dealers where appropriate.
                Not only is there a right of appeal, but the finder, and/or land-owner also has an opportunity to provide an independent valuation (at his own cost and by visitation only) during the process, providing it is on the same professional basis that the committee operates. That’s always going to create disgruntlement among “treasure hunters” who think their find is worth more, but there’s no mileage in reporting that a private collector has already offered you £5,000 for it… or whatever. That’s not a “valuation”.
                Whatever you think about the valuation process, it’s as fair and transparent as it could be and – in combination with the voluntary PAS for non-treasure, plus the relatively few restrictions on where you can hunt or dig in Britain – offers a much better relationship between amateur collectors and the archaeological community than our American friends suffer.
                  Its just my opinion Rog....... although there are plenty of finds I have seen valuated in the press that struck me as low; not helped by some finders being interviewed on television complaining about the value they received.  For example the two saxon hoard finders who featured on a Time Team Special.  They found some unique gold saxon coins and were 'robbed' on the values.
                Having someone from 'your camp' on a committee of many is no guarantee of anything but occupying a chair.  The proof of this is the Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authorities....they all have a token angler and completely ignore anything the anglers rep says.  I have no idea what influence the 'Searcher' mag guy has, but the values of Treasure Committee awards does not fill me with confidence.  If it were truly fair the item would go to auction and the government would bid on it the same as private collectors....then the real value would be paid !
                Personally I would not declare and certainly not unless the landowner had agreed.  In the eyes of many that would be seen as wrong, but so is robbing the finder of the true 'market' value.  The government is not poor and if they want their museums to own finds with provenance then they should pay.  After all, they pay for many things that I wouldn't agree with, waste billions and billions.  Underpaying the finder of a treasure item is small potatoes.
                I met a guy, in Dubai, a Brit expat, who used to nighthawk sites here and sell everything....now that is wrong (IMO)....so there is a balance to all things
                One of the estates I used to detect on had found a stash of polished Neolithic axe heads, whilst digging out and widening a drainage ditch.  They handed the lot in to Hampshire Museum Services (Andover Museum of the Iron Age).  This had occurred about 10 years before I began detecting on the estate.  When I enquired with the museum to go and see them they had no record of them.  So I went to the sites and monuments record at Winchester, expecting the card index record of the find to be there (and a clue as to where the axes were)....but there was no record.  Clearly the find was never formally processed...and the axes doubtless found their way into the private collection of the museum staff !
                I also booked in to see the coin collection in Andover Museum; specifically a small hoard of gold staters found in a hollowed out rock.  I was particularly interested in the Iron Age gold staters at that time.  I saw the hoard coins...beautiful.  But when I enquired why there were so many gaps in the other trays, that was apparently down to internal losses !
                As one chap said to me, if you want to a really good collection of gold staters you go to the archaeologists house !!!!!
                That was probably a bit disingenuous, but where were the missing coins ?!!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Sunny there has and always will be problems with any system which requires a person to automatically hand over their finds to the authorities.
                  It is better though than what happens with the expat that you mentioned.
                  Some of us are seekers of history and seldom if ever sell their finds and others are only in it for the money and sell on the black market.
                  The later ones are those that give us all a black mark and are the reason for most of the regulations against our particular form of pleasure.
                  Bruce
                  In life there are losers and finders. Which one are you?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    2ndoldman wrote: Sunny there has and always will be problems with any system which requires a person to automatically hand over their finds to the authorities.
                    It is better though than what happens with the expat that you mentioned.
                    Some of us are seekers of history and seldom if ever sell their finds and others are only in it for the money and sell on the black market.
                    The later ones are those that give us all a black mark and are the reason for most of the regulations against our particular form of pleasure.
                      Spot on.
                    We call them night-hawks.  They detect on scheduled (prohibited/protected) sites and it is often associated with sales & thus greed.
                    I don't detect on prohibited sites, have the landowners permission and have kept everything I ever found; provided I considered it worthy of keeping.  I obviously leave junk at the side of the field (modern junk, horse shoes, plough shares etc.)

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X