Largest hoard of Anglo-Saxon treasure found in UK

[gunnut]

Largest hoard of Anglo-Saxon treasure found in UK

By RAPHAEL G. SATTER, Associated Press Writer Raphael G. Satter, Associated Press Writer – 1 min ago

LONDON – An amateur treasure hunter prowling English farmland with a metal detector stumbled upon the largest Anglo-Saxon treasure ever found, a massive seventh-century hoard of gold and silver sword decorations, crosses and other items, British archaeologists said Thursday.

One expert said the treasure found by 55-year-old Terry Herbert would revolutionize understanding of the Anglo-Saxons, a Germanic people who ruled England from the fifth century until the Norman conquest in 1066. Another said the find would rank among Britain's best-known historic treasures.

"This is just a fantastic find completely out of the blue," Roger Bland, who managed the cache's excavation, told The Associated Press. "It will make us rethink the Dark Ages."

The Anglo-Saxons, a group of Germanic tribes, gradually invaded England by sea starting in the fifth century in the wake of the collapse of the Roman Empire. Originally, they came from what is now the coastal region of northwest Germany.

Their artisans made striking objects out of gold and enamel and created poetry including "Beowulf," an anonymous epic poem about a warrior who does battle with monsters and a dragon.

Archaeologist Kevin Leahy, who catalogued the find, said the stash appeared to be war loot and included dozens of pommel caps — decorative elements attached to the knobs of sword handles. He noted that "Beowulf" contains a reference to warriors stripping the pommels of their enemies' weapons as mementoes.

But much other Anglo-Saxon literature and artwork has been lost through warfare, looting, upheavals and the passage of time, leaving scanty evidence for scholars of the period.

Bland said the hoard was unearthed in what was once Mercia, one of five main Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, and is thought to date to 675-725 AD.

The hoard consists of at least 650 items of gold and 530 silver objects weighing more than 2.2 pounds (1 kilo), along with some copper alloy, garnets and glass.

A total of 1,345 items have been examined by experts and 56 lumps of earth were found to contain metal artifacts detected by an X-ray machine, meaning the total will likely rise to about 1,500.

Most of the objects are ornaments for weapons and other military artifacts, some inlaid with precious stones.

"I think wealth of this kind must have belonged to a king but we cannot say that for absolute certain," Bland said.

Leslie Webster, the former curator of Anglo-Saxon archaeology at the British Museum, said the amount of gold uncovered — about 11 pounds (5 kilograms) — suggested that early medieval England was a far wealthier place than previously believed.

She also said the crosses and other religious artifacts mixed in with the mainly military items, might shed new light on the relationship between Christianity and warfare among the Anglo-Saxons.

Herbert, from the western English town of Burntwood, found the gold on a friend's farm on July 5 and spent the next five days scouring the field for the rest of the hoard, recovering the first items before professional archaeologists took over the excavation.

"Imagine you're at home and somebody keeps putting money through your letterbox, that was what it was like," Herbert said. "I was going to bed and in my sleep I was seeing gold items."

The hoard was officially declared treasure by a coroner, which means it will now be valued by a committee of experts and offered up for sale to a museum. Proceeds would be split 50-50 between Herbert and his farmer friend, who has not been identified. The find's exact location is being kept secret to deter looters.

Bland said he could not give a precise figure for the worth of the hoard, but he said the treasure hunter could be in line for a "seven-figure sum."

Herbert said the experience had been "more fun than winning the lottery," adding that one expert likened his discovery to finding Tutankhamen's tomb.

"I just flushed all over when he said that. The hairs on the back of my neck stood up," Herbert said.

The treasure is in storage at the Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery. Some of the items are due to go on display starting Friday.

One of the most intriguing objects in hoard is a small strip of gold inscribed with a warlike Latin quotation from the Old Testament, which translates as: "Rise up, O Lord, and may thy enemies be dispersed and those who hate thee be driven from thy face."

The strip may have been fastened to a shield or a sword belt.

Bland said archaeologists were still baffled by the function of many of the pieces.

"There's lots of mystery in it," he said.

___

Associated Press Writer David McHugh in London contributed to this report.

Largest hoard of Anglo-Saxon treasure found in UK - Yahoo! News

[tankie]

Yup , saw it on the news , now the Queen owns it , good pay day for the guy and the land owner tho ;)

[gunnut]

I know so very little about the history of England. Who are the "British" today? Descendants of the Normans? Anglo-Saxons? Who were the Anglos?

[tankie]

I know so very little about the history of England. Who are the "British" today? Descendants of the Normans? Anglo-Saxons? Who were the Anglos?

We are Heinz 57s G/N a mix of lots , found this for ya , ;)




Is there such a race as the British? With 2,000 years of immigration behind us, we are a well and truly mixed bunch, writes Jonathan Duffy.
If the challenge had been to expunge racism from the general election hustings, then it has not been a good start.

Even before official campaigning has begun, the thorny subject of race is all over the front pages.



Short on morals but big on pillaging: the Vikings

Writing in the Daily Mail on Friday, Roger Scruton admonished the Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, for his "in praise of multiculturalism" speech the day before.

"Labour rightly takes pride in respecting minorities yet refuses to accept the existence of a British race," sings the headline.

But has there ever been such a thing as a British race?

It all depends on which definition you chose for "race" itself.

The Oxford English Dictionary broadly defines the word as "a group of persons connected by common descent".



Asians expelled from Uganda arrive in the UK

That seems to open the door to the idea of a British race, although since modern Britain only became an entity with the Act of Union in 1707 we are still a relatively young race.

But the OED's primary definition for "race" is more specific, siding with the idea that race can transcend national borders.

It classes a race as one of the "major divisions of humankind, having distinct physical characteristics".

In which case, the modern-day British are not a single race but a hotchpotch of ethnic groups that have settled within these shores down the centuries.

Certainly then, the notion of racial purity among the British is a fallacy, and our multiculturalism dates back to the Dark Ages and beyond.



Immigrants have taken on many aspects of British culture

The Celts and Picts are among the most ancient settlers of the British Isles. They were followed by the Romans in the first century AD, although their contribution to British stock is thought to be minimal.

The Romans quit Britannia, as they had termed it, in the 5th century AD, making way for a succession of invasions by the Jutes, the Angles and the Saxons.

These three tribes, which settled mainly in southern England, were all Germanic people descending from parts of Denmark and what is now northern Germany.

Some 400 years later came the next wave, this time it was the Vikings. These pagan Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish warriors settled large tracts of what they called Bretland, including Shetland, Orkney, Northumbria and East Anglia.

Next up came the Normans, who were themselves descendants of the Vikings that had settled in northern France.

The Far East has come to Manchester


In the thousand years since the Norman Conquest of 1066, there have been several other tides of settlement including a band of about 100,000 Huguenots fleeing persecution from France in the late 17th century.

The 19th century saw an influx of Jews and Irish and post-war 20th century Britain opened its doors to Poles, Indians, West Indians, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, Ugandan Asians and Chinese.

Do today's asylum seekers, who have come in from Eastern Europe and further afield, represent another step forward in Britain's long history of multiculturalism?

Opinion may be divided but what is certain is that when it comes to ethnic purity, the British are a lost cause.


;)

[Blackleaf]

The Anglo-Saxons came over to Britain from what is now northern Germany, Denmark and Holland in the 400s, after the Romans left.

They pushed the native Britons to the far western and far northern extremities of the island, with the Anglo-Saxons settling the rest of the island.

Over time, those native British communities in the far western and northern extremities of the island became Wales and Scotland. The rest of the island, occupied by the Anglo-Saxons, became England. That's why there are three nations on the island today.

But during the time of the Anglo-saxons, England didn't actually exist. What is now England was then several Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, such as Mercia, Wessex, Northumbria and Kent. These kingdoms each had their own king or queen and royal family, and they were often warring with one another.

In 927AD, these kingdoms were unified to form England. Athelstan was the king - the first king of England.

Anglo-Saxon England lasted from the 400s to 1066, when the Normans invaded.

The Anglo-Saxons are the ancestors of the English, and their language, Old English, is the ancestor of modern English. If you went back in time and spoke to an Anglo-Saxon you could just about understand them.

[Hitman817]

The Anglo-Saxons came over to Britain from what is now northern Germany, Denmark and Holland in the 400s, after the Romans left.

They pushed the native Britons to the far western and far northern extremities of the island, with the Anglo-Saxons settling the rest of the island.

Over time, those native British communities in the far western and northern extremities of the island became Wales and Scotland. The rest of the island, occupied by the Anglo-Saxons, became England. That's why there are three nations on the island today.

But during the time of the Anglo-saxons, England didn't actually exist. What is now England was then several Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, such as Mercia, Wessex, Northumbria and Kent. These kingdoms each had their own king or queen and royal family, and they were often warring with one another.

In 927AD, these kingdoms were unified to form England. Athelstan was the king - the first king of England.

Anglo-Saxon England lasted from the 400s to 1066, when the Normans invaded.

The Anglo-Saxons are the ancestors of the English, and their language, Old English, is the ancestor of modern English. If you went back in time and spoke to an Anglo-Saxon you could just about understand them.

And who were the Normans?


p.s. I would have kept the treasure for myself. : )

[Kernow]

The Anglo-Saxons came over to Britain from what is now northern Germany, Denmark and Holland in the 400s, after the Romans left.

They pushed the native Britons to the far western and far northern extremities of the island, with the Anglo-Saxons settling the rest of the island.

Over time, those native British communities in the far western and northern extremities of the island became Wales and Scotland. The rest of the island, occupied by the Anglo-Saxons, became England. That's why there are three nations on the island today.

But during the time of the Anglo-saxons, England didn't actually exist. What is now England was then several Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, such as Mercia, Wessex, Northumbria and Kent. These kingdoms each had their own king or queen and royal family, and they were often warring with one another.

In 927AD, these kingdoms were unified to form England. Athelstan was the king - the first king of England.

Anglo-Saxon England lasted from the 400s to 1066, when the Normans invaded.

The Anglo-Saxons are the ancestors of the English, and their language, Old English, is the ancestor of modern English. If you went back in time and spoke to an Anglo-Saxon you could just about understand them.

Cornwall wasn't settled until the Norman era.;)

[gunnut]

The Anglo-Saxons came over to Britain from what is now northern Germany, Denmark and Holland in the 400s, after the Romans left.

They pushed the native Britons to the far western and far northern extremities of the island, with the Anglo-Saxons settling the rest of the island.

Over time, those native British communities in the far western and northern extremities of the island became Wales and Scotland. The rest of the island, occupied by the Anglo-Saxons, became England. That's why there are three nations on the island today.

But during the time of the Anglo-saxons, England didn't actually exist. What is now England was then several Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, such as Mercia, Wessex, Northumbria and Kent. These kingdoms each had their own king or queen and royal family, and they were often warring with one another.

In 927AD, these kingdoms were unified to form England. Athelstan was the king - the first king of England.

Anglo-Saxon England lasted from the 400s to 1066, when the Normans invaded.

The Anglo-Saxons are the ancestors of the English, and their language, Old English, is the ancestor of modern English. If you went back in time and spoke to an Anglo-Saxon you could just about understand them.

So Scots and Welsh were the inhabitants of today's England before the Anglo-Saxons arrived?

I thought Old English spoken by the Anglo-Saxons was closer to German than modern English?

[gunnut]

And who were the Normans?


p.s. I would have kept the treasure for myself. : )

Normans were from what is today France, I believe, Normandy to be more precise.

[middle earth]

Normans were from what is today France, I believe, Normandy to be more precise.

Yes, they got their name from Normandy, but they were not the natives in that place, their ancestors were also from the north, the name Normandy got something to do with their origin, or Norman. They were distant relatives of Anglo-Saxons-Jutes tribes who defeated King Arthur and his round table knights. Through marriage or some arrangement, the Anglos and the Normans believed they had rights to each other’s land. I don’t remember the details, I got my English history book stowed somewhere I forgot.

Scots Welsh and Irish are more likely the descendents of Celts who were natives to that land.

[clackers]

So Scots and Welsh were the inhabitants of today's England before the Anglo-Saxons arrived?

Yeah, Gunnut, they were remnants of what's often called 'Celtic culture'.

I thought Old English spoken by the Anglo-Saxons was closer to German than modern English?

Yes, it's a branch of 'West Germanic'.

[clackers]

If you went back in time and spoke to an Anglo-Saxon you could just about understand them.

You'd probably be okay with the modern English of Shakespeare, and some of Chaucer's Middle English, but not really Old English, Blackleaf.

I've watched Julian Glover read some of Beowulf in the original tongue and it's pretty alien, even though the rhythms are familiar.

Here's The Lord's Prayer, for instance:

Fęder ure žu že eart on heofonum
Si žin nama gehalgod.
To becume žin rice,
gewurže šin willa, on eoršan swa swa on heofonum.
Urne gedęghwamlican hlaf syle us todęg
and forgyf us ure gyltas, swa swa we forgyfaš urum gyltendum.
And ne gelęd žu us on costnunge, ac alys us of yfele.
Sožlice

[clackers]

Yes, they got their name from Normandy, but they were not the natives in that place, their ancestors were also from the north, the name Normandy got something to do with their origin, or Norman. They were distant relatives of Anglo-Saxons-Jutes tribes who defeated King Arthur and his round table knights.

'Norman' is like, from 'Norseman' ... they're the descendants of Vikings who invaded Anglo-Saxon England (settling as the Danes) and Frankish France (localizing as the Normans).

Through marriage or some arrangement, the Anglos and the Normans believed they had rights to each other’s land. I don’t remember the details, I got my English history book stowed somewhere I forgot.

Yes, ME, 1066 and the Battle of Hastings was really a Scandinavian family dispute.

[Mihais]

Count Harald Hardrada and you get a menage a troi.

Anyway,great find.I'm looking forward(in 2-3 years)to read some of the studies.

[tankie]

Jeez , xmas coming , makes memo , must get a metal detector,send the G/F on gold finding missions a long while ago i owned one but only ever found ring pull tops and pennies


A novice metal-detecting enthusiast has said he was "stunned" to unearth a £1 million Iron Age treasure hoard during his first outing with the machine.
Safari park keeper David Booth, 35, had owned his metal detector for just five days when he discovered four 2,000-year-old gold neckbands in a Stirlingshire field.

The neckbands, dating from between the 1st and 3rd century BC, are worth an estimated £1 million and the find represents the most important hoard of Iron Age gold in Scotland to date.

Mr Booth, the chief game warden at Blair Drummond Safari Park, near Stirling, joined experts at the National Museum of Scotland in Edinburgh as the treasure was revealed.

He said he was still trying to come to terms with the importance of his discovery. He said: "It's absolutely unbelievable, I don't think it's really sunk in yet since the moment I discovered it."

He described how he uncovered the hoard just minutes into his first outing with his new metal detector.

"I'd only had the detector for five days. I'd just practised around the house with nails and bits and pieces. I went with it for the first time, parked the vehicle up, got out, picked a direction to set off on, and about seven yards away that was the first thing I came across. I was completely stunned, there was a bit of disbelief. This was my first find."

Mr Booth took the bands, known as torcs, back to his home near Stirling and contacted the authorities.

Under Scots law, the Crown can claim any archaeological objects found in Scotland. Finders have no ownership rights and must report any objects to the Treasure Trove Unit. But Mr Booth may receive a reward equal to the value of the jewellery.

Asked about any financial reward he could receive, he said: "There are loads of figures getting banded about, so you just need to wait and see what the valuation committee values it at. I'm trying not to speculate about it at the moment