Magpies, Squirrels and Thieves by Jacqueline Yallop Page A

expertise to survey barrows and other archaeological sites, and was one of the first antiquaries to meticulously record, draw and publish his findings to a high standard, laying the foundations for the work of the Victorianswho followed. In
Nenia Britannica
, he recounted something of Faussett’s collection, being the first to realize that the objects were Anglo-Saxon. Roach Smith recalled the description of Faussett’s work, his archaeological explorations, and the diversity of his collection and he decided to pay a visit, unannounced, on whichever surviving relatives he could find.
    Roach Smith was taking a chance. He had no idea whether the collection still existed, what state it might be in or what Faussett’s descendants might make of his unsolicited inquiries. But he was fortunate enough to receive a warm welcome from Henry Godfrey Faussett, the collector’s grandson, who was delighted that someone was, at last, taking an interest in the family treasure. Henry spoke enthusiastically about his grandfather’s achievements and spent hours showing Roach Smith boxes and drawers and shelves full of the antiquities that he had collected from local sites. The two men pored over slips of glass and pottery, over amber and amethyst beads, brooches, axes and spearheads, keys and daggers. Henry Faussett was eager that the collection should finally receive official recognition and urged Roach Smith to spread the word about what he had found. Roach Smith needed little encouragement. He was astounded by the quality and variety of the objects packed into the churchman’s study and, when he finally left the Faussett house, as dusk closed in over the pale Kent hills, he promised to return with a delegation from the British Archaeological Association.
    Henry Godfrey Faussett was never to see the collection receive the attention it deserved, however. The British Archaeological Association did indeed inspect the finds and confirmed Roach Smith’s evaluation of the objects as important and valuable, but no one in the Association could find the time or the money to publish the details of the collection and nothing more was done. Other collections became newsworthy instead, and when Henry Godfrey Faussett died, eleven years after Roach Smith had visited,interest in the Faussett finds had largely waned. It looked as though the collection might once more lapse into obscurity. Although the terms of Henry Faussett’s will urged that it should be sold complete and intact, no public organization could be persuaded to find the £700 Faussett’s heirs were requesting, despite the actual value of the collection being much greater. In 1853, Franks made four attempts to persuade the British Museum to make the purchase, but without success. The Department of Antiquities had an annual purchase grant of £3,000 but this was stretched by a previous liability of £550, and, without extra funds from the government, the museum was unwilling to commit to the Faussett sale. Even though the Society of Antiquaries sent a series of protests, and complained that ‘there is a strong probability that it will be purchased in France; and that it will be a disgrace to England that English objects thought worthy of being purchased in France, should leave this country’, the museum once again declined. 10 A trustees’ meeting just a month later confirmed a request to the Treasury for a special grant of £86,000 to build and fit out the Round Reading Room in the Inner Courtyard. They perhaps thought better of asking for yet more money to acquire the Faussett collection, and were no doubt unwilling to jeopardize the ongoing programme of building work. The opportunity was lost.
    Joseph Mayer, however, was much taken by the thought of the collection. As early as November 1853, when staff at the British Museum were still, in theory, negotiating for the pieces, he wrote a friendly and enthusiastic note to Franks, forewarning