Metal Detecting as a Cash Crop at Butley Priory

At the Suffolk Sandlands-Metal Detecting UK pay-to-dig event at Butley in Suffolk there were "Stunning ancient discoveries" according to the "Unearthed Detecting TV" channel. The hirsute presenter's accent giving away that he'd come a long way to loot these Suffolk fields for artefacts to take away. More than that, he reveals his involvement is even greater: "we've got a group of detectorists out here already and the next three or four days will be very very interesting. I'm going to be alongside the detectorists doing a bit of detecting myself with John the other tour guide and we hope to bring you some wonderful finds from all ages" So from that, it looks like he's one of the organizers making money from pay-to-dig looting artefacts from the archaeological record (in his case, that'd be from a county the other end of the country). Right under the noses of the arkies in Suffolk. 

Posted on You Tube by @unearthed-detecting-tv Mar 23, 2025 - 1,606 views .

 The blurb goes: 

"Metal detecting at the Suffolk Sandlands Tours doesn't get much better, what an amazing experience, discovering history from the Bronze Age all the way through to the modern era, with treasure unearthed within the first few hours! Such an amazing group too, with dedicated metal detectorists all searching as a team".

Here's the blurb for Suffolk Sandlands Tours

 

Butley Priory
"Metal Detecting Holidays in Suffolk
Treasure hunters, we offer specialist metal detecting tours in the Suffolk countryside, with access to many acres of private farmland. In the heart of Suffolk close to the ancient burial ground of Sutton Hoo. As featured in The Mail on Sunday and The Telegraph [...] The BAFTA award winning BBC's Detectorists [was] filmed nearby, with Mackenzie Crook and Toby Jones [...]
Three full days metal detecting guided by our experienced hosts for the duration of your stay.
Expert identification of finds, recording with t he PAS of required artefacts and your own personal finds box provided for all your finds."

Hang the effing presentation "box" what about these records? PAS database: County:Suffolk, District:Suffolk Coastal, Parish:Butley Created after: Wednesday 1st January 2020 (Covid): FOUR records. yet this is not the first time this rapacious group of tekkie-tourists, sopme from the USA, have been there...
Sudbourne same search terms, 0 results.
Gedgrave same search terms, one result SF-61DC76 

Orford  same search terms, one result : SF-A91E49  

So, what's going on there?

This is in the context of aggressively taunting comments on the forums and social media from this milieu to the effect of: 

"Amateur archaeologists uncovering more history than the 'professionals' that highlights the pathetic attempts of they (sic), and their university-educated 'experts', to uncover anything of significance",

"finds and discoveries you and your bigoted friends as so-called uncoverers of the past can only dream about!",

 "how many treasure finds does the Department for Culture, Media and Sport show were found by archaeologists? The ones who have lost the plot are not us, but you and your tiny group of unenlightened fossilized archaeologists. We will continue to contribute all that is important regarding our country's history...",

or a comment posted to this blog: that seems to be related to this very same group:
"Sorry to interrupt your nap Paul, but do you not think you should get on with the job of disparaging detectorists instead of dreaming of treasures you will never Unearthed [UK]" .

There is a big mega-hypocritical gap between words (puerile taunts) and grown-up responsible action. The claims to be reporting huge numbers of "discoveries" are here shown to be hollow. We need to recognise the number of detectorists sheltering under the comfy umbrella supplied by the PAS, but in fact who have no active connection with it. One day those "sleepy fossilised" jobsworths of teh British archaeological establishment will wake up to THEIR responsibilities while the looters continue to loot from under their noses.

Pyramid Pseudoscientific Mumbo-Jumbo

'Controversial study claims massive structures discovered under pyramids in Egypt' Egypt Independent March 23, 2025

A new study on the Egyptian pyramids has caused a stir worldwide, after researchers from Italy and Scotland claimed that there is a “huge underground city” extending over 6,500 feet beneath Giza pyramids – ten times larger than the pyramids themselves. This claim is based on the use of pulse radar devices by experts to create high-resolution images deep underground beneath the structures, in the same way that sonar radar is used to map the depths of the oceans. The study, which has not been reviewed by independent experts, revealed the presence of eight vertical cylindrical structures extending over 2,100 feet beneath the pyramid, in addition to additional unknown structures at a depth of 4,000 feet. A press release described the findings as “groundbreaking,” and if proven true, could rewrite the history of ancient Egypt.

Trouble is, it's all bollocks. The first thing that comes to mind is the massive weight of the Pyramids, and one asks oneself, if anyone of sound mind would first dig out massive cavities below the site where they are going to build this thing? Second question, although they don't give much in the way of dimensions, the volume of limestone chips and fragments that would have had to be quarried out to cut such chambers is massive. So where are the dumps of this material, and why have they never been found? Thirdly not very far away from the place where these shafts are supposed to be (and under the Khafre causeway) is the so-called Tomb of Osiris (Shaft of Osiris), the lower level of which is water-filled due to the proximity of the water table to the ground surface here. Fourthly, there are the technical aspects of remote sensing (from a satellite) no less right through the pyramid over them. I call it a scam. I am not alone: 

" independent experts have raised serious concerns about the study [...] Egyptologist and former Director General of the Giza Pyramids Area, Hussein Abdel-Basir, stated that this study lacks the most basic standards of proper scientific research. He added that any genuine scientific discovery in the field of archaeology must first be published in a reliable scientific journal after careful peer review. Abdel-Basir continued, “What happened here was merely a press conference and press release, without a scientific paper published in any respectable journal, and without an official announcement from the Egyptian Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities or the Supreme Council of Antiquities.” He said that geophysical techniques such as GPRs or seismic analysis can only survey limited depths, not exceeding tens of meters in the best of circumstances. The claim of the existence of huge structures at a depth of 2,000 feet (600 meters) is science fiction and not based on any reality, Abdel-Basir stressed. He also noted that one of the people making this claim, Corrado Malanga, is a well-known researcher in unidentified flying objects and has previously appeared on programs about aliens. Abdel-Basir added, “When this approach is introduced into archaeological research, it transforms from scientific research into the promotion of conspiracy theories and populism that do not serve the truth.”

Egyptian Stone Vase Heritage

Uh-oh... Night Scarab "Vase Scan Team: Civil War over Petrie Scans?" After 5 months of unpaid work for a "foundation", Petrie Museum scans analysis results published in public domain by the author of the analyses, Stine Gerdes. Good.

Report here: Arc.Scientific
MV11, MV16, MV17, MV18, MV19, MV20, MV21 are the excavated ones 

Vase scanners (VST) seem unhappy, it seems they did not prepare a good enough contract, Károly Póka @karolypoka moans 

@karolypoka 1 hour ago
The results that were published were not final and had not undergone peer review, nor were they posted with the team's permission.

This is a bit confusing

What does it mean "not final" if the author (Steine Gerdes) of the actual analyses considers them final enough to publish under their name? Does this NOT represent the results that THEY came to (reportedly after five months of their work)? Did you plan to somehow manipulate these results - and if so, is that why they decided to pre-empt that by publishing what they had? 

Find another analyst if you want other results. 

An EU directive is not law. Your Foundation has only the claims to the INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (not "trade secrets" - so unprofessional) stipulated in the contact you signed with the analyst.  

But I note that the only items from this teaching collection that have a secure excavated context, all but one have relatively low "precision scores" compared to examples from the antiquities market  (and the other one has no result yet). Could that be the problem why you are uncomfortable with these results being available? 

As a researcher into the market, I wonder whether these few results suggest that with more work, this "precision score" can be used as a non-invasive means of determining authenticity - the higher the score, the more dodgy the purchase?   

The publication of these results is good news for enquiring minds... I am pleased to see that the points I was making about objects from the antiquities market are validated. To reiterate, of the Petrie objects analysed, as I earlier warned would be the case, only seven of the teaching collection objects are specifically documented as from excavations and compared to some from the antiquities market, SIX OF THESE HAVE LOW "PRECISION SCORES" (c. 2,29,12,14,9,10) and one has no result available yet.

Obviously, we need more results than just 5 vases, but it's beginning to look as if to get a reliable view of the nature of production processes of these objects, we need exclusively to use excavated material, not stuff from any part of antiquities market. Thank you, Stine Gerdes for all your had work. Thanks also to the Petrie Museum for allowing the Scanners access to these vessels so that through prompt publication of analytical results we can learn more about them.

market

Consider Using a Burner Phone if you plan to Visit the USA

             Welcome (posted on You Tube by Omeleto Jul 10, 2017)

According to Le Monde, a French researcher was recently expelled from the US for expressing "a personal opinion on the policies pursued by the Trump administration". The CNRS researcher was reportedly subjected to random checks upon arrival, before his computer and phone were searched. Grok summarises the press coverage:

"The incident occurred on March 9, 2025, when a French space researcher from the National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS) was detained in Houston airport while en route to a conference, according to Le Monde and other reports.< His professional and personal equipment was reportedly confiscated, and the researcher was sent back to Europe on March 10.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) conducted a random search, discovering messages on the researcher’s phone criticizing the Trump administration’s science policies, which led to his expulsion, as reported by The New Republic and Newsweek.
France’s Minister of Higher Education and Research, Philippe Baptiste, expressed concern, stating the researcher was banned for expressing personal opinions on Trump’s research policies, as noted in Le Monde.
According to a diplomatic source, social media messages discussing the Trump administration's treatment of scientists were found on his phone personal phone and as a result, the man was allegedly accused of messages "that reflect hatred toward Trump and can be classified as terrorism", according to another source familiar with the matter, he was accused of "hateful and conspiratorial messages".
An FBI investigation was reportedly announced, for which "charges were dropped," the source continued.
This case aligns with broader concerns about heightened immigration enforcement and potential curbs on free speech under the Trump administration, with similar detentions reported for other international visitors, according to Newsweek.
The Trump administration’s policies, including cuts to scientific research funding and the Department of Government Efficiency’s efforts, have sparked criticism, contributing to the context of the researcher’s detention, as detailed in The New Republic.
Aix-Marseille University in France has launched a “Safe Place for Science” initiative to host U.S. researchers affected by Trump administration policies, reflecting a growing international response, as reported by Le Monde on March 17, 2025"

Unfortunately, the available information from Le Monde, The New Republic, The Guardian, and other sources does not mention the researcher’s skin color, ethnicity, or any physical descriptors. Based on my own observations even in pre-MAGA days of very obvious racial profiling at US airports, one might have suspicions of what happened here. So much for the respect for free speech. Probably only works if you are White and on the political right.

What actually constitutes a "conspiritorial" tweet (in French) according to ma US Border officuial? And just how does the USA define here "terrorim" in the case of a tweet or social media post?
I hope the man comes forward and shows us what made patranoid US officials overrreact in this way. If only they were so assiduous about catching antiquities smugglers and their suppliers and clients.

Paris déplore le refoulement d’un scientifique français par les États-UnisOuest-France 19/03/2025
 

"French Scientist Reportedly Denied U.S. Entry Due to Trump Criticism" New Republic March 19, 2025,

"French scientist denied US entry after phone messages critical of Trump found" The Guardian: March 19, 2025.

Update:
Geez, Canadian citizen Jasmine Mooney is back home after U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detained her at the border in San Diego as she was reapplying for her work visa. She describes the 12-day ordeal of being shipped to various facilities, sleeping on concrete, no proper food? "I do not wish it upon anyone": BC woman detained for 12 days at US border details ordeal; " 'The most inhumane thing I've ever seen': Canadian on being detained by U.S. border officials"

Beware

 Caesar, you should not go to the Forum today....

In the image, what should be an imperial mantle has no fastener, so what the artist has shown here can only be interpreted as a winding sheet, a shroud. 

Looting By and For the Coin Collectors

                   Dug up: "Discovery"   
               or Damage?   

 

I did not know about this when I did my study of 'Dolphins' from Olbia. Interesting comparative results:

Le "Numismatique : le pillage et le commerce des oboles de Marseille", par Xavier Delestre Publié le 21 janv. 2020 

Le pillage des sites archéologiques alimente un commerce florissant du matériel découvert lors de ces pratiques destructrices. Il en est ainsi des oboles de Marseille qui ont été la proie de nombreux "échanges" illégaux. L'ouvrage de X. Delestre, conservateur régional de l'archéologie à la DRAC PACA, retrace les nombreuses séquences de ce commerce.
Vous pouvez télécharger cet ouvrage gratuitement.

Here we see the damage done by metal detectorists, and I really do not think there is any compensation in their oft-bleated mantra "but we discover many things that would still be below the ground if we did not dig them up". The PAS in the UK is simply NOT doing its job countering this misconception - and in fact bolstering it.    

When Are British Archaeologists Going to Start Taking This Seriously?

Way back when, on this PACHI blog on Sunday, 15 July 2018, I posed a question (not for the first time): < How Many 'Metal Detectorists' are there in England and Wales? I might not have bothered, it did not really attract the attention of anyone much (Dr Neil Brodie's google search did not find it for example)  he stated that a "broad consensus that the actual number [of active metal detectorists] is in the region of 10-15000" and then gives literature a decade old to support this. He ignores the fact that the numbers quite clearly have been growing and the 2018 figures really do make it look like there were twice that number at least. Nobody apart from myself and the late Nigel Swift (please correct me if I've missed any lively discussion of this and its implications somewhere) has seemed particularly bothered that the numbers shown in my little graph seemed to be suggesting a steady rate of growth. As far as I am aware, there were no other estimates published after that, so I did not bother to update my graph.

Until today.  One of the figures that was always missing was from the geriatric NCMD that consistently concealed its membership figures for the very reason I was so interested in them. The numbers of their members would be quite an accurate gauge of active tekkies as they were one of the main sources of the obligatory Third Party Insurance that tekkies needed to show the farmer. And comparison of that number with the volume of artefacts being "responsibly reported" to the PAS and other bodies (TTU in Scotland too) will be a good index of responsibility (all the time the public are told that the MAJORITY of artefact hunters take objects from the archaeological record "responsibly, in accordance with the Code of Best Practice - ie recording the lot with the PAS. I say that is a lie). 

But now, as I noted a while ago, the NCMD, in a bid to be "relevant" suddenely and probably absent mindedly let slip the true (?) figures [National Council for Metal Detecting Drops Its Guard, 38000 Membership: Implications}. Duh. 

I left it a while, wondering if somebody else was going to spot it and run with it... nah... So here is the new graph. What it shows is that, if it really does show what is happening, the numbers have almost DOUBLED in the last decade and a half. And the reporting of artefacts to the PAS? Is that keeping up and mitigating the additional damage? And the reporting of Treasure cases is up, yes... but NOT by the same order of magnitude. So either there are now a lot of Treasure cases going into people's pockets unreported OR the resource is being depleted now so seriously that artefact hunters are not coming across Treasures as frequently as they could have done fifteen years ago (my "Treasure blip" issue that only seem to be interested at all in). 

This will now need adjusting: https://paul-barford.blogspot.com/2018/07/a-revised-artefact-erosion-counter.html

If in 2023 there were just 50,550 records (of 74,506 archaeological finds) reported by just 4,375 finders of all kinds, that is really not a very good level of participation...