"Dear Seller..." [Updated]

The reason why this blog is not monetised is that instead of save-the-planet products, The Internet Gods would stuff it with antiquities for sale adverts by a whole load of shady people selling dodgy stuff. I try to keep popups away from anything I am reading, but... and among the ones that do get through are antiquities (let me put that in invertaed commas: "antiquities"). For a long while a persistent culprit was Artemission (ugh) and now somebody else has started to annoy me by their intrusive crap.

As far as I am concerned, the Internet is here for everybody to share information, views and opinions (for good or bad). Today it seems to be being seen by a lot of people merely as a marketplace, a place to advertise stuff they want to sell, and persuade you that you really, really "want to buy". OK, but then they should be aware that by posting up their stuff openly for assessment they are exposiong it to assessment not only of the people that want to buy 'cool antiquities', but also people that actually know something about what dugup antiquities do and do not look like, and people that see the trend towards trashing sites to dig them up for saleble collectables as a highly negative phenomenon, and one that needs to be actively challenged. So here I am, falling into the last two groups, with a blog on the very same internet to boot, and some numpty is posting their goods on a site that thrusts pictures and details (I use the term loosely, see below) right in my face. I tried to ignore it the first few times... then I looked for the "make this stop" button to click on, found none. So thought I'd take a closer look. So somehow a site called "1st Dibs" has got me on its "send stuff to" list. Maybe its the Twitter handle (portantmatters - "portable antiquities matters - important", get it?) maybe the blog name, maybe some old searches activated some cookies, but several times a day, I keep getting this cute "cat-headed pot" thrust into my face somewhere in a news item I am reading about the Ukrainian War. So in the end, I clicked...

The problem for numpty anonymous seller with their stuff plastered all over the internet is they DO NOT OWN the internet, and since they are not controlling who gets to see their stuff, neither can they claim any right to be able to control what is thought and said about it. I am not going to buy this thing, I am not interested in whether Bob the Replacement Window Salesman from Ohio buys it or not, so I offer no commercial advice, but I do think that as somebody involved in discussions of the antiquities market I can (and indeed, from some point of view, should) say what I honestly think about it.

So (warning, I cannot guarantee you'll not subsequently get amusing little 1stDibs popups too) click here, and if Bob's not snapped it up, you'll see a picture of a "Pre-Columbian Pottery Vessel with Cat Heads" and seven more pictures and the purchase price of €1,030.22. for what is being marketed as a dug-up antiquity (most likely from a tomb) exported from Mexico.

Clicking on 'more details' (below 'purchase') gives more information:

"Presenting a lovely piece of Native American antiquity, namely, a Pre-Columbian pottery vessel with cat heads. From circa 13th-14th century and probably made by the Mayan’s (sic) in the Mexico area. The bowl is very simplistic in form and shape with a baluster shape with narrow rim and opening. It has the most glorious pair of cat’s heads on the sides. It sits on 4 pointed feet. In great condition for it’s (sic) age. Some minor nibbling, especially on the rim. One foot repaired.

Details
Dimensions  Height: 5.25 in. (13.34 cm) Width: 9.5 in. (24.13 cm) Depth: 6 in. (15.24 cm)

Style  Pre-Columbian (Of the Period)

Materials and Techniques Pottery, Hand-Crafted

Place of Origin  Mexico

Period  15th Century and Earlier,  Date of Manufacture 1400

Condition Good Repaired: One leg/foot repaired. Wear consistent with age and use. Minor losses. Good original condition. Some minor losses to rim with age and one foot repaired.

Shipping
€65.86 Standard Parcel Shipping Delivered by a parcel delivery service such as UPS, FedEx, or DHL. to Poland 03-287, arrives in 8-17 days. We recommend this shipping type based on item size, type and fragility. View Options Customs Duties and Taxes May Apply."

You'll see that the seller has "other items", is a "platinum" 1stDibs seller and... that's it. No name is given, no indication of their expertise in assessing Postclassic Maya pottery. They say it is "Precolumbian", one assumes that they mean that was made, used and buried before "Christopher Columbus sailed the ocean blue". Nothing else. in fact there is a question her whether they mean (made in pre-Columbian times" or "made in pre-Columbian style". There is a difference and that imprecise term without any explanation is ambiguous. No collection history, nothing. Just the bold description. But the latter is not even that. It is an interpretation, not backed up by any supporting evidence. I myself would say if the seller has a cat that looks like that, they should take the animal to a vet straight away, not least to get a second opinion. The animal depicted is a canid, most probably a coyote (whose range today is Central and North America). The vessel itself is not "baluster-shape", and our 1stDibs platinum seller art connoisseur cannot spell "Maya", "baluster" or "its". Nevertheless, taking advantage of the fact that the seller proclaims helpfully that [instead of being there to make a profit by selling cultural objects] "I'm here to help! You can ask me about additional images, more detailed dimensions, best price, condition details, or shipping information", I thought I would check what information was available from Texas, though I am not so much interested in "dimensions" or "best price", but the things that should be being said here:

Dear anonymous antiquities seller, For some reason, and despite me never clicking on anything to say I actually want to view such content, 1stDibs is pushing images of this vessel as an intrusive and annoying popup onto websites I view. It has done it so many times I am intrigued and tried to look at it. But I find so few relevant details - like who the "seller" actually is and on what they base the identification (culture, age, origins?). Why specifically "cats"? Is there any collection history and paperwork (excavation permit, official export papers) that you can let the buyer have? I am a bit disturbed by the fact that the images are not zoomable, and hardly comprise the basis for a prospective buyer to actually judge what they are getting. At the scale visible some of the "manganese deposits" supposed to confirm burial look like circular inkspots. Could you comment on that? As a seller do you find that using a venue that operates through intrusive unsolicited advertising like this benefits your business? Do you have a contact address please? Thank you. Paul Barford

Watch this space for any answer the author of this blog gets about the export documentation and  apparent inkspots (for the latter see the post below).

UPDATE 23.04.2022

The blurb says "typically replies within an hour". So it must be atypical that a day later, even allowing for timezone differences, I still have received no reply. Perhaps they are still trying to find the paperwork I asked about to send me a scan to prove that all is kosher with this item. But on the inbox where the reply should appear, there's a little dropdown thingy that tells us that the dealer's name is: "Rockwell Antiques" and there's quite a bit about them in the internet, they are based in the Dallas Design District, Dallas, TX 75207. Here's the website and proclaims "French, European, British and Asian Antiques a speciality", but not dugup pre-Columbian artefcts, I guess.

Not in it For the Money, Or Perhaps We Are Really...

Reportedly, a treasure hunter is being sued by the Church of Scotland over a record £2million haul of Viking relics he found on their land (Kevin Duguid, 'Treasure hunter sued by Church of Scotland over record £2million haul of Viking relics he found on their land' The Scottish Sun, 14th September 2019) Kirk chiefs are said to be demanding Derek McLennan, 52, hands over £1million after he allegedly snubbed a written agreement to give them half the value of his bounty. This refers to a much trumpeted find from Dumfries and Galloway in 2014

The metal detector buff now faces a legal challenge at the Court of Session in Edinburgh [...] One source said last night [...] “The church could do a lot of good with that money. It was church land they were on [...] “You don’t want to get in a legal wrangle over it. Why would anyone let him on to their land again — or any other detectorist?” [...] the retired businessmen, from Ayr, was promised the bumper reward three years later under Scots treasure trove laws. His payment was raised through more than £430,000 in public donations, £1million from the National Heritage Memorial Fund, £150,000 from the Scottish Government and £400,000 from the Art Fund. [...] In this case there was a written agreement between the general trustees of the Church of Scotland and Derek.” [...] The Church of Scotland confirmed their court action.

His former detecting pal talked about the fracas:

The minister said charity champion Derek felt let down by experts drafted in after his discovery. He added: “He felt very badly treated by the treasure trove system in Scotland who decide on rewards. Experts took control and he was pushed to the edge a bit. He did everything by the book in terms of working with the system. “But he felt because of the way he was treated by the system he wanted to put the whole thing behind him.” 

Here's a text about his complaint about his 'treatment'  and here's about those public funds he gets.

UPDATE
It seems it could be even worse if you look at the comments. A "Susannah McSweeney" alleged on 15th September:

Derek also broke gentelman" agreements with his team mates, including my husband. There was 4 of them including Derek's wife sharon, not just the church of Scotland. [...] The other 2 men including my husband were also snubbed by Derek after the viking hoard was claimed and since broken off all contact and never had any recognition for being there to unearth the treasure. What was done was shady and despicable.

What is worth noting however is that the Church claims there was a written agreement, not just a "gentleman's agreement". If what Mrs McSweeney alleges is true, one detectorist first pushes aside three other blokes, and then attempts to lay claim to the entire reward for himself alleging that he was "sidelined by the experts". If that is true, all very odd and immature.

The BBC also has picked up the story: BBC, 'Church of Scotland sues for share of £2m Viking treasure', 15th September 2019.

There is an added detail in another source (Russell Blackstock, 'Kirk to sue treasure hunter claiming he reneged on promise to share proceeds of £2 million Viking hoard found buried on church land' The Sunday Post September 15, 2019):

Following the find, Mr McLennan and his detectorist wife Sharon launched a firm called Beyond The Beep, to work with the Coming Home Centre for ex-forces personnel in Glasgow and veterans’ mental health charity Combat Stress. [...] Derek McLennan found the Viking treasure just months after discovering hundreds of medieval coins in Twynholm, Kirkcudbrightshire, in another landmark find. He only started using a metal detector a few years before two stunning discoveries.

Beyond the Beep does not seem to be all that active these days. Here's John Winter enthusing about it. But here's the Minelab spiel on it:

We'd like to introduce Sharon McKee and Derek McLennan of Beyond The Beep, Scotland, to our Treasure Talk audience. Sharon and Derek have 12 years of combined detecting experience and for the last few years have used a wide range of Minelab machines, from the GO-FIND Series through to the GPX 5000 for personal detecting and to promote responsible detecting through their not-for-profit company, Beyond The Beep. Since February 2015, the couple have been regularly providing outdoor learning experiences in schools, and they have also created and implemented a detecting programme for veterans suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). [...] Derek mostly uses the CTX 3030, but when on a hoard site, the GPX 5000 comes out, as he loves the depth these machines can reach. [...] After the discovery of The Galloway Viking Hoard, the enterprising pair created their company Beyond The Beep to teach about responsible detecting and to promote the health and educational benefits that detecting brings [...] The programme is also supported by the National Council of Metal Detecting in the UK, to which Beyond The Beep is affiliated.

All in this together, eh? Derek McLennan is also a ML detexpert Now that GPX is one of those "depth advantage" machines that Heritage Action and I have been going on about for a good few years now, but the implications of which are being systematically ignored by the archaeological community, but look at this remark:

Last week, Mr McLennan’s friend and fellow metal detector enthusiast, the Rev David Bartholomew, who was with him when he made his discovery, told how [...] Mr McLennan had searched the unidentified area of Church of Scotland land for more than a year in the hunt for treasure. [...] Mr McLennan, 50, unearthed the valuables two feet beneath the ground – well below the depth his machine should pick up a signal. [...] Mr Bartholomew said: “I would never have found the hoard. Derek did because he is a gifted detectorist. “I was just pleased to be part of an amazing day.”

and would like that money from a pagan hoard to go to the Church and used for the benefit of the parishoners.

Commercialising the "Assets" of the Past in America

Roberta Mazza has drawn our attention ('There are merchants in the temple: selling and buying ancient Biblical artefacts' Faces and Voices February 11, 2015) to a business venture set up last year in the US to "Bring New Purpose to Ancient Biblical Artifacts". What that purpose is is strongly suggested by the name, "Ancient Asset Investments" and the frequent mentions of assessors' valuations. These good Christian folk seem obsessed by their tax reductions and showing off their generaosity donating manuscripts to various places. When you go to the contacts page it looks like it was set up by Todd A. Hillard from San Antonio, TX. Hillard is a well-known Christian author (co-author with individuals such as the Young Earth Creationists Ken Ham of Creation Museum fame). These books seem to be particularly concerned with the problems of indoctrinating your kids in what is called a "Godless world". Hillard is also reportedly co-author with Steve Green of a work ('The Bible in America') for which Amazon gives a date of publication for as 2013, but like other Green-Bible-collection-related stuff has apparently been delayed. Another Green Collection link is the apparent collaboration between Hillard's AAI and Scott Carroll's Manuscripts and Rare Books which seems to be where they are sourcing the products they deal in. here's the unctuous introductory video:

.

Posted on You Tube 10 Oct 2014 by AAI (embedding enabled).

.

The AAI appears to offer its clients access to a variety of material. These include Hebrew Scrolls which 'come from every corner of the earth' ('Price range: $25,000 – $150,000' or single books like the Book of Esther Price range: $10,000 – $125,000, but clients may prefer the added kudos proffered by the 'Unusually Rare Specialty Scrolls' Price Range: $200,000-$500,000. There is an endorsement by Josh McDowell on the front page, the Josh McDowell that inexplicably shows off his very old Torah scroll from Łódż, Poland discussed on this blog. This raises questions where precisely these scrolls are coming from and why the communities that treasured them are now flogging them to AAI.  The home decoration end of the market is also catered for by "Bible Background Literary Sets". Price range: $3,000 – $30,000. These are assemblages of "biblically-related artifacts" fixed in displayable presentation boxes. Clients are told they will:

illustrate the ancient world and bring the Bible to life. Supporting information is provided to offer guidance on how each item might be used in a teaching context. They make extraordinary gifts. For collectors, these sets are solid investments and absolutely unique treasures to own.

Then there are papyri bearing "Classical and Biblical Texts" including classical works (such as Homer) and biblical texts in Greek and Coptic. "Each text is virtually one-of-a-kind and would be prized additions to the most prestigious private collections, a university's special holdings or a museum's collection". Price range: $50,000 (for small fragments of biblical papyri in Coptic dating between 300 and 700 AD) to $1,000,000+ (for early fragments of the Greek New Testament). So that probably gives trashing mummy masks a pretty good return for the money. The website illustrates a "second century" papyrus, said to be a Ptolemaic royal document of unspecified nature "It was discovered in the infrastructure of a mummy covering. Traces of painted plaster can be seen". Not enough Palmolive, obviously.

In this object-centred world, the 'people' section of the AAI webpage tells us it deals with  just 'clients' (who have "the unique opportunity to utilize the artifacts they purchase to the greatest advantage, be it personal, emotional, or financial") and 'guardians'. The following two You Tube videos make it clear what it's all about:

.

.          

Posted on You Tube 10 Oct 2014 by AAI (embedding enabled).

The text on 'Process' of this business venture starts off with 'Step One – Acquisitions'. "Clients can often acquire artifacts for 1/3 or less of appraised values" it says. This is achieved through AAI buying bulk lots ("collections") and buying artefact "directly from street-level foreign sources". They boast "unparalleled access to undocumented and unidentified artifacts in the overseas markets". Moving along, 'Step Two – Research'. Now here's the significant bit. "At our clients’ request, artifacts may undergo in-depth research. The research documentation allows appraisers to value them higher than undocumented and unknown scrolls". Free of any charge to the clients, AAI gets their street-level-bought artefacts to "scholars of cuneiform tablets, papyri, Dead Sea Scrolls, biblical manuscripts and scrolls of enormous significance"

MRG places manuscripts in the hands of capable professors and select graduate students in strategic universities around the world. New leaders are given unprecedented opportunities to research and publish the most important texts available and thereby mentor a new generation of highly capable scholars.

But for the client, the significance is that this research has the capability of "Illuminating Value".

Artifacts are returned with dozens (and sometimes hundreds) of pages of documentation. This documentation aids the appraiser by documenting details and descriptions representing hours and hours of intricate observations—work that an appraiser could never afford to due on their own—yet this work illuminates the artifacts hidden worth as an asset, makes the appraiser’s job easier and can even secure much higher values for the items. Quality research adds great value to ancient artifacts—both for the clients and for the scholars who have the privilege to work with them.

Now, there are two issues here. First is absolutely no mention is made of any kind of documentation being provided to the client (still less the future 'guardian') of licit origins and collecting history ('provenance') whether free of charge or not. Neither is there any mention who will arrange export licences for objects moving back and forth across national borders or the objects even haviong any export licences (for example from Egypt in the case of papyri). This becomes important when these objects are taken onto campus or the premises of a research institution, but also - and more important for "the process" - when they are gifted. The donor has to show title was gained lawfully and ethically otherwise the gift cannot be accepted by any self-respecting institution.  The second issue is the use of students and university facilities for commercial purposes. Here one is getting into serious issues with professional ethics of teachers and institutes. This is especially acute in the case of in the case of what are reported to includef undocumented and unidentified artefacts obtained somehow in unspecified "overseas markets".  Which universities are allowing the exploitation of its students by this commercial enterprise?

Then we get to the nitty grity of the whole "process" 'Step Three  – Appraisals': "for any number of reasons, a client may wish to have a declaration of value. AAI [...] refer clients to independent experts who can give an estimated appraised value". The culmination of the AAI 'process' is 'Step Four – Gifting'. This "results in these artifacts being placed with good people who will care for them and share them with the world again, Our business model does this to the benefit of all involved, including the financial benefit of our clients". The AAI can even recommend suitable recipients, and organize some kind of a shindig where the donor can get dressed up, invite all his friends and people he wants to impress and strut his Christian piety and generosity. The list of AAI-linked "Dedication Events" begins and ends with a series in the autumn of 2014:

September 18: Trinity International University (Deerfield, IL):
Torah scroll  "The scroll originated in Germany and dates to the late 1400s or early 1500s." donated by Ken and Barbara Larson. here was a Christian dedication service. 
September 30: The Master’s Seminary (Sun Valley, CA) It is not clear what this is, seems not to be mentioned on Facebook page.
November 13: Trinity Western Seminary (Vancouver, BC) It is not clear what this was, it is not mentioned on the website, but see here.
November 18: Wheaton College (Wheaton, IL). Neither is it clear what this was, see here. The events calendar does not go back that far.
December 3: Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (Ft. Worth, TX) Again no details, odd in the light of this.
December 5: Dallas Theological Seminary (Dallas, TX) "This morning Dr. Scott Carroll, Director and Senior Research Scholar for the Manuscript Research Group, donated a beautiful Torah scroll to DTS" (actually paid for by Barbara and Ken Larson). See 'DTS Welcomes A Torah Scroll' (SC from 24:17), with a You Tube version. "This comes from North Africa" (Marocco) and part of it is "800 years old"....

Of the six educational institutions I could only find information about two, both of whom received Torah scrolls. What did the other educational institutes receive?I was interested to come across what seems to be the deletion of a blog post about one of these vents and the turning off of the comments under the DTS video. No mention is made of how the DTS one was taken from North Africa ... This reminds me a little of the fuss about Torahs donated by Rabbi Youlus and his Save a Torah foundation.  There seems a huge appetite for them in the US.

"Everybody's Lying": Some Detectorists' Opinions on Deep Detecting

A newbie detectorist "who appears to know so little he doesn’t realise how little he knows" claims that he is being lied to constantly by archaeologists (except ones who say what he wants to hear who are the only truthful ones) says that a new breed of metal detectors "won’t go that deep":

Anyway, infinitely more experienced detectorists (than someone who has only ever found two recordable finds in their life!) have settled the depth issue entirely in Farmer Brown’s favour. (“Hello there, Neil Jones here aka slow_n_low, i can now get 24″ on the same small coins as i know the machine inside out and a lot lot deeper on the larger finds”).

There was a video made on the Corfe rally showing Neil Jones demonstrating what he'd learnt, he was filmed digging an enormous hole in pasture to extract a single Roman coin from some considerable depth. Unfortunately, with Gary Brun's mysterious parting of the ways with Minelab, that video went with him, and cannot now be found on the internet. But here's a thread about it: 
Thread: Slow-n-Low GPX 5000 Depth Advantage Video, and here are some of the comments made at the end of October 2010:

great video that machine looks awesome,you certainly had to dig deep neil

Good video. I love the way Gordon stands there chatting while Neil spends 10 minutes digging.

Very impressive!

Impressive, that machine definately does its job!  Just have to hope you can do some searching between digging those craters!

Very impressive depth!!

unbeliveble depth,,,,,great video.....

Well done lads - impressive that.

Interesting approach as todays finds become more rare at the 6 to 10 inch depth, this may open a whole new style to coin and releic hunting? Well done boys.

Get used to digging deep holes boys [...].

Now that was impressive

very impressed wouldnt mind a go on one to try on our never been ploughed pasture land we've got, we've had a few deep roman but i reckon theres loads more there but out of reach of the se or etrac so this machine looks as if its capable of finding the deep ones,it would be interesting to have a bash on one

Weve got some pasture that has had loads of shallow finds on it, mostly bronzes and brooches so we're getting to the stage now where we need to investigate deeper so The GPX hopefully is going to be our answer. I think more than a few others on the forum are thinking the same way also.

we have alot of untouched pasture and theres alot of goodies we think that are just out of our reach so it would be interesting to see what the GPX is like so yeah you will be getting an invite soon mate and poor old dave doing all your digging i bet hes knackered after being out with you,digging them 2ft+ deep holes

I do not understand why digging a hole, say two feet deep, poses any threat to anything, provided it is properly filled in as that hole was.


Loved the vid, great finds and just goes to show the power of the new GPX's and what they are capable of - Awesome!

Well done. Clearly shows the advantage.

Neil proved beyond all doubt in the film that the new GPXs are capable of discrim far deeper than the few inches your suggesting. I havent used mine more than an hour at the moment but the few good finds Ive had like a nice roman brooch were well down below normal Explorer depths. Time will tell but I think we are maybe on to a real winner here.

Is this all lies? Gary Brun responds: "Do people really belive I would make à video to mislead folks??? Do you thinking I would post it to mislead my friends??? Minelab dont own me.".

I also think they may be of use on fields that have produced hoards, I am lucky enough to have found two hoards in the past, so am tempted to buy one to use on those particular fields and go over previously productive ground. Yes, they are very expensive machines but I think that the investment may be worthwhile for some detector users. Has anyone used one to locate deep stray coins from previously found hoards with success?

I would suggest it has two places in the UK market. 1. Good,heavily detected sites. 2. Known hoard sites where there maybe stragglers/more coins etc below normal depth but still within plough soil (in case this gets C&P elsewhere).

I would also put a third place on your list... 3. On sites that have only been shallow plowed. I have several sites, one of which has a Roman bath house, which for various reasons are only allowed to shallow plow. I don't think the plow has gone more than six inches on some sites. The bath house site has a restriction on deep plowing because of the archeology. Some sites have very chalky soil and some have been pasture and never been plowed in living memory!.

(omegamike, Rochester, Kent: 02-11-2010, 11:29 AM #65).

The site is protected from deep ploughing, but not deep artefact hunting and hoiking? Has the Kent FLO contacted Omega Mike about this post and this site?


as for sensitivity

"You couldnt use it on the rallies Whiggs theres too much interference to other tecterists, you need a wide berth", and "Yep and quite a wide berth from anything metallic on your body. First thing I noticed I just happened to leave the wrong boots on first time I used mine. Two metal lace eyelets sounded off big time, . Minelab even warn in the handbook about carrying loose change in your pocket and about keeping the battery pack well behind your back".

I think Andy Baines, the man who accuses myself and Nigel Swift of "lying" over this really has not been following the discussion on the detecting forums properly, and I bet he's never learnt how to use for artefact hunting the GPX 5000 or any related machine. But he seems to think that those with far more experience than him are all lying or misled too. It does not occur to him to read around the subject or find out whether he could be wrong.
   

Is it, or Isn't it? PAS Supporters get a Chance to Challenge

Is East Anglia's Buried and Unexplored Heritage being Pilfered in an unsustainable way? 

That's the provocative title of this afternoon's upcoming seminar. British archaeologists who support the current status quo will presumably want to say "no, everything is under control, we have the PAS and its metal detecting partners and everything is hunky dory". The PAS FLOs will presumably also be dying to tell us how it is, how the system we have is the best thing we have since sliced bread. These groups by definition feel that the archaeological record is in no way being 'pilfered' by being mined for collectables, and that what is going on out in the fields is some form of sustainable management of the erosion. I amm sure they will have some good answers and awkward questions for those who believe otherwise.

Meanwhile, those British archaeologists who are as worried as myself about the effects of the current situation will have a forum to express their concerns, I am interested how many will turn up to show their faces.

Apparently these seminars have been attracting 25-35 people each time, and the local and Cambridgeshire FLOs are regular attendees, so we look forward to some vigorous discussion of the archaeological issues. Already local archaeologists George Somerfiled, "Clare", Clive Falstaff and "Adam C" have begun the polemic on the USC blog, and promising more later on today. I look forward to meeting them, the latter promises to bring along a few colleagues. On a detecting forum, on the other hand, it has been suggested that I will chicken out and appear by video link - not wanting to face criticism by my archaeological peers. Well, I am here and curious to see what the afternoon brings.

UPDATE
It went quite well, considering. Of course the FLOs never turned up, the PAS was represented by a lady from the BM who took copious notes and revealed she'd been asked to report back to Bloomsbury "what he said" (Roger if you ask normally, I can send you a copy of the text!). Three metal detectorists came up to me afterwards and were very civil and wanted to exchange a few comments - which was very welcome. It was good to meet UKDFD's Jon Adkin (Flinty). Another one (Clive6) wanted to put me right on "depth advantage" detectors and made a good point about them. Needless to say, none of the persons who'd commented under assorted names claiming to be archaeologists who wanted to make comments on my interpretation of facts made themselves known.  There were a lot of good questions and points made from archaeologists, museum folk and others. Certainly a lot of food for thought. Thanks.

Only afterwards when mulling over what had been said, did it occur to me that the HA Artefact Erosion Counter which I'd presented did not even come up at all in the discussion. It seemed that those present were willing to accept as a starting point of what they were saying that it could indeed represent what was happening.  Through that, I did not say something about it which I'd been saving up for the discussion... But that is quite an interesting development in itself because it is precisely the implications of the HA Counter that irresponsible UK detectorists do not want discussed (because of course those convinced of their responsibility to the archaeological record will be discussing it with us).

I was also very interested in comments made about the PAS both in the session as well as in the corridor.
It seems I am not alone in formulating certain observations. It seems British archaeology is not as fully behind the Scheme as I had thought. In the light of that, it seems to me even more to be the case that the Scheme really needs to be seen to be engaging more with archaeological concerns as it seems in danger of becoming a divisive force in British archaeology - which is already internally split along other lines.

UPDATE 11.04.13
Quite a nice writeup on LM - includes transcript of live tweeting which gives a flavour of the topics covered in the initial presentation and our subsequent discussion.

Vignette: USC logo

"Brun, Baby, Brun": UK-Norwegian Hoard Hunters

.
Networks UK’s History channel has ordered what is billed as a "new factual series", the eight episode "Hoard Hunters" from ITV Studios. This is a "docuseries following archaeologist Mike Webber and his team as they travel to sites of known treasure hoards around the UK to piece together history and perhaps find more artefacts". The treasure hunting escapade is described as a "character driven series that feature amateur enthusiasts who are the best at what they do”:

Hoard Hunters follows Gordon Heritage and Gary Brun as they team up with archaeologist Mike Webber to embark on a quest to unearth hoards of treasure and unlock historical mysteries. Each week the treasure hunting heroes take on a fresh challenge at a new UK location, heading to sites where previous hoards have been found in an attempt to salvage what may have been left behind and maybe even find a whole new hoard. 

It was described by Andy Cook one of the TV researchers thus:

A sort of Top Gear meets Time Team for the History Channel, made by ITV Studios. Hoard hunters follows Gordon Heritage & Gary Brun, expert metal detectorists as they re-visit the sites of old hoards with bigger and better equipment than before. Combining history, humour the show resembles a boys own adventure – as we follow Gary and Gordon on their quest, whilst historical investigator Mike Webber looks into what they might find.

It is called an "archaeology" programme. Well, what can we expect after the ITV's PAS-produced "Britain's Secret Treasures"? Now we are not going to have even secret ones. The presenters will show just how easy it is for any Tom, Dick and Hamid to go to the records, find a likely Treasure spot and get the metal detectors and spades out and dig up the rest of the archaeology at these sites. Sites, that is of the discovery of nationally important archaeological remains, so by that token these are themselves nationally important archaeological sites, not suitable for ad hoc digging willy-nilly on a Treasure-hunter's whim. What is going on over in the UK? Has any archaeological body given the producers of this treasure-seeking adventure film full of "characters" the low-down on the possible undesirable side effects? Or has the PAS already put its name down to supply FLO-Characters (the pop-star, the cute one, the jovial bald one) for the needs of the programme?

Mike Webber does a lot of work with mudlarks. My guess is that anyone who has seen some of the river detecting or the depth-advantage videos Messrs Brun and Heritage have been involved in will feel that it is very likely that (like Ric Savage's "American Digger" over in the States), this one is not going to present UK metal detecting in the most favourable of lights. We will see.


Sources:
Patrick Munn, 'History UK Orders Two Factual Series ‘Banger Boys’ and ‘Hoard Hunters’..', February 22nd, 2013.

 Kelly Anderson, 'History UK orders “Banger Boys,” “Hoard Hunters”...', Real screen February 22, 2013. 

Renewed Focus onUK Metal Detecting: Filling in the Holes is not Enough

Over two years ago Australian metal detectorist C. Nyal de Kaye wrote:

 I do not understand why digging a hole, say two feet deep, poses any threat to anything, provided it is properly filled in ...

I've discussed that text here, and see that de Kaye was on this blog last night looking at my post on it  but as yet there has been no retraction of his assertion that there is nothing so "foolish" as to express concerns about the new generation of site-wrecker "depth advantage" machines being used on archaeological sites. Neither - which is more significant - has he attempted to justify the dismissive tone he adopts in his 'argument'. Digging a hole two feet deep into an archaeological site in the UK, Iraq, Kashmir or even Australia does indeed pose a threat to its integrity and information value; digging several, or several dozen, destroys it.

Vignette: nice and flat after the act... 

Staffordshire Hoard Archaeological Scandal Act Three

.
The Staffordshire hoard field has an area, I reckon, of about 48200 square metres. Its about 350 metres long along the ridge, and 230 m across at its widest part. So if one wanted to do a proper metal detecting survey after the "first ploughing after the hoard discovery", how many people would you employ with sensitive "depth advantage" detectors, and how long would you need to do the job properly? So, just eight people in two weeks? Is that OK?

Those of us who read metal detecting forums with any attention will duck sniggering behind our monitors at the naivity of someone who claims they can do a 100% survey of such an area with just eight blokes in two weeks. But that is exactly what some hapless archaeologist has just claimed in the PAS' favourite artefact collecting magazine "The Searcher". This would be utterly laughable were it not another tragic example of the ongoing shameful botchup which  is the story of the Staffordshire Hoard. "Surely this story cannot get worse" one thinks, and then you read "The Searcher" and weep.

In just two pages with three photos project leader Bryn Gethrin tries to convince us all (well, metal detectorist readers of the Searcher) that everything is OK. He obviously is trying to make the best of a bad job, and failing utterly.

His eight man team is pictured in the article. I am not a great detector nerd, but it seems to me that only one of the blokes is pictured carrying anything like the distinctive shape of a Minelab GPX 5000 with its chunky underslung box, but whether or not it is I could not say. In any case, any nighthawk going onto that field tonight with such a machine has an advantage over the majority of the people working with the archaeologists. You would think that with all the "partners" PAS has, one might find better equipped tekkies for such an operation. I'll come back to that photo later.

Mr Gethrin is very careful not to reveal how long they were out in the field. Hilary Cool however does not know it was supposed to be a secret and reveals that it lasted at the most two weeks ("took place within the final two weeks in November"). This matches with the report in a metal detecting forum of "15 detectorists" (interesting!) on that field in the morning of 21st November 2012. In order to do the entire field (Gethrin 2013, 16), that would be 480 sq metres daily for each searcher. But, "the weather was appalling" and the day short in November. Nighthawks all over England will be reaching for their warm woolly outdoor gear and torches reading that. As any tekkie would confirm, it takes years and years to hammer a field, not 14 days with eight blokes in the rain and mist. The article's author seems to think sophisticated transects etc are enough to  ensure they get everything. This really does signal a lack of time spent on the "partners'" forums, where he'd learn beyond all question that not everything is found in one or ten trip even after a single ploughing. The article ends forlornly "in our opinion [we] found as much as could be found". He forgot to add, "working under such conditions". But then should a professional archaeologist be working under such conditions?

 Mr Gethin goes to great pains to say that they found the field to be "full of modern metal detritus, in fact just like your [sic] average day in any field. We did get a little tired of cow ear tags, bull nose rings and beer cans". Obviously he hopes that by saying this, the nighthawks will decide not to bother. What he does not say is whether when they found stuff like this, whether it was reburied (to be found again in any future archaeological surveys) or taken away to remove the contamination from the soil.

The article stresses something one would have thought not needing mentioning in an account of a piece of archaeology, but this text is written for tekkies: "naturally, nobody kept anything, everyone signing a waiver saying as much before the project began".  Artefact hunting is of course normally about taking away what is "detected".

The posed group photo on page 16 is looking north and is situated very close to where the holes photographed by Nigel Swift three weeks ago have since appeared. If you look closely at the ground between the figures you can see where the edge of the trampled area ends, beyond which are untrampled clods casting shadows. It appears the whole area in the foreground has been heavily trampled (so heavily searched)  while the area behind had not (yet) been done. This suggests that the searching was started somewhere to the south of the actual hoard findspot, rather than starting there and working out. Why? And why is this same spot now being visited by nighthawks? What is still here (or was before the nighthawks got it)?

There is another puzzle. The photo on the bottom of page 17 is labelled "finding the cheekpiece". This bloke (finder John Palmer?) is shown apparently squatting by the actual hole where he found whatever it is he has in his hand. The caption says its the 'cheekpiece' which matches that from the hoard proper. But is it? Is it from the hoard proper? It seems to me that if you match up the trees and hedgerows visible through the mist, it is possible that this finder was not actually on the Hoard findspot but a point 35-40m distant, and if so, this would raise the question of whether it had originally been part of the original deposit or another one.


It seems to me that the Staffordshire Hoard is demonstrating the huge gaping flaw in the British antiquities 'preservation' legislation. British archaeology has been caught unawares by the find, it was not prepared to do a proper investigation in 2009, the 2010 followup was on an inadequate scale. The site is not protected and for three years has most likely been looted many times, in 2013 archaeologists return there to attempt working on a shoestring to do something with eight blokes bringing their own equipment, a few volunteer fieldwalkers wandering about in adverse conditions. There is no money to do a project on the scale this find requires - not only should the entire field be surveyed very carefully, so should the field to the west, the fields to the north down towards the stream (at least). There are no resources for a team of any size to go out and conduct top-quality large-scale archaeological work on such sites and process and publish the results. meanwhile the looters go back again and again to the site so nicely put on the map for them by the search by Terry Herbert aided by the evil "spirits of Yesteryear". Instead of a piece of world class archaeology, we see here a bit of typical British muddle-through and make-do, incapable of meeting the challenges caused by current archaeological policies on artefact hunting and collecting. But hey, we got the gold did'n we? 


*  The magazine of course, though very widely read in the metal detecting milieu, is obviously never read by a single "nighthawk".

Vignette: Terry Herbert celebrating his "windfall" which has cost British archaeology more than mere cash which it does not have. 

Unexplored Site of National Importance Looted, is Anyone at all Bothered?

.
This morning Nigel Swift wrote:

If ever either detectorists or the authorities bring themselves to publicly acknowledge what I’ve been photographing on the Staffordshire Hoard field for the past two weeks (will they?)...

Well, since this is the third week, the question is perhaps "did they?" The answer is no, no they did not. Nothing was done, nothing will be done. This comes as little surprise. On the Thegns of Mercia (sic) blog ("More of the Hoard!", 20 Dec 2012) the news of the discovery of new bits of gold up on the hill was greeted with a similar lack of surprise "the original finder, Mr Terry Herbert confided to me this year that the original excavation in Farmer Fred Johnson’s field at Hammerwich had been far from complete".

Fred Johnson: Responsible in
English law for the protection from looting.
of the Staffordshire Hoard findspot site?
(photo Birmingham Mail)

Farmer Fred Johnson, one of those responsible in English law for protecting the site of the nationally-important Staffordshire Hoard from further looting of any archaeological content is of another opinion. In March 2011 he was recorded as saying:

“I don’t think there’s any possibility of more gold in that field. Anyone who claims otherwise is talking nonsense in my opinion.   ....And even if there was any more gold there, I wouldn’t bother going looking for it myself as I’ve had enough of the whole thing.”

And he's not bothered to fix the fence on the north side of the field either. It seems nobody much can be bothered.

The farmer perhaps may be excused for believing (after all that PAS outreach) that "gold" is the only thing that would be of archaeological interest in that field. The rest of us know that the archaeological evidence vital to understanding the context of deposition of this find will not be golden and glittery, it may be dark stains in the subsoil, preserved biological remains giving a clue to the environment, traces of other contemporary activity in the vicinity. All this can only be understood through being found in context, a context that is highly sensitive to damage through disturbance. People tramping over the site at night with 'depth advantage' metal detectors and spades is going to disrupt that vital  evidence. Evidence that is as yet unexamined due to the pathetically small scale, delayed and ad hoc archaeological response to the issues raised by this site so far. Is anybody bothered? Is any archaeologist out there actively campaigning to change that situation? To inform public opinion? Not one.

Metal detector using Treasure hunter Terry Herbert has reportedly now been banned from searching the farm. He says:

“It’s a real shame Fred won’t let me on the fields anymore because I’m convinced there’s more to be found on the site, but no-one will listen. “Even the archaeologists would not listen to me, even though I found artefacts 100 yards from where they investigated".

Funnily enough there are now holes being dug by unidentified persons (maybe readers of teh birmingham mail) about that distance away from the original findspot. I believe Nigel Swift wrote a week ago to the local PAS officer about the ongoing looting, but has yet to receive a reply. That seems pretty normal for FLOs whenever you ask them a question which goes beyond "found this thing inafield, wot is it?". Past experience suggests that the PAS does not seem to appreciate questions that go much beyond that, whether they are from members of the public like Nigel Swift or archaeologists.

On the other hand, perhaps - despite ionvolving portable antiquities - this is not a matter for the PAS. So whose responsibility is planning for the protecting this heritage from further depletion by artefact thieves now the site has been found? Solely that of the farmer? What is the joined-up-thinking UK policy on that?

Sunday Mercury, ' Staffordshire Hoard farmer denies there is more gold in his field Birmingham Mail, 27 Mar 2011.

Depth Advantage: Massive Gold Detector Find in Searched-Out Area

An  unidentified Australian metal detector user astonished experts last week by unearthing a gold nugget weighing 5.5kg  and worth USD $315,000 near the town of Ballarat in the  state of Victoria. The nugget was lying 60cm underground.

Local gold experts say gold has been prospected in the area for decades, but no such discovery had been made before. "I have been a prospector and dealer for two decades, and cannot remember the last time a nugget over 100 ounces (2.8kg) has been found locally," said Cordell Kent, owner of the Ballarat Mining Exchange Gold Shop. "It's extremely significant as a mineral specimen. We are 162 years into a gold rush and Ballarat is still producing nuggets - it's unheard of." [...] He told Australian media the prospector had been using a state-of-the-art metal detector, which meant he was able to find the gold relatively deep underground in an area which had been searched many times in the past. 

Yet British archaeologists continue to underestimate the significance of these state-of-the-art detectors now available and those still being developed for policies on artefact hunting and collecting.


'Australian amateur prospector finds massive gold nugget', BBC News 17 January 2013

Vignette: Aussie tekkie

2012: That was a year that was... (part one)

I thought I'd try and summarise for my own benefit as much as anything, this blog's contents for the year 2012 in portable antiquity collecting issues as I see them. I was expecting it to be a much more pessimistic picture than in fact emerged. 

January opened with the beginning of the saga of the 'Cabinet W' Weiss seizure  in New York. Readers will know that I consider the coineys and their arguments to be extremely dangerous, and it was good to feel that at last the US authorities were going to take their activities more seriously than they had been doing. Well, it was a nice thought at the time. I was asked to keep quiet about my misgivings about two of the coins.... It seems I was not the only one who thought this case might be a watershed one, revealing rather a lot about the circulation of numismatic material, the ANS, to their shame, started to remove any information from their website about the many donations of Dr Weiss to their collections. Shortly after this there was the Prospero coin sale which also reminded us just how much money could be made from dugup coins. It is still being claimed that this is nothing to do with looting, we heard more about the coin elves  this time from the ANA. Robert Hecht's trial came to an end, followed by the dealer's death a month later. In January, on a PAS front, I tried to engage Professor Raimund Karl the Heritage management lecturer at Bangor University over his paper on the PAS being the best thing for dealing with artefact looting and collecting since sliced bread, he however declined to take part...  - no surprise there then.

February began with a metal detecting forum carrying the information suggesting that once again PAS employees have been saying behind my back things about the preservationist point of view represented on this blog that not a single one of them has the nerve to say to my face. This set the foundations for a pattern of deteriorating professional standards ...  The Glasgow team got a big grant to look at heritage crime raising hopes that we would be seeing some innovative new research and thinking on this topic. In America the fuss was starting up over television portrayal of metal detecting. Back in Britain, LootBusters was set up. The private, pirate, "UK Detector Finds Database" started to hide finders' names, but later in the year suffered some kind of system problems and some aspects of it have been crippled for several months. Meanwhile an AIAD member was selling a number of Pa Miw Shabtis (and last time I looked still was several months later). English Heritage issued a notably clueless statement about metal detectorists.

It was in February that the Olympia Museum was robbed , prompting the traditional chorus of the US collecting crowd protesting the idea of "repatriation" of stolen artefacts to "those people" - rather missing the point. SAFE had a rather more positive approach ("what can I do to help?"). Turkey began deliberations on the deaccession of certain museum objects. We began to hear of a curious case in Italy, where an archaeologist reportedly got involved in dealing and artefact fakery but I have been unable to learn the outcome. Odyssey Marine Exploration had to surrender the cargo of the Spanish ship Nuestra Senora de las Mercedes to its owners, Spain. The Syrian conflict became even more heated and I examined the frequency one could meet unprovenanced  Syrian coins on sale through V-Coins, nothing has changed in this regard in the intervening months. Egypt detained a traveller for carrying artefacts which turned out to be modern tourist souvenirs. It was at this time that a series of posts about the Koh Ker statuary began, with one on Cambodia's Trunkless Legs of Stone and then a mention of the ACCG's favourite london dealer, Spinks ("no Paperwork" eh? ).

In March, the fuss continued in the US about TV programmes on artefact hunting with the Spike TV offering("John Roby: "Putting the hurt on heritage")  joined by one from somebody one might have expected to know better ("National Geographic and Bozo Archaeological Site Emptying"). I commented on this one prophetically ("just Imagine this Happening in the UK ") and Heritage Action noted the difference between the US and UK. Over in Britain, it turned out that the rumoured TV programme  "Britain's Secret Treasures" (which it was claimed earlier that PAS had "binned") would soon be aired.  The Portable Antiquities Scheme went on a promotional tour of America. A Virginia metal detectorist was reportedly convicted of destruction of context and stealing metal artefacts from Petersburg National Battlefield. Meanwhile a belated US cultural property MOU with Bulgaria was under discussion. The US preservationist organization  SAFE revamped their excellent and valuable website, giving more prominence to case studies highlighting the problem of looting.  Dealer Michael Malter was sentenced for illegally trafficking in Native American archaeological resources. Oded Golan and Robert Deutsch were acquitted in the Jerusalem antiquities forgery trial. Turkey continued its increased pressure on foreign museums to return cultural property taken from Anatolia, questioning the Schimmel Collection. There was a big Greek antiquities bust which prompted thoughts about the no-questions-asked market in dugups. There was a bust in Egypt too, but the most interesting aspect of that was some indication of the number of items still missing from the previous year's events. It was in March too that the first more reliable but shocking reports came in from El Hibeh about the looting there. I covered this story quite extensively giving support to the US campaign to try and get something done. Sadly they were less than grateful. Lootbusters met the real antiquity trolls.

My first post in April about 'an Unknown Pope' was of course an April Fool joke - in hindsight not a very good one, though it made a point about the PAS and text-driven archaeology. The supporters of the Scheme continue to pretend that site-wrecker 'Depth Advantage' metal detectors do not exist, and challenge none of the mantras they spout in support of "partnering" their users. Shame on them. The PAS got a £150K research project grant to justify their database. There was an antiquity bust in Bulgaria but no US coin dealer's blog or website noted it. I wonder why?

 There was some discussion in April of the Ka Nefer Nefer mask case which looked to be drawing out into a long battle. I started a series of posts where I looked critically at the "Collection History" of the object that the US Museum was sticking to, it turned out to be so full of holes that it was simply untenable.  In Egypt, Former Minister Zahi Hawass faced charges brought by his political enemies over the travelling exhibitions touring the US (the charges were later quietly dropped and the exhibitions are still touring until next month). In the US New York antiquities dealer Morris Khouli pleaded guilty to smuggling Egyptian antiquities. Two other sarcophagi (or what was left of them after they'd passed through the hands of saw-wielding middlemen) were seized in Jerusalem, they'd passed through Dubai. New antiquity laws were instituted in Israel. The Cambodian Statues Saga continued with the entry of Ms Bunker. On the coiney front, Wayne Sayles, having given up his V-coins store, says he's now not going to blog on the fight for cultural property, only coin collecting - we would see how long that lasted. This blog received over half a million hits since it started - showing (together with a similar number of David Gill's looting matters" that there is indeed a lot of public interest in issues related to cultural property and portable antiquity collecting.

In May, Wyatt Yeager, former collections manager at the American Numismatic Association Money Museum in Colorado Springs was Sentenced for stealing coins, many of them have not yet been recovered.  Another theft from US collections which the other collecting blogs will not tell you about was in the news in May too. Meanwhile a coin dealer had some stock stolen.  A New York antiquities ("ancient art") dealer who had previously threatened a fellow blogger  was arrested and awaiting extradition from Germany to India beginning the Kapoor Saga that was recounted on several heritage blogs (though not collecting ones) over the next few months. Another saga that was to occupy the pages of this blog for seven months was the Tarby sale by Heritage Auctions which defied a court order. In Italy, a court upheld the claim on the Atleta di Fano the case remains unresolved. There was continued concern over Syria's cultural property threatened in the ongoing civil war.

In Britain, at a public presentation in May, the British Museum labelled as mere "trolls" preservationists questioning British policies (I use the term loosely) on artefact collecting and the trade. One of their "partners" called however on metal detectorists never to back down and resist the temptation to work with archaeologists. Some archaeologists actually broke ranks and disapprovingly accused the British government of  facilitating looting of a shipwreck, though blind to the depredations of metal detectorists on land under their noses.

In the early summer of 2012, there were a number of thefts from UK museums. British metal detectorists had a good month in June, over on Jersey a huge Iron Age coin hoard was dug out from very deep down, it turns out this was a known site that was being targeted. The British newspapers once again started the ritual of enthusing about the "massive wealth" that is just "up for grabs""  for anyone who buys a metal detector. Dealers were rubbing their hands in anticipation awaiting the upcoming PAS Treasure-fest on TV. Questions about possible  future trends in metal detecting in the UK went unanswered - it seems discussing the future of artefact hunting is not on the agenda in Britain. Metal detectorists were however worried about another aspect of the future, the amount of non-ferrous contamination in green wast compost spread on many of "their" fields.  Roger Bland got a new post, and Minelab lost the Man-in-the-Hat.

In Egypt somebody tried to saw a stela of Merenptah from the quarry wall at Silsila (the photos show this was not the first time, my question on the date and identity of the author of the first attempt went unanswered).  Also in Egypt, a June antiquity bust revealed that one third of the items being offered alongside real dugups by these dealers  were fakes. This seems to be quite a frequent occurrence in this trade. The attempts to get something done at El Hibeh continued.  Tragically, some looters were killed in a tunnel collapse. In Jerusalem, Oded Golan, acquitted of other charges, was sentenced for some antiquity dealing. US-Iraqi archaeological co-operation was reported suspended over some items the US had taken and were refusing to return (what happened here in the end?).

There was discussion of Looting in Albania, in Greece a routine traffic stop led to the arrest of antiquity traffickers. A public information campaign  Protect Greek Antiquities got underway in June. Turkey too was keeping up the pressure. In the US, the Flamenbaums were told to give  a piece of war-loot back to the Vorderasiatischen Museum in Berlin (what happened to this story?). The Polish Museum of America got some stolen artefacts back courtesy of coin dealer Harlan Berk. Two Khmer Statues in the Met came under scrutiny. The tarbosaurus skeleton sold the previous month  by Heritage Auctions was seized by Federal agents and the legal process was begun to forfeit it. At this stage nothing was done about other items the same dealer was handling. Peter Tompa was one of two lawyers engaged to defend this important case.

Throughout the first part of the year, I continued to demonstrate - with verifiable reference to real-life cases - that the idealistic rosy picture painted by both artefact hunters with metal detectors (as well as no-questions-asked coin dealers and collectors across the seas) about their aims and activities fails totally to correlate with the far more complex realities of both milieux.  It is only by wholly ignoring these issues that anyone can even begin to contemplate calling these people their "partners" - but that is exactly what the British establishment does, and most likely will continue to do.

(part two tomorrow)

Focus on UK Metal Detecting: Rejoicing Heard in the Hills and Valleys!

.
This is pretty unbelievable, but in a thread called End Of Time Team the metal detectorists of Wales are applauding the announced demise of the TV programme. You know, all those blokes out there who with one voice claim to "only be in it fer th'istry" ("always wanted to be an archaeologist, but nevver 'ad the chance [me spelling let me down]"). This is the whole justification for PAS-partnering of this milieu to enable them to "engage" with the past. Anyway they are tickled pink that there will be one less archaeology programme for people to watch. On hearing the news, member "Proconsul" ("Administrator, Hero Member") proclaims:

Hooray! All metal detectorists should be delighted at this news. The Time Team programme has been a consistent enemy of metal detecting and [Tony] Robinson and [Professor Mick] Aston have done everything they could to get our hobby banned, including giving 'evidence' against us in front of a Parliamentary committee. I for one am extremely happy that Channel 4 have finally come to their senses and binned this programme.

Because the Time Team archaeologists were asked to give (and gave) an archaeological opinion? He is glad it is going because from time to time a less-than-wholly fawning opinion was expressed about artefact hunting from an archaeological point of view on an archaeology programme? Now it is gone, does he imagine that any who were persuaded by the message that there is a problem in current policies towards artefact hunting and collecting will now assume that since the problem has gone, that particular problem has too?

Another time-worn mantra-compilation from the Taffish beep-beep boys was submitted by member "Rjm" ("Detector Guru, Superhero Member"). He writes (apparently not understanding one bit what he's on about):

It always amazed me that they could rip the top 12" of topsoil off with a JCB digger without a second thought...... the very soil that we detect...... and then criticise detectorists for removing items out of context! If it wasn't for detectorists we wouldn't have the wonderful hoards and other finds in our museums. I personally think these so called academics don't like amateurs intruding into their sphere of so called expertise. I think detectorists have given the nation more than them and they don't like it. The good detectorists do far exceeds the odd bad incident. [...]

Well, I suppose many will continued to be "amazed" by things they do not understand. The rest of us think that Britain has thrown millions of quid at an outreach Scheme to liaise with these people and explain simple things like the difference between surface evidence surveys and excavation and all that. It's not rocket science, but it seems the PAS has concluded that it's beyond their capabilities to explain that to their "metal detecting" partners over fifteen years of "outreach". Quite what they've done with the time and money apart from compiling a database of objects lost from the archaeological record is beyond the rest of us. In any case, quite a lot of the discussion on detecting forums these days is about the new generation of sensitive depth advantage machines and the advantages they give over those who do shallow detecting. The PAS would of course  never create such a list (because their "partners" would not come out too well if they did), but I bet if the public were kept properly informed about what's happening out in the fields, a high proportion (perhaps a very high proportion) of the multiple-object Treasure finds made each year are coming from below ploughsoil levels, despite strenuous efforts of the pro-collecting lobby to suggest otherwise. 

Mr Rjm may "personally think" what he likes, the rest of us can reflect on what the real problem is with ten thousand self-interested artefact hunters week after week pulling as many collectable metal artefacts they can out of the archaeological sites and assemblages all over the country, keeping what they want, flogging off or discarding what they do not. If it was elephants, wild orchids or bats I do not expect too many (sane) people would be saying that the reason ecologists are unhappy about it is because they are jealous that killing them is in their area of expertise. I think most (sane) people would realise that this would look rather like a total misunderstanding of the concerns (and areas of activity) of ecologists. Again, where is the PAS when nonsense like this again emerges in the community of their artefact-hunting "partners"?

Finally, I would contest the statement that "detectorists do good". I would ask the question whether instead the PAS (I assume that's what hides behind that glib comment) is a necessary evil required in the circumstances by what, archaeologically, would be an even greater one?

Do not rejoice, all you Philistines, 

that the rod that struck you is broken; 

from the root of that snake will spring up a viper, 

its fruit will be a darting, venomous serpent. 

Isaiah 14:29

 

The Future of Discovery: "The ultimate TREASURE detector is coming soon" - Good News for Some, Maybe...

.

The development team at Minelab excitedly announce that they will soon be bringing artefact hunters everywhere "the ultimate TREASURE detector, the CTX 3030". This revolutionary detector incorporates new and advanced technologies like nothing seen before. "With the CTX 3030, The Future of Discovery is coming to a hunting ground near you very soon!" (Hunting ground is a euphemism in artefact hunting for a "productive" archaeological site).  The blurb of the TV commercial says it all: "Untold treasures have been lost throughout the ages. Go detecting with Minelab and you will find the treasures that others have missed. With the unrivalled performance of the CTX 3030 you will experience the future of discovery". Here it is, complete with pirates, some of them with metal detectors.They are detecting on grassland (code of "responsible detecting" anyone?) and have just found a purse hoard of historic gold coins.

You Tube video posted on May 4, 2012 by MrSpamerska (freeze the screen at 18 seconds)

We are promised that we can learn "more" about its potential site-damaging capabilities by visiting  www.ctx3030.com  to view a short preview. The full details will be released on May 11th, before the CTX 3030 goes on sale worldwide May 28th. Then we expect the PAS to join in the discussion of the proliferation of depth advantage machines of increasingly sophisticated search capabilities and how this will be affecting the nature of the body of "archaeological information" that is hoiked out of the ground and more importantly how it will be affecting the below-ground remains when they are used in Britain. That will be May 29th then?

From the chat on the "New Minelab CTX 3030 Detector Forum" (on the "find mall.com" website) it appears that this new machine might have a built-in GPS. 'Oh good', say the supporters of collecting, 'allows recording of findspots'. 'Hang on', says the PAS, 'does this not allow the easy pinpointing of specific spots identified beforehand in the field?' This one would not happen to have a back-lit screen or otherwise be legible in 'poor lighting conditions' would it?

Anyway, reactions are enthusiastic:Big Boys Hobbies says (May 05, 2012 07:31AM)

We all should know more about it the 11th! I can't wait myself! I have reserved a few "hunted out" spots to try in on. Should be interesting!

Yes, I am sure we will see many more "hunted out" sites producing more and more finds from deeper down.Some of those finds may subsequently appear on the PAS database, some will not, but in no case will the holes in the archaeological resource they came from be recorded.

The future of "discovery" (taking collectable artefacts) is indeed shifting from the comfy situation fifteen years ago when the PAS was set up when metal detectors were just leaving the Age of Steam and getting more sophisticated electronics. Since then, the policies and approaches adopted by the PAS have not shifted an inch in the intervening period of technical advance. Maybe it is time for the PAS to catch up with the times and what the pirates are up to.