Replying to Furness Metal Detectorists

       Detecting on grassland       
 

Just in case they disappear, here are the comments I made on a local newspaper under a story about an upcoming ITV series in which a local tekkie is taking part:

Paul Barford   User ID: 930068 2nd January 04:48 pm

Why is disagreeing with you considered "trolling"? maybe instead of ad personam comments and aggressively throwing down challenges, you could try to just address the concerns raised about this exploitative and damaging hobby being advertised by this projected series without resorting to the same defensive clichés that have been thrown about by detectorists for the last quarter of a century. 

A perfectly justifiable comment has been made from the point of view of preserving an important resource that that artefact hunting and collecting with the use of metal detectorists is damaging to the archaeological heritage of the North West. Maybe the "detectorists" of the North West can show why that is not so and exploiting of ancient and historical sites for "collectable" items is in some substantive way different from doing the same thing in Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Italy, the jungles of Yucatan, or anywhere else where looting is damaging the region's archaeological heritage. Can we see the damage being done by selfish collectors to archaeological sites in the NW in a wider context than just "my mate's gonna be on TV, and you're jealous and to cowardly to talk about it"? Before unbecoming name-calling, please show that you are brave enough to talk objectively about the conservation issues involved. 

There was, of course, no answer. There IS no substantive difference. Though one is done by brown skinned folk with spades in foreign lands and we label it "looting", and the precise same thing done by white-skinned folk with spades in the green fields of England is called "citizen archaeology". In the article, the metal detectorist is quoted as saying that in terms of archaeology, Cumbria is a "lost county". 

Paul Barford   User ID: 930068 2nd January 04:39 pm

I do not understand why "metal detecting" is supposed to be making Cumbria less of a "lost county", when it is simply emptying the archaeological record into collectors' pockets and onto eBay. 

 If you take PAS data for the last five years, the LANCUN FLO has been documenting only an average of 869 records a year from ALL members of the public, and yet - unless the proportion of detectorists in the region is substantially less than in other parts of the UK, there will be roughly 957 detectorists in the LANCUN area (reporting less than one object each for the last five years or more). It means that even if they each make only ten reportable finds per year (as per the official Code of Best Practice for Responsible Metal Detecting), the majority of these people are reporting only a very small fraction of what they are pocketing. 

 The knowledge that these pocketed artefacts ("worth fifty quid on the market", eh?) belongs to us all, not a handful of selfish individuals that walk off with it. Pointing the immorality of that out is not "jealousy", nor can it legitimately be dismissively labelled "trolling", it raises questions "metal detectorists" and those who support them (the journalist who wrote this piece not leas among them) should be addressing. 

Raising these concerns is a natural reaction to behaviour that is downright outrageous. What is the difference between artefact hunting in Kendal, and Kirkuk Iraq in terms of the devastating effect it is having on the archaeological heritage? I'd like the media to be getting that message over to the British public, and it remains to be seen if Henry Cole is up to the task.

Why are journalists writing these things? For one thing, there is no press pack produced by any of the archaeological bodies such as The Chartered Institute for Archaeologists, the Council for British Archaeology, RESCUE, Portable Antiquities Scheme or the Federation of Archaeological Managers and Employers on the wider context of Collection-Driven Exploitation of the Archaeological Record in Britain.  

And the reply from a local metal detectorist? He seems to be accusing me of being a space alien with an egg-timer and a "crush" on some artefact hunter or other

Absolute Prosser User ID: 3787507 2nd January 05:58 pm
ive heard of you a few times in certain circles, you seem to have a strange fascination with one or two detectorists which is bordering a school boy crush, your egg timer is running low and you know it, and the thought of this is tipping you to troll where you can, coward is called out and goes running to the mother ship of warriors behind a screen, laughable if it wasn't so sad!

Speaking Ill of the Dead

Many archaeologists tend to shrink from engaging more deeply with the public on issues such as Collection-Driven Exploitation of the archaeological record. Becoming a 'face' associated with the profession will often earn them little more than the sort of disrespectful comments that we see on the social media associated with a f commercial Metal Detecting Rally company. It concerns

 landscape archaeologist the Late Prof Mick Aston (1 July 1946 – 24 June 2013).

It is not clear whether Meryl Wright knew Mich Aston or is just repeating what she heard somebodty else say on a tekkie forum... in any case the grounds for the specific accusation about the alleged contents of his home are unclear. Perhaps his heirs will take it up in court.

For the record, and probably most (even British) archaeologists would (privately and ever so timidly) agree, most "metal detectorists" are indeed stealing history. There is no doubt at all about it. but just look at the hate from the grammar-challenged that speaking the truth still evokes eight years after the Professor's death. STOP Taking Our Past. In future, the hobby needs to strive to teach better spelling as well as good manners in metal-detecting school, in order to avoid the whole milieu being tarred with the same brush as vicious, uncouth people like these.

And Meryl Wright should be kicked out of any "responsible metal detecting" group she belongs to.

Mick Aston has left a huge legacy, including a number of important and influential books. To judge by the apparent problems this detractor has here penning four coherent and grammatically correct sentences, I think it a fair bet that Ms Wright will not be revealed to be a writer of books. Who, beyond what we can see here, is Meryl Wright?

Portable Antiquities Collectors Won't Look Up

Don't Look Up

Two Warsaw members of the Barford family spent this New Year in isolation from wider contacts with a bottle of Ukrainian "champagne" (solidarity with our country's neighbours) and a chicken and cheese pie. We decided to watch the film "Don't Look Up" (USA 2021). As many readers will know, it is a satirical science fiction story centred around science denial by media, the 'establishment' and politicians - of course the real story behind it is a metaphor for government, media (and thus ultimately public) indifference to the climate crisis and the way the public as a whole is rendered complacent and complicit through accepting misinformation at face value. Before watching it I'd read a number of reviews - mostly fairly hostile, so was not expecting much. I must say I really liked it, but was at the same time repulsed and disturbed by it. I found it quite thought-provoking, both in general as well as personally.

The story (spoilers here: Netflix, Wikipedia, IMDb) is multilayered, and looking closer behind its seeming simplicity and in-your-face brashness, it turns out there is a lot of clever writing and innuendo. The message about the dangers of our current state of prevalent anti-intellectualism could not be clearer. It is here the film spoke to me. In the telling caricature, the whistle blower astronomers at first celebrate their 'discovery' a new comet, but when they realise the significance of its trajectory they are frustrated in their attempts to get effective action taken. The media treat a serious issue as just part of their usual fare of marginal trivia, politicians think only of their popularity ratings and are afraid to take action, while a third option (big tech symbolised by the ultra-creepy, meek-voiced billionaire Peter Isherwell amazingly played by Mark Rylance) comfortingly reassures that "everything's fine" while at the same time avoiding eye contact (ie looking the facts in the face). Spoiler alert, everyone dies in the end.

This was very close to home for me. Together with a few other folk (Nigel Swift, Sam Hardy and others), we have been trying for some two decades or more to get across to a wider public the issue of the massive damage being done to the historical record by artefact hunting and collecting. I am not for a moment suggesting that this is a problem anything near the magnitude of a planet-killer comet or global climate change, but I hope we can agree that neither is this an issue of totally negligible importance for humanity. Yet, like the whistleblower comet-spotters of the film, the media, the establishment and the politicians not only could not give a tinkers, but actively deflect discussion away from the crux of the issue to some supposed benefits. The media fail to attempt to see beyond the same few easy marginal trivia and tropes that they always use. The PAS and dealer's lobby groups have been 100% in Isherwell mode for over two decades. Governments say the remains of our ancient past are important and they are determined to protect them , but don't (and even see "opportunities" provided by its destruction by artefact hunters). These are the ones urging the public "don't look up" to see the reality but encouraging them to focus instead on their soothing narratives and science denial.

This, I think, is a narrative that is already familiar to many campaigners. Two things about this film that are notable also have their parallels in the fight against damage caused by collection-driven exploitation of the archaeological record.

The first is "where are the other scientists?". The storyline is that only two scientists are urging action be taken, and presenting convincing and verifiable evidence that the situation is dire and requires a remedy. the rest are sitting back and watching from the sidelines. That may in part be a desire on the part of the writer to keep the story simple, but it is what is happening. How many of the world's tens of thousands of scientists are actively campaigning against climate warming (how many can you name without looking it up?). How many of even the UK's c.6000 archaeologists about "metal detecting"? Where are these people? In the film, in the end one of the comet-spotters decides to work "with" the establishment, ultimately realising (too late) that this is not the way to influence events.

The second attribute of the film is the assumption that "the world" actually consists of the USA. This is a pretty typical 'given' of US mass culture of course. Here though it is what the Americans do or don't do, by themselves that decide the direction of future events that affect the entire planet (China is depicted just as a passive watcher). The fictional problem of the film plot, like the collection and commerce in antiquities, is one that requires international collaboration. This concerns not just action against culture thieves across national borders, but actually establishing what it is we are faced with and fighting... a task that is not easy given that two major market/collecting countries (UK and USA) have laws and conceptions that not only differ from each other, but also the majority of other countries in the world. And we try to pin the whole thing together under a UNESCO Convention 50 years old, referring to the market of the 1960s, that is not actually about looting at all.

I do wonder however about the point of it all. The film raises a number of questions. The main one seems to be "what can we do about this"? A realistic answer to that escapes me. It seems that in the end, all some of us are left with is the sentiment expressed near the end of the film when Dr Mindy and his family and friends sit out the end of the world, and Dibiasky says "I'm grateful we tried".  

Update 5th Jan 2022
Several interesting reviews:

George Monbiot, 'Watching Don’t Look Up made me see my whole life of campaigning flash before me' Guardian Tue 4 Jan 2022

"No wonder journalists have slated it. They’ve produced a hundred excuses not to watch the climate breakdown satire Don’t Look Up: it’s “blunt”, it’s “shrill”, it’s “smug”. But they will not name the real problem: it’s about them. The movie is, in my view, a powerful demolition of the grotesque failures of public life. And the sector whose failures are most brutally exposed is the media".

Branco Marcetic, ‘Don’t Look Up’ and the Maddening Reality of the Climate Crisis', Science 5th Jan 2022. 

Rebecca Oppenheimer, 'Hollywood Can Take On Science Denial; Don’t Look Up Is a Great Example' Scientific American   December 30, 2021 [though I think she focuses on the comet and misses the main point]. 

Donna Lu  ‘It parodies our inaction’: Don’t Look Up, an allegory of the climate crisis, lauded by activists Guardian 30 Dec 2021. 

David Vetter, 'Why Sneering Critics Dislike Netflix’s ‘Don’t Look Up,’ But Climate Scientists Love It', Forbes Dec 28, 2021. 

Rain Jordan, 'Environmental Activists Praises Adam McKay's 'Don't Look Up' Saying "It's an Allegory for the Climate Crisis", Nature World News Dec 30, 2021 ["I've heard from a lot of activists who say that after seeing the video, they felt heard and recognized"]. 

John Leo C. Algo, ' ‘Don’t Look Up’: A film review by a climate advocate', Rappler Jan 4th 2022.

Update Updated

"Rarely has a film been as divisive as Adam McKay’s climate satire Don’t Look Up. Although it has been watched by millions, and is already Netflix’s third most watched film ever, the response from critics was largely negative.[...] We asked four climate experts to give their views on the film":
Ketan Joshi, Fiona Harvey, Nina Lakhani and Damian Carrington, 'Don’t Look Up: four climate experts on the polarising disaster film' Guardian Sat 8 Jan 2022

the movie has been panned by many critics, with the main charge being that it is heavy-handed, blunt and too obvious. But that is exactly the point.

I'd really like to hear Greta Thunberg's response.

Also, despite many critics suggesting the film is heavy-handed, one notices the plethora of texts appearing on the Internet of the " 'Don't Look Up' ending explained" ilk. Dozens of them, which reveals something about the audience, I guess.

Bobble Hat Brigade on Bonkers Britain TV

                    British bobble hats in action                    
               

Local reporter George Lythgoe is really excited that "Metal detectorists from Furness are set to take part in a five-part series on metal detecting that is set to hit screen on ITV very soon". This is referring to a series that British archaeologists have failed to condemn or conduct any educational outreach about is a follow up to the initial pilot episode of 'Henry Cole's Great British Treasure Hunt', broadcast on ITV4 back in December 2020.

Unearthed UK detectorist Graeme Rushton - who took part in the pilot show - said there is no confirmed date for the show yet but promises it will be "a big hit with British audiences". [...] Mr Rushton, of Unearthed UK in Dalton, said that the show has been approved for a five-part series running over the course of a week. It is due to air at the end of January or the beginning of February. "It was a hit with ITV higher ups and has been given the go ahead for a five-episode series which is great," he said. [...] Mr Rushton said it was tough with all the cameras. "I think that we showed the hobby in a really positive light and proved it isn't all about finding gold and silver all the time," he said.

Positive light? Oh,... we'll see.  I suppose how effective one thinks lowering an issue to the cringeworthy lowbrow level of Henry Cole's antics in the pilot episode is an effective advocacy technique. I'd like to think it is not. 

 

Map of Gandhara - Buddhist sites in Pakistan

A map of Gandhara - Buddhist sites in Pakistan. Many antiquities from sites like these are on foreign markets - but those selling them will rarely give an honest (or verifiable) answer how and when they got there, or precisely where they are from. (larger version here and here). Both part of the core as well as peripheries of the state occur further west, in Afghanistan too. 

PAS Recording in 2021

 PAS top recorders in the difficult time of Covid-affected 2021:

Finds per Institution

County	Objects	Records
BERK	929	900
BH	1180	981
BM	49	49
BUC	219	219
CAM	208	73
CORN	568	109
DENO	254	221
DEV	1399	593
DOR	732	231
DUR	229	221
DYFED	131	131
ESS	111	111
FAJN	2	2
FAKL	12	12
FASAM	139	135
GAT	73	69
GGAT	25	25
GLO	8144	827
HAMP	1185	952
HESH	297	253
IARCH	1	1
IOW	548	548
KENT	961	597
LANCUM	966	526
LEIC	962	776
LIN	1730	1208
LON	235	210
LVPL	862	737
NARC	680	645
NCL	66	65
NLM	2606	2219
NMGW	880	878
NMS	2872	2383
OXON	1302	1207
PAS	6	6
PUBLIC	2037	1681
SF	4607	2962
SOM	225	112
SUR	2182	2151
SUSS	478	460
SWYOR	2267	1870
WAW	417	370
WILT	1184	770
WMID	1140	691
WREX	104	92
YORYM	377	143

It would be interesting to be able to break this down in more detail, but that may not be possible without going into internal PAS documents (would make an interesting undergraduate thesis topic, charting the effects of Covid on Responsible Metal Detecting, using records from 2017-March 2019 and then March 2019 to the present).

Here there has been some major work done by Dr Anna Booth and Phil Hughes in Suffolk (mostly Medieval and Roman finds), Martin Foreman (Roman and medieval mostly), Adrian Marsden and Andrew Rogerson (Medieval, Post Medieval, Roman), the team at SWYOR (Medieval, Post Medieval, Roman), Simon Maslin (Medieval, Roman), Lisa Brundle (Roman, Medieval). Other FLOs have been lagging behind, this policy leaving big holes in the archaeological records when metal detectorists have been continuing hoiking (including on rallies) and no records have been made. 

PAS Frantic Recording to the Very End

 

Last night the counter showed a certain number of objects in the database at midnight Friday 31st Dec 2021. At (Polish) six in the morning, Saturday 1st January 2022, it had two more (LANCUM-F9B3DA, BERK-F9A2DB) Why were FLOs were still working late into the night on New Year's Eve to boost the record numbers, and were they doing it for the benefit of the PAS or their own recording institution? 

As we've seen, the PAS managed to make 32098 or maybe 29422 records of public finds, which is substantial drop from the c. 80 000 they were managing before Covid. In pre-Covid years (according to HA figures) that would be 80k out of an estimated 810000 recordable items pulled out of the ground and pocketed by 27000 artefact hunters. We do not know how many artefact hunters actually did stay indoors during the UK's lockdown in 2021, there are a number of public records (including items offered for sale with the date of discovery given) that indicate it was not universal. The commercial rallies did not take place (but few finds are reported from them anyway).

Interestingly, although three coins were recorded (by two FLOs and one public recorder) on the previous day the Gloucester FLO made five records on 30th December 2021, nobody is currently shown by the Database daily statistics  to have been working on 31st December (which is not a holiday in the UK).  This makes the appearance of two records made at midnight, or very early the next day (which is a bank holiday in the UK) very odd. But, hey... PAS - stranger things have happened.