Association for Metal Detecting Sport (AMDS)

     Energetic site exploration

Message for metal detectorists from the Association for Metal Detecting Sport (AMDS) " The experienced voice for metal detecting", "JOIN NOW to become part of our family".

You now can make the right choice and join us.

AMDS MISSION STATEMENT
The Association for Metal Detecting Sport was established towards the end of 2021 when several long serving metal detectorists were deprived of insurance and a voice for their respective regions. In order to continue pursuing their hobby and to protect themselves and their regional members, they established an insurance cover scheme supported and financed by a concerned benefactor and a team of willing volunteers. This insurance scheme was designed to offer competitive insurance to all metal detectorists at reasonable rates i.e. £5:00 per year. The aim was to fill the vacuum that exists between ordinary detectorists and the decision makers that have influence over the hobby.

Hmm, and who might this anonymous artefact-hunting-supporting "concerned benefactor" be? Where is this "vacuum" asnd how will the Association for Metal Detecting Sport fill it? This seems nothing more than an overblown insurance schere, but - interestingly enough absolutely no terms and conditions to the insurance policy itself are given on the website. Under what circumstances will compensation not be paid, and who decides? This is actually important, because if an artefact hunter gains access to land on the grounds that they are covered by public liability insurance and can pay compensation - and then it turns out that through not reading the small print, the cover does not actually apply to a particular circumstance and the insurance company fails to pay up, the artefact hunter him or herself is then personally liable for the damage done. The insurance policy should form part of the paperwork on the basis of which the permit is awarded. 

Is collection-driven exploitation (aka "looting") of the archaeological record in fact a "sport"? Why? Can it be made into an Olympic event? We are further told:

AMDS will always endeavour to have the best interests of its members at the heart of all its deliberations. By joining AMDS you will be helping to put personal involvement back in the hobby. It is our policy to influence those at the very heart of the establishment i.e. the NFU, CLA, PAS and Government. To this end AMDS have people who have experience spanning over 40 years, who were heavily involved in the introduction of the Treasure Act 1996, Green Waste - Waste not wanted, Nighthawking, Heritage Initiative etc., and who continue to do so actively.

The AMDS has no affiliations to any other organisations, including the IoD, and the AoD.

Here is the information about who we are: Jed Walker [...] John Wells [...] David Rees [...] Rachel Edwards [...] Teresa Barnett [...] Cat Thomas [...] William Fitzpatrick [...] The others in the team are all connected with legal and other professions and not metal detecting or archaeology, and they wish to remain anonymous and that is respected.

They may endeavour to have the best interests of the hobby at the heart of all its deliberations, but what about resource conservation? The group of "those at the very heart of the establishment" (sic) they will be lobbying includes the PAS but no other heritage organization. 

Furthermore, this group defines "responsible metal detecting" (just) as "taking part in any metal detecting on land with the permission of the landowner", including "metal detecting in commercial detecting events'.

What does "helping to put personal involvement back in the hobby" mean? Also stressing the organizers' qualifications including "were heavily involved in [...] nighthawking" seems particularly unfortunate phrasing. And of course to the dullards: "has no affiliations to [...] the IoD, and the AoD" is a telling reference to who,precisely this group has been set up for. No wonder "the others in the team [...] wish to remain anonymous".

The logos of its supporters at the bottom of the home page include: The Searcher and treasure Hunting magazines, but also Mark Harrison's Heritage Watch and the Portable Antiquities Scheme. I wonder why they would be supporting such an organization. 

The Consequences of Platitudes

Hampshire FLO Jenny Durrant ( @Durrant_Jenny 15 g.)

Recently finders have told me of coin hoards being taken away in handfuls from the ground, of nighthawked finds being 'found' on club digs, of bragging about not reporting treasure. This is THEFT. Know something? Notify the police - anonymously, by phone or online. Please.

responses:

David Roberts @DavidRobertsArch  
Zablokowano Cię Nie możesz obserwować ani czytać Tweetów użytkownika @DavidRobertsArc.

Huh. More usefully:

James Sainsbury @JSArchaeology 1 g.
W odpowiedzi do @Durrant_Jenny i @DavidRobertsArch
I hear about this far too often down in Sussex and in a few examples this is done with the support of the farmer/landowner too. *Something* drastic needs to change, and soon. @MatthewPope did a brilliant lecture on this and other issues last night. Can't go on like this!

and

Dan Robertson @robertson_btn 12 min
W odpowiedzi do @Durrant_Jenny
I’m sure @timloughton , @mikeheyworth et al might like to be aware of this. Such thefts deprive society of our shared heritage. @JSArchaeology @MatthewPope @Sussex_Heritage @CBASouthEast 

I do not know what David Roberts had to say about things, but it always amazes me that after all the time we've had a PAS to actually empirically measure how capable the metal detecting community of England and Wales  are of being responsible, we still find people who are apparently surprised by the revelation that the "most detectorists are responsible" mantra is simply untrue. time and time again. Mr Robertson might like to reflect on why, according to him, the people he mentions might "not have heard" about this earlier? Artefact hunting with metal detectors of course is pretty new, it's only been going on on quite a massive scale since the 1970s. What we need is some kind of effective "liaison" to judge scale of irresponsibility, yeah? The problem is that the PAS leads the rest of British archaeological establishment, media and public, to think that there is a "majority" of "responsible detectorists" (sic) reporting everything, when the evidence we do have contradicts such platitudes. Nobody has yet disproved the assertion that just over eight out of nine reportable artefacts dug up by artefact hunters in England and Wales are NOT being "responsibly reported", simply pulled out of the ground and pocketed (and what about in Scotland?). That is knowledge theft. Is it not?

And what is also archaeologically irresponsible is British archaeologists (especially publicly-funded liaison bodies) that spread unsupported platitudes instead of reaching for the actual facts and numbers and keeping the British public informed about what is happening to our portable antiquities heritage. And those archaeologists who (ignoring other voices) simply repeat as facts the same platitudes without checking.

Public Awareness Fail

Modern British public's view of what archaeologists do. and what archaeology is... 

The geography's not too brilliant either, where is Staffordshire? 

Hat tip: Dave Coward

Before the 1970 Convention

             Sites and monuments               

We tend to forget these sections of the 1956 UNESCO Recommendation on International Principles Applicable to Archaeological Excavation

IV. Trade in antiquities

27. In the higher interests of the common archaeological heritage, each Member State should consider the adoption of regulations to govern the trade in antiquities so as to ensure that this trade does not encourage smuggling of archaeological material or affect adversely the protection of sites and the collecting of material for public exhibit.

28. Foreign museums should, in order to fulfill their scientific and educational aims, be able to acquire objects which have been released from any restrictions due to the laws in force in the country of origin.

V. Repression of clandestine excavations and of the illicit export of archaeological finds

Protection of archaeological sites against clandestine excavations and damage 29. Each Member State should take all necessary measures to prevent clandestine excavations and damage to monuments defined in paragraphs 2 and 3 above, and also to prevent the export of objects thus obtained.

International co-operation in repressive measures

30. All necessary measures should be taken in order that museums to which archaeological objects are offered ascertain that there is no reason to believe that these objects have been procured by clandestine excavation, theft or any other method regarded as illicit by the competent authorities of the country of origin. Any suspicious offer and all details appertaining thereto should be brought to the attention of the services concerned. When archaeological objects have been acquired by museums, adequate details allowing them to be identified and indicating the manner of their acquisition should be published as soon as possible.

Return of objects to their country of origin

31. Excavation services and museums should lend one another assistance in order to ensure or facilitate the recovery of objects derived from clandestine excavations or theft, and of all objects exported in infringement of the legislation of the country of origin. It is desirable that each Member State should take the necessary measures to ensure this recovery. These principles should be applied in the event of temporary exports as mentioned in paragraph 23(c), (d) and (e) above, if the objects are not returned within the stipulated period.

VI. Excavations in occupied territory

32. In the event of armed conflict, any Member State occupying the territory of another State should refrain from carrying out archaeological excavations in the occupied territory. In the event of chance finds being made, particularly during military works, the occupying Power should take all possible measures to protect these finds, which should be handed over, on the termination of hostilities, to the competent authorities of the territory previously occupied, together with all documentation relating thereto.

Austrian Collector Needs to Learn Classical Mythology

 

Arthur Brand says that the reason why a simple Google search did not reveal where a statue of infant Bacchus owned by an Austrian collector belonged was that they don't know their mythology: 

Well, as you know with google, you have to find the right search-words. This statue was considered falsely to be an Adonis.

Adonis in a panther skin and shown as an infant. Yeah. These are the people that collect dugup antiquities to appear erudite. As they say "before you buy the antiquity, buy the book". Perhaps they should add "and read it too".

Arthur Brand Helps Two Collectors, French Police, an English Auction House and a French Museum [UPDATED]

A heart-warming story of the cautious collector doing pre-purchase due diligence, the famous art detective, a collector that repented of a good faith purchase, and the dealer that steps in to help out.  According to Paul Kirby ('Stolen Roman statue returned to France after 50 years' BBC News, Feb 2 2022)

Almost half a century after it was stolen, a Roman statue of the god Bacchus has been handed back to the French museum where it was displayed. The 1st Century bronze of Bacchus as a child was taken by thieves in December 1973, along with 5,000 Roman coins. Art detective Arthur Brand traced the statue to the museum when a client was offered it by an Austrian collector.[...] [Arthur Brand] described how he had been contacted by a client who wanted to know more about the statue after he was offered it by an Austrian collector, who had bought it legally and in good faith. There were no databases in 1973 but Mr Brand eventually found a reference to it in an archaeology magazine dating back to 1927, and French police then found their report from the time of the theft. "I contacted the collector. He didn't want to have a stolen piece in his collection so he wanted to give it back, but French law dictates that a small amount has to be paid for safekeeping." That small amount in relation to the statue's value is still a considerable sum of money. While half was paid by the local authority in Chatillon, the rest was provided by an auction house specialising in ancient art in the English port town of Harwich. "The piece belongs in the museum so it's only right people can get together and make that happen," said Aaron Hammond of Timeline Auctions.

Well, that's a bit odd, a seven-second Google search reveals that a seller of stock photos has one of this statue (same stains in the patina) labelled: Roman bronze of the infant Bacchus found at Chatillion-sur-Seine France, Photographer: CM Dixon, Collection: Heritage Image... Shooting date: 26/01/2011. Odd. Chatillion-sur-Seine is 18 km from the findspot but is the location of the museum from which the statue was stolen in 1973. You can get giclee prints of this photo too. Is this a photo of a copy of the statue on display in the place of the missing one? 

Update Feb 2 2022

Over on Twitter, detectophage orchidoclaste has found a publication dedicated to this statue, showing it in better condition than the one in the museum:

Et la référence idoine pour ce Bacchus: Héron de Villefosse Antoine. Bacchus enfant, statuette de bronze trouvée à Vertault (Côte-d'Or). In: Monuments et mémoires de la Fondation Eugène Piot, tome 3, fascicule 1, 1896. pp. 51-58. http://persee.fr/doc/piot_1148-6023_1896_num_3_1_1749

It transpires from this, that when dug up the infant Bacchus held a quatrefoil in his right hand - which seems to be the case with the copy displayed in the museum, but in the condition when it was offered by the Austrian collector, this had been removed in an extremely crude manner by one of its previous handlers. It is a shame that the Austrian collector did not know of this reference when they were the owner. They would not then have confused it with "Adonis"!

The missing element

Update Update Feb 3rd 2022

Interestingly, an article in French which we find linked to by Arthur Brand himself gives a different story (France 24, 'Une rare statue romaine rendue à la France 50 ans après son vol', 02/02/2022):

La statue a refait surface par pur hasard il y a deux ans lorsqu'un client autrichien contacte Arthur Brand, [...] Le client autrichien lui demande d'enquêter sur une statue d'un garçon qu'il a achetée légalement sur le marché de l'art. [...] Après des mois de recherche, une photo de la statue dans un magazine archéologique daté de 1927 révèle finalement un indice : la sculpture représente Bacchus enfant et appartenait à un musée français.[...] Choqué d'apprendre que la pièce avait été volée, le client autrichien demande alors à ce qu'elle soit rendue au musée. "En vertu de la loi française, il a reçu une petite somme - une infime part du prix de la statue, qui pourrait atteindre des millions d'euros – pour la +garde+" de l'objet, explique M. Brand. Deux collectionneurs d'art britanniques, Brett et Aaron Hammond, ont parrainé la moitié du montant, et la Ville de Châtillon-sur-Seine a payé l'autre moitié de la somme, non divulguée.

Confusing, isn't it? How many clients? The British guys are just collectors, or auctioneers?

UK Teen Gives Metal Detecting Top Tips to Find Treasure

Yes, all that PAS outreach, definitely paying off. Even the BBC is promoting Treasure hunting now. Metal detecting teen's top tips to find treasure Video by Stuart Howells.

A teenager who uncovered a Bronze Age hoard while metal detecting says research and perseverance are key to success. Milly, 13, from Suffolk, discovered dozens of axe heads and other artefacts in a field near Royston, Hertfordshire, on only her third trip. She has shared her top tips for BBC podcast The Localist - Suffolk.

Research, you see.

Vignette: not-a-thirteen-year-old