The Things UK Detectorists say about Partnership

bus depot

The UK metal detectorist, self-confessed hoiker and conspiracy theorist, John Howland of Bournemouth bus depot has posted this comment about archaeological bloggers who question current policies on artefact hunting:

the kind of people waging a jihad against our pastime includes a minority of foul-mouthed slobs and ivory tower dwelling prejudiced ‘academics’, who have no compunction in exploiting the more vulnerable of their own kind, who, if you read the content of their blogs, you will see are completely off their trollies – or put another way, are more than a few coins short of hoard – in common parlance; ‘nutters.’ These barmy buggers are best ignored, to be pitied even, owing to of thier (sic) inability to grasp (sic) any sense of reality. What disturbs me though, are those other academics and archaeologists who use these poor weak-minds souls to fire the bullets they themselves are shit-scared to do (sic). These ‘abusers’ – for that is what they – are readily identifiable, and a stain on the those (sic) who accuse us of all the heritage ills. When it comes to using mental cripples to promote one’s advocacy, then the lowest depths have been plumbed. Best Hoiker Howland

I leave it up to my readers to identify who they consider to be the real mental cripples and illiterates in the heritage debate, but I think this raises the question - why does that writer expect academics and archaeologists be 'scared sh*tl*ss' of artefact hunters engaged in a pastime? Surely the official narrative promoted by both sides is that the two are 'partners', no?

Metal Detectorists Taking Grievances to the European Parliament

The 'European Council of metal Detecting' exists to 'promote, protect and encourage' the collection-driven exploitation (CDE) of the archaeological record. It was formed with the connivance of the British Museum's Portable Antiquities Scheme and is now lobbying to get pilfering the archaeological record for collectables for personal entertainment and profit made legal in other countries of the EU. To this aim the hoikers got tarted up in suits and visited the European Parliament this month (ecmdeu, 'ECMD at the European Parliament' February 11, 2017). They just do not get it:

ECMD believes strongly that responsible metal detecting should be treated fairly in all European countries.As promised earlier, we’ve also started lobbying at the European Parliament in Brussels, hoping that eventually one standard of practices related to detecting will be adopted throughout Europe.

Bird eggers probably would be saying the same if was still legal in the UK. Fortunately since Britain will soon be excluded from the EU, the standard we'll be adopting here will not be theirs. In the photo, smug Polish tekkie Filip Jarosz meets Polish climate-change denying MEP Janusz Lewandowski.

 Basically you'd have to be a complete moron to claim anything like this:

Some authorities are not adequately educated about the topic of metal detecting. As a result, metal detecting is governed by ambiguous and unfair laws in many different European countries. For example, it is entirely possible to accidentally come across an ancient artefact without actually intending to find it. However, simply finding such objects is illegal in some countries. As a result, many people are forced to hide their accidental discoveries in order to avoid getting prosecuted, as opposed to simply informing a museum or an archaeologist about their find.

Heritage professionals in all EU countries are perfectly well 'educated' and they know all about collection-driven exploitation of the archaeological record. The laws are no more unfair on those that want to privately and destructively exploit a common resource for their own personal entertainment and profit than those conserving any other resource for the public good. And Mr Jarosz will no doubt be able to give us examples of the legislation that make the accidental discovery of artefacts 'illegal'. That is the type of '\alternative fact' that artefact collectors use to support their case. The rest of us call that simply lying.

Anyway these poor lost souls really need to clue themselves up about how EU institutions work, it is not the European Parliament that will decide common cultural European policy, but the Council of Europe, and they already have a perfectly clear (and 'educated') 'Resolution on metal detecting' (no. 921) which shows clearly what is what. It in fact advocates strengthening the laws to prevent CDE of the archaeological record (points 9 and 14). These new attempts by heritage-pocketers make even more urgent the task of putting these measures into effect.

   

Cemetery of Saydnaya prison Victims? Unlikely

Amnesty International published a report about killings in Saydnaya prison (Syria) last week, and this week in answer to the question where the bodies went, a handout photo is produced:

Original caption: "A handout image by Amnesty International shows the military-run Saydnaya prison, one of Syria's largest detention centres located 30 kilometres (18 miles) north of Damascus, in two distinct satellite pictures, one taken on March 3, 2010 (L) and the other of the same taken on September 18, 2016. AFP/AFP/Handout "

This however seems to show a moderate-sized civilian cemetery. Note the co-ordinates given  33.3927°, 36.3685°.... which turns out to be a small village cemetery for the settlement Kherbet Al-Ward, some 33 km south of the Saydnaya prison, on the other side of Damascus. The satellite photos of the prison itself (33°39'54.99"N  36°19'43.22"E) do not seem to show any mass grave sites.

Ethics of Acquiring Cultural Heritage Objects

“Conference participants will examine, from a multitude of perspectives,
ethical matters related to systems and networks of trade in conflict antiquities,
policies and practices of protection, rightful stewardship, repatriation, and
digitally and artistically re-imaged cultural heritage sites and objects.

The conference provides an opportunity to parse the many intertwined
layers related to cultural heritage and its ethical treatment.”  

Ethics of Acquiring Cultural Heritage Objects focus of W and L conference Published Thursday, Feb. 16, 2017,

Neil Brodie, senior research fellow in Endangered Archaeology in the Middle East and North Africa at the University of Oxford, is the keynote speaker for the Mudd Center for Ethics’ interdisciplinary conference on “The Ethics of Acquiring Cultural Heritage Objects” at Washington and Lee University. Brodie’s lecture will kick off the conference on March 2 at 5 p.m. in Stackhouse Theater, Elrod Commons. He will speak on “Controlling the Globalized Market in Cultural Object: Closing the Gap Between Law and Ethics.” His talk is free and open to the public. [...]  “International regulatory policy aimed at protecting cultural heritage seems to be floundering,” said Brodie. “Whether taken remotely by satellites or close-up with cell phones, images of looted landscapes in Syria tell the same story – widespread destruction of cultural heritage is an ever-present accompaniment to conflict and is out of control. The carefully worked out systems of legal and normative regulation developed since the middle years of the 20th century seem unable to cope, overwhelmed by the liquid reality of the twenty-first century market.”[...] The March 3 conference on the “Ethics of Acquiring Cultural Heritage Objects” will look at the ethical and cultural heritage concerns surrounding the looting and trafficking of art objects in the Middle East, South Asia and the West. 

Travis Hits Gold

From the Tim's Pirate Band Ancient Artefact Collectors Discussion Group:

Real Ptolemaic shabti? Wed Feb 15, 2017 2:53 am (PST) . Posted by: Travis
Hello all, I am just starting out (ordered my copy of "Egyptian Shabtis" by H.M. Stewart a few days ago), and am waiting to make any big purchases until I am more well-versed; however, I came across a listing that seems like a good, inexpensive starter piece. The seller is from this list of trusted dealers http://paul-barford.blogspot.com/2010/02/serious-collectors.html I came across; however, the list is from 2010 so I thought I'd double check here before I purchase. Many thanks for your insights into the authenticity. See attachment for photo. The description reads: "Egyptian Faience Ushabti, Ptolemaic Period, 332 - 30 BC. Mold made blue-green faience ushabti. The figure wears the typical wig and beard, and carries a pick and hoe. On the back is a central column and a basket on the left shoulder. 11.2 cm tall. Intact, no repairs." Respectfully, Travis

The dealer is Barry and Darling, who very rarely can supply a proper documented collecting history for the antiquities they sell. Why is it that starter collectors are more worried about 'authenticity' of artefacts and not their licit origins? I doubt whether 'Travis' was interested enough to read through the introduction to the list to which he refers (which, if he'd read it he'd have spotted that it actually came from the very same forum he was asking whether members agreed with it !) or down to the bottom of my post. It was probably too many words for the neophyte.  Anyway, the list was reproduced not to help collectors buy undocumented items, like this one, but as I said to provide a checklist of websites and venues where the workings of the antiquities trade can be examined at first hand. 'Carefree Travis' seems less concerned about that... Travis also seems to think rather amateurishly that a Shire Archaeology paperback is the definitive reference....

He might also like to think about the fact that the items he is thinking of collecting were all made to be piously placed in tombs, and these tombs are now being located and opened on an industrial scale by grave-robbing looters in order to hoik out stuff they can flog to the dealers who supply the likes of the folk on my list. If he was at all bothered about the ethics of all this, 'Travis' might like to ask the dealer selling these items on about what happened to the human remains disturbed in this shabti-producing plunder of the ancient sites of Egypt. More than likely the grave robbers treated them like they do all over Egypt, as here.

Looted mummy remains at El Hibeh

Without the documentation, walk away Travis, don't buy objects that you cannot verify were not looted recently by commercial grave robbers.

PAS Karaoke Recording Explained

The PAS presented the PAStExplorers project (karaoke recorders) as a 'community contribution' at the 'Age Friendly Museums' conference held at the BM, illustrated by some twee 1970s-style cartoons. Here's theirs:

Note the fossils. Note also the statement about government commitment - the scheme now cannot work without volunteers. So, instead of archaeological liaison between finders and professional archaeologists we are getting a 'database' created on the basis of karaoke recording by students, metal detectorists and OAPs, who are offered 'structure' in their life, a social life, rehabilitation and it's all so very flexible, anything goes? What's this all about? The PAS seems to have lost allsense of its identity, once aspiring to be 'citizen science' producing academically usable data to rigorously-high standards, it has now declined to seeing itself as basically a social club for OAPs and metal detectorists. 

Dutch Art Restitution Dancing to the Kremlin's Tune

Russians were involved in an effort to influence a Dutch referendum last year on a trade agreement with Ukraine. (Andrew Higginsfer, 'Fake News, Fake Ukrainians: How Russians Tilted a Dutch Vote' Feb 16th, 2017)

They attended public meetings, appeared on television and used social media to denounce Ukraine’s pro-Western government as a bloodthirsty kleptocracy, unworthy of Dutch support. [...] The Dutch referendum, held last April, became a battering ram aimed at the European Union. With turnout low, Dutch voters rejected the trade agreement between the European Union and Ukraine, delighting Moscow, emboldening pro-Russia populists around Europe and leaving political elites aghast.

We remember another element in the rhetoric depicting Ukraine as a kleptocracy were the accusations, never justified or proven, by Arthur brand and the museum curator Ad Geerdink, that Ukrainian politicians were directly involved in the affair. it turned out that neither of them were able to determine whether they were dealing with Ukrainian or Russian sources. Shame on them. They need to apologise for their amateurish blundering.

[Westfries Museum Theft]