So, What IS Going on in the British Museum?

William Dalrymple @DalrympleWill (16/2/2026)

"I've just been chatting with Nick Cullinan, the excellent new director of the British Museum, and I'm very relieved to say that the story put by the Daily Telegraph about the BM cancelling the name Palestine is a complete misrepresentation of the facts:
"To reassure you we are not removing mention from Palestine from our labels," Nick told me. "Indeed, we have a display on at the moment about Palestine and Gaza.
"I know this is something our curators have thought long and hard about - as you can imagine. We amended two panels in our ancient Levant gallery last year during a regular gallery refresh, when some wording was amended to reflect historical terms.
"To be honest, the even more frustrating and concerning thing is that I knew nothing about this until yesterday and has only been explained to me this morning. I hadn’t even seen that [UK Lawyers for Israel] letter despite asking for it until this morning. I’m disgusted by the whole thing."
The question remains why the Daily Telegraph would put out such a mischief-making story without first fact checking it with the Directors office."

But it's not the Telegraph is it? The story appears to have originated with UK Lawyers for Israel 'British Museum Reviewing Palestine Terminology in Galleries after Audience Testing', February 14, 2026

"The British Museum has confirmed that it is reviewing and updating some gallery panels and labels after “Audience testing has shown that the historic use of the term Palestine … is in some circumstances no longer meaningful.” [...] In a letter to the British Museum, UKLFI explained ...[...].
UKLFI argued that ...[...]
UKLFI requested that the Museum review its collections and revise terminology ...[...]
Responding to the concerns, the British Museum’s spokesperson [unnamed] confirmed that the Museum was in the processes of reviewing and updating panels and labels on a case-by-case basis" [....] A UKLFI spokesperson said: “We welcome the British Museum’s willingness to review and amend terminology.

So, surely some misunderstanding. You'd think lawyers would make sure they are speaking to a spokesperson who knows what's what.

Palestine for the Palestinians.

UK Treasure Hunting, Bottle-Digging History Prof Flogs off Protohistoric Hoard

                      .                     

A professor of medieval history, Tom Licence of the University of East Anglia, while out artefact hunting near Bury St Edmunds, suffolk with a metal detector, dug blindly down into the archaeological record and uncovered a hoard of 18 Iron Age gold coins  ( Rachael McMenemy, 'History professor finds huge Iron Age hoard' BBC 14.02.2026). The coins date to the reign of Dubnovellaunos, ruler of the Trinovantes tribe between 25 BC and AD 10. Now he and the landowner are flogging off this archaeological material, marketed as 'the Bury St Edmunds Hoard', and the find is expected to brinmg them in £25,000 at auction through Noonans. He first uncovered 17 full gold Iron Age coins and one quarter‑coin in autumn 2024, followed by one more full coin when he returned a few months later – bringing the total to 18. The hoard will be sold at auction by Noonans in London on Wednesday 4 March

PAS record ID: SF-03C894. Nota bene., the record was made in Feb 2025 and contains 17, not the 18 coins. The PAS record is a bit of a mess.

Interestingly, although mention is made in the University's report of the discovery of finding some "pieces of Viking hack silver" in the field on the day of the find of the first coins, the PAS does not seem to have a record of this, what is going on?

What is striking—and frankly disheartening—is not simply that this hoard was removed from its burial context and situational associtions (which was...?) in such a disruptive manner, but that it was done by someone (who bloody well should be) fully aware of the importance of historical context. In the case of this find, and all the others this guy has been hoiking out of the ground as he fancies, they have lost most of their context, apart from the contexts he grabbed these trophy collectable from having lost part of their content. Archaeology is not treasure hunting, the true value of such a hoard lies not in the gold content or auction estimate, but in its precise location, stratigraphy, and association with surrounding material evidence. Once objects are extracted without controlled excavation, irreplaceable contextual data is lost forever. The coins might have contributed to a deeper understanding of ritual deposition practices in late pre-Roman Britain, or the site where they were found. Yet instead of being investigated through a systematic archaeological dig, the site became a metal-detecting success story.

Even more uncomfortable is the romantic language used to frame the discovery. The suggestion that the coins might have belonged to one of his “ancestors” personalizes and sentimentalizes what should be treated as shared cultural heritage. This is not a family heirloom rediscovered in an attic; it is part of the collective archaeological record of Iron Age Britain.

Although the find was reported under the Portable Antiquities Scheme and some funds may be donated to a public collection, this does not undo the damage done by removing the hoard outside a controlled research framework. Recording an object after extraction is not the same as documenting its full archaeological context before disturbance.

It is genuinely sad to see a history professor participating in (and publicly celebrating) activities that contribute to the erosion of archaeological evidence and thus the historical record in general. Scholars, above all, should understand that context is everything. These are the people that should be opinion-makers/informers. This one's got it all wrong.

Professor Tom Licence is shown on his university's website to be a Professor of Medieval History and Literature, School of Literature, Drama and Creative Writing Member, specialist in the Norman Conquest, the cult of the saints, ecclesiastical history and Latin literature (10th-12th centuries). He's written over thirty books, research papers and other texts, including one on dump-digging (2017) [incongruously refereing to Victorian dumps as a 'resource' but seemingly unconcerned about the hobby that is digging them up for profit and pleasure destroying that resource, making then unavailable for future research]. He also wrote a book: "What the Victorians Threw Away". Licence is also a Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries, because, of course he is.

The University of East Anglia's very proud of what he's done: "History professor strikes gold with remarkable Iron Age discovery" by: University of East Anglia Communications Thursday 12 February 2026.

British Museum Admits to Mislabelling Heritage Objects since May 1948 (UPDATED)

They won't even consider repatriating multiple stolen items of other people's cultural property that they have, steadfastly resisting any calls to reconsider. Yet, they cave in the moment they are confronted by one group. In February 2026, the British Museum confirmed it had begun removing and updating references to "Palestine" in its ancient Middle East galleries following a formal complaint from UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI).

UKLFI argued that using "Palestine" as a geographical term was "historically inaccurate". The museum apparently agrees with them, admitting that it had mislabelled these items for so long  (another slipup by the beleagered institution). The BM is now busy altering information panels and maps. 

This decision has led to backlash from critics who view the change as an attack on Palestinian cultural identity and a result of political pressure.

Reportedly,

UKLFI identified a number of maps displayed in the British Museum’s Egypt galleries[...] [that] label the area of modern-day Israel as “Palestine”. [...] According to UKLFI, this wording wrongly applies a much later geographical term to an earlier historical context. [...] UKLFI argues that retroactively applying the name “Palestine” across thousands of years creates a false impression of historical continuity and erases the emergence and existence of Jewish kingdoms and Jewish national identity in the region.

Further concerns were raised about the placement of mid-20th-century dolls described as wearing “Palestinian traditional dress” within the Museum’s Ancient Levant gallery. UKLFI says that displaying modern artefacts in this context risks implying an uninterrupted cultural lineage that is not historically accurate [eh? PMB]. UKLFI pointed out that these curatorial choices are not only misleading for the general public but also deeply troubling for Jewish and Israeli visitors. UKLFI states that the terminology used may create a hostile or offensive environment and could amount to harassment under the Equality Act 2010, which prohibits harassment related to protected characteristics including race, religion and philosophical belief.

Map of Palestine and the Holy Land published in Florence around 1480
 in an edition of Ptolemy's Geographia. Israel is not on this map.

UK Lawyers for Israel issued a statement Saturday welcoming the museum's willingness to revise its displays. The group, founded in 2011 (pro bono legal director Natasha Hausdorff, voted in October 2024, Jerusalem Post's #2 "most influential young Zionist"), describes itself as an association of lawyers countering the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement and "to contribute generally as lawyers to creating a supportive climate of opinion in the United Kingdom towards Israel". Now the same UKLFI is complaining that free speech talk of genocide is distressing for Israel’s supporters and if they have their way we'll no longer be able to talk about that either. And yet, I would say that there are far more important issues concerning Israel's relationship with Palestine (recognised - please note - British Museum, as a  non-member observer state) that we should be fretting about than the wording of a few museum labels. 

British Palestine, the land where Kathleen Kenyon
 dug and where the new state of Israel later was created

Presumably many objects IN the "British" Museum got there by means of the Brits occupying a bit of the former Ottoman Empire. During the Ottoman Empire (1517–1917), the general region of what we now call "the Holy Land" was generally referred to by locals and in literature as Filastin (Palestine) or Ard al-Muqaddas (The Holy Land), 17th-century Ottoman maps and documents, such as those by Kâtip Çelebi, referred to the region as Ard-i Filistin (Land of Palestine).

1732 The British Museum was established only in 1753.

Reportedly, the UKLFI ('British Museum under pressure to change historically inaccurate use of “Palestine”...', February 7, 2026 ) has called on the British Museum to conduct a comprehensive review of its labelling "and to amend them so that regions are referred to by the historically accurate names applicable to the specific period in question, such as Canaan, the Levant, the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah, Judea, Samaria, or the Galilee". They forgot (accidentally I am sure) - appropriate to period - Coele-Syria, Syria Palaestina, in the Byzantine Period: Palaestina Prima/ Secunda, and Tertia. Then it became Jund Falastin (Palestine military district) when it came under Islamic rule. Let us see Jerusalem referred to properly under its historically accurate names in the same material as well (Rushalimum/Urusalim, Jebus, Yerushalayim, Hierosolyma, Aelia Capitolina, and Al-Quds/Īliyā). I hope the British Museum takes that into account (but also takes into account that the modern visitor - of which it has millions from all over the world and all sorts of backgrounds will need all those terms explaining).

How much are the Israeli/Jewish lawyers contributing to the costs of all this relabelling?

In other news, the entire collection of finds from Sutton Hoo is now about to be relabelled under the Museum's new policy, rather than coming from any part of England, it is now assigned to the  Ēastengla Rīċe. 



References
Craig Simpson, 'British Museum removes ‘Palestine’ from ancient Middle East displays' The Telegraph 14 February 2026.
AA 'British Museum removes 'Palestine' from displays after pro-Israel pressure', en.yenisafak.com, 15/02/2026, Sunday AA

UPDATE
Somebody has pointed out that this is the same group of Karens: Harriet Sherwood, 'London hospital takes down artwork by Gaza schoolchildren after complaint' The Guardian Mon 27 Feb 2023 (" Pro-Israel group objected to display saying it made Jewish patients feel ‘vulnerable, harassed and victimised’ [...].") An exhibition of children's artwork. UK Lawyers must be great at parties.

.

Culture Crime Under Illegal Occupation by Russia

The names of 14 individuals allegedly involved in the removal to Russia of Ukrainian Cultural Heritage have been made public. In early February 2026, the Defence Intelligence of Ukraine (DIU) launched a "Stolen Heritage" register on the War & Sanctions portal to identify those responsible for what has been called the largest museum theft in Europe since World War II. Defence Intelligence of Ukraine has identified those who removed exhibits from museums in Kherson, Nova Kakhovka, and the “Kamiana Mohyla” reserve, transported them to Russia, and used them in propaganda exhibitions. 

Key Individuals Identified ... The DIU's investigation has focused on high-ranking collaborators and Russian military officials., they include:

• Artem Lahoyskyi: The Russian-appointed "Minister of Culture" of the Kherson region. He is identified as a primary organizer who personally participated in the removal of items from Kherson museums and the exhumation of Prince Grigory Potemkin's remains from St. Catherine's Cathedral.
• Dmytrii Lipovyi: A Russian Black Sea Fleet officer and former "commandant" of Kherson. He reportedly coordinated the transportation of stolen artefacts and personally sealed the trucks used for their removal.
• Volodymyr Bodelan: The "permanent representative" of the Kherson region to the Russian government, accused of organizing propaganda exhibitions in Moscow using stolen Ukrainian art.
• Nataliia Desiatova: The Russian-appointed director of the Kherson Art Museum during the occupation. She has already been sentenced in absentia by Ukrainian courts to 10 years in prison. 

The scale of the damage done to Ukrainian cultural heritage and destination of the looted items can be indicated by just a few examples

Kherson Museums: Over 28,000 artefacts were taken from the Regional History Museum alone, while the Kherson Regional Art Museum lost more than 10,000 exhibits, including works by Aivazovsky and Shovkunenko. 

Kamiana Mohyla: Approximately 37 unique petroglyphs and artefacts from this fragile archaeological reserve in Zaporizhzhia were moved to the "Tauric Chersonese" museum in occupied Crimea under the guise of a "temporary exhibition".

Nova Kakhovka: More than 16,000 pieces, including ancient Greek amphoras and Scythian gold, were looted from the city's history museum and art gallery. 

Propaganda Use: Many stolen items, specifically paintings by Albin Havdzynskyi, were displayed at the Transneft headquarters in Moscow for an exhibition titled "Always Nova Kakhovka" to legitimize the illegal Russian occupation.

Ukraine has launched a State Registry for Stolen Cultural Valuables to help international customs and law enforcement prevent the resale of these items on the global market.

The international conservation bodies, meanwhile are proving to be as useless as they generally tend to be when firm action is needed. A French non-governmental organization, “Pour l’Ukraine, pour leur liberté et la nôtre!”" [For Ukraine, for their freedom and ours!] has issued a petition demanding that Russia be stripped of its membership in the International Council of Museums (ICOM). The document emphasizes that the membership of institutions and individuals who destroy, plunder, and falsify cultural heritage violates ICOM’s principles. The French organization noted that many national committees have already called for Russia’s exclusion from ICOM, so far without result. 

• Of course, publishing names does not replace legal accountability. Much work still lies ahead.

Egyptian Antiquities Inspector Convicted Over Involvement in Major Artefact Smuggling

                                       .                                  

In what is considered one of the most significant antiquities smuggling cases to affect Egypt’s cultural heritage sector, a Cairo criminal court has sentenced an antiquities inspector to life imprisonment (25 years) in a prominent case tied to the theft and smuggling of 370 ancient artefacts from a major museum ('Egypt court hands life sentence to antiquities inspector over major artifact smuggling', Egypt Today, 18 Jan 2026).

The matter goes back to 2015. Three defendants were accused of conspiring with an unnamed accomplice to illegally move the stolen pieces out of the country. The 370 ancient artefacts involved had been stolen from the storerooms of the National Museum of Egyptian Civilization, located in Old Cairo (Fustat), Egypt. Court records indicate that the defendants, which included two antiquities inspectors, took advantage of lax security and inadequate storage controls within the museum’s storage facilities to steal the items. Investigators found that two of the suspects created fake replicas of the original artefacts and left these counterfeits in the storage rooms to hide the thefts. Meanwhile, the genuine artefacts were smuggled abroad in coordination with an unidentified individual. Prosecutors stated that the defendants were fully aware that the objects they stole were irreplaceable pieces of national heritage and were protected under Egyptian law.

The National Museum of Egyptian Civilization (NMEC) - commonly referred to in local reporting as Muzium al-Hadara / Muzium al-Hadhara is relatively new compared with some of Egypt’s long-standing museums. The construction for the current museum began around 2000 and it was officially inaugurated on April 3, 2021, making it one of the newest major cultural institutions in the country.

Russia Protests Detention of Archaeologist in Poland

Screenshot from 2018 film: Крымский мост. Сделано с любовью! 

Russia has today summoned Krzysztof Krajewski the Polish ambassador to Moscow to the Russian Foreign Ministry to demand the release of a Russian archaeologist who was detained in Poland last month at the request of Ukraine. A Warsaw court is due this week to rule on whether he should be extradited to face trial in Ukraine for illegal archaeological research in occupied Crimea. The Warsaw District Court extended the pretrial detention of Russian archaeologist Alexander B. until March 4.

The Russians claim the accusations are 'absurd', but seem (like the archaeologist involved, it seems) unaware of the implications of the provisions of Art 9 of the Second Protocol of the 1954 Hague Convention. Tass, 'Russian MFA lodges protest with Polish ambassador over archeologist’s detention' 13 Jan 2026.

The archaeologist, identified under Polish privacy law as Alexander B., is employed by the State Hermitage Museum in St Petersburg. Ukrainian investigators accuse him of leading excavations at an ancient site near Kerch on the Crimean peninsula, without the authorisation of Ukrainian authorities. According to Kyiv, the work resulted in partial damage to the archaeological site and constitutes a violation of Ukrainian cultural heritage and criminal law.

Alexander B. was detained last month by Poland’s Internal Security Agency (ABW) at a Warsaw hotel while travelling from the Netherlands to the Balkans, where he was scheduled to deliver a series of academic lectures. His arrest followed a request from Ukrainian prosecutors, who are seeking his extradition to face charges related to the alleged illegal excavations. Since his detention, Alexander B. has remained in custody under a court order. On Monday, Warsaw’s district court approved an extension of his detention until 4 March. A further hearing scheduled for Thursday will determine whether Poland will grant Ukraine’s extradition request. A spokesman for the Warsaw district prosecutor’s office, stated that Ukrainian authorities had submitted the necessary legal documentation and assurances required under extradition procedures. “From a formal standpoint, the extradition documentation raises no objections,” he said.

Ukrainian officials argue that any archaeological activity conducted in Crimea without Kyiv’s consent is unlawful under international law, as Ukraine continues to regard the peninsula as its sovereign territory despite Russia’s occupation. This is also recognized by most countries, including Poland. Ukrainian legislation prohibits the removal, disturbance, or study of archaeological material in occupied territories without authorisation, classifying such actions as damage to cultural heritage. Given that the archaeologist in question (and indeed his whole team) ignored that legal requirement, I think he should be extradited and tried in Ukraine to ensure accountability.

"It's incredibly sad and disappointing that anyone would choose to exploit Lincolnshire's rich heritage in this way."

 

The wheels grind on so slowly. The time between infringement and consequence in the UK are too long. Anyway, four years after suspicions were raised (e.g., That's a Funny State to be in! How Did That Happen? PACHI Monday, 16 May 2022), a Lincolnshire man who fabricated the discovery of what was claimed to be an 1,800-year-old Roman artefact has walked free from court after receiving a suspended prison sentence (Bill Bowkett, 'Treasure hunter who claimed eBay purchase was 1,800-year-old Roman brooch dodges prison ', MSN  9th Jan 2026). 

Jason Price, 54, from Grantham, was given a 12-month prison sentence suspended for two years at Lincoln Crown Court yesterday after pleading guilty to four counts of fraud by false representation. He was also ordered to complete 150 hours of unpaid work, pay £1,000 in court costs and £3,250 in compensation to Lincolnshire County Council. The £5,000 he [and the landowner?] received for the artefact has been repaid.

The court heard that Price, a funeral director, metal detectorist and Royal Navy veteran, falsely claimed to have discovered a copper-alloy horse figurine during a Detecting for Veterans charity event in 2019. Price told journalists at the time that he was “shaking” when he uncovered the object, which he claimed had been buried eight inches deep in a heavily ploughed field near Leasingham. “My jaw fell,” he said. He later admitted that he had in fact bought the object on eBay. 

The item, dubbed the “Leasingham Horse Brooch”, was initially celebrated as a major archaeological find and recorded as the first three-dimensional horse brooch on the Portable Antiquities Scheme database, dated to between AD 43 and 410. It was displayed at The Collection Museum in Lincoln and featured on the television programme Great British History Hunters.

Suspicion arose in February 2023 when Price continued submitting artefacts from another site at Long Bennington [no, Mr Bowkett, suspicion arose when Paul Barford and others noted earlier that the object looks like a Bulgarian fake and this is one of a number of potential out-of-place artefacts the PAS is full of].  Following testing by Historic England in February 2024, the brooch was found to be no earlier than the 16th century. Prosecutor Declan Austin told the court that investigators believed Price had “seeded” items on sites and that more than 150 hours were spent assessing the large number of submissions he had made [we are not told how many items that were formerly recorded on the PAS database were deleted as a result].

In an impact statement, Dr Lisa Brundle, Finds Liaison Officer at Lincolnshire County Council who had recorded the piece (in a record of some length) in the first place, described the case as a “betrayal” that had undermined trust and diverted resources from legitimate archaeological work. Poor lady, deceived by a tekkie. It is quite clear that the PAS is on many occasions FAILING to verify material brought in by artefact hunter/collectors by even such basic means as checking whether EACH find is accompanied by a signed release form by the landowner confirming that the items was taken from their land with their agrerement and knowledge - to help avoid the PAS handling clandestinely-excavated and stolen material. Obviously instead of verifying the origin (and authenticity) of the find, Ms Brundle "trusted" that the person claiming to be the finder was telling the truth. The number of danubian finds and coins (and those from further afield) in the "database" suggests that not all of these people were telling the truth and the gullible FLO recorded a whole lot of dubious material as British finds (I am doing a book chaptder on this in 2026).  

Apparently, Will Mason, head of culture at Lincolnshire County Council, said: “It’s incredibly sad and disappointing that anyone would choose to exploit Lincolnshire’s rich heritage in this way.” Apparently he has no real problem with individual collectors ripping up the archaeological record for personal gain and entertainment. With attitudes like that in the British heritage community as a whole, one might very well follow that with the sentiment "what can anyone do?" 

hat tip to Dave Coward for the link. 

Update 23/1/2026

The British Museum loses count of Treasure items in England and Wales. In mid-November '25, they said the sum for 2024 was a "record" (of course) "1446". Now it seems they've recounted and its "1540"! Why not get it right the first time?