Advanced Metal Detecting: Bad News for Ancient Coin Importers

.
Some bad news for importers of ancient coins:  

A more advanced metal detector which is capable of detecting different precious metals inside the human body has been finally introduced to the world by Protective Technologies International (PTI). The metal detector XVS 10mi is sensitive enough to detect even the smallest metal amounts [...].  

“With the new installation last week my company gained back $20,000 in stolen items. Thank you PTI – Sandy Williams

When will they be installed in airports?

Huffington Post on the Antiquities Trade: "clandestine, lucrative and often dangerous"

The Huffington Post has an online opinion piece about antiquities looting (Brendan Pittaway, 'Mobsters, Museums and the Twin Towers: Tutankhamun and the Illicit Antiquities Trade ' 22/11/2012). It is based around the tale of Carter's opening of Tutankhamun's tomb and an increasing interest among collectors to get their hands on collectable items, and the way this has been capitalised on by what the author calls "gangsters and terrorists". Over the years, he argues:

mobsters now globalised the trade, generating billions of dollars each year. They ensnared private collectors and unscrupulous institutions who didn't care from where or how objects were acquired. [...] The latter-day illegal tomb raiders, also used mechanical diggers to smash apart historic sites in search of sellable trinkets and used material as collateral in drug deals. Great swathes of land, formerly part of ancient or classical civilisations in the Americas, Europe and the Far East have been destroyed.

he then illustrates the alleged terrorist connection by referring to the story that WTC attacker, Egyptian Mohamed Atta is reported to have tried to sell artefacts looted in Afghanistan to a German university in 1999 in order to get the money to buy a plane.

thieves have used political upheaval and war in order to cherry-pick antiquities from museums and places of interest. The 'Arab Spring' continues to prompt grave concerns about spoliation with museums not spared from attack. Syria currently alarms the archaeological community in much the same way that Libya, Egypt and Iraq all have in recent years.

It is however the connections between the no-questions-asked market in antiquities and the raising of money to fund criminal and extremist activities have led to two recent schemes intended to create conditions to stem the black market in antiquities.

Both measures provide structure and the promise of greater knowledge of a topic which, by its very nature, has been clandestine, lucrative and often dangerous.

The first is the team at Glasgow University who has been  awarded a £1 million grant to determine the extent and methods of the criminal trade in artefacts. The second is the announcement that the International Council of Museums (ICOM) is setting up a new intelligence group to monitor illegal antiquities trafficking.

Olympia Museum Robbery Suspects Arrested

While the Americans can barely bring themselves to do more than get a few stolen artefacts back and send them home, over in Greece they are doing the job properly. See Samarkeolog 'Olympia museum robbery: three local, Greek suspects arrested in police sting'. Initially three men, all Greeks, were arrested after one of them was apprehended in a hotel room trying to sell one of the 77 items stolen in the robbery  to an undercover police agent for half a million euros. The item concerned was the 3,300-year-old, Mycenaean bull-leaping gold ring. When the police agent revealed his identity the seller reportedly drew a gun on him, but was overpowered by police, who then arrested two accomplices in the hotel foyer. The three arrested had other items identified as Olympic Museum pieces and later revealed that many of the others laid buried in a hill in the area of Koskina, 2km from ancient Olympia.

The suspects are reportedly a 50-year-old contractor from Patra, a 36-year-old unemployed man from Patra and a 41-year-old unemployed man - described as the 'mastermind' of the gang who is from Patra but lives in Athens and reportedly made a living "selling little things" (like lighters on a bench in Monastiraki). What is not explained is where these three blokes got their AK47s from. Police are searching for two more residents of Patra in connection with the case, a 58-year-old and a 33-year-old.

It would seem that the gang had found themselves in a difficult position, with a treasure trove of collectable artefacts on their hands, they actually lacked the contacts to be able to sell them on. This is yet another illustration that the antiquity market cannot function without such demand-and-supply  connections.

UPDATE 25:11:2012

The recovered objects on a table, the thieves in jail (Al Jazeera)

Al Jazeera still thinks the most important thing is: Greek police recover stolen Olympia artefacts: 25 Nov 2012

UPDATE 30.11.2012:
'Olympia museum robbery suspects remanded; plead poverty', by samarkeolog

UK Detectorists Focus on "Chicago Ron" - "Should be Barred"

On the UK detectorist forum there is currently a thread running, entitled 'Chicago Ron and friends'. Here are a few snippets for those who cannot see what is happening on this closed-access forum:

Few of us were watching some videos of his where he and some friend were over here on detecting holidays, Colchester was the venue, and the amount of gear they found was off its tits! I'm sure he's a great guy but it proper annoyed us last night knowing they are robbing our soil and taking our coins back to the USA.

Another commentator is of a similar opinion:

Think he and his cronies believe they have a right to everything they dig up, because they have some English ancestry, which in his case is probably doubtfull. if they do, their ancestors turned there backs on England many years ago and therefore have no right whatsoever. Seeing his crowd makes my blood boil, especially the arrogance of them, they are foriegners and their attitude is completely dissrespectfull to this country, and its people, its unbelievable and they should be barred. Thats my personal opinion anyway. 

I think the Polish metal detectorists (Thesaurus metal detecting club) who a few weeks ago were arrogantly dismissive of my comments about their own exploitation of British laws might profitably reflect on the sentiments expressed in that thread. Those of them resident in England might like to add their own comments to the ongoing discussion of foreign artefact hunters hoiking stuff out and taking the artefacts away.

UPDATE 26th Nov 2012:
It is nice to see that the Poles noticed my comment and are taking it to heart. Pozdrawiam. 

Vignette: "Chicago Ron" as some UK tekkies see him? 

Focus on UK Detecting: Chicago Ron and the Enhancement of the British Archaeological Record

From the forum thread mentioned in the post above thread entitled 'Chicago Ron and friends':
One commentator suggests seeding is going on:

maybe they pay so much to detect that some bits possible might have been popped into the ground? Just a thought.

This would, another member points out, produce an anomaly - quite apart from any contamination of the archaeological record - the British public then has to pay:

Thing is, if it is all planted and if, when treasure it is declared, as is suggested in the vids, then we have a situation where the state is paying out for a false historical record plus, of course, the 'seeds' then become free. Bonus!

Another member searched a site this group had previously been active on and was surprised at what he was finding, he thinks they are pricing local artefact hunters out of the market by offering high fees for archaeologically-productive sites:

For the sort of money they can afford to pay landowners it's hardly surprising that they get great sites and find stuff. A while ago I detected on a site in Norfolk that they had recently visited and it was still stuffed full of hammered and other great finds, including BA and Celtic. I found the most hammereds in a day and a weekend that I'd ever had in thirty years (then) of detecting. [...]

Another also doubts they are seeding sites:

If I was seeding a site for organised dig for a handful of people I'd make sure I found f-all or didn't detect. But the lad Ron finds as much as the others. For me it's not seeded, it's just done hard every hour god sends on great land.

The logic of this escapes me. If the aim is to show people that "these fields are full of stuff" and the stuff has been planted, surely it makes sense for the organizers to retrieve as much of it as possible themselves but making sure everybody else taking part sees it. Whatever, another member points out that somebody is making a lot of money out of selling off the British archaeological heritage to random searchers from abroad:

Imagine the number of trips they sell off the back of those videos, I don't know what is seeded and what isnt but financially it could make a lot of sense A) for whoever runs the trips and B) for the guy who gets the youtube revenue and might make a nice comission on trips he sells from being emailed!

It might be interesting to add to that the thoughts of the Essex FLO on whose patch this group are operating most frequently (she's based in Colchester) about recording these finds...

News of Three More Antiquity Busts in Egypt, Hooray... er.....

.
Kate Phizackerley drew attention ('More Items Stolen Items Recovered') to a news item written by Al Masry Al Youm reporting "the recovery of more items stolen from the Egyptian Museum along with others allegedly stolen from archaeological sites" See http://www.egyptindependent.com/news/stolen-artifacts-recovered 08/11/2012

This is one of those infuriating products of Egyptian journalism which  makes very little sense. "Security services seized on Thursday stolen artifacts in Cairo, Giza and Sharqiya". So far, so good.Then we find a bit about affluent southeastern Cairo suburb Maadi which, taken on its own, makes sense:  



Four people are suspected of attempting to sell artifacts stolen from the Egyptian Museum out of an apartment in Maadi. Two suspects were arrested for possessing a stone bust and 28 golden pieces, which are not believed to be authentic artifacts. One of them reportedly admitted to planning to sell the objects.

 A third suspect was also arrested for possession of stolen artifacts, which he said he had acquired from a fourth person, who allegedly stole them from the museum. 



A bit short on details, a "stone bust" (one of the missing Amarna pieces?) and 28 "golden pieces". But 28 "golden pieces are not listed as missing from the Museum collection as a result of the 28th January 2011 robbery. What could be being referred to here however are items stolen from the Museum's shop which was looted then. This would explain how even before a commission is mentioned tyo examine the "authenticity" it is said that the items (gold+statue or just gold?) are not ancient. The next item seems to be a wholly unrelated event:

In Giza, investigations indicated that suspects hid artifacts found by archaeological missions operating in the Berket Khaled area in Badrashein and planned to sell them. 

 

Giza is of course the western suburb of Cairo. Badreshein is the town just outside Cairo on the south (opposite Helwan) next to the site of the ancient capital Memphis (but I am not sure what site in the region Birket Khaled is, maybe somebody can help). Certainly looting still seems to be going on at Sakkara just across the valley. Then there seems to have been a third piece of information thrown in for good measure:

Police said they arrested a person with a criminal record in Sharqiya who possessed five medium-sized statues and a base for another, but its authenticity is also doubted.

"Also?", also like the other statues, or also like the "golden pieces"? Sharqiya is the name of a governate in the Delta to the NNE of Cairo.

On this blog mention has been made several times of announcements of supposed artefact seizures in these same regions, when information is available it looks likely that what has been seized are common tourist pieces misidentified by over-zealous (or vindictive) police. This is a suspicion that is reinforced by a total absence of any followup story, just a veil of silence. My bet is that of these three good news stories, only the second has, maybe, a chance of being the real thing.

Meanwhile objects stolen from archaeological stores and a major museum collection remain in circulation, sites are being looted, sites are being built on with no mitigation, and the authorities try to pretend everything is under control by announcing "artefact seizures" for effect.

Its a bit like an Egyptian version of having a Portable Antiquities Scheme to paper over the cracks of the erosion of the archaeological record being caused by British artefact hunters.

More on the Proculus coins

.
Over on the Forum coiny discussion list there is extreme scepticism about British Museum numismatist Roger Bland's opinion that the coin now in the hands of Dix, Noonan, Webb is a fifteenth century forgery. "Pscipio" for example writes (November 17, 2012, 06:22:25 am ):

I find it hard to believe that a 15th Century (or somewhat later) forger would a.) know of the context of what were considered barbarian imitations for a long time and b.) produce a fake of this quality, with style and fabric perfectly fitting in what one would expect from original coins of an usurper in that area, with convincing corrosion, surfaces and strikes c.) the fake only showing up twice, in the late 20th and early 21st Century under such circumstances as we see it here. Style, surfaces and find circumstances thus seem to be convincing to me and I so far fail to see a reason to doubt the authenticity of these coins - other than that the extreme rarity, which understandably raises initial doubts. But if the name on the coins is the only reason to doubt them, while everything else seems to be pointing towards authenticity, I don't think they can be condemned.

"Mark Fox" is of a similar opinion (November 16, 2012, 06:21:29 pm ):

For me, the quality and style of the engraving, the way in which it was struck, and the fabric of the flan, all work together to rule out a 15th century fantasy. An inventor of such a fraud would have to be extremely ingenious to copy a debased antoninianus over some showier denomination and then give a distinct barbarous flare to the inscriptions and "Gallic" look to the designs, just as someone might expect from a coin minted in the late 3rd century AD in an area of Gaul without access to an official imperial mint, but instead to local minters of barbarous radiates. Compare the situation of Regalian. What's more, the simple obverse inscription IMP C PROCULUS AUG does not correspond to Hubertus Goltzius' supposed recording of a Proculus coin with the more fanciful reading of IMP C T AEL PROCVLVS P F AVG. See page 75 of his Thesaurus rei antiquariae huberrimus (1579).

On the Mauseus blog ('Proculus, a British Museum comment on the find') there is a comment in similar vein from "Angelo di Ragusa" [18 November 2012 23:19]:

I find Mr. Bland's comments very hard to square with a serious academic opinion. Who would have forged in the 15th. century of all times a coin of an unheard of usurper? Furthermore, if as it seems the coin has been made by a Gallic local mint , the metal content can be compared to the other coin in Munich and other products of the same time from the same area. Not rocket science.

So here we have an interesting confrontation of views between coin collectors and shopkeepers and the (real) professional (museum) numismatists. Who is correct? Frankly, from looking at the photo as a mere 'dirt' archaeologist, I'm (this time) on the side of the coineys. I do not think either coin is a fake.

The PAS still have not answered a perfectly civil email asking about this coin sent three days ago. I bet a tekkie would have got a quicker answer.

Anyway, for the record, here is what "curtislclay" says on the Forum Discussion list about the first coin sold for 92,000 DM by Bankhaus H. Aufhäuser, Versteigerung 8 (1991), 640 and now in the Staatliche Münzsammlung München (November 16, 2012, 05:26:56 pm)

I asked Hubert Lanz about the first Proculus coin, since it was sold in Munich and was purchased by the Munich Coin Cabinet, but then later (I had heard) was condemned as a forgery. Dr. Lanz responded that that first specimen had a very convincing provenance: the British coin dealer Richard Swan, who lived in Munich for many years, "got it from a large lot of late roman Ants found in England which he cleaned." So it would seem that the antiquity of the two coins can hardly be doubted. [...]

An unrecorded hoard dug up by metal detectorists in England and flogged off on the continent? How many times has that happened? Anyhow - to judge by the price they were willing to pay - the buyers of that coin seem to have no doubt about its authenticity as a third century issue.

Also of interest in the thread are the contributions of one of the "mates" ("David J6") of the finders. The thread begins with him asking "how much is this coin of Proculus werf then?" on 8th November. The odd thing is that the coin had been found the previous day, in Yorkshire, had been identified by "Jules" in Hertfordshire (how?) and posted on Facebook and the forum by ten in the morning the very next day (Nov 8th) ("all the hype and story from the guy Mark Hildreth"). By one in the afternoon the same day we see this: "the finder has been contacted by a major Auction house and it is being placed in an auction March 2013. Coin has also been authenticated by museum". Well, now we know that on the 8th November the coin had NOT been "authenticated", the museum lady apparently had said its probably a fake. So why is that not being mentioned by the bloke trying to draw the attention of US (mostly) coineys to it? [rhetorical]. On the basis of all this, there is something rather fishy about this story and some clarification would be in order. Like for example ("Glasgow Fourth Alert") was this coin seen and signed over by the landowner before "Jules" identified it?

Vignette: Roger Bland said this coin was the product of post-medieval antiquarians (William Camden (1551-1623) )