Yeah I remember that, at the time I watched it I didn't really get why she was getting so angry about it, but it makes more sense now.

Well, there were two points. First was the basic principle of this genuine 2000-year old historical artefact being put into wet dung to rot in modern times. But there's also that she was the one who made the argument (hope?) that it might be genuinely stratified on-camera. (I'm always a little bit sceptical about these things with a modern eye - was she blinded by hope, or did she draw the short straw when the producers needed someone to play devil's advocate for the site?) So she got to look like a bit of a fool when that barbed wire emerged, all the more reason to be livid.

Thank you for sharing the link!

So it returned unwanted to where it was found.

I found it almost funny - from that paper - that the sword had been repaired by whoever sold it to the people who buried it. They talked multiple times in the show about how fragile the handle was, but never mentioned the X-ray at the vet (as brought up in this video), or that it had been repaired by inserting a "metal dowel" in modern times (per the paper).

At a rough guess, the site started out as an antiquarian's confection of fake ancient sites, and was taken over by a fraudster much later on. If you are a legal detectorist, it is quite difficult to get permission to detect on fields, and all finds need to be recorded and shared with the landowner. Hoovering up finds and making a killing selling them is really quite difficult, hence a nasty minority become nighthawk detectorists and illegally detect fields by night. If you dig up anything from land that does not belong to you or on where you don't have permission to be, and take it off that field, then you are stealing and the object you have taken does not belong to you. Even though the owner of the land had no idea it was there and would never have found it, someone taking it is stealing. If the object is archaeological or of precious metal, then the law takes even more notice of the theft. Therefore nighthawk detected items are stolen goods, and quite a lot of archaeological stuff offered for sale online is stolen goods. What the Celtic Spring owner was trying to do was to establish a context for these artefacts to be legitimately "found" (actually salted into an artificial spring), which then makes it look like the owner has legal title over them, and makes selling them on that much easier and that much more profitable. Indeed, once said owner has had an official archaeological investigation done, then they can subsequently make a very good claim that everything found subsequently is also from that archaeological context and is also legitimate. It is in essence money-laundering only with artefacts, and comes under the heading of fraud, and handling stolen goods (just because someone buys the items in good faith does not give the new owner good title to them; the Market Ouverts were closed decades ago). All this shows that whoever the fraudster was, if they were the one who welcomed Time Team onto the site, then they were idiots. Welcoming a large number of extremely astute, professional archaeologists onto a site where one is trying to perpetrate a fraud is asking for trouble, and oh boy this muppet didn't half get trouble! That's that little scam completely banjaxed forever, I'd say. The La Tene sword is now known and cannot subsequently be "re-found" anywhere else; ditto the other metalwork and stonework. The place name is known as dodgy (it was dodgy previously, now it is *really* dodgy).

@@Wyrm1701 Thank you!

Detectorist

@@show3086 I'm an American, we haven't spoken the queen's English since, I'd guess the British surrendered around 1781 or so. We do things our own way and won't bow to any peer pressure. Nice try though.

@@Unit13FREMSLT I was referencing a show called "Detectorists", which I assumed anyone who watches Time Team has seen. In the show, whenever anyone calls them "Detectors" they always correct them an say "Detectorists!". If you haven't seen the show, check it out. It's great!

Great question.

It's the weirdest part because they explain why each of the other sites was definitely invalid, but with the spring, they just show a few old photos and then declare that the spring wasn't there. That raises a lot of questions, as you've asked. If they didn't make a fake spring, isn't it possible it was still there, just filled in?

One aspect that has been documented with regard to the site is that the La Tène sword was returned to the land owner not long after its discovery because no museum would take it. The following quote is from the paper 'A Real Relic From a Sham Site: An Iron Age Sword 'Found' At Llygadwy, Powys, Wales' by Andrew Fitzpatrick (specialist in later prehistory, University of Leicester): ''The uncertainty as to the original context, and indeed the ownership of the piece, meant that any conservation could prejudice information about the find’s original burial environment and what had happened to it after its first discovery. Moreover, any work would increase the market value of the sword and scabbard. For the same reasons no museum would agree to accept the sword and scabbard into their collections and it was returned to the owner of the Llygadwy ‘site’ in November 2001.''

​@@MontyCantsin5 That sounds absurd. It's an incredibly rare virtually priceless piece of history and a museum won't take it out of a petty desire to ensure the current owner doesn't gain any value from it? That makes no sense in the long run.

@@promontorium: It is understandable though. If there is no kind of context associated with the object (remember it wasn't originally found in the UK), in addition to the fact that it has such a dubious, probably illegal, recent past, a museum will be very reluctant to take it into their collection.

Tim Taylor, the creator of time Team.

Yeah, exactly how stupid do you have to be to put the sword on top of something like modern barbed wire and expect it to pass muster? Especially when you've invited a bunch of professional archaeologists making a TV show to **essentially record it being found on-camera**.

oh my god, I hope not. where would they have gotten it from?