The Financial Times has profiled the efforts of a Chinese arms manufacturer associated with the People Liberation Army to repatriate what the Chinese regard as stolen art. See
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/dafabaf2-6919-11df-aa7e-00144feab49a.html
According to the article,
America might have its vaunted military-industrial complex but China, fast becoming the world’s other great power, has its own version: a state-funded military-cultural complex charged with repatriating antiquities lost to foreign looters and returning them to mainland China.
At the heart of this vast and shadowy operation is Beijing-based Poly Culture and Arts, a pleasant-sounding body ultimately controlled by the People’s Liberation Army, the world’s largest military force by numbers and China’s leading arms dealer.
Poly Culture is a curious beast. Its stated aim – beating swords into ploughshares – is laudable and straightforward. A loosely controlled army of agents trawl global galleries and auction houses hunting for specific cultural items. Three thousand-year-old bronzes are highly sought after, as are stone Buddhist sculptures from the sixth, seventh and eighth centuries AD – a high point in Chinese civilisation.
During the State Department's deliberations over China's request for import restrictions, however, it was also suggested that Poly Culture and Arts used its influence to procure high quality archaeological objects from within China itself. It would be interesting to see the Financial Times investigating these allegations as well, but I doubt that will happen anytime soon. The suspicion that China's cultural heritage laws are not applied equally to all is simply not a topic that apologists for China seem at all anxious to discuss openly.
A Web Log Championing the Longstanding Interests of Collectors in the Preservation, Study, Display and Enjoyment of Cultural Artifacts Against an "Archaeology Over All" Perspective
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
New York Observer on Medici Poloroids
Michael Miller has commented on "self-appointed looting watchdog" David Gill's use of the Medici Polaroids in the New York Observer. See http://www.observer.com/2010/digging-past?page=1 His article discusses the difficulties in researching "provenance information" even for rather valuable artifacts. Predictably, David Gill has critiqued the article. See http://lootingmatters.blogspot.com/2010/05/messy-murky-issues-clouding-market.html
Yet, Gill has yet to fully disclose the circumstances behind his own access to the Polaroids, which are only partly available to the public.
As I asked in a recent blog, "Is Gill acting as an undisclosed agent of the Italian Cultural Bureaucracy or as some sort of Internet cultural property vigilante?"
That in many ways is more interesting than whether particular pieces in an auction were pictured in the Medici trove or not.
Addendum, dated June 3, 2010
This note from a well-placed "Cultural Property Observer" explains what is not commonly known about the "Medici Poloroids."
Peter,
It was good to speak with you today about your email of last week concerning the Polaroids posted by David Gill.
First, let's review the history. In September, 1995 the Swiss police raided four warehouses in the Geneva Free Port and seized several hundred antiquities. The warehouses were leased by a Swiss company, Editions Services ("ES"), which was traced to Giacomo Medici. Two sets of Polaroids were seized from the warehouse. The first set ("Group 1") were images of recently-excavated objects. The second set ("Group 2") were images of cleaned objects being offered for sale by ES. In addition, the Caribinieri took their own set of photographs of all of the objects in the warehouses ("Group 3").
In January 1997, the Carabinieri arrested Medici. According to the Carabinieri the warehouses contained 10,000 artifacts. This figure was exaggerated. The Group 1 images were the core of the Italian case against Medici and probably amounted to about 500 objects. The Group 2 images were a mix of objects represented in Group 1 plus objects that were purchased by ES on the market. Remember, ES was in the first instance a trading company which purchased and sold objects on the market and most of these objects were never connected to the Group 1 images. The Group 3 images were mostly of objects already represented in Groups 1 and 2.
The Italian Caribinieri posted a number of images from Groups 1 and 2 (about 150 in total) on their website in 1998. All of the images were removed from the website in late 2000 or early 2001. A number of institutions created archives of these images. Unfortunately, I don't think the Art Loss Register was one of these! Therefore, it is possible that David Gill and others were given copies of the Polaroids or downloaded the images from the website. Some of the images were posted to the AIA's website in 1998 at http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/geneva/captions/1.html
It would be useful to have all of the images in a public database, but this is an unlikely while they remain the gift that keeps on giving to the Italian prosecutor's office.
Yet, Gill has yet to fully disclose the circumstances behind his own access to the Polaroids, which are only partly available to the public.
As I asked in a recent blog, "Is Gill acting as an undisclosed agent of the Italian Cultural Bureaucracy or as some sort of Internet cultural property vigilante?"
That in many ways is more interesting than whether particular pieces in an auction were pictured in the Medici trove or not.
Addendum, dated June 3, 2010
This note from a well-placed "Cultural Property Observer" explains what is not commonly known about the "Medici Poloroids."
Peter,
It was good to speak with you today about your email of last week concerning the Polaroids posted by David Gill.
First, let's review the history. In September, 1995 the Swiss police raided four warehouses in the Geneva Free Port and seized several hundred antiquities. The warehouses were leased by a Swiss company, Editions Services ("ES"), which was traced to Giacomo Medici. Two sets of Polaroids were seized from the warehouse. The first set ("Group 1") were images of recently-excavated objects. The second set ("Group 2") were images of cleaned objects being offered for sale by ES. In addition, the Caribinieri took their own set of photographs of all of the objects in the warehouses ("Group 3").
In January 1997, the Carabinieri arrested Medici. According to the Carabinieri the warehouses contained 10,000 artifacts. This figure was exaggerated. The Group 1 images were the core of the Italian case against Medici and probably amounted to about 500 objects. The Group 2 images were a mix of objects represented in Group 1 plus objects that were purchased by ES on the market. Remember, ES was in the first instance a trading company which purchased and sold objects on the market and most of these objects were never connected to the Group 1 images. The Group 3 images were mostly of objects already represented in Groups 1 and 2.
The Italian Caribinieri posted a number of images from Groups 1 and 2 (about 150 in total) on their website in 1998. All of the images were removed from the website in late 2000 or early 2001. A number of institutions created archives of these images. Unfortunately, I don't think the Art Loss Register was one of these! Therefore, it is possible that David Gill and others were given copies of the Polaroids or downloaded the images from the website. Some of the images were posted to the AIA's website in 1998 at http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/geneva/captions/1.html
It would be useful to have all of the images in a public database, but this is an unlikely while they remain the gift that keeps on giving to the Italian prosecutor's office.
Monday, May 24, 2010
Backsliding on Long Term Loans?
The extent of Italy’s compliance with its promise to share long term loans with American museums that had not voluntarily repatriated artifacts was an important issue during the recent CPAC hearing to address renewal of the current MOU. Under the circumstances, I was surprised when it was recently brought to my attention that a similar long term loan requirement was quietly dropped when the MOU with El Salvador was extended yet again in March 2010.
The March 7, 2005 version of ART II of the MOU with El Salvador stated,
A. The Government of the Republic of El Salvador will use its best efforts to encourage long and short-term loans, for research and scientific purposes, of its archaeological materials under circumstances in which such exchange does not jeopardize its cultural patrimony and when consistent with the responsibilities of the National Council for Culture and Art(CONCULTURA), as carried out in accordance with the Special Law for the Protection of Cultural Patrimony of El Salvador. (Emphasis added.)
See http://exchanges.state.gov/heritage/culprop/esfact/pdfs/es2005mouext.pdf
In contrast, the March 8, 2010 version of ART. II the MOU now only states,
D. Both governments shall endeavor to permit the exchange of pre-Columbian archaeological material under circumstances in which such exchange does not jeopardize the cultural patrimony of El Salvador, such as through temporary loans for exhibition purposes and study abroad, to benefit the people of both countries, including persons of Salvadoran heritage currently living in the United States of America (Emphasis added.)
See http://exchanges.state.gov/media/office-of-policy-and-evaluation/chc/pdfs/sv2010mouextameng.pdf
Was CPAC consulted about dropping this requirement? If not, was the vote to extend the current MOU made under the false assumption that El Salvador would continue to be required to provide such loans as a quid pro quo ?
What does this say about the long term loan requirement in the current MOU with Italy? Will the State Department's Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs also quietly drop that requirement rather than hold Italy to it? One would hope not, but based on the El Salvadoran example, that possibility cannot be discounted.
The March 7, 2005 version of ART II of the MOU with El Salvador stated,
A. The Government of the Republic of El Salvador will use its best efforts to encourage long and short-term loans, for research and scientific purposes, of its archaeological materials under circumstances in which such exchange does not jeopardize its cultural patrimony and when consistent with the responsibilities of the National Council for Culture and Art(CONCULTURA), as carried out in accordance with the Special Law for the Protection of Cultural Patrimony of El Salvador. (Emphasis added.)
See http://exchanges.state.gov/heritage/culprop/esfact/pdfs/es2005mouext.pdf
In contrast, the March 8, 2010 version of ART. II the MOU now only states,
D. Both governments shall endeavor to permit the exchange of pre-Columbian archaeological material under circumstances in which such exchange does not jeopardize the cultural patrimony of El Salvador, such as through temporary loans for exhibition purposes and study abroad, to benefit the people of both countries, including persons of Salvadoran heritage currently living in the United States of America (Emphasis added.)
See http://exchanges.state.gov/media/office-of-policy-and-evaluation/chc/pdfs/sv2010mouextameng.pdf
Was CPAC consulted about dropping this requirement? If not, was the vote to extend the current MOU made under the false assumption that El Salvador would continue to be required to provide such loans as a quid pro quo ?
What does this say about the long term loan requirement in the current MOU with Italy? Will the State Department's Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs also quietly drop that requirement rather than hold Italy to it? One would hope not, but based on the El Salvadoran example, that possibility cannot be discounted.
Sunday, May 23, 2010
Leon Levy Foundation Seeks to Publish Partage Records
A Culture Grrl post brought my attention to the Leon Levy Foundation's recent efforts to promote the publication of records from old digs. See http://leonlevyfoundation.org/category/newsroom/whats-new/ It's particularly nice to see representatives of the AIA in attendance. That makes sense. Indeed, the AIA already has a similar program. See http://www.archaeological.org/webinfo.php?page=10295
Hopefully, these efforts will also lead to the publication of coins from excavations. During the recent MOU hearing on Italy, it struck me that a number of speakers from the archaeological community maintained that import restrictions were necessary to promote archaeological research into coins. Yet, an academic paper the International Association of Professional Numismatists commissioned conclusively demonstrated that Italian finds from official archaeological excavations remain woefully underpublished.
Hopefully, these efforts will also lead to the publication of coins from excavations. During the recent MOU hearing on Italy, it struck me that a number of speakers from the archaeological community maintained that import restrictions were necessary to promote archaeological research into coins. Yet, an academic paper the International Association of Professional Numismatists commissioned conclusively demonstrated that Italian finds from official archaeological excavations remain woefully underpublished.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Appeal to Rescue Numismatic Archive
Coins Weekly has carried an appeal seeking donations to restore numismatic manuscripts that suffered severe damage when the building housing the Cologne archives collapsed. For more, see http://www.coinsweekly.com/en/Archive/8?&id=150&type=n
As the appeal notes,
Coin collectors as the true custodians of cultural assets! Hundreds of numismatic and economic historical sources are stored in Cologne which surely are not at the top of the priority list for a restoration funding. Therefore, the disappearing of a history coin collectors are interested in is imminent. Research is hindered by the gigantic damage that makes an accession of the Cologne sources impossible for decades. The coin collectors are now facing a possibility to make clear who is really interested in protecting cultural assets! The Cologne disaster is a chance for every responsible coin collector to show that not only our own collection but the public treasures as well are near and dear to us! Just now, in the ongoing discussion about cultural assets, emphatic and generous help is of the essence! After all, we collectors are willing to assume responsibility for our common past!
As the appeal notes,
Coin collectors as the true custodians of cultural assets! Hundreds of numismatic and economic historical sources are stored in Cologne which surely are not at the top of the priority list for a restoration funding. Therefore, the disappearing of a history coin collectors are interested in is imminent. Research is hindered by the gigantic damage that makes an accession of the Cologne sources impossible for decades. The coin collectors are now facing a possibility to make clear who is really interested in protecting cultural assets! The Cologne disaster is a chance for every responsible coin collector to show that not only our own collection but the public treasures as well are near and dear to us! Just now, in the ongoing discussion about cultural assets, emphatic and generous help is of the essence! After all, we collectors are willing to assume responsibility for our common past!
Friday, May 21, 2010
Full Report on CPAC Hearing on Proposed Renewal of the MOU with Italy
On May 6, 2010, the U.S. State Department’s Cultural Property Advisory Committee met to hear public comments about the proposed renewal of a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) with Italy and its import restrictions on cultural goods of Greek and Roman cultures. Although it remains unclear whether Italy has formally requested that the MOU be amended to include import restrictions on coins, that issue dominated the hearing. CPAC members also heard testimony about the one-sidedness of the current MOU, the benefits of the MOU to the archaeological community, and a debate whether Italy has complied with its obligations to provide long term loans to museums that have not already repatriated artifacts.
CPAC heard from twenty (20) speakers about the MOU, including a representative of the Italian Ministry of Culture. Of these, nine (9) speakers opposed various aspects of the MOU or its possible extension to coins and eleven (11) supported it.
Chairwoman Katherine Reid invited archaeologist Stephano de Caro, General Director for Antiquities within the Italian Ministry of Culture, to speak first. He indicated that the looting situation has improved somewhat due to the work of the Carabinieri, but looting is now a criminal enterprise that relies on illegal aliens as diggers. There are improved surveys, including ones using helicopters. There is also an effort to send repatriated art back to museums in the sites from which it was looted. Preventative archaeology has also become important. Developers now pay for excavations. De Caro hopes for a good resolution of the difficult matter of coins. CPAC member Robert Korver (Trade) asked de Caro about budget cuts. De Caro indicated they are a real concern at his ministry. He also indicated there was some discussion of a special “landscape protection” tax to help fund his ministry.
Alex Nyerges of the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts spoke next on behalf of the AAMD. He reported on a survey of AAMD members concerning long term loans of archaeological artifacts from Italy. [The current MOU contemplates that Italy will make such loans available to museums.] Nyerges indicated that of the twenty-one (21) museums that responded only five (5) had received long term loans, and each of these museums had voluntarily repatriated artifacts. He further indicated such loans should ideally be for periods of ten (10) to twenty (20) years and not be tied to conservation projects. He hoped the Italian government would be more proactive in setting up loans. Nygers than referenced an AAMD report on looted works from the Fascist era in Italy. Finally, he advocated the sale of excess artifacts from Italian stores. CPAC member Joan Connelly (archaeology) wondered if two (2) year loans would be preferable as they could be changed out more frequently. Nygers indicated the associated costs and logistical problems make such loans unpalatable. CPAC member Nancy Wilkie (archaeology) asked Nyergers about the response rate for the survey. He indicated that the response rate was good for museums that held ancient art.
Art Friedberg, past president of the International Association of Professional Numismatists, spoke on his own behalf. He outlined the concerns that import restrictions on ancient coins struck in Italy would raise. These include: difficulties in identification for US Customs; questions about a coin’s country of origin; prohibitive compliance costs and prohibitive litigation costs. He indicated the broader the restrictions, the more unenforceable they will be. He also indicated that the regulations would only punish those who already properly declare coins on entry to the United States and encourage efforts to evade the law, particularly through the use of the mail. CPAC member Robert Korver (Trade) asked Friedberg if there were any export controls on classic US rarities like the 1804 Dollar (the answer is “no”). He also asked Friedberg about the Treasure Act, which Friedberg agreed is an excellent system.
Clifford Mishler (ANA President) and Douglas Mudd (ANA curator) represented the American Numismatic Association. Clifford Mishler requested that a letter from the Italian Numismatic Society opposing restrictions be entered into the record. Douglas Mudd spoke how restrictions would hamper the ANA’s educational mission and ability to procure coins for its collections. He also indicated that the Committee ought to also consider the effect of restrictions on the willingness of collectors to fund numismatic research. CPAC member Nancy Wilkie (Archaeology) indicated that the restrictions would not be retroactive, but Mudd insisted that such restrictions would be of concern for the future. In response to a question from CPAC member Joan Connelly (Archaeology), Mudd defended the practice of using low value coins “with dirt still on them” for educational purposes. He noted that if archaeologists are concerned about this, they should advocate laws akin to the UK Treasure Act that encourage finders to report artifacts. He also indicated that the tactile experience of holding ancient coins makes for an excellent educational tool.
Wayne Sayles spoke for the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG). He noted that almost 2000 coin collectors used the ACCG fax wizard to express concerns about the possible inclusion of coins in the MOU. Those restrictions could keep ACCG members from importing coins legitimately in markets abroad. Concerns about State Department transparency and accountability motivated the ACCG’s FOIA lawsuit and Customs Test Case. CPAC should be wary of extending import restrictions to “coins of Italian type” given Customs’ and State’s handling of that test case. The ACCG imported the coins in April 2009. ACCG’s Customs Broker had to tell Customs that the coins were subject to potential restrictions. On the 5th attempt, Customs seized the coins, but instead of filing the required forfeiture action, Customs did nothing. ACCG waited for almost a year, and then filed its own suit against Customs and the State Department. The government’s first move was to ask for yet more time to respond. Most collectors and dealers cannot afford to wait so long or afford a lawyer. This suggests if the Italian MOU goes through, many coins will just be abandoned after they are seized. This reality should weigh heavily on CPAC.
Souzana Steverding represented Ancient Coins for Education (ACE). She indicated her program using ancient Roman coins to teach kids about history currently reaches 75-100 schools. She expressed concern that restrictions would preclude her organization from receiving coins as donations for her program. She believes the system in the U.K. is a good one that Italy should emulate.
Rick Witschonke (ANS, but speaking on his own behalf) indicated that he was deeply saddened by the loss of knowledge occasioned by looting. He also believes looting has not decreased in Italy despite the MOU. It may be riskier than previously, but there will always be some ready to take that risk. The UK was in a similar situation before the Treasure Act was passed and a portable antiquities scheme was implemented. He believes CPAC can and should suggest that Italy consider a similar system modified to Italy’s own needs. CPAC made a similar suggestion back in 2000 and should do so again here. Some may claim this system has its faults, but it is much preferable to the current state of affairs in Italy. The governing statute, the CCPIA, contemplates that CPAC will make such suggestions to assist source countries protect their own cultural patrimony.
Peter Tompa represented the International Association of Professional Numismatists and the Professional Numismatists Guild. He indicated that the numismatic community was unclear whether the issue of coins was actually “on the table” because the Federal Register notice did not indicate whether new restrictions would be contemplated within the context of renewal. He wrote the Undersecretary McHale to ask, but received no response. If coins are “on the table,” there is no reason to depart from CPAC’s prior two recommendations to exempt coins from restrictions. The governing statute limits restrictions to artifacts “first discovered” in Italy. IAPN presented an academic paper that demonstrated Greek and Roman coins struck in Italy circulated far from there. There also is the issue that such coins are freely collected in Italy and the rest of the EU without any need to show provenance information. There are no import controls on coins into the EU and the two main market countries of Germany and the UK do not require export permits for coins not straight from the ground. In addition, the Italian-Swiss bilateral agreement exempts coins. This means the governing statute’s “concerted international response” requirement cannot be met and restrictions would only discriminate against Americans.
William Pearlstein represented several antiquities collectors. He indicated that now that looting is under control in Italy there is no reason to continue restrictions. Restrictions under the current MOU should be narrowed to incorporate only artifacts that are demonstrably Italian. Criminal law already protects Italy’s interests sufficiently. Pearlstein also passed around a Pandolfini catalogue of Italian archaeological materials being sold in Italy. He indicated that given the fact artifacts on the designated list were found in that catalogue, restrictions are only discriminatory against Americans.
Arthur Houghton, speaking for himself only, said the current MOU was of concern because it was unclear with respect to the designated list of covered material, which could include objects legally exported by other countries; encouraged under performance by the Government of Italy with respect to that country's reciprocal obligations under Article II; and discriminated against Americans in that it allows Italians and others access to routine sales of privately held antiquities not claimed by the State but restricts such objects against export to the United States by American citizens. He was asked for suggestions that would remedy the stark asymmetry of the MOU's provisions.
Karol Wight, the antiquities curator at the Getty, spoke in support of the MOU. She expressed some disagreement with the AAMD’s testimony during CPAC’s interim review of the MOU as well as Dr. Nyerges testimony earlier in the hearing. Specifically, she does not believe that the AAMD’s testimony about the lack of long term loans from Italian institutions reflects the experience of non-AAMD museums. She specifically mentioned the travelling Pompeii, Stabiano and Rome and America exhibits that are on a “long term” loan to the United States, if not to a specific museum. Wight also indicated that the Getty has had successful collaborations with Italy and has received loans of spectacular pieces, like the “Chimera of Arezzo.” Wight also indicated that AAMD members need to be more proactive in seeking loans from Italy. CPAC member O’Brien (public) noted that there seems to be a difference of opinion as to what constitutes a “long term loan.” Wight indicated that the Getty itself considers a period of 5 years to constitute a “long term loan” when it sends its own are out for exhibition elsewhere.
Susan Alcock is an archaeologist associated with Brown University. She has not excavated in Italy (her major work has been in Greece and Armenia), but she believed the MOU should be renewed and extended to coins. Her specialty is the “systematic pedestrian survey,” that is “field walking” with an eye to trying to understand archaeology from an examination of surface finds. She indicated that when she finds a coin during her walks, it is “a cause for celebration.” She also indicated that “There may be millions of these little suckers, but they are still important.” CPAC Chairwoman Reid (museum) asked about the practicality of Alcock’s recommendations, observing that she appeared to live in an “ideal world.” Alcock responded that she stood by her idealism. When Chairwoman Reid followed up by asking her recommendations, Alcock suggested: (1) CPAC recommends an extension of the MOU; (2) the MOU be extended to coins; (3) there must be public education efforts about the evils of looting.
Elizabeth Barton is the First VP of the AIA. She claimed that while one can see Italian archaeological materials openly for sale in New York City, such materials are not sold openly in Italy. Sometimes one sees coin stores in Italy, but they never have ancient coins in for display in their windows. The market fuels looting. Exhibits are better. They cater to non-collectors. The Pompeii exhibit drew as many as 2000 visitors per day. Barton disputed Rick Witschonke’s claim that the MOU was not working. It has reduced sales as proven by the fact that there are fewer ancient artifacts being auctioned by companies like Christie’s.
Elise Freedman is an assistant professor of classics at GW University. Students should understand the context of ancient art. This needs to be documented. The MOU seeks to encourage context to be documented. It also includes provisions for loans like the Rome and America exhibit.
Sebastian Heath is an AIA VP and is also associated with the American Numismatic Society, but he spoke on his own behalf. Coins are important to the cultural history of Italy and should be included in the MOU. We know Emperor Augustus gave out coins as New Year's Day gifts. We also know that a Roman knight was put to death for defacing the images on the coins. This shows they were considered bearers of meaning outside of their importance to archaeology. Fourth Century burials with coins depicting Christian symbolism tell us something about who was buried. If the coins had been looted, this information would have been lost. Coins are under threat. EBay sells coins still covered in dirt. The MOU needs to be amended to include coins to protect them from looting. CPAC member Robert Korver (trade) asked if the ANS had a position on the Italian renewal. Heath indicated “no.” [The ANS has a more general cultural property statement on its website.]
Laetitia La Folette is a classics professor at the University of Massachusetts. The Italian government has been cooperative in helping to set up exhibits. These exhibits give Americans contact with Italian culture.
Richard Leventhal is a professor with the Penn Cultural Heritage Center. Context must be preserved. There are top down and bottom up methods to do so. There needs to be community outreach to help. According to Leventhal, there is no such thing as a duplicate. The context in which every artifact is found makes each artifact important individually. The licit trade does not make sense. Loans do.
Clemente Marconi is a professor of Greek Art and Archaeology at NYU. He has excavated in Western Sicily. He believes the MOU has been effective tool in staunching looting and that it should be extended to include coins, which have been the targets of individuals with metal detectors. He also supports the longer term loans.
Brian Rose is the President of the AIA. The AIA has 8,000 professional members and 200,000 subscribers to its Magazine, Archaeology. He also is associated with the University of Pennsylvania Museum. He has knowledge of coins through his excavations at Troy. Italians collaborate in rights to publish archaeological material, which is welcome. Prof. Rose does not want to speak against collecting but rather in support of preservation of context. He has first hand experience about the importance of coins found in context from his excavations at Troy. Some of the coins support the view that the Romans considered themselves to be descendants of the Trojans. Rose was surprised to hear Phillipe de Montebello admit recently that he believes that the era of the big museum purchases is over. Rose would like to see the MOU renewed and would support its extention to coins should Italy seek it. In response to a question from CPAC member Robert Korver (trade), Rose thinks coins found out of their original context could still be important if the new context associates them with later time periods. CPAC Chairwoman Reid asked what Rose would suggest as to coins, since it appears broad import restrictions would be impossible to enforce. In response, Rose indicated the early coins of Magna Graecia and the Etruscans were a much smaller subset of coins to which restrictions could be imposed. He also believes that Italy should ban the use of metal detectors.
Prof. Patty Gerstenblith is a law professor at DePaul. She also acts as president of the Lawyers' Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation. She indicated that many of the speakers opposing the MOU were "blowing smoke." The MOU is necessary because it provides protections beyond those available under criminal law. There is no “scienter” or intent requirement for illicit artifacts to be seized. It is extremely difficult for the government to prove intent so import restrictions are an important part of the arsenal against looting. Importers may contest country of origin determinations so their rights are adequately protected under the relevant statutes. She does not believe that renewal of the restrictions is dependant on Italy's compliance with the long term loan requirements under Article II of the MOU, but she nonetheless supports long term loans.
CPAC was then invited to ask Prof. de Caro additional questions. Prof. Boyd (Museum) indicated that he favored a licit trade and rewards to finders. De Caro indicated that Italy had some provision for rewards of 1/4 of the value of the artifact for items found on private property, but there were few claimants. He also indicated that Italy allows for the export of some ancient coins. He noted there was a large seizure of ancient coins in the not too distant past. Prof. Reid (Museum) asked de Caro if Italy would contemplate something akin to the United Kingdom's Portable Antiquities Scheme. De Caro indicated there was talk about a pilot program in two regions in the North that were away from archaeologically sensitive areas.
CPAC heard from twenty (20) speakers about the MOU, including a representative of the Italian Ministry of Culture. Of these, nine (9) speakers opposed various aspects of the MOU or its possible extension to coins and eleven (11) supported it.
Chairwoman Katherine Reid invited archaeologist Stephano de Caro, General Director for Antiquities within the Italian Ministry of Culture, to speak first. He indicated that the looting situation has improved somewhat due to the work of the Carabinieri, but looting is now a criminal enterprise that relies on illegal aliens as diggers. There are improved surveys, including ones using helicopters. There is also an effort to send repatriated art back to museums in the sites from which it was looted. Preventative archaeology has also become important. Developers now pay for excavations. De Caro hopes for a good resolution of the difficult matter of coins. CPAC member Robert Korver (Trade) asked de Caro about budget cuts. De Caro indicated they are a real concern at his ministry. He also indicated there was some discussion of a special “landscape protection” tax to help fund his ministry.
Alex Nyerges of the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts spoke next on behalf of the AAMD. He reported on a survey of AAMD members concerning long term loans of archaeological artifacts from Italy. [The current MOU contemplates that Italy will make such loans available to museums.] Nyerges indicated that of the twenty-one (21) museums that responded only five (5) had received long term loans, and each of these museums had voluntarily repatriated artifacts. He further indicated such loans should ideally be for periods of ten (10) to twenty (20) years and not be tied to conservation projects. He hoped the Italian government would be more proactive in setting up loans. Nygers than referenced an AAMD report on looted works from the Fascist era in Italy. Finally, he advocated the sale of excess artifacts from Italian stores. CPAC member Joan Connelly (archaeology) wondered if two (2) year loans would be preferable as they could be changed out more frequently. Nygers indicated the associated costs and logistical problems make such loans unpalatable. CPAC member Nancy Wilkie (archaeology) asked Nyergers about the response rate for the survey. He indicated that the response rate was good for museums that held ancient art.
Art Friedberg, past president of the International Association of Professional Numismatists, spoke on his own behalf. He outlined the concerns that import restrictions on ancient coins struck in Italy would raise. These include: difficulties in identification for US Customs; questions about a coin’s country of origin; prohibitive compliance costs and prohibitive litigation costs. He indicated the broader the restrictions, the more unenforceable they will be. He also indicated that the regulations would only punish those who already properly declare coins on entry to the United States and encourage efforts to evade the law, particularly through the use of the mail. CPAC member Robert Korver (Trade) asked Friedberg if there were any export controls on classic US rarities like the 1804 Dollar (the answer is “no”). He also asked Friedberg about the Treasure Act, which Friedberg agreed is an excellent system.
Clifford Mishler (ANA President) and Douglas Mudd (ANA curator) represented the American Numismatic Association. Clifford Mishler requested that a letter from the Italian Numismatic Society opposing restrictions be entered into the record. Douglas Mudd spoke how restrictions would hamper the ANA’s educational mission and ability to procure coins for its collections. He also indicated that the Committee ought to also consider the effect of restrictions on the willingness of collectors to fund numismatic research. CPAC member Nancy Wilkie (Archaeology) indicated that the restrictions would not be retroactive, but Mudd insisted that such restrictions would be of concern for the future. In response to a question from CPAC member Joan Connelly (Archaeology), Mudd defended the practice of using low value coins “with dirt still on them” for educational purposes. He noted that if archaeologists are concerned about this, they should advocate laws akin to the UK Treasure Act that encourage finders to report artifacts. He also indicated that the tactile experience of holding ancient coins makes for an excellent educational tool.
Wayne Sayles spoke for the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG). He noted that almost 2000 coin collectors used the ACCG fax wizard to express concerns about the possible inclusion of coins in the MOU. Those restrictions could keep ACCG members from importing coins legitimately in markets abroad. Concerns about State Department transparency and accountability motivated the ACCG’s FOIA lawsuit and Customs Test Case. CPAC should be wary of extending import restrictions to “coins of Italian type” given Customs’ and State’s handling of that test case. The ACCG imported the coins in April 2009. ACCG’s Customs Broker had to tell Customs that the coins were subject to potential restrictions. On the 5th attempt, Customs seized the coins, but instead of filing the required forfeiture action, Customs did nothing. ACCG waited for almost a year, and then filed its own suit against Customs and the State Department. The government’s first move was to ask for yet more time to respond. Most collectors and dealers cannot afford to wait so long or afford a lawyer. This suggests if the Italian MOU goes through, many coins will just be abandoned after they are seized. This reality should weigh heavily on CPAC.
Souzana Steverding represented Ancient Coins for Education (ACE). She indicated her program using ancient Roman coins to teach kids about history currently reaches 75-100 schools. She expressed concern that restrictions would preclude her organization from receiving coins as donations for her program. She believes the system in the U.K. is a good one that Italy should emulate.
Rick Witschonke (ANS, but speaking on his own behalf) indicated that he was deeply saddened by the loss of knowledge occasioned by looting. He also believes looting has not decreased in Italy despite the MOU. It may be riskier than previously, but there will always be some ready to take that risk. The UK was in a similar situation before the Treasure Act was passed and a portable antiquities scheme was implemented. He believes CPAC can and should suggest that Italy consider a similar system modified to Italy’s own needs. CPAC made a similar suggestion back in 2000 and should do so again here. Some may claim this system has its faults, but it is much preferable to the current state of affairs in Italy. The governing statute, the CCPIA, contemplates that CPAC will make such suggestions to assist source countries protect their own cultural patrimony.
Peter Tompa represented the International Association of Professional Numismatists and the Professional Numismatists Guild. He indicated that the numismatic community was unclear whether the issue of coins was actually “on the table” because the Federal Register notice did not indicate whether new restrictions would be contemplated within the context of renewal. He wrote the Undersecretary McHale to ask, but received no response. If coins are “on the table,” there is no reason to depart from CPAC’s prior two recommendations to exempt coins from restrictions. The governing statute limits restrictions to artifacts “first discovered” in Italy. IAPN presented an academic paper that demonstrated Greek and Roman coins struck in Italy circulated far from there. There also is the issue that such coins are freely collected in Italy and the rest of the EU without any need to show provenance information. There are no import controls on coins into the EU and the two main market countries of Germany and the UK do not require export permits for coins not straight from the ground. In addition, the Italian-Swiss bilateral agreement exempts coins. This means the governing statute’s “concerted international response” requirement cannot be met and restrictions would only discriminate against Americans.
William Pearlstein represented several antiquities collectors. He indicated that now that looting is under control in Italy there is no reason to continue restrictions. Restrictions under the current MOU should be narrowed to incorporate only artifacts that are demonstrably Italian. Criminal law already protects Italy’s interests sufficiently. Pearlstein also passed around a Pandolfini catalogue of Italian archaeological materials being sold in Italy. He indicated that given the fact artifacts on the designated list were found in that catalogue, restrictions are only discriminatory against Americans.
Arthur Houghton, speaking for himself only, said the current MOU was of concern because it was unclear with respect to the designated list of covered material, which could include objects legally exported by other countries; encouraged under performance by the Government of Italy with respect to that country's reciprocal obligations under Article II; and discriminated against Americans in that it allows Italians and others access to routine sales of privately held antiquities not claimed by the State but restricts such objects against export to the United States by American citizens. He was asked for suggestions that would remedy the stark asymmetry of the MOU's provisions.
Karol Wight, the antiquities curator at the Getty, spoke in support of the MOU. She expressed some disagreement with the AAMD’s testimony during CPAC’s interim review of the MOU as well as Dr. Nyerges testimony earlier in the hearing. Specifically, she does not believe that the AAMD’s testimony about the lack of long term loans from Italian institutions reflects the experience of non-AAMD museums. She specifically mentioned the travelling Pompeii, Stabiano and Rome and America exhibits that are on a “long term” loan to the United States, if not to a specific museum. Wight also indicated that the Getty has had successful collaborations with Italy and has received loans of spectacular pieces, like the “Chimera of Arezzo.” Wight also indicated that AAMD members need to be more proactive in seeking loans from Italy. CPAC member O’Brien (public) noted that there seems to be a difference of opinion as to what constitutes a “long term loan.” Wight indicated that the Getty itself considers a period of 5 years to constitute a “long term loan” when it sends its own are out for exhibition elsewhere.
Susan Alcock is an archaeologist associated with Brown University. She has not excavated in Italy (her major work has been in Greece and Armenia), but she believed the MOU should be renewed and extended to coins. Her specialty is the “systematic pedestrian survey,” that is “field walking” with an eye to trying to understand archaeology from an examination of surface finds. She indicated that when she finds a coin during her walks, it is “a cause for celebration.” She also indicated that “There may be millions of these little suckers, but they are still important.” CPAC Chairwoman Reid (museum) asked about the practicality of Alcock’s recommendations, observing that she appeared to live in an “ideal world.” Alcock responded that she stood by her idealism. When Chairwoman Reid followed up by asking her recommendations, Alcock suggested: (1) CPAC recommends an extension of the MOU; (2) the MOU be extended to coins; (3) there must be public education efforts about the evils of looting.
Elizabeth Barton is the First VP of the AIA. She claimed that while one can see Italian archaeological materials openly for sale in New York City, such materials are not sold openly in Italy. Sometimes one sees coin stores in Italy, but they never have ancient coins in for display in their windows. The market fuels looting. Exhibits are better. They cater to non-collectors. The Pompeii exhibit drew as many as 2000 visitors per day. Barton disputed Rick Witschonke’s claim that the MOU was not working. It has reduced sales as proven by the fact that there are fewer ancient artifacts being auctioned by companies like Christie’s.
Elise Freedman is an assistant professor of classics at GW University. Students should understand the context of ancient art. This needs to be documented. The MOU seeks to encourage context to be documented. It also includes provisions for loans like the Rome and America exhibit.
Sebastian Heath is an AIA VP and is also associated with the American Numismatic Society, but he spoke on his own behalf. Coins are important to the cultural history of Italy and should be included in the MOU. We know Emperor Augustus gave out coins as New Year's Day gifts. We also know that a Roman knight was put to death for defacing the images on the coins. This shows they were considered bearers of meaning outside of their importance to archaeology. Fourth Century burials with coins depicting Christian symbolism tell us something about who was buried. If the coins had been looted, this information would have been lost. Coins are under threat. EBay sells coins still covered in dirt. The MOU needs to be amended to include coins to protect them from looting. CPAC member Robert Korver (trade) asked if the ANS had a position on the Italian renewal. Heath indicated “no.” [The ANS has a more general cultural property statement on its website.]
Laetitia La Folette is a classics professor at the University of Massachusetts. The Italian government has been cooperative in helping to set up exhibits. These exhibits give Americans contact with Italian culture.
Richard Leventhal is a professor with the Penn Cultural Heritage Center. Context must be preserved. There are top down and bottom up methods to do so. There needs to be community outreach to help. According to Leventhal, there is no such thing as a duplicate. The context in which every artifact is found makes each artifact important individually. The licit trade does not make sense. Loans do.
Clemente Marconi is a professor of Greek Art and Archaeology at NYU. He has excavated in Western Sicily. He believes the MOU has been effective tool in staunching looting and that it should be extended to include coins, which have been the targets of individuals with metal detectors. He also supports the longer term loans.
Brian Rose is the President of the AIA. The AIA has 8,000 professional members and 200,000 subscribers to its Magazine, Archaeology. He also is associated with the University of Pennsylvania Museum. He has knowledge of coins through his excavations at Troy. Italians collaborate in rights to publish archaeological material, which is welcome. Prof. Rose does not want to speak against collecting but rather in support of preservation of context. He has first hand experience about the importance of coins found in context from his excavations at Troy. Some of the coins support the view that the Romans considered themselves to be descendants of the Trojans. Rose was surprised to hear Phillipe de Montebello admit recently that he believes that the era of the big museum purchases is over. Rose would like to see the MOU renewed and would support its extention to coins should Italy seek it. In response to a question from CPAC member Robert Korver (trade), Rose thinks coins found out of their original context could still be important if the new context associates them with later time periods. CPAC Chairwoman Reid asked what Rose would suggest as to coins, since it appears broad import restrictions would be impossible to enforce. In response, Rose indicated the early coins of Magna Graecia and the Etruscans were a much smaller subset of coins to which restrictions could be imposed. He also believes that Italy should ban the use of metal detectors.
Prof. Patty Gerstenblith is a law professor at DePaul. She also acts as president of the Lawyers' Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation. She indicated that many of the speakers opposing the MOU were "blowing smoke." The MOU is necessary because it provides protections beyond those available under criminal law. There is no “scienter” or intent requirement for illicit artifacts to be seized. It is extremely difficult for the government to prove intent so import restrictions are an important part of the arsenal against looting. Importers may contest country of origin determinations so their rights are adequately protected under the relevant statutes. She does not believe that renewal of the restrictions is dependant on Italy's compliance with the long term loan requirements under Article II of the MOU, but she nonetheless supports long term loans.
CPAC was then invited to ask Prof. de Caro additional questions. Prof. Boyd (Museum) indicated that he favored a licit trade and rewards to finders. De Caro indicated that Italy had some provision for rewards of 1/4 of the value of the artifact for items found on private property, but there were few claimants. He also indicated that Italy allows for the export of some ancient coins. He noted there was a large seizure of ancient coins in the not too distant past. Prof. Reid (Museum) asked de Caro if Italy would contemplate something akin to the United Kingdom's Portable Antiquities Scheme. De Caro indicated there was talk about a pilot program in two regions in the North that were away from archaeologically sensitive areas.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Report on CPAC Hearing on Italian MOU-Part VI
Here is the end of my report on the 5/6 CPAC hearing on the proposed renewal of the MOU with Italy.
Clemente Marconi is a professor of Greek Art and Archaeology at NYU. He has excavated in Western Sicily. He believes the MOU has been effective tool in staunching looting and that it should be extended to include coins, which have been the targets of individuals with metal detectors. He also supports the longer term loans.
Brian Rose is the President of the AIA. The AIA has 8,000 professional members and 200,000 subscribers to its Magazine, Archaeology. He also is associated with the University of Pennsylvania Museum. He has knowledge of coins through his excavations at Troy. Italians collaborate in rights to publish archaeological material, which is welcome. Prof. Rose does not want to speak against collecting but rather in support of preservation of context. He has first hand experience about the importance of coins found in context from his excavations at Troy. Some of the coins support the view that the Romans considered themselves to be descendants of the Trojans. Rose was surprised to hear Phillipe de Montebello admit recently that he believes that the era of big museum purchases is over. Rose would like to see the MOU renewed and would support its extension to coins should Italy seek it. In response to a question from CPAC member Bob Korver (trade), Rose thinks coins found out of their original context could still be important if the new context associates them with later time periods. CPAC Chairwoman Reid asked what Rose would suggest as to coins, since it appears broad import restrictions would be impossible to enforce. In response, Rose indicated that restrictions on the early coins of Magna Graecia and the Etruscans would cover a much smaller universe of coins than restrictions that included Roman coins. He also believes that Italy should ban the use of metal detectors.
Prof. Patty Gerstenblith is a law professor at DePaul. She also acts as president of the Lawyers' Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation. She indicated that many of the speakers opposing the MOU were "blowing smoke." The MOU is necessary because it provides protections beyond those available under criminal law. There is no "scienter" or intent requirement for illicit artifacts to be seized. It is extremely difficult for the government to prove intent so import restrictions are an important part of the arsenal against looting. Importers may contest country of origin determinations so their rights are adequately protected under the relevant statutes. She does not believe that renewal of the restrictions is dependant on Italy's compliance with the long term loan requirements under Article II of the MOU, but she nonetheless supports long term loans.
CPAC was then invited to ask Prof. De Caro additional questions. Prof. Boyd (Museum) indicated that he favored a licit trade and rewards to finders. De Caro indicated that Italy had some provision for rewards of 1/4 of the value of the artifact for items found on private property, but there were few claimants. He also indicated that Italy allows for the export of some ancient coins. He noted there was a large seizure of ancient coins in the not too distant past. Prof. Reid (Museum) asked de Caro if Italy would contemplate something akin to the United Kingdom's Portable Antiquities Scheme. De Caro indicated there was talk about a pilot program in two regions in the North that were away from archaeologically sensitive areas.
The end. For the convenience of Cultural Property Observer readers, I will post the entire report in one blog, in a slightly edited form.
Clemente Marconi is a professor of Greek Art and Archaeology at NYU. He has excavated in Western Sicily. He believes the MOU has been effective tool in staunching looting and that it should be extended to include coins, which have been the targets of individuals with metal detectors. He also supports the longer term loans.
Brian Rose is the President of the AIA. The AIA has 8,000 professional members and 200,000 subscribers to its Magazine, Archaeology. He also is associated with the University of Pennsylvania Museum. He has knowledge of coins through his excavations at Troy. Italians collaborate in rights to publish archaeological material, which is welcome. Prof. Rose does not want to speak against collecting but rather in support of preservation of context. He has first hand experience about the importance of coins found in context from his excavations at Troy. Some of the coins support the view that the Romans considered themselves to be descendants of the Trojans. Rose was surprised to hear Phillipe de Montebello admit recently that he believes that the era of big museum purchases is over. Rose would like to see the MOU renewed and would support its extension to coins should Italy seek it. In response to a question from CPAC member Bob Korver (trade), Rose thinks coins found out of their original context could still be important if the new context associates them with later time periods. CPAC Chairwoman Reid asked what Rose would suggest as to coins, since it appears broad import restrictions would be impossible to enforce. In response, Rose indicated that restrictions on the early coins of Magna Graecia and the Etruscans would cover a much smaller universe of coins than restrictions that included Roman coins. He also believes that Italy should ban the use of metal detectors.
Prof. Patty Gerstenblith is a law professor at DePaul. She also acts as president of the Lawyers' Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation. She indicated that many of the speakers opposing the MOU were "blowing smoke." The MOU is necessary because it provides protections beyond those available under criminal law. There is no "scienter" or intent requirement for illicit artifacts to be seized. It is extremely difficult for the government to prove intent so import restrictions are an important part of the arsenal against looting. Importers may contest country of origin determinations so their rights are adequately protected under the relevant statutes. She does not believe that renewal of the restrictions is dependant on Italy's compliance with the long term loan requirements under Article II of the MOU, but she nonetheless supports long term loans.
CPAC was then invited to ask Prof. De Caro additional questions. Prof. Boyd (Museum) indicated that he favored a licit trade and rewards to finders. De Caro indicated that Italy had some provision for rewards of 1/4 of the value of the artifact for items found on private property, but there were few claimants. He also indicated that Italy allows for the export of some ancient coins. He noted there was a large seizure of ancient coins in the not too distant past. Prof. Reid (Museum) asked de Caro if Italy would contemplate something akin to the United Kingdom's Portable Antiquities Scheme. De Caro indicated there was talk about a pilot program in two regions in the North that were away from archaeologically sensitive areas.
The end. For the convenience of Cultural Property Observer readers, I will post the entire report in one blog, in a slightly edited form.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Medici Polaroids Leaked to Anti-Collector Archaeo-Blogger?
This blog has questioned the practice of the Italian Government (or at least elements within the Culture Ministry) of using the Medici Polaroids to play a game of "gotcha" on American auction houses and collectors. See http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2009/11/gotcha-italian-style.html
Now, anti-collector and anti-trade archaeo-blogger David Gill has evidently been given access to the Polaroids so he can play the same game of "gotcha" on his blog. See
http://lootingmatters.blogspot.com/2010/05/apulian-rhyton-from-medici-dossier.html and http://lootingmatters.blogspot.com/2010/05/medici-archive-roman-marble-youth.html
The group of Polaroids in Gill's possession seem to be different from another group released on DVD. See http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2010/01/italian-authorities-disclose-pictures.html
Who provided Gill with access to the Polaroids? Why haven't the authorities shared them with Sotheby's and Christie's auction houses? Why are only some of the Polaroids on the ALR Database? See http://illicit-cultural-property.blogspot.com/2010/05/why-cant-public-see-medici-polaroids.html Why release some pictures and not others?
Is Gill acting as an undisclosed agent of the Italian Cultural Bureaucracy or as some sort of Internet cultural property vigilante?
Wouldn't the right thing to do be to share all the images with collectors and auction houses? Playing games of "gotcha" either directly or through surrogates like Gill seriously undercuts the Italian Government's interest in appearing reasonable and cooperative as it renegotiates its MOU with the United States.
Now, anti-collector and anti-trade archaeo-blogger David Gill has evidently been given access to the Polaroids so he can play the same game of "gotcha" on his blog. See
http://lootingmatters.blogspot.com/2010/05/apulian-rhyton-from-medici-dossier.html and http://lootingmatters.blogspot.com/2010/05/medici-archive-roman-marble-youth.html
The group of Polaroids in Gill's possession seem to be different from another group released on DVD. See http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2010/01/italian-authorities-disclose-pictures.html
Who provided Gill with access to the Polaroids? Why haven't the authorities shared them with Sotheby's and Christie's auction houses? Why are only some of the Polaroids on the ALR Database? See http://illicit-cultural-property.blogspot.com/2010/05/why-cant-public-see-medici-polaroids.html Why release some pictures and not others?
Is Gill acting as an undisclosed agent of the Italian Cultural Bureaucracy or as some sort of Internet cultural property vigilante?
Wouldn't the right thing to do be to share all the images with collectors and auction houses? Playing games of "gotcha" either directly or through surrogates like Gill seriously undercuts the Italian Government's interest in appearing reasonable and cooperative as it renegotiates its MOU with the United States.
Report on CPAC Hearing on Italian MOU- Part V
Here is a continuation of my report about the May 6, 2010 CPAC hearing.
Elise Freedman is a classics professor at George Washington University. Students should understand the context of ancient art. This needs to be documented. The MOU seeks to encourage context to be documented. It also includes provisions for loans like the Rome and America exhibit.
Sebastian Heath is an AIA VP and is also associated with the American Numismatic Society, but he spoke on his own behalf. Coins are important to the cultural history of Italy and should be included in the MOU. We know Emperor Augustus gave out coins as New Year's Day gifts. We also know that a Roman knight was put to death for defacing the images on the coins. This shows they were considered bearers of meaning outside of their importance to archaeology. Fourth Century burials with coins depicting Christian symbolism tell us something about who was buried. If the coins had been looted, this information would have been lost. Coins are under threat. EBay sells coins still covered in dirt. The MOU needs to be amended to include coins to protect them from looting.
Laetitia La Folette is a classics professor at the University of Massachusetts. The Italian government has been cooperative in helping to set up exhibits. These exhibits give Americans contact with Italian culture.
Richard Leventhal is a professor with the Penn Cultural Heritage Center. Context must be preserved. There are top down and bottom up methods to do so. There needs to be community outreach to help. According to Leventhal, there is no such thing as a duplicate. The context in which every artifact is found makes each artifact important individually. The licit trade does not make sense. Loans do.
To be continued.
Elise Freedman is a classics professor at George Washington University. Students should understand the context of ancient art. This needs to be documented. The MOU seeks to encourage context to be documented. It also includes provisions for loans like the Rome and America exhibit.
Sebastian Heath is an AIA VP and is also associated with the American Numismatic Society, but he spoke on his own behalf. Coins are important to the cultural history of Italy and should be included in the MOU. We know Emperor Augustus gave out coins as New Year's Day gifts. We also know that a Roman knight was put to death for defacing the images on the coins. This shows they were considered bearers of meaning outside of their importance to archaeology. Fourth Century burials with coins depicting Christian symbolism tell us something about who was buried. If the coins had been looted, this information would have been lost. Coins are under threat. EBay sells coins still covered in dirt. The MOU needs to be amended to include coins to protect them from looting.
Laetitia La Folette is a classics professor at the University of Massachusetts. The Italian government has been cooperative in helping to set up exhibits. These exhibits give Americans contact with Italian culture.
Richard Leventhal is a professor with the Penn Cultural Heritage Center. Context must be preserved. There are top down and bottom up methods to do so. There needs to be community outreach to help. According to Leventhal, there is no such thing as a duplicate. The context in which every artifact is found makes each artifact important individually. The licit trade does not make sense. Loans do.
To be continued.
Monday, May 17, 2010
Jewish Archive to Return to Iraq Along with Other Baath Era Documents
The US State Department has again shown its preference for repatriation in its decision to return Jewish archives to Iraq, a nation that has hounded virtually all its own Jews out of the country. There was apparently no effort to return the artifacts to their true owners-- Iraqi Jews in exile.
Along with the Jewish archives, the State Department is also returning Saddam Hussein era documents to Iraq's Shia dominated government. One wonders if repatriationists in the archaeological community will rue the day they supported returning the document trove to the new Iraq. If history is any judge, Iraq's current Shia rulers will be tempted to use the documents to "out" collaborators with Saddam Hussein's Baathist regime. This at least potentially includes members of the archaeological community. Though many would probably now rather forget it, many Iraqi and certain Western archaeologists enjoyed an all too cozy relationship with the Iraqi dictator's government, which after all, used archaeology as a tool to butress its legitimacy.
Anyway, here is the story:
Iraq strikes deal with US for return of archives (AFP) - 2 hours ago BAGHDAD -
The United States has agreed to return millions of documents to Iraq, including Baghdad's Jewish archives, that were seized by the US military after the 2003 invasion, a minister said on Thursday.
The documents, which fill 48,000 containers, are currently being held by the US State Department, the National Archives and the Hoover Institute, a think-tank.
"We have reached an agreement with the United States, after negotiations with officials at the State Department and the Pentagon,over the return of the Jewish archives and millions of documents that were taken to America after the events of 2003," Deputy Culture Minister Taher Hamud said.
"The Jewish archives are important to us -- like the rest of the documents, it is a part of our culture and sheds light on the lives of the Jewish community," he told a news conference.
Iraq was home to a large Jewish community in ancient times but its members left en masse after the creation of Israel and the first Arab-Israeli war in 1948.
"Despite logistical, technical and political obstacles, we took thefirst step along the path to the return of the archives," Hamud said.
Iraqi National Archives director Saad Iskander told AFP in October that some 60 percent of the archives, amounting to tens of millions of documents, were missing or had been damaged or destroyed as a result of water leaks and a fire at a storage centre in the aftermath of the invasion.
Iskander added at Thursday's news conference that in addition to the Jewish archive many of the documents related to executed dictator Saddam Hussein and his banned Baath Party.
"There is a special archive about the Baath Party that was moved to the United States," he said."The CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) and the Pentagon studied it to find a relationship between Saddam and Al-Qaeda, terrorism, weapons of mass destruction and human rights violations.
"Mohsen Hassan Ali, the culture ministry's associate museums director,said US forces had found damaged and water-logged documents in the basement of government buildings following the 2003 war."Despite our refusal, the containers were sent to the United States," Ali said.
Addendum: Here is a report about the negotiations that led to the State Department's decision to repatriate the documents, written by a proponent of repatriation:
https://lists.uchicago.edu/web/arc/iraqcrisis/2010-05/msg00008.html
Report on CPAC Hearing on Italian MOU-Part IV
Last week, I summarized the testimony of those who sought to amend the MOU or who opposed new restrictions on coins. This week, time permitting, I hope to report on the testimony of MOU's proponents.
Karol Wight, the antiquities curator at the Getty, spoke in support of the MOU. She expressed some disagreement with the AAMD’s testimony during CPAC’s interim review of the MOU as well as Dr. Nyerges testimony earlier in the hearing. Specifically, she does not believe that the AAMD’s testimony about the lack of long term loans from Italian institutions reflects the experience of non-AAMD museums. She specifically mentioned the travelling Pompeii, Stabiano and Rome and America exhibits that are on a “long term” loan to the United States, if not to a specific museum. Wight also indicated that the Getty has had successful collaborations with Italy and has received loans of spectacular pieces, like the “Chimera of Arezzo.” Wight also indicated that AAMD members need to be more proactive in seeking loans from Italy. CPAC member O’Brien (public) noted that there seems to be a difference of opinion as to what constitutes a “long term loan.” Wight indicated that the Getty itself considers a period of 5 years to constitute a “long term loan” when it sends its own are out for exhibition elsewhere.
Susan Alcock is an archaeologist associated with Brown University. She has not excavated in Italy (her major work has been in Greece and Armenia), but she believed the MOU should be renewed and extended to coins. Her specialty is the “systematic pedestrian survey,” that is “field walking” with an eye to trying to understand archaeology from an examination of surface finds. She indicated that when she finds a coin during her walks, it is “a cause for celebration.” She also stated, “There may be millions of these little suckers, but they are still important.” CPAC Chairwoman Reid (museum) asked about the practicality of Alcock’s recommendations, observing that she appeared to live in an “ideal world.” Alcock responded that she stood by her idealism. When Chairwoman Reid followed up by asking her recommendations, Alcock suggested: (1) CPAC recommends an extension of the MOU; (2) the MOU be extended to coins; (3) there must be public education efforts about the evils of looting.
Elizabeth Barton is the First VP of the AIA. She claimed that while one can see Italian archaeological materials openly for sale in New York City, such materials are not sold openly in Italy. Sometimes one sees coin stores in Italy, but they never have ancient coins in for display in their windows. The market fuels looting. Exhibits are better. The Pompeii exhibit drew as many as 2000 visitors per day. Barton disputed Rick Witschonke’s claim that the MOU was not working. It has reduced sales as proven by the fact that there are fewer ancient artifacts being auctioned by companies like Christie’s.
To be continued....
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Chinese Death Sentences for Tomb Raiding
The New York Times on 5/14 carried this Associated Press report that China has sentenced some tomb raiders to death:
China Sentences to Death 4 Robbers of Old Tombs
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Filed at 8:48 a.m. ET
BEIJING (AP) -- China has sentenced to death four robbers who used explosives and heavy machinery to plunder tombs almost 2,500 years old.
The state-run Xinhua News Agency says the four sentenced Friday were part of a 27-member gang who robbed a dozen tombs near the capital of the central province of Hunan in 2008 and 2009.
The report says some of the more than 200 stolen artifacts were under China's highest level of protection. One of the tombs dates from the Warring States period that began in 475 B.C.
An investigator told Xinhua all the relics were recovered.
The Intermediate People's Court in Changsha handed down the death sentences. The other robbers got prison terms.
China executes more people than any other country in the world.
Capital punishment for this kind of crime seems like gross "overkill" to me, and raises further questions about double standards at work. In particular, one wonders whether similar punishment would be meted out to members of the Chinese elite, particularly when antiquities trading is quite popular in such circles.
I suspect many archaeologists and others who have ties with the Chinese cultural establishment are also horrified by such harsh punishment, but I suspect few, if any, will condemn such death sentences publicly.
China Sentences to Death 4 Robbers of Old Tombs
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Filed at 8:48 a.m. ET
BEIJING (AP) -- China has sentenced to death four robbers who used explosives and heavy machinery to plunder tombs almost 2,500 years old.
The state-run Xinhua News Agency says the four sentenced Friday were part of a 27-member gang who robbed a dozen tombs near the capital of the central province of Hunan in 2008 and 2009.
The report says some of the more than 200 stolen artifacts were under China's highest level of protection. One of the tombs dates from the Warring States period that began in 475 B.C.
An investigator told Xinhua all the relics were recovered.
The Intermediate People's Court in Changsha handed down the death sentences. The other robbers got prison terms.
China executes more people than any other country in the world.
Capital punishment for this kind of crime seems like gross "overkill" to me, and raises further questions about double standards at work. In particular, one wonders whether similar punishment would be meted out to members of the Chinese elite, particularly when antiquities trading is quite popular in such circles.
I suspect many archaeologists and others who have ties with the Chinese cultural establishment are also horrified by such harsh punishment, but I suspect few, if any, will condemn such death sentences publicly.
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Report on CPAC Hearing on Italian MOU-Part III
Here is more from the 5/6 CPAC hearing:
Souzana Steverding represented Ancient Coins for Education (ACE). She indicated her program using ancient Roman coins to teach kids about history currently reaches 75-100 schools. She expressed concern that restrictions would preclude her organization from receiving coins as donations for her program. She believes the system in the U.K. is a good one that Italy should emulate.
Rick Witschonke (ANS, but speaking on his own behalf) indicated that he was deeply saddened by the loss of knowledge occasioned by looting. He also believes looting has not decreased in Italy despite the MOU. It may be riskier than previously, but there will always be some ready to take that risk. The UK was in a similar situation before the Treasure Act was passed and a portable antiquities scheme was implemented. He believes CPAC can and should suggest that Italy consider a similar system modified to Italy’s own needs. CPAC made a similar suggestion back in 2000 and should do so again here. Some may claim this system has its faults, but it is much preferable to the current state of affairs in Italy. The governing statute, the CCPIA, contemplates that CPAC will make such suggestions to assist source countries protect their own cultural patrimony.
Peter Tompa represented the International Association of Professional Numismatists and the Professional Numismatists Guild. He indicated that the numismatic community was unclear whether the issue of coins was actually “on the table” because the Federal Register notice did not indicate whether new restrictions would be contemplated within the context of renewal. He wrote Undersecretary McHale to ask, but received no response. If coins are “on the table,” there is no reason to depart from CPAC’s prior two recommendations to exempt coins from restrictions. The governing statute limits restrictions to artifacts “first discovered” in Italy. IAPN presented an academic paper that demonstrated Greek and Roman coins struck in Italy circulated far from there. There also is the issue that such coins are freely collected in Italy and the rest of the EU without any need to show provenance information. Tompa passed along three Italian auction catalogues picturing unproveanced ancient Greek and Roman coins struck in Italy to demonstrate that point. There are no import controls on coins into the EU and the two main market countries of Germany and the UK do not require export permits for coins not straight from the ground. In addition, the Italian-Swiss bilateral agreement exempts coins. This means the governing statute’s “concerted international response” requirement cannot be met and restrictions would only discriminate against Americans.
William Pearlstein represented several antiquities collectors. He indicated that now that looting is under control in Italy there is no reason to continue restrictions. Restrictions under the current MOU should be narrowed to incorporate only artifacts that are demonstrably Italian. Criminal law already protects Italy’s interests sufficiently. Pearlstein also passed around a Pandolfini catalogue of Italian archaeological materials being sold in Italy. He indicated that given the fact artifacts on the designated list were found in that catalogue, restrictions are only discriminatory against Americans.
Arthur Houghton, speaking for himself only, said the current MOU was of concern because it was unclear with respect to the designated list of covered material, which could include objects legally exportable by other ountries; encouraged underperformance by the Government of Italy with respect to that country's reciprocal obligations under Article II; and discriminated against Americanas in that it allows Italians and others access to routine sales of privately held antiquities not claimed by the State but restricts such objects against export to the United States by American citizens. He was asked for suggestions that would remedy the stark asymmetry of the MOU's provisions.
To be continued.
Souzana Steverding represented Ancient Coins for Education (ACE). She indicated her program using ancient Roman coins to teach kids about history currently reaches 75-100 schools. She expressed concern that restrictions would preclude her organization from receiving coins as donations for her program. She believes the system in the U.K. is a good one that Italy should emulate.
Rick Witschonke (ANS, but speaking on his own behalf) indicated that he was deeply saddened by the loss of knowledge occasioned by looting. He also believes looting has not decreased in Italy despite the MOU. It may be riskier than previously, but there will always be some ready to take that risk. The UK was in a similar situation before the Treasure Act was passed and a portable antiquities scheme was implemented. He believes CPAC can and should suggest that Italy consider a similar system modified to Italy’s own needs. CPAC made a similar suggestion back in 2000 and should do so again here. Some may claim this system has its faults, but it is much preferable to the current state of affairs in Italy. The governing statute, the CCPIA, contemplates that CPAC will make such suggestions to assist source countries protect their own cultural patrimony.
Peter Tompa represented the International Association of Professional Numismatists and the Professional Numismatists Guild. He indicated that the numismatic community was unclear whether the issue of coins was actually “on the table” because the Federal Register notice did not indicate whether new restrictions would be contemplated within the context of renewal. He wrote Undersecretary McHale to ask, but received no response. If coins are “on the table,” there is no reason to depart from CPAC’s prior two recommendations to exempt coins from restrictions. The governing statute limits restrictions to artifacts “first discovered” in Italy. IAPN presented an academic paper that demonstrated Greek and Roman coins struck in Italy circulated far from there. There also is the issue that such coins are freely collected in Italy and the rest of the EU without any need to show provenance information. Tompa passed along three Italian auction catalogues picturing unproveanced ancient Greek and Roman coins struck in Italy to demonstrate that point. There are no import controls on coins into the EU and the two main market countries of Germany and the UK do not require export permits for coins not straight from the ground. In addition, the Italian-Swiss bilateral agreement exempts coins. This means the governing statute’s “concerted international response” requirement cannot be met and restrictions would only discriminate against Americans.
William Pearlstein represented several antiquities collectors. He indicated that now that looting is under control in Italy there is no reason to continue restrictions. Restrictions under the current MOU should be narrowed to incorporate only artifacts that are demonstrably Italian. Criminal law already protects Italy’s interests sufficiently. Pearlstein also passed around a Pandolfini catalogue of Italian archaeological materials being sold in Italy. He indicated that given the fact artifacts on the designated list were found in that catalogue, restrictions are only discriminatory against Americans.
Arthur Houghton, speaking for himself only, said the current MOU was of concern because it was unclear with respect to the designated list of covered material, which could include objects legally exportable by other ountries; encouraged underperformance by the Government of Italy with respect to that country's reciprocal obligations under Article II; and discriminated against Americanas in that it allows Italians and others access to routine sales of privately held antiquities not claimed by the State but restricts such objects against export to the United States by American citizens. He was asked for suggestions that would remedy the stark asymmetry of the MOU's provisions.
To be continued.
Monday, May 10, 2010
Report on CPAC Hearing on Italian MOU-Part II
Here is a continuation of my report on last Thursday's CPAC hearing.
Art Friedberg, past president of the International Association of Professional Numismatists, spoke on his own behalf. He outlined the concerns that import restrictions on ancient coins struck in Italy would raise. These include: difficulties in identification for US Customs; questions about a coin’s country of origin; prohibitive compliance costs and prohibitive litigation costs. He indicated the broader the restrictions are the more unenforceable they will be. He also indicated that the regulations would only punish those who already properly declare coins on entry to the United States and encourage efforts to evade the law, particularly through the use of the mail. CPAC member Robert Korver (Trade) asked Friedberg if there were any export controls on classic US rarities like the 1804 Dollar (the answer is “no”). He also asked Friedberg about the Treasure Act, which Friedberg agreed is an excellent system.
Clifford Mishler (ANA President) and Douglas Mudd (ANA curator) represented the American Numismatic Association. Clifford Mishler requested that a letter from the Italian Numismatic Society opposing restrictions be entered into the record. Douglas Mudd spoke how restrictions would hamper the ANA’s educational mission and ability to procure coins for its collections. He also indicated that the Committee ought to also consider the effect of restrictions on the willingness of collectors to fund numismatic research. CPAC member Nancy Wilkie (Archaeology) indicated that the restrictions would not be retroactive, but Mudd insisted that such restrictions would be of concern for the future. In response to a question from CPAC member Joan Connelly (Archaeology), Mudd defended the practice of using low value coins “with dirt still on them” for educational purposes. He noted that if archaeologists are concerned about this, they should advocate laws akin to the UK Treasure Act that encourage finders to report artifacts. He also indicated that the tactile experience of holding ancient coins makes for an excellent educational tool.
Wayne Sayles spoke for the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG). He noted that almost 2000 coin collectors used the ACCG fax wizard to express concerns about the possible inclusion of coins in the MOU. Those restrictions could keep ACCG members from importing coins legitimately in markets abroad. Concerns about State Department transparency and accountability motivated the ACCG’s FOIA lawsuit and Customs Test Case. CPAC should be wary of extending import restrictions to “coins of Italian type” given Customs’ and State’s handling of that test case. The ACCG imported the coins in April 2009. ACCG’s Customs Broker had to tell Customs that the coins were subject to potential restrictions. On the 5th attempt to bring the matter to Customs' attention, Customs seized the coins, but instead of filing the required forfeiture action, Customs did nothing. ACCG waited for almost a year, and then filed its own suit against Customs and the State Department. The government’s first move was to ask for yet more time to respond. Most collectors and dealers cannot afford to wait so long or afford a lawyer. This suggests if the Italian MOU goes through, many coins will just be abandoned after if they are seized. This reality should weigh heavily on CPAC.
To be continued.
Art Friedberg, past president of the International Association of Professional Numismatists, spoke on his own behalf. He outlined the concerns that import restrictions on ancient coins struck in Italy would raise. These include: difficulties in identification for US Customs; questions about a coin’s country of origin; prohibitive compliance costs and prohibitive litigation costs. He indicated the broader the restrictions are the more unenforceable they will be. He also indicated that the regulations would only punish those who already properly declare coins on entry to the United States and encourage efforts to evade the law, particularly through the use of the mail. CPAC member Robert Korver (Trade) asked Friedberg if there were any export controls on classic US rarities like the 1804 Dollar (the answer is “no”). He also asked Friedberg about the Treasure Act, which Friedberg agreed is an excellent system.
Clifford Mishler (ANA President) and Douglas Mudd (ANA curator) represented the American Numismatic Association. Clifford Mishler requested that a letter from the Italian Numismatic Society opposing restrictions be entered into the record. Douglas Mudd spoke how restrictions would hamper the ANA’s educational mission and ability to procure coins for its collections. He also indicated that the Committee ought to also consider the effect of restrictions on the willingness of collectors to fund numismatic research. CPAC member Nancy Wilkie (Archaeology) indicated that the restrictions would not be retroactive, but Mudd insisted that such restrictions would be of concern for the future. In response to a question from CPAC member Joan Connelly (Archaeology), Mudd defended the practice of using low value coins “with dirt still on them” for educational purposes. He noted that if archaeologists are concerned about this, they should advocate laws akin to the UK Treasure Act that encourage finders to report artifacts. He also indicated that the tactile experience of holding ancient coins makes for an excellent educational tool.
Wayne Sayles spoke for the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG). He noted that almost 2000 coin collectors used the ACCG fax wizard to express concerns about the possible inclusion of coins in the MOU. Those restrictions could keep ACCG members from importing coins legitimately in markets abroad. Concerns about State Department transparency and accountability motivated the ACCG’s FOIA lawsuit and Customs Test Case. CPAC should be wary of extending import restrictions to “coins of Italian type” given Customs’ and State’s handling of that test case. The ACCG imported the coins in April 2009. ACCG’s Customs Broker had to tell Customs that the coins were subject to potential restrictions. On the 5th attempt to bring the matter to Customs' attention, Customs seized the coins, but instead of filing the required forfeiture action, Customs did nothing. ACCG waited for almost a year, and then filed its own suit against Customs and the State Department. The government’s first move was to ask for yet more time to respond. Most collectors and dealers cannot afford to wait so long or afford a lawyer. This suggests if the Italian MOU goes through, many coins will just be abandoned after if they are seized. This reality should weigh heavily on CPAC.
To be continued.
Sunday, May 9, 2010
Report on CPAC Hearing on Italian MOU-Part I
I took extensive notes at last Thursday's Cultural Property Advisory Committee meeting. Due to the length of the hearing, I've decided to break up my report into segments. Here is the first. I will continue in subsequent posts:
On May 6, 2010, the U.S. State Department’s Cultural Property Advisory Committee met to hear public comments about the proposed renewal of a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) with Italy and its import restrictions on cultural goods of Greek and Roman cultures. Although it remains unclear whether Italy has formally requested that the MOU be amended to include import restrictions on coins, that issue dominated the hearing. CPAC members also heard testimony about the one-sidedness of the current MOU, the benefits of the MOU to the archaeological community, and a debate whether Italy has complied with its obligations to provide long term loans to museums that have not already repatriated artifacts.
CPAC heard from twenty (20) speakers about the MOU, including a representative of the Italian Ministry of Culture. Of these nine (9) speakers opposed various aspects of the MOU or its possible extension to coins and eleven (11) supported it.
Chairwoman Katherine Reid invited Stefano de Caro, an archaeologist with the Italian Ministry of Culture, to speak first. He indicated that the looting situation has improved somewhat due to the work of the Carabinieri, but looting is now a criminal enterprise that relies on illegal aliens as diggers. There are improved surveys of sites, including ones using helicopters. There is also an effort to send repatriated art back to museums at the sites from which it was looted. Preventative archaeology has also become important. Developers now pay for excavations. De Caro hopes for a good resolution of the difficult matter of coins. CPAC member Robert Korver (Trade) asked de Caro about budget cuts. De Caro indicated they are a real concern at his ministry. He also indicated there was some discussion of a special “landscape protection” tax to help fund his ministry.
Alex Nyerges of the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts spoke next on behalf of the AAMD. He reported on a survey of AAMD members concerning long term loans of archaeological artifacts from Italy. [The current MOU contemplates that Italy will make such loans available to museums.] Nyerges indicated that of the twenty-one (21) museums that responded only five (5) had received long term loans, and each of these museums had voluntarily repatriated artifacts. He further indicated such loans should ideally be for periods of ten (10) to twenty (20) years and not be tied to conservation projects. He hoped the Italian government would be more proactive in setting up loans. Nyerges then referenced an AAMD report on looted works from the Fascist era in Italy. Finally, he advocated the sale of excess artifacts from Italian stores. CPAC member Joan Connelly (archaeology) wondered if two (2) year loans would be preferable as they could be changed out more frequently. Nyerges indicated the associated costs and logistical problems make such loans unpalatable. CPAC member Nancy Wilkie (archaeology) asked Nyerges about the response rate for the survey. He indicated that the response rate was good for museums that held ancient art.
To be continued.
On May 6, 2010, the U.S. State Department’s Cultural Property Advisory Committee met to hear public comments about the proposed renewal of a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) with Italy and its import restrictions on cultural goods of Greek and Roman cultures. Although it remains unclear whether Italy has formally requested that the MOU be amended to include import restrictions on coins, that issue dominated the hearing. CPAC members also heard testimony about the one-sidedness of the current MOU, the benefits of the MOU to the archaeological community, and a debate whether Italy has complied with its obligations to provide long term loans to museums that have not already repatriated artifacts.
CPAC heard from twenty (20) speakers about the MOU, including a representative of the Italian Ministry of Culture. Of these nine (9) speakers opposed various aspects of the MOU or its possible extension to coins and eleven (11) supported it.
Chairwoman Katherine Reid invited Stefano de Caro, an archaeologist with the Italian Ministry of Culture, to speak first. He indicated that the looting situation has improved somewhat due to the work of the Carabinieri, but looting is now a criminal enterprise that relies on illegal aliens as diggers. There are improved surveys of sites, including ones using helicopters. There is also an effort to send repatriated art back to museums at the sites from which it was looted. Preventative archaeology has also become important. Developers now pay for excavations. De Caro hopes for a good resolution of the difficult matter of coins. CPAC member Robert Korver (Trade) asked de Caro about budget cuts. De Caro indicated they are a real concern at his ministry. He also indicated there was some discussion of a special “landscape protection” tax to help fund his ministry.
Alex Nyerges of the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts spoke next on behalf of the AAMD. He reported on a survey of AAMD members concerning long term loans of archaeological artifacts from Italy. [The current MOU contemplates that Italy will make such loans available to museums.] Nyerges indicated that of the twenty-one (21) museums that responded only five (5) had received long term loans, and each of these museums had voluntarily repatriated artifacts. He further indicated such loans should ideally be for periods of ten (10) to twenty (20) years and not be tied to conservation projects. He hoped the Italian government would be more proactive in setting up loans. Nyerges then referenced an AAMD report on looted works from the Fascist era in Italy. Finally, he advocated the sale of excess artifacts from Italian stores. CPAC member Joan Connelly (archaeology) wondered if two (2) year loans would be preferable as they could be changed out more frequently. Nyerges indicated the associated costs and logistical problems make such loans unpalatable. CPAC member Nancy Wilkie (archaeology) asked Nyerges about the response rate for the survey. He indicated that the response rate was good for museums that held ancient art.
To be continued.
Saturday, May 8, 2010
For some coin collectors, federal regulations don't add up
This article was in today's Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/07/AR2010050705046.html
It discusses the ACCG's Baltimore "test case" and Thursday's CPAC meeting about the Italian MOU:
For some coin collectors, federal regulations don't add up
By Maria Glod
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, May 8, 2010; B01
They're only worth about $275, but 23 bronze coins seized by the federal government at Baltimore-Washington International Marshall Airport last year just might be the most important chunk of change for numismatists in years.
These well-worn coins, struck more than a thousand years ago in Cyprus and China, are at the center of a dispute over U.S. rules that collectors across the country say could threaten their popular and beloved hobby.
For generations, collectors have freely bought and sold coins from around the world, including many from ancient times. But the United States in recent years began restricting imports of some coins as part of a broader effort to protect antiquities and combat the looting of archaeological sites abroad.
It began with some Cypriot coins in 2007, then certain Chinese coins were added last year. But numismatists are worried that Roman coins, the passion of many collectors, could be next to join the list.
So the Missouri-based Ancient Coin Collectors Guild bought the 23 bronze coins in April last year from a London dealer, solely to challenge the rules and set off a legal showdown over requirements that people show proof of where or when certain coins are unearthed.
In a lawsuit filed February in Maryland federal court, the collectors say presidents John Quincy Adams, Thomas Jefferson and Ronald Reagan were ancient coin collectors. Most coins, they contend, were so widely circulated in ancient times that it might be impossible to know when they were dug up. Plus, they argue, the rules will do little to discourage plundering because they apply only to U.S. collectors.
Wayne G. Sayles, a longtime collector and guild executive director, said he agrees that some antiquities -- such as religious icons, mummies and precious artwork -- need the government's protection and belong to the people of the country in which they were found. But he thinks coins are different. Most aren't high-dollar items, he says, and collectors keep, study and protect coins that museums don't want.
"Do I think that the Liberty Bell ought to be sold to somebody in Russia? No, it belongs here. I understand that, and I agree with that. But we're not talking about the Liberty Bell," Sayles said.
On the flip side, there's Richard M. Leventhal, an anthropology professor at the University of Pennsylvania. He's among those who see a coin or pottery bowl or marble statue as pieces of one big historical puzzle. Leventhal, who said he once was shot at by looters at an ancient Mayan site in Belize (they missed), supports the restrictions that he thinks will hinder metal-detector-toting thieves who destroy historic sites before archaeologists can study them.
"Coins are part of the record of our past. To learn about the past and think about our identities and cultural heritage, coins have to be included," Leventhal said. "Ripping stuff out of the ground destroys our knowledge of who we are and where we came from."
Under federal rules, anyone bringing certain ancient coins that are Cypriot or Chinese into the United States must either have an export permit from that country or documents that show they were unearthed elsewhere or purchased before the regulations went into effect.
On Wednesday, Leventhal and Sayles attended a hearing before the State Department's Cultural Property Advisory Committee on an agreement with Italy that restricts the import of some pre-classical, classical and Imperial Roman artifacts. Many collectors are lobbying against the addition of coins, while many archaeologists want them on the list.
Souzana Steverding of Ancient Coins for Education told the committee that the restrictions would hurt her group's efforts to put common ancient coins in the hands of students. Brown University archaeology professor Susan Alcock said they should be protected. "There may be millions of these little suckers, but they are still important," she said.
Sebastian Heath, the Archaeological Institute of America's vice president for professional responsibilities, said he gets frustrated when he sees ancient coins, still caked in the dirt in which they were found, advertised on eBay with no indication they were studied in context. "It's impossible to recover that knowledge," he said.
It may seem like this is a clear divide between collectors and archaeologists, until you hear from Alan M. Stahl, curator of Princeton University's extensive coin collection.
Stahl is an archaeologist who appreciates the great value of finding a coin buried exactly where it dropped centuries ago. Coins help date sites or provide clues to where people traveled. But he also purchases coins to grow the university's collection, one of the oldest in the United States. And, he said, few coins on the market have the paperwork to prove their provenance.
"It is not a simple problem, which is why I don't put myself solidly in either camp," Stahl said.
In fact, Stahl presents the issue to students in the numismatic methodologies class he teaches. "If there is a coin that would improve Princeton's collection for teaching and research purposes, and the only example does not come with provenance, should I buy it?" he asks. The students, he said, almost always vote yes.
One recent afternoon, Michael Mehalick, an internship coordinator at Montgomery College and a guild member who has collected coins since he was a boy, laid out some of his prized ancient Roman coins on the kitchen counter of his New Carrollton home. Most cost about $50 to $100.
Mehalick, a history buff who can tick off names of Roman leaders, doesn't want sites to be looted. But he thinks the new rules would do little to deter plundering and would make it harder for him to legally purchase coins.
"It's strange because coins have been collected for hundreds and hundreds of years," Mehalick said. "It's a way to have a tangible piece of history that is not too expensive. Most of the coins I have, you probably would not see in a museum because there is not enough interest.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/07/AR2010050705046.html
It discusses the ACCG's Baltimore "test case" and Thursday's CPAC meeting about the Italian MOU:
For some coin collectors, federal regulations don't add up
By Maria Glod
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, May 8, 2010; B01
They're only worth about $275, but 23 bronze coins seized by the federal government at Baltimore-Washington International Marshall Airport last year just might be the most important chunk of change for numismatists in years.
These well-worn coins, struck more than a thousand years ago in Cyprus and China, are at the center of a dispute over U.S. rules that collectors across the country say could threaten their popular and beloved hobby.
For generations, collectors have freely bought and sold coins from around the world, including many from ancient times. But the United States in recent years began restricting imports of some coins as part of a broader effort to protect antiquities and combat the looting of archaeological sites abroad.
It began with some Cypriot coins in 2007, then certain Chinese coins were added last year. But numismatists are worried that Roman coins, the passion of many collectors, could be next to join the list.
So the Missouri-based Ancient Coin Collectors Guild bought the 23 bronze coins in April last year from a London dealer, solely to challenge the rules and set off a legal showdown over requirements that people show proof of where or when certain coins are unearthed.
In a lawsuit filed February in Maryland federal court, the collectors say presidents John Quincy Adams, Thomas Jefferson and Ronald Reagan were ancient coin collectors. Most coins, they contend, were so widely circulated in ancient times that it might be impossible to know when they were dug up. Plus, they argue, the rules will do little to discourage plundering because they apply only to U.S. collectors.
Wayne G. Sayles, a longtime collector and guild executive director, said he agrees that some antiquities -- such as religious icons, mummies and precious artwork -- need the government's protection and belong to the people of the country in which they were found. But he thinks coins are different. Most aren't high-dollar items, he says, and collectors keep, study and protect coins that museums don't want.
"Do I think that the Liberty Bell ought to be sold to somebody in Russia? No, it belongs here. I understand that, and I agree with that. But we're not talking about the Liberty Bell," Sayles said.
On the flip side, there's Richard M. Leventhal, an anthropology professor at the University of Pennsylvania. He's among those who see a coin or pottery bowl or marble statue as pieces of one big historical puzzle. Leventhal, who said he once was shot at by looters at an ancient Mayan site in Belize (they missed), supports the restrictions that he thinks will hinder metal-detector-toting thieves who destroy historic sites before archaeologists can study them.
"Coins are part of the record of our past. To learn about the past and think about our identities and cultural heritage, coins have to be included," Leventhal said. "Ripping stuff out of the ground destroys our knowledge of who we are and where we came from."
Under federal rules, anyone bringing certain ancient coins that are Cypriot or Chinese into the United States must either have an export permit from that country or documents that show they were unearthed elsewhere or purchased before the regulations went into effect.
On Wednesday, Leventhal and Sayles attended a hearing before the State Department's Cultural Property Advisory Committee on an agreement with Italy that restricts the import of some pre-classical, classical and Imperial Roman artifacts. Many collectors are lobbying against the addition of coins, while many archaeologists want them on the list.
Souzana Steverding of Ancient Coins for Education told the committee that the restrictions would hurt her group's efforts to put common ancient coins in the hands of students. Brown University archaeology professor Susan Alcock said they should be protected. "There may be millions of these little suckers, but they are still important," she said.
Sebastian Heath, the Archaeological Institute of America's vice president for professional responsibilities, said he gets frustrated when he sees ancient coins, still caked in the dirt in which they were found, advertised on eBay with no indication they were studied in context. "It's impossible to recover that knowledge," he said.
It may seem like this is a clear divide between collectors and archaeologists, until you hear from Alan M. Stahl, curator of Princeton University's extensive coin collection.
Stahl is an archaeologist who appreciates the great value of finding a coin buried exactly where it dropped centuries ago. Coins help date sites or provide clues to where people traveled. But he also purchases coins to grow the university's collection, one of the oldest in the United States. And, he said, few coins on the market have the paperwork to prove their provenance.
"It is not a simple problem, which is why I don't put myself solidly in either camp," Stahl said.
In fact, Stahl presents the issue to students in the numismatic methodologies class he teaches. "If there is a coin that would improve Princeton's collection for teaching and research purposes, and the only example does not come with provenance, should I buy it?" he asks. The students, he said, almost always vote yes.
One recent afternoon, Michael Mehalick, an internship coordinator at Montgomery College and a guild member who has collected coins since he was a boy, laid out some of his prized ancient Roman coins on the kitchen counter of his New Carrollton home. Most cost about $50 to $100.
Mehalick, a history buff who can tick off names of Roman leaders, doesn't want sites to be looted. But he thinks the new rules would do little to deter plundering and would make it harder for him to legally purchase coins.
"It's strange because coins have been collected for hundreds and hundreds of years," Mehalick said. "It's a way to have a tangible piece of history that is not too expensive. Most of the coins I have, you probably would not see in a museum because there is not enough interest.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
My Oral Comments at CPAC Hearing on Italy: Keep Coins Off the Designated List
Here is what I said more or less during today's CPAC Hearing on the renewal of the Italian MOU:
My name is Peter Tompa of Bailey & Ehrenberg PLLC. Thank you for allowing IAPN and PNG- two trade associations representing the small businesses of the numismatic trade – the opportunity to speak to you today.
.
My name is Peter Tompa of Bailey & Ehrenberg PLLC. Thank you for allowing IAPN and PNG- two trade associations representing the small businesses of the numismatic trade – the opportunity to speak to you today.
I must confess I don’t even know if the ancient coin community has been properly invited to this party. The Federal Register notice fails to indicate whether Italy has even asked you to reconsider import restrictions on coins. Although I wrote Undersecretary McHale to ask, the State Department isn’t telling. But, based on the last minute addition of coins to the Cypriot renewal, it is better to be safe than sorry. I am sorry, however, that the comment period was so short. CPAC received over 1900 faxes from concerned coin collectors, but only the Internet savvy will have heard about the comment period before it closed.
One way or the other, you should deny any effort to extend new import restrictions to coins. CPAC has on two prior occasions recommended against import restrictions on ancient Greek and Roman coins struck in Italy. Nothing has changed to justify a change in that precedent.
The Cultural Property Implementation Act (“CPIA”) only allows for restrictions on artifacts “first discovered within” Italy. But, one cannot assume that Greek and Roman coins struck in Italy were found there. It is beyond dispute Roman coins circulated far and wide and, as our papers show, it also is clear that Greek coins struck in Italy circulated outside of Italy.
The very idea of restrictions runs up against the reality on the ground. Italians trade and collect unprovenanced Greek and Roman coins quite freely—just like their fellow collectors in the rest of the EU. This brings us to the CPIA’s “concerted international response” requirement. That provision –which seeks to ensure the comity and effectiveness of any import restrictions--- cannot possibly be met here.
As our papers show, the U.S. market for ancient coins is relatively small compared to the European market. In addition, neither the EU nor Switzerland restricts the trade in unprovenanced ancient coins from Italy. For example, the UK and Germany allow for the free export and import of such coins not directly from archaeological sites and the Swiss-Italian bilateral agreement also exempts ancient coins. Under the circumstances, import restrictions on ancient Greek and Roman coins can only discriminate against Americans. This would lead to a ridiculous and unfair result: American citizens—including those of Italian descent—would find it difficult, if not impossible, to import such coins while Italian citizens and fellow collectors in the EU could continue to collect and trade in such coins unabated.
Thank you again for your allowing me the opportunity to speak to you on behalf of the small businesses of the numismatic trade. Please feel free to ask me any questions.
I hope to be able to write more about the CPAC hearing in the near future.
.
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
PAS Lets Finders Record Their Own Finds
The PAS has changed its database so that registered users now can record their own finds. See http://finds.org.uk/blogs/centralunit/2010/05/04/recording/
Presumably, archaeologists who already think the PAS and Treasure Act are merely a "license to loot" will assume this system will be abused.
On the other hand, allowing finders to record their own finds will help alleviate the administrative burden on PAS personnel. In an era of lean budgets, outsourcing recordkeeping will also help the PAS to use its limited resources to the fullest.
I also suspect the personal stake one will feel in recording one's own finds may actually increase the accuracy of PAS records, and the very act of entering data may provide finders with a tangible feeling that they are indeed an important part of the larger system. That can only further the overriding goal of the PAS to encourage finders to collaborate with archaeologists in mapping the past in England and Wales. Isn't that what it all should be about anyway?
Presumably, archaeologists who already think the PAS and Treasure Act are merely a "license to loot" will assume this system will be abused.
On the other hand, allowing finders to record their own finds will help alleviate the administrative burden on PAS personnel. In an era of lean budgets, outsourcing recordkeeping will also help the PAS to use its limited resources to the fullest.
I also suspect the personal stake one will feel in recording one's own finds may actually increase the accuracy of PAS records, and the very act of entering data may provide finders with a tangible feeling that they are indeed an important part of the larger system. That can only further the overriding goal of the PAS to encourage finders to collaborate with archaeologists in mapping the past in England and Wales. Isn't that what it all should be about anyway?
Monday, May 3, 2010
Indonesia Partners with Treasure Hunters
The New York Times reports that the Indonesian Government is auctioning off artifacts found in a 10th c. shipwreck. See http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/15/business/worldbusiness/15iht-auction.3543182.html?_r=1
Indonesian museums will only retain what they can reasonably be expected to care for and the rest will be sold off to collectors who will study, preserve and perhaps ultimately donate their purchases to museums outside of Indonesia.
"If it has more economic value than historical value, there is no need to take it for our heritage museums," Sularso [a government spokesman] said. "The government's strategy is to choose the auction house that offers the highest price."
Predictably, archaeologists are angry about this turn of events. They say all the cargo should be retained for study purposes, but Indonesia has decided otherwise and has instead concluded that a representative sample of the artifacts and records of the find should suffice.
Indonesian museums will only retain what they can reasonably be expected to care for and the rest will be sold off to collectors who will study, preserve and perhaps ultimately donate their purchases to museums outside of Indonesia.
"If it has more economic value than historical value, there is no need to take it for our heritage museums," Sularso [a government spokesman] said. "The government's strategy is to choose the auction house that offers the highest price."
Predictably, archaeologists are angry about this turn of events. They say all the cargo should be retained for study purposes, but Indonesia has decided otherwise and has instead concluded that a representative sample of the artifacts and records of the find should suffice.