On April 8, 2015, The US State Department Cultural Property
Advisory Committee (CPAC) met in open session to discuss renewal of the Italian
MOU. The following CPAC members were
present: (1) Prof. Patty Gerstenblith,
Chair (PG) (Public Member); (2) Rosemary Joyce (RJ)(Archaeology); (3) Jane Levine (JL) (Trade); (4) Marta de la
Torre (MT)(Public); (5) Nancy Wilkie (NW)
(Archaeology); and (6) James Willis (JW) (Trade). The following members were absent: (1) Nina Archabal (Museum); (2) Barbara Kaul (Public); (3) Lothar von Falenhausen
(Archaeology); (4) Thomas Murray (Trade) and (5) Katherine Reid (Museum). These absences are regrettable, though
perhaps understandable given scheduling so soon after the Easter-Passover
holiday.
The following individuals spoke in this order: (1) Wayne Sayles (WS) (Ancient Coin
Collectors Guild); (2) Peter Tompa (PT) (International Association of
Professional Numismatists/Professional Numismatists Guild); (3) Sue
McGovern-Huffman (SMH)(Association of Dealers and Collectors of Ancient and
Ethnographic Art); (4) Doug Mudd (DM) (American Numismatic Association); (5)
Karol Wight (Corning Glass Museum); (6) Judith Mann (JM) (St. Louis Art
Museum); (7) Stephen Knerly (Association of Art Museum Directors); (8) Jane
DeRose Evans (Temple University); (9) Alex Barker (University of Missouri); and
(10) Carla Antonaccio (Duke University, Archaeological Institute of America and
Society for American Archaeology). The
first seven speakers associated with the trade, collectors groups, educational
associations and museums opposed the MOU, supported the MOU with major changes
or opposed import restrictions on coins.
The last three speakers associated with the archaeological community
gave the MOU unqualified support.
There was also a six member Italian delegation present, but
they did not speak in the public session.
WS- The Convention on
Cultural Property Implementation Act protects what we call orphaned artifacts
that have circulated in international trade, often for centuries, without any requirement or need for recorded provenance. The law only allows import restrictions on coins that were "first
discovered within" and "subject to export control" of a State
Party with whom an MOU might be negotiated.
There was no legislative intent to restrict common coins.
WS's full statement may be found here.
WS's full statement may be found here.
Questions: PG points
to a Numismatica Ars Classica Catalogue which states that the firm will provide
documentation for coins subject to US import restrictions. She asks if NAC can provide such
documentation why can’t other firms? WS
explains that NAC only sells high value coins that are more likely to have provenance
information than common issues. In
response to a question by NW, WS indicates that NW’s views about “what is
ethical” must be distinguished from what is required under the law when it
comes to retention of provenance information.
PT- The
2011 decision to impose import restrictions on “coins of Italian types” was not
made with CPAC’s knowledge or consent, and, indeed, CPAC member Robert Korver
resigned on account of it. CPAC should
rethink current import restrictions and under no circumstances should
restrictions be expanded to include late Roman Republican and Roman Imperial
coins due to their wide circulation. Given budgetary realities, private collectors,
not the Italian State, are the best stewards for common artifacts like
coins.
In prior MOUs, Italy pledged to consider ways to make it
easier to secure export certificates for archaeological objects legitimately
sold within Italy itself. Unfortunately,
nothing has been done to keep this promise, and, if anything it has become more
difficult to procure them. An IAPN
member was even told that “The Americans” would not think Italy was serious
about protecting its own cultural patrimony if such permits were granted. Given this failure, CPAC should recommend that
the MOU be modified so that U.S. Customs accepts proof of lawful export from
any E.U. member state to help facilitate the legal import of coins “of Italian
types” also legitimately for sale within Italy itself.
PT's full statement may be found here.
PT's full statement may be found here.
Questions: PG thinks Korver’s statement that CPAC did not
approve of restrictions should not be repeated because CPAC’s recommendations
should be considered confidential. PT
notes that such information was supposed to be reported to Congress. PG wonders whether the relatively few finds
of Greek coins from Sicily and Italy that are found outside of Italy discussed
in an attachment to IAPN’s written statement supports the assumption they predominantly
circulated within Italy. PT refers back
to the plain meaning of the statute that requires artifacts to only be found
there for there to be restrictions. JW
wanted to know whether the MOU was working to limit looting. PT believes that
is more a function of aggressive police work. In response to a question from MT, PT
indicates that restrictions only harm those who comply with law because coins
are so easy to smuggle. He also notes
that some European dealers don’t want to trade with Americans any longer given
the red tape.
SMH- Restrictions have been detrimental to collecting. Over time, this will negatively impact
museums that benefit from donations from collectors. Import restrictions disadvantage American
collectors versus those in the EU.
Questions: PG asks about ADCAEA. SMH indicates it is a new organization with
approximately 100 members. In response
to a question, SMH gives an example how restrictions have discouraged
imports. One of SMH’s clients wanted to
bid on an Italian artifact in a Christie’s sale in London, but decided against
it due to the red tape.
DM- Import restrictions will result in a loss of interest
in ancient coins by collectors as the supply of Italian coins (ancient and
otherwise) dries up. This will destroy the historically close relationship
between advanced collectors and museums and inevitably impact donations of
coins to numismatic institutions. In the
end these restrictions are likely to result in a drastic reduction in numismatic
scholarship – much of which has been the result of the fruitful interaction of advanced
private collectors and museum curators.
KW- There are too many barriers to long term loans. American museums would like to display what
Italian museums have in storage. The problem
is that personal contacts are necessary to get anywhere in Italy. There are also concerns about expensive
insurance and courier fees.
JM-Echoes concerns about fees and difficulty in getting
loans. It is very time consuming navigating
the system.
Questions- PG wonders why so many museums have not asked
for loans from Italy. JM indicates it’s
a chicken and egg problem. The Italians
make it so difficult that no one asks.
SK- Italy has not lived up to its promises in the MOU to
provide long term loans. The only
museums to get long term loans are those that receive them as a quid pro quo
for repatriating artifacts. SK also
reiterates the fact that museums have to deal with expensive courier and
insurance fees. Italy will not accept US
State Department guarantees of indemnity and requires American museums to
purchase insurance from Italian companies.
Questions- PG asks why some small museums have gotten
loans. SK explains you have to
distinguish exposition loans from long term loans. Exposition loans are set up by Italian for
profit companies and the cost is considerable. They do not satisfy Italy’s promises under
Article II of the MOU. In response to
another question, SK also reiterates that Italy has done nothing to make it
easier to secure export permits for purchases of artifacts legitimately for
sale within Italy itself.
JE- Fresh coins on the market damage archaeology. Locals and collectors and dealers should be
educated to discourage looting. Even common coins have value. At archaeological sites like Sardes common
bronze coins are mostly found. Bronze
coins were traded locally. There is an
exhibition in Philadelphia that features ancient coins.
AB- Asserts that all the legal requirements for a renewal
of the MOU have been met. AB’s school is
involved in an innovative program with the Capitoline Museum. It is studying material excavated in Rome in
the late 1800’s and stored since. It is
funded privately.
CA- Excavates at Morgantina. Italy is doing its best it can despite a
severe budgetary crisis. Metal detectorists
prospect just outside the archaeological site and sometimes have come on site
too during the period archaeologists are not excavating.
Questions: In
response to a question by NW, CA indicates she believes illegal metal
detectorists are searching for coins. They
have had some success deterring them with metal washers and other false
targets.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Henceforth, comments will only be posted from those who provide a full name, country of residence and basis for interest, i.e., collector, archaeologist, academic, etc. or their Blogger profile provides such information.