Thursday, January 28, 2016
Sunday, January 24, 2016
It's likely the group tried to cover up their mistake because of fear of Egypt's military rulers. In a less harsh system, the initial problem with the mask's beard would likely have been reported rather than covered up with a amateurish restoration job. And no doubt those responsible would have been fired, but not be subjected to criminal punishment.
Is the death penalty out of the question in Sissi's Egypt? Others who have done far less to insult the State have already received such a sentence.
Tuesday, January 19, 2016
According to the Art. II of the 2001 and 2006 MOUs,
F. The Government Of the United States of America acknowledges the efforts by the Government of the Republic of Italy in recent years to review the laws concerning the export of archaeological artifacts and to improve the efficiency of the system to release certificates of exportation. The Government of the Republic of Italy will continue to examine new ways to facilitate the export of archaeological items legitimately sold within Italy.
In 2011, the year that US import restrictions were extended to "coins of Italian types," the language changed as follows:
G. Noting that the law of Italy, as it currently stands, allows the purchase of archaeological objects of verified legal provenance, the Government of the Republic of Italy and the Government of the United States will discuss and explore ways to facilitate the legal export of such objects.
H. The discussions mentioned above in paragraphs E. and G. will take place during the first half of the year 2011.
The promise contained in Art. II of the 2011 MOU, has been repeated in the 2016 MOU, but without any "discussions" on the subject.
Yet, as well known numismatic dealer Arturo Russo indicated in his public comments to CPAC as it was considering the 2016 renewal, if anything, after US import restrictions were put in place on "coins of Italian types" in 2011, Italian cultural authorities made it even more difficult to export coins legally on the market in Italy, apparently because they perceived otherwise "the Americans" would not think Italy "serious" about protecting its cultural patrimony.
So, will the new MOU really help facilitate the export of artifacts legally for sale in Italy itself or are its promises just more window dressing?
Saturday, January 16, 2016
Friday, January 15, 2016
There was a concern that there might be a move to expand the list given the breadth of the designated list for Bulgaria, but it seems common sense (helped along by the overwhelming number of public comments) prevailed.
CPO thanks anyone who commented back in April to CPAC. The effort to keep Roman Imperial coins off the designated list was a successful one.
There is a serious question why this MOU should have been renewed. The MOU lacks public support. Restrictions put unreasonable burdens on American citizens importing Italian cultural goods. Many objects cannot be imported at all because they lack the necessary paperwork. Yet, Italy has an open, legal market in certain of the objects-- notably ancient coins-- which raises an obvious question: What's the point?
This burden was never supposed to be permanent. Rather, restrictions were only supposed to be in force so long as necessary to allow the source country time to get control over looting. Here, due to aggressive enforcement, Italy has been successful in limiting looting in places like Sicily.
What ails Italy's magnificent cultural patrimony most now-- gross under funding and continued mismanagement of its cultural resources-- won't be fixed by another MOU.
It's long past time the MOU with Italy should sunset, but its burden on American citizens interested in importing Italian cultural goods will last for at least another 5 years.
Wednesday, January 13, 2016
Tuesday, January 12, 2016
Monday, January 11, 2016
The archaeological lobby in both the United States and Germany are joined at the hip with the foreign policy bureaucracies of both countries. In the US, the State Department's Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs has worked closely with archaeological groups like the Archaeological Institute of America and the American Schools of Oriental Research for years. In Germany, the German Archaeological Institute is similarly linked to the German Foreign Ministry.
Moreover, both the US State Department and the German Foreign Ministry have recently decided that repatriation is a "soft power" measure that can further foreign relations with source countries in Southern Europe and the Middle East. And the archaeological lobby can be counted on to be supportive of even the most authoritarian of regimes as long as excavation permits are assured. So, perhaps it should be no surprise that what appears to knowledgeable antiquities dealers to be a fake seized back in March is now being used months later to again claim that there is an "ISIS Crisis" demanding a change in current law on the importing of antiquities.
Serious questions have been raised as to the wisdom of the current forms of HR 1493/S.1887 in the United States and a new Cultural Heritage law in Germany, particularly now that dubious claims about ISIS and antiquities have been exposed. So, perhaps this story that appears to have been planted in the New York Times at the behest of the State Department and archaeological groups in the US and Germany should be viewed more as part of a desperate effort to overcome legitimate questions about this legislation and the new intrusive bureaucracies that would be created in the US and Germany as much as anything else.
Sunday, January 10, 2016
Wednesday, January 6, 2016
2015's Questionable Claims on ISIS and Syrian Antiquities: To Hopes for More Accuracy and Less Hype in 2016
In honor of the New Year, CPO counts down the top five (5) dubious claims made in 2015 in support of this legislation that would create a new State Department coordination and enforcement bureaucracy and place what amounts to permanent import restrictions on Syrian cultural goods.
Hopefully, questions about the accuracy of these claims will also lead to questions about the wisdom of the Senate passing H.R. 1493/S. 1887 in its current form. While this legislation was no doubt introduced with the best of intentions, it suffers because its sponsors failed to consult with all stakeholders before its introduction and have relied on incomplete, misleading or false information to justify its approach to the issue of cultural heritage preservation.
5. The Claim: Trade data helps prove there has been an upsurge in stolen Syrian antiquities on the market.
The Source: "Cultural Heritage Lawyer" Rick St. Hilaire and "Red Arch" Cultural Heritage Law Policy Research" have heavily promoted this idea on St. Hilaire's blog. See most recently, Rick St. Hilaire, "Antiques from Syria: U.S. Cultural Property Import Stats Raise Suspicion," Cultural Heritage Lawyer Blog (December 29, 2015), available at http://culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com/2015/12/antiques-from-syria-us-cultural.html
(last visited January 6, 2016).
The Reality: Mr. St. Hilaire and his blog are associated with the archaeological lobby and its anti-trade and anti-collecting views. As such, his interpretation of trade data should be viewed as that of an advocate for a position and not that of an unbiased researcher. With regard to his work, at the outset, there appears to be a serious misconception about the nature of the figures themselves. St. Hilaire at least implies the figures reflect the values for artifacts exported from Syria in 2014 rather than a “country of origin” or “country of manufacture” of Syria and exported from elsewhere to the United States. In fact, due to massive confusion in the trade and a lack of guidance from U.S. and foreign Customs, it is likely that the figures include values for both artifacts manufactured in Syria (perhaps thousands of years ago) and exported to the U.S. from elsewhere along with artifacts directly exported from Syria itself. Thus, artifacts that were manufactured in Syria but have been out of Syria for decades are likely included (and indeed may represent the bulk of the material that has been imported.) In any event, the values cited are modest (particularly compared to wild claims for the values of looted Syrian antiquities (see Claim No. 2 below)), and it would be interesting to compare them with figures for antiquities imports with a country of origin of Syria over time.
4. The Claim: There must be storehouses full of valuable stolen Syrian antiquities.
The Source: In 2002 and 2005, Swiss police raided warehouses that were used to house antiquities illicitly excavated in Italy and Greece over the past decades. See David Gill, "Warehouses, Antiquities and Basel," Looting Matters Blog (November 7, 2008), available at http://lootingmatters.blogspot.com/2008/11/warehouses-antiquities-and-basel.html (last visited January 6, 2016). Of course, Switzerland is an exceptionally stable country that at the time was also known for its strong privacy laws. What better a place to store valuable antiquities?
The Reality: Though warehouses full of illicitly excavated antiquities were found in Switzerland, is it also likely that similar storehouses also exist in unstable Middle Eastern countries? One would not necessarily think so, but the archaeological lobby has nonetheless promoted the idea. Why? After the Second Gulf War, there were also claims that material looted from archaeological sites in Iraq would be reaching the market in quantity. When this never materialized, the archaeological lobby then explained away the issue by claiming that the material was being stockpiled. See Guy Gugliata, "Looted Iraqi Relics Slow to Surface," The Washington Post (November 8, 2005) available at https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/167/35577.html (last visited January 6, 2016). Now, given the dearth of fresh Syrian material on the market, the same claim is again being used to explain away suspicions that efforts to loot archaeological sites (as evidenced by what appear to be holes in the ground in satellite photography) may not be anywhere near as successful as has been maintained. (Apparently, no one has seriously (or at least publicly) considered the possibility that many of these holes were "dry" or at least some of these "looter's holes" were actually "fox holes" dug for military purposes.)
But what of the recent seizure from an ISIS financier? On May 15, 2015, U.S. Special Operations personnel removed a cache of hundreds of artifacts from the home of ISIS Financier Abu Sayyaf. According to the State Department, "The cache represents significant primary evidence of looting at archaeological sites in Syria and Iraq, theft from regional museums, and the stockpiling of these spoils for likely sale on the international market." See "ISIL Leaders Loot," U.S. State Department Cultural Heritage Center Website (undated), available at http://eca.state.gov/cultural-heritage-center/iraq-cultural-heritage-initiative/isil-leaders-loot (last visited January 5, 2016). So far, this is the only storehouse full of "valuable" ISIS loot that has come to light. However, an experienced dealer who looked at images of the coins found in the group valued them at perhaps $40,000 retail and $8,000 wholesale. Indeed, the cache looked more like the modest stock of a small dealer in Middle Eastern antiquities than a storehouse for a fabulous cache of valuable Syrian antiquities.
3. The Claim: Only ISIS is benefiting from sales of illicit antiquities.
The Sources: Back in 2014, Secretary of State Kerry highlighted the looting and destruction of cultural sites in Syria at an event at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York. See Secretary of State John Kerry, Remarks at Threats to Cultural Heritage in Iraq and Syria Event (September 22, 2014), available at http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2014/09/231992.htm (last visited January 5, 2016). Kerry evidently illustrated his talk with satellite imagery showing severe damage to Apamea, an important classical site in Syria. CBS News and other news outlets then ascribed the damage at Apamea to ISIS even though Apamea appears to have been in government hands since the beginning of the Civil War. It is unclear whether the archaeological lobby purposefully perpetuated this deception, but it is clear that CBS and other news sources have relied exclusively on State Department and archaeological lobby sources for their reporting. See "The Perils of Limited Sourcing," Cultural Property Observer Blog (September 9, 2015), available at
The Sources: The “tens of millions” figure ultimately derives from an erroneous claim that ISIS had stolen $36 million in antiquities from one on area in Syria alone. See Heather Pringle, “ISIS Cashing in on Looted Antiquities to Fuel Iraq Insurgency,” National Geographic, June 27, 2014, available at http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/06/140626-isis-insurgents-syria-iraq-looting-antiquities-archaeology/ (last visited January 6, 2016). The report was later found to refer to money made from all types of looting in the al-Nabuk region of Syria, not only the looting of archaeological material. (See “New Documents Prove ISIS Heavily Involved in Antiquities Trafficking,’ Gates of Nineveh Blog (September 30, 2015), available at https://gatesofnineveh.wordpress.com/2015/09/30/new-documents-prove-isis-heavily-involved-in-antiquities-trafficking/) (last visited January 6, 2016).
The $100 million figure has been cited in a "Fact Sheet" to justify support for H.R. 1493/S.1887, but it appears even less grounded in fact. See "Fact Sheet: Deny ISIS Funding & Save Syria's Antiquities," United States House of Representatives, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Elliot L. Engel, Democrats (October 28, 2015) available at https://democrats-foreignaffairs.house.gov/news/press-releases/fact-sheet-deny-isis-funding-save-syrias-antiquities-hr1493s1887 (last visited January 6, 2016). Instead, it traces back to an unsupported claim made by Iraq’s UN Ambassador at a time the U.N. was considering a resolution condemning the terrorist group’s destruction and looting of cultural sites in Iraq. See Rick Gladstone, “U.N. Resolves to Combat Plundering of Antiquities by ISIS,” The New York Times, May 28, 2015, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/29/world/middleeast/un-resolves-to-combat-plundering-of-antiquities-by-isis.html?_r=0 (last visited January 6, 2016).
The Reality: Provable amounts that ISIS has made from antiquities sales are far smaller, ranging from several hundreds of thousands of dollars to several millions. See Derek Fincham, "Leaked Records Hint at How Much ISIS Makes on Antiquities," Illicit Cultural Property Blog, http://illicitculturalproperty.com/leaked-records-hint-at-how-much-isis-makes-on-antiquities/#more-10623 (last visited January 4, 2016). See also Kate Fitz Gibbon, "Debunking the ISIS Antiquities Funding Myth,' Committee for Cultural Policy Blog (December 6, 2015), available at http://committeeforculturalpolicy.org/debunking-the-isis-antiquities-funding-myth/ (last vistited January 6, 2016). These figures are a drop in the bucket compared to ISIS estimated take of at least $1 billion.
1. The Claim: Import restrictions will "save" Syrian cultural property.
The Sources: The archaeological lobby claims that embargoes on cultural goods will "save" Syrian cultural property, act as to disincentive looting, and damage terrorist financing. See Erin Thompson, "Restrict Imports of Antiquities from Syria to Cut Down on Looting," The New York Times (January 21, 2015), available at http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/10/08/protecting-syrias-heritage/restrict-imports-of-antiquities-from-syria-to-cut-down-on-looting (last visited January 6, 2016) and Heather Lee, "Heritage Crisis in Syria; a Call for a Moratorium on the Antiquities Trade, Saving Antiquities for Everyone Blog (September 3, 2014) available at http://savingantiquities.org/heritage-crisis-syria-call-temporary-moratorium-trade/ (last visited January 6, 2016).