Sunday, August 28, 2016
Where's the Beef?
Last week's Diane Rehm Radio Show segment entitled, "The Big Business in Looted Art," is getting lots of play in the archaeological blogosphere. And why not? The statement of the token "collector representative" (Gary Vikan, past Director of the Walters Art Gallery) questioning the show's premise-- that large amounts of material looted by ISIS is leaving Syria-- was ignored by the host and the other guests who are all associated with the Antiquities Coalition. And the only difficult question from the audience about the repatriation of artifacts to unstable regimes was turned into a discussion about how wonderful it was that Khmer artifacts were being repatriated to Cambodia. More evidence, if any were needed, that establishment media is not really interested in hearing from all sides in the cultural heritage debate or questioning the archaeological lobby's narrative that "collectors are the problem."
Labels:
Antiquities Coalition,
Blogging,
Museums,
Repatriation
Saturday, August 13, 2016
Syrian Import Restrictions Imposed
US Customs has published a very extensive list of "Syrian" artifacts now restricted pursuant to the "Protect and Preserve International Cultural Property Act." Coin collectors should special take note that that the "designated list" includes all coins minted and circulated in Syria through the Ottoman period.
Now that restrictions are in place, two important enforcement issues remain. First, will Customs only detain, seize and seek the forfeiture of artifacts on the new designated list "unlawfully removed from Syria on or after March 15, 2011?" Or, will Customs revert back to its current extralegal practice of detaining, seizing, and seeking the forfeiture of anything that looks remotely like it appears on the designated list and then require the importer to "prove the negative?" One can only hope that the explicit directions of the measure's sponsor, Congressman Elliot Engel, emphasizing the limits on Customs' discretion will control.
Second, what will happen to any artifacts that are seized and forfeited under the regulations? When the "Protect and Preserve International Cultural Property Implementation Act" was first introduced, there was a real hope the Assad regime would be replaced by a far more Democratic alternative. No more. So, will Customs and the State Department still follow current practice and repatriate the artifacts to the Syrian Government which means the Assad regime? And, if so, what does that really say about the wisdom of the statute and the US Government's current emphasis on repatriation over preservation?
Now that restrictions are in place, two important enforcement issues remain. First, will Customs only detain, seize and seek the forfeiture of artifacts on the new designated list "unlawfully removed from Syria on or after March 15, 2011?" Or, will Customs revert back to its current extralegal practice of detaining, seizing, and seeking the forfeiture of anything that looks remotely like it appears on the designated list and then require the importer to "prove the negative?" One can only hope that the explicit directions of the measure's sponsor, Congressman Elliot Engel, emphasizing the limits on Customs' discretion will control.
Second, what will happen to any artifacts that are seized and forfeited under the regulations? When the "Protect and Preserve International Cultural Property Implementation Act" was first introduced, there was a real hope the Assad regime would be replaced by a far more Democratic alternative. No more. So, will Customs and the State Department still follow current practice and repatriate the artifacts to the Syrian Government which means the Assad regime? And, if so, what does that really say about the wisdom of the statute and the US Government's current emphasis on repatriation over preservation?
Thursday, August 11, 2016
Collectors' Voices Need to be Heard Once Again!
The State Department’s
Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and its Cultural Heritage Center have
announced a comment period for a proposed extension of a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) with Cyprus. See https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2016/08/10/2016-19018/notice-of-meeting-of-the-cultural-property-advisory-committee
The U.S. Cultural
Property Advisory Committee will review these comments and make recommendations
based upon them with regard to any extension of the current agreement with
Cyprus.
According to U.S.
Customs’ interpretation of the governing statute, import restrictions
authorized by this MOU currently bar entry into the United States of the
following coin types unless they are
accompanied with documentation establishing that they were out of Cyprus as of
the date of the restrictions, July 16, 2007:
1. Issues of the
ancient kingdoms of Amathus, Kition, Kourion, Idalion, Lapethos, Marion,
Paphos, Soli, and Salamis dating from the end of the 6th century B.C. to 332
B.C.
2. Issues of the
Hellenistic period, such as those of Paphos, Salamis, and Kition from 332 B.C.
to c. 30 B.C. (including coins of Alexander the Great, Ptolemy, and his Dynasty)
3. Provincial and
local issues of the Roman period from c. 30 B.C. to 235 A.D.
Why bother to comment when Jay Kislak,
CPAC’s Chairman at the time, has stated that the State Department rejected
CPAC’s recommendations against import restrictions on Cypriot coins back in
2007 and then misled both Congress and the public about its actions? And isn’t it also true that although the vast
majority of public comments recorded have been squarely against import
restrictions, the State Department and U.S. Customs have imposed import
restrictions on coins anyway, most recently on ancient coins from Bulgaria?
Simply, silence just allows the State
Department bureaucrats and their allies in the archaeological establishment to
claim that collectors have acquiesced to broad restrictions on their ability to
import common ancient coins that are widely available worldwide. And, of course, acquiescence is all that may
be needed to justify going back and imposing import restrictions on more recent
coins that are still exempt from these regulations.
Under the circumstances, please take 5
minutes and tell CPAC, the State Department bureaucrats and the archaeologists what
you think.
How do I comment? To
submit short comment just click on the green box on the upper right hand side
of the above notice that says “submit a formal comment” and follow ther
directions: https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2016/08/10/2016-19018/notice-of-meeting-of-the-cultural-property-advisory-committee
If you are having trouble, go to the Federal eRulemaking
Portal (http://www.regulations.gov),
and enter Docket No. DOS-2016-0054 for Cyprus, and follow the prompts to submit
comments. To send comments via US Mail or FEDEX see the directions contained in
the Federal Register Notice above.
What should I say?
The State Department bureaucracy has dictated that any public comments
should relate solely to the following statutory criteria:
1. Whether
the cultural patrimony of Cyprus is in jeopardy from looting of its
archaeological materials;
2. Whether
Cyprus has taken measures consistent with the 1970 UNESCO Convention to protect
its cultural patrimony;
3. Whether
application of U.S. import restrictions, if applied in concert with similar
restrictions by other art importing countries, would be of substantial benefit
in deterring a serious situation of pillage and that less drastic remedies are
not available; and,
4. Whether
the application of import restrictions is consistent with the general interest
of the international community in the interchange of cultural property among
nations for scientific, cultural, and educational purposes.
(See 19 U.S.C. §
2602 (a).) Yet, collectors can really only
speak to what they know. So, tell them what you think within this
broad framework. For instance, over
time, import restrictions will certainly
impact the American public’s ability to study and preserve historical coins and
maintain people to people contacts with collectors abroad. (These particular restrictions have hurt the
ability of Cypriot Americans to collect ancient coins of their own
culture.) Yet, foreign
collectors—including collectors in Cyprus—will be able to import coins as
before. And, one can also remind CPAC
that less drastic remedies, like regulating metal detectors or instituting
reporting programs akin to the Treasure Act and Portable Antiquities Scheme, must
be tried first. Finally, Cyprus is a member of the European
Union, so why not allow legal exports of Cypriot coins from other EU countries?
Be forceful, but polite.
We can and should disagree with what the State Department bureaucrats and
their allies in the archaeological establishment are doing to our hobby, but we
should endeavor to do so in an upstanding manner.
Please submit comments just once,
before the deadline on September 30, 2016.
Labels:
ancient coins,
CPAC,
Cyprus,
Cyprus MOU,
Import Restrictions
Cyprus: What's Wrong with This Picture?
Cypriot Government requests extension of MOU with US that authorizes the detention, seizure and repatriation of undocumented artifacts of Cypriot origin to Cyprus because they "may be stolen." For more, see here.
Mayor of Paphos, Cyprus, accuses antiquities service of stealing artifacts; antiquities service says not stolen, just undocumented. For more, see here.
Mayor of Paphos, Cyprus, accuses antiquities service of stealing artifacts; antiquities service says not stolen, just undocumented. For more, see here.
Labels:
bureaucracy,
Cyprus,
Cyprus MOU,
Humor/Satire/Irony,
poor stewardship
Monday, August 8, 2016
Credulous Live Science Blames Western Collectors for the Death of Child Looters
In what must be a new low, advocates with ties to Egypt's military dictatorship have used credulous media to divert attention from Egypt's poor cultural heritage record with inflammatory claims that Western collectors are responsible for the death of children from impoverished families that engage in looting. And once again, the main "proof" for such claims are dubious figures billed as representing exports from Egypt but which in fact likely reflect exports of artifacts with a "country of origin" of Egypt that likely have been out of the country for years. Coin collectors-- who have raised serious concerns about Egypt's problematical MOU request-- get special mention, again based on a dubious assumption that an increase in trade in gold coins must mean there has been more looting of Egyptian archaeological sites. Of course, it's just as likely that the small overall increase in trade in antique gold coins with a country of origin of Egypt (at least compared to the immense number of gold coins that must be on the international market) relates to modern issues from the 19th century and earlier as opposed to ancient coins that originated in buried hoards.
Tuesday, August 2, 2016
Third Circuit Awards Valuable 1933 Gold Coins to Government
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals has awarded valuable 1933 $20 Gold coins to the Government. A panel of the same court had previously reversed a jury decision for the government because of delays in bringing the matter before a court. Steve Roach's article about the decision can be found here. The Court's opinion can be found here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)