Time Again to Tell the Cultural Property Advisory Committee What You Think About Import Restrictions on Coins for Taliban Afghanistan and Erdogan’s Türkiye

 The State Department has announced a Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) Meeting to consider renewals of current “emergency” import restrictions on behalf of Taliban Afghanistan, and the renewals of current cultural property memorandums of understanding (MOUs) with Erdogan’s Türkiye and Colombia.  CPAC will also consider a new MOU with Cameroon.

The State Department’s announcement can be found here:  https://www.state.gov/cultural-property-advisory-committee-meeting-september-15-17-2025/

The State Department is soliciting comments here:  https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOS-2025-0203-0001

Comments are due on or before September 8, 2025.

The renewals for Afghanistan and Türkiye should be controversial because they prioritize soft power efforts directed at a terrorist state (Afghanistan) and an authoritarian one (Turkey) over the interests of American collectors, museums, and the trade in cultural goods.  For coin collectors, the big issue is the grossly overbroad designated lists for both countries that cover coins that circulated regionally or internationally.   There are currently no import restrictions for coins for Colombia, and it does not appear that Cameroon is requesting any restrictions, likely because coins were not used there until recently.

The other big issue relates to enforcement.  Unfortunately, in the only case that addressed the issue, courts in the US Fourth Circuit gave Customs a “green light” to detain, seize and repatriate coins for no other reason that they were of types on a “designated list” for import restrictions.  This puts collectors importing such coins at risk because it is often difficult, if not impossible, to produce the documentation necessary for legal import under current “safe harbor” procedures.

For further details about these MOUs and emergency restrictions and how to comment see this solicitation from the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild https://accguild.org/news/13533301 as well as this critique from the Cultural Property Observer blog: https://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2025/08/soft-power-love-for-taliban-trump-state.html  Again, comments are due on or before September 8, 2025, with the CPAC hearing to take place on September 15, 2025, via a Zoom video conference. 

What should you say? It’s better to write in your own words about how import restrictions hurt your ability to  access coins and learn more about other cultures or even get in touch with your own cultural heritage.  However, here is a model for you to consider:

Please do not renew current import restrictions that prioritize the interests of a terrorist state (Afghanistan) and an authoritarian one (Türkiye) over the rights of American coin collectors.  If you nonetheless renew these agreements, please ensure that the designated lists are rewritten so that it is absolutely clear that they do not impact coins legitimately imported from legal markets abroad, particularly those in Europe.  Coin collecting is a hobby that promotes cultural understanding and relationships with collectors abroad.  It is troubling that the State Department Bureau of Cultural Affairs is behind efforts that do considerable damage to a hobby that actually promotes the cultural understanding the Bureau supposedly aims to foster.

Summary of March 17, 2021 CPAC Meeting to Accept Public Comments on Proposed MOU with Albania and Proposed Renewal with Egypt

 On March 17, 2021, the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee (“CPAC”) met to consider a proposed MOU with Albania and a proposed renewal of the MOU with Egypt. The following members were present: (1) Stefan Passantino (Chairman- Public); (2) Steven Bledsoe (Public); (3) Karol Wight (Museums); (4) J.D. Demming (Public); (5) Ricardo St. Hilaire (Archaeology); (6) Joan Connelly (Archaeology) and (7) Anthony Wisniewski (Collector-Sale of International Cultural Property).  Allison Davis, CPAC’s State Department Executive Director, and Andrew Cohen, State Department Lead Foreign Affairs Analyst, were also present.

Chairman Passantino welcomed the speakers.  He indicated that the Committee had read all the comments, and as indicated in an email to the speakers, they would be allotted 3 minutes to focus on points most important to them.  Chairman Passantino called on speakers who had put in papers on Albania first, then speakers who had written about coins, and finally speakers who wrote on Egypt.  There was some overlap because some speakers put in papers on more than one topic.  He deferred questions to the end to be assured everyone who registered to speak would be heard.

The following individuals provided oral comments:  (1) John K. Papadopoulos  (UCLA); (2) Michael Galaty (U. Michigan), (3) James Gould (RPM Nautical Foundation); (4) Randolph Myers (Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG)); (5) Peter Tompa (Peter Tompa Law-International Association of Professional Numismatists (IAPN) and Professional Numismatics Guild (PNG)); (6) Steve Benner (Ancient Numismatic Society of Washington, D.C. (ANSWDC)); (7) Kate FitzGibbon (FitzGibbon Law-Committee for Cultural Policy (CCP) and Global Heritage Alliance (GHA)); (8) Brian Daniels (Archaeological Institute of America (AIA)); (9) Mireille Lee (Vanderbilt); (10) Marcel Marée and Suzanne Veigh (British Museum); (11) Rocco Debitetto (Hahn Loeser- Association of Art Museum Directors); and (12) Katie Paul (ATHAR Project). 

John Papadopoulos has visited in Albania periodically since the late 1990’s.  He undertook field work there from 2004-2008.  Looting was at its height in the late 1990’s.  It is not as severe today, but it is still problematic.  Looting destroys context which tells us much about how people lived in the area from the Neolithic through the Byzantine and post-Byzantine periods.  Coins are amongst the most common, easily located, and smuggled ancient objects. Albania is very welcoming to academic exchange and has made strides in cultural heritage management. 

His written testimony may be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0003-0056

Michael Galaty has excavated in Apollonia and North Albania.  Galatay has documented systematic metal-detecting in the Shkoder province, targeting both settlements and burial mounds. He says he has been approached by children selling coins at archaeological sites.  He also has seen people metal detecting who had learned about it in England where it is legal.  Some are hobbyists but others are in it for profit.  He also indicates European coin dealers buy coins in Albania. Over the years, he has seen the government of Albania take great strides in trying to limit looting, including expansive cultural heritage laws, a professionalized regional archaeological/heritage service, upgrades to site security, and public education about the problem.  His testimony may be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0003-0010

James Gould speaks for the RPM Nautical Foundation.  During the Hoxha regime, anyone diving in Albanian waters would be shot on sight.  Since the fall of Communism, underwater looting with the use of scuba gear and fast boats for a getaway have become a problem.  Amphorae are typical targets for looters.  The Albanians have been excellent collaborators and a MOU would help address looting.

The Nautical Foundation’s written comments can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0003-0046

Randolph Myers indicates the current membership of CPAC does not reflect Congressional intent because the interests of dealers and the small businesses of the numismatic trade are underrepresented. Given their wide circulation, it is impossible to assume that coins struck in Albania are necessarily found there.  Numismatic research proves far more hoards of coins struck at Apollonia and Dyrrachium are found outside Albanian than within it.

The ACCG’s written comments may be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0003-0014

Peter Tompa acknowledges the passing of James Fitzpatrick, Esq., one of the drafters of the CPIA who appeared before CPAC multiple times to emphasize the need for the Committee to follow Congressional intent.  He indicates that only coins that exclusively circulated within a given country can be restricted under the CPIA’s limitations of import restrictions to archaeological objects “first discovered within” and “subject to export control” by a UNESCO State party.  He believes that the 2016 Egyptian designated list violated this requirement because it included widely circulating large denomination Greek and Roman Provincial coins.  He also indicates there is no basis to expand current import restrictions further to widely circulating Roman Imperial coins struck in Egypt.  Nor is there any basis for restrictions on silver ancient Illyrian coinage struck in what is now Albania because far more hoards of these coins are found in Romania than Albania.  He also asks CPAC to recommend that Customs no longer apply import restrictions on coins as embargoes, but rather limit detentions and seizures to situations where there is probable cause that coins were illicitly exported after the effective date of governing regulations. 

Peter Tompa’s oral comments may be found here:  https://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2021/03/cpac-must-focus-on-congressional-intent.html

IAPN’s and PNG’s written submissions may be found here:

Albania: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0003-0015

Egypt: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0003-0016

Peter Tompa’s personal written submission may be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0003-0055

Steve Benner indicates that collectors like himself and other members of the Ancient Numismatic Society of Washington, D.C. are interested in numismatic scholarship, not making money out of coins.  The joy of holding an ancient coin in one’s hand stimulates one’s interest even more, pushing collectors to ascertain facts about a coin’s history and composition. Taking this away would be demoralizing to collectors and detrimental to our hobby. The Roman Republic and Empire included all the countries bordering the Mediterranean Sea as well as Western Europe, Britain, the Balkans, etc. Roman coins struck at any of the mints circulated freely throughout the Empire and should not be considered the property of any single country.

Kate FitzGibbon also invokes Jim Fitzpatrick’s efforts to ensure that the Committee complies with the law, particularly the need for a showing of substantial current looting for an agreement to be justified. She questions whether there is such a problem in Albania or if looted material is coming here in quantity given the dearth of archaeological items being imported into the United States. As for Egypt, Ms. FitzGibbon notes that Egypt fails to acknowledge much material left the country legally before the 1980’s, and even where export certificates were issued, they were so general as to be useless to show provenance. Ms. FitzGibbon suggests that Egypt has only made a token effort at self help measures to care for its own cultural patrimony. Instead of spending money on preservation efforts, it has dumped huge amounts of money on General Sissi’s museum vanity project being built in the desert.  CPAC must consider such self help measures as part of its review of MOUs.  She also notes the China MOU which should be undergoing an interim review should consider China’s intentional destruction of Uighur cultural heritage.

The CCP’s and GHA’s written submission on the Albanian MOU can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0003-0031

The CCP’s and GHA’s written submission on the Egyptian MOU can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0003-0044

Brian Daniels indicates ongoing looting and violence in Egypt justify the renewal of its MOU.  Recently, two site guards were killed by looters.  Egypt has been a good collaborator with U.S. archaeologists.  There was a conference about looting in Albania in 2009. There has been excellent collaboration with Albanian colleagues.  There will be a travelling exhibition of Albanian archaeological material in the U.S. in 2022.  Archaeological preservation efforts help foster tourism.  The AIA conducts tours in both Egypt and Albania.

The AIA’s written submissions for both Albania and Egypt can be found here: 

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0003-0043

Mireille Lee has used travelling exhibits as teaching tools.  It is important to question how an object got there. There are also ethical questions related to exhibiting mummies.  Hopefully, after the pandemic students will be able to visit exhibitions in person, but in the meantime, they have taken advantage of the Internet.

Marcel Marée and Suzanne Veigh work with the British Museum’s CircArt project.  The project, made possible by grants from the British Council’s Cultural Protection Fund, is generating a digital knowledge base of Egyptian and Sudanese antiquities in the trade.  CircArt examines objects offered for sale on the ‘official’ open market as well as on social media. CircArt and the ATHAR Project work closely together, as there are many synergies between the projects.

 The first results of their research show clearly that the scale of ongoing looting and trafficking is far greater than is generally assumed. Since its inception in 2018, CircArt has recorded some 50,000 circulating artefacts from Egypt on the market, of which at least 15% were demonstrably excavated and exported illegally. A group of dealers in the USA remain heavily involved in the release of such objects onto the open market. They show images of broken off faces from mummy cartonnages where the rest of the coffin was discarded.  They indicate all these faces were offered by one U.S. dealer.  Dealers in Turkey have also been active with trans-shipment points in the Middle and Far East.  Much material also shows up on eBay or Facebook.  The data show with increasing urgency the true scale of illicit trade in cultural artefacts, indicating not only a need to renew the MOU between the US and Egypt, but ideally to reinforce the present import restrictions and to enact more robust regulation of the trade.

The British Museum’s CircArt project’s submission may be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0003-0061

Its website may be found here:

 https://www.britishmuseum.org/our-work/departments/egypt-and-sudan/circulating-artefacts

Rocco Debitetto indicates that CPAC must consider whether Egypt has met all the four determinations before its MOU is renewed.  The renewal should not be used to expand the designated list beyond the 250-year-old threshold for archaeological objects.  Ethnological objects need not be 250 years old, but Egyptian ethnological objects do not fit the criteria under the CPIA.  Egypt was not a tribal society in the 19^th century but a major power. If anything, the current designated list should be narrowed.  In addition, the MOU needs to be reformed to require Egypt to make available more objects for loan without attendant high fees.  Since the 2016 MOU, Egypt has only sent two travelling exhibitions to the United States, both of which were only available to museums willing to pay high fees.

The AAMD’s written submission can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0003-0032

Katie Paul states that the ATHAR project is devoted to fighting trafficking on Facebook.   Research conducted by ATHAR Project illustrates a trafficking crisis in Egypt that is feeding material to black market groups on Facebook. This material includes items as small as coins and as large as coffins. She has tracked material from “trafficker groups” on Facebook that have ended up in the United States. She indicates this trade is hard to track because the buyers frequently try to cover their tracks.

The ATHAR Project’s written submission can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0003-0039

Question and Answer Period

Anthony Wisniewski asks Marcel Marée to explain the difference between Alexander the Great and Hellenism. He indicates the Hellenistic period is generally thought to have started after Alexander died and his Empire was divided amongst his generals.

Anthony Wisniewski asks Randy Myers to confirm that Alexander the Great coins as well as Roman and Byzantine coins from Egyptian mints are found in quantity outside of Egypt.  He points to the ACCG’s research online and within the Royal Numismatic Society’s Coin hoard series of books.

Anthony Wisniewski asks Peter Tompa to confirm there were no Roman Imperial mints in Albania.  He does so.

Anthony Wisniewski asks Brian Daniels if there is sufficient evidence to establish the 4 required determinations for a MOU with Albania.  He says he believes so because the totality of the evidence shows that there is ongoing looting, and that Albania has also undertaken sufficient self-help measures and efforts at collaboration with American archaeologists to satisfy the statutory criteria.

Ricardo St. Hilaire notes that we should also acknowledge the passing of Nancy Wilkie, a long-term member of CPAC.  He asks Brian Daniels if archaeologists have had problems dealing with Egypt during the pandemic.  He says there have been issues, but they have been understandable ones given the circumstances. 

Joan Connelly elicits information from Michael Galaty and John K. Papadopoulos about a 1991-coin hoard containing coins from Aegina (in Greece).  She posits that the hoard shows that Albania was important cross-roads and that it suggests the presence of a city thought to be in the area.  They suggest we only know this information because the hoard was professionally excavated.

Stefan Passantino then closed the public meeting with thanks to all those who testified.

Slim Public Support for MOU's with Yemen and Morocco

The docket for the upcoming CPAC meeting on proposed MOU's with Morocco and Yemen indicates that 170 comments were received about one or both of these MOU's.  The vast majority of comments came in response to an appeal from JIMENA (Jews Indigenous to the Middle East & North Africa) against State Department efforts to recognize the rights of authoritarian MENA countries to the religious and cultural artifacts of their displaced Jewish populations.

Coin collector-numismatic trade comments were way down (to approximately 10) from 100's in the past, no doubt due to frustration about the likelihood of numismatic logic moving the State Department, as well as the fact that the obscure coin types found in these countries are mainly of interest to specialists. 

Archaeologists and archaeological advocacy groups were only represented with approximately 10 comments as well, which should again confirm that there is very little actual public support for these MOU's.

Oddly, the "Antiquities Coalition" which has worked with the Yemeni Government on this MOU apparently failed to submit any public comments.  Is it possible the Coalition has already received assurances that the MOU's are a "done deal?"

Building Bridges: A Symposium on Global Cultural Heritage Preservation

This week I attended an interesting seminar put on by the State Department's new Cultural Heritage Coordinating Committee (CHCC) that took place at the Smithsonian Institution.   There were some really enjoyable programs about preservation work, and it was nice to have the opportunity to meet others with different perspectives.  However,  CPO still came away concerned that legitimate collecting is more at risk than ever by grossly over-broad application of cultural heritage laws which Congress originally intended to focus prospectively on specific looting problems in specific countries abroad.

I don't have time to summarize the entire symposium, but here are some of my takeaways:

1.  ISIS may have been defeated on the battlefield, but the terror group still looms large as the justification for all sorts of efforts that impinge on the due process and private property rights of collectors.  The latest claim is that while ISIS may have lost most, if not all, of its territory, it has been warehousing large numbers of valuable artifacts with which to fund its ongoing jihad.

2.  The State Department and law enforcement coordinate heavily with academics and related advocacy groups which are largely hostile to private collecting of antiquities.  Even though the statute that set up the CHCC calls for the committee to coordinate with the trade in addition to cultural heritage groups, there appears to be little evidence of consultations with the trade.  (CPO was happy to get invited, but he was not there for a dealer group.)  This should be particularly troubling because it has certainly contributed to  overboard application of cultural heritage laws in a matter hostile to even legitimate collecting.

3.  Enforcement will be ramped up in the next 18 months, which should be a major concern given the increasing number of cultural property agreements, how broad they have become and how broadly they are enforced.   Apparently, the State Department (with the help of the archaeological lobby)  is working on five new agreements with Middle Eastern countries (most, if not all, of which have authoritarian governments which claim title to anything and everything "old.")  Moreover, there still is no up-to-date guidance for the public in this area, though U.S. Customs at least realizes this is a problem. 

4.  FBI and Homeland Security Investigations are on board with archaeological advocacy groups' and certain compliance vendors' efforts to impose new anti-money laundering (AML) regulations specifically on the art trade because AML violations may be used to pile on charges and encourage guilty pleas.  Still, the evidence presented that money laundering is a real problem in the art trade remains very slim and largely depends on conflating money laundering with other financial crimes.

5.  The Smithsonian has done lots of good work on cultural heritage preservation and restoration projects, but has also joined the cultural property wars on the side of archaeological advocacy groups and has lobbied with them in their legislative efforts that have harmed the legitimate trade in cultural artifacts.  

Cultural Heritage Center Faces Budget Cuts

The State Department's Cultural Heritage Center (CHC) along with the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) faces severe cuts in the Trump Administration's Budget proposal.  That proposal,

"Reduces funding for the Department of State's Educational and Cultural Exchange (ECE) Programs. ECE resources would focus on sustaining the flagship Fulbright Program, which forges lasting connections between Americans and emerging leaders around the globe.”

While the CHC's programs have been characterized as "soft power" diplomatic efforts, its MOUs have devolved into special interest programs that only benefit small numbers of archaeologists and foreign cultural bureaucracies that offer them excavation permits. Meanwhile, associated embargoes on cultural goods have thoroughly alienated large numbers of legitimate dealers and collectors both here and abroad. So, any supposed "soft power" benefits may in reality be deficits as far as the most of the general public is actually concerned.

It may be too much to hope for, but going forward the Trump State Department CHC should consider retooling to promote people to people cultural exchange that sees collecting as an asset and not an enemy.  Such an inclusive vision would increase CHC's popularity dramatically and help stave off any budget cuts going forward.  

ANA Warns Import Restrictions Damage Mission

The American Numismatic Association explains how import restrictions on coins that focus on place of minting in ancient times rather than modern find spots have damagesd its educational mission.  CPO once again expresses hope that the Trump Administration will perform a cost benefit analysis of such restrictions and their impact on various stake holders.

Thomas Murray, an Appreciation

CPO expresses thanks to Thomas Murray for his all too short service on the Cultural Property Advisory Committee.  President Obama appointed Mr. Murray to serve on CPAC in April 2013 to replace Bob Korver (who had resigned), but he was never allowed to serve a full term on his own.  This is a shame.  Mr. Murray, a past President of the Antique Tribal Arts Dealer Association, not only has real, tangible experience in the trade of ethnographic artifacts.  In addition, he actually represented the interests of his trade constituents by asking some "hard questions" at CPAC hearings.  In contrast, President Obama's replacement  for Mr. Murray may have political connections (albeit not with the party in power), but it remains unclear how he can actually "represent" the interests of the trade in either archaeological or ethnological objects as contemplated by the Statue. See Senate Report 97-564 at 9.  And, after all, "representing the interests" of  designated stakeholders is a major reason why CPAC exists.

Egyptian Import Restrictions Notice Published; Conflict of Interest Concerns Raised

The US Government has published an extensive list of artifacts subject to import restrictions pursuant to the MOU with Egypt.  The effective date is 12/5/16.

The designated list restricts the following ancient coin types down to 294 AD:

H. Coins

In copper or bronze, silver, and gold.

1. General—There are a number of references that list Egyptian coin types. Below are some examples. Most Hellenistic and Ptolemaic coin types are listed in R.S. Poole, A Catalogue of Greek Coins in the British Museum: Alexandria and the Nomes (London, 1893); J.N. Svoronos, Τα Nομισματα του Κρατουσ των Πτολe μαιων (Münzen der Ptolemäer) (Athens 1904); and R.A. Hazzard, Ptolemaic Coins: An Introduction for Collectors (Toronto, 1985). Examples of catalogues listing the Roman coinage in Egypt are J.G. Milne, Catalogue of Alexandrian Coins (Oxford, 1933); J.W. Curtis, The Tetradrachms of Roman Egypt (Chicago, 1969); A. Burnett, M. Amandry, and P.P Ripollès, Roman Provincial Coinage I: From the Death of Caesar to the Death of Vitellius (44 BC-AD 69) (London, 1998—revised edition); and A. Burnett, M. Amandry, and I. Carradice, Roman Provincial Coinage II: From Vespasian to Domitian (AD 69-96) (London, 1999). There are also so-called nwb-nfr coins, which may date to Dynasty 30. See T. Faucher, W. Fischer-Bossert, and S. Dhennin, “Les Monnaies en or aux types hiéroglyphiques nwb nfr,” Bulletin de l'institut français d'archéologie orientale 112 (2012), pp. 147-169.

2. Dynasty 30 —Nwb nfr coins have the hieroglyphs nwb nfr on one side and a horse on the other.

3. Hellenistic and Ptolemaic coins—Struck in gold, silver, and bronze at Alexandria and any other mints that operated within the borders of the modern Egyptian state. Gold coins of and in honor of Alexander the Great, struck at Alexandria and Memphis, depict a helmeted bust of Athena on the obverse and a winged Victory on the reverse. Silver coins of Alexander the Great, struck at Alexandria and Memphis, depict a bust of Herakles wearing the lion skin on the obverse, or “heads” side, and a seated statue of Olympian Zeus on the reverse, or “tails” side. Gold coins of the Ptolemies from Egypt will have jugate portraits on both obverse and reverse, a portrait of the king on the obverse and a cornucopia on the reverse, or a jugate portrait of the king and queen on the obverse and cornucopiae on the reverse. Silver coins of the Ptolemies coins from Egypt tend to depict a portrait of Alexander wearing an elephant skin on the obverse and Athena on the reverse or a portrait Start Printed Page 87808of the reigning king with an eagle on the reverse. Some silver coins have jugate portraits of the king and queen on the obverse. Bronze coins of the Ptolemies commonly depict a head of Zeus (bearded) on the obverse and an eagle on the reverse. These iconographical descriptions are non-exclusive and describe only some of the more common examples. There are other types and variants. Approximate date: ca. 332 B.C. through ca. 31 B.C.

4. Roman coins—Struck in silver or bronze at Alexandria and any other mints that operated within the borders of the modern Egyptian state in the territory of the modern state of Egypt until the monetary reforms of Diocletian. The iconography of the coinage in the Roman period varied widely, although a portrait of the reigning emperor is almost always present on the obverse of the coin. Approximate date: ca. 31 B.C. through ca. A.D. 294.

With respect to the wording of the restrictions themselves, Customs has reverted back to restrictions based on place of manufacture rather than find spot. (Recent Syrian import restrictions followed the statutory requirements more closely-- likely because they were receiving special scrutiny in Congress.)

This is significant because such restrictions ignore evidence that demonstrates that Egyptian mint coins are regularly discovered outside of Egypt.  Egypt's so-called "closed monetary system” was meant to keep foreign coins "out" and not Egyptian coins “in.” Hoard evidence confirms Ptolemaic coins from Egyptian mints circulated throughout the Ptolemaic Empire which stretched well beyond the confines of modern-day Egypt.  (And, indeed, some hoards are found outside the Empire's territory.)  They also ignored finds reported under the UK's PAS that show Roman Egyptian Tetradrachms circulated as far away as Roman Britain. 

Finally, it is troubling that Evan Ryan, Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau of Educational Affairs, made the decision despite a recusal request made on behalf of numismatic trade and advocacy groups. In CPO's view, Ryan's acceptance of an award from the AIA  raises serious conflict of interest issues, if not a violation of ethics rules concerning the acceptance of gifts and awards.  Of course, the AIA lobbied heavily for a MOU with Egypt, and the AIA's award to Ryan specifically referenced ECA's work in implementing MOU's.  

Goldman Sachs Power and Influence Benefit Archaeology Lobby?

A front page article in Sunday's New York Times raises some important questions about how cultural heritage policy is made in the United States that deserve further investigation.   The article explores close ties between Hillary Clinton and Goldman Sachs including during the period Mrs. Clinton was Secretary of State.  That discussion highlights the Clinton State Department's partnership with Goldman Sachs' 10,000 women initiative.

While it is no doubt a good program, what is relevant for our purposes here is that this initiative is run by former Bush Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Dina Powell.  Powell and her State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs are not popular with coin collectors for good reason.

In May 2007, Powell rejected the U.S. Cultural Property Advisory Committee's  recommendations against import restrictions on Cypriot coins.  Then, according to a declaration signed by Former CPAC Chair Jay Kislak, State Department officials went on to mislead Congress and the public about CPAC's true recommendations in official reports. That decision changed long-standing U.S. Government policy against import restrictions on coins, and provided the "precedent" for further restrictions on certain coin types from Iraq (2008), China (2009), Italy (2011), Greece (2011), Bulgaria (2014), and Syria (2016).

In CPO's view, Powell's 2007 decision at a minimum raises an appearance of conflict of interest. Critically, Powell made the decision after accepting her high level job with Goldman Sachs but before leaving the State Department.  At the time, Goldman was apparently heavily involved in arranging controversial credit swaps with Greece and likely had at least some business dealings with Cyprus too.  Of even more concern, it has since come to light that Powell was recruited by John F.W. Rogers, Goldman's powerful chief of staff, where she serves as part of his "lobbying team."   This is relevant to cultural heritage issues because Mr. Rogers is married to Deborah Lehr, an AIA Trustee and international business consultant, who also serves as President of the Antiquities Coalition, a well-funded archaeological lobbying group.

So, perhaps it's no surprise that the State Department's Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs has actively participated in Antiquities Coalition events, such as its recent "Culture Under Threat" conference in New York City.

Of course, the point of these conferences is to drum up support in Congress for measures sought by the archaeological lobby.  So, it also should be no surprise that the Antiquities Coalition has successfully lobbied Congress to clamp down on illicit antiquities (efforts which the trade and collectors see as grossly over-broad and hence damaging to the legitimate trade and collecting).

What's also interesting is that the Antiquities Coalition lobbying efforts are part of a partnership with the Middle East Institute and this work has been done to support repatriation efforts sought by authoritarian Middle Eastern governments like that of Egypt.

What's less clear is whether all this effort also directly or indirectly benefits the financial interests of those involved, i.e., is lobbying on cultural heritage issues of interest to countries like Greece, Cyprus and Egypt being "leveraged" to promote other business interests?

CPO commends all interested in expressing their views on cultural heritage issues, but given the amounts of money that the Antiquities Coalition must be spending on its efforts and all the contacts that are being worked,there should be far more transparency about the Antiquities Coalition's funding, its aims and details about its public-private partnerships with countries like Egypt.

Rigged

Hacked emails have confirmed the suspicions of Senator Bernie Sanders' followers that the powers that be in the Democratic National Committee-- who are supposed to be neutral-- in fact sought to rig the system against him and his campaign.

Collectors, both here and in Germany, already know that feeling.  In the US, the State Department-- which is supposed to be neutral when it comes to deciding whether foreign requests for MOUs meet the criteria in the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act-- has never rejected one. Even worse, when a last minute effort to engineer import restrictions on Cypriot coins was turned down by the State Department's own Cultural Property Advisory Committee, the State Department's Bureau of Educational Affairs imposed them anyway and then went so far as to mislead the public and Congress about CPAC's true recommendations.  That, of course, gave the State Department bureaucrats license to do the same with other coins from Bulgaria, China, Greece, and Italy, citing the Cyprus decision as "precedent."

The situation is even worse in Germany.  There almost 50,000 collectors and dealers made their valid concerns known about a draconian new law, but CDU Culture Minister Monika Grutters rammed it through anyway, cheered on only by a small group of mostly authoritarian cultural nationalist countries and the German Archaeological Institute, which is part of Germany's Foreign Ministry.  Again, the desires of connected insiders associated with the archaeological lobby and the bureaucracy seemed to take precedence over the concerns of ordinary people and small businesses. 

Cultural Property Advisory Committee, May 24, 2016 Open Session to Discuss Renewals of Bolivian and Greek MOUs

On May 24, 2016, The US State Department Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) met in open session to discuss renewal of the Bolivian and Greek MOUs.  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); 6) James Willis (JW) (Trade); (7) Barbara Kaul  (Public) (arrived late); (8) Lothar von Falenhausen (LVF) (Archaeology); and (9) Thomas Murray (Trade).  Katherine Reid (Museum) and Nina Archabal (Museum) were absent.

The following individuals spoke on the Bolivian MOU in this order: (1) Donna Yates (DH) (University of Glasgow); and (2) Sonia Alconini, Society of American Archaeology.  Both speakers supported the MOU with Bolivia.

The following individuals spoke on the Greek MOU in this order:  (1) Sue McGovern-Huffman (SM) (Association of Dealers and Collectors of Ancient and Ethnographic Art); (2) Peter Tompa (PT) (International Association of Professional Numismatists/Professional Numismatists Guild); (3) Carmen Arnold-Biucchi (CAB) (Harvard University); (4) Nathan Elkins (NE) (Baylor University); (5) Peter Schertz  (PS) (Virginia Museum of Fine Arts); (6) William Parkinson (WP) (Field Museum/University of Chicago); (7) Bryan Burns (BB) (Wellesley); (8) John Papadopoulos (JP) (University of California, Los Angeles); (9) Kim Shelton (KS) (University of California, Berkeley); and (10) Barbara Tsinakis (BT) (Vanderbilt). 

   

The first two speakers supported the MOU with changes or opposed import restrictions on coins.  The second two speakers supported the MOU and restrictions on coins.  The next speaker supported the MOU with modest changes on museum loans.  The rest of the speakers supported renewal of the MOU without qualification.  

Bolivian MOU   

Donna Yates (DY) - Focuses comments on ecclesiastical artifacts that are trafficked into the US.  Since the last MOU there have been church robberies.   310 items were stolen in two separate thefts.  Registries are better for ecclesiastical artifacts because Churches maintain inventories.  It’s hard to tell Peruvian from Bolivian ecclesiastical artifacts apart, but both are subject to MOUs.  There were 24,000 ecclesiastical artifacts recorded before the last MOU.  DY is unsure if additional work has been done since.

Sonia Alconini (SA) - SA teaches at the University of Texas at San Antonio.  She previously taught in Bolivia.  MOUs are important instruments to stop trafficking in Bolivian artifacts.  Bolivian artifacts still appear on eBay.  Some may be fake. 

MT asked if there are warnings at the airport about exporting Bolivian archaeological and ethnological goods.  SA states, “no.”

TM asks about Bolivian textiles.  SA says that some stores still sell them from “hidden rooms,” but that there was a crack-down on such activity in 2013.  

NW asks about local collections.  Both DY and SA indicate they exist, but the objects are supposed to be registered. 

There is also a market for Bolivian artifacts in Brazil.

SA is asked about working in Bolivia.  She indicates there are 5 levels of permits that must be procured, but she maintains this added bureaucracy is “worth it” because it demonstrates a buy-in to the archaeological work at both a national and local level.

JL asks if any Bolivian material is legal under Bolivian law.   DY indicates archaeological artifacts purchased before 1906 and ecclesiastical artifacts purchased before 1923 would be legal under Bolivian law.  Apparently, artifacts can only leave legally with a “presidential decree” and this sometimes happens. 

Greek MOU

Sue McGovern (SM) – SM represents the Association of Dealers and Collectors of Ancient and Ethnographic Art (ADCAEA).   ADCAEA stands for a responsible and legal trade.  The MOU has not worked.  No seizures have been reported under it.  ADCAEA recommends that the MOU not be extended in its current form.  ADCAEA believes that US Customs should allow legal import of artifacts on the designated list that are legally exported from Greece’s sister EU countries. 

MT questions a statement in SM’s written presentation that artifacts without a provenance have no commercial value.  SM states all the objects she sells have a provenance and she could not sell them without one.  SM also states as an appraiser she would give “0” value to an artifact without a provenance.  SM states that eBay is full of material without a provenance. SM defines good provenance as an artifact that is documented to have come from a recognized collection.  1970 is an ideal date, but not always possible, particularly for minor items like oil lamps. 

SM gives an example of artifacts with exceptional provenance.  She recently sold artifacts that had been previously lent to and exhibited at the Smithsonian. 

JW notes that the 1970 date is a construct and there is no real difference regarding the loss of context from an artifact illicitly excavated in 1969 and one illicitly excavated in 1971.

SM notes while provenance is important we “should not throw out the baby with the bathwater” when it comes to orphan artifacts. 

SM notes that Greece should sell documented artifacts and use the money to support archaeology.  She also notes back in the 1960’s no one could care less about provenance. 

Peter Tompa (PT) – PT represents the International Association of Professional Numismatists and the Professional Numismatists Guild.  He states that current restrictions based on where a coin is made rather than found are contrary to the plain meaning of the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act.  Such restrictions have already damaged coin collecting and the people to people contacts collecting brings.  He criticizes the paper of Nathan Elkins, an academic supporting restrictions, as advocating positions either contrary to the CPIA's plain meaning, contradictory to Elkins' prior statements, or misleading on details about past coin seizures.  PT also advocates that archaeological objects on the open market within Greece’s sister EU countries should be allowed entry into the US with either a valid EU export permit or no permit if this is allowed under local law.  He indicates instead of focusing on more restrictions, Greece can take simple steps like requiring that archaeologists pay a fair wage to locals and ensure there is site security in the long off season. 

JW indicates that the coin issue “is a difficult one” and wonders if all the emphasis on context is to the exclusion of other important issues.  PT notes that the CPIA suggests “context” is not the most important issue because the CPIA only allows restrictions on objects of archaeological interest if they are also of “cultural significance.”

MT questions PT’s views about EU regulations, but PT directs MT to attorney Michael McCullough’s expert report on the issue.  He promises to provide CPAC with that report.  PT also promises to provide Sotheby’s paper on “cultural significance” under the CPIA. 

JW asks about due diligence. PT indicates that US dealers are forming a “Council for Numismatic Integrity” to make their due diligence practices more transparent.

LVF objects to PT’s suggestions in his paper about privatizing archaeological sites, but PT notes that this assumes local groups will take them over with oversight from the Greek cultural ministry. 

NW asks about the provenances of coins. PT says very few have recorded provenances and that there is no law either here or within EU market countries that requires it for what is for sale. 

PG asks about the academic paper attached to IAPN/PNG’s submission that indicates that 18% of Greek coins are found outside of Greece.  PT notes that is a number for all issues.  For some issues, like Athenian Tetradrachms and Decadrachms, there are more found outside of Greece than within Greece. 

There is some discussion about what is an archaeological site.  PT indicates that it is a site with other material remains nearby, but recognizes that some archaeologists define the term as anywhere something ancient is found. 

PT's oral comments may be found here.  IAPN/PNG's written comment can be found here.

Carmen Arnold-Biucchi (CAB) – Indicates support for the MOU and restrictions on all coins found in Greece.  CAB emphasizes, however, that the coins must be found in Greece and not found elsewhere.  She agrees with PT that issues of Athens predominate outside of Greece.  CAB supports the sale of duplicate coins from state collections and the institution of programs like the UK’s Treasure Act and PAS.  Harvard only purchase coins with a 1970 provenance. 

TM asks if it is unrealistic to assume most collectors can find coins with a 1970 provenance.  CAB admits most coins lack any provenance.  However, she says collectors should be educated about its importance.

NW asks about Byzantine coins.  CAB indicates those found in Greece should also be restricted. 

JW expresses concern that “context” has been allowed to trump all other values.

CAB indicates that she supports laws that encourage coin hoards to be reported.

CAB criticizes the fact that so many excavation coins are not published, but notes that American archaeologists are far better than their foreign counterparts.

Nathan Elkins (NE) - Coins are looted by the thousands.  Even common coins can be significant to dating.  One coin worth 50 cents on the open market helped date a synagogue in Israel.  NE has written an article critical of the ACCG and its test case.  In it, he explains that the current designated lists are quite conservative because they only take in coins primarily found in a given country.  Elkins now thinks more should be covered—all those commonly found in a given country. 

NW wants to know about coins found in Bolivia.  Elkins indicates he is no expert.

Elkins thinks the broad Bulgarian MOU should be a guide and looks forward to a day where overlapping MOUs will protect all coins. 

Peter Schertz (PS) – PS speaks on behalf of the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts (VMFA) and AAMD.  Loans are an issue.  Pre-packaged loans like the one going to National Geographic are fine, but they don’t meet the current MOUs requirements for loans to institutions.   The AAMD is looking for clarity on loans. 

William Parkinson (WP) – WP speaks on behalf of the Field Museum, the University of Chicago, the Society for American Archaeology and the Archaeological Institute of America.  WP lauds Greece’s efforts and collaboration.   WP works at the excavation of an early cave site.   WP says a new exhibit from Greece called “the Greeks” to be seen at National Geographic opens up 5000 years of Greek history.  It is a stunning achievement and to call it “pre-packaged” is wrong. 

In response to a question, WP admits it’s easier to collaborate with people you know and its possible AAMD museums have problems because their curators do not have such personal relationships. 

Bryan Burns (BB) – BB teaches at Wellesley College.  BB supports the MOU.   He thinks more can be done to help Greece digitize collections and ensure site security.   In response to a question from TM, BB says Cycladic art is problematical because the area where this art is found has been heavily looted.     

John Papadopoulos (JP) - JP teaches at UCLA.  Looting is a fact of life in Greece.   There has been an increase in first time offenses.  Artifacts stolen from the Corinth museum ended up in Miami.  Shelby White and the Getty have repatriated artifacts stolen from Greece. 

PG asks about private museums in Greece.  JP indicates there are several, but each has a public function.  TM notes that the Cycladic museum in Greece is a private institution.  JP thinks there should be better on-line inventories.  JP also advocates public awareness campaigns to tackle looting.

Kim Shelton (KS) – KS teaches at University of California, Berkeley.   She works at Nemea and has made efforts of outreach to the local people.  They have repaid her by reporting suspicious activity on site. 

Barbara Tsinakis (BT) – BT teaches at Vanderbilt.  She is speaking on behalf of the AIA.  BT works on excavating homes.  She thinks common artifacts found at the sites of homes have cultural significance because the artifacts have much to tell about how people lived.   Coins are obvious common objects, but others include transport amphora, loom weights and cooking pots.  BT would support making loans more long term, but recognizes the difficulty of transporting fragile artifacts.  

State Department Expresses Qualms Over Liberation of Palmyra from ISIS

Russian propagandists are having a field day with our State Department's apparent indifference to the Assad regime's liberation of Palmyra and its scarred  UNESCO World Heritage Site from ISIS.

CPO is a bit puzzled by the State Department stance given all the emphasis that has been placed on "saving" Syrian cultural patrimony.   And, isn't the point of the State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs sponsored HR 1493 to repatriate undocumented Syrian cultural artifacts to the same Assad regime anyway?

CPO has serious qualms about repatriating any undocumented artifacts to the Assad regime because of its own part in destroying and looting Syrian cultural patrimony, but, even so, we should all be happy if ISIS is driven away from Palmyra given all the destruction it has caused to the ancient city and death it has visited on the city's modern inhabitants.

Update (3/28/16):  The State Department has issued a clarification.  The State Department now indicates despite its opposition to Assad, it welcomes Palmyra's liberation from ISIS.

As Cultural Bureaucrats, Culture Cops and Archaeologists Party-- Questions Linger about MOU with Italy

On March 23, 2016, the Italian Embassy will be hosting a party to celebrate (a bit late) the 15th anniversary of Italy's MOU with the United States.

Speakers will include the Italian Ambassador, Evan Ryan, the Assistant Secretary of the State Department's Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, as well as representatives of the Archaeological Institute of America, the Carabiniri Command for Safeguarding Cultural Patrimony, Homeland Security Investigations and the Italian Ministry of Culture, i.e., the bureaucracies, police forces and archaeological groups that have benefited most from the agreement.

There will surely be no mention of the fact that 94% of the public comments received by CPAC were either opposed to the renewal of the MOU or continued import restrictions on historical coins of the sort widely collected within Italy itself.  Nor any discussion of the limited benefits of the MOU to American citizens, who, after all, have had to pay substantial admissions fees to visit museum exhibits hyped as "cultural exchange" under its terms.

Nor presumably will there be any discussion about the poor state of Italy's monuments or the gross under funding, corruption and bureaucratic malfeasance that has caused it.

After all, why spoil a good time?

ISIS Crisis: Likely Fake Seized Months Ago Used as Justification for New Laws?

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.

But Who Will Hold US Government Officials into Account?

The US State Department and US Customs have held a ceremony to repatriate to the Chinese Government artifacts and a fossil forfeited from American citizens because of misrepresentations on customs documentation.  In each case, the small businessmen who made the misrepresentations also suffered criminal penalties.

But what about gross exaggerations concerning the value of ISIS antiquities made to the US Congress and the American public?

Is it just that small businessmen lose their property and suffer criminal convictions for misrepresentations on customs documentation while government officials can exaggerate values of stolen antiquities with impunity in order to justify new government regulations?

Forging a Public/Private Response to Save Endangered Patrimony of Iraq and Syria

CPO appreciates being invited to this event.  A few observations.

It was nice to see a recognition that it is important to work with collectors and dealers on these issues. CPO supports efforts to encourage more due diligence, but the level of it must depend on the value  of the object and what information about it is likely available.  The presumption should never be that an artifact is "illicit" merely because of where it was made thousands of years ago.

After hearing Michael Danti speak twice now, CPO has come to the conclusion that Danti is reporting the facts as accurately as he can, but then they are "spun" by others to achieve another purpose.  For example, Danti said point blank that all sides are involved in looting and that Apamea has always been in Assad's hands.  The problem is what Danti says is selectively reported so it makes it sound like ISIS is the only problem in the region.  So, over and over again we have that same picture of all those holes at Apamea which are then by implication attributed to ISIS rather than the Assad regime.

CPO is now even more dubious that looted antiquities are a major ISIS funding source.  Assistant Secretary Keller of the State Department's Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs said that ISIS has probably netted several million dollars from antiquities sales, but he also put all ISIS income at over $1 billion.

This again begs the question whether the value of "conflict antiquities" from Syria really justifies major changes in the law both here and in Germany or whether it's all being purposefully overblown in the effort to justify the creation of intrusive new government bureaucracies in both countries.

US Government Repatriates Artifacts to War Zone

The United States Government has completed repatriating artifacts to war ravaged Iraq.   Some of these artifacts had been in US Government custody for years so it's fair to ask, "why now?"

Is  "repatriation" more important as a diplomatic measure than "protecting" an artifact for future generations?   And, is there a concerted effort to conflate one concept with the other even where the facts suggest that repatriation will instead most likely endanger the object?

State Department to Repatriate Artifacts to War Zone

The State Department has announced a repatriation ceremony to take place at the Iraqi Embassy on March 16, 2015.  It seems only media are invited.

One would hope the press might ask about the wisdom of sending such artifacts to a war zone, what assurances there are that the sectarian Iraqi government will care for them, and whether there was any judicial determination that the items were smuggled or whether the property was simply abandoned.

Movie Critics

Egypt's Culture Minister has cited "historical inaccuracies" as the reason for banning Ridley Scott's "Exodus" from movie theaters.  Cynics might think Egypt's generals were more concerned with depictions of  Jews winning freedom from their Egyptian military oppressors.  After all, the Egyptians themselves apparently believe that Joseph the Prophet struck coins.

Our State Department and its Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs supposedly stand up for both religious and artistic freedom.  So, will this move be protested in any fashion?  Or, will they just shrug and pretend Egypt is still a democracy, albeit an imperfect one, when Egypt's Culture Minister is feted as part of celebrations for a new MOU only cultural bureaucrats,  Egypt's dictators and the archaeological lobby will love.

Egyptian Religious Bigotry Behind Pulling of Excavation Permit?

Archaeo-blogger Paul Barford has made the case that Egyptian cultural bureaucrats have pulled the excavation permit of American archaeologists from Brigham Young University because they disagree with the tenants of their Mormon faith and not because of some "misunderstanding" about the number of "mummies" they have found in a cemetery unearthed at the site of Fag El Gamous in Fayoum. 

While Barford approves of such intolerance, CPO does not. One's religious beliefs (or lack thereof) should never come into play in deciding whether to award excavation permits or not.

So, how will the US State Department, which supposedly promotes religious freedom as a core objective of American foreign policy, respond?

And will the International Coalition to Protect Egyptian Antiquities put even 1/10th the effort lobbying the Egyptian Government on behalf of the Brigham Young archaeologists and their religious freedom as it has lobbying the U.S. Government for "emergency import restrictions" on Egyptian cultural goods?

Or, will both just shrug, and celebrate the expected announcement of the pre-judged MOU with Egypt in early  2015 as if the country was still a democracy, albeit an imperfect one?

If there is any time to rethink a MOU with Egypt, its's now.  Any need for "emergency restrictions" has long since passed.  And, anyway, its no time to reward the generals for possible spying (presumably on behalf of the Chinese) or their continuing crackdown on dissent, which most recently included refusing entry to a prominent US scholar and democracy supporter.