Sector Insights: Coins as Cultural Goods: Promoting Conservation Over State Control in Low End Markets for Art and Cultural Goods (Palgrave MacMillian 2026)

 CPO is honored to publish his views on coins as cultural goods in an open access book funded by the European Union entitled,  Low-End Markets for Art and Cultural Goods (Palgrave Macmillan 2026).

From the abstract,
This chapter argues that historical coins, due to large mintages and significant survival rates, are best preserved and studied through private collecting and a robust numismatic trade rather than state control. Current regulatory schemes, including restrictive import and export controls in the United States and European Union, are overly burdensome and impractical, especially given the lack of provenance for many coins. The chapter critiques these regulations for undermining legitimate collecting and numismatic scholarship while offering limited benefits to cultural heritage preservation. Instead, it promotes a model based on the United Kingdom’s Portable Antiquities Scheme and Treasure Act, which encourages responsible reporting of finds and cooperation among finders, collectors, and institutions. As a result, we have a much better picture of early British economic history. The chapter concludes that policies emphasizing conservation and collaborative stewardship serve both cultural heritage and scholarly inquiry far more effectively than rigid governmental controls.

For the chapter, see https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-032-27566-0_24

and https://rdcu.be/fxRiF

CPAC meets to discuss new Cultural Property Agreement with Romania and Renewals with Albania and Nigeria

 On July 14, 2026, the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) met in a virtual public session to accept comments regarding a proposed Cultural Property Agreement with Romania and renewals with Albania and Nigeria.

The State Department described these requests as follows:

Romania 

The Government of Romania seeks protection for archaeological materials from approximately 2 million years ago to A.D. 1800, and ethnological material from approximately the beginning of the 4th century A.D. to A.D. 1800.  Archaeological material is from the following periods:  Paleolithic, Neolithic, Chalcolithic, Bronze Age, Iron Age (including Dacian, Thracian, Archaic-Classical Greek, Hellenistic, and Roman Republic periods), Early Roman Empire, Late Roman Empire, Migration Periods/Early Middle Ages, Middle Ages/Byzantine/Ottoman periods, Renaissance/Early Modern periods, and the Modern period, and includes objects made from stone, metal, ceramic, bone, ivory, horn, wood, other organic materials, glass and faience, textiles, documents, and paintings.  Ethnological material is from the Late Roman Empire, Migration Periods/Early Middle Ages, Middle Ages/Byzantine/Ottoman periods, and Renaissance/Early Modern periods, and includes objects made from stone, metal, ceramic, bone, horn, ivory, wood, glass, textiles and garments, documents and archives, paintings, and mosaics. 

Albania 

Extending the Albania MOU would continue import restrictions on categories of archaeological material ranging in date from approximately 300,000 years ago to A.D. 1750, and ethnological material ranging in date from approximately A.D. 400 to 1913. 

Nigeria 

Extending the Nigeria MOU would continue import restrictions on categories of archaeological material ranging in date from approximately 1500 B.C. to A.D. 1770, and ethnological material ranging in date from approximately A.D. 200 to the early 20th century A.D. 

See  https://www.state.gov/cultural-property-advisory-committee-meeting-July-14-16-2026/  

The meeting was conducted entirely on Zoom.  None of the CPAC or ECA staff identified themselves to the speakers, so it was difficult to confirm who attended the meeting.

Nevertheless, based images from the Zoom platform, the following members (all appointed by President Biden) appeared to be present:  (1) Alexandra Jones (Chair, Represents/Expertise Archaeology, Anthropology, related fields, CEO Archaeology in the Community, Washington, DC); (2) Alex Barker (Represents/Expertise Archaeology, Anthropology, related fields) Director, Arkansas Archeological Survey, Arkansas); (3) Mirriam Stark, Represents/Expertise Archaeology, Anthropology, related fields, Professor of Anthropology, University of Hawaii); (4) Nii Otokunor Quarcoopome (Represents/Expertise Museums, Curator and Department head, Detroit Museum of Art); ( (5) Andrew Conners (Represents/Expertise Museums, Director, Albuquerque Museum, New Mexico); (6) Michael Findlay (Represents/Expertise: International Sale of Cultural Property, Director, Acquavella Galleries, New York) and; (7) Cynthia Herbert (Represents/Expertise: International Sale of Cultural Property President, Appretium Appraisal Services LLC, Connecticut).

In contrast, the following members appeared to be absent: (8) Amy Cappellazzo, Represents/Expertise: International Sale of Cultural Property, Principal, Art Intelligence Global; (9) Thomas R. Lamont (Represents Public, President of Lamont Consulting Services, LLC, Illinois);  (10) Susan Schoenfeld Harrington  (Represents Public, Past Deputy Finance Chair, Democratic National Committee, Past Board member, China Art Foundation); and, (11) William Teitelman (Represents General Public, Legislative Counsel to the PA Trial Lawyers Association, Attorney (Retired)).

There were also Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) Cultural Heritage Center staff present, presumably including Glen Davis, Director of the Cultural Heritage Center and Andrew Zonderman, who is serving as CPAC’s Executive Director.  

The Chair, Alexandra Jones, welcomed the speakers.  She thanked the speakers for attending, and then indicated that speakers should try to limit themselves to 4 minutes and 30 seconds  each given the number of presenters. 

Dr. Ömür Harmanşah spoke as the Vice President for Cultural Heritage, Archaeological Institute of America (AIA).  He first provided some background about the organization.  The AIA currently has 150,000 members, a figure that includes not only professional archaeologists, but others interested in archaeology, including subscribers to the AIA’s magazine.   The AIA supports all three Cultural Property Agreements (CPAs).  He notes Romania and Albania have hosted American archaeologists and have offered museum loans. Moreover, both countries face continuing problems with looting.  For example, an important helmet excavated in Romania was stolen from a museum in the Netherlands and the AIA’s letter references a report about looting in Albania. While there has been less collaboration with Nigeria, an American archaeologist was recently awarded with a grant to study glass production in Nigeria.

Here are links to the AIA’s written comments:

Albania: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2026-0628-0066

Nigeria:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2026-0628-0068

Romania:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2026-0628-0067

Elias Geraoulis spoke as the Executive Director of the Global Heritage Alliance (GHA).  Gerasoulis focused his oral testimony on Nigeria.  He urged the Committee to reject or pause extension of a CPA.  He believes this CPA must be examined in light of pressing issues pertaining to U.S.-Nigeria relations.  He noted that the Trump Administration and Congress have expressed grave concerns about religious persecution and human rights abuses in the country, including mass killings of Christians. He believes Nigeria is a failed state with much of the North currently under the control of terrorist organizations such as Boko Haram.  He further noted that other armed groups have moved from the North southward with parts of the army being compromised as well.  He further argued that Nigeria is a failed state, and that should raise questions about the safety of any cultural objects which may be repatriated there. 

CPAC member Nii Otokunor  Quarcoopome questioned whether Christians are really being targeted and argued that CPAC in any case should not address any such concerns in the context of deliberating about at CPA.   

Elias Gerasoulis countered that he based his testimony on statements of members of Congress and the Administration.  His view is that any renewal must be considered in the context of current diplomatic relations with Nigeria.

Teresa Ngan is a student associated with the Oregon Archaeological Society.  She believes that CPAs are necessary to protect our understanding of Romanian and Albanian archaeology.  She shared her screen to show images of various artifacts, including inscriptions and jewelry.  She argued that CPAs are necessary to protect both archaeological context and our knowledge of ancient societies.

Peter Tompa spoke next as the Executive Director of the International association of Professional Numismatists (IAPN).  He noted that IAPN had submitted comments on all the proposed CPAs, but focused his words on the new CPA with Romania and the renewal with Albania.  He first noted that the “designated list” for Albania ignored numismatic research submitted by IAPN, was grossly overbroad, and that efforts to limit it to coins that “circulated primarily” in Albania did not comply with the “fair notice” requirements of the Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA).  With regard to Romania, he indicated that the vast majority of coins that circulated there also circulated regionally and internationally, making it impossible to “assume” that they were “first discovered” within Romania, and hence were subject to Romanian export control.  He then reminded the Committee that Transylvanian coins are neither archaeological nor ethnological objects under the CPIA and are considered “Hungarian” rather than “Romanian”  in numismatic literature.

 He next focused in on the failure of the State Department to recognize that the EU has comprehensive export rules which are binding on all member states that allow these countries to export coins and other artifacts with or without an export permit according to local law.  He further indicated that the failure to recognize EU rules would lead to ridiculous results.  In particular, if the State Department again imposes an embargo on the import of virtually all coins made before 1750, that could include Hungarian and Austro- Hungarian (Hapsburg) Empire coins simply because in addition to circulating in Austria, Hungary, and a number of other countries, they also circulated heavily in Transylvania, now a Romanian province since 1920.  Thus, we could have a situation where an American collector could legally purchase and export such a Hungarian or Austro-Hungarian coin from Austria or Hungary consistent with EU law, but Customs could still seize it under a CPA with Romania for no other reason that it was of a type found on the “designated list” for Romania.

CPAC member Alex Barker questioned Tompa.  He took the position that the US should ignore these rules because any CPA is with Romania not the EU and Romania’s own rules do not normally allow for the export of even common coins.   Tompa responded by noting that the EU has its own rules which allow Romania to ask for the return of illicitly excavated materials and that IAPN’s concerns were particularly warranted given the way US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces CPAs as embargos based on coin types alone without any probable cause that any particular coin that is seized was illicitly removed from a given country with a CPA after the effective date of any import regulations.

Here are links to IAPN’s written comments:

Albania:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2026-0628-0020

Nigeria: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2026-0628-0022

Romania:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2026-0628-0021

Here are Tompa’s oral comments:  https://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2026/07/yes-cpac-there-is-eu-and-its-member.html

In addition, here are his personal comments:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2026-0628-0034

Kate FitzGibbon next spoke on behalf of the Committee for Cultural Policy (CCP)  She first noted that the CCP had uploaded specific comments on all three CPAs, but she wanted to speak more generally about the concerns CCP and others have about the trajectory such agreements are taking.  She noted that before decision making was folded into the State Department, there were only limited numbers of such agreements and they never covered such wide ranges of materials.  The numbers of CPAs have grown exponentially from 13 in 2010 to 36 today, with more pending every year.  Moreover, the scope of the designated lists has grown as well, with it now being common for such lists to encompass 1 million years of cultural heritage, including items made for trade as well as ecclesiastical objects and folk art.  FitzGibbon argues that the claim the whole material culture of a given country is subject to pillage is dubious at best and that CPAs have been granted in all cases even though it is doubtful that all four required determinations have been actually met.

She further indicated that overbroad CPAs and designated lists have had a chilling effect on museums, collectors, and the legitimate trade whereas Mark Feldman, the State Department’s chief architect for the CPIA, has indicated that Congressional intent sought a balanced approach to only address serious concerns about the looting of archaeological and ethnological objects of cultural significance.   She noted that trade statistics demonstrate that there is not much imported from Romania.  She further indicated that Romania spends little on protecting its cultural heritage, and much of that is used to pay awards to metal detectorists for their finds.   She also indicated that there are serious minority issues that must be considered in Romania relating to Hungarians and the Roma and in Nigeria with regard to Benin bronzes.  With regard to the Benin bronzes, they have been returned to the hereditary Oba whose ancestors enslaved Africans without any acknowledgment of this history or the interests of American descendants of slaves in this issue.

Here are the CCP/GHA comments:

Albania:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2026-0628-0061

Nigeria: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2026-0628-0060

Romania:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2026-0628-0062

Michael Galaty of the University of Michigan has worked in Albania for his entire career.  He has seen burial grounds decimated.  Metal detecting is a major problem. He has been offered coins by children. Some metal detectorists are hobbyists, but he believes a lot of what is found is smuggled into the European Union. 

Miriam Stark asks Galaty if coins can be excavated without damaging archaeological context.  He indicates that is impossible.

[CPO Note:  IAPN’s written comments indicated that only the very few coins found in “secure contexts” at archeological sites are useful for dating purposes.  It also indicated that Romanian law allows metal detecting and has instituted a system of awards for metal detectorists that turn in their finds.]

Dr. Galaty’s written comments can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2026-0628-0047

Brittany Kyle is a Professor at the University of Northern Colorado.  She has studied human skeletons to investigate how Greek and native populations interacted in the ancient world. Her work has taken her to Albania to investigate how Greek colonists at Apollonia interacted with local Illyrians.  She has worked with American and Armenian students in this capacity.

Guards at a site in Apollonia tried to sell Kyle coins.  [CPO Note:  Doesn’t this instead suggest that foreign archaeological missions investing in site security and paying guards a fair living wage may be a solution?]   Prior work at Himara in Sicily shows the importance of coins from documented find spots.  There, coins were found in the mouths of skeletons as payment to the ferryman to cross the River Styx.  Had those coins been removed by looters, that evidence and the story they tell would have been lost forever.

Dr. Kyle’s written testimony may be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2026-0628-0036

Deadria Farmer-Paellmann spoke on behalf of the Restitution Study Group.  The Restitution Study Group has worked for the past 25 years on issues of reparatory justice relating to the transatlantic slavery trade.  The Restitution Study Group supports protecting Nigerian cultural heritage but asks CPAC to strengthen cultural property policy by recognizing all communities whose histories are materially embedded within Nigerian cultural heritage.  Specifically, the Benin bronzes represent a unique circumstance. They represent both art and crimes against humanity perpetrated by the Kingdom of Benin working with European slave traders.  During this period, 50 bronze manilla currency bracelets were used to purchase a woman and 57 to purchase a man.  Scientific analysis has now demonstrated that many Benin Bronzes were cast from brass consistent with the composition of these manillas.  It is important that the descendants of the slaves purchased with these manillas be made part of the conversation.  She asked  the any CPA with Nigeria take into account the Restitution Study Group’s recommendations meant to preserve this history, which has been rejected by the Smithsonian Institution and other museums in the rush to repatriate Benin bronzes to Nigeria.   

The Restitution Study Group’s written testimony can be found here: 

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2026-0628-0050

The Hon. Ogechukwu Nkere is a human rights activist and is serving as the Prime Minister of the Biafran Government in Exile (BRGIE). Mr. Nkere recounted the suffering of the Biafran people during the Civil War between 1966 and 1970 which took the lives of 3 million Biafrans, mostly due to forced starvation.  More recently the Biafran people, who are Christians, have been subject to a Nigerian government campaign of torture, extrajudicial killings, and disappearances.  Mr. Nkere cited statements from President Trump condemning these actions and noted that any CPA with Nigeria should be put on hold until Nigeria aligns with US policy regarding Biafra. 

Dr. Scott MacEachern spoke for the Society for American Archeology.  He supports an extension of the current CPA with Nigeria.  He has worked in Nigeria since the 1990s. His primary fieldwork site has unfortunately been overrun by Boko Haram terrorists. Boko Haram primarily attacks Muslim communities that are considered heretics.  There isn’t necessarily a correlation between terrorism and looting.  So far, Boko Haram does not appear to be interested in exploiting antiquities.  Instead, others focus on objects from the Nok and Benin cultures as items to loot. Bilateral agreements are the primary instrument for fighting illegal networks.

Dr. MacEachern’s written comments can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2026-0628-0056

Stephen Knerly represents the Association of Art Museum Directors (AAMD).  AAMD offered qualified support for the extension of the CPA with Nigeria.  He indicated any renewal should promote opportunities for American museum goers to interact with the many diverse and important cultures of Nigeria.  As a result, museums must look to loans from source countries like Nigeria if they are to fulfill their mission of bringing the world's cultures to the public.  While there appears to be some interest from Nigerian officials in providing such loans, the process lacks predictability and standard practices. Improvements to the status quo can be promoted as a condition for any renewal.   Issues include who has authority to make loans, what documents can be used for such transactions, and what immunity arrangements may be worked out to foster such loans.  Formerly, such issues were addressed on a case by case basis in each agreement, but recently the ability to do so has been lost with the creation of standardized CPAs.

The AAMD’s written comments can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2026-0628-0040

Adam Rabinowitz is an associate professor at the University of Texas.   He spoke on his own behalf as a field archaeologist who has been working in Romania for the last 10 years.

He wanted to second the AIA’s testimony about the interest in Romanian material on the illicit market for antiquities.  He gave as an example a helmet and three gold bracelets stolen from a Dutch museum which were subsequently recovered.  (CPO note:  Such material would be considered “stolen” under US and International law even without a CPA.)  He is also familiar with illicit excavations noting that metal detectors are used to recover coin hoards.  (CPO note:  Metal detecting is legal in Romania with Romanian authorities paying finders awards.)

Rabinowitz is working with a numismatist at the Museum of National History and archaeology in Constanța on the coins that we excavated at an archaeological site. He also has a project about trade currency that appears frequently on the international coin market. He believes Romanian authorities are doing their best to preserve heritage and enforce existing laws.

Professor Rabinowitz’s written comments can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2026-0628-0054

Vivien Bence speaks on behalf of the Hungarian Human Rights Foundation (HHRF).  She asked that the Romanian request be rejected if any restrictions are to apply to Transylvanian or Hungarian items as that would in effect recognize Romanian government ownership and control over the cultural heritage of the Hungarian diaspora. 

The HHRF has monitored the rights of ethnic Hungarian minorities in Eastern Europe since 1976, with particular focus on Romania as the home to a 1.1 million strong Hungarian community.  This community has suffered since Transylvania was forcibly incorporated into Romania from Hungary in 1920.  Although it has been almost 40 years since the fall of Communism, the Romanian government has delayed returning property confiscated from Hungarian interests during this period.  The HHRF is especially concerned about the Batthyaneum Library and Astronomical Observatory and its priceless collection of rare manuscripts. The Romanian state has ignored domestic laws and European Union decisions ordering the return the building and the Library’s contents to its legitimate owner, the Alba Iulia Catholic Archdiocese.  The HHRF called on CPAC  to recommend that the State Department condition any CPA  with Romania on an assurance that Romania will return objects belonging to the Batthyaneum Library and other significant cultural institutions that were unlawfully expropriated from the autochthonous Hungarian national minority to representatives of that community within Romania.

The HHRF’s written comments can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2026-0628-0045

John O’Shea speaks on behalf of the Society for American Archaeology.   He has worked in the Tri national boundary area of Romania Serbia and Hungary since 1976  so he has some perspective  how regimes have changed and how the rules have changed. In 1989, it was unthinkable there would be a collaborative project involving both Hungary and Romania.  Because both Hungary and Romania are part of the Schengen zone of the EU, it is relatively easy for traffickers to move material.  (CPO note:  EU rules provide for law enforcement cooperation between borders and the area is well policed against traffickers in cultural property.) 

Metal detecting is a huge issue particularly because of artifacts produced during the Roman and Medieval eras. Because again of the Schengen zone connection Romania is not only the subject of looting but it's also becoming a node in the international movement of illicit cultural property. 

One of the big problems with the funding is that young professionals that are graduating from school don't see a future in cultural heritage protection in Romania and they immigrate to in Germany. EU funding is critical as is the EU regulations and the CPA with the US.  O’Shea indicated that he did not want the US to become a loophole in this system.

Another concern is that “trafficking” is a charge that is used against archaeologists in Romania to derail careers.  There needs to be a better way to facilitate the legal export of archaeological materials for study purposes.

After this testimony, the Chair thanked everyone for their public testimony and close the public session. 

Trump State Department Prioritizes "Soft Power" Outreach to Turkey's Authoritarian Government Over Protecting the Rights of American Collectors and Minority Groups

The Trump State Department has renewed a controversial Cultural Property Agreement with Turkey's authoritarian government over the objections of American coin collectors and representatives of displaced minorities.  The implementing regulations continue to embargo a wide variety of cultural goods made as recently as 1924, including an extensive list of ancient Greek, Roman Provincial, Byzantine and Ottoman coin types and religious objects associated with Turkey's displaced Greek, Armenian and Jewish minority communities.  This latest indication of "business as usual" once again demonstrates the need for Congress to pass HR 595, a bill to facilitate the lawful trade in historical coins, as well as to consider far more fundamental  reform legislation.  Such legislation would place guardrails on the regulatory process and enforcement efforts to help protect the private property rights of collectors and minority communities.  

Repatriation of Late Roman Imperial Coins Raises Serious Questions about the Cultural Property Agreement with Turkey and the Private Property Rights of American Citizens

 Nazlan Ertan, writing for Al-Monitor, reports on the repatriation of 83 Late Roman Imperial coins struck at Anatolian Mints, under a 2021 Cultural Property Agreement (CPA)  between the United States and Turkey.  See Nazlan Ertan, Turkey boasts of antiquities' return, but faces scrutiny at home, Al Monitor (October 4, 2025), available at https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2025/10/turkey-boasts-antiquities-return-faces-scrutiny-home (last visited October 16, 2025).

Ertan quotes Deputy Culture and Tourism Minister Gokhan Yazgi as stating, “The process was swift, transparent and efficient.”  The article then goes onto to portray the authoritarian government of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan as using “repatriation victories to project cultural authority abroad, an arena in which Turkey currently leads.”     

While the article also criticizes government mismanagement and the influence of short term political and commercial interests, Ertan completely ignores the serious critique of both Erdogan’s policies and the CPA levelled by  representatives of the trade, collectors and minority religious and ethnic groups at a recent U.S. State Department Cultural Property Advisory Committee meeting convened to discuss the CPA’s renewal. 

Indeed, the news of the repatriation of these Roman Imperial coins highlights these problems, at least for coin collectors.  First, it is unclear how the 2021 CPA and its implementing regulations can retroactively justify a seizure that took place in 2015, some six years earlier.  Second, it is highly questionable that the Roman Imperial coins that were seized are even subject to the import restrictions that implement the CPA.  Those regulations apply to Roman provincial coins, but not to Roman Imperial coins, which circulated well beyond the confines of modern-day Turkey as far as England in the West and Sri Lanka to the East.  Certainly, one cannot assume that such coins were found in Turkey, a prerequisite for them to be restricted under the governing statute, the Cultural Property Implementation Act. 

As it is, this looks like yet another case where the U.S. State Department and U.S. law enforcement have prioritized “cultural diplomacy” over due process rights for American citizens. As such, this seizure represents yet another reason for Congress to pass HR 595, a bill to protect coin collectors, as well as far more ambitious reform legislation to protect the private property rights of American citizens. 

It's Time for a Reset

Here is what I said, more or less, at yesterday's virtual Cultural Property Advisory Committee Meeting.  I hope to post a full report of that meeting shortly:  

            The Trump Administration’s emphasis on promoting American business and scaling back regulations requires this Committee to consider a new paradigm, one which facilitates the lawful trade in common items like coins, particularly where they are already legally available for sale in countries seeking restrictions. 

            There is no better place to start than Italy.  Since 2011 there has been an embargo in place on ancient coins of Italian types minted before 211 BC.   During this same period, Italy’s Carabinieri have mounted a successful campaign against looters without damaging Italy’s large, lawful numismatic market. 

            What does IAPN request?  First, we join hundreds of coin collectors to oppose expanding the current designated list past 211 BC  to encompass late Roman Republican and Imperial coins. 

Prior committees that considered the initial MOU in 2001 and subsequent renewals for 2005, 2011, 2016 and 2021 all came to the same conclusion buttressed by current research: One simply cannot assume that all such coins are “Italian cultural property” when only 5.24% of the 15,000 Roman Imperial coins hoards containing over 6 million coins are found within Italy itself. 

The current Italian designated list also needs to be reformed.  At a minimum—using the Greek designated list as a model—larger denomination coins which circulated in international trade should be delisted.

            We also request that any renewal be conditioned on Italy facilitating the export of any item legally available for sale within Italy itself.  Despite solemn promises, Italy has actually made it harder to export ancient coins.  Finally, this Committee should also require that US Customs accept legal exports from sister EU countries as legal imports of items on the Italian designated list.  Such a modification of the current MOU is not only consistent with the UNESCO Convention, but also with Italian law. 

            The proposed MOU with Vietnam raises similar issues.  A past IAPN President who visited the UNESCO World Heritage site of Hue (pronounced “Hugh”) earlier this week reports that cash coins up for restriction here are for sale to tourists at a gift shop there. 

More than that, any import restrictions will only cause confusion.  Chinese cash coins found in Vietnam also circulated in far greater numbers in China.  They should be restricted, if at all, under the current Chinese MOU.  No Vietnamese coins should be restricted. The earliest Vietnamese coins are virtually identical to Chinese prototypes from the post-Tang period which are not restricted under the MOU with China. Later Vietnamese coins, particularly the machine struck coins of the French protectorate struck in France or at the US Mint, do not meet the threshold requirements for either archaeological or ethnological objects.

As for the other MOUs, the designated list for Morocco does not provide fair notice to importers.  It simply recounts all the ancient and early modern civilizations whose coin types circulated within Morocco without naming specific types exclusively found there. Limiting restrictions to types that “circulated primarily” in Morocco fails to correct this problem, particularly where the vast majority  “circulated primarily” elsewhere. Accordingly, if restrictions are to continue, the current designated list must be limited to bronze coin types issued by Moroccan mints for local circulation.

Finally, there should be no new restrictions on coins for Chile or Costa Rica.  Spanish Colonial and early Republican era coinage that circulated in these countries also circulated in far greater numbers elsewhere, including as legal tender here in the United States until 1857.   They are as much part of US cultural heritage as they are of these nations. 

Thank you. 

US imposes grossly overbroad emergency import restrictions on behalf of Ukraine and new import restrictions for Yemen without a public hearing

At the behest of the State Department, US Customs has imposed grossly overbroad emergency import restrictions on behalf of Ukraine.  It has also issued revised import restrictions on behalf of  "the Republic of Yemen" without a public hearing or full statutory Cultural Property Advisory Committee review. Both sets of import restrictions again demonstrate that the Biden-Harris State Department places a  premium on expediency over legality and the interests of American collectors and the small and micro businesses of the trade in cultural goods.  

The Ukrainian emergency import restrictions cover archaeological material from the Paleolithic period (c. 1.4 million years ago) through 1774 AD and ethnological material from 200 AD to 1917.  The restrictions on widely collected coins  and medallions are exceptionally broad:

1. Coins —In gold, silver, bronze, copper, and lead. Some coin types minted in or commonly found in archaeological contexts in Ukraine in various periods are listed below.

a. Ancient Greek cities in Ukraine, including Olbia, Panticapaeum, Chersonesus, and Tyras, minted coins of various weights and metals. Cast currency in dolphin, sturgeon, and arrowhead forms was also produced in this period. See Zograph, A. Ancient Coinage, Part II, Ancient Coins of the Northern Black Sea Littoral. (Oxford, 1977). Approximate date: 600-47 B.C.E.

b. In the Roman period, Panticapaeum continued to mint coins, and other Roman imperial coins were also used. See MacDonald, D. An Introduction to the History and Coinage of the Kingdom of the Bosporus, Classical Numismatic Studies 5. (Lancaster, 2005). Approximate date: 47 B.C.E.-500 C.E.

c. Coins minted in the Kyivan Rus period include gold and silver zlatnyks with a portrait of the ruler and the trident (tryzub) symbol. Hexagonal cast ingots (hryvnia) were also produced. Bohemian deniers and dirhams of Islamic states were also used in the Medieval period. Pierced coins and exfoliated (flaked) coins, including half-coins and forgeries, were common. Approximate date: 880-1240 C.E.

d. Coins in use during the Late Medieval and Early Modern periods include, but are not limited to, Mongolian dirhams, Lithuanian denars, Polish ducats, Crimean Khanate akces, Austro-Hungarian talers, Ottoman coins, and Russian rubles. Approximate date: 1240-1774 C.E.

2. Medallions —Usually featuring relief images, known since the Early Iron Age, with gold, silver, and bronze phaleras used during the Roman period. Approximate date: 1000 B.C.E.-1774 C.E.

Such import restrictions authorize the detention, seizure and repatriation of  coin types made in what is today Ukraine or occupied Crimea that circulated in quantity elsewhere as well as issues made elsewhere that primarily circulated well outside of present day Ukraine.  Early modern issues of the surrounding nation states of Austria, Hungary, Lithuania, Poland, and Russia are included.   As with ancient Roman Imperial coins, such coin types that are widely and legally sold  in legitimate markets in Europe are now in danger of confiscation on entry into the US unless the importer can "prove" they were out of Ukraine as of the September 10, 2024 effective date of the regulations.  

These concerns were raised in written and oral comments  made on behalf of the American Numismatic Association, the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild, and the International Association of Professional Numismatists, but they were ignored.  Additionally, by issuing "emergency import restrictions"  rather than entering into a cultural property MOU, the State Department avoided having to consider "less drastic measures" raised in these comments.  Such "less drastic measures" like the creation of a Portable Antiquities Scheme and a web based system for issuing export permits would have been particularly appropriate here since Ukraine allows a large internal market for the cultural goods that are now embargoed as well as the purchase and sale of metal detectors.  

In one positive move that cynics will link to the election year, the new Yemeni restrictions on ethnological material explicitly exclude Jewish ceremonial and ritual objects and manuscripts.  JIMENA, B'nai B'rith and Global Heritage Alliance have argued that such materials should exempted from cultural property MOUs with repressive Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) governments which have forced their Jewish populations into exile.  

Addendum (9/16/24):  What the administrative state "gives" with one hand, it "takes" with the other.  A further review of the Ukrainian restrictions linked above demonstrates that they explicitly include Jewish and Christian ceremonial and ritual objects.  Of course, Ukraine is no  Yemen, but such restrictions could still lead to trouble for Christians or Jews of Ukrainian decent bringing such material into the US for religious purposes.  

U.S. Cultural Property Advisory Committee Meeting About Proposed Cultural Property MOU Renewals with Ecuador and Jordan and a New MOU with Ukraine

 On June 4, 2024, the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee (“CPAC”) met in a virtual public session to hear public comments regarding proposed renewals of Memorandums of Understanding (“MOUs”) with Ecuador and Jordan and a new proposed MOU with Ukraine.  An update on the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs’ (“ECA’s”) website made shortly before the hearing provided further information about the scope of the requests.  See Cultural Property Advisory Committee Meeting, June 4-6, 2024, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Media Center (April 30, 2024), available at https://eca.state.gov/highlight/cultural-property-advisory-committee-meeting-june-4-6-2024

(last visited June 5, 2024).   That document indicated that neither Ecuador nor Jordan sought restrictions on additional categories of materials.  Ukraine, however, sought restrictions on a wide variety of archaeological and ethnological objects as follows: 

 Ukraine

Protection is sought for archaeological material from the Paleolithic Period (approximately 1.4 million years ago) to 1774 CE, including metal (sculpture, jewelry, weapons, coins, vessels, and horse fittings and trappings); ceramic (sculpture, vessels, and seals); stone (sculpture, monuments, vessels, tools, and jewelry); bone, ivory, wood, horn, and other organic material; glass and faience; paintings and mosaics.  Ethnological materials for which protection is sought span from the Roman Period (3rd century CE) to 1917 CE and include religious, ritual, and ecclesiastical objects; rare books, manuscripts, and other written documents; architectural elements; objects related to funerary rites and burials, both ritual and secular; paintings; military material; and traditional folk clothing and textiles.  

 Id.   

 The CPAC members did not introduce themselves before the public section, but CPAC currently includes the following members: (1) Alexandra Jones (Chair, Represents/Expertise Archaeology, Anthropology, related fields, CEO Archaeology in the Community, Washington, DC); (2) Alex Barker (Represents/Expertise Archaeology, Anthropology, related fields) Director, Arkansas Archeological Survey, Arkansas); (3) Mirriam Stark, Represents/Expertise Archaeology, Anthropology, related fields, Professor of Anthropology, University of Hawaii); (4) Nii Otokunor Quarcoopome (Represents/Expertise Museums, Curator and Department head, Detroit Museum of Art); ( (5) Andrew Conners (Represents/Expertise Museums, Director, Albuquerque Museum, New Mexico); (6) Michael Findlay (Represents/Expertise: International Sale of Cultural Property, Director, Acquavella Galleries, New York); (7) Amy Cappellazzo, Represents/Expertise: International Sale of Cultural Property, Principal, Art Intelligence Global; (8) Cynthia Herbert (Represents/Expertise: International Sale of Cultural Property President, Appretium Appraisal Services LLC, Connecticut); (9) Thomas R. Lamont (Represents Public, President of Lamont Consulting Services, LLC, Illinois);  (10) Susan Schoenfeld Harrington  (Represents Public, Past Deputy Finance Chair, Democratic National Committee, Past Board member, China Art Foundation); and, (11) William Teitelman (Represents General Public, Legislative Counsel to the PA Trial Lawyers Association, Attorney (Retired)).

 The meeting was conducted entirely on Zoom.  At least the following members were present:  Jones; Teitelman; Quarcoopome; and Stark.  CPAC’s executive director, Allison Davis, was also present.

 The Chair, Alexandra Jones, welcomed the speakers.  She indicated that speakers would be given four minutes each given the number of oral comments. 

Dr. Chris Jasparro, Associate Professor in the National Security Affairs Department and Director of the Africa Regional Studies Group at the Naval War College, spoke first.  He indicated that a MOU with Ukraine would be an important tool to fight organized crime and Russian aggression.  Jasparro maintained that Russian forces destroyed archaeological sites, but also looted small items which would then enter international markets.  He also indicated that a MOU could act as a token of American support for Ukraine.  He further maintained that “stolen antiquities” were used to test smuggling routes for other, more dangerous items.  The factual basis for this contention is unclear. 

Dr. Patricial Juninska of Artyfact, an archaeological management company, spoke next.  She indicated that 341 Kurgans or burial mounds have been damaged during the war.  She believed that a MOU will demonstrate our support for Ukraine and its efforts at preservation during a difficult time.

Dr. Sam Hardy of the Norwegian Institute for Cultural Heritage Research (NIKU) spoke next.  He indicated that Ukraine has struggled for years against looters.  Russian looting and destruction of cultural heritage is being investigated as a war crime.  Looting incentivizes corruption.  Hardy has found social media indicating that Russian mercenaries have been trading in antiquities. One of these individuals was pictured with Russian President Putin and former Russian Defense Minister Shoigu.

 Adam Rabinowitz, an Associate Professor at University of Texas at Austin, spoke next.  Rabinowitz is familiar with Ukraine through his prior work at Chersonesus.  Rabinowitz believes that much of the looting caused by the war is of small metal objects.  He noted that metal detectors are widely available in Ukraine and that artifacts like coins will be found by farmers during demining operations.  He believed that farmers and others will be tempted to sell such material on eBay, and this material should be kept off the market.  He maintained Ukrainian officials are doing the best they can under the circumstances and have thus have met the Cultural Property Implementation Act’s (“CPIA’s”) self-help requirements.

His written testimony may be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0015-0049 (last visited June 5, 2024).

 Randolph Myers next spoke on behalf of the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (“ACCG”).   Myers chastised the State Department for failing to meet the notice requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act.  He indicated that circulation of coinage is complex, and one cannot assume many coin types are found in Ukraine given their much wider circulation patterns.  He also indicated that the United Kingdom’s Portable Antiquities Scheme provides an excellent example of a “less drastic measure” that should be adopted before import restrictions are imposed. 

 The ACCG’s and the American Numismatic Association’s testimony on Ukraine can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0015-0010 (last visited June 5, 2024).

 Their testimony on Jordan can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0015-0011 (last visited June 5, 2024).

 Peter Tompa next spoke as the Executive Director of the International Association of Professional Numismatists (“IAPN”).   He raised four points.  First,  political geography explains why one cannot assume that coins found in Ecuador, Jordan or Ukraine, are only found there.  Each of these countries were small parts of larger political entities for much of their histories, meaning that coins that circulated within their current boundaries also circulated in quantity elsewhere.  Second, CPAC must consider the realities on the ground, in particular the existence of large open markets in both Jordan and Ukraine.  Given these markets, assisting Jordan and Ukraine to create workable web-based systems of providing export certificates for common items like coins should be contemplated.  Another reality is the use of metal detectors.  The best way to deal with metal detectors is to help Jordan and Ukraine create a working Portable Antiquities Scheme.  Congressional appropriators have highlighted the importance of the CPIA’s reporting requirements, particularly the mandate that “less drastic measures” have to be considered before import restrictions are imposed.  The creation of a workable system of export permits, a portable antiquities scheme and more focused enforcement are just such “less drastic measures” that Congress contemplated. 

 Peter Tompa’s oral comments can be found here:

https://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2024/06/cpac-meeting-to-discuss-renewals-of.html (last visited June 6, 2024).

 His personal comments can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0015-0039 (last visited June 6, 2024).

 IAPN’s comments on the proposed renewal of the MOU with Ecuador can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0015-0003  (Last visited June 6, 2024).

 IAPN’s comments on the proposed renewal of the MOU with Jordan can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0015-0004  (last visited June 6, 2024)

 IAPN’s comments on the proposed MOU with Ukraine can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0015-0012 (last visited June 6, 2024).

 Elias Gerasoulis next spoke on behalf of the Global Heritage Alliance (“GHA”) as its executive director.  GHA submitted joint testimony with its sister organization, the Committee for Cultural Policy (“CCP”).  Gerasoulis focused his comments on Jordan.  He also indicated that Kate FitzGibbon, his colleague from the CCP was unavailable, so he would also be available to answer any questions about Ecuador and Ukraine.  He noted that the State Department previously approved its MOU with Jordan based on historic looting that took place in the 19^th and 20^th centuries.  He also called out Jordan for allowing sales of coins at the Petra archaeological site and at a bourse in Amman.   He argued that such internal sales of coins to locals and tourists was inconsistent with any effort to embargo their entry into the United States.  He mentioned that the coin bourse in Amman was opened by a Jordanian princess, which suggested that it was an event sanctioned by the Jordanian government. 

 One CPAC member asked Gerasoulis about the lack of evidence being provided regarding current looting in Jordan.  Gerasoulis indicates he would welcome such evidence, but none had been provided publicly by either the State Department or Jordan for purposes of justifying this renewal. 

 GHA’s and CCP’s comments regarding the renewal of the MOU with Ecuador can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0015-0045 (last visited June 6, 2024).

 Their comments regarding the renewal of the MOU with Jordan can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0015-0036 (last visited June 6, 2024).

 Their comments regarding the proposed MOU with Ukraine could be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0015-0053 (last visited June 6, 2024).

 Katie Paul spoke as the founder and co-director of the Antiquities Trafficking and Heritage Anthropology Research (ATHAR) Project.  Paul discussed her advocacy group’s use of screen shots taken from eBay and other social media platforms as evidence of significant looting that must be addressed.  She maintained there was no legal market for archaeological objects in Jordan.  Despite evidence submitted by IAPN, GHA, and CCP to the contrary, she maintained that there was no legal market for coins in Jordan.  She noted that Jordan does have a numismatic museum instead.  Paul stated that Ukrainian metal detectorists sell directly to American buyers.  She indicated that a hoard of 2,500 coins from the Black Sea coast was recovered by the authorities.  She further indicated that Ukraine needs US assistance to stem widespread looting.

 ATHAR’s comments regarding the proposed renewal of the MOU with Jordan are here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0015-0050 (last visited June 6, 2024).

 ATHAR’s comments regarding the proposed MOU with Ukraine can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0015-0052 (last visited June 6, 2024).

 Morag Kersel is an Associate Professor of Anthropology at DePaul University in Chicago.  She spoke from Jordan where she is working.  Professor Kersel discussed her “Follow the Pots” project which tracked looted biblical era pots on the market.  Biblical era materials are in demand in the United States.  She also discussed the cooperation of the Jordanian government with American archaeologists and museums.  She believed that the MOU should be renewed.

 Professor Kersel’s comments can be found here:

 https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0015-0041 (last visited June 6, 2024).

 James Zeidler is an Emeritus Research Professor at Colorado State University.  Zeidler has excavated in Ecuador for the past 50 years.  He indicated that looting has declined in Ecuador since the 1980’s due to increased enforcement and better community engagement.  Though looting has declined, he maintained that the current MOU still should be renewed to help protect Ecuadorian cultural heritage. 

 Professor Zeidler’s comments can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0015-0044 (last visited June 6, 2024).

Sarah Rowe is an Associate Professor Department of Anthropology at the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley.  Professor Rowe commended Ecuador for its efforts at community engagement including the training of local and foreign archaeologists.  She also praised the creation of the first code of archaeological ethics for Latin America in Ecuador as well as programs with local communities aimed at discouraging looting. 

 Dr. Ömür Harmanşah spoke as the Vice President for Cultural Heritage, Archaeological Institute of America (“AIA”).  Harmanşah indicated that the AIA strongly supported a MOU with Ukraine to help address Russian looting of archaeological objects.  He noted that Ukraine sent museum displays to the U.S. in the 2,000s.  He believed the MOU could also address illicit digs in the occupied Crimean Peninsula.

 The AIA’s comments on the renewals for Ecuador and Jordan and the new MOU for Ukraine are not available in the record posted in regulations.gov, but they are posted here: 

https://www.archaeological.org/aia-submits-letters-to-u-s-cultural-property-advisory-committee/ (last visited June 6, 2024).

 Tess Davis spoke as the Executive Director for the Antiquities Coalition, an archaeological advocacy group.  Ms. Davis indicated that she also serves on the faculty at Johns Hopkins University and is a member of the Council of Foreign Relations.  Ms. Davis discussed her work in Cambodia exposing the Latchford criminal network.  She maintained that import restrictions are “consumer protection measures” that help keep “stolen” artifacts off the market.  She also indicated that the Antiquities Coalition works closely with both the State Department, G-13 countries and individual source countries to facilitate cultural property MOUs and other restrictions on the trade meant to deter illicit trade.  She maintained that CPIA import restrictions can be complied with “simply”  with the required documentation. 

 Jeremy Sabaloff is an American anthropologist and past president of the Santa Fe Institute.  Sabaloff previously served as CPAC’s Chair during the Obama Administration.  Sabaloff did not speak directly about any of the MOUs.  Instead, he praised the work of CPAC and the importance of MOUs to our foreign relations and fostering “legitimate” trade. 

 Chair Alexandra Jones closed the CPAC public session about 10 minutes before the one hour allotted for the meeting expired.  Despite the additional time that was available, there were no additional questions from CPAC members. 

US Customs and State Department issue more grossly overbroad restrictions on behalf of another unfriendly authoritarian government, this time Pakistan

 The US State Department and its Cultural Heritage Center have again  deputized U.S. Customs and Homeland Security to enforce the export controls of another unfriendly, authoritarian government, this time Pakistan. It remains unclear how they will apply these exceptionally broad import restrictions, which cover a host of materials also found in Central Asia, Afghanistan, India, Sri Lanka, and, indeed, as far away as Northern Europe.  

The designated list for coins is in particular very broad.  It lists types that circulated regionally as well as internationally, including Roman Imperial coins, which the designated list itself admits are only "sometimes" found in Pakistan.  The entire designated list for coins is as follows:

(5) Coins—Ancient coins include gold, silver, copper, and copper alloy coins in a variety of denominations. Includes gold and silver ingots, which may be plain and/or inscribed. Some of the most well-known types are described below:

(a) Early coins in Pakistan include silver sigloi of the Achaemenid Empire. Gold staters and silver tetradrachms and drachms of Alexander the Great and Philip III Arrhidaeus are also found. Regionally minted Achaemenid-period coins include silver bent bars ( shatamana) with punched symbols such as wheels or suns. Local Hellenistic (Greek)-period and Mauryan imperial punch-marked silver coins ( karshapana) are covered with various symbols such as suns, crescents, six-arm designs, hills, peacocks, and others. Circular or square, die-struck cast copper alloy coins with relief symbols and/or animals on one or both sides also date to this period. Approximate Date: 6th-2nd Centuries B.C.

(b) Greco-Bactrian, Indo-Greek, Indo-Scythian, and Indo-Parthian coins include gold staters, silver tetradrachms, drachms, and obols, and copper alloy denominations. Copper alloy coins are often square. The bust of the king, the king on horseback, Greek and Hindu deities, the Buddha, elephants, bulls, and other animals are common designs. The name of the king is often written in Greek, Kharosthi or Brahmi script. Approximate Date: 2nd Century B.C.-1st Century A.D.

(c) Roman Imperial coins struck in silver and bronze are sometimes found in archaeological contexts in Pakistan. Approximate Date: 1st Century B.C.-4th Century A.D.

(d) Kushan coins include gold dinars, silver tetradrachms, and copper alloy denominations. Imagery includes the king as a portrait bust (“Augustus type”), standing figure with a fire altar, or equestrian figure; emblems ( tamgha); and figures from Greek, Zoroastrian, Buddhist, and Hindu religious traditions. Inscriptions are written in Greek, Bactrian, and/or Brahmi scripts. Approximate Date: A.D. 30-350.

(e) Sasanian coins include gold dinars, silver drachms, obols ( dang), and copper alloy denominations. Imagery includes the bust of the king wearing a large crown and Zoroastrian fire altars and deities. Inscriptions are usually written in Pahlavi, but gold dinars minted in Sindh with Brahmi inscriptions are included. Approximate Date: A.D. 240-651.

(f) Kushano-Sasanian or Kushanshah coins include gold dinars, silver tetradrachms, and copper alloy denominations. Some Kushano-Sasanian coins followed the Kushan style of imagery, while others resemble Sasanian coins. Inscriptions are written in Greek, Bactrian, Brahmi, or Pahlavi scripts. Approximate Date: A.D. 225-365.

(g) Gupta coins include gold dinars and silver and copper alloy denominations. Imagery includes the king in various postures and activities, the queen, Hindu deities, altars, and animals. Inscriptions are usually written in pseudo-Greek or Brahmi script. Approximate Date: A.D. 345-455.

(h) Coins of the Hephthalite, Kidarite, Alchon and Nezak Hun, Rai, Brahmin Chacha, and Turk Shahi Dynasties include silver and copper alloy denominations. Designs resemble Sasanian coins with a portrait bust of the ruler wearing a distinctive crown on the obverse and a fire altar or other Zoroastrian imagery on the reverse. Coins sometimes bear emblems ( tamgha s) and/or inscriptions in Bactrian, Pahlavi, Brahmi, or Nagari script. Designs are sometimes highly schematized. Approximate Date: 5th-9th Centuries A.D.

(i) Hindu Shahi silver coins often bear inscriptions in Nagari or Sharada script and depict a horseman and a bull, or an elephant and a lion. Approximate Date: A.D. 822-1026.

(j) The Umayyad and Abbasid Caliphates and the Ghaznavid and Ghurid Empires issued gold dinars, silver dirhams, and copper alloy fulus (singular fals) bearing Arabic inscriptions on both faces. Inscriptions are often enclosed in circles, squares, rings of dots, or an inscription band. Silver and copper alloy denominations of local governors, the Habbari Dynasty of Sindh, and the Emirate of Multan are similar, but some coins of Multan carry inscriptions in Nagari or Sharada. Some Ghaznavid coins carry bilingual inscriptions in Arabic and Sharada scripts, and some bear images of a bull and horseman. Some Ghurid coins bear inscriptions in Devanagari and/or stylized images of a flower, bull, horseman, and/or goddess. Approximate Date: A.D. 712-1206.

(k) The Delhi Sultanate issued gold tankas, silver tankas and jitals, and copper alloy denominations bearing Arabic inscriptions, either enclosed in a circle, scalloped circle, octofoil, flower, square, or inscription band, or covering the full face of the coins. Some bear inscriptions in Devanagari and/or stylized images of a bull, horseman, lion, or goddess. Some coins are square. Approximate Date: A.D. 1206-1526.

(l) The Mughal Empire issued coins such as gold mohurs; silver shahrukhis, rupees, and tankas; copper and copper alloy dams, and other denominations. Coins bear Arabic inscriptions enclosed in a circle, ring of dots, square, or inscription band, or covering the entire face. Some coins are square. Some coins bear an image of the seated emperor, a portrait bust of the emperor, a sun, and/or Zodiac symbols. Approximate Date: A.D. 1526-1749.

It is also frustrating that the very same coins now subject to a State Department embargo are sold quite openly in Pakistan.  Moreover, despite the claim that Assistant Secretary, ECA Lee Satterfield considered "less drastic remedies" before imposing restrictions on coins, the coin trade's suggestions related to focusing restrictions solely on coins traced back to Pakistani contexts, the provision of export certificates, and the creation of a Pakistani Portable Antiquities Scheme were evidently ignored.  

State Department Offers Advance Notice of CPAC Hearing to Address New MOU with Ukraine and Renewals of Current MOUs with Ecuador and Jordan-- UPDATED 4/26/24, 5/6/24

The State Department Cultural Heritage Center has provided advance notice of a proposed MOU with Ukraine and renewals of current MOUs with Ecuador and Jordan. According to this preliminary notice, written comments and requests to speak at the June 4, 2024, CPAC hearing must be received on or before May 28, 2024.

Sympathy for the Ukrainian people and their struggle against Russian imperialism makes it difficult to oppose any MOU, but the State Department must still honor the CPIA’s statutory requirements in processing the request.

The CPIA closely defines archaeological and ethnological objects that may be subject to restrictions.  A threshold consideration for objects to be considered “archaeological or ethnological material” of Ukraine is that they were “first discovered within” Ukrainian territory and “subject to” Ukrainian export control.

This raises a serious question as to coins and other artifacts from the sites of ancient Greek Black Sea colonies that are now in occupied Crimea.   While Ukraine still maintains that Crimea remains part of that country, the reality is that Russia, which has occupied the peninsula since 2014, is unlikely to give up its conquest. 

Of course, there are other issues, particularly related to coins, including whether common types are of “cultural significance” and whether it is proper to assume that they were found on current Ukrainian territory when they were types that circulated regionally or even internationally.  

Overbroad designated lists enforced as embargos are a major concern for collectors.  Although the State Department and their "partner" archaeological advocacy groups claim that import restrictions are directed at current looting of archaeological sites, their impact is much broader.  In fact, they have allowed foreign governments to "claw back" coins and other cultural goods legally sold and available for export on open markets in Europe.   State and Customs then conduct elaborate "repatriation ceremonies" where they claim they are returning "stolen property."  The reality most often is simply that  some unfortunate collector was unable to provide provenance information that just does not exist for most low value items like coins.  Of course, all this goes against the fundamental Anglo-American view that the burden of proof always is on the government to prove guilt, but it is expediency in the name of "soft power" that prevails here.  

The issue of an overbroad designated list certainly already applies to the current import restrictions with Jordan.  Those import restrictions include coins that circulated regionally.  

The Jordanian MOU and its related import restrictions should also raise different questions because the very same types of coins (and pottery) that are now restricted to American citizens are openly available for sale there. 

At least, the current designated list with Ecuador does not include coins.  That makes sense because Spanish Colonial and Republican era coinage that circulated in Ecuador fails to fit the definition of either “archaeological” or “ethnological” objects.   

Nevertheless, the designated list for Ecuador remains overly broad, including colonial era art that stretches the definition of “ethnological objects.”

The legislative history makes clear that the CPIA’s drafters  believed that "ethnological objects" must be the products of what was at the time referred to as “primitive cultures.”  

Update: April 26, 2024-   The regulations.gov link to comment on the proposed MOU with Ukraine and renewals with Ecuador and Jordan is now live and can be found HERE.  

Update: May 6, 2025-  The State Department Cultural Heritage Center has confirmed fears that Ukraine is asking for very broad based import restrictions in a blog post dated April 30, 2024.  The request includes archaeological objects (including coins) created as recently as 1774 and ethnographic artifacts created as recently as 1917. More here.

 

Public Session of the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee to Review Proposed Renewals of MOUs with Bulgaria and China, June 5, 2023

                 On June 5, 2023, the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) met in a virtual public session to hear testimony regarding the proposed renewals of MOUs with Bulgaria and the People’s Republic of China (PRC).  An update on the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs’ (ECA’s) website made shortly before the hearing provided further information about the requests.  See https://eca.state.gov/highlight/cultural-property-advisory-committee-meeting-april-26-27-2023 (last visited June 7, 2023).  According to that website, Bulgaria has asked for import restrictions on additional categories of archaeological material dating from the Paleolithic Period to the Neolithic (c. 1.6 million years ago – 7500 B.C.) and on additional ethnological material of an ecclesiastical nature dating from 1750 through the 20^th century.  Id.  In contrast, the PRC does not seek any additional restrictions.  Id. 

                The public session was postponed from April 26-27, 2023, presumably to allow all the remaining Trump appointees to be replaced by Biden appointees to CPAC.  Those replaced included Anthony Wisniewski, the sole coin collector representative on the Committee.  One of the replacements, Susan Schoenfeld Harrington, has discernable links to the PRC, as a past Board Member of the China Art Foundation.  See http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2023/04/new-cpac-members.html (last visited June 7, 2023).

                Despite the postponement, the public was only allowed an exceptionally short time to comment on these MOUs on the regulations.gov website.  See https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOS-2023-0016-0001  (last visited June 7, 2023).  Although the Federal Register notice was posted on Friday, May 19, 2023, due to a snafu, the regulations.gov website did not accept comments until midday Monday, May 22, 2023.  The comment period closed only 4 days later, on Friday, May 26, 2023.  An analysis of the comments that were submitted can be found here.  See http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2023/05/low-public-support-for-mous-with.html  (last visited June 7, 2023). 

                Oral comments during the public session were also circumscribed.  Rather than the usual 5 minutes, each speaker was only allotted 4 minutes to speak.   

                At least the following CPAC members were present for the meeting:  (1) Alexandra Jones (Chair, Represents/Expertise Archaeology, Anthropology, related fields, CEO Archaeology in the Community, Washington, DC); (2) Alex Barker (Represents/Expertise Archaeology, Anthropology, related fields) Director, Arkansas Archeological Survey, Arkansas); (3) Nii Otokunor Quarcoopome (Represents/Expertise Museums, Curator and Department head, Detroit Museum of Art); (4) William Teitelman (Represents General Public, Legislative Counsel to the PA Trial Lawyers Association, Attorney (Retired)); (4) Andrew Conners (Represents/Expertise Museums, Director, Albuquerque Museum, New Mexico); (5) Michael Findlay (Represents/Expertise: International Sale of Cultural Property, Director, Acquavella Galleries, New York); (6) Susan Schoenfeld Harrington  (Represents Public?, Past Deputy Finance Chair, Democratic National Committee, Past Board member, China Art Foundation); (7) Cynthia Herbert (Represents/Expertise: International Sale of Cultural Property President, Appretium Appraisal Services LLC, Connecticut); and (8) Thomas R. Lamont (Represents Public?, President of Lamont Consulting Services, LLC, Illinois).

                Additionally, at least the following State Department employees were present for the meeting:  Allison Davis (Executive Director, CPAC) and Andrew Zander. 

                These individuals spoke at the public session about one or both MOUs: (1) Kate FitzGibbon (Committee for Cultural Policy/PRC); (2) Elias Gerasoulis (Global Heritage Alliance/PRC); (3) Peter Tompa (International Association of Professional Numismatists/Bulgaria and PRC); (4) Doug Davis (Anti-Counterfeiting Educational Foundation/PRC); (5) Ömür Harmanşah (Archaeological Institute of America/Bulgaria and PRC); (6) Douglas Mudd (American Numismatic Association, Ancient Coin Collectors Guild/Bulgaria); (7) Louisa Greve (Uyghur Human Rights Project/PRC); (8) Peter Irwin (Uyghur Human Rights Project/PRC); (8) Josh Knerly (Hahn, Loeser & Parks, LLP for Association of Art Museum Directors/PRC); (9) Dr. Rowan Flad (Harvard Department of Anthropology/Society for American Archaeology/PRC); (10) Dr. Anne Underhill (Yale/Society for American Archaeology/PRC); and (11) Dr. Rian Thum (University of Manchester/PRC). 

                Alexandra Jones (AJ), CPAC’s chairperson, indicated that the Committee had reviewed all the testimony, and asked the speakers to limit their remarks to 4 minutes each.  AJ indicated that she would allow CPAC members to ask questions after each speaker finished their prepared remarks.  Very few questions were actually posed. 

                Kate FitzGibbon (KFG) spoke first.  She indicated that none of the criteria for renewal of the MOU found in the Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA) could be met.  The second determination, related to the PRC taking measures consistent with the UNESCO Convention concerning the protection of its cultural patrimony, has not been met because of the PRC’s intentional destruction of the cultural heritage of its Uyghur population.  KFG pointed to the creation of concentration camps as well as the destruction of over 500 Uyghur sites in her testimony.  Moreover, the first and third determinations, related to the PRC’s cultural patrimony being in jeopardy, and the effectiveness of the response, could not be met given the booming internal Chinese market for cultural goods.  The fourth determination relating to benefits to the international system could not be met given the PRC’s mercantilist approach to repatriating artifacts and failing to follow through on museum loans. 

                The Committee for Cultural Policy’s and the Global Heritage Alliance’s joint written testimony can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0044 ) (last visited June 7, 2023).

                Elias Gerasoulis (EG) echoed many of the concerns that KFG raised about the PRC’s intentional destruction of minority culture.  He also noted that current import restrictions have the perverse effect of promoting the interests of PRC auction houses associated with the government over their American competitors.  It makes no sense for ECA to undertake to renew the MOU given the anti-American actions the PRC has taken, including the recent spy balloon overflight.  EG believes that renewing the MOU would be tantamount to committing diplomatic malpractice.

                Peter Tompa (PT) asked CPAC to oppose any effort to expand current import restrictions on behalf of Bulgaria to Roman Republican and Roman Imperial coins.  He explained that one cannot assume that such coins come from Bulgarian archaeological contexts.  Only a very small percentage of such coins circulated there compared to those which circulated elsewhere.  He also indicated that it is important to distinguish Roman Republican and Roman Imperial coins from Roman Provincial coins, which are currently restricted.  Roman Provincial coins were struck for local use in contrast to Roman Republican and Roman Imperial coins which were meant to circulate through the Empire.   Due to time constraints, PT was only able to express general concerns about the MOU with the PRC.  He mentioned that the PRC should not be rewarded for destroying the cultural property of its minority populations or for its failure to address counterfeiting of US historical coins.

                PT’s planned oral comments can be found here:  https://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2023/06/cpac-should-be-skeptical-about-new.html (last visited June 7, 2023).

                The International Association of Professional Numismatist’s (IAPN’s) written comments about the MOU with Bulgaria can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0010 (last visited June 7, 2023).

                IAPN’s written comments about the MOU with the PRC can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0009 (last visited June 7, 2023).

                PT’s personal written comments can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0056 (last visited June 7, 2023).

                Doug Davis (DD) indicated that the PRC is a major source of counterfeits with 100,000s of coins being faked.  These are exported in bulk to the US for resale, often to unsuspecting buyers.   The Anti-Counterfeiting Educational Foundation Task Force has worked with US law enforcement on seizing $46 million worth of counterfeit US coins.  In addition to historical US coins, counterfeiters are also faking modern US Mint products including bullion pieces like silver eagles.  This is a global problem because Chinese counterfeiters are faking coins of all nations. 

                CPAC member Alex Barker asks DD about what kinds of bullion are being faked. DD indicates the fakes include silver bars. 

                The Anti-Counterfeiting Educational Foundation’s written comments can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0067 (last visited June 7, 2023).

                Ömür Harmanşah (OH) indicates that the Archaeological Institute of America (AIA) supports the renewals of both MOUs.  The AIA maintains that each of the four criteria for renewal found in the CPIA are met for both MOUs.  OH mentions that the PRC recovered 66,000 stolen archaeological artifacts in the year 2021 showing that the PRC’s cultural patrimony is in jeopardy.  OH states that it is important to ensure restrictions are imposed on mass produced items like coins to promote their study.  He further indicates that the PRC has worked to ensure that there is extensive collaboration with US archaeologists and museums.  For example, an exhibition featuring the famous “Terracotta warriors” has been exhibited in a number of venues around the United States. 

                The AIA’s written testimony regarding the MOU with Bulgaria can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0068 (last visited June 7, 2023).

                The AIA’s written testimony regarding the PRC renewal can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0066 (last visited June 7, 2023). 

                Douglas Mudd (DM) speaks on behalf of the American Numismatic Association (ANA) and the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG), a member organization.  DM indicates that import restrictions have negatively impacted the study of coins.  Because coins are so durable many have come down to us from ancient times. There are far too few trained archaeologists to study the numbers of coins that have been found and there is no reason to sequester them all in museums.  The most important thing that can be accomplished is to ensure they are properly recorded, something that can be achieved through programs like the UK’s Portable Antiquity Scheme.  DM also asks that import restrictions not be imposed on widely circulating Roman Imperial coins.  He further believes that the current designated list should be subject to expert review because many of the coin types currently on that list circulated in quantity outside of the confines of Bulgaria. 

                The ANA’s written comments can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0006  (last visited June 7, 2023).

                The ACCG’s written comments can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0031 (last visited June 7, 2023).

                Louisa Greve (LG) opposes the MOU with the PRC.  The PRC is committing genocide against the Uyghurs.  CPAC should not brush aside this genocide and cultural cleansing in order to approve the renewal.  The current MOU authorizes import restrictions through the Tang period.  The PRC has sought to rewrite history through cultural cleansing to create a false narrative that Han was the dominant culture throughout what is today the PRC.  If CPAC and ECA approves this MOU, the Uyghur Human Rights Project (UYRP) will protest the decision. 

                The UYRP’s written comments can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0069 (last visited June 7, 2023).

                Peter Irwin (PI) is LG’s colleague at the UYRP.  The PRC has not worked to protect cultural heritage, but to purposefully destroy that of the Uyghurs.  Some 10,000 to 50,000 sites have been destroyed to date.  These includes mosques and up to 85% of the historic city of Kashgar. The MOU should not be extended in these circumstances. 

                Josh Knerly (JK) stated the Association of Art Museum Directors (AAMD) supports the extension of the MOU with the PRC contingent on Article II being modified to provide for multi-year museum loans with more significant objects and the PRC granting immunity from seizure for art sent there for display from the US.  The 2019 MOU dropped any meaningful requirements regarding loans.  Multi-year loans are necessary to make it cost effective to bring exhibits to the US.  Only multi-year loans allow museums to share the substantial costs involved. Another issue is US tariffs of 7.5% on Chinese art, which make it impossible for US museums to purchase Chinese art internationally.  Such tariffs give Chinese museums, dealers and collectors a competitive advantage compared to their American counterparts. 

                CPAC member Susan Schoenfeld Harrington asks JK if the MOU provides an opportunity for cultural exchange with the PRC.  JK indicates for this to happen, the PRC needs to change its policies on long term loans and immunity from seizure.

                The AAMD’s written comments can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0061 (last visited June 7, 2023).

                Dr. Rowan Flad (RF) indicates that the PRC has undertaken significant self-help measures to protect its own cultural patrimony.  A database of cultural heritage has been established.  There is active collaboration with American archaeologists. 

                RF’s written testimony may be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0055 (last visited June 7, 2023).

                Dr. Anne Underhill (AU) states that the PRC has met its obligations under the MOU.  It has protected archaeological sites from looting.  One innovative program has used drones to monitor a site for looting.  Another development is an increase in “indoor excavations,” for which entire depositional matrices are transported to covered labs for careful excavation in safe conditions.  In 2020, 4,200 crimes were investigated, involving 9,700 individuals. Some 93,000 artifacts were recovered.  Access to museums has improved.

                AU’s written comments can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2023-0016-0057  (last visited June 7, 2023).

                Dr. Rian Thum (RT) indicates that he could not make policy determinations, but he could state facts.  It is an unassailable fact that the PRC has failed to take measures consistent with the UNESCO Convention to protect its cultural patrimony.   It has demolished large parts of the Silk Road city of Kashgar.  It has recently bulldozed two very important Uyghur shrines, and any archaeological artifacts beneath them.  Another target is books.  Initially PRC authorities enforced a “blacklist” of forbidden books.  Now, however, that has been replaced with a “whitelist” which deems any book not explicitly permitted to be forbidden.  This has led to the confiscation and destruction of countless books, some of which are otherwise unknown to scholarship.  It has also prompted some Uyghurs to burn their own books in an effort to avoid being sent to concentration camps.  As was discussed regarding Bulgaria, modern boundaries don’t always correspond with ancient ones.  The same is also true with the status of the Uyghur region in the PRC.  RT observes all of the PRC’s achievements prior speakers associated with archaeological advocacy groups praised relate solely to the study of the PRC’s Han culture. These studies feed the PRC’s narrative.  The PRC seeks to rewrite history to make it appear that Han culture was always the dominant culture in the Uyghur areas.  RT expresses disappointment that his colleagues are unwilling to acknowledge the PRC’s intentional destruction of Uyghur cultural heritage for political purposes.

                No CPAC members asked any additional questions, and AJ concluded the public session approximately 10 minutes early.