This is no Time to Expand Restrictions; It is time to Facilitate Lawful Trade and Encourage Archaeologists to do Their Part

This is what I said more or less at today's CPAC hearing.  I hope to summarize the public session to discuss a proposed MOU with Nigeria and proposed renewals with Greece and Bolivia shortly.

Thank you for this opportunity to speak to you on behalf of the Global Heritage Alliance.  I also drafted comments on behalf of IAPN and PNG, so feel free to refer any detailed questions about those papers to me.

First, as to the proposed renewal of the Greek MOU, we would echo IAPN’s and PNG’s concerns that this renewal is no excuse to expand current import restrictions.  Those restrictions purport to only apply to coin types that circulated locally in Greece in order to comply with the statutory requirements found in 19 U.S.C. § 2601.  That provision requires that such coins were “first discovered within” and are therefore subject to Greek export controls.  Under no circumstances should CPAC recommend expanding those restrictions to widely circulating trade coins which can be found most anywhere.  Those coins can be found in many countries, including ones with no MOU with the U.S.

CPAC already considered the issue in 2010, and rejected the proponent’s request to expand current restrictions further when the MOU was renewed in 2016.  There is simply no reason to revisit this decision, particularly when much of the coin trade is already being badly hurt by Covid related shut downs of coin shows.  Indeed to do so would not only be contrary to the statutory requirements, but the words of Greece’s Ambassador who back in 2010 stated that Greece’s request only concerned “antiquities that have been found exclusively on Greek territory.”

 Second, CPAC should also promote the lawful exchange of cultural artifacts. In particular, CPAC should recognize the obvious ramifications of Greece’s membership in the European Union (“E.U.”). Coins on the current designated list may be traded outside the E.U. with or without an export license according to the local law of Greece’s sister E.U. members. CPAC, the State Department and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) should honor these E.U. export controls, which, after all, are also binding on Greece as an E.U. member.

 Finally, with regard to both Greece and Bolivia, we would urge that archaeologists be asked to do their own part too.  CPAC should amend MOU Art. II to ensure archaeological missions pay diggers a fair living wage and that they be required to file site security plans which take advantage of modern electronic surveillance technology.  Both steps can be seen as “self-help measures” or “less drastic remedies” than import restrictions under 19 U.S.C. § 2602 (1) (B) and (C) (ii).

 Thank you.

PAS Under Threat?

This news should be of concern to everyone.   Due to budget pressures in the UK, the Portable Antiquities Scheme will be folded into another department at the British Museum and likely suffer budget cuts despite its popularity with both the public and many British archaeologists.   As a result, Roger Bland, who has run the PAS since its inception, will be leaving his post.   

The PAS has been instrumental in bringing archaeologists, metal detectorists and collectors together in a shared effort to help record the past.  So, perhaps it's not surprising that the BM states that the PAS is being placed in the Department of Learning, Volunteers and Audiences as part of an effort to help the BM with public outreach to help make it the "museum of the country" by working with partners outside of London. If so, CPO hopes that the BM will ensure this important asset remains adequately funded despite obvious budget pressures.  

For more, see here.  

Monopoly vs. Better, Faster, Cheaper

A turf battle in France between public and private sector archaeologists has led to the Louvre being occupied by angry public sector archaeologists.  Meanwhile, in the nearby United Kingdom as interested amateurs publish thousands of finds, materials excavated by professionals languish in warehouses.

Of course, the situation is far worse in the favorite countries of the archaeological lobby-- Cyprus, Greece, Italy and Egypt,   There, amateur archaeologists are treated the same as looters for profit  while underfunded and corrupt archaeological establishments are poor stewards of even the most  important artifacts.

Perhaps, the answer is more competition.  Unleash the passion of private individuals and groups in community archaeology efforts.  And, of course, let them share redundant artifacts with the state and landowers.  As long as items are properly recorded, preserved and published, why not?

An Archaeologist in Every Backyard?

From the looks of it, the archaeological establishment wants an archaeologist in every backyard to make sure you are not excavating anything of historical value on your own land: See http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/21/arts/television/spikes-american-digger-draws-concern-from-scholars.html?_r=2&hpw

The Spike TV show "American Digger" takes place on private land, but that is of little moment to Susan Gillespie, an associate professor of anthropology at the University of Florida. She is quoted as stating:

“Our main issue is that these shows promote the destruction and selling of artifacts which are part of our cultural heritage and patrimony.”

But Spike TV's star, Ric Savage, counters that,

“I’ve been a digger my whole life,” he said in a telephone interview on Monday. “But I never had the funds to get the right kind of detector or the time to go out and do it.” After he retired from wrestling more than a decade ago, he devoted himself to digging.

“When you find something of value and hold it in your hands, that’s what it’s all about for me,” he said. “It’s about touching history. You can read or watch history, but the only way you can touch or feel it is to dig it out of the ground.”

That’s about what the anthropologists and archaeologists would say as well. They just argue that this sort of entrepreneurial artifact hunting is antithetical to the more straightforward goal of preserving the past. And also that shows like this could, as Dr. Gillespie put it, “encourage people to dig not on private property” but on federal land, battlefields and American Indian burial grounds.

Mr. Savage said he avoided such areas. He seeks out private property, makes a deal with an owner to, say, dig up his yard or pool, and split with him the proceeds from the finds.
Before any dig takes place, his team, led by his wife, Rita Savage, researches the historical record of an area, compares period maps with contemporary maps and makes a guess about sites where something of value might be found.

That value is mainly derived from what private collectors might pay. For example, Mr. Savage, a Civil War buff, said that buttons from Confederate uniforms are so plentiful that museums have boxes of them that they no longer bother to put on display. But a private collector might still pay him several thousand dollars.

Is the archaeological establishment's campaign really about preserving artifacts or is it instead motivated by snobbery, self-promotion and a desire for control?

Perhaps Spike TV should start its own campaign: Archaeologists: NIMBY! And, of course, use the controversy to increase buzz and ratings.

Citizen Patrols as an Antidote to Looting?

The New York Times has published Roger Atwood's editorial suggesting that the Iraqis and others organize citizen patrols to combat looting. See http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/13/opinion/13atwood.html

While this approach sounds promising, I wonder if the successes in Peru and Mali can be replicated in a place like Iraq. I suspect at least part of the success in Peru and Mali may come from the links the local people feel towards the tombs of their ancestors. I wonder if the same feeling may be absent in Iraq where looting concentrates on pre-Islamic sites.

I also question whether "binoculars, cellphones, maybe a few dirt bikes and some basic training" is all that is needed. Though Atwood does not seem to want to admit it, most looters are poor, local people. That is not surprising. All too often locals receive few tangible benefits from archaeological digs in their midst. Some might be hired to help with the digging, but such artifacts that are found tend to be removed by the authorities to a national or regional museum.

Then, there is the question of common, redundant artifacts. Is it really necessary for the state to keep them all? Perhaps, a version of the U.K.'s Treasure Act and Portable Antiquities Scheme can be investigated as well. This would ensure that everything would be recorded, but that the State would only keep that which it realistically can take care of. The rest would be returned to the community for them to decide whether to display it locally or to sell it for the community's good. The community should also be rewarded in some fashion when something significant is found on its land. Archaeologists may believe they are "saving antiquities for everyone," but the local people will naturally feel that they should have rights to the artifacts found on their land.

Peru Officials Find Pre-Hispanic Textiles on Sale in Lima Tourist Market

This article posted on the Museum Security Network List piqued my interest:

Peru officials find pre-Hispanic textiles on sale in Lima tourist market

The Associated Press
Saturday, July 5, 2008

LIMA, Peru: Shoppers at a tourist market in Peru's capital could have netted greater bargains than they thought -- rare, pre-Hispanic textiles costing little more than a Machu Picchu magnet. Police and archaeologists raiding the block-long, outdoor Indian Market June 27 found swatches of centuries-old cloth -- mainly from the Chancay culture -- nestled among itchy llama sweaters and other mass-produced Peruvian handicrafts. The textiles, likely scraps from looted archaeological sites, were pasted atop decorative boxes and sewn into dolls that sold for as little as US$6.50, said Blanca Alva, chief of the Historic Patrimony Defense Department for the government's National Cultural Institute. Some dated as far back as the 13 th century. Alva didn't say why the material sold so cheaply, but she said the vendors knew exactly what they were selling. Some of the boxes decorated with ancient textiles sold for $50. "We saw with our own eyes a saleswoman hiding a box with swatches of the textiles in another stand, trying to get rid of the evidence," Alva said. According to Peruvian law, the destruction, alteration or sale of pre-Hispanic cultural artifacts can carry a prison sentence of three to eight years. Peru's famed pre-Inca art is featured around the world, especially the colorful weavings of ancient civilizations that thrived along the Andean nation's coast. But Peruvian officials are trying to crackdown on "huaqueros," or looters, who illegally traffic the artifacts, Alva said. The government has seized about 620 objects made with ancient textiles in three raids, one of them in the Duty Free shop of Lima's Jorge Chavez International Airport.

I obviously don't think its a good thing to cut up ancient textiles to decorated tourist trinkets. Also, Peruvian police have the right and obligation to enforce Peru's own laws aimed at stopping the looting of archaeological sites. At the same time, the fact that such artifacts were sold openly at a tourist market and even a duty free shop at the airport points to the fact that "the situation on the ground" can be quite different from what we hear from members of the archaeological community. Also, I suspect at least some members of the indigenous populations that make up the "looters" question the rights of the government to keep them from making a living off of artifacts left by their ancestors. I guess this is where "community archaeology" mentioned in a prior post should come in.

Perhaps, Peru should also create a licit market for such materials. Certainly, the Peruvian government does not have the funds to properly study, display and store all the artifacts from the ancient civilizations located within the bounds of the modern day nation state. A licit export market of more mundane material could help spread interest in Peru's ancient cultures, help stimulate tourism, help preserve artifacts, help fund Peruvian archaeology, and help poor indigenous populations put food on the table.

Community Archaeology

I am no fan of SAFE or what it normally posts on its website. However, I did find this article by Barbara Betz, a student at Macalester College in St. Paul, Minnesota, to be quite worthwhile:
http://www.savingantiquities.org/feature_page.php?featureID=10

Let's face it. Most "looters" are locals who may view foreign archaeologists and the governments that sponsor them with suspicion, if not outright hostility. It stands to reason then that the more archaeologists and host governments take into account the interests of local communities, the less likely the local populace will loot or otherwise damage archaeological sites.