IAPN and PNG Statement on Greek MOU

I hope to summarize today's proceeding when I can, but in the interim, here is what I said more or less at today's CPAC meeting:

             IAPN and PNG join 88% of the public comments posted on the regulations.gov website that express concerns about the MOU’s restrictions on ancient coins. The cumulative effect of these restrictions has already damaged private and institutional collecting, the preservation of coins, the study of the history they represent, the appreciation of other cultures, and the people to people contacts collecting brings.  And, of course, it has hurt the ability of Greek Americans to get in touch with their own culture.

Greece—which is still trying to dig out of a terrible sovereign debt crisis that has been exacerbated by an influx of Syrian refugees—needs our help, but import restrictions on coins are not the way to go.  As applied by US Customs to coin types made in Greece rather than exclusively found in Greece, they do nothing but hurt legitimate collectors who want to obey the law.  In this regard, I would like to commend Carmen Arnold-Biucchi for recognizing the wrong-headedness of an approach that focuses on where a coin is made rather than found.  However, her proposal that all coins found in Greece be designated will just sow more confusion and further damage legitimate coin collecting UNLESS Customs is directed only to detain and seize coins WHERE there is specific proof that they were illicitly exported from that country.  And, really, who is going to do that?

Restricting all Greek coins merely because some coins of the same type have been found in Greece would make a mockery of the plain meaning of the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act.  It requires that objects of “archaeological interest” must be first discovered within Greece and subject to Greek export control before they can be restricted.

          Let me also comment on some of the statements made by Dr. Nathan Elkins.   Elkins now suggests the designated list should include all coins “commonly found” in Greece.  However, Elkins previously advanced a different standard in his Journal of Field Archaeology article that attacks the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild and its test case.  There, Elkins claims that the current designated list is proper because it is limited to coins that “primarily circulated there.”  Such shifting positions totally ignore the statutory mandate and for that matter the past Greek Ambassador’s promise made on the record at the last MOU hearing that Greece only seeks restrictions on artifacts that are exclusively found there. 

Elkins (and Prof. Jane Evans) also point to an increase in applications for metal detectors as a reason for restrictions, but isn’t that instead a reason for Greece to be either more careful in issuing such permits or adopting something akin to the PAS in the UK? 

Next, Elkins suggests that a seizure of valuable Greek coins from Peter Weiss, a former ANS Trustee back in 2012 justifies restrictions.  However, he fails to mention that a number of the coins had old provenances from the early 20^th and late 19^th century. If anything, the seizure and repatriation of coins with such old provenances should raise serious questions about overreach by NY State authorities. 

Finally, Elkins points to a change in the ANS acquisition guidelines, but fails to note the ANS’ “cultural property” statement continues to recognize, “because most coins in private collections have been traded and held without any provenance, it is unreasonable to assume that a coin is stolen, illegally exported, or illegally imported merely because the holder cannot establish a chain of custody beyond receipt from a reputable source.”

          Rather than overbroad restrictions that adversely impact Americans interested in Greek culture, let’s consider modest steps archaeologists can take—like ensuring their sites are monitored in the long off-season and ensuring local people they employ are paid a fair living wage so they don’t have an incentive to loot to help make ends meet—instead. 

Simple steps like these could do far more to help protect Greece’s cultural patrimony than prohibitions on imports that only hurt legitimate collecting and people to people contacts and appreciation of Greek culture it engenders. Thank you.     

CPAC Meets to Discuss Renewal of MOU With Italy

On April 8, 2015, The US State Department Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) met in open session to discuss renewal of the Italian MOU.  The following CPAC members were present:  (1) Prof. Patty Gerstenblith, Chair (PG) (Public Member); (2) Rosemary Joyce (RJ)(Archaeology);  (3) Jane Levine (JL) (Trade); (4) Marta de la Torre  (MT)(Public); (5) Nancy Wilkie (NW) (Archaeology); and (6) James Willis (JW) (Trade).  The following members were absent:  (1) Nina Archabal  (Museum); (2) Barbara Kaul  (Public); (3) Lothar von Falenhausen (Archaeology); (4) Thomas Murray (Trade) and (5) Katherine Reid (Museum).   These absences are regrettable, though perhaps understandable given scheduling so soon after the Easter-Passover holiday.

The following individuals spoke in this order:  (1) Wayne Sayles (WS) (Ancient Coin Collectors Guild); (2) Peter Tompa (PT) (International Association of Professional Numismatists/Professional Numismatists Guild); (3) Sue McGovern-Huffman (SMH)(Association of Dealers and Collectors of Ancient and Ethnographic Art); (4) Doug Mudd (DM) (American Numismatic Association); (5) Karol Wight (Corning Glass Museum); (6) Judith Mann (JM) (St. Louis Art Museum); (7) Stephen Knerly (Association of Art Museum Directors); (8) Jane DeRose Evans (Temple University); (9) Alex Barker (University of Missouri); and (10) Carla Antonaccio (Duke University, Archaeological Institute of America and Society for American Archaeology).   The first seven speakers associated with the trade, collectors groups, educational associations and museums opposed the MOU, supported the MOU with major changes or opposed import restrictions on coins.  The last three speakers associated with the archaeological community gave the MOU unqualified support. 

There was also a six member Italian delegation present, but they did not speak in the public session.

WS-  The Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act protects what we call orphaned artifacts that have circulated in international trade, often for centuries, without any requirement or need for recorded provenance.  The law only allows import restrictions on coins that were "first discovered within" and "subject to export control" of a State Party with whom an MOU might be negotiated.  There was no legislative intent to restrict common coins.

WS's full statement may be found here.

Questions:  PG points to a Numismatica Ars Classica Catalogue which states that the firm will provide documentation for coins subject to US import restrictions.  She asks if NAC can provide such documentation why can’t other firms?  WS explains that NAC only sells high value coins that are more likely to have provenance information than common issues.   In response to a question by NW, WS indicates that NW’s views about “what is ethical” must be distinguished from what is required under the law when it comes to retention of provenance information.

PT- The 2011 decision to impose import restrictions on “coins of Italian types” was not made with CPAC’s knowledge or consent, and, indeed, CPAC member Robert Korver resigned on account of it.  CPAC should rethink current import restrictions and under no circumstances should restrictions be expanded to include late Roman Republican and Roman Imperial coins due to their wide circulation. Given budgetary realities, private collectors, not the Italian State, are the best stewards for common artifacts like coins.  

In prior MOUs, Italy pledged to consider ways to make it easier to secure export certificates for archaeological objects legitimately sold within Italy itself.  Unfortunately, nothing has been done to keep this promise, and, if anything it has become more difficult to procure them.  An IAPN member was even told that “The Americans” would not think Italy was serious about protecting its own cultural patrimony if such permits were granted.  Given this failure, CPAC should recommend that the MOU be modified so that U.S. Customs accepts proof of lawful export from any E.U. member state to help facilitate the legal import of coins “of Italian types” also legitimately for sale within Italy itself. 

PT's full statement may be found here.

Questions: PG thinks Korver’s statement that CPAC did not approve of restrictions should not be repeated because CPAC’s recommendations should be considered confidential.  PT notes that such information was supposed to be reported to Congress.  PG wonders whether the relatively few finds of Greek coins from Sicily and Italy that are found outside of Italy discussed in an attachment to IAPN’s written statement supports the assumption they predominantly circulated within Italy.  PT refers back to the plain meaning of the statute that requires artifacts to only be found there for there to be restrictions.  JW wanted to know whether the MOU was working to limit looting. PT believes that is more a function of aggressive police work.   In response to a question from MT, PT indicates that restrictions only harm those who comply with law because coins are so easy to smuggle.   He also notes that some European dealers don’t want to trade with Americans any longer given the red tape.

SMH- Restrictions have been detrimental to collecting.  Over time, this will negatively impact museums that benefit from donations from collectors.  Import restrictions disadvantage American collectors versus those in the EU. 

Questions: PG asks about ADCAEA.  SMH indicates it is a new organization with approximately 100 members.  In response to a question, SMH gives an example how restrictions have discouraged imports.  One of SMH’s clients wanted to bid on an Italian artifact in a Christie’s sale in London, but decided against it due to the red tape.

DM- Import restrictions will result in a loss of interest in ancient coins by collectors as the supply of Italian coins (ancient and otherwise) dries up. This will destroy the historically close relationship between advanced collectors and museums and inevitably impact donations of coins to numismatic institutions.  In the end these restrictions are likely to result in a drastic reduction in numismatic scholarship – much of which has been the result of the fruitful interaction of advanced private collectors and museum curators.

KW- There are too many barriers to long term loans.  American museums would like to display what Italian museums have in storage.  The problem is that personal contacts are necessary to get anywhere in Italy.  There are also concerns about expensive insurance and courier fees.

JM-Echoes concerns about fees and difficulty in getting loans.  It is very time consuming navigating the system.

Questions- PG wonders why so many museums have not asked for loans from Italy.  JM indicates it’s a chicken and egg problem.  The Italians make it so difficult that no one asks.

SK- Italy has not lived up to its promises in the MOU to provide long term loans.  The only museums to get long term loans are those that receive them as a quid pro quo for repatriating artifacts.   SK also reiterates the fact that museums have to deal with expensive courier and insurance fees.  Italy will not accept US State Department guarantees of indemnity and requires American museums to purchase insurance from Italian companies.

Questions- PG asks why some small museums have gotten loans.  SK explains you have to distinguish exposition loans from long term loans.  Exposition loans are set up by Italian for profit companies and the cost is considerable.  They do not satisfy Italy’s promises under Article II of the MOU.  In response to another question, SK also reiterates that Italy has done nothing to make it easier to secure export permits for purchases of artifacts legitimately for sale within Italy itself.

JE- Fresh coins on the market damage archaeology.  Locals and collectors and dealers should be educated to discourage looting.   Even common coins have value.  At archaeological sites like Sardes common bronze coins are mostly found.  Bronze coins were traded locally.   There is an exhibition in Philadelphia that features ancient coins.

AB- Asserts that all the legal requirements for a renewal of the MOU have been met.  AB’s school is involved in an innovative program with the Capitoline Museum.  It is studying material excavated in Rome in the late 1800’s and stored since.   It is funded privately.

CA- Excavates at Morgantina.  Italy is doing its best it can despite a severe budgetary crisis.  Metal detectorists prospect just outside the archaeological site and sometimes have come on site too during the period archaeologists are not excavating. 

Questions:  In response to a question by NW, CA indicates she believes illegal metal detectorists are searching for coins.  They have had some success deterring them with metal washers and other false targets.   

Organizations Overwhelmingly Against Renewal of Italian MOU or Import Restrictions on Coins

CPO previously reported that 94% of the public comments on the regulations.gov website either oppose the MOU's extension or import restrictions on coins.  It also appears that comments of  organizations representing the interests of their members also follow that trend.

Trade Associations

The International Association of Professional Numismatists, the Professional Numismatists Guild, and the International Association of Dealers in Ancient Art all opposed the MOU or import restrictions on the lawful trade in ancient coins.  

Educational Organizations

Both the American Numismatic Association and Ancient Coins for Education expressed concerns about import restrictions on coins. 

Professional Organizations

The Association of Art Museum Directors took a nuanced approach to the MOU.  While supporting the renewal, AAMD requested changes to encourage Italy to live up to its part of the bargain.

Advocacy Groups

Two groups that advocate for the interests of dealers and collectors, the Association of Dealers and Collectors in Ancient and Ethnographic Art and the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild, also argued against renewing the MOU or extending restrictions on historical coins.

In contrast, only one advocacy group associated with the archaeological lobby, the Lawyers' Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation, supports the extension unequivocally.  

All in all, 7 organizations oppose the renewal or import restrictions on coins, 1 organization supports the renewal, but with significant qualifications and only 1 organization supports the renewal unequivocally. 

More Double Standards at CPAC?

The New York Times has reported that the Cambodian Government asked for CPAC member Jane Levine, who is also employed by Sotheby's, to be recused from deliberating on the upcoming CPAC meeting relating to the renewal of the Cambodian MOU.   Presumably, the Cambodians are claiming that Levine cannot fairly discharge her duties given the ongoing dispute involving a Khmer statue.  The article indicates Levine was not going to attend the meeting anyway due to a conflict with a Sotheby's board meeting, but also suggests that the "scheduling conflict" may have provided Levine and Sotheby's with a graceful exit from the dispute.

But, if so, it's worth recalling that State failed to recuse an archaeologist who received an excavation permit from Cyprus despite the clear conflict of interest issues her participation in deliberations related to the renewal of the Cypriot MOU raised.

So, once again, is there one standard applied to collectors and the trade and another for archaeologists aligned with the State Department and source country bureaucracies?

Obama Appoints Another Archaeologist to CPAC

The Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) is supposed to represent a diversity of opinion, but President Obama's appointments to date only represent one view-- that of archaeologists who want to clamp down on the trade in cultural artifacts.

Indeed, President Obama's latest appointment to CPAC is yet another archaeologist who has advocated for import restrictions before the same Committee on which she will now serve. See http://www.politicaldigestonline.com/tag/property-advisory/ and http://saa.org/Portals/0/SAA/GovernmentAffairs/honduras_joyce_testimony.pdf

As the notice reads,

Rosemary A. Joyce, Appointee for Member, Cultural Property Advisory Committee

Rosemary Joyce is a professor of anthropology and former chair of the Anthropology Department at the University of California at Berkeley. She is one of the world's leading experts on Honduran archaeology and once served as an Assistant Director of the Peabody Museum at Harvard University and Director of the Hearst Museum at Berkeley. She has served as an officer of the Archaeology Division of the American Anthropological Association, on committees of the Society for American Archaeology and the Archaeological Institute of America, and is a member of the Society for Historical Archaeology. Her research includes comparative study of collections of Honduran archaeological materials in museums in Europe, the United States, and Central America, and historical research on the origins of museums in systematic collecting of objects beginning in the sixteenth century. Professor Joyce received her A.B. from Cornell University and her Ph.D. in Anthropology from the University of Illinois-Urbana.

President Obama has protested he is not anti-business, but so far the White House has appointed no one to CPAC who represents the interests of those who actually have to deal with import restrictions on a daily basis. Instead, only academic critics of the trade in cultural artifacts have been appointed. How about appointing some members of the trade (for whom three slots should be reserved under the CPIA)? Or, why not appoint some collectors to the three public slots or museum professionals to the two slots reserved for museum interests? Shouldn't consumers of artifacts subject to restrictions also be represented?

This is not a partisan issue. There are plenty of Obama supporters who collect ancient artifacts, but they may very well be less likely to vote for his reelection if his administration continues its present course of ensuring that an "archaeology over all" perspective dominates CPAC.

PNG Renews Commitment to Combat Import Restrictions on Coins

PNG has issued a press release indicating that it has renewed its commitment to fight against the imposition of import restrictions on coins. See: http://www.coinlink.com/News/general-collecting/professional-numismatists-guild-assists-in-combating-coin-import-restrictions/

PNG mainly represents U.S. coin dealers that sell U.S. coins. PNG also has concerns with issues such as Chinese counterfeits of U.S. coins. See http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2008/12/scary-counterfeit-coins-from-china.html

Given these other concerns, PNG's decision underscores the severe practical problems that import restrictions raise for the small businesses of the numismatic trade. Producing invoices is one thing. Documenting a coin's whereabouts potentially back 5 or more years is something entirely different, particularly when you are seeking that information about large numbers of low value artifacts like coins, from foreign sellers who can more easily sell to some other foreign buyer without such "red tape." Indeed, such information may not even be available at all.

This problem is exacerbated because U.S. customs has relied upon archaeologists with an axe to grind against collectors to help them detect and identify illicit "cultural property." This, of course, is a recipe for unfair enforcement.

To date, import restrictions have been imposed on ancient coins of Cypriot and Chinese type. The State Department has previously rejected calls for similar restrictions on ancient coins of Italian type.

PNG has also joined another trade group, IAPN, and the ACCG in seeking more information about such import restrictions in an ongoing Freedom of Information Act case.