An upcoming UNESCO Report will offer yet another opportunity to rehash damage done to the site of Babylon by US and Polish troops in the aftermath of the 2003 invasion. For more, see: http://abcnews.go.com/International/Story?id=6236787&page=1
The ancient Mesopotamian City, conquered in turn by the Assyrians, the Persians and then by the Greeks under Alexander the Great (who died there), was last the subject of serious archaeological exploration over a century ago. More recently, Saddam Hussein sought to aggrandize his regime through an association with the site. The results weren't pretty. Saddam sought to rebuild the city as a tourist attraction, complete with a modern palace in the shape of a ziggurat. Many of the bricks he used were even inscribed with his name in imitation of the ancient Babylonian kings. For more, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babylon At the time, however, there was not much of an outcry from the archaeological establishment. After all, Saddam had funded Iraqi archaeology lavishly for the very same reasons that he took interest in Babylon, and Iraq was a friendly place for foreign archaeologists (as long as they did not "rock the boat" at least).
In any event, despite a long history of abuse and neglect of the site, the Iraqi government has apparently asked UNSECO to focus a report about Babylon on damage to the site caused by US and Polish troops which had a base there. This was already the subject of substantial coverage in the media following an outcry from members of the archaeological establishment, many of whom had vehmently opposed the war.
While bashing the US Military might fit in well with the agendas of UNESCO, members of the archaeological community and certain Iraqi politicians, I'm not sure what another report will do to help ensure that the site will be properly rehabilitated.
The US has already agreed to throw more money at the site. However, with increasing concerns about Iraqi government corruption, one wonders whether this money will be well spent. See generally, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/18/world/middleeast/18maliki.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=corruption%20Iraq%20&st=cse (noting that the Iraqi government has dismissed fraud monitors in government agencies, including the Ministry of Culture).
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
More Success for Treasure Act and PAS as UK Commits to Funding
The Museum, Libraries and Archives Council has released a review of the Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS). The Report by an independent consultant can be found on the PAS website, at http://www.finds.org.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/pas-final.pdf , along with the latest Treasure Report covering 2005-2006 (http://www.finds.org.uk/documents/TAR2005_2006HighRes.pdf).
The report on the PAS is significant because it recognizes that the Scheme needs more funding. In so doing, the report notes,
PAS has overcome the scepticism of archaeologists and the mistrust of finders to create a partnership in the understanding of the past. Data from thousands of members of the public has helped create a new cultural map of England and Wales, with insights into rural life in Roman Britain, Anglo-Saxon trade, the Vikings and the links between Britain and the Byzantine world. PAS has filled a gap in museum services, re-established skills in identifying objects and created a virtual collection used by a quarter of a million individuals each year. It also seems to have reduced the amount of illicit detecting on archaeological sites.
The report on the PAS is significant because it recognizes that the Scheme needs more funding. In so doing, the report notes,
PAS has overcome the scepticism of archaeologists and the mistrust of finders to create a partnership in the understanding of the past. Data from thousands of members of the public has helped create a new cultural map of England and Wales, with insights into rural life in Roman Britain, Anglo-Saxon trade, the Vikings and the links between Britain and the Byzantine world. PAS has filled a gap in museum services, re-established skills in identifying objects and created a virtual collection used by a quarter of a million individuals each year. It also seems to have reduced the amount of illicit detecting on archaeological sites.
The accompanying Treasure Annual Report, which details finds made under the mandetory provisions of the Treasure Act, is similarly upbeat. As a press release indicates,
The Treasure Annual Report, announced today, records another dramatic increase on the amount of finds reported in the last year, with 749 objects reported in 2007 (up from 665 in 2006). The current report includes all finds which have passed through the Treasure Process in 2005 and 2006, 1,257 finds in total. Key finds include one of the best Iron Age torcs to be found in the last 50 years. The ‘Newark Torc’ provides an excellent example of the value of the Treasure Act, in that its discovery has forced historians and archaeologists to re-think the importance of the Trent Valley area 2,000 years ago. The proper recording of this find, and indeed all the finds listed in the report, have contributed inestimably to our understanding of our past.
Congratulations to Roger Bland, his colleagues at the British Museum and the PAS Finds Liaison Offices, and all the members of the public in Britain and Wales that have made the program such a success.
Saturday, November 15, 2008
AIA Lectures About Coins
Nathan Elkins has publicized lectures related to numismatics scheduled for the upcoming AIA meeting in Philadelphia. For more, see here: http://coinarchaeology.blogspot.com/2008/11/numismatics-and-archaeology-at-aia.html
It's good to see this emphasis on coins at the AIA meeting. I attended a symposium some years back where archaeologists who focused on coins complained about a general lack of interest in the subject in the wider world of archaeology. Still, one wonders how much of this emphasis on coins will be used as a justification for limiting the ability of collectors to study, display and preserve ancient coins themselves. If so, that would be pity.
It's good to see this emphasis on coins at the AIA meeting. I attended a symposium some years back where archaeologists who focused on coins complained about a general lack of interest in the subject in the wider world of archaeology. Still, one wonders how much of this emphasis on coins will be used as a justification for limiting the ability of collectors to study, display and preserve ancient coins themselves. If so, that would be pity.
ANS to Auction Off Greek Die Duplicates
Museums periodically deaccession artifacts. The American Numismatic Society ("ANS") has decided to deaccession duplicates of Greek coins in its collection. Gemini LLC will auction off the coins during the annual New York International Numismatic Convention. The lots may be found here: http://www.geminiauction.com/category.asp?inventorygroup=cc&category=ANS+Duplicate+Collection. This should be a great opportunity for collectors of Greek coinage to bid on some spectacular coins with old provenances from some famous collections.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Sharon Waxman Talks About "Loot"
Sharon Waxman, a former entertainment correspondent for the New York Times, promoted her new book, "Loot," in Washington, D.C. yesterday.
Waxman is not an archaeologist. She is not a museum person. She is no art historian. She is, however, a seasoned correspondent who is friends with Egypt's Antiquities Pharaoh, Zahi Hawass. She thus comes at these issues with considerable sympathy for source countries in their "tug of war" against Western Museums. Having said that, she also appears to take a practical, non-ideological approach to the complex issues surrounding restitution. Overall, she thinks that source countries should get beyond threats, lawsuits and the like.
Her presentation focused on how French and British colonialists built up the Louvre and the British Museum as nationalistic statements of their imperial grandeur. She then touched on how the Germans hoodwinked the Egyptians out of the magnificent bust of Nefertiti, a move that spelled the end of partage and the beginning of stringent cultural patrimony laws. She also touched upon Italy's and Greece's efforts to repatriate objects from the Getty and the MET. Overall, she calls for more transparency in how museum exhibits "got there" in the descriptions of the pieces in the gallery.
Waxman does not let source countries off the hook either. She suggested that their efforts at conservation and display are substandard and that corruption is endemic. Perhaps even worse, she indicates that source country museums have failed to connect with the general public. Many remain sleepy backwaters, full of art, but not a lot of visitors. Obviously, this does not bode well for the preservation, study and display of any artifacts, let alone those repatriated as part of nationalistic campaigns to restore source countries' "national patrimony."
Waxman specifically cited the story of the Lydian Hoard, a treasure of precious metal artifacts, illicitly excavated and exported from Turkey. After some legal wrangling, the MET repatriated the hoard to Turkey. The hoard was then displayed in a small, provincial museum,. There, it has only received some 500 visitors a year (compared to the 10,000 a day that visit the MET). Even worse, one of the major pieces was subsequently stolen from its galleries. In fact, the very same provincial museum director that helped effectuate the return of the Lydian Hoard was ultimately arrested for switching out the piece (a gold hippocampus) for a copy and selling off the original to pay for gambling debts and loose women. At a minimum, this episode has caused the Turkish government considerable embarrassment. More to the point, stories like this seriously undermine any "moral high ground" source countries rely upon to buttress their repatriation claims.
One major nit. From Waxman's commentary, it appeared that she did not much understand the effect of the 1970 UNESCO Convention. She seemed to think that it "banned" the import and export of antiquities. In fact, the Convention is not self-executing and many antiquities still are imported legally into the United States and other market countries each year.
In any event, I look forward to reading Waxman's book and perhaps providing some further comment.
Waxman is not an archaeologist. She is not a museum person. She is no art historian. She is, however, a seasoned correspondent who is friends with Egypt's Antiquities Pharaoh, Zahi Hawass. She thus comes at these issues with considerable sympathy for source countries in their "tug of war" against Western Museums. Having said that, she also appears to take a practical, non-ideological approach to the complex issues surrounding restitution. Overall, she thinks that source countries should get beyond threats, lawsuits and the like.
Her presentation focused on how French and British colonialists built up the Louvre and the British Museum as nationalistic statements of their imperial grandeur. She then touched on how the Germans hoodwinked the Egyptians out of the magnificent bust of Nefertiti, a move that spelled the end of partage and the beginning of stringent cultural patrimony laws. She also touched upon Italy's and Greece's efforts to repatriate objects from the Getty and the MET. Overall, she calls for more transparency in how museum exhibits "got there" in the descriptions of the pieces in the gallery.
Waxman does not let source countries off the hook either. She suggested that their efforts at conservation and display are substandard and that corruption is endemic. Perhaps even worse, she indicates that source country museums have failed to connect with the general public. Many remain sleepy backwaters, full of art, but not a lot of visitors. Obviously, this does not bode well for the preservation, study and display of any artifacts, let alone those repatriated as part of nationalistic campaigns to restore source countries' "national patrimony."
Waxman specifically cited the story of the Lydian Hoard, a treasure of precious metal artifacts, illicitly excavated and exported from Turkey. After some legal wrangling, the MET repatriated the hoard to Turkey. The hoard was then displayed in a small, provincial museum,. There, it has only received some 500 visitors a year (compared to the 10,000 a day that visit the MET). Even worse, one of the major pieces was subsequently stolen from its galleries. In fact, the very same provincial museum director that helped effectuate the return of the Lydian Hoard was ultimately arrested for switching out the piece (a gold hippocampus) for a copy and selling off the original to pay for gambling debts and loose women. At a minimum, this episode has caused the Turkish government considerable embarrassment. More to the point, stories like this seriously undermine any "moral high ground" source countries rely upon to buttress their repatriation claims.
One major nit. From Waxman's commentary, it appeared that she did not much understand the effect of the 1970 UNESCO Convention. She seemed to think that it "banned" the import and export of antiquities. In fact, the Convention is not self-executing and many antiquities still are imported legally into the United States and other market countries each year.
In any event, I look forward to reading Waxman's book and perhaps providing some further comment.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Cambodian MOU Posted
The State Department's Cultural Heritage Center has posted the new MOU with Cambodia on its website: http://culturalheritage.state.gov/Cambodia2008MOU.pdf
The MOU furthers the archaeological community's preference for loans (Art. II. A.) over the creation of licit markets. It also potentially justifies the use of public monies to fund archaeological activists under the guise of providing "technical assistance." (See Art. II. C. and http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2008/06/state-department-slush-fund-for.html)
The MOU also at least implicitly recognizes that poor conservation practices and corruption threaten Cambodia's cultural heritage. (See Art. II. E and F. See also: http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2008/09/cambodian-import-restrictions-extended.html)
While Cambodia undertakes to seek collaboration with Thailand over the illicit movement of Cambodian archaeological material (Art. II. G.), one suspects this may be easier said than done due to the strained relations between the two countries relating to control over the site of a sacred Temple Complex. See: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1851339,00.html
Finally, it is interesting to note in this era of financial turmoil, all these undertakings are subject to the availability of funds. (Art. III.)
The MOU furthers the archaeological community's preference for loans (Art. II. A.) over the creation of licit markets. It also potentially justifies the use of public monies to fund archaeological activists under the guise of providing "technical assistance." (See Art. II. C. and http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2008/06/state-department-slush-fund-for.html)
The MOU also at least implicitly recognizes that poor conservation practices and corruption threaten Cambodia's cultural heritage. (See Art. II. E and F. See also: http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2008/09/cambodian-import-restrictions-extended.html)
While Cambodia undertakes to seek collaboration with Thailand over the illicit movement of Cambodian archaeological material (Art. II. G.), one suspects this may be easier said than done due to the strained relations between the two countries relating to control over the site of a sacred Temple Complex. See: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1851339,00.html
Finally, it is interesting to note in this era of financial turmoil, all these undertakings are subject to the availability of funds. (Art. III.)
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Cultural Property Issues and the Election
One archaeologist/blogger associated with Savings Antiquities for Everyone ("SAFE") has already heralded Barack Obama on his historic win and with it the prospect that Prof. Patty Gerstenblith, a well known activist for the archaeological community, is now in a position to impact US policy: http://lootingmatters.blogspot.com/2008/11/congratulations-to-barack-obama.html
Not so fast. It is still probably much too early to draw too many conclusions on this point. The new administration will have much on its plate when it takes control of the government in January. One would think there might be higher priorities than the preservation of archaeological context in other countries through the use of import controls and/or criminal sanctions. In addition, wealthy collectors have also provided support for Obama. One would also suspect they would act as counterweights to the "archaeology over all" perspective of Professor Gerstenlith, SAFE and others.
In any event, hasn't Obama himself spoken eloquently about government accountability, transparency and ethics? See generally: http://blog.johnjosephbachir.org/2008/02/07/obama-speaking-on-government-accountability-transparency-and-ethics/ and http://www.barackobama.com/issues/ethics/
Isn't application of these principles to the State Department and CPAC what groups like the AAMD and ACCG (but curiously not SAFE) have demanded?
In other news, there has been at least some speculation that former Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns may be seeking a new position in the Obama Administration. (Burns authored an article critical of the McCain-Palin ticket shortly before the election: See: http://www.newsweek.com/id/165650/page/1.) If so, hopefully the Obama Administration or the Senate will apply these very same principles and query former Undersecretary Burns about the exact circumstances behind the controversial decision to impose import restrictions on coins of Cypriot type. While some might spin this as an "insignificant matter," how the decision was actually made potentially could speak volumes about Burns' approach to decision making.
Finally, Republican Phil English (Pa-3rd) has lost his bid to seek reelection. See: http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/politics/17897006/detail.html?rss=pit&psp=news Congressman English is best known in the cultural property field for his support for legislation to impose import restrictions on cultural artifacts of Iraqi and Afghan origin. When the Republicans controlled the House, Congressman English was the AIA's "go to" legislator for such efforts. Presumably, the AIA and other advocacy groups have been grooming other Democratic legislators for such a role.
Not so fast. It is still probably much too early to draw too many conclusions on this point. The new administration will have much on its plate when it takes control of the government in January. One would think there might be higher priorities than the preservation of archaeological context in other countries through the use of import controls and/or criminal sanctions. In addition, wealthy collectors have also provided support for Obama. One would also suspect they would act as counterweights to the "archaeology over all" perspective of Professor Gerstenlith, SAFE and others.
In any event, hasn't Obama himself spoken eloquently about government accountability, transparency and ethics? See generally: http://blog.johnjosephbachir.org/2008/02/07/obama-speaking-on-government-accountability-transparency-and-ethics/ and http://www.barackobama.com/issues/ethics/
Isn't application of these principles to the State Department and CPAC what groups like the AAMD and ACCG (but curiously not SAFE) have demanded?
In other news, there has been at least some speculation that former Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns may be seeking a new position in the Obama Administration. (Burns authored an article critical of the McCain-Palin ticket shortly before the election: See: http://www.newsweek.com/id/165650/page/1.) If so, hopefully the Obama Administration or the Senate will apply these very same principles and query former Undersecretary Burns about the exact circumstances behind the controversial decision to impose import restrictions on coins of Cypriot type. While some might spin this as an "insignificant matter," how the decision was actually made potentially could speak volumes about Burns' approach to decision making.
Finally, Republican Phil English (Pa-3rd) has lost his bid to seek reelection. See: http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/politics/17897006/detail.html?rss=pit&psp=news Congressman English is best known in the cultural property field for his support for legislation to impose import restrictions on cultural artifacts of Iraqi and Afghan origin. When the Republicans controlled the House, Congressman English was the AIA's "go to" legislator for such efforts. Presumably, the AIA and other advocacy groups have been grooming other Democratic legislators for such a role.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
