For more evidence that American Museums' efforts to cooperate with the cultural bureaucracies of source countries like Italy has not bought them the peace that was promised, read Jason Felch's blog about the latest efforts to send the "Getty Bronze" to Italy. See http://chasingaphrodite.com/2012/05/04/the-gettys-bronze-italian-court-upholds-order-to-seize-a-getty-masterpiece/
He states,
Since 2005, the Getty has voluntarily returned 49 antiquities in its collection, acknowledging they were the product of illegal excavations and had been smuggled out of their country of origin. Hundreds of other objects were returned by other American dealers, collectors and museums. In the wake of those returns, several American museums struck cooperative deals with Italy and Greece that allow for long-term loans of ancient art.
But such agreements have not shielded American museums from further claims that ancient art in their display cases are the product of a black market responsible for the destruction of archaeological sites around the world. In March, Turkish officials revealed they were seeking the return of dozens of allegedly looted antiquities from the Getty, the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, the Cleveland Museum of Art and Harvard’s Dumbarton Oaks.
It's high time for American Museums to rethink their efforts to appease source countries and the AIA. Such appeasement does little in the end, but encourage other, ever more aggressive claims.
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Monday, May 7, 2012
Archaeologists Train Guns on Odessey Marine Again
Archaeologists- this time in the United Kingdom- have once again shot a broadside at Odessey Marine-- this time with regard to its deal with the UK Government to salvage the wreck of the HMS Victory. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/may/06/hms-victory-shipwreck-odyssey-excavation?newsfeed=true
For an interesting critique of the position of archaeologists with regard to Odessey's work, see http://www.culturalheritagelaw.org/blog?mode=PostView&bmi=711550
According to the author, Tom King, an archaeologist who was commenting not specifically about the Victory wreck, but rather generally in favor of Odessey's work:
1. Shipwrecks are deteriorating, both from natural causes and particularly as a result of modern methods of fishing, which plow up the bottom as effectively as agricultural land-levelers have torn up the Mississippi Valley.
2. Academic institutions and museums lack the financial resources to excavate everything that's being destroyed, or even a small percentage of it.
3. There are commercial salvagers who conduct very high quality archaeological excavations, and who have technological and financial resources that the academic community can’t touch (See, for example, the two recent publications by Odyssey Marine Exploration here and here --- which are substantial archaeological survey and site reports, some of which also document my point #1 above).
4. The only difference between such “salvage” and the work of academic underwater archaeologists (other than that, in my experience, Odyssey at least does better work) is that a percentage of the recovered material gets sold after it is described and analyzed.
5. Odyssey at least has rather strict protocols governing what can and can't be sold; what gets sold comprises mostly manufactured items of limited research interest;
6. We archaeologists used to claim that we were interested in the data from sites, not the goodies. The violent and near-mindless standard archaeological reaction to responsible shipwreck salvage proves that we've been dissembling all these years, or simply don't understand our own motivations.
For an interesting critique of the position of archaeologists with regard to Odessey's work, see http://www.culturalheritagelaw.org/blog?mode=PostView&bmi=711550
According to the author, Tom King, an archaeologist who was commenting not specifically about the Victory wreck, but rather generally in favor of Odessey's work:
1. Shipwrecks are deteriorating, both from natural causes and particularly as a result of modern methods of fishing, which plow up the bottom as effectively as agricultural land-levelers have torn up the Mississippi Valley.
2. Academic institutions and museums lack the financial resources to excavate everything that's being destroyed, or even a small percentage of it.
3. There are commercial salvagers who conduct very high quality archaeological excavations, and who have technological and financial resources that the academic community can’t touch (See, for example, the two recent publications by Odyssey Marine Exploration here and here --- which are substantial archaeological survey and site reports, some of which also document my point #1 above).
4. The only difference between such “salvage” and the work of academic underwater archaeologists (other than that, in my experience, Odyssey at least does better work) is that a percentage of the recovered material gets sold after it is described and analyzed.
5. Odyssey at least has rather strict protocols governing what can and can't be sold; what gets sold comprises mostly manufactured items of limited research interest;
6. We archaeologists used to claim that we were interested in the data from sites, not the goodies. The violent and near-mindless standard archaeological reaction to responsible shipwreck salvage proves that we've been dissembling all these years, or simply don't understand our own motivations.
Friday, May 4, 2012
Rutgers Publishes Urice and Adler Piece on Lawless State Department and CBP Actions in Cultural Property Field
The Urice and Adler article detailing the US State Department's and U.S. Customs' lawless approach to cultural property law has appeared on the Rutgers Law Review website here: http://www.rutgerslawreview.com/current-issue/ and http://www.rutgerslawreview.com/wp-content/uploads/archive/vol64/Adler_&_Urice_Macro%20Version.pdf
The article touches on the ACCG test case, currently before the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. In it, the authors state,
Cultural property policy in the United States has become increasingly lawless, for lack of a better term. In recent years, the executive branch has aggressively restricted the movement of cultural property into the United States, but it has repeatedly done so without regard for constraining legal authority. The result is a troubling disjunction between the executive branch’s (the “Executive”) current cultural property policies and the existing legal framework established by Congress and the Judiciary.
The article touches on the ACCG test case, currently before the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. In it, the authors state,
Cultural property policy in the United States has become increasingly lawless, for lack of a better term. In recent years, the executive branch has aggressively restricted the movement of cultural property into the United States, but it has repeatedly done so without regard for constraining legal authority. The result is a troubling disjunction between the executive branch’s (the “Executive”) current cultural property policies and the existing legal framework established by Congress and the Judiciary.
Archaeologists' Mantra Not Applicable to Coins
One of the mantras one hears from the archaeological community is that an artifact without context is worthless from a scholarly perspective. It's refreshing then to hear from archaeologists that the iconography of coins does indeed give them quite a bit of meaning. See http://coinarchaeology.blogspot.com/2012/04/call-for-papers-art-in-round-new.html
Thursday, May 3, 2012
Swank AIA Gala at Odds with Anti-Business, Due Dilligence Rhetoric?
The AIA has announced the success of its Spring Gala on its website. See http://aia.archaeological.org/gala/
But the optics of such a posh event are seemingly at odds with the anti-business rhetoric one sometimes hears from AIA members at hearings of the State Department Cultural Property Advisory Committee.
It's also interesting to note that the AIA auctioned off an antique Turkish kilim during the event. See http://aia.archaeological.org/gala/auction/fethiye-kilim Again, one wonders given all the rhetoric about due dilligence whether the item was imported into the United States consistently with Turkish export controls. See http://www.turkeytravelplanner.com/details/Shopping/AntiquitiesWarning.html
But the optics of such a posh event are seemingly at odds with the anti-business rhetoric one sometimes hears from AIA members at hearings of the State Department Cultural Property Advisory Committee.
It's also interesting to note that the AIA auctioned off an antique Turkish kilim during the event. See http://aia.archaeological.org/gala/auction/fethiye-kilim Again, one wonders given all the rhetoric about due dilligence whether the item was imported into the United States consistently with Turkish export controls. See http://www.turkeytravelplanner.com/details/Shopping/AntiquitiesWarning.html
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
Hillary More Attuned to Pop Culture than to Concerns of Numismatic Community?
I had to laugh a bit when I read that Hillary Clinton (or her staff) had time to write Jason Segal, a Hollywood personality, to decline an invitation to appear on his television show. See http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/hillary-clinton-writes-jason-segel-rejection-letter-318512
In contrast, Secretary Clinton has declined to respond at all to correspondence expressing the sincere concerns of the numismatic community about how import restrictions are damaging small business and the appreciation and study of ancient coins in the United States.
What gives?
In contrast, Secretary Clinton has declined to respond at all to correspondence expressing the sincere concerns of the numismatic community about how import restrictions are damaging small business and the appreciation and study of ancient coins in the United States.
What gives?
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
No Shipment to the USA
One of the major Swiss coin auction houses has announced that it will no longer ship ancient coins to the USA, due to the growing list of import restrictions (and presumably recent problems importers have had with US Customs with regard to unrestricted ancient coins).
Here is the communication that has been sent by Sincona (formerly the numismatic arm of UBS) to US bidders:
Dear Mr. xxx
We would like to thank you very much for your bids.
Due to specific US customs regulations, Sincona is no longer shipping ancient coins into the USA!
Either you can personally pick up your auction lots at our office in Zurich (or having someone to do so on your behalf) or you have to provide us with a mailing address within the European Community, where we can send your purchase. If we do not receive your respective directives within 48 hours before the sale, we are sorry but cannot accept your bids for ancient coins!
Thank you for your understanding.
Elements within the AIA, the archaeological blogosphere, and cultural bureaucracies here and abroad will no doubt [at least secretly] applaud such developments. On the other hand, others may now conclude that any speculative benefit import restrictions may have on the protection of archaeological sites is far outweighed by the direct, negative consequences they undoubtedly also have on US small businesses, collectors, and ultimately the study, preservation and appreciation of ancient coins and the cultural exchange it fosters.
Here is the communication that has been sent by Sincona (formerly the numismatic arm of UBS) to US bidders:
Dear Mr. xxx
We would like to thank you very much for your bids.
Due to specific US customs regulations, Sincona is no longer shipping ancient coins into the USA!
Either you can personally pick up your auction lots at our office in Zurich (or having someone to do so on your behalf) or you have to provide us with a mailing address within the European Community, where we can send your purchase. If we do not receive your respective directives within 48 hours before the sale, we are sorry but cannot accept your bids for ancient coins!
Thank you for your understanding.
Elements within the AIA, the archaeological blogosphere, and cultural bureaucracies here and abroad will no doubt [at least secretly] applaud such developments. On the other hand, others may now conclude that any speculative benefit import restrictions may have on the protection of archaeological sites is far outweighed by the direct, negative consequences they undoubtedly also have on US small businesses, collectors, and ultimately the study, preservation and appreciation of ancient coins and the cultural exchange it fosters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
