Please Help Save Roman Imperial Coin Collecting (and Express Concerns about Current or Possible Restrictions on Other Coins from Chile, Italy, Morocco, and Vietnam)

 The State Department has announced that Italy has requested a renewal of its current Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the United States.  See https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/12/30/2024-31257/proposal-to-extend-the-cultural-property-agreement-between-the-united-states-and-italy 

The State Department’s Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) will accept public comments concerning this renewal, as well as additional proposed extensions with Chile and Morocco and a newly proposed MOU with Vietnam on or before January 27, 2025.  See https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/12/30/2024-31255/cultural-property-advisory-committee-meeting  To provide written comments,  use https://www.regulations.gov, enter the docket DOS-2024-0048 and follow the prompts.  Alternatively, try to use this direct link:  https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOS-2024-0048-0001

You do not have to be a US Citizen to comment.  In fact, it would be good for the State Department to hear from collectors and members of the trade in Italy and elsewhere about how import restrictions will negatively impact the people to people contacts and appreciation of coins and the cultures that make them as well.

CPAC will also conduct a public hearing to accept oral comments from the public on February 4, 2025 from1:00-2:00 PM EST.  Id.  Those interested in providing oral comments must contact the State Department Cultural Heritage center at CULPROP@state.gov as indicated in the above notice on or before January 27, 2025 to express an interest in speaking.

The Proposed Extension with Italy and the Possible Expansion of Import Restrictions to Include Late Roman Republican and Roman Imperial Coins

That MOU with Italy first authorized import restrictions on Italian cultural artifacts from the Pre-Classical, Classical and Imperial Roman periods in 2001.  The restrictions were extended 2006 and again in 2011, 2016, and 2021.  The 2011 renewal added new import restrictions on Greek, early Republican and Provincial coins from the early Imperial Period.  Coins types from the later Roman Republic (post 211 BC) and Roman Imperial Coins were excluded from any import restrictions.

No additional import restrictions have been imposed for Italy, but since the last renewal in 2021, new import restrictions have been imposed on Roman Imperial coins on behalf of  Afghanistan, Egypt, Pakistan and Ukraine despite evidence being presented that comparatively few such coins are found in these countries.  In addition, at a meeting attended by representatives of the numismatic community, CPAC’s executive director indicated that she “did not see a reason” why Roman Imperial coins could not be restricted.  Given this information, the numismatic community must assume (absent clear assurances to the contrary which have not been provided) that the extension of the current MOU with Italy will be used to impose new import restrictions on  Roman Imperial Coins—the heart of ancient coin collecting—as well.   Accordingly, if one feels strongly about their continued ability to collect Roman Imperial and other historical coins and artifacts, they should comment on the regulations.gov website.  Why?  Because silence will only be spun as acquiesce.  

So, serious collectors should oppose yet another renewal as unnecessary and detrimental to the appreciation of Italian culture and the people to people contacts collecting brings.  Moreover, they should clearly state under no circumstances should import restrictions be extended to Roman Imperial coins.   Collectors should also weigh in generally on any potentially overbroad list for Vietnam as well as the overbroad lists already place on coins from Italy and Morocco.  For more, see https://accguild.org/news/13409276 There are no current import restrictions for Spanish Colonial or early Republican era coins from Chile, but we shouldn’t take that for granted either. 

A.  Background for Coin Collectors

There are large numbers of coin collectors and numismatic firms in the US.  Very few collectors do so to “invest.”  Most collect out of love of history, as an expression of their own cultural identity, or out of interest in other cultures.  All firms that specialize in ancient coins in the US are small or micro businesses. Private collectors and dealers support much academic research into coins.  A further clamp down on collecting will inevitably lead to less scholarship.

When what became the Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA) was being negotiated, one of the State Department’s top lawyers assured Congress that “it would be hard to imagine a case” where coins would be restricted.   In 2007, however, the State Department imposed import restrictions on Cypriot coins, against CPAC’s recommendations, and then misled the public and Congress about it in official government reports.  What also should be troubling is that the decision maker, Assistant Secretary Dina Powell, did so AFTER she had accepted a job with Goldman Sachs where she was recruited by and worked for the spouse of the founder of the Antiquities Coalition, an archaeological advocacy group that has lobbied extensively for import restrictions.  Since that time, additional import restrictions have been imposed on coins on behalf of 19 additional countries, with more import restrictions being considered. 

The cumulative impact of import restrictions has been very problematical for collectors since outside of some valuable Greek coins, most coins simply lack the document trail necessary for legal import under the “safe harbor” provisions of 19 U.S.C. § 2606.  The CPIA only authorizes the government to impose import restrictions on coins and other artifacts first discovered within and subject to the export control of Italy. (19 U.S.C. § 2601). Furthermore, seizure is only appropriate for items on the designated list exported from the State Party after the effective date of regulations.  (19 U.S.C. § 2606).  Unfortunately, the State Department and Customs view this authority far more broadly.  In particular, designated lists have been prepared based on where coins are made and sometimes found, not where they are actually found and hence are subject to export control.  Furthermore, restrictions are not applied prospectively solely to illegal exports made after the effective date of regulations, but rather are enforced against any import into the U.S. made after the effective date of regulations, i.e., an embargo, not targeted, prospective import restrictions.  While it is true enforcement has been spotty,  the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild has uncovered information about situations where coins have been detained, seized and repatriated where the importer cannot produce information to prove his or her coins were outside of a country for which import restrictions were granted before the date of restrictions.  See https://new.coinsweekly.com/news-en/customs-repatriation-to-greece-raises-questions/

  B.  What You Can Do

Admittedly, CPAC seems to be little more than a rubber stamp these days.  Still, to remain silent is to give the cultural bureaucrats and archaeologists with an ax to grind against collectors exactly what they want-- the claim that any restrictions will not be controversial.  Moreover, a past CPAC member who is a coin collector  has confirmed that comments do matter because they give support to those CPAC members supportive of collectors and collecting.

For written comments, use http://www.regulations.gov, enter the docket [DOS-2024-0048] and follow the prompts to submit your comments.  Alternatively, click this link (https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOS-2024-0048-0001 and click on the Blue “Comment Now” Button which should pull up a screen that allows you to comment.  (Please note comments may be posted only UNTIL January 27, 2025 at 11:59 PM.)

Please also note comments submitted in electronic form are not private. They will be posted on http://www.regulations.gov. Because the comments cannot be edited to remove any identifying or contact information, the Department of State cautions against including any information in an electronic submission that one does not want publicly disclosed (including trade secrets and commercial or financial information that is privileged or confidential pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 2605(i)(1)).

C.  What Should You Say?

What should you say?  Provide a brief, polite explanation about why the renewal with Italy should be allowed to expire or be limited.  Question CPAC why it’s necessary to renew the Italian MOU yet again when looting is under control due to Italy’s aggressive enforcement efforts as well as  economic development.  Indicate how restrictions will negatively impact your business and/or the cultural understanding and people to people contacts collecting provides.   Coin collectors should add that it’s typically impossible to assume a particular coin (especially Roman ones) was “first discovered within” and “subject to the export control” of Italy.  In fact, by far most Roman Imperial coins are found not in Italy, but on the Empire’s frontiers.  You might add that Roman coins are very common (The Coin Hoards of the Roman Empire database lists over 6 million such coins. See https://chre.ashmus.ox.ac.uk/.) and widely and legally available for sale elsewhere, and point out the absurdity of restricting coins freely available in Italy itself.  Finally, you don’t have to be an American citizen to comment—you just need to be concerned enough to spend ten or so minutes to express your views on-line.  Comments from Italian collectors and members of the trade are particularly welcome! 

To the extent you also want comment on the proposed MOU with Vietnam, as well as the proposed renewals with Morocco and Chile, you can again make the point that for the most part, coins found in those countries circulated well outside their borders as well so its difficult to assume that any particular coin is the “cultural property” of a given country.

Personalized comments are best, but feel free to use this submission as a model: 

Dear CPAC:

Enough is enough. The current MOU with Italy, which has been in effect since 2001, should be allowed to lapse. It is no longer necessary because Italy’s own aggressive enforcement efforts as well economic development have greatly diminished any looting.  Moreover, the MOU negatively impacts legitimate collecting, the appreciation of Italian culture and people to people contacts collecting brings. At a minimum, please free all ancient coins from restriction. Such coins are openly and legally available for sale within Italy itself. It makes absolutely no sense to continue to restrict American access to what Italians themselves have enjoyed since the Renaissance. Finally, please do not recommend new restrictions on late Roman Republican and Roman Imperial Coins.  These coins are extremely common, with at least 6 million known to scholars. As the products of a great empire, these coins circulated throughout Europe, the Middle East and beyond. They “belong” not to Italy, but to us all.

As for current and potential restrictions on other coins from Vietnam, Chile and Morocco, I also oppose such restrictions.  Again, as a general rule coins circulated outside their modern borders in quantity, and one cannot assume that they are the “cultural property’ of a given country.

Sincerely,

xxx

Cultural Property Advisory Committee Meeting, February 4-6, 2025; New MOU for Vietnam; Renewals for Chile, Italy and Morocco- Comments Now Being Accepted!

 In what has become a holiday “tradition,” the State Department has provided advance notice of an upcoming Cultural Property Advisory Committee meeting on Feb. 4-6, 2025.

 The meeting will cover a proposed new cultural property MOU with Vietnam as well as renewals for Chile, Italy, and Morocco.  The advanced notice can be found here:

https://eca.state.gov/highlight/cultural-property-advisory-committee-meeting-february-4-6-2025

 Coin collectors and others should be particularly concerned if as has been the case in several recent renewals, that the renewal with Italy could be used as an opportunity to apply new restrictions to items of more recent vintage.  

Hopefully, the renewal of the MOU with Italy will not be used to expand the current designated list  to additional coin issues, particularly those of the late Republic and Roman Empire.  The current MOU with Italy does not include Roman Republican coins post 211 BC or or any Roman Imperial coins, but recently the State Department imposed restrictions on such coins on behalf of Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Ukraine, despite the lack of evidence many are found there.  

The numbers of such coins found in Italy are also relatively small compared to those found elsewhere.  Additionally, there is a huge legal internal market in Italy itself which undercuts any claim that import restrictions will lessen demand for "looted" material.  

The real issue of course is that US Customs takes the position that the mere placement of coin types on the designated list is sufficient for Customs to "assume' they were illicitly exported from a particular country absent specific evidence to the contrary.  Of course, such an assumption has no factual basis behind it, but to date courts have been unwilling to question State Department and Customs discretion in this area.   

Moreover, coin collectors and the general art trade should be concerned about another recent trend, imposing restrictions on everything and anything identifiable as being produced or used by a given culture down to 1775 for “archaeological objects” and even more recently for “ethnological objects” which have included paintings, most recently for Ukraine.  See https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/09/10/2024-20385/emergency-import-restrictions-imposed-on-categories-of-archaeological-and-ethnological-material-of

Such restrictions place embargoes on anything and everything ever made or used in a given country despite the negative impacts such restrictions have on legitimate trade and cultural exchange.  

Here are the relevant dates:

January 27, 2025- All written comments and requests to speak due.

February 4, 2025 @ 1 PM- Public meeting.

CPO will provide updates about this CPAC hearing, once the regulations.gov starts accepting comments.  Hopefully, there will also be further clarity if  there will be a move to expand current restrictions under the MOU with Italy to more recent "Italian" material.  

Addendum (12/29/24):

The Federal Register for Monday, December 30, 2024, includes formal notices for a new MOU with Vietnam and renewals with Chile, Italy and Morocco as well as the upcoming CPAC meeting.  Although a regulations.gov docket number is provided  (DOS-2024-0048) the link to comment is not yet available.  Here are the notices:  

Cultural Property Agreement Extension:

United States and Italy

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/12/30/2024-31257/proposal-to-extend-the-cultural-property-agreement-between-the-united-states-and-italy

Cultural Property Protection:

The Socialist Republic of Vietnam

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/12/30/2024-31254/notice-of-receipt-of-request-from-the-government-of-the-socialist-republic-of-vietnam

Hearings, Meetings, Proceedings, etc.:

Cultural Property Advisory Committee

 https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/12/30/2024-31255/cultural-property-advisory-committee-meeting

Written comments and requests to speak at Feb. 4, 2025 hearing due on or before January 27, 2025.

Written comments can be posted on regulations.gov website:

Docket No. DOS-2024-0048

Note, as of 12/29/24 this docket was not posted. 

Proposal to Extend the Cultural Property Agreement between the United States and Chile

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/12/30/2024-31256/proposal-to-extend-the-cultural-property-agreement-between-the-united-states-and-chile

Proposal to Extend the Cultural Property Agreement between the United States and Morocco

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/12/30/2024-31258/proposal-to-extend-the-cultural-property-agreement-between-the-united-states-and-morocco

Addendum:  (12/31/24): Comments are now being accepted here: https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOS-2024-0048-0001

ACCG Secures Heavily Redacted FOIA Release of Materials Related to "Invitation Only" Roundtable to Sign Controversial MOU with Saudi-Supported Faction in Yemen

The Ancient Coin Collectors Guild has secured heavily redacted materials in response to its FOIA request  relating to a controversial "invitation only" roundtable organized by the Antiquities Coalition, a mysteriously well-funded archaeological advocacy group with ties to Middle Eastern dictatorships. The ACCG has appealed the State Department's decision to redact the materials, but what was produced demonstrates that the Biden-Harris State Department has gone even further than prior administrations in favoring archaeological advocacy groups and cutting out other interested stake holders representing trade, collector, museum, and religious and ethnic minority interests.  All this advocacy on behalf of a foreign governments also begs the question why these archaeological advocacy groups apparently do not feel a need to register under either the Lobbying Disclosure Act or Foreign Agents Registration Act.

Summary of CPAC Meeting to Discuss Proposed Agreements or Emergency Import Restrictions for Lebanon and Mongolia and Renewal of Agreement with El Salvador

On September 24, 2024, the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) met in a virtual public session to accept public comments regarding proposed Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) or emergency import restrictions with Lebanon and Mongolia and a renewal of a current agreement with El Salvador.  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:

Lebanon

Protection is sought for archaeological material from the Paleolithic period (approximately 700,000 years ago) to 1774 CE, including, but not limited to, objects in stone (such as tools, statues, figurines, sarcophagi, stelae, architectural elements, seals, amulets, objects of daily use, jewelry, and ceremonial and cultic objects), ceramic (such as vessels, figurines, objects of daily use, and ceremonial and cultic objects), metal (such as vessels, statues, figurines, jewelry, tools, objects of daily use, weapons and armor, and coins), plaster (such as wall paintings and frescoes), glass (such as vessels, seals, jewelry, and objects of daily use), bone and ivory (such as carvings, seals and amulets, jewelry, and objects of daily use), wood (such as panel paintings, icons, and objects of daily use), textiles, manuscripts (on parchment, paper, and leather), and rare specimens of fossilized fauna and flora.

Protection is additionally sought for ethnological material dating from the 17th century until today, including all cultural works, artifacts, and artworks (such as textiles, traditional garments, headdresses, accessories and jewelry, liturgical objects, manuscripts, books, archives, weapons and armor, and objects of daily use) crafted, made, or produced by Lebanese artists, craftsmen, writers, symbolic personalities, or made on the Lebanese territory and considered unique and representative of the diversity of the Lebanese identity and its recognition worldwide (such as works of Gibran Khalil Gibran and famous Lebanese painters).

Mongolia

Mongolia seeks protection of its cultural artifacts including archaeological material, including stone tools and statues; terracotta architectural materials and containers; religious and ceremonial objects; ornaments decorated with gold, silver, bronze, and precious stones; metal objects including coins, equipment, tools, and weapons;  manuscripts and objects used to create or bind manuscripts; wooden objects; carpets; clothing and shoes; and objects made from animal hide, animal skin, and wool.  The protection would also include hand-made ethnological materials including religious figures of deities and other religious objects; shoes and clothes; decorative items; handwritten manuscripts and other literary objects; fine art items; sewn, knit, and embroidered items; items used in traditional ceremonies or festivals; traditional ger housing materials; agricultural equipment; and musical instruments.

 El Salvador

Extending the El Salvador MOU would continue import restrictions on categories of archaeological material ranging in date from approximately 8000 B.C. to A.D. 1550 and certain ethnological material, including categories of ecclesiastical material from the Colonial period to the first half of the twentieth century (A.D. 1525 to 1950).

Cultural Property Advisory Committee Meeting, September 24-26 2024, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Media Center (amended August 27, 2024) available at  https://eca.state.gov/cultural-property-advisory-committee-meeting-Sept-24-26-2-24 (last visited September 24, 2024). 

The CPAC members did not introduce themselves before the public session, but CPAC currently includes the following individuals: (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.  None of the members identified themselves to the speakers so it was difficult to ascertain who asked the few questions that were posed.

The Chair, Alexandra Jones, welcomed the speakers.  She thanked the speakers for attending, indicated that all comments had been read, and that speakers would be given five minutes each to present their oral comments. 

Dr. Ömür Harmanşah spoke as the Vice President for Cultural Heritage, Archaeological Institute of America (“AIA”).  Given time constraints, he focused his comments on Lebanon and Mongolia.  He stated that the AIA was founded in 1906 and that today it has some 200,000 members which includes professionals and members of the interested public.  Dr. Harmanşah indicated that Lebanon’s cultural heritage has been endangered since the 1975-1991 Civil War when looting was at its peak.  In Mongolia, a 2019 report indicated that most tombs had been looted.  Lebanon and Mongolia both have legislation meant to address looting that satisfies the “self-help” requirement.  In 2003, the Lebanese government partnered with the World Bank and bilateral agencies to implement what is known as the Cultural Heritage and Urban Reconstruction Project (CHUD) “to help conserve and restore the country’s cultural heritage in five of its historic cities: Baalbek, Byblos, Saida, Tripoli, and Tyre."

The AIA’s written comments about Lebanon can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0028-0054

The AIA’s written comments about Mongolia can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0028-0055

The AIA’s written comments about El Salvador can be found here: 

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0028-0056

Kate FitzGibbon spoke as the executive director of the Committee for Cultural Policy.  She indicated that since she served on CPAC reasonable restrictions on trade have been replaced by blanket restrictions and perpetual MOUs.  The Lebanese government is beholden to Hezbollah, an Iranian proxy, putting objects potentially at risk.  Most looting in Lebanon occurred during the civil war of the 1990s under the direction of various militias.  There are only five paid Lebanese archaeologists who are expected to protect the entire country, which is impossible.  There is no “self-help” whatsoever.  In El Salvador, a blockade on art has done nothing to protect cultural heritage from destruction due to development.   Mongolian material is not going to the US, but China.  Much of what may appear on a designated list for Mongolia would be either Chinese made Buddhist religious artifacts, some of which were taken to Mongolia by Tibetans fleeing Chinese oppression.  It would be a shame if a MOU were used to take such material away from Tibetan exiles.

The Committee for Cultural Policy’s and the Global Heritage Alliance’s written comments on all the requests can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0028-0048

Elias Gerasoulis spoke as executive director of the Global Heritage Alliance.  He indicated that the MOU with Lebanon cannot be divorced from the political situation in the country.  El Salvador cannot meet the “self-help” requirement because it has prioritized construction projects over protecting cultural heritage.  It is important that the State Department hold countries seeking MOUs to certain standards.

Peter Tompa spoke as executive director for the International Association of Professional Numismatists (IAPN).  He made the following three points.  First, CPAC should reject any cultural property agreement or emergency import restrictions for Lebanon.  US  Customs should not be made the “culture cop” for a government dominated by Hezbollah, a terrorist group and proxy for Iran’s dictatorial regime.  Repatriating objects to a war zone where they could be destroyed also makes no sense.  Second, the State Department has misleadingly claimed that MOUs only stop trafficked property from entering the US and promote legal cultural exchange.  In fact, MOUs are instead used to claw back coins and other designated archaeological and ethnological material from legitimate markets abroad, particularly in Europe.  Third, there is no factual basis for the assumption that coins minted or found in El Salvador, Lebanon or Mongolia necessarily come from those countries.  IAPN presented scholarly evidence that coins minted or found in these countries are also found elsewhere regionally or internationally in much greater numbers.  The Shekel of Tyre is a specific example.  This coin was used to pay the Temple Tax and is found in great numbers in Israel. 

Peter Tompa’s oral statement can be found here:  https://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2024/09/cpac-meeting-on-new-agreements-or.html

Peter Tompa’s personal comments can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0028-0040

IAPN’s comments on Lebanon can be found here:

 https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0028-0021

IAPN’s comments on Mongolia can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0028-0023

IAPN’s comments on the extension of the current agreement with El Salvador can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0028-0019

Randy Myers spoke as a board member on behalf of the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild.  He also spoke on behalf of the American Numismatic Association.  He touched on four points.  First, the State Department continues to provide inadequate notice to the public for upcoming MOUs.  This makes it difficult to solicit informed public comment.  In this case, notice was first provided 32 days before the CPAC hearing, and it only became clear 21 days in advanced that both Lebanon and Mongolia sought import restrictions on coins.  Even here, no details were provided about what coin types were included in the request, and any factual basis for doing so.  Second,  Myers reiterated Tompa’s point about “Lebanese” coins circulating well beyond Lebanon, such that it is impossible to assume any particular coin was found there.  Myers mentioned that the largest hoard of “Shekels of Tyre” (over 4,000 coins) was found in Israel, not Lebanon.  Finally, Myers indicated that there could be no credible “self-help” measures since Lebanon is a failed state.  He further noted that in addition to Hezbollah’s malign influence, the Cultural Ministry itself is run by Amal, another militia which is also a proxy of Syria and Iran. 

The Ancient Coin Collectors Guild’s and the American Numismatic Association’s comments regarding Lebanon can be found here:

 https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0028-0022

After Myers spoke, an unidentified Committee members asked Tompa, FitzGibbon or Myers why they thought the US Government would be repatriating antiquities to terrorists.  Tompa explained that Hezbollah, a terrorist organization, was the most powerful force in the country, effectively controlling its government.  He further indicated that the US Government and Manhattan DA’s office had already given over antiquities to the Lebanese government. 

Andrew G. Vaughn spoke as executive director of the American Society of Overseas Research (ASOR).  Vaughn visited Lebanon back in 2017 and 2019.  He was impressed by the efforts of Lebanese authorities to overcome obstacles caused by war, and now more than any other time the US should support Lebanon by entering into a MOU.  He maintained that during times of conflict, concerns about looting increase, which would be addressed by such a MOU.  Recently, 60 Lebanese archaeologists visited the US for training.  Lebanon needs our support to continue to use cultural heritage to bring its diverse population back together.  Vaughn quotes President Biden that the US must “lead not by example of power, but power of our example.”  He also maintains that Mongolia is also doing a wonderful job protecting its own cultural heritage. 

Vaughn did not submit his own written comments, but here are comments submitted on Lebanon on ASOR’s behalf:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0028-0043

Dr. Jeffrey H. Altschul spoke on behalf of  Coalition for Archaeological Synthesis regarding Mongolia.  He indicated that looting is a serious problem that Mongolian authorities are trying to address.  Mongolians also can benefit from interacting with their American colleagues. 

Dr, Altschul’s written comments can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0028-0028

Dr. Julia Clark of Nomad Science spoke about looting in Mongolia.  She indicated that looters had focused on materials buried in permafrost because they tend to be well preserved. They keep items like cloth with gold thread and discard less salable items as well as human remains.  A MOU is necessary to disincentivized this type of looting and empower Mongolian archaeologists.  Dr. Clark is asked if looting occurs elsewhere. She indicates it has. 

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

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0028-0036

Carlos Flores Manzano is a PhD student at Yale from El Salvador.  He speaks for a renewal of the current MOU.  He indicates that while urban development is a problem, El Salvador is trying to address these issues as best as it can. Recently, the Cultural Ministry and Foreign Ministry have cooperated in seeking repatriations from abroad. 

Mr. Flores Manzano’s written statement can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0028-0041

The docket contains all written statements, the vast majority of which opposed import restrictions on coins.  See https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOS-2024-0028-0001/comment

Notable statements include that of the American Israel Numismatic Association, which can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0028-0025;

CINOA which can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0028-0012;

and the Oriental Numismatic Society which can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2024-0028-0020.

The speakers finished 15 minutes early.  As there were no additional questions beyond the two posed by CPAC members, the Chair thanked the speakers and ended the session abruptly.

CPAC Meeting on New Agreements or Emergency Restrictions for Lebanon and Mongolia and Renewal for El Salvador

 Here is what I said more or less during today's CPAC hearing: 

Thank you for this opportunity to comment on behalf of IAPN and the micro businesses of the numismatic trade and the collectors they service.

1.   CPAC should reject any cultural property MOU or emergency import restrictions with Lebanon. US Customs should not be made the “culture cop” for a government dominated by Hezbollah, a terrorist group and proxy for Iran’s dictatorial regime.  Additionally, no decision should be made to repatriate artifacts to Lebanon when Israel and Hezbollah are gearing up for a full scale war.  Repatriated antiquities are in danger of being destroyed or sold to fund Hezbollah’s jihad against America and Israel.

2.   While the State department has claimed and I quote “Agreements create import restrictions that stop trafficked cultural property from entering the United States while encouraging the legal exchange of cultural property for scientific, cultural, and educational purposes”  that is untrue. They are actually applied far more broadly as embargoes that “claw back” common items like coins that are available for sale and export from legal markets abroad, particularly in Europe.  Once a coin type is “listed,” US Customs can assert its authority to detain, seize, and forfeit similar coins under the assumption they “belong” to the particular country for which import restrictions have been granted. 

3.   There is no factual basis for such an assumption for coins minted or found in El Salvador, Lebanon or Mongolia.  Until recently, these countries were parts of much larger Empires.  One simply cannot assume that such coins are only found there, a key requirement of the CPIA. IAPN has provided scholarly evidence demonstrating that coins struck in Lebanon circulated regionally and even internationally.  Notably, “Shekels of Tyre” that were accepted to pay the Temple tax are often found in Israel. Scholars believe some may have been made to order for King Herod or that they may even have been struck in Israel. CPAC must avoid blessing overbroad designated lists that do not comply with CPIA requirements.  Fact based decision-making must prevail.  Thank you for listening.   

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.  

Cultural Property Advisory Committee Meeting, September 24-26, 2024 to Discuss New MOUs with Lebanon and Mongolia and a Renewal With El Salvador

The State Department’s website has given advanced notice of a Cultural Property Advisory Committee Meeting to discuss new cultural property Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) with Lebanon and Mongolia and a renewal with El Salvador.

The proposed MOU with Lebanon should be highly controversial. The UNESCO Convention assumes that nation states are the “best stewards” of cultural heritage and MOUs authorize US Customs to repatriate cultural goods seized under them to their care.  But Lebanon is a failing state.  The power there is not in the weak and corrupt government, but Hezbollah (“the Party of God”), a heavily armed Shiite militia group that acts as the Iranian regime’s proxy force against Israel and the United States.  The United States Government has designated  Hezbollah as a terrorist organization, and right now, it has been raining down rockets on Northern Israel,  forcing residents to flee.   Israel, of course, has retaliated, shelling and bombing  parts of Lebanon intensively in an effort to root out Hezbollah terrorists and their allies.

How then can a MOU with Lebanon even be considered?  Repatriating objects to failed states that have become war zones is not a recipe for their “protection” under any circumstance.  Moreover, the State Department's Cultural Heritage Center and its  "partner organization," the Antiquities Coalition, have claimed that "looted antiquities" are a significant terrorist funding source.  RAND Corporation and others dispute such claims, but given that “narrative” shouldn’t the State Department also be concerned that Hezbollah will resell whatever may be returned for funds?

The public session will take place September 24, 2024, at 2:00 p.m. (EDT).

 Public comments will be due no later than September 16, 2024. 

Proposed new MOUs with Lebanon and Mongolia that will likely again cover collectors coins that circulated regionally or internationally making it difficult to import them from legitimate markets in Europe again underscores the need for HR 7865.  More here: https://accguild.org/HR-7865

Addendum (8/19/24):  Regulations.gov is now accepting comments for these MOUs.  Here is a direct link to comment:  https://www.regulations.gov/document/DOS-2024-0028-0001

Alternatively, go to Regulations.gov and then search for DOS-2024-0028.  

What should you say?  Of course, it is much better to speak in your own words, but here is a template for coin collectors:

CPAC should reject any MOU with Lebanon.  Any such MOU would not help "protect" cultural heritage.  Rather, repatriating artifacts would be disastrous for their continued preservation.  Lebanon is a failed state dominated by Hezbollah, a terrorist group and Iranian proxy at war with Israel and the United States.  There is no money to properly preserve artifacts and there is a real danger they will be either destroyed in a conflict or sold to fund Hezbollah's terrorist activities.  

Additionally, there is no reason to apply import restrictions to coins for Lebanon, Mongolia or El Salvador.  For most of their history, these countries were but small parts of much larger Empires, meaning all or most all coins that circulated there also circulated in much greater quantities elsewhere.  One simply cannot assume that coins of a particular type were found there, a prerequisite for them being restricted under the governing statute.