I have been struck by SAFE associate Blogger David Gill's increasingly negative comments about the U.K.'s Portable Antiquities Scheme. Compare Gill from 2008 when continued funding for the scheme was in doubt
(http://lootingmatters.blogspot.com/2008/03/portable-antiquities-scheme-to-preserve.html and http://lootingmatters.blogspot.com/2008/01/portable-antiquities-scheme-funding.html) with Gill of today (http://lootingmatters.blogspot.com/2009/11/portable-antiquities-scheme-cited-in.html)
If the scheme is worth funding isn't it worth asking the Italians (who are every bit as wealthy as the English) to investigate?
Does Gill even disagree with Lord Refrew on this point? See http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2009/01/report-on-lord-renfrew-talk-in-new-york.html ("The talk was followed by Q&A, so, knowing that Renfrew had supported PAS when its funding was threatened, I took the opportunity to ask: "Do you think that if other source countries were to adopt similar schemes, that it would help to reduce looting ?". His answer was an unqualified yes ("brilliant scheme"), with none of the usual caveats about it not being our place to dictate antiquity policy to other nations.").
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Against PAS Because the ACCG is for It?
Posted by Cultural Property Observer at 6:11 PM
Labels: David Gill, Italian MOU, pas, Treasure Trove
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Post a Comment