Friday, January 17, 2014

Historic Coin Circulation Commission

Given the confusion at the State Department, US Customs and within the archaeological blogoshere about which coins circulated broadly and which did not for purposes of preparing designated lists for the ever growing laundry list of countries for which MOUs have been granted, CPO hereby officially proposes the  formation of the Historic Coin Circulation Commission so everyone-- State Department bureaucrat, archaeologist, coiney and culture cop-- will be on the same page. 

Specifically, CPO envisions a nine (9) member commission with representatives from the ANA, ANS, IAPN, PNG, AIA, ACCG, Smithsonian, Penn Cultural Heritage Center and the ever fair Brits from the BM. CPO suspects that some archaeo-bloggers may gripe about under-representation, but as CPO has also observed few, if any, field archaeologists really care about or understand coins anyway except when it comes to restricting them for the greater glory of their foreign hosts in the cultural bureaucracies of  the world.

The HCCC will be instrumental in deciding what coin types are local (so they can be safely restricted and repatriated to the modern nation states from which the originated) and what coin types circulated in international trade (so they can remain in American collectors' trays and also continue to travel in the international coiney trade without fear of seizure).  

In light of our country's budget deficit, CPO also suggests that no new funds be allocated, but that rather that existing monies be reprogrammed away from grants to the Cyprus American Archaeological Research Institute, which, after all apparently got the ball rolling on import restrictions on coins in the first place. 

CPO has been assured that the HCCC is likely to meet with approval at the highest levels of American Government, a place where some well placed "coineys" apparently serve in anonymity but with some distinction. 


Wayne G. Sayles said...

It would be interesting and enlightening to see how the bureaucracy would manage to stack the membership of that committee — but I have faith that they would find a way, or simply ignore the committee recommendations when contrary to prevailing ideology. History is a great prophet.

Cultural Property Observer said...

It appears that Messrs. Elkins and Barford either did not notice the label "humor/satire/irony" below the post or perhaps they don't appreciate the same:

Cultural Property Observer said...

Arthur Houghton asked me to post this:

"Peter, you make light of the idea, but I have checked with a number of people and a number of them believe that a Historic Coin Circulation Commission would be not only appropriate, but could go far toward dispelling some of the mythology generated by underpublished numismatists and undistinguished blog writers who choose to blind themselves to the facts and wish to blind others by purveying misinformation. If you wish, we could work on a charter that would allow broad latitude, provide credibility, and bring in behind it large numbers of well-connected people who could add emphasis and financial support. I would recommend that the H-Triple-C issue regular reports, perhaps using the wording that a certain US government agency does for it's NIE's: "The HCCC judges that (underpublished numismatist X)(undistinguished blogger Y) either have little knowledge of the facts or have chosen to distort them with respect to the circulation of coins in (Country Z).

Again, thank you for your service. Arthur"

Paul Barford said...

Mr Tompa, could you please ask Mr Houghton why he thinks one needs a commission to do this research? Why can not such an august and active body as the Cultural Property Research Institute take on the task and issue the reports (with of course the generous backing of all those same highly influential and well-heeled individuals with whom Mr Houghton is in such constant contact)?

Am I supposed to end this "ha, ha, ha", or do you think Mr Houghton expected us to take that seriously? It's getting difficult to tell these days.

Cultural Property Observer said...

Pease add the following to your blog:

"Peter, there are some people so intellectually challenged that they do not fit the definition of "don't understand numismatics" but instead fall into the category of "incapable of undestanding". Are we surprised? Their cephalitic selves (as opposed to encephalitic; if they don't know Greek it would do them good to learn) might be improved if they had a good dose more education in the discipline. Will they do it? Don't hold your breath. But point them in the direction of a good seminar course followed by a rigorous blue-book examination with the expectation of no less than an A average, which one must doubt they would pass. They they should then be instructed to write something, anything, in the field that shows they know what they are talking about. Until that happens, they must fall silent. Tough love for the undistinguished.

I applaud you again for your interest in disseminating truth to the ignorant.

Warm regards,


Paul Barford said...

Mr Tompa, could you please ask Mr Houghton again why he thinks one needs a Commission to do this research? He seems to have been too busy rudely insulting guests on your blog to have noticed the question.

Could we please learn why such an august and active body as his Cultural Property Research Institute cannot take on the task and issue the reports (with of course the generous backing of all those same highly influential and well-heeled individuals with whom Mr Houghton is in such constant contact)?

Paul Barford