Challenge To Doctor Elkins

Nathan Elkins purports to be a serious academic numismatist, but  CPO has had its doubts ever since the release of his academic diatribe directed against a non-profit that uses ancient Roman coins to teach kids about history.   CPO now has more such doubts based on Elkins' latest claim that "Clearly existing import restrictions are at pains to restrict only regional and locally circulating types, such as the provincial coins, while more broadly circulating types such as republican and imperial denarii are not included in restrictions." 

And so would any serious academic numismatist who reviews the State Department and Customs designated lists that (with the exception of the Greek list that leaves off gold and some silver coins) restrict all coins made in Cyprus, China, Italy, Greece, and Bulgaria over periods of hundreds and hundreds of years.  

For example, does Elkins really believe each  and every coin type placed on the Bulgarian designated list (including those of gold and silver) only circulated "locally and regionally" within the confines of the modern Bulgarian nation state?  Let's hope not.   CPO therefore challenges Dr. Elkins to either explain his statement with respect to such coins or to retract it.  

More Double Standards at CPAC?

The New York Times has reported that the Cambodian Government asked for CPAC member Jane Levine, who is also employed by Sotheby's, to be recused from deliberating on the upcoming CPAC meeting relating to the renewal of the Cambodian MOU.   Presumably, the Cambodians are claiming that Levine cannot fairly discharge her duties given the ongoing dispute involving a Khmer statue.  The article indicates Levine was not going to attend the meeting anyway due to a conflict with a Sotheby's board meeting, but also suggests that the "scheduling conflict" may have provided Levine and Sotheby's with a graceful exit from the dispute.

But, if so, it's worth recalling that State failed to recuse an archaeologist who received an excavation permit from Cyprus despite the clear conflict of interest issues her participation in deliberations related to the renewal of the Cypriot MOU raised.

So, once again, is there one standard applied to collectors and the trade and another for archaeologists aligned with the State Department and source country bureaucracies?

Not for Me to Decide....

That's the message that comes across loud and clear from Judge Blake's admittedly well written opinion dismissing the ACCG test case. See
http://www.accg.us/News/Item/Decision_released_in_Baltimore_litigation.aspx

But if it's not a matter for the courts, who then will address legitimate concerns about how the State Department and US Customs impose and apply import restrictions on widely collected cultural goods like ancient coins?

The State Department or US Customs? Fat chance.

The Obama White House, under its transparency and regulatory reform initiatives? Doubtful.

Congress? Well, members of the House and Senate from both political parties have indeed made their concerns known about how import restrictions are imposed to the State Department, only to be stonewalled in return. But wrestling with the State Department's entrenched bureaucracy is not a high priority, particularly given the other problems facing our country.

All this, of course, helps explain why regular citizens increasingly hold our government in such low regard. Indeed, this issue in many ways encapsulates what is wrong with Washington: Faceless bureaucrats making decisions in secret at the behest of connected, narrow special interest groups with little more than lip service being given to the protections built into the law for small businesses and individuals.

All shameful, but legal, at least according to one US District Court.

Report on CPAC Hearing on Italian MOU-Part III

Here is more from the 5/6 CPAC hearing:

Souzana Steverding represented Ancient Coins for Education (ACE). She indicated her program using ancient Roman coins to teach kids about history currently reaches 75-100 schools. She expressed concern that restrictions would preclude her organization from receiving coins as donations for her program. She believes the system in the U.K. is a good one that Italy should emulate.

Rick Witschonke (ANS, but speaking on his own behalf) indicated that he was deeply saddened by the loss of knowledge occasioned by looting. He also believes looting has not decreased in Italy despite the MOU. It may be riskier than previously, but there will always be some ready to take that risk. The UK was in a similar situation before the Treasure Act was passed and a portable antiquities scheme was implemented. He believes CPAC can and should suggest that Italy consider a similar system modified to Italy’s own needs. CPAC made a similar suggestion back in 2000 and should do so again here. Some may claim this system has its faults, but it is much preferable to the current state of affairs in Italy. The governing statute, the CCPIA, contemplates that CPAC will make such suggestions to assist source countries protect their own cultural patrimony.

Peter Tompa represented the International Association of Professional Numismatists and the Professional Numismatists Guild. He indicated that the numismatic community was unclear whether the issue of coins was actually “on the table” because the Federal Register notice did not indicate whether new restrictions would be contemplated within the context of renewal. He wrote Undersecretary McHale to ask, but received no response. If coins are “on the table,” there is no reason to depart from CPAC’s prior two recommendations to exempt coins from restrictions. The governing statute limits restrictions to artifacts “first discovered” in Italy. IAPN presented an academic paper that demonstrated Greek and Roman coins struck in Italy circulated far from there. There also is the issue that such coins are freely collected in Italy and the rest of the EU without any need to show provenance information. Tompa passed along three Italian auction catalogues picturing unproveanced ancient Greek and Roman coins struck in Italy to demonstrate that point. There are no import controls on coins into the EU and the two main market countries of Germany and the UK do not require export permits for coins not straight from the ground. In addition, the Italian-Swiss bilateral agreement exempts coins. This means the governing statute’s “concerted international response” requirement cannot be met and restrictions would only discriminate against Americans.

William Pearlstein represented several antiquities collectors. He indicated that now that looting is under control in Italy there is no reason to continue restrictions. Restrictions under the current MOU should be narrowed to incorporate only artifacts that are demonstrably Italian. Criminal law already protects Italy’s interests sufficiently. Pearlstein also passed around a Pandolfini catalogue of Italian archaeological materials being sold in Italy. He indicated that given the fact artifacts on the designated list were found in that catalogue, restrictions are only discriminatory against Americans.

Arthur Houghton, speaking for himself only, said the current MOU was of concern because it was unclear with respect to the designated list of covered material, which could include objects legally exportable by other ountries; encouraged underperformance by the Government of Italy with respect to that country's reciprocal obligations under Article II; and discriminated against Americanas in that it allows Italians and others access to routine sales of privately held antiquities not claimed by the State but restricts such objects against export to the United States by American citizens. He was asked for suggestions that would remedy the stark asymmetry of the MOU's provisions.

To be continued.

AIA and SAFE Outreach Programs: Education or Indoctrination?

Nathan Elkins' "scholarly" hatchet job on Ancient Coins for Education ("ACE") and its program to teach kids about ancient history through coins (see below at http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2010/02/elkins-treasure-hunting-101-in-americas.html), got me to think about the Archaeological Institute of America's ("AIA's") and Saving Antiquities for Everyone's ("SAFE's") own outreach programs to youth.

A link to the AIA programs can be found here: http://www.archaeological.org/webinfo.php?page=10260

A less well-developed link to SAFE's programs can be found here: http://www.savingantiquities.org/education.php

I'll let the reader decide to what extent each organization's programs reflect a desire to educate versus a desire to indoctrinate.

Elkins' "Treasure Hunting 101 in America's Classrooms:" Propaganda or Scholarship?

With some difficulty, I've finally been able to procure a copy of Nathan Elkins' "Treasure Hunting 101 in America's Classrooms," published in the rather obscure (to at least some well-known libraries) "Journal of Field Archaeology." While an archaeologist of the David Gill school may view Elkins' work as scholarship, I consider it little more than distasteful propaganda, designed to demean Ancient Coins for Education ("ACE") and its program to pair collectors with schools to teach children about ancient history through coins.

According to Elkins, "[t]he program's practices directly sponsor criminal activities in source countries, such as Bulgaria, and the destruction of archaeological and cultural heritage." (Elkins at 487.) Never mind ancient coins of the type ACE uses in its program are widely available for sale in Bulgaria itself, and, indeed, the Bulgarian Constitutional Court recently struck down aspects of Bulgaria's recent antiquities law and instead concluded that an invoice will be sufficient to establish ownership. See http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2009/10/bulgarian-constitutional-court-strikes.html, a fact Morag Kersel and Christina Luke rather crankily admit in their "editorial introduction." (Id. at 481.)

Darkly, Elkins also claims ACE effectively exploits children, cynically using them as pawns to support the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild's (ACCG's) agenda. He states, "ACE's activities ought to be of concern for another reason: the program is clearly being used to manipulate school children in order to promote their own private and commercial interests, especially since it became an affiliate member and ally of the ACCG in 2004." (Id. at 485.)

In this regard, Elkins first takes ACE to task because its founder appeared at a meeting of the Cultural Property Advisory Committee in 2005 to testify in favor of continuing an exemption for coins from import restrictions [because such would likely impact the ability of ACE to perform its core mission to use Roman coins to teach children about ancient history]. (Id.) But really, what's wrong with that? Elkins himself has testified at a subsequent CPAC hearing on Italy in favor of restrictions on coins, and pro-archaeological groups like the Archaeological Institute of America ("AIA"), Lawyer's Committee for Cultural Heritage Preservation, Saving Antiquities for Everyone, and the Cyprus American Archaeological Research Institute ("CAARI") have become fixtures at such meetings. Does Elkins agree with CAARI VP Ellen Herscher's patently ridiculous claim that archaeologists don't lobby? http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2010/02/response-to-caari-vp-ellen-herscher.html Or, is "lobbying" only okay if you take Elkins' "archaeology over all perspective?"

Elkins specifically dislikes ACCG's work with ACE to promote ancient coin collecting, suggesting that it is corrupting our youth. According to Elkins, "the remarks made by [ACCG ED] Wayne Sayles and [ACE Director] Scott Uhrick indicate an awareness that the ACE program is an excellent way to recruit future hobbyists and collectors and to indoctrinate them to the dealer lobby's point of view regarding the ethics of collecting and the attitudes they wish to impart." (Elkins at 486.) His antidote? Well, what I might characterizes as a good "brainwashing" by archaeologists, of course! (Id. at 487.) But really, is what ACE actually teaches children about ancient coins and history substantially different from similar programs undertaken over the years? No, but then, ACE actually gives ancient coins to both teachers and students. And that is what likely actually irks Elkins the most.

For more about ACE and its programs, see http://ancientcoinsforeducation.org/

Is the Journal of Field Archaeology Now Just Another Propaganda Tool in the Cultural Property Wars?

As set forth below, the Journal of Field Archaeology has evidently published Nathan Elkins' "Treasure hunting 101 in America's classrooms" (2009, Journal of Field Archaeology 34 (4):482-9), an apparent "expose" about the Ancient Coins for Education ("ACE") program to teach children about ancient Greece and Rome through the use of historical coins.

The Journal of Field Archaeology purports to publish:

• Field reports whose results in terms of interpretive content or of techniques and methods employed seem clearly to be of more than regional interest.
• Technical and methodological studies that relate to actual archaeological data, are also of general rather than only regional significance, and would be comprehensible to most readers.
• Review articles such as updated regional or topical summaries designed to appeal to a fairly wide professional readership.
• Occasional essays on the history of archaeology in major geographical areas, or with respect to research topics of general archaeological concern.
• Brief preliminary reports describing the results of recent fieldwork or other research.

See http://www.maney.co.uk/index.php/journals/jfa/

I'm not sure where Elkins' attack on a non-profit group that uses ancient coins to teach kids fits exactly under these criteria.

Is Elkins' subject matter really the stuff of scholarship today? Even if one disagrees with ACE's sourcing of the ancient coins it uses to teach kids, should a journal that purports to foster scholarship help denigrate the efforts of members of public to encourage our nation's youth to learn more about ancient Greece and Rome? Isn't Elkins' subject matter more appropriate for blogs than scholarly journals?

Unfortunately, it thus appears that the Journal of Field Archaeology has departed from its original scholarly mission in favor of becoming just another propaganda tool in the culture property wars.

Ancient Coins and the Corruption of Youth?

Archaeo-blogger Paul Barford reports that fellow blogger Nathan Elkins has written a "peer reviewed" article entitled, "Treasure hunting 101 in America's classrooms" (2009, Journal of Field Archaeology 34 (4):482-9). That article is apparently an "expose" about the Ancient Coins for Education ("ACE") program to teach children about ancient Greece and Rome through the use of historical coins. See http://paul-barford.blogspot.com/2010/02/treasure-hunting-101-in-americas.html

For more about ACE, see http://ancientcoinsforeducation.org/

Elkins' article is not readily available to those not associated with the university culture for free and I don't want to spend any money to get it so I must confess I have not read his work.

Nevertheless, Mr. Barford evidently captures the spirit of Elkins' writing when he says,

The idea that one can be "educated" by collecting decontextualised artefacts potentially stolen from the archaeological record of another region really is a totally false argument.

There is thus some irony then in the fact that Mr. Elkins is currently studying such "decontextualized" coins himself as an employee of Yale University. See http://artgallery.yale.edu/pages/collection/permanent/pc_coins_over.html Indeed, Yale's collection contains a large number of unprovenanced coins of the sort normally available on the market, including those from a recent purchase. See http://www.yale.edu/opa/arc-ybc/v33.n2/story19.html ("The Yale University Art Gallery has acquired a collection of 4,100 coins from one of Europe's most renowned numismatic scholars, Peter R. Franke.
The collection, amassed by Franke over the course of a lifetime, includes coins from throughout the Mediterranean basin, with a principal focus on Greek coins of the Roman period."). Presumably, both Yale and Elkins believe these coins have some value outside of any "lost archaeological context."

In any event, I'm all for using ancient coins ("decontextualized" or not) to help teach our children about ancient history. In that regard, ACE is only doing in the classroom what museums themselves have started to do-- give the public and particularly children-- the opportunity for some "hands on" experience with common ancient artifacts, like ancient coins.

A few years back, I visited the British Museum "coin room" where a young museum employee was cruising the gallery with a cart containing ancient coins for the public to touch.

Perhaps Yale and even some less collector friendly institutions like the University of Pennsylvania can set up similar programs to give the public some direct contact with artifacts from the past. Understanding of ancient cultures needs to be encouraged in our society. Most ancient coins in University collections gather little but dust. Perhaps, now is the time to put at least some of the lesser specimens to work to engage our youth just as the volunteers at ACE have been doing for some six years-- and all without government handouts or large institutional grants.

Doomsday 2012: Pop Culture Masquerading as Science and Celebrity Archaeologists

In the 1960's, a damaged Mayan tablet was found that suggested that a cycle in the Mayan calendar would end in December 2012. Enter pop culture, including a History Channel show and soon-to-be released movie, and December 21, 2012 has now become Doomsday. See http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/6300744/2012-is-not-the-end-of-the-world-Mayan-elder-insists.html

Media outlets like the "History" and "Discovery" Channels, carry some great, serious programing, but many of their shows can rightfully only be characterized as "entertainment." There is nothing wrong with that, but I wonder about what message that is being sent when archaeologists or scientists appear. Does their mere presence help confuse "pop culture" with "scientific fact," particularly to children?

Under the circumstances, I found it highly ironic when I viewed an archaeologist who has publicly belittled Ancient Coins for Education ("ACE") pontificating on two such "entertainment" programs (though not about the Maya). Here was a highly educated PhD lending her name to what many would consider programs celebrating "junk science." Yet, at a public meeting of the Cultural Property Advisory Committee, she criticized ACE's founder for using ancient coins to teach children about history, apparently because in her mind, that was tantamount to teaching children "to loot."

I would suggest we need more programs like those of ACE. See http://ancientcoinsforeducation.org/ Allowing children to handle common ancient artifacts, like coins, helps encourage learning and true love of history. In contrast, we need fewer celebrity archaeologists and scientists providing the patina of "science" on what is actually pure TV entertainment.

Addendum: For critiques of the History Channel show from 2006 see: http://alignment2012.com/historychannel.html and http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2006/08/2012_mayan_prop.html