This is no Time to Expand Restrictions; It is time to Facilitate Lawful Trade and Encourage Archaeologists to do Their Part

This is what I said more or less at today's CPAC hearing.  I hope to summarize the public session to discuss a proposed MOU with Nigeria and proposed renewals with Greece and Bolivia shortly.

Thank you for this opportunity to speak to you on behalf of the Global Heritage Alliance.  I also drafted comments on behalf of IAPN and PNG, so feel free to refer any detailed questions about those papers to me.

First, as to the proposed renewal of the Greek MOU, we would echo IAPN’s and PNG’s concerns that this renewal is no excuse to expand current import restrictions.  Those restrictions purport to only apply to coin types that circulated locally in Greece in order to comply with the statutory requirements found in 19 U.S.C. § 2601.  That provision requires that such coins were “first discovered within” and are therefore subject to Greek export controls.  Under no circumstances should CPAC recommend expanding those restrictions to widely circulating trade coins which can be found most anywhere.  Those coins can be found in many countries, including ones with no MOU with the U.S.

CPAC already considered the issue in 2010, and rejected the proponent’s request to expand current restrictions further when the MOU was renewed in 2016.  There is simply no reason to revisit this decision, particularly when much of the coin trade is already being badly hurt by Covid related shut downs of coin shows.  Indeed to do so would not only be contrary to the statutory requirements, but the words of Greece’s Ambassador who back in 2010 stated that Greece’s request only concerned “antiquities that have been found exclusively on Greek territory.”

 Second, CPAC should also promote the lawful exchange of cultural artifacts. In particular, CPAC should recognize the obvious ramifications of Greece’s membership in the European Union (“E.U.”). Coins on the current designated list may be traded outside the E.U. with or without an export license according to the local law of Greece’s sister E.U. members. CPAC, the State Department and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) should honor these E.U. export controls, which, after all, are also binding on Greece as an E.U. member.

 Finally, with regard to both Greece and Bolivia, we would urge that archaeologists be asked to do their own part too.  CPAC should amend MOU Art. II to ensure archaeological missions pay diggers a fair living wage and that they be required to file site security plans which take advantage of modern electronic surveillance technology.  Both steps can be seen as “self-help measures” or “less drastic remedies” than import restrictions under 19 U.S.C. § 2602 (1) (B) and (C) (ii).

 Thank you.

Papers Not in Order

The Israeli Antiquities Authority raided a store selling ancient artifacts and coins and has charged the owner with violating Israel's new registration laws.  It is unclear from the story whether there is any actual evidence the store was selling recently looted material.

CPO is concerned that hard to comply with registration schemes will lead to more seizures of artifacts without proof they were actually looted.

Moreover, if dealers are to register there wares so should archaeologists.  Requiring archaeologists to maintain registries will help protect against pilfering of archaeological stores and provide at least some information short of publication on what is being found.

Hitting a Nerve

In the extremes of the archaeological blogosphere, the suggestion that rich American Universities that  sponsor archaeological digs in source countries like Greece should pay their local workers a fair living wage has provoked some controversy.  Yet, with authorities such as Donna Yates admitting that underpaid diggers loot in the long off season, doesn't it make sense that well paid workers will be less likely to use their knowledge of their sites to steal?   And it's also true that after some pressure American Universities have already been paying their service workers at home better?   So, why isn't this instead a common sense solution to an obvious problem that American Universities should adopt and publicize as something they are doing to give back to the localities where they sponsor digs?

Update (5/31/16)-- One of CPO's readers indicates that the issues of site security and fair wages for local archaeological workers were discussed at a recent conference sponsored by the University of Chicago.  Glad to hear there are others out there who support responsible archaeology!

Blame Game

Archaeologist Donna Yates has again blamed Western collectors for looting in third world countries.  Yet, in so doing, Yates lets on that workers employed on digs she has worked on have admitted to her that they engage in looting in the long off season.  If archaeologists paid local diggers a fair living wage they would see no need to loot to help make ends meet.  So, perhaps the blame should be on rich American Universities and archaeologists themselves rather than on Western collectors, who after all, collect not for money or fame, but for genuine interest in past societies.

Obsessive Compulsive Archaeologists?

This article examines obsessive compulsive hoarding behavior in archaeology.  Admittedly, collectors are sometimes accused of the same thing, but a hoarding mentality amongst archaeologists has made rational proposals for deaccession of duplicates a non-starter.  Funds generated by sales of such duplicates would be better spent supporting archaeological efforts in places like Greece, Italy and Cyprus.

Israel Requires On-Line Inventories

After losing a court challenge, Israeli antiquities dealers will be required to establish on-line inventories that will allow Israeli authorities to better track purchases, sales and exports.

In theory at least, this sounds reasonable, but CPO wonders whether the process will be a nightmare in practice, particularly for small, inexpensive items like oil lamps and coins.

And if this is such a great idea, why not require archaeologists and museums operating in Israel to establish on-line inventories as well?  Such on-line inventories would help deter insider theft and perhaps provide information that will be helpful to scholars.

Michael Danti Speaks

Michael Danti, who runs the State Department-ASOR Syrian Cultural Heritage initiative, spoke about his activities on an ABA Cultural Heritage Law Committee "telecoffee"  discussion.  Michael McCullough, the Committee Chair, acted as moderator. A link to the talk, which was recorded, will appear on the Committee's website.  See here.  The below is based on my hurried notes so CPO readers are encouraged to listen to the program themselves if they want more than CPO's impressions of the event. 

Danti dug in Syria from 1991-2010.  He has also worked in Iraqi Kurdistan.  He has been associated with Boston University and the University of Pennsylvania.  He oversees the initiative that not only monitors the ongoing situation in Syria, but has also been involved in disaster planning and training initiatives for Syrian cultural heritage officials.

The conflict response includes 40-50 people and there are 5-10 reporters about what is going on within Syria itself.  (The initiative also relies on Arab media sources.)

Danti indicates that press reports focus too much on ISIL's destruction of classical sites and too little on its destruction of houses of worship of other Islamic sects as well as the destruction of Yazidi shrines and places of worship.   (Danti did not mention destruction of Christian houses of worship.)

There also has been a tendency to imply that all looting has been done on behalf of ISIS when in fact it has been done on behalf of all belligerents as well as desperate individuals.  This includes the Assad regime and Kurdish forces.

Digital media has been used to try to sell looted materials to individuals abroad.  Other Syrians who immigrated abroad and who are now fairly prosperous are particular targets of such sale pitches.  Part of the pitch is to save Syrian cultural heritage from destruction.

ISIS has an "antiquities office" that is in charge of looting.  It sells licenses that allow individuals to loot in ISIS territory.  The Abu Sayef raid shows that looted material is being stockpiled.

The initiative has documented approximately 1,000 cases of individuals trying to sell looted material with cell phone images.  Most of the material that is being sold is either classical or early Islamic.  Lebanon and Turkey are transshipment points.  Material goes on from there to Cyprus, Bulgaria, Austria or Greece and then into other EU countries. Coins, sculpture and mosaics are among the material that is for sale.  Refugees also bring material with them.  Once out of Syria, material looted from ISIS territory is mixed up with material looted from elsewhere.

The material does not appear to be going to established auction houses but coins are appearing in on-line auctions. 

Material is being offered to dealers in Turkey and Lebanon and in on-line chat rooms.  Lebanese Customs is doing a good job stopping material while Turkish Customs could do more. 

ASOR's contract with the State Department has been extended for another year.  In the second year of the contract, they plan to focus more on documenting the illicit trade in objects.  

Exploiting a Tragedy?

The University of Chicago's Oriental Institute has rightly condemned the murder of Khaled al-As'ad, the retired antiquities director for the city of Palmyra, by ISIS.

In so doing, however, the Oriental Institute also claims that:

The 81 year old Mr. al-As'ad was arrested, tortured, and beheaded for refusing to reveal the location of antiquities from Palmyra that he had hidden away to prevent them from being looted and sold on the illicit antiquities market.

But how does the OI know that?

A well-researched piece in the New York Times instead suggests that the scholar was killed because of his membership in the Baath party and association with the Assad regime.

And, indeed, it appears the claim that the scholar was murdered for refusing to disclose the location of hidden antiquities is based not on eyewitness testimony but upon the claims of antiquities officials of the Assad regime in Damascus.

The murder of this scholar should be mourned as yet another tragedy coming out of Syria's civil war. As'ad devoted his life to studying Palmyra.  At least for the moment, it still stands.

Destroying Undocumented Artifacts: What Were They Thinking?

Kate FitzGibbon asks in reaction to a series of  revealing "tweets" from some well-known archaeologists and academics associated with the archaeological lobby which appear to either support the idea of destroying undocumented artifacts in order to keep them off the market, support the idea with some qualifications, think its for the source country to decide, or think it should not be discussed, not because it's wrong, but because it undercuts their anti-looting argument.

Of course, collectors like Kyri don't think that way.   For them, "all antiquities 'merit saving' with or without context."  CPO heartily agrees.

PAS Under Threat?

This news should be of concern to everyone.   Due to budget pressures in the UK, the Portable Antiquities Scheme will be folded into another department at the British Museum and likely suffer budget cuts despite its popularity with both the public and many British archaeologists.   As a result, Roger Bland, who has run the PAS since its inception, will be leaving his post.   

The PAS has been instrumental in bringing archaeologists, metal detectorists and collectors together in a shared effort to help record the past.  So, perhaps it's not surprising that the BM states that the PAS is being placed in the Department of Learning, Volunteers and Audiences as part of an effort to help the BM with public outreach to help make it the "museum of the country" by working with partners outside of London. If so, CPO hopes that the BM will ensure this important asset remains adequately funded despite obvious budget pressures.  

For more, see here.  

ISIS HAD A BOOK WITH PICTURES OF COINS IN IT!

Yesterday, the archaeological blogosphere and twitterdom whipped itself up into a minor frenzy over of an image of a page from a book that Kurdish fighters evidently seized from ISIS that included a picture of some ancient coins.

The implication of course is that this image is somehow hard "proof" that ISIS is funding itself with conflict antiquities, specifically ancient coins.  Indeed, we are informed, "[The book]  might help us to identify which ancient coins the Islamic State is handling (or expecting to handle). Thereby, it might help us to trace how the Islamic State is funding itself through the trafficking of conflict antiquities."

Of course, it does not seem much to matter that the coins depicted appear to be either Phoenician ones struck in Lebanon and coastal areas in Syria (outside of ISIS' control) or perhaps Egyptian copies of Athenian Tetradrachms.  As it is further explained, "obviously they were used and may have been deposited elsewhere". (Prof. Elkins take note.)

In any event, with all the millions ISIS is supposedly making from "conflict antiquities" one would think they could at least buy a decent price guide.

Destruction at the Mosul Museum: Who Cares?

Assyrian Christian minorities in Iraq and Syria and its diaspora  do.

Archaeologists both here and in the Middle East do (though some apparently can't help themselves and must find a way to take swipes at collectors as they mourn for what is lost) .

Collectors and Museum professionals most certainly do, despite what some archaeologists may think.

And based on news reports at least, presumably the Western World does, though the scope of the tragedy may not be fully appreciated.

But what of the Islamic world in general and the Islamic inhabitants of Syria and Iraq in particular?

Do they really care or might they even view Western outrage over the destruction of artifacts over lives as misplaced or even worse?

And depending on the answer what does that say? 

Cultural Heritage Center in Conservative Cross-Hairs

The State Department and its Cultural Heritage Center find themselves in conservative cross-hairs for wasteful spending in their Ambassador's Fund for Cultural Heritage Preservation.   The Weekly Standard paints a picture of a misguided "soft power" effort that has spent millions in anti-American countries.  In so doing, the author, Stephen Schwartz, focuses on the foolishness of giving millions for restoration projects to the same Assad regime which has bombed the Old City of Aleppo into rubble.

The article expresses hope the new Congress will scrutinize the program.  CPO also hopes Congress will also review the Cultural Heritage Center's administration of the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act.  Even leaving aside serious concerns about prejudgement of MOUs, it's increasingly clear that MOUs are little more than special interest programs for foreign cultural bureaucracies and the archaeologists that do business with them.  For proof, one need look no further than low public support for MOUs.  For instance, CPAC recently received only four public comments regarding a renewal of the MOU with Nicaragua, including one from the AAMD that suggested it should be turned down.

Too Much Information?

Archaeo-bloggers David Gill and Paul Barford have taken the Portable Antiquities Scheme to task for allowing archaeologists to post finds on the database that was designed to record non-Treasure finds by the public.  Of course, PAS is a voluntary scheme and while it is not mandatory for archaeologists to post finds, really what's wrong with them doing so?   In the end, shouldn't it be about creating the most complete record of significant finds possible?  As it is, without archaeologists reporting, there is a hole in the PAS record.  Sure, archaeologists should report details of their finds to the local Historic Environment office, but is such information as accessible as the PAS database for scholars and anyone else interested in learning more details about what is found?

Draconian

Is the only way to describe a proposal Monika Grütters, Germany's Commissioner for Culture, has made at the behest of archaeologists with an axe to grind against collectors and cultural bureaucrats of failed states and/or dictatorships like Afghanistan, Egypt, Iraq and Syria. 

According to the report,

Ms. Grütters outlined plans for a new law that would require documented provenance for any object entering or leaving Germany, long among the laxest of regulators of the art market. Among other measures, dealers would be required to show a valid export permit from the source of the piece’s origins when entering Germany.

It's unclear how Grütters believes German dealers and collectors are going to come up with documentation that simply does not exist for artifacts that have been traded legally for generations without such paperwork.

Meanwhile, there was apparently no discussion about simple steps archaeologists can take that will discourage looting like hiring site guards and paying local diggers a living wage.    

Ethical archaeologists are already taking similar steps.  So why not make them a legal requirement for every archaeologist excavating abroad?  It's always better to tackle any problem at the source. 

And, if the point of Grütters' proposals is to ensure Germans appear ethical to the world, shouldn't that start with archaeologists, who after all, have direct contact with the people of source countries?

Archaeological Assault Brigade?

There is some talk in twitterdom about the need for archaeologists to team up with the military to defeat ISIS/ISIL.  CPO is all for it.   Committed archaeologists should sign up, get some basic military training, and be inserted into Syria and Iraq to help reclaim archaeological sites from terrorists.  Better to solve any looting problem at the source.   The other idea floated about-- import restrictions on anything and everything "Syrian"-- will undoubtedly inflict too much collateral damage on legitimate collecting.

Egyptian Military Dictatorship Botches Pyramid Restoration Work

The archaeological blogosphere goes into high gear anytime any artifact is seized from a hapless peasant in Egypt, so one would think there might be at least some mention of a horribly botched restoration of one of Egypt's earliest pyramids.

Not so.

Instead of silence, archaeologists should be asking how this could have happened, and whether the restoration company was selected based on merit or their political connections and/or their willingness to pay bribes.

The fact archaeologists have consistently failed to do so with regard to this and other examples of poor stewardship again raises an important question:  Is the Egyptian state and its supporters in the archaeological lobby really interested in conservation or control?

Some Welcome Honesty

Along with the usual references to shadowy international "cultural racketeers" and the difficult to comprehend refrain that "looting" is worse than "destruction," Dr. Amr Al-Azam, an archaeologist associated with Shawnee State University who involved in efforts to save Syria's cultural patrimony from civil war and ISIS, made this forthright statement to the Chasing Aphrodite blog.  In it, Al-Azam explains why ordinary Syrians loot in areas no longer under government control:

Anything to do with your cultural heritage in Syria belongs to the Assad family. That kicks back if you’re rebelling against the state and the regime. Anything associated with them becomes an acceptable target. Syria had some of the most stringent laws in terms of antiquities ownership. If you’re plowing your field and you hit a stone and discover a mosaic, you must inform the state. The state will come, surround the area, rip out the mosaic and it will disappear. You’re not a stakeholder. All he sees is a valuable item removed from him and taken by a kleptocracy. He says, Why should I let the state have it? 

Perhaps then, a long term solution is for archaeologists to promote changes in the laws of such countries. As it is, unqualified support for stringent antiquities laws that don't recognize land owners as stakeholders does little for conservation and lots to support a corrupt status quo.

There are obviously atrocities taking place in Syria today, but hopefully at some point, peace will return and such honest assessments can be used to help guide future policy.

Standard Operating Procedure?

By his silence on allegations contained in the Economist Magazine article linked below, Archaeo-blogger Paul Barford, the self appointed voice of the archaeological community on issues relating to portable antiquities, only seems to confirm that it's standard operating procedure to excavate without publishing or fully studying artifacts, sometimes for decades or even centuries.  CPO has covered this subject before, noting, for example, that  coins excavated in Rome over a century ago still await study and publication.

Barford long ago alienated himself from his former colleagues in the United Kingdom, criticizing them for their acceptance of the UK's Portable Antiquities Scheme.  So its no great surprise that Barford blames  British archaeologists rather than the Egyptian Military Dictatorship for this latest scandal.  But Egypt holds King Tut's grave goods, and has happily exploited the long-dead boy king for years, securing millions upon millions in the process.

If Egypt wants our help in "protecting" antiquities to supposedly ensure they are studied and published, the least we can expect is for Egypt to make that happen, either by funding the study itself or by requiring that objects be published within a reasonable amount of time in return for the privilege of excavating in the country.

We'll Get to It Eventually

The Egyptian Military Dictatorship and the archaeological community have argued that import restrictions on cultural goods are necessary to ensure Egyptian cultural artifacts are protected and studied by trained archaeologists.

But, if that is so, why after almost a century has elapsed have only 30% of the 5,398 objects that trained archaeologists removed from King Tut's tomb back in the 1920's been studied?

The Boy King has made the Egyptian government millions upon millions.  So, there should have been plenty of money available to allocate to such an important project. 

More evidence, if any were needed, that import restrictions do not actually promote archaeological research. Rather, it takes real commitment from source countries and archaeologists themselves for that to happen.