New Metal Detecting Blog

John Howland has initiated his own blog.  It may be accessed here.   John is a frequent commentator on this blog and has long contributed to Dick Stout's own metal detecting blog.  John has lots to say.  And quite a sense of humor.  So enjoy!

Where's the Beef?

Last week's Diane Rehm Radio Show segment entitled, "The Big Business in Looted Art," is getting lots of play in the archaeological blogosphere.  And why not?  The statement of the token "collector representative" (Gary Vikan, past Director of the Walters Art Gallery) questioning the show's premise-- that large amounts of material looted by ISIS is leaving Syria-- was ignored by the host and the other guests who are all associated with the Antiquities Coalition.  And the only difficult question from the audience about the repatriation of artifacts to unstable regimes was turned into a discussion about how wonderful it was that Khmer artifacts were being repatriated to Cambodia.  More evidence, if any were needed, that establishment media is not really interested in hearing from all sides in the cultural heritage debate or questioning the archaeological lobby's narrative that "collectors are the problem."

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.

Numismaster on Italian MOU

Richard Giedroyc has written on the extension not expansion of the Italian MOU for Numismaster and World Coin News.  Meanwhile, the usual suspects in the archaeological blogosphere are once again disengenously claiming that opposition to the MOU means support for the trade in "looted and stolen coins."  Not at all.  As set forth in Mr. Giedroyc's article, the concern is that as applied by US Customs, restrictions ban import of coins lawfully on markets abroad, including within Italy itself.

How Much Money is ISIS Making from Antiquities?

The Gates of Nineveh blog contains this comprehensive analysis of the issue.  The answer, something, but nowhere near as much as has been claimed.

2015's Questionable Claims on ISIS and Syrian Antiquities: To Hopes for More Accuracy and Less Hype in 2016

Knowledgeable cultural property observers have been frustrated that questionable claims about Syria, ISIS and antiquities trade continue to be actively promoted as part of the archaeological lobby's campaign in support of H.R. 1493/S. 1887,  problematic legislation that purports to address protecting cultural property in times of war and civil strife.

In honor of the New Year, CPO counts down the top five (5) dubious claims made in 2015 in support of this legislation that would create a new State Department coordination and enforcement bureaucracy and place what amounts to permanent import restrictions on Syrian cultural goods.

Hopefully, questions about the accuracy of these claims will also lead to questions about the wisdom of  the Senate passing H.R. 1493/S. 1887 in its current form.  While this legislation was no doubt introduced with the best of intentions, it suffers because its sponsors failed to consult with all stakeholders before its introduction and have relied on incomplete, misleading or false information to justify its approach to the issue of cultural heritage preservation.

5. The Claim:  Trade data helps prove there has been an upsurge in stolen Syrian antiquities on the market.

The Source:  "Cultural Heritage Lawyer" Rick St. Hilaire and "Red Arch" Cultural Heritage Law Policy Research" have heavily promoted this idea on St. Hilaire's blog.  See most recently, Rick St. Hilaire, "Antiques from Syria: U.S. Cultural Property Import Stats Raise Suspicion," Cultural Heritage Lawyer Blog (December 29, 2015), available at http://culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com/2015/12/antiques-from-syria-us-cultural.html

 (last visited January 6, 2016).

The Reality:  Mr. St. Hilaire and his blog are associated with the archaeological lobby and its anti-trade and anti-collecting views.  As such, his interpretation of trade data should be viewed as that of an advocate for a position and not that of an unbiased researcher. With regard to his work, at the outset, there appears to be a serious misconception about the nature of the figures themselves.  St. Hilaire at least implies the figures reflect the values for artifacts exported from Syria in 2014 rather than a “country of origin” or “country of manufacture” of Syria and exported from elsewhere to the United States.  In fact, due to massive confusion in the trade and a lack of guidance from U.S. and foreign Customs, it is likely that the figures include values for both artifacts manufactured in Syria (perhaps thousands of years ago) and exported to the U.S. from elsewhere along with artifacts directly exported from Syria itself.  Thus, artifacts that were manufactured in Syria but have been out of Syria for decades are likely included (and indeed may represent the bulk of the material that has been imported.)  In any event, the values cited are modest (particularly compared to wild claims for the values of looted Syrian antiquities (see Claim No. 2 below)), and it would be interesting to compare them with figures for antiquities imports with a country of origin of Syria over time. 

4.  The Claim:  There must be storehouses full of valuable stolen Syrian antiquities.

The Source:  In 2002 and 2005, Swiss police raided warehouses that were used to house antiquities illicitly excavated in Italy and Greece over the past decades.   See David Gill, "Warehouses, Antiquities and Basel," Looting Matters Blog (November 7, 2008), available at http://lootingmatters.blogspot.com/2008/11/warehouses-antiquities-and-basel.html  (last visited January 6, 2016).   Of course, Switzerland is an exceptionally stable country that at the time was also known for its strong privacy laws.  What better a place to store valuable antiquities?

The Reality:  Though warehouses full of illicitly excavated antiquities were found in Switzerland, is it also likely that similar storehouses also exist in unstable Middle Eastern countries?  One would not necessarily think so, but the archaeological lobby has nonetheless promoted the idea. Why?  After the Second Gulf War, there were also claims that material looted from archaeological sites in Iraq would be reaching the market in quantity.  When this never materialized, the archaeological lobby then explained away the issue by claiming that the material was being stockpiled.  See Guy Gugliata, "Looted Iraqi Relics Slow to Surface," The Washington Post (November 8, 2005) available at https://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/167/35577.html (last visited January 6, 2016).  Now, given the dearth of fresh Syrian material on the market, the same claim is again being used to explain away suspicions that efforts to loot archaeological sites (as evidenced by what appear to be holes in the ground in satellite photography) may not be anywhere near as successful as has been maintained.  (Apparently, no one has seriously (or at least publicly) considered the possibility that many of these holes were "dry" or at least some of these "looter's holes" were actually "fox holes" dug for military purposes.)

But what of the recent seizure from an ISIS financier? On May 15, 2015, U.S. Special Operations personnel removed a cache of hundreds of artifacts from the home of ISIS Financier Abu Sayyaf.  According to the State Department, "The cache represents significant primary evidence of looting at archaeological sites in Syria and Iraq, theft from regional museums, and the stockpiling of these spoils for likely sale on the international market." See  "ISIL Leaders Loot," U.S. State Department Cultural Heritage Center Website (undated), available at http://eca.state.gov/cultural-heritage-center/iraq-cultural-heritage-initiative/isil-leaders-loot (last visited January 5, 2016).  So far, this is the only storehouse full of "valuable" ISIS loot that has come to light.  However, an experienced dealer who looked at images of the coins found in the group valued them at perhaps $40,000 retail and $8,000 wholesale.  Indeed, the cache looked more like the modest stock of a small dealer in Middle Eastern antiquities than a storehouse for a fabulous cache of valuable Syrian antiquities.

3.  The Claim:  Only ISIS is benefiting from sales of illicit antiquities.  

The Sources:  Back in 2014, Secretary of State Kerry highlighted the looting and destruction of cultural  sites in Syria  at an event at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York.  See Secretary of State John Kerry, Remarks at Threats to Cultural Heritage in Iraq and Syria Event (September 22, 2014), available at  http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2014/09/231992.htm (last visited January 5, 2016).  Kerry evidently illustrated his talk with satellite imagery showing severe damage to Apamea, an important classical site in Syria.  CBS News and other news outlets then ascribed the damage at Apamea to ISIS even though Apamea appears to have been in government hands since the beginning of the Civil War.  It is unclear whether the archaeological lobby purposefully perpetuated this deception, but it is clear that CBS and other news sources have relied exclusively on State Department and archaeological lobby sources for their reporting.  See "The Perils of Limited Sourcing," Cultural Property Observer Blog (September 9, 2015), available at

http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2015/09/the-perils-of-limited-sourcing.html (last visited January 5, 2016).

The Reality:  A Dartmouth College study has confirmed that all participants in the Syrian civil war have taken part in looting Syrian archaeological sites. See "Dartmouth Led Study Shows ISIS Not Only Culprit in War Related Looting in Syria," Dartmouth Press Release (October 21, 2015), available at http://www.dartmouth.edu/press-releases/war-related-looting102115.html (last visited January 6, 2016).  As the press release states, "One of the most well-known incidents of looting occurred at Apamea, a massive Roman city in western Syria. The satellite images indicate that looting began in the start of 2012, after Syrian forces invaded the area, and continued during the Syrian occupation of the site through at least the fall of 2013. However, the most extreme phase of looting was conducted in the government-administered portion of the site with privately held fields remaining untouched until several months later when looting holes made by heavy machinery encroached into nearby areas on a systematic block by block basis with Syrian soldiers only 200 meters away."  Id.

2.  The Claim:  ISIS has made $10 s of millions or $100 s of millions from stolen antiquities.

The Sources:  The “tens of millions” figure ultimately derives from an erroneous claim that ISIS had stolen $36 million in antiquities from one on area in Syria alone.   See Heather Pringle, “ISIS Cashing in on Looted Antiquities to Fuel Iraq Insurgency,” National Geographic, June 27, 2014, available at http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/06/140626-isis-insurgents-syria-iraq-looting-antiquities-archaeology/ (last visited January 6, 2016).  The report was later found to refer to money made from all types of looting in the al-Nabuk region of Syria, not only the looting of archaeological material.  (See “New Documents Prove ISIS Heavily Involved in Antiquities Trafficking,’ Gates of Nineveh Blog (September 30, 2015), available at https://gatesofnineveh.wordpress.com/2015/09/30/new-documents-prove-isis-heavily-involved-in-antiquities-trafficking/) (last visited January 6, 2016). 

The $100 million figure has been cited in a "Fact Sheet" to justify support for H.R. 1493/S.1887, but it appears even less grounded in fact.  See "Fact Sheet: Deny ISIS Funding & Save Syria's Antiquities,"  United States House of Representatives, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Elliot L. Engel, Democrats (October 28, 2015) available at https://democrats-foreignaffairs.house.gov/news/press-releases/fact-sheet-deny-isis-funding-save-syrias-antiquities-hr1493s1887 (last visited January 6, 2016).  Instead, it traces back to an unsupported claim made by Iraq’s UN Ambassador at a time the U.N. was considering a resolution condemning the terrorist group’s destruction and looting of cultural sites in Iraq.  See Rick Gladstone, “U.N. Resolves to Combat Plundering of Antiquities by ISIS,” The New York Times, May 28, 2015, available at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/29/world/middleeast/un-resolves-to-combat-plundering-of-antiquities-by-isis.html?_r=0  (last visited January  6, 2016).   

The Reality:  Provable amounts that ISIS has made from antiquities sales are far smaller, ranging from several hundreds of thousands of dollars to several millions.  See Derek Fincham, "Leaked Records Hint at How Much ISIS Makes on Antiquities," Illicit Cultural Property Blog, http://illicitculturalproperty.com/leaked-records-hint-at-how-much-isis-makes-on-antiquities/#more-10623    (last visited January 4, 2016).  See also Kate Fitz Gibbon, "Debunking the ISIS Antiquities Funding Myth,' Committee for Cultural Policy Blog (December 6, 2015), available at http://committeeforculturalpolicy.org/debunking-the-isis-antiquities-funding-myth/ (last vistited January 6, 2016).  These figures are a drop in the bucket compared to ISIS estimated take of at least $1 billion.

1. The Claim:  Import restrictions will "save" Syrian cultural property.

The Sources:  The archaeological lobby claims that embargoes on cultural goods will "save" Syrian cultural property, act as to disincentive looting, and damage terrorist financing.  See Erin Thompson, "Restrict Imports of Antiquities from Syria to Cut Down on Looting," The New York Times (January 21, 2015), available at http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/10/08/protecting-syrias-heritage/restrict-imports-of-antiquities-from-syria-to-cut-down-on-looting (last visited January 6, 2016) and Heather Lee, "Heritage Crisis in Syria; a Call for a Moratorium on the Antiquities Trade, Saving Antiquities for Everyone Blog (September 3, 2014) available at http://savingantiquities.org/heritage-crisis-syria-call-temporary-moratorium-trade/ (last visited January 6, 2016).

The Reality:  As applied by U.S. Customs, import restrictions are grossly over broad because they relate to where artifacts are made instead of where and when they were found.  Under the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act ("CPIA"), the law governing import restrictions on cultural goods, the Government bears the initial burden to establish: (1) the item is of a type that appears on the designated list; (2) the item was first discovered within and subject to the export control of the country for which restrictions were granted; and (3) that it was illegally removed from the country for which import restrictions were granted after the applicable date.  (Under the CPIA, this is the date restrictions were imposed; here the date proposed under H.R. 1403/S.1887 is March 15, 2011.)  Thus, under H.R. 1493/S.1887, the Government should be required to establish that (1) the item is of a type that appears on the designated list of Syrian artifacts that will be created; (2) the item was “first discovered within” Syria and was subject to Syrian export control; and (3) the item was illegally removed from Syria after March 15, 2011.

Unfortunately, history shows that the State Department and U.S. Customs put expedience first.  Despite the CPIA’s plain meaning, the applicable regulation, 12 C.F.R. § 12.104 (a), ignores these requirements.  See Ancient Coin Collectors Guild v. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 801 F. Supp. 2d 383, 407 n. 25 (D. Md. 2011) (“Congress only authorized the imposition of import restrictions on objects that were ‘first discovered within, and [are] subject to the export control by the State Party.’ Under the regulations, that requirement seems to apply only to the importation of a ‘fragment or part’ of an object of archaeological or ethnological interest.  This appears to have been an oversight in the drafting, or codification, of the original regulations in 1985, and has persisted in the C.F.R. ever since.”), aff’d,  698 F.3d 171 (4th Cir. 2012).  Accordingly, collectors are rightly concerned that following standard operating procedure,  the Government will argue that it need only establish the first element of its burden, i.e. that the object is “of archaeological interest” with a “country of origin” or manufacture of “Syria.”  For coins (one of the most common ancient artifacts), the practical result will thus be to give CBP license to “scoop up” all historical coins minted in Syria over the centuries even though such coins circulated far from Syria in ancient times as items of commerce and in more modern times as collectibles.  This, of course, will do little or nothing to "save" Syrian cultural property, disincentivize looting, and damage terrorist financing, but will do much to harm the legitimate trade in ancient art and the cultural understanding it brings.  

And what will happen to any antiquities and coins that are swept up in the dragnet?  The CPIA assumes that they will be repatriated to Syria, something not changed in H.R. 1493/S. 1887.  This, of course, raises pertinent questions.  Can artifacts be saved if they are returned to a war zone?  And is it morally justifiable to give them to the Assad regime, which has done its own share of looting and which has also intentionally destroyed cultural sites with its barrel bombs and artillery?

Consider Helping Dick Stout

Dick Stout, a metal detectorist who runs a popular blog, lost his home to a tornado.  Friends have set up a way to donate money to help Dick and his family during this difficult time.  CPO hopes Dick, his wife and their community will bounce back from this tragedy.  Those who wish to help can do so here.

Muted Response to Russian Bombing Attack Near Palmyra's Ancient Citadel

The archaeological blogosphere has had a muted response to a Russian attack on ISIS positions near the ancient citadel of Palmyra.  Last month, Assad's director of antiquities reacted favorably to other such reports.  CPO wonders if the response would be as muted if US warplanes conducted similar attacks on archaeologically significant areas.

Consider the Source

This blog is up front.  It reflects the views of collectors.  But that's not the case for major sources for claims about looting in Syria.  Each source has interests and agendas not always apparent from news coverage or archaeological blogs that rely on such information (often without clear attribution).    That's not to say what these sources say is necessarily 100% false.  Rather,  just that its always a good idea to consider the source in assessing the information.

The Assad Regime-- The Assad Regime is a major source of information for others, particularly archaeological blogs.  The problem is pure propaganda.   As Syrian government officials would have it, ISIS is always to blame for all damage to Syrian cultural patrimony.  In contrast, brave Syrian cultural officials are always doing their best to protect Syrian cultural patrimony from destruction and looting.  The latter may or may not be based on fact, but the former is pure nonsense.  ISIS is an awful plague on the people of Syria and its cultural patrimony, but Assad's military has done its fair share of bombing cultural sites into dust.  Moreover, the Syrian military has certainly been involved in looting and otherwise damaging the major sites of Palmyra and Apamea before they fell to rebels.  And, of course, let's not forget Assad is wholly responsible for crushing a largely peaceful movement and thereby starting a full fledged civil war.

UNESCO-  UNESCO is run by a former Bulgarian Communist (now Socialist) and its pronouncements reflect a state ownership approach that ignores the rights of individuals, ethnic and religious groups.  Not surprisingly, UNESCO supports repatriation of artifacts to Assad in the midst of a civil war despite the Assad regime's poor stewardship and even purposeful destruction of cultural artfiacts.

American Schools for Oriental Research (ASOR) and the State Department's Syrian Heritage Initiative--   Potential conflict of interest is the problem here.   The State Department awarded a $600,000 contract to ASOR, an organization that takes a dim view of private collecting.  Furthermore, the contract seeks to help raise public awareness about looting in war torn Iraq and Syria at the very same time both the State Department and ASOR are lobbying Congress to impose what amounts to permanent import restrictions on all Syrian cultural goods and create a new bureaucracy within the State Department.  Enough said.

Syrian Treasure Houses: Hype vs. Reality

Not surprisingly given efforts to get the Senate to take up HR 1493, a bill that takes advantage of the ongoing tragedy in Syria to create a new State Department bureaucracy to coordinate enforcement efforts and impose what amounts to permanent restrictions on Syrian cultural goods, both the State Department and the archaeological lobby are heavily promoting news about the repatriation of  items seized from Abu Sayaff , a terrorist financier, as proof such legislation is needed.

As a State Department press release indicates,

On May 15, 2015, U.S. Special Operations Forces recovered a cache of hundreds of archaeological and historical objects and fragments during a raid in al-Amr (eastern Syria) to capture ISIL leader Abu Sayyaf. According to the U.S. Department of Defense, Abu Sayyaf was involved in ISIL's military operations and helped direct the terrorist organization's illicit oil, gas, and financial operations. The cache represents significant primary evidence of looting at archaeological sites in Syria and Iraq, theft from regional museums, and the stockpiling of these spoils for likely sale on the international market. It also corroborates evidence of looting previously documented by the Department of State and the American Schools of Oriental Research. All objects and fragments were turned over to officials at the Iraq National Museum on July 15 by the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. 

(Emphasis added.)  Well, that may be true in the narrow sense, but even so, the actual quantity, quality and value of what was found falls so far short of what we were led to expect that responsible parties in Congress and in the press should start asking some serious questions.

Let's not forget not so long ago, an ASOR State Department contractor was telling the press that "looted antiquities" were ISIS' second most important source of funding after "hot oil" and others were claiming that $36 million in stolen antiquities were taken from one area in Syria alone.  And,  of course, if such dubious claims were true, the Abu Sayaff cache would presumably look far more like how what one one foreign archaeo-blogger has imagined those fabled storehouses for stolen Syrian antiquities:

If they exist, they could be veritable treasure houses, the buyer had the pick of a vast amount of numbers of objects from the tens of thousands of holes dug in 'productive' areas of productive sites. They could afford to buy the best of the best, sawn-up Assyrian friezes, glyptic  material, cunies, Sumerian statues, Akkadian jewellery, Seleucid bronzes, and coins, loads of coins. You can just imagine it. Rather like a Swiss freeport, just somewhere at the end of a dirt track in the Middle Eastern desert. 

The reality, of course, now appears to be quite different and instead of the contents of a "Swiss freeport" we appear to have the equivalent of the small stock of a none too prosperous Middle Eastern antiquities dealer. So, perhaps, a reassessment is needed, not only about to what extent ISIS may be funded by antiquities sales, but in determining the real need for substantial departures from current law proposed both here and in Germany, which have almost entirely been justified by the ISIS threat.

ISIS Stash-- Some Additional Thoughts

Archaeo-blogger Sam Hardy has analyzed  what was found in Abu Sayyaf's stash, but in his rush to promote the group of coins and small antiquities as proof that "highly portable antiquities" are funding ISIS, he misses at least three important points.

First, Hardy makes much of the number of coins (236 by his count) in the group, but is that number really that surprising?  Other than pottery shards, coins are the most common artifacts to come down to us from antiquity.  So, the fact there are more coins than anything else in the group should not be deemed significant.

Second, the items in the hoard may be portable, but that does not necessarily make them valuable.  Indeed, assuming the coins are real-- not fake-- they still would still likely not be worth that much.  A quick Internet search suggests that common Islamic gold coins typically retail here in the US for $300-$600 depending on condition.  Common Islamic silver sells in the $30-$75 range and bronze even less. Of course, wholesale values, particularly in Syria, Turkey or  Lebanon, would likely be far less.   As for the antiquities, even if they are real, they certainly don't appear that valuable either.  So, what is the hoard worth?  CPO would make an educated guess somewhere around $40,000 (retail in the US), but even if it were double or triple that, these numbers still fall far short of what has been speculated and what is needed to fund an insurgency of ISIS' size and scope.

Finally, and perhaps most significantly what may be most interesting about the group is what's missing--there may be Islamic coins with their decorative legends praising Allah, but no Greek, Roman or Byzantine ones with their images of gods, goddesses and rulers.   So, where are they?  Of course this is just speculation, but perhaps ISIS' iconoclasm and the crucible found with the group provide a clue to an unfortunate fate.

Addendum (Tuesday, July 21):  Though little detail is provided, archaeo-blogger Paul Barford notes that the State Department is saying that the group did include some Byzantine and Roman Povincial bronze coins.  For whatever reason, no Greek, Roman or Byzantine precious metal coins appear to be in the group.  http://eca.state.gov/cultural-heritage-center/iraq-cultural-heritage-initiative/isil-leaders-loot  While the State Department also suggests that the material was found with metal detectors, it is more likely in CPO's opinion that it came from local collectors or museums.

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.

Days After ISIS Publicly Destroys Artifacts, the Archaeological Lobby Debates Destroying Undocumented Artifacts to Remove Them from the Market

Only days after ISIS publicly sledgehammered Palmyrene busts of the sort it is allegedly selling to fund terrorism into dust, some well-connected archaeological bloggers -- citing the public destruction of (modern) ivory at Times Square in NYC as a precedent-- are using twitter to debate the question, "Would we consider destroying undocumented artifacts to remove them from the market?"

Are they serious?

Given the AIA's and ASOR's view that "undocumented archaeological objects" --like the Palmyrene busts ISIS just destroyed--should not be granted any waiver to give them "safe harbor" from Syria's civil war, perhaps so.

Of course, all this just again raises fundamental questions:  Is it about conservation or control?  And  preservation or repatriation?

Tabloid Journalism Alert: An Archaeologist Patrols the Market

The Guardian Newspaper reports on what an UCL archaeologist saw when he walked around antiquities stores in London.  And what did he find?  Well, the same kinds of small antiquities from the Middle East that have been sold there for generations.

Yet, now in some academic circles they are called "blood antiquities."  This, of course, provides the perfect excuse for the usual suspects to declaim on the supposed evils of the antiquities trade and try to justify a major change in our great Anglo-American legal traditions that presumes innocence rather than guilt-- something to think about on this Independence Day.

There is even an image of that that infamous coin struck in Apamea millenia ago.   Though the Guardian quoted archaeo-blogger Sam Hardy, it evidently did not bother to check Hardy's blog that raised serious questions about whether the coin is as advertised out of a war zone.

More tabloid journalism at its worst.

Archaeo-Blogger Acknowledges Assad Regime Involvement

In a long post, archaeo-blogger Sam Hardy has examined the involvement of the Assad regime in looting at Palmyra before the site fell into ISIS' hands.  He deserves kudos for doing so now given the unexplained relucatance of the archaeological lobby to criticize the Assad regime in the past.   Still, as always, caution is warranted given the untrustworthy nature of most media sources in the region upon which Hardy has relied for this and other blog posts he has made in the past.

Archaeo-Blogger Finds FOIA

It's good to see that one archaeo-blogger, who previously criticized the ACCG's efforts to seek information about import restrictions from the State Department, has now embraced the process himself as important to the public's right to know.  Will wonders never cease.

UNESCO Chief Condemns Mosaic Museum Attack; Archaeological Blogosphere Slow to Follow

UNESCO's Chief has rightly condemned the Assad regime's barrel bombing of the Maarrat al Numman Mosaic Museum.  Yet, in the Anti-American reaches of the archaeological blogosphere, it's just a case of "stuff happens" in war and yet another opportunity to take swipes at the antiquities trade. 

"Stuff" indeed "happens" in war, but in this particular case it's hard to stomach the claim that the bombing was done by "mistake" given the publicity efforts to protect the museum's mosaics from war damage have received in the international press.   Indeed, if anything, it's more likely Assad's forces attacked the museum BECAUSE a consortium of U.S. Institutions were involved in supporting the effort to shore up the museum's mosaics.  One can only hope those efforts succeeded, at least to some extent.

 It remains to be seen how more responsible archaeological blogs respond to this latest tragedy.

Update (6/23)-  It seems none of the other well known archaeological blogs thinks this story is worth comment on.  It's unclear why, but it does again suggest that there is a conscious effort to deemphasize any destruction and looting done on behalf of the Assad regime and instead focus entirely on ISIS.

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.

What's There to Hide?

Archaeo-blogger and anti-coin trade advocate Nathan Elkins has accused CPO of misrepresenting his views about the circulation of ancient coins.   Yet, Elkins has been cagey about not making his work easily accessible to anyone but like-minded academics.  Indeed, Elkins has even gone so far as to avoid making his comments to CPAC public by refusing to post  them on the regulations.gov website. (CPO is puzzled by his statement that CPO refused to post his comments on this blog.  Only one fellow archaeo-blogger is banned based on the tenor of his comments.)  If Elkins is really concerned about his views about coin circulation being misrepresented, he can easily remedy that concern by making his papers and CPAC comments public.  Really, what's there to hide?