Summary of January 25, 2022, Cultural Property Advisory Committee Meeting to Discuss Proposed Renewals and Amendments of MOUs with Cyprus and Mali and a Proposed Renewal of a MOU with Guatemala

                 On January 25, 2022, the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) met to consider proposed renewals and amendments of MOUs with Cyprus and Mali and a proposed renewal of a MOU with Guatemala.  CPAC carried over a discussion of the Cypriot renewal from its October 5, 2021, meeting.  The following members were present: (1) Stefan Passantino (Chairman- Public); (2) Steven Bledsoe (Public); (3) Karol Wight (Museums); (4) J.D. Demming (Public); (5) Ricardo St. Hilaire (Archaeology); (6) Joan Connelly (Archaeology); Rachael Fulton Brown (Archaeology?); (7) Anthony Wisniewski (Collector-Sale of International Cultural Property); (8) Mark Hendricks (Sale of International Cultural Property); and (9) David Tamasi (International Sale of Cultural Property).  Allison Davis, CPAC’s State Department Executive Director, and Michele Prior, also of ECA, were also present.

                Chairman Passantino welcomed the speakers.  He apologized for starting late due to some technical difficulties.  He indicated that the Committee had read all the comments, and speakers could only be allotted 4 minutes time given the busy schedule.  The speakers would be divided up according to subject matter.  The Chair also reserved a short amount of time for questions.

                The following speakers addressed the Committee on Mali: (1) Kathleen Bickford Berzock (Mary and Leigh Block Museum of Art, Northwestern University); (2) Kate FitzGibbon (Committee for Cultural Policy and Global Heritage Alliance); (3) Susan McIntosh (Rice University). Barbara Arroyo (Society for American Archaeology) addressed the Committee about Guatemala.   The following speakers spoke specifically about import restrictions on coins: (1) Peter Tompa (Peter Tompa Law representing the International Association of Professional Numismatists (IAPN)); (2) Robert Leonard (private collector); and (3) Randy Myers (Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG)).  The following speakers focused their comments on Cyprus: (1) Andrew McCarthy (College of Southern Nevada); (2) Josh Knerly (Hahn Loeser representing Association of Art Museum Directors (AAMD); (3) Helena Aroz (HA) (Antiquities Coalition); (4) Lindy Crewe(Cyprus American Archaeological Research Institute (CAARI); and (5) Dr. Despina Pilides (former Curator of Antiquities, Cypriot Department of Antiquities).  The following speakers covered all the MOUs at issue: (1) Dr. Brian Daniels (Archaeological Institute of America); and (2) Dr. Marlene Losier (ML) (Losier Gonz law firm).

                Kathleen Bickford Berzock (KBB) indicates that the Caravans of Gold exhibit demonstrates that Mali has engaged in cultural exchange.  KBB believes that Mali has done all it could to preserve its cultural patrimony despite political instability and the pandemic.

                Kate FitzGibbon (KFG) does not believe Mali has met any of the four determinations before import restrictions may be renewed.  There are minimal exports coming from Mali with only $691 of cultural goods being exported in 2019.  There is a concern with insufficient notice of any amendment.  The Federal Register indicates that the request only goes up to the mid-18th c. while the Cultural Heritage Center’s website suggests that restrictions up to the 1920’s will be considered.  Most of the Malian material on the market was exported during the French Colonial period.  Mali has failed to fund its cultural heritage sector.  MOUs should not be renewed over and over again if they are not making a difference.  Most of the effort to protect Malian cultural heritage seems to have been funded from abroad.  The US Government made a significant grant back in 2020.  We need to insist on better benchmarks before the MOU is renewed.  The real problem in Mali is political turmoil, most recently with a military coup.  There should also be safe haven given to Malian artifacts in the event of further armed conflict that could destroy cultural heritage.

                The Committee for Cultural Policy’s and Global Heritage Alliance’s papers can be found here:

Mali:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0037-0027

Cyprus:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0032-0077

Guatemala:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0037-0021

                Susan McIntosh (SM) did not have time to submit written comments.  The MOU with Mali is necessary to reduce looting.  The Malian government has done what it can to protect its own cultural heritage by creating nine cultural missions.  These formerly had been funded by taxes on tourists who are now scarce due to Covid and political instability.  Despite the lack of taxes, the Malian government has still funded this effort to the best of its ability.  Looting remains a problem at least with lower value material.

                Barbara Arroyo (BA) supports renewal of the MOU with Guatemala.  The MOU is important to stem criminal activities.  Most of the problems occur where the government does not have adequate resources to protect cultural heritage.  There is an ongoing effort to work with the Catholic Church to document religious artifacts.  There is still a looting problem.  Recently, the US recovered 257 Guatemalan archaeological items.  US archaeologists have not only funded digs, but the training of Guatemalan archaeologists. 

                The Society for American Archaeology’s papers can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0037-0028

                Peter Tompa (PT) noted that there were no import restrictions on coins for 25 years after the CPIA was passed into law.  This is not surprising as coins are items of commerce, and while they may be of “archaeological interest,” they are not generally of “cultural significance.”  In 2007, this changed under questionable circumstances that raise fairness questions.  Coin collectors are realists and recognize such import restrictions are here to stay, but a reset is warranted in how they are implemented.  First, to be consistent with the Cultural Property Implementation Act (“CPIA”), restrictions should only be placed on coins that are exclusively or actually found in Cyprus.  The State Department’s current standard, based on where a coin “primarily circulated” simply ignores the statutory requirements.  Second, even if this standard is utilized, all Cypriot mint gold coins and Cypriot mint coins of Alexander the Great and his immediate successors struck on an Attic weight standard should be delisted based on hoard evidence.  Third, the State Department should only utilize neutral experts to prepare designated lists and meet and confer with the trade and collectors about such lists.  Under no circumstances should collectors have to guess what coins are restricted and which are not restricted.  Finally, there should be no restrictions on Spanish Colonial and Republican era coins from Guatemalan mints.  These coins either do not meet the 250-year-old threshold for archaeological objects or are not normally discovered on the ground.  They are not ethnological objects because they are not the products of tribal cultures but what were for the time sophisticated industrial processes.  Moreover, one cannot assume they are found in Guatemala because they travelled widely in international commerce and even served as legal tender in the United States until 1857. 

                PT’s oral comments can be found here:  http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2022/01/comments-from-todays-cpac-hearing-its.html

                IAPN’s written comments can be found here:

Cyprus:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0032-0038

Cyprus Supplemental:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0037-0015

Guatemala:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0037-0009

                Robert Leonard (RL) states that import restrictions should not be extended to Crusader era coins.  Examination of the actual object is essential for proper scholarship, and import blockages will harm the study of medieval Cypriot numismatics in the United States.  Such coins were well known to Italian merchants.  The hoard evidence presented proves that they circulated outside of Cyprus in quantity.  Legitimate Cypriot dealers only sell Cypriot coins imported from abroad.  Import restrictions only hurt American collectors buying such coins from third countries.  It makes absolutely no sense to restrict Guatemalan coins because that would be restricting what were legal tender in the United States. 

                RL’s written testimony can be found here: 

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0037-0002

                Randy Myers (RM) wants to focus his comments on behalf of the ACCG on one procedural and one substantive issue.  Procedurally, the Federal Register notice fails to indicate specifically that there will be an effort to amend the Cypriot MOU to include more coins.  This does not provide sufficient notice to allow collectors to comment. Substantively, there is no indication that less drastic measures have been considered before import restrictions have been imposed on coins.  One such less drastic measure would be for Cyprus to adopt a program akin to the Treasure Act and Portable Antiquities Scheme.  This program requires coins that are found to be reported so they can be recorded and gives the State a right of first refusal over coins for a payment of fair market value.  CPAC should also recommend that the State Department honor export permits from fellow EU members for imports of Cypriot coins.

                The ACCG’s written testimony can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0032-0025

                Andrew McCarthy (AM) states that MOUs are a crucial tool.  Coins should be included because how is he supposed to know if a coin on the market was stolen from his archaeological site unless the burden of proof is placed on collectors to provide a provenance for it.  McCarthy hopes the MOU will be expanded to include both very early material as well as a rolling date for material over 100 years old.  Early settlements have been looted for paleolithic tools.  Archaeological remains of a famous bandit dating from the early 20^th century should also be protected. 

                Josh Knerly (JK) focuses on the fourth determination that asks if the application of import restrictions is consistent with the general interest of the international community in the interchange of cultural property among nations for scientific, cultural and educational purposes.  He notes that this provision contemplates collaboration far broader than that related to the exchange of archaeological and ethnological material because “cultural property” is far more broadly defined in the CPIA and UNESCO Convention.  He also notes that the boilerplate Article II placed in the current Cypriot MOU fails to set forth specific criteria to facilitate such cultural exchange.  The same issues arise with regard to the MOUs with Guatemala and Mali.  There is a separate “action plan” for Mali which addresses these issues to some extent, but JK questions whether the State Department will allow CPAC to make recommendations to modify it in an effort to stimulate cultural exchange.

                The AAMD’s written testimony on Cyprus can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0032-0105

                Helena Aroz (HA) viewed the 2016 CPAC proceedings on Cyprus.  MOUs are important in combatting looting and benefit collectors and dealers by keeping looted material off the market.  They complement widely held ethical guidelines.  HA also had the opportunity to excavate in Cyprus where she saw firsthand that looting leads to the loss of important information.  She also had excellent interchanges with the Cypriot people and remembers fondly being invited to attend local weddings.  MOUs are also important in fostering cultural exchange. 

                The Antiquity Coalition’s paper on Cyprus can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0032-0080

                Lindy Crewe (LC) speaks about CAARI’s efforts as the only on-site American archaeological organization in Cyprus.  CAARI hosts both US scholars and US tourists. It has hosted Fulbright scholars and interacts with the 17 US archaeological digs on Cyprus.  There have been major advances in the study of Byzantine and Colonial era archaeology which also deserves protection.  Looting has also impacted the ability to study DNA when cemeteries are disturbed.    

                Dr. Despina Pilides (DP) strongly supports the MOU.  She previously was the curator for the Department of Antiquities in charge of museums.  She also worked on archaeological digs and has been a Chair of ICOM, the International Council of Museums.  A study indicates that one-half of the Byzantine material that was left in the Turkish occupied zone remains missing.  There needs to be strong protections for Byzantine and Ottoman era artifacts.  There has been an effort to digitize Byzantine era artifacts from the Turkish zone that are in the museum at Nicosia.  Coins are important for Cypriot history and should be protected to help protect the context in which they are found. 

                DP’s written testimony can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0037-0014

                Dr. Brian Daniels (BD) mentions that the AIA has over 200,000 members [the vast majority of this number are individuals who subscribe to Archaeology Magazine].  The AIA supports renewals of MOUS with Mali, Cyprus and Guatemala.  Import restrictions are an important tool in discouraging looting of archaeological sites. The MOU with Cyprus should be made consistent with that of Greece and Turkey regarding what coins should be covered.  There have been long term loans of objects provided by Cyprus, Guatemala and Mali.  Mali in particular has done what it can despite political turmoil.

                The AIA’s papers can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0037-0025

                Dr. Marlene Losier (ML) supports renewals and expansion of import restrictions to new categories as part of a “progressive view” of the development of the law.  By entering into such MOUs we encourage other countries to protect our own heritage both abroad and even in space like the Apollo 11 landing site.

                Chairman Passantino then allowed CPAC members a brief time for questions.

                Anthony Wisniewski observed that most of the oral and written testimony reflected the opinions of the speakers.  He also noted that CPAC cannot apply a “progressive view of the law” because it is obliged to apply Congressional statutes as written.  He notes that coin collectors have produced information from third party academic sources that by their nature have a much higher degree of reliability than the arguments of the participants.  He asks PT if he agrees with the statement that those sources show that over 95% of the Cypriot mint coins of Alexander the Great are found outside of Cyprus.  PT agrees.  He then indicates this carries a burden on this point which has not been contested by proponents of the restrictions. 

                Joan Connelly asks DP about the digitization of collections.  DP says some 96,000 objects have been digitized.  There has been a special effort to digitize items in the Nicosia Museum that come from the occupied North of Cyprus.  She then reiterates the importance of coins.

                Karol Wight asks JK about Cyprus’ lack of an immunity from seizure law.  JK indicates such a law patterned on those of other EU countries would help facilitate loans. 

                Chairman Passantino then thanked the speakers and CPAC went into a recess for lunch before reconvening. 

                Some additional testimony on the Cypriot renewal can be found in this summary of CPAC’s October 5, 2021, meeting:  http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2021/10/summary-of-october-5-2021-cultural.html  

Comments from Today's CPAC Hearing: It’s Time for a Reset for Import Restrictions on Coins

 I said this more or less at today's CPAC hearing to discuss proposed renewals of MOUs with Cyprus and Guatemala: 

            I am speaking on behalf of IAPN which represents the micro and small businesses of the numismatic trade.  In many ways, this hearing is a much greater test for CPAC than for ancient coin collectors.  We’ve heard a lot in the past several years about how the system is rigged.  Here, unfortunately, there is convincing evidence that may be the case.  

            For 25 years after the CPIA was passed, there were no restrictions on coins.   This should be no surprise.  Coins are items of commerce.  So, it is difficult for modern nation states to justifiably claim them as their “cultural property.”  They are among the most common of historical artifacts and while they may be of “archaeological interest”, they are generally not of “cultural significance.”  They are avidly collected and traded worldwide including in Cyprus.  It simply makes no sense to preclude Americans from importing such coins.   Indeed, when the CPIA was being discussed, Mark Feldman, a high-ranking State Department lawyer, represented to Congress that it was “hard … to imagine a case where we would need to deal with coins except in the most unusual circumstances.”

            In 2007, all this changed with Cypriot coins.   According to the declarations of two former CPAC Members, including Former Chair Kislak, that change was made against CPAC’s recommendations.  Moreover, there was an attempt to mislead the public and the Congress about CPAC’s opposition to import restrictions on coins.  Even worse, the decision maker made the decision after she had already announced she was leaving for a job at Goldman Sachs, where she was recruited by and worked for the husband of a former AIA trustee and the founder of the Antiquities Coalition, which has been highly active lobbying for import restrictions.  How can such a decision be a fair one?

            We are realists and understand at this point that import restrictions on coins are probably here to stay, but CPAC can still advocate for a reset on how they are implemented.  First, CPAC should insist that the State Department only apply restrictions to coins that are “exclusively found” within Cyprus or to those where there is proof that they were illicitly excavated there.  Only such coins can be “first discovered within, and … subject to export control by” Cyprus as required by the CPIA at 19 U.S.C. § 2601(2).   In contrast, the State Department’s current standard based on where a coin “primarily circulated” simply ignores these requirements.

            Second, even under a “primarily circulated” standard, certain coin types on the current designated list should be removed.  Here, numismatic research proves that all Cypriot mint gold and all Attic standard Hellenistic silver coins of Alexander the Great, Philip and Demetrius did not “primarily circulate” within Cyprus and should be delisted.

            Third, CPAC should ensure that the State Department only uses neutral experts to help prepare designated lists; not ones who have advocated for import restrictions in the past.  At a minimum, State should be directed to meet and confer with collectors and the trade on the contents of these lists.  Under no circumstances should collectors and US Customs be forced to guess what coin types are restricted and which are not, as is the case with the recent Turkish and amended Greek lists.

            Finally, no new restrictions should be contemplated for Guatemalan coins.  Spanish Colonial and Republican era coins are not archaeological in nature; they either do not meet the 250-year threshold and/or are not “normally discovered” within the ground.  Nor do such coins meet the definition of ethnological objects.  They are not the products of tribal cultures but were produced en masse with sophisticated industrial processes.  Finally, due to their wide circulation in international commerce, one cannot assume such coins were “first discovered within” and hence were “subject to export control by” Guatemalan authorities. Indeed, early coins that circulated within Guatemala were also legal tender in the United States until 1857.

            With these recommended actions, CPAC can demonstrate that it operates with fairness and adheres to the CPIA’s statutory requirements. 

            Thank you.

State Department reopens record for renewal and possible amendment of the current MOU with Cyprus; Renewals of MOUs with Guatemala and Mali also to be discussed.

The State Department's Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and its Cultural Heritage Center have provided public notice of a Cultural Property Advisory Committee meeting on January 25 and 26 to discuss a renewal of a MOU with Guatemala, and renewals and possible amendments of current MOUs with Cyprus and Mali.  The public notice can be found here. A direct link to comment can be found here.  It is important that any comments be received before the January 18, 2021 11:59 PM deadline. That is also the deadline to inform the Cultural Heritage Center if you want to speak at the hearing. 

The renewal and possible amendment of the MOU with Cyprus was to be discussed last October, but consideration of the request was bumped to CPAC's January meeting given a last minute addition of proposed "emergency import restrictions" on behalf of Afghanistan being placed on the docket.  CPO has covered the CPAC public meeting that discussed that absurd request that will only benefit the Taliban regime here.  At this juncture, we have not heard one way or the other whether the State Department will actually go through with authorizing such import restrictions that would claw back Afghan heritage imported from legitimate markets in Europe just so it can be handed over to the iconoclasts who blew up the Bamiyan Buddhas and smashed many of the statues in the Kabul Museum. 

In any case, that report also includes links to papers submitted by the ACCG, IAPN, and Alan Berman about the proposal to extend and amend the Cypriot MOU.  Collectors of Byzantine, Crusader and Turkish coins should beware; it is likely that this renewal will be used as a vehicle to amend current restrictions on Archaic, Classical, Hellenistic, and Roman Provincial coins minted in Cyprus to include such later issues.   

Please consider commenting if you failed to do so back in September because silence will be spun as acquiescence.  A guide on the request and what to say can be found here.  Those of you who also collect Latin American coinage should also consider commenting on the Guatemalan request.  The issues there are similar to those raised with regard to MOUs with other Latin American countries.  As described in  IAPN's paper about last year's Peruvian request, Spanish Colonial and Republican era coinage of Latin American countries simply fail to meet the threshold criteria for archaeological or ethnological objects.  Spanish Colonial and Republican era coins cannot be considered archaeological objects because they are not normally discovered in the ground.  Nor can they be properly viewed as ethnological objects.  They are the products of what at the time were sophisticated industrial practices, not crafts of tribal societies.  Moreover, such coins circulated widely, including within the United States, where they were legal tender until 1857. 

On Mali, there are no numismatic issues as far as CPO can tell. Evidently, the people of Mali preferred to use salt as currency rather than coins.  The first Malian coins were not local, but French Colonial issues from the late 19th c, making Mali one of the few countries coin collectors at least have little to worry about. Or, maybe we all should be worried if the State Department embargoes Malian salt as cultural heritage and US Customs bans all salt imports because even trained customs inspectors cannot tell Malian from other types of salt.  Don't laugh!  Recently, "rope" became targets of such embargoes, although to be fair any rope shortage appears to be the result of pandemic related supply chain issues and not cultural property embargoes. 

Summary of October 5, 2021, Cultural Property Advisory Committee Meeting to Address Emergency Import Restrictions Request on Behalf of the “Former Government of Afghanistan,” Proposed Renewals of MOUs with Cyprus and Peru.

                On October 5, 2021, the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee (“CPAC”) met to consider proposed emergency import restrictions on behalf of the “former government of Afghanistan” as well as proposed renewals of MOUs with Peru and Cyprus.  The following members were present: (1) Stefan Passantino (Chairman- Public); (2) Steven Bledsoe (Public); (3) Karol Wight (Museums); (4) J.D. Demming (Public); (5) Ricardo St. Hilaire (Archaeology); (6) Joan Connelly (Archaeology); Rachael Fulton Brown (Archaeology?); (7) Anthony Wisniewski (Collector-Sale of International Cultural Property); Mark Hendricks (Sale of International Cultural Property?); and David Tamasi (International Sale of Cultural Property?).  Allison Davis, CPAC’s State Department Executive Director, and Michele Prior, also of ECA, were also present.

                It appears that the State Department has seated last minute Trump Appointees in slots reserved to represent the interests of archaeology and the international trade of cultural property, but that has not yet been confirmed on the State Department website.   Rachael Fulton Brown is an associate professor of History at the University of Chicago.  David Tamasi is a Founding Partner and Managing Director of Chartwell Strategy Group, a Washington based government relations and strategic communications firm.  Mark C. Hendricks is a principal at Taradin Service Ltd., a private equity firm.  Messrs. Tamasi’s and Hendricks’ background in the international sale of cultural property is unclear.

Chairman Passantino welcomed the speakers.  He indicated that the Committee had read all the comments, and speakers could only be allotted 4 minutes time given the busy schedule.  He also indicated that due to the addition of Afghan emergency import restrictions to the schedule, the Committee’s consideration of the Cypriot renewal would be tabled until a January meeting.  Nonetheless, speakers were free to discuss Cyprus if they were prepared to do so.  Alternatively, they could defer their comments until January. 

The following speakers addressed the Committee: (1) Kate FitzGibbon (Committee for Cultural Policy/Global Heritage Alliance); (2) Josh Knerly (Association of Art Museum Directors); (3) Dr. Elizabeth Greene (Archaeological Institute of America); (4) Dr. Brian Bauer (University of Illinois); (5) Dr. Karen Olsen Bruhns (San Francisco State University); (6) Peter Tompa (International Association of Professional Numismatists/Professional Numismatists Guild; (7) Dr. Brian Daniels (Archaeological Institute of America); (8) Tess Davis (Antiquities Coalition); (9)  Allen Berman (Author, Professional Numismatist); and (10) Randolph Myers (Ancient Coin Collectors Guild).

Kate FitzGibbon (KFG) spoke first on behalf of the Committee for Cultural Policy (CCP) and Global Heritage Alliance (GHA).  Although she also put in a paper on Peru, she will focus her comment on Afghanistan.  KG lived in Afghanistan from the 1970s to early 1980s writing about the culture and dealing in ethnographic art.   She had to flee the country in 1982 after the Soviet invasion.  The real issue today is not looting but the fear that the Taliban will intentionally destroy cultural heritage either intentionally to score jihadist propaganda points or to exploit Afghanistan’s mineral wealth.  Section 1216 of the National Defense Authorization Act does not provide a basis for safe harbor for Afghan antiquities. ECA should forget about emergency import restrictions and instead work with the trade and museums in protecting Afghan cultural heritage and extracting Afghan archaeologists from the country. 

The CCP’s and GHA’s testimony on Afghanistan can be found here:  https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0032-0068

Their testimony on the proposed renewal of a MOU with Cyprus can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0032-0077

Their testimony on the proposed renewal of a MOU with Peru can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0032-0097

                Josh Knerly (JK) spoke next on behalf of the Association of Art Museum Directors (AAMD).  The request of the “former Government of Afghanistan” raises some serious legal issues.  The government that made the request no longer exists and there was insufficient information provided about the proposal within a short five (5) day comment period to make intelligent comment or for CPAC to have a full grasp of the issues.  The effect of import restrictions may be to freeze objects in place in Afghanistan where they may be destroyed by the Taliban. CPAC needs to consider the consequences of any import restrictions carefully. Section 1216 of the National Defense Authorization Act is not a safe harbor provision.  It only immunizes from seizure institutional loans already covered by an Afghan Government export certificate.  It would make far more sense to defer consideration of the matter until the situation on the ground is clearer.  JK next discussed the Peruvian renewal.  He criticizes the State Department’s replacement of tailored language for each MOU with generic language in Article II of the Agreement.  This generic language does not help AAMD members negotiate with State Parties on museum loans.   The terms and conditions of each MOU should encourage source countries to provide such loans with reasonable fees.  Peru’s loan fees are very high. 

                The AAMD’s written testimony regarding Peru and Cyprus can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0032-0105

                Dr. Elizabeth Greene (EG) is the president elect of the Archaeological Institute of America (AIA).  She focuses her comments on the Fourth Determination that any import restrictions are consistent with the general interest of the international community in the international exchange of cultural property.   She indicates the AIA’s 200,000 members (this figure derives from the number of subscribers to the AIA’s “Archaeology” Magazine) have benefitted from the MOU.  Many have taken AIA sponsored trips to Peru to view Peruvian cultural heritage.  Peru has been generous with loans, including one recent loan of 200 items. Dr. Greene specializes in the study of transport amphora.  They may appear to be duplicates but have manufacturing marks that makes each unique.  MOUs can protect duplicate objects like amphora and coins as well as ensure the market only contains legitimate material.  They are not perfect, but they do help reduce looting. 

                Dr. Brian Bauer (BB) appreciates the fact that Spanish Colonial era documents have been added to MOUs.  He now asks CPAC to recommend changes to Article II of the MOU with Peru to ensure that archaeological samples can be exported for further study.  There are no labs within Peru which can do this work, but the Peruvian cultural bureaucracy, especially on a provincial level, have made it a bureaucratic nightmare to export such material.  Only material shepherded through the system with the help of Peruvian colleagues gets exported.   Many times requests for export get lost or simply stay in limbo so long that the researcher just gives up.  The MOU needs to be modified to encourage Peruvian authorities to fix this problem.

                Dr. Karen Olsen Bruhns (KOB) believes MOUs are essential to fight illicit networks.  She has been involved in the fight against looting since 1963.  She has seen the depredations of looters in Latin America firsthand.  She assists U.S. Customs in repatriating artifacts.  She names US dealers she claims sell looted goods.  She attacks US Museums as being filled with looted material.  She views collectors as no better than looters.

                Peter Tompa (PT) spoke on behalf of the International Association of Professional Numismatists (IAPN) and the Professional Numismatists Guild (PNG).  He defers his comments on Cyprus to focus attention on Peru and Afghanistan.  Spanish Colonial and Republican era coinage of Peru do not fit the statutory definitions for archaeological or ethnological material.  They cannot be considered archaeological material because they are not normally found underground and/or do not meet the 250-year-old threshold.  Such coins were also produced by Europeans using sophisticated industrial processes that churned out thousands of virtually identical coins.  As such, they cannot be ethnological material either. PT then turns to Afghanistan.  He indicates that is should weigh heavily on CPAC that import restrictions could have the perverse effect of requiring US Customs to “claw back” undocumented Bactrian coins imported from Europe and hand them over to the Taliban who could resell, or even worse, melt them.  The CPIA does not contain a “safe harbor” provision to keep that from happening, and Section 1216 of the National Defense Reauthorization Act will provide no help.  Items will be repatriated when diplomatic relations are reestablished, a decision that will be made based on considerations other than the Taliban’s treatment of cultural heritage.  Restrictions are especially problematic for coin collectors since they are applied not as prospective restrictions on illicitly excavated coins but as embargoes to coins already on legal markets within our major trading partners in the EU, UK, and Switzerland. 

                PT’s oral testimony can be found here:  https://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2021/10/the-cpia-cannot-support-import.html

                IAPN’s and PNG’s written testimony on Afghanistan can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0032-0088

                IAPN’s and PNG’s written testimony on Cyprus can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0032-0038

                IAPN’s and PNG’s written testimony on Peru can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0032-0021

Dr. Brian Daniels (BD) spoke for the Archaeological Institute of America (AIA).  The request for a MOU by the former government of Afghanistan allows the Committee to consider emergency import restrictions.   There is looting of crisis proportions in Afghanistan.  Research has shown that 170 sites have suffered looting from 2000-2017.   In 2019, there was an uptick in looting of inscriptions.  Customs has seized archaeological material which appears to be from Tillya Tepe.  In the past decades, US archaeologists have worked on capacity building with their Afghan colleagues. BD acknowledges Section 1216 of the National Defense Reauthorization Act would only have helped evacuating Afghan material when the former government was in power.  Now emergency import restrictions are necessary not only to keep looted material off the market but to support Afghan colleagues.  Customs has inherent authority to hold onto such items until it is safe to return them to Afghanistan. 

The AIA’s submission on Afghanistan can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0032-0069

                Tess Davis (TD) spoke on behalf of the Antiquities Coalition (AC).  The Antiquities Coalition supports emergency import restrictions on Afghan cultural goods.  It is important to take decisive action now given the warning from the Afghan National Museum that looters and smugglers are taking advantage of political instability following the Taliban take over.   Emergency restrictions are not MOUs, but they can protect cultural heritage and collections.  They do not vest title of artifacts in the government.  No concerted international response is necessary.  The US did not adopt emergency restrictions on Cambodian artifacts in the 1970s and we are now seeing the consequences with investigations into Latchford’s sales of Cambodian conflict antiquities to US collectors and museums. 

                AC’s submission on Afghanistan can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0032-0082

                AC’s submission about Cyprus can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0032-0080

AC’s submission on Peru can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0032-0081

                Allen Berman (AB) is an author, publisher and the American Numismatic Association’s instructor on medieval coinage.  He believes that the law of unintended consequences may apply to import restrictions on coins.  Provenanced coins already cost more, but there are very few comparatively on the market because there was no reason historically to keep the provenance of most coins.  On Peru, 95% of coins produced there was made for export.  On Afghanistan, the last time the Taliban were in control, they not only dynamited the Bamiyan Buddhas; they also smashed artifacts in the National Museum.  AB is horrified by the prospect that the US Government may hand over Bactrian coins to the Taliban.  All these coins feature pagan images the Taliban find offensive.  As to Cyprus, thousands of Crusader era coins are documented as having been found outside of Cyprus so you cannot assume such coins were found there.  It would be better for Cyprus and other countries to try systems akin to the United Kingdom’s Portable Antiquity Scheme and Treasure Act.  This system encourages people to report their finds and allows the government the right of first refusal to buy them.

AB’s written testimony on Afghanistan can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0032-0037

                His written testimony on Cyprus can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0032-0035

                Randolph Myers appeared on behalf of the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG).  Given the time, he indicated he would defer his comments on Cyprus until January.

                The ACCG’s written testimony on Afghanistan can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0032-0040

The ACCG’s written testimony on Cyprus can be found here:

https://www.regulations.gov/comment/DOS-2021-0032-0025

Question and Answer Period:

Ricardo St. Hilaire asked JK about Article II in the Peru agreement.  JK indicated that standardized Article IIs do not work.  Peru charges high fees for loans which need to be addressed on an individualized basis in Article II of any renewal.

 Karol Wight asks JK if AAMD museums have faced the same bureaucratic obstacles to loans as BB has experienced with exports of archaeological samples.  JK responds that loans with Peru take an inordinate amount of time to negotiate and that loan fees are high.

J.D. Demming asks if instead of keeping Afghan artifacts in Afghanistan it would be better if they escaped the country given Taliban control.  KOB states that providing a market for antiquities encourages looting.  The real problem is antiquities dealers in the US which now have a “bad odor.”  Sotheby’s now avoids selling antiquities in the US to avoid this perception.  KFG indicates that KOB has an outdated view of the antiquities market based on practices of decades ago.  The art market today takes pains to ensure that what it sells is legal.  Complicating the situation here is that it was quite legal to sell and export antiquities from Afghanistan for decades.  Therefore, one cannot assume items on the market are the products of recent, illicit digs.   Repatriating items to Taliban Afghanistan will not help protect them.  The real issue is the danger of Taliban intentional destruction or destruction of artifacts through mining.  BD indicates that import restrictions will protect items currently in the ground within Afghanistan because there will be less incentive to loot them.  US Customs and the State Department have ample authority to provide safe harbor to any antiquities that are seized.  PT appreciates what BD says about import restrictions protecting unexcavated artifacts within Afghanistan, but the problem is that Customs applies them far too broadly and will repatriate artifacts that have been out of Afghanistan for decades merely because they do not have solid provenances. 

Anthony Wisniewski gets the last word.  He has spent over 500 hours on his CPAC duties.  He has seen lots of conflict between the parties, but thinks all sides believe in cultural property preservation.  He will be working to bring people together to find common ground which promotes both transparency and protects private collections. 

Cyprus Turns its Back on the Common Law Tradition

By advocating for an international convention that would reverse the burden of proof and place it on auction houses selling antiquities, Cyprus has turned further away from its past Common Law traditions as part of the British Commonwealth of Nations.

Auction Houses can and should be more transparent about what is known about an object's provenance, but proposals that call for a reversal of the burden of proof are more appropriate for Middle Eastern dictatorships than for democracies like Cyprus.

And as one of the comments to the linked Cyprus Mail article mentions, in any event perhaps it's not the best time for Cyprus to make such demands given that ongoing matter in Paphos

Collectors' Voices Need to be Heard Once Again!

The State Department’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and its Cultural Heritage Center have announced a comment period for a proposed extension of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Cyprus.  See https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2016/08/10/2016-19018/notice-of-meeting-of-the-cultural-property-advisory-committee

The U.S. Cultural Property Advisory Committee will review these comments and make recommendations based upon them with regard to any extension of the current agreement with Cyprus. 

According to U.S. Customs’ interpretation of the governing statute, import restrictions authorized by this MOU currently bar entry into the United States of the following coin types unless they are accompanied with documentation establishing that they were out of Cyprus as of the date of the restrictions, July 16, 2007:

1. Issues of the ancient kingdoms of Amathus, Kition, Kourion, Idalion, Lapethos, Marion, Paphos, Soli, and Salamis dating from the end of the 6th century B.C. to 332 B.C.

2. Issues of the Hellenistic period, such as those of Paphos, Salamis, and Kition from 332 B.C. to c. 30 B.C. (including coins of Alexander the Great, Ptolemy, and his Dynasty)

3. Provincial and local issues of the Roman period from c. 30 B.C. to 235 A.D.

Why bother to comment when Jay Kislak, CPAC’s Chairman at the time, has stated that the State Department rejected CPAC’s recommendations against import restrictions on Cypriot coins back in 2007 and then misled both Congress and the public about its actions?   And isn’t it also true that although the vast majority of public comments recorded have been squarely against import restrictions, the State Department and U.S. Customs have imposed import restrictions on coins anyway, most recently on ancient coins from Bulgaria?

Simply, silence just allows the State Department bureaucrats and their allies in the archaeological establishment to claim that collectors have acquiesced to broad restrictions on their ability to import common ancient coins that are widely available worldwide.   And, of course, acquiescence is all that may be needed to justify going back and imposing import restrictions on more recent coins that are still exempt from these regulations.

Under the circumstances, please take 5 minutes and tell CPAC, the State Department bureaucrats and the archaeologists what you think. 

How do I comment?  To submit short comment just click on the green box on the upper right hand side of the above notice that says “submit a formal comment” and follow ther directions:  https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2016/08/10/2016-19018/notice-of-meeting-of-the-cultural-property-advisory-committee

If you are having trouble, go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov), and enter Docket No. DOS-2016-0054 for Cyprus, and follow the prompts to submit comments. To send comments via US Mail or FEDEX see the directions contained in the Federal Register Notice above. 

What should I say?  The State Department bureaucracy has dictated that any public comments should relate solely to the following statutory criteria: 

1.       Whether the cultural patrimony of Cyprus is in jeopardy from looting of its archaeological materials;

2.      Whether Cyprus has taken measures consistent with the 1970 UNESCO Convention to protect its cultural patrimony;

3.      Whether application of U.S. import restrictions, if applied in concert with similar restrictions by other art importing countries, would be of substantial benefit in deterring a serious situation of pillage and that less drastic remedies are not available;  and,

4.      Whether the application of import restrictions is consistent with the general interest of the international community in the interchange of cultural property among nations for scientific, cultural, and educational purposes.

(See 19 U.S.C. § 2602 (a).)   Yet, collectors can really only speak to what they know.  So, tell them what you think within this broad framework.  For instance, over time, import restrictions will certainly impact the American public’s ability to study and preserve historical coins and maintain people to people contacts with collectors abroad.  (These particular restrictions have hurt the ability of Cypriot Americans to collect ancient coins of their own culture.)  Yet, foreign collectors—including collectors in Cyprus—will be able to import coins as before.  And, one can also remind CPAC that less drastic remedies, like regulating metal detectors or instituting reporting programs akin to the Treasure Act and Portable Antiquities Scheme, must be tried first.   Finally, Cyprus is a member of the European Union, so why not allow legal exports of Cypriot coins from other EU countries?

Be forceful, but polite.  We can and should disagree with what the State Department bureaucrats and their allies in the archaeological establishment are doing to our hobby, but we should endeavor to do so in an upstanding manner.

Please submit comments just once, before the deadline on September 30, 2016.

Cyprus: What's Wrong with This Picture?

Cypriot Government requests extension of MOU with US that authorizes the detention, seizure and repatriation of undocumented artifacts of Cypriot origin to Cyprus because they "may be stolen."  For more, see here.

Mayor of Paphos, Cyprus, accuses antiquities service of stealing artifacts; antiquities service says not stolen, just undocumented.  For more, see here.

Terrorist Financing

A House Foreign Relations subcommittee held a hearing on terrorist financing.  ISIS gets most of its $1 bn from confiscations, taxes and "hot oil," but the terror group  also gains funding from ransoms, donations and sales of looted antiquities.  ASOR/State Department Point Man Michael Danti rightly declined to to put a number  on the value of these looted antiquities, and noted that far more needs to be done by Lebanon, Turkey, Greece, Cyprus and Bulgaria, which are the main transit points to the EU.   Frankly, the last four have a special obligation to act given their own self-righteous stance when it comes to their own cultural patrimony.  But will the archaeological lobby hold their feet to the fire?

Monopoly vs. Better, Faster, Cheaper

A turf battle in France between public and private sector archaeologists has led to the Louvre being occupied by angry public sector archaeologists.  Meanwhile, in the nearby United Kingdom as interested amateurs publish thousands of finds, materials excavated by professionals languish in warehouses.

Of course, the situation is far worse in the favorite countries of the archaeological lobby-- Cyprus, Greece, Italy and Egypt,   There, amateur archaeologists are treated the same as looters for profit  while underfunded and corrupt archaeological establishments are poor stewards of even the most  important artifacts.

Perhaps, the answer is more competition.  Unleash the passion of private individuals and groups in community archaeology efforts.  And, of course, let them share redundant artifacts with the state and landowers.  As long as items are properly recorded, preserved and published, why not?

Hypocrisy

Archaeo-blogger Sam Hardy has an interesting post about the Cypriot Department of Antiquities looking the other way while connected Cypriot collectors added looted material from both occupied and unoccupied Cyprus into their collections which were then "legalized."

While the Cypriot Antiquities Service would plead "extenuating circumstances," the information Hardy provides should cast the archaeological lobby's moralistic attacks on coin collectors for contesting import restrictions on "coins of Cypriot type" in a new light.

And what of Cyprus itself?  Wouldn't it be better to institute a program open to all  akin to the UK's Portable Antiquities Scheme and Treasure Act than one based on insider access to looted material?

PAS Maps Finds For All to See

The Portable Antiquities Scheme has unveiled this nifty tool to help visualize the distribution of coin finds from different periods within Britain and Wales.  When will the Italians, Greeks, Cypriots and Bulgarians come up with something similar?  Likely never.  Why not?  Simply because they have nothing akin to the Treasure Act and PAS that encourage the public to report finds so they can be recorded and used to tell us something about the distribution and use of historical coinage. But why don't they have such a system?  Well, perhaps because its not primarily about conservation for their cultural bureaucracies, but rather mostly about control.

They Are Out to Get You

Or, so it would seem from this report about a confab of cultural bureaucrats, academics and cops that took place back in September in the Hague.  There is nothing wrong with States seeking to protect their own archaeological sites and items of cultural significance.  But that should not be confused with draconian measures aimed at controlling everything old or targeting foreigners for dealing in the exact same cultural goods that are openly available at home.  Unfortunately, that's just what the "activists" commended in the report advocate.  Why not instead adopt a balanced but fair approach like that found in the United Kingdom?  CPO would rather have the UK seen as a model rather than the favorites of these activists, countries like Cyprus, Greece and Italy.

PAS and Treasure Act Records over 920,000 Archaeological Finds

Last week's news of the new Bulgarian and renewed China MOUs overshadowed good news coming out of the UK-  the Portable Antiquities Scheme and Treasure Act have now recorded over 920,000 archaeological finds.

It's thus too bad that our own State Department appears to be only interested in helping to prop up corrupt systems in places like Bulgaria and China that only benefit connected insiders.  Why not instead promote the system in place in our friend and ally, Great Britain, one that actually engages the public in helping to record and preserve the past?

The proof is in these numbers.  We know how many archaeological finds the public has reported in Britain and Wales.  How many do you think have been recorded in places like Cyprus, Greece and Italy?

It would be interesting to learn more about such figures from some of the "models" for the anti-collector archaeological establishment, but, of course, these are not readily available, if they are kept at all.

ACCG Contests Forfeiture Action

The ACCG has filed a claim of interest to a group of coins minted in China and Cyprus that were seized by US Customs back in 2009.  By filing this pleading, the ACCG has placed the the government on notice that it intends to contest the forfeiture proceeding in Court.   The ACCG now has twenty-one (21) days to respond to the government's forfeiture complaint. 

German High Court Rules Export Permits Not Required for Collectors' Coins in Trade

Germany's highest regulatory court has ruled  that coins in trade will not be treated as archaeological objects requiring an export permit under EU law. The court said that because they are objects created in quantity, they have lost any archaeological value, and to require export permits for them would put an unreasonable restraint on trade. The decision in its entirety can be read here.   

UPDATE 5/4/13:  Not surprisingly, archaeo-blogger Paul Barford is in denial about the implications of Court's ruling and has even implied the court's decision-making was corrupted by "commercial interests."  As to the former, I think a well known numismatist said it best:

Of course Mr. Barford is in denial of the court's actual ruling: “coins coming from Antiquity generally have no archeological value and thus are not archeological objects”. It doesn’t come much clearer than that. Nor is this “the Bavarian judiciary” as Mr. Barford would like to believe; it is the supreme court of Germany for cases involving customs and taxes.

As to the latter, I think Mr. Barford should compare what Transparency International says about Germany and places whose views of cultural property matters he champions, like Greece, Cyprus, Italy and China.