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.

Rethinking Antiquities: Restitution and Collecting in the Time of ISIS

The Committee for Cultural Policy and the Cardozo School of Law are sponsoring a panel discussion entitled "Rethinking Antiquities:  Restitution and Collecting in the Time of ISIS" on March 1, 2016 @ 5-6:30 PM in New York City.  It should be nice to hear from the trade, collectors and museums on the subject.

Forging a Public/Private Response to Save Endangered Patrimony of Iraq and Syria

CPO appreciates being invited to this event.  A few observations.

It was nice to see a recognition that it is important to work with collectors and dealers on these issues. CPO supports efforts to encourage more due diligence, but the level of it must depend on the value  of the object and what information about it is likely available.  The presumption should never be that an artifact is "illicit" merely because of where it was made thousands of years ago.

After hearing Michael Danti speak twice now, CPO has come to the conclusion that Danti is reporting the facts as accurately as he can, but then they are "spun" by others to achieve another purpose.  For example, Danti said point blank that all sides are involved in looting and that Apamea has always been in Assad's hands.  The problem is what Danti says is selectively reported so it makes it sound like ISIS is the only problem in the region.  So, over and over again we have that same picture of all those holes at Apamea which are then by implication attributed to ISIS rather than the Assad regime.

CPO is now even more dubious that looted antiquities are a major ISIS funding source.  Assistant Secretary Keller of the State Department's Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs said that ISIS has probably netted several million dollars from antiquities sales, but he also put all ISIS income at over $1 billion.

This again begs the question whether the value of "conflict antiquities" from Syria really justifies major changes in the law both here and in Germany or whether it's all being purposefully overblown in the effort to justify the creation of intrusive new government bureaucracies in both countries.

Trade Professionals Speak Common Sense

The Ivory Tower academics of the archaeological lobby often speak about requiring "provenance information" and "export certificates" as proof that items are not the products of recent looting. However, those with actual practical experience in the international trade of cultural goods have once again demonstrated that coming up with such documentation is easier said than done.

Numismatic professional Alfredo de la Fe has written about the lack of provenance information for most coins and antiquities dealer James Ede has explained the impossible task of supplying export certificates that simply don't exist.

Hopefully, decision makers will give much needed consideration to these practical concerns raised by those in the know.

Archaeo-Blogger Celebrates Small Business Saturday

Archaeo-Blogger Paul Barford has unexpectedly celebrated Small Business Saturday with a tribute to the small businesses of the International Association of Dealers in Ancient Art.  What better way to mark the day by purchasing an antiquity or ancient coin from one of these fine IADAA dealers or some equally fine small businesses of the numismatic trade?

Should Transparency Be a Two Way Street?

Archaeo-Blogger and Cultural Heritage Lawyer Rick St. Hilaire wants to mandate additional record-keeping for dealers in cultural goods in the name of "transparency."  Leaving aside whether creating more red tape will accomplish anything other than to place additional administrative burdens on the small businesses of the antiquities and coin trade, one wonders whether he would also acknowledge that transparency should be a two way street. 

So, how about some transparency for the State Department and CBP concerning their process for imposing import restrictions on cultural goods?  Or how about imposing new record keeping requirements on archaeologists, such as requiring them to publish their findings within in a reasonable time on the Internet so they will be easily accessible to interested members of the general public?

After all, State, CBP and the archaeological community all purport to act in the public's interest, so is some transparency from them too much to ask?

Minerva Provides Open Access

The AIA claims it acts in the public interest and antiquities dealers are only interested in profit.  If so, how is it that Minerva, a commercial journal run by an antiquities dealer, has allowed open access to past issues, but the AIA continues to oppose open access, even for research material paid for by taxpayer dollars?

More on Return of Polish Museum Artifacts

Harlan Berk has kindly elaborated on his firm's part in returning artifacts stolen from a Polish American museum in Chicago.

Here is how Harlan recounts the event.

On September 30, 2011 a Friday evening at 6 PM as I was getting home I received a call from our document and paper money specialist Dennis Forgue. He informed me that we had purchased late that day an 4 page letter by Thomas Jefferson about how to finance the US government dated 1814 and a letter endorsed by Abraham Lincoln ,Gen. McClernand and Gen. Winfield Scott, and other items for $5000 . The people had asked for $2000. Monday morning I told Dennis to research the items for pedigree. The Jefferson papers were only published through 1813 so far by the Papers of Thomas Jefferson: Retirement Series at Monticello and the U of VA, so he worked on the Lincoln. It came up that the Lincoln was published in the Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln from 1953 and that it was owned by the Polish Roman Catholic Union in Chicago, which had been renamed The Polish Museum of America, in Chicago.



I immediately called the Polish Museum and spoke to the museum president Maria Ciesla. I asked her if they had even de-accessioned anything. Her answer told me the items we had purchased were stolen ,in the true meaning of the word.To say the least she was thrilled. I told her that we should continue to buy from these people so we could recover all or as much of the material as possible. She ,with board approval agreed to reimburse us our purchase prices. We continued to buy for two months until November 7, 2011, spending $31,400 in all . The items were sold to us by different combinations of individuals usually brought in by a young man who ,until the last purchase refused to give his ID. There was always someone with him who gave ID and to whom the checks were written. We documented every transaction. Photocopying the ID ,the check we paid and every item we purchased and kept every individual purchase together. On the several occasions when the Museum reimbursed us we gave them copies of everything along with the real documents we had recovered.


The Museum wanted to call in the FBI but I asked them to wait as the repurchase program was working so well . I did not want to spook them and never be able to recover all the material. Finally when they said they were going to Sothebys with the rest of the material. I alerted a friend at Sothebys to the problem. The Museum then call in the FBI. They ,special agent Luigi Mondini, was very nice and professional as one would expect. We gave them copies of everything we had collected. The FBI recovered the final 121 items to add to the 279 we recovered. Even though we suspected that these items were past the statutes of limitation for theft, it never crossed our mind to keep them. They were and are the property of the Polish Museum of America and we are very happy to have recovered these great pieces of American history for them.

Again, kudos to Harlan Berk and Harlan J. Berk, Ltd. for ensuring long lost artifacts were returned to the Polish American Museum.

Congratulations to Jerry Eisenberg

CPO congratulates NY antiquities dealer Jerry Eisenberg.

The President of the Republic of Italy, the Hon. Giorgio Napolitano, awarded Eisenberg with the Order of the Star of Italy and the title of Ufficiale (Officer) at a ceremony that took place in  NY on June 2nd. 

Coins Weekly states that the Order of the Star of Italy is bestowed upon those who have provided a meaningful contribution to the prestige of Italy while promoting friendly relations and cooperation between Italy and other countries.

Revised ACCG Code of Ethics

The ACCG has revised its code of ethics. For more, see http://www.accg.us/issues/news/accg-board-updates-code-of-ethics

IADAA Presents Pro-Collector, Pro-Trade, Pro-Museum Views on Cultural Property Issues: So What?

The International Association of Dealers in Ancient Art (IADAA) has offered the opinions of some scholars who are friendly to museums, antiquities dealers and collectors in the debate over cultural property issues on its website. See http://www.iadaa.org/en/cultural-property-1

Apparently, that is controversial in some circles. But, I find it a more than a bit ironic that archaeo-bloggers David Gill (see http://lootingmatters.blogspot.com/2010/03/iadaa-makes-its-position-clear.html) and Paul Barford (see http://paul-barford.blogspot.com/2010/03/international-association-of-dealers-in.html) feel so free to criticize the IADD for publicizing views in sync with those of its members. Anyone who has read the fare on the Gill or Barford blogs will be hard pressed to find any collector-friendly views expressed therein. Indeed, Gill even feels free to engage in ad hominem attacks in the Blogosphere without giving his targets the opportunity to comment. See http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2010/02/unposted-comments-to-gill-posts.html

The IADAA is free to post what it wishes on its website on this subject. The views the IADAA expresses are no more unbalanced than what one finds on the websites of pro-archaeological groups like the Archaeological Institute of America or Saving Antiquities for Everyone. Gill's and Barford's complaints to the contrary are just plain silly.

New SAFE "Resource" on Numismatics

The archaeological advocacy group Saving Antiquities for Everyone ("SAFE") has announced a new "resource" devoted to numismatics. See http://www.savingantiquities.org/coin.php

I've read many of the offerings listed before either elsewhere on the SAFE web site or on blogs of SAFE associates. Overall, the new "Coin matters" site appears merely to centralize in one location more of the usual SAFE fare, i.e., tales of looting of archaeological sites, speculation about the quantity of information that is lost, and allegations of criminal conduct in source countries, supposedly encouraged by U.S. dealers and collectors buying "unprovenanced coins."

From the looks of it, I suppose "Coin matters" is really designed as a "resource" to aid SAFE's and the AIA's ongoing campaign to convince the public and government decision makers that "unprovenanced" or "undocumented" coins must be "stolen." See http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2009/08/david-gill-and-insinuation-assertions.htm

In any event, in my opinion, "Coin matters" would be more more complete and hence more useful if it also covered:

• Successful efforts under the U.K.'s Treasure Act and Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS) to encourage the public to report finds of coins and other antiquities;
• The existence of large, open and legal markets for "unprovenanced" ancient coins in such "source" countries as Bulgaria, China and Italy;
• The hypocrisy of source countries with strict laws like Cyprus that demand the U.S. to impose import restrictions on unprovenanced coins, but which allow their own wealthy and/or "connected" registered collectors to import unprovenanced coins at will;
• The failures of archaeologists and source countries to adequately preserve, publish and display hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of coins already in their care.

There are far too many historical coins out there for an "archaeology over all" approach to have any realistic prospect of ensuring historical coins are protected. If SAFE intends this resource to be more than just another advocacy piece in the "culture wars" between archaeologists and collectors, "Coin matters" will need to cover far more ground and, in particular, place more emphasis on cooperative approaches between archaeologists and collectors like that embodied in the U.K.'s Treasure Act and PAS.

Another Perspective on the "Status Quo"

Nathan Elkins has an interesting post where he expresses concern about the "status quo." See: http://coinarchaeology.blogspot.com/2009/04/we-need-to-change-status-quo.html For some reason, I can't open the link to Nathan's lecture, but I think I understand his drift from this post and others he has done over the past several years.

Specifically, he complains about

"an unregulated and unconcerned market, the distasteful nature of the dialogue that has developed in North America, and the urgent need for thoughtful collectors, archaeologists, and law enforcement to find common ground in the face of organized and unconcerned commercial interests."

Let me agree on some points and disagree on others. First, one must conclude that the market is hardly "unregulated." Customs officials in the US and Europe actively enforce their regulations. Nathan may think those regulations do not go far enough, but that is a different issue.

Second, Nathan wrongly discounts the contributions and views of ancient coin dealers, because like many in the archaeological community, he betrays a distrust for "commercial interests." But why are such interests any less valid than those of source countries, collectors and archaeologists? Certainly, all these groups are motivated to some extent by "self-interest." What dealers, collectors, archaeologists and source countries share is an interest in preserving artifacts, like ancient coins.

The differences between archaeologists and source countries on one hand and collectors and dealers on the other hand relate to value of private efforts to preserve ancient artifacts. In my opinion, a heavy dose of academic snobbery motivates those who constantly belittle the contributions of collectors and dealers in preserving, publishing and displaying artifacts from the past.

Nathan may or may not agree with this himself, but certainly coin dealers and collectors have been responsible for preserving millions and millions of ancient coins from oblivion. Coin dealers are also heavy contributors to organizations like the American Numismatic Society and American Numismatic Association. Without their generous funding, there would be a large void in numismatic research in the United States. In short, if coin dealers and collectors are suppressed, who will preserve, display and study all those coins? Certainly, archaeologists and source countries have difficulty handling those coins already in their charge. For example, it often takes decades for coin finds to be published, if they are published at all. This will hopefully change over time with the ability to post coins on line, but such a project is massive, and it is doubtful it will ever be mandated.

Third, as to the "distasteful nature of the dialogue that has developed in North America," I would have to agree that strongly held opinions in the area are all too often expressed in unfortunate terms. Still, it is wrong to imply that only those supporting the rights of collectors and coin and antiquities dealers are at fault or to suggest that the problem is limited to North America. Indeed, one of the very worst offenders posts from Eastern Europe and purports to represent the interests of the archaeological community.

All this raises another important point. The impact of spirited, but all too often nasty debate on the Internet between collectors and archaeologists pales in comparison to the effect of efforts to "blackball" academics who question the status quo within the archaeological community itself. Sometimes this is a none too subtle hint that speaking too strongly in favor of collectors is not good for one's career. Other times, there are more active "disciplinary measures" in the form of delays in processing excavation permits and the like.

Expressing one's opinion in negative terms on the Internet is one thing. Threatening an other's academic career is quite another. Such efforts to stifle debate within the archaeological community can only diminish any real hope for a workable compromise between the archaeological community and source countries on one hand and collectors and dealers on the other about the best way of protecting ancient artifacts. That is what is really wrong with the "status quo" in my opinion.

Tariq Aziz Goes on Trial for Executions of Merchants

The BBC reports that Tariq Aziz, Saddam's former Deputy PM, will go on trial for the executions of merchants accused of profiteering during a period of international sanctions against Iraq. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7372356.stm

Why is this relevant to cultural property issues? Well, the urbane Aziz served as point man in Saddam's strategy to break international sanctions against his regime. This included successful efforts to recruit support against the sanctions from members of the Western archaeological community, most notably by sponsoring a conference on the "Birth of Writing" in 2001. I can locate little about this conference other than this Chicago Tribune article that can be found on National Geographic's web site: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/03/0326_writing.html

In any event, the exact nature and extent of Western archaeologists' relationship with Saddam's regime has yet to be fully disclosed to the public. Yet, many archaeologists most closely associated with Iraq have attacked the motives and actions of the U.S. Government, the U.S. Military, American collectors, dealers and museums in the strongest terms.

My feeling is that their continuing expressions of moral outrage must be judged in context. Learning how their relationship with Saddam's regime may have colored the narrative presented to the public and press is important to assessing many claims such the suggestion that the theft of many of the most important artifacts from the Iraq Museum was organized at the behest of Western collectors. Hopefully, a journalist or academic will look into this issue further, perhaps in time for the sixth anniversary of the looting of the Iraq Museum.

Rome Lives-- The Pope Visits DC

The Pope's "triumphal procession" through streets lined with neo-classical architecture in his chariot a.k.a. the Pope Mobile. The use of Latin in the Mass at the National's Stadium. The wearing of vestments and the use of liturgical instruments similar to those seen in late Roman art. All reminded me that the echos of ancient Rome live on even today.

Rome was a multi-cultural Empire that spanned across much of Europe, the Mediterranean basin and the Middle East. The descendants of those who lived under the Empire now live as far away as North and South America. Yet, some Italian politicians encouraged by some members of the archaeological community want to lay claim to any unprovenanced Roman artifact as property of the modern Italian nation state. This seems silly to me on its face, but this view has certainly made some inroads in the press and the popular consciousness, particularly when pitched in stories about "looting," avaricious collectors, dealers and museum curators. Hopefully, over time, the popularity of such narrow, nationalistic sentiments will recede and the view that Rome and its culture belongs to everyone will prevail.