In reviewing some of the submissions for CPAC's upcoming public session concerning the proposed renewal of the MOU with Cambodia, I was struck by the submission of Christina Luke to CPAC advocating tapping into a vast amount of federal dollars for archaeological projects. Ms. Luke is associated with Boston University and serves as the Chair of the AIA's "Cultural Heritage Policy Committee."
Leaving aside the self-serving nature of any such request, let's talk about its bad timing, what with sequestration coming this week. If anything, the State Department should be considering whether any funding for foreign archaeological projects makes sense in a tough budgetary climate where there is pressure to cut other programs that benefit people in foreign countries far more directly, like funding for clean water and HIV/AIDs prevention.
Showing posts with label Archaeological Organizations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Archaeological Organizations. Show all posts
Your Tax Euros at Work
The archaeological blogs are all agog over the news that the EU funded European Research Council has given a 1 million Euro grant to some well known academics with an axe to grind against collectors to sharpen their axe further.
The publicity for the grant does not suggest anything that even remotely resembles academic detachment. For more, see http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/scotland-blog/2012/feb/13/glasgow-team-gets-1m-grant-to-study-illegal-trade-in-antiquities and http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4128514/Saviour-of-the-Lost-Ark.html
Under the circumstances, the European Research Council should be embarrassed if its goal really is to fund high quality research into pressing issues, particularly given the tremendous financial problems facing cultural establishments in countries like Greece and Italy. I suspect the money could be better spent helping these countries take care of what they already have rather than to fund yet another study which will just be used to justify more repatriations.
As it is, by the looks of it, this study will have about as much credibility as one funded by big Pharma to justify sales of a new drug, no one actually needs. It is, however, part of a trend. Get a governmental entity to fund an anti-collector study by academics with an axe to grind, and use it to help justify further government action and spending on cultural bureaucracies. Other recent examples include the sole source contract to ICOM to prepare the Egyptian Red list.
Perhaps a governmental entity should fund a study on the damage caused by development, corruption, underfunding, and inept management of cultural resources. Or, what about another about how collectors help preserve and study the past without any government funding whatsoever. Not likely though, as such studies would be an anathema to the nanny state.
For more about the European Research Council, see http://erc.europa.eu/about-erc
Note: There seems to be some confusion in the sources as to whether the grant is for 1 million Euros or 1 million UK Pounds. In any event, this is a lot of money for such a study. By comparison, if memory serves the cost of administering the Portable Antiquity Scheme for an entire year is not a lot more.
The publicity for the grant does not suggest anything that even remotely resembles academic detachment. For more, see http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/scotland-blog/2012/feb/13/glasgow-team-gets-1m-grant-to-study-illegal-trade-in-antiquities and http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4128514/Saviour-of-the-Lost-Ark.html
Under the circumstances, the European Research Council should be embarrassed if its goal really is to fund high quality research into pressing issues, particularly given the tremendous financial problems facing cultural establishments in countries like Greece and Italy. I suspect the money could be better spent helping these countries take care of what they already have rather than to fund yet another study which will just be used to justify more repatriations.
As it is, by the looks of it, this study will have about as much credibility as one funded by big Pharma to justify sales of a new drug, no one actually needs. It is, however, part of a trend. Get a governmental entity to fund an anti-collector study by academics with an axe to grind, and use it to help justify further government action and spending on cultural bureaucracies. Other recent examples include the sole source contract to ICOM to prepare the Egyptian Red list.
Perhaps a governmental entity should fund a study on the damage caused by development, corruption, underfunding, and inept management of cultural resources. Or, what about another about how collectors help preserve and study the past without any government funding whatsoever. Not likely though, as such studies would be an anathema to the nanny state.
For more about the European Research Council, see http://erc.europa.eu/about-erc
Note: There seems to be some confusion in the sources as to whether the grant is for 1 million Euros or 1 million UK Pounds. In any event, this is a lot of money for such a study. By comparison, if memory serves the cost of administering the Portable Antiquity Scheme for an entire year is not a lot more.
Libya: What Emergency?
There they go again. Only months after apparently receiving assurances from their buddies at the State Department about "emergency import restrictions" on Egyptian cultural artifacts, archaeological trade groups are again taking advantage of another supposed emergency to call for yet another round of emergency import restrictions, which of course, are just the first step towards a permanent ban. See http://www.archaeological.org/news/aianews/6415
Yet, the facts seem to conspire against them. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2011/sep/11/tripoli-museum-antiquity-shattered-gaddafi-image (noting that there was no looting of archaeological artifacts at the Libyan national museum).
If I were a member of the Libyan provisional government, I might be a bit peeved that foreign academics are implying that the Libyans themselves are incapable of caring for their own cultural patrimony (despite considerable evidence to the contrary) and view this call for import restrictions as nothing more than a paternalistic violation of Libyan sovereignty.
One also has to wonder what, if any contacts, members of these groups had with the deposed regime. If past history in places like Egypt and Iraq are any guide, these relations could have been considerable. And certainly, this should be considered by Libyan officials as well in determining whether the help of these groups is necessary or desirable.
But do the facts on the ground and the desires of the Libyans really matter when the cronies of these groups run the State Department's Cultural Heritage Center? Or, will Libyan cultural officials be convinced to go along whatever the true facts and what the need for emergency restrictions says about Libya's own competence to care for its own cultural patrimony?
Yet, the facts seem to conspire against them. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2011/sep/11/tripoli-museum-antiquity-shattered-gaddafi-image (noting that there was no looting of archaeological artifacts at the Libyan national museum).
If I were a member of the Libyan provisional government, I might be a bit peeved that foreign academics are implying that the Libyans themselves are incapable of caring for their own cultural patrimony (despite considerable evidence to the contrary) and view this call for import restrictions as nothing more than a paternalistic violation of Libyan sovereignty.
One also has to wonder what, if any contacts, members of these groups had with the deposed regime. If past history in places like Egypt and Iraq are any guide, these relations could have been considerable. And certainly, this should be considered by Libyan officials as well in determining whether the help of these groups is necessary or desirable.
But do the facts on the ground and the desires of the Libyans really matter when the cronies of these groups run the State Department's Cultural Heritage Center? Or, will Libyan cultural officials be convinced to go along whatever the true facts and what the need for emergency restrictions says about Libya's own competence to care for its own cultural patrimony?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)