my find at the CNE
fabric to love from here
a metal deer head I have yet to mount from here
another score from HomeSense!
and my favourite candles from here
what's been making you happy lately?
More Comments on de Valette's Sword
Here are some interesting comments about de Valette's sword from numismatist and scholar Alan Walker. He has graciously allowed me to post them on the CPO blog.
I just read your blog on the campaign to get back Grand Master Jean de la Valette's ceremonial sword and dagger, which are apparently now in the Louvre. He was given these ornamental weapons by Philip II of Spain in 1565 to celebrate the defeat of the Turkish invasion force. It would be interesting to see what they look like but I can't find them in any simple way. In any event, after his death in 1568, it would seem that they were carefully kept (perhaps as a dedication in a church - someone must know but we are not told) until they were looted by the French in 1798. Now the French of the Revolution, like the Nazis, were stupendous looters of works of art, books, coins, everything imaginable, which they brought back to adorn a great museum in Paris. This is just like Hitler's planned museum in Linz. After Napoleon was finally defeated vast amounts of looted art was returned to museums, churches and wherever all over Europe. This was thought to be correct and was a demand that the French government basically fulfilled. However, by that time Malta had become a British possession and stayed that way until 1964. So what happened with this sword at this point? In fact, what happened with whatever other art works that the French went off with from Malta in 1798? Were some or any returned to Malta, or did they just stay wherever they went? This is something we need to know.
The reason why I say this is that de la Valette was, because of his actions as Grand Master, one of Malta's great heros. Thus, something that belonged to him would be of great resonance for Malta (what else do they have that belongs to him - I don't know). So a demand that France give something back that was clearly looted in a obviously stolen sense (i.e., it was not dug out of the ground or found in ruins or in some way you could say was ownershipless - it was in fact appropriated from some kind of institution) is not at all far fetched. These items were, if they were in a church let's say (we don't know do we ) that would mean that they had been seeable by the public and were known to them over several hundred years. This also means they were really part of the nation's culture (or cultural heritage). This is very much in opposition to all those ancient objects that people scream about since they - let's say the Eupronios Krater for example - are not in any real sense part of a nation's heritage since they had no influence whatsoever on later generations of the people involved. If, for example, people could see the sword of the great hero (perhaps only on special days - we don't know) they could be inspired by it, and this could continue over some 230 years (like religious statues or paintings that stood in churches since the 14th century and were revered by generations of people for generations), we can really talk about heritage. And so, this is the kind of thing that ought, for very good reasons, be considered for repatriation from France to Malta: And not necessarily to SMOM, Valette may have been the Order's Grandmaster,but his connection to the Island is much more important.
We really aren't talking about something that is the same as a coin or an antiquity - it is a specific item that was given by a known person in a known event to a known person, and which stayed where it belonged until it was 'officially stolen'
I just read your blog on the campaign to get back Grand Master Jean de la Valette's ceremonial sword and dagger, which are apparently now in the Louvre. He was given these ornamental weapons by Philip II of Spain in 1565 to celebrate the defeat of the Turkish invasion force. It would be interesting to see what they look like but I can't find them in any simple way. In any event, after his death in 1568, it would seem that they were carefully kept (perhaps as a dedication in a church - someone must know but we are not told) until they were looted by the French in 1798. Now the French of the Revolution, like the Nazis, were stupendous looters of works of art, books, coins, everything imaginable, which they brought back to adorn a great museum in Paris. This is just like Hitler's planned museum in Linz. After Napoleon was finally defeated vast amounts of looted art was returned to museums, churches and wherever all over Europe. This was thought to be correct and was a demand that the French government basically fulfilled. However, by that time Malta had become a British possession and stayed that way until 1964. So what happened with this sword at this point? In fact, what happened with whatever other art works that the French went off with from Malta in 1798? Were some or any returned to Malta, or did they just stay wherever they went? This is something we need to know.
The reason why I say this is that de la Valette was, because of his actions as Grand Master, one of Malta's great heros. Thus, something that belonged to him would be of great resonance for Malta (what else do they have that belongs to him - I don't know). So a demand that France give something back that was clearly looted in a obviously stolen sense (i.e., it was not dug out of the ground or found in ruins or in some way you could say was ownershipless - it was in fact appropriated from some kind of institution) is not at all far fetched. These items were, if they were in a church let's say (we don't know do we ) that would mean that they had been seeable by the public and were known to them over several hundred years. This also means they were really part of the nation's culture (or cultural heritage). This is very much in opposition to all those ancient objects that people scream about since they - let's say the Eupronios Krater for example - are not in any real sense part of a nation's heritage since they had no influence whatsoever on later generations of the people involved. If, for example, people could see the sword of the great hero (perhaps only on special days - we don't know) they could be inspired by it, and this could continue over some 230 years (like religious statues or paintings that stood in churches since the 14th century and were revered by generations of people for generations), we can really talk about heritage. And so, this is the kind of thing that ought, for very good reasons, be considered for repatriation from France to Malta: And not necessarily to SMOM, Valette may have been the Order's Grandmaster,but his connection to the Island is much more important.
We really aren't talking about something that is the same as a coin or an antiquity - it is a specific item that was given by a known person in a known event to a known person, and which stayed where it belonged until it was 'officially stolen'
Utter Foolishness
Now I really have seen everything. PAS critic Paul Barford is so upset with another blog that he has asked the PAS to step in on his behalf. See
http://paul-barford.blogspot.com/2011/09/wholly-inadequate-response.html
He accuses the other blog of spreading misinformation, but, of course, I know more than a few individuals who believe Mr. Baford's blog is full of misinformation (as well as utter rudeness to anyone with whom he disagrees).
The good people at the PAS obviously have more to do than to mediate disputes amongst bloggers or to take issue with everything that might be said in the blogosphere.
On a related note, I understand that Mr. Barford's critical book about the PAS has evidently been delayed by the publisher once again. One can only imagine the reason why.
http://paul-barford.blogspot.com/2011/09/wholly-inadequate-response.html
He accuses the other blog of spreading misinformation, but, of course, I know more than a few individuals who believe Mr. Baford's blog is full of misinformation (as well as utter rudeness to anyone with whom he disagrees).
The good people at the PAS obviously have more to do than to mediate disputes amongst bloggers or to take issue with everything that might be said in the blogosphere.
On a related note, I understand that Mr. Barford's critical book about the PAS has evidently been delayed by the publisher once again. One can only imagine the reason why.
Can't Egypt Come Up With Its Own List?
Archaeologists have criticised the idea of suggesting programs akin to PAS to foreign states.
Yet, they seem supportive of the State Department's paternalistic effort to announce to Egypt and the rest of the world what Egyptian antiquities are supposedly "at risk." See
http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/09/state-department-commissions-egyptian.html
The Federal Budget is facing large cuts that will impact health care, defense and foreign aid. Under the circumstances, is money for the sole source contract to create this "red list" really money well spent?
Why can't Egyptian authorities prepare their own list if one is truly necessary?
Yet, they seem supportive of the State Department's paternalistic effort to announce to Egypt and the rest of the world what Egyptian antiquities are supposedly "at risk." See
http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/09/state-department-commissions-egyptian.html
The Federal Budget is facing large cuts that will impact health care, defense and foreign aid. Under the circumstances, is money for the sole source contract to create this "red list" really money well spent?
Why can't Egyptian authorities prepare their own list if one is truly necessary?
State Department Commissions Egyptian "Red List:" More Evidence of A Done Deal?
The US State Department has given a sole source contract to pro-import restrictions ICOM to create a "red list of Egyptian antiquities at risk." See https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=fa0c2fe21fd3cf5028a500f1fc4b97e4&tab=core&tabmode=list
Even as any "cultural property emergency" (if there ever really was one) fades, it again appears that the State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Cultural Heritage Center may be busily at work stage managing a shadow process for imposing import restrictions on cultural goods.
What should happen under the CPIA is clear. A request from Egypt itself is contemplated. And the request should be processed through CPAC.
Here, however, former Egyptian antiquities head, Zahi Hawass, has himself been assured by American archaeologists that import restrictions are a done deal, making any request from Egypt or CPAC hearings to consider it a mere formality. See http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/05/hawass-says-emergency-import.html
And now it would seem that CPAC will have no real input on the content of any designated list either-- that presumably will be derived from whatever "red list" ICOM creates.
The CPRI has already made a FOIA request related to whether there is any done deal on and MOU with Egypt. See
http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/06/cpri-files-foia-request-on-purported.html However, to date that FOIA request has not been acted upon by the State Department.
In running for election, President Obama promised transparent government and attention to procedure. Yet, the Obama State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs appears committed to neither.
Even as any "cultural property emergency" (if there ever really was one) fades, it again appears that the State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Cultural Heritage Center may be busily at work stage managing a shadow process for imposing import restrictions on cultural goods.
What should happen under the CPIA is clear. A request from Egypt itself is contemplated. And the request should be processed through CPAC.
Here, however, former Egyptian antiquities head, Zahi Hawass, has himself been assured by American archaeologists that import restrictions are a done deal, making any request from Egypt or CPAC hearings to consider it a mere formality. See http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/05/hawass-says-emergency-import.html
And now it would seem that CPAC will have no real input on the content of any designated list either-- that presumably will be derived from whatever "red list" ICOM creates.
The CPRI has already made a FOIA request related to whether there is any done deal on and MOU with Egypt. See
http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/06/cpri-files-foia-request-on-purported.html However, to date that FOIA request has not been acted upon by the State Department.
In running for election, President Obama promised transparent government and attention to procedure. Yet, the Obama State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs appears committed to neither.
Ancient Coins and Cultural Property Debate at ANS
My own article is the second in a series being published in the ANS Magazine about ancient coins and the cultural property debate. Not surprisingly, while Sebastian Heath's article came from an archaeological perspective, my own article comes from that of a collector. An extended version can be found here:
http://numismatics.org/wikiuploads/DigitalPublications/WitschonkeTompaFinal.pdf
After explaining that bureaucrats in the State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Cultural Heritage Center and their allies in the archaeological establishment have perverted the statutory process for imposing import restrictions on cultural goods to ensure that undocumented coins are treated as "stolen," and that such regulatory overkill can only damage numismatics in this country, I urge the following:
I'm grateful for the ANS to allow me to express my views, and hope others will also make workable suggestions on how to preserve both collecting that is essential to numismatics and context that is so important to archaeologists.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)