Europeans (and Americans) are looking to Germany to "save Europe" by doing more to prop up the bankrupt Greek economy and the ever more shaky Italian one. See
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d29da7fc-19ee-11e1-b9d7-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1f6othzXp
However, throwing more money at the Greeks and the Italians will only delay the inevitable. What is really needed is to break down the internal barriers in each country that have led to special interests strangling any chance for much needed economic reforms.
But this is a blog about cultural property issues. On that score, isn't it funny that self-righteous archaeologists hold up Italy and Greece as models for all to emulate? Meanwhile, rational systems like those in Germany and the United Kingdom that recognize the importance of collectors and the trade in cultural goods to the appreciation of ancient culture and its ultimate preservation, get little but scorn heaped on them, largely because they don't allow archaeologists to monopolize policy toward cultural property issues.
Archaeologists assume that government control over all cultural artifacts is the answer-- but how can this be, particularly in the current environment where these governments and their economic and cultural systems that favor the connected few are facing default?
Do Import Restrictions Only Apply to "Illicitly Exported" Items?
Do MOU's only apply to "illicitly exported" artifacts as archaeo-blogger Paul Barford has claimed?
No. In fact, import restrictions as applied by US Customs bar entry of coins openly and legitimately sold in markets abroad merely because they are of a type on a designated list.
There are limited exceptions to this embargo, but they provide little solace for coin collectors.
First, for coins coming directly from the country for which import restrictions are granted, there is an exception if they are accompanied with an export permit. However, this is easier said than done. There are currently import restrictions on certain coins of Cypriot, Chinese and Italian types. Cyprus offers no export permits. Italy does, though the process is evidently time consuming. When the issue was being discussed before CPAC, it was said that the Chinese regularly issued export certificates for certain items. However, since there have been reports that they are no longer so easy to obtain. Even if export certificates are provided, the costs of obtaining them may very well exceed the value of the coin itself, particularly if the coin in question is only worth a few dollars.
The second means of legal import is applied in the much more common situation where a coin is coming from one of the open markets in a third country. That anticipates procuring certifications documenting that the coin in question was out of either Cyprus, China or Italy as of the date of the restrictions. Again, even if this information is available and the foreign consigner is willing to provide it, the costs of compliance may very well exceed the value of the coin itself.
Import restrictions do indeed apply to all undocumented coins on the designated list, not just "illegally exported" ones as Barford misleadingly claims.
Such restrictions are therefore grossly overinclusive-- and do indeed suggest that the Obama State Department has taken an anti-small business position in imposing them, particularly on such popular and widely collected issues as the Greek coins of S. Italy, Sicily and certain Roman Republican and Imperial city coins.
Such coins can and are freely traded worldwide, but no longer can easily be imported into the US. Thus, these restrictions are not only place onerous burdens on small businesses, they also discriminate against American collectors.
How then are such restrictions consistent with President Obama's stated goals of eliminating onerous government regulations and protecting the interests of American small business?
No. In fact, import restrictions as applied by US Customs bar entry of coins openly and legitimately sold in markets abroad merely because they are of a type on a designated list.
There are limited exceptions to this embargo, but they provide little solace for coin collectors.
First, for coins coming directly from the country for which import restrictions are granted, there is an exception if they are accompanied with an export permit. However, this is easier said than done. There are currently import restrictions on certain coins of Cypriot, Chinese and Italian types. Cyprus offers no export permits. Italy does, though the process is evidently time consuming. When the issue was being discussed before CPAC, it was said that the Chinese regularly issued export certificates for certain items. However, since there have been reports that they are no longer so easy to obtain. Even if export certificates are provided, the costs of obtaining them may very well exceed the value of the coin itself, particularly if the coin in question is only worth a few dollars.
The second means of legal import is applied in the much more common situation where a coin is coming from one of the open markets in a third country. That anticipates procuring certifications documenting that the coin in question was out of either Cyprus, China or Italy as of the date of the restrictions. Again, even if this information is available and the foreign consigner is willing to provide it, the costs of compliance may very well exceed the value of the coin itself.
Import restrictions do indeed apply to all undocumented coins on the designated list, not just "illegally exported" ones as Barford misleadingly claims.
Such restrictions are therefore grossly overinclusive-- and do indeed suggest that the Obama State Department has taken an anti-small business position in imposing them, particularly on such popular and widely collected issues as the Greek coins of S. Italy, Sicily and certain Roman Republican and Imperial city coins.
Such coins can and are freely traded worldwide, but no longer can easily be imported into the US. Thus, these restrictions are not only place onerous burdens on small businesses, they also discriminate against American collectors.
How then are such restrictions consistent with President Obama's stated goals of eliminating onerous government regulations and protecting the interests of American small business?
Small Business Saturday Promotion Needs to Be Extended to Obama CPAC
American Express is running advertisements in the United States promoting "Small Business Saturday." The campaign underscores the importance of small business to the American economy, something that one also often hears from politicians of both political parties as well.
Such a promotion also needs to be run for the Obama CPAC, the State Department's Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and its Cultural Heritage Center. President Obama may claim that he sympathizes with small business, but no such sympathy was on display at CPAC's recent meeting on a proposed MOU with Bulgaria.
Instead, Jane Levine, a former prosecutor for the FBI's Art Crime team who now runs Sotheby's compliance department and who is an Obama CPAC pick for a trade slot on CPAC, seemed to suggest that it should be "easy" for the small businesses of the numismatic trade to comply with the certification requirements for legal import of items on the designated list under the CPIA.
Really? As I explained to Ms. Levine, the small businesses of the numismatic trade (most of which are sole proprietorships) really don't have the resources of a Sotheby's to cope with all the red tape involved (even assuming that European sources would be willing to provide the required certifications for EACH restricted coin that is imported). And as I also noted, Customs has been known to go well beyond the documentation requirements of the CPIA and only allow restricted items entry if they are pictured in a catalogue predating any import restrictions. This of course forecloses the import of virtually every ancient coin type on the designated list, as perhaps only one in every 10,000 or so coins actually is significant enough to be catalogued in this manner.
Although one hopes there is enough common sense left somewhere in the State Department or Customs to realize that the CPIA's restrictions were never meant to apply to such numerous and inexpensive artifacts like most ancient coins, one suspects that this really won't matter to a group of AIA members or supporters that hold that that the only legitimate exchange of cultural artifacts is a long term loan from a source country museum to a like institution in the United States.
Hopefully, someone in the Obama White House political operation will realize there is a problem at CPAC and the State Department that is threatening to turn ancient coin collectors (most of whom are likely Democrats) against President Obama's reelection bid. Can the President's appointees really afford to alienate at least 50,000 serious ancient coin collectors and the hundreds of small businesses of the numismatic trade, particularly when the number of public comments recorded in support of MOU's is so infinitesimal?
Such a promotion also needs to be run for the Obama CPAC, the State Department's Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and its Cultural Heritage Center. President Obama may claim that he sympathizes with small business, but no such sympathy was on display at CPAC's recent meeting on a proposed MOU with Bulgaria.
Instead, Jane Levine, a former prosecutor for the FBI's Art Crime team who now runs Sotheby's compliance department and who is an Obama CPAC pick for a trade slot on CPAC, seemed to suggest that it should be "easy" for the small businesses of the numismatic trade to comply with the certification requirements for legal import of items on the designated list under the CPIA.
Really? As I explained to Ms. Levine, the small businesses of the numismatic trade (most of which are sole proprietorships) really don't have the resources of a Sotheby's to cope with all the red tape involved (even assuming that European sources would be willing to provide the required certifications for EACH restricted coin that is imported). And as I also noted, Customs has been known to go well beyond the documentation requirements of the CPIA and only allow restricted items entry if they are pictured in a catalogue predating any import restrictions. This of course forecloses the import of virtually every ancient coin type on the designated list, as perhaps only one in every 10,000 or so coins actually is significant enough to be catalogued in this manner.
Although one hopes there is enough common sense left somewhere in the State Department or Customs to realize that the CPIA's restrictions were never meant to apply to such numerous and inexpensive artifacts like most ancient coins, one suspects that this really won't matter to a group of AIA members or supporters that hold that that the only legitimate exchange of cultural artifacts is a long term loan from a source country museum to a like institution in the United States.
Hopefully, someone in the Obama White House political operation will realize there is a problem at CPAC and the State Department that is threatening to turn ancient coin collectors (most of whom are likely Democrats) against President Obama's reelection bid. Can the President's appointees really afford to alienate at least 50,000 serious ancient coin collectors and the hundreds of small businesses of the numismatic trade, particularly when the number of public comments recorded in support of MOU's is so infinitesimal?
Chinese Auction Houses to US State Department and AIA: Suckers!
The Art Newspaper has reported that China Guardian, a well respected Chinese auction house that sells Chinese antiquities and ancient coins, is to open a New York Office.
For now, China Guardian plans to use its office to drum up consignments for its auctions in China, but it is not foreclosing the possibility that its longer term plans may include establishing a presence in the US Market.
Of course, China Guardian will no doubt be able to use its excellent contacts with the Chinese Government to ensure that it secures export permits for any artifacts it might choose to sell abroad.
While China Guardian will no doubt execute its plans quite successfully, one must consider that any success it may achieve will likely be largely based on the competitive advantage it will have over Sotheby's and other US Auction Houses, all courtesy of the US State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and its moronic import restrictions on Chinese archaeological artifacts.
One must also wonder whether the AIA and all those self-righteous archaeologists that strongly supported a MOU with China now realize all they have done is to help allow the Chinese themselves to corner the market in Chinese artifacts.
For now, China Guardian plans to use its office to drum up consignments for its auctions in China, but it is not foreclosing the possibility that its longer term plans may include establishing a presence in the US Market.
Of course, China Guardian will no doubt be able to use its excellent contacts with the Chinese Government to ensure that it secures export permits for any artifacts it might choose to sell abroad.
While China Guardian will no doubt execute its plans quite successfully, one must consider that any success it may achieve will likely be largely based on the competitive advantage it will have over Sotheby's and other US Auction Houses, all courtesy of the US State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and its moronic import restrictions on Chinese archaeological artifacts.
One must also wonder whether the AIA and all those self-righteous archaeologists that strongly supported a MOU with China now realize all they have done is to help allow the Chinese themselves to corner the market in Chinese artifacts.
More Thoughts on Stuart Campbell's Ruler
During CPAC's recent public meeting about the proposed Bulgarian MOU, I borrowed a page from Stuart Campbell, a Scottish archaeologist and government official, to suggest most people consider illicit excavations to be no worse than a traffic violation.
Of course, not all illicit excavations are equal. Here is how I would rank them from the most troubling to the least:
Illicit excavations from world heritage sites;
Illicit excavations from active archaeological sites;
Illicit excavations from inactive archaeological sites;
Illicit excavations from archaeological sites that are obvious, but have not been excavated;
Illicit excavations from mounds of excavated dirt on inactive archaeological sites;
Illicit excavations from private land where there are no obvious archaeological features;
Illicit excavations from private land that already has been disturbed by ploughing.
Properly record what they find;
Properly publish what they find;
Properly preserve what they find;
Properly display what they find.
Where would archaeologists rank theses sins? Are they any worse than illicit excavations?
Of course, not all illicit excavations are equal. Here is how I would rank them from the most troubling to the least:
And speaking of "wrongs," where would most people rank any failure of archaeologists to:
Where would archaeologists rank theses sins? Are they any worse than illicit excavations?
Bulgarian Deputy Minister of Culture Fired, Rehired
Bulgarian Deputy Minister of Culture Todor Chobanov has been rehired as an advisor to assist in the development of cultural tourism soon after being fired as Deputy Minister of Culture of Bulgaria. See
http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=133616
Chobanov was evidently instrumental in the passage of Bulgaria's much criticised cultural heritage law and likely also had something to do in asking the US to impose import restrictions on Bulgarian cultural artifacts.
http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=133616
Chobanov was evidently instrumental in the passage of Bulgaria's much criticised cultural heritage law and likely also had something to do in asking the US to impose import restrictions on Bulgarian cultural artifacts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)