Around the house



Don't forget to enter the Veet prize pack giveaway here

State Indirectly Funding War on Sotheby's?

During the Vietnam war era, the US Government funded a "secret war" in Cambodia. Now, is the State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and its Cultural Heritage Center indirectly funding a not so secret war against Sotheby's Auction House?

Heritage Watch, an archaeological advocacy group with a focus on Cambodia, has been at the forefront of a recent campaign against Sotheby�s. See http://art-crime.blogspot.com/2011/10/what-does-lack-of-provenance-indicate.html
And http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/29/arts/design/sothebys-caught-in-dispute-over-prized-cambodian-statue.html?pagewanted=1

At the same time, Heritage Watch has received funding from the State Department�s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and its Cultural Heritage Center:
See http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2008/09/eca-ambassadors-fund-awards-22-million.html and http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2008/09/cambodian-import-restrictions-extended.html

Is State indirectly funding the archaeological lobby�s war on Sotheby�s? If so, it would be consistent with State's ongoing funding of the Cyprus American Archaeological Research Institute, which has been at the forefront of lobbying for a clamp down on collectors of ancient coins and other artifacts from Cyprus.

Loot Busters

Dorothy King and Culture-Concierge.com have unveiled a website designed to help identify likely looted material. For more, see http://www.lootbusters.com/

The website is built some basic principles: images accessible to all, no agenda, and no strings attached. As such, it is a welcome change from the usual finger wagging.

Cambodian Cultural Property Fracas Again Shows Appeasment Leads to Escalating Demands

Leaving aside the merits of Cambodia's claim to a valuable statue that was to be auctioned off at Sotheby's, this latest fracas in the cultural property wars again suggests appeasing the archaeological lobby does little but encourage escalating demands. For more, see http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/29/arts/design/sothebys-caught-in-dispute-over-prized-cambodian-statue.html

If Sotheby�s thought hiring a former prosecutor who has developed strong contacts with the archaeological community would win friends and influence people within the archaeological community, it was wrong.

Also, if anyone thinks 1970 provides a safer harbor to repatriation claims, the archaeological lobby's recourse to a 1925 law to press this claim also suggests that 1970 may not be the "safe harbor" date the archaeological community initially claimed as well.

Yes, appeasement leads to little but escalating demands for more.

Odyssey Marine: Carriage of Coinage Rules

While the archaeological community has pitched Spain's win in the Odyssey Marine Case as win for archaeology over the commercial exploitation of shipwrecks, the decision was in fact narrowly based on the fact that a Spanish warship carried the treasure, i.e., archaeological arguments were not result determinative.

Indeed, if anything, the decision is a defeat for repatriation in a broader sense; in awarding the treasure to Spain, the U.S. courts also turned down Peru's claims to the treasure largely based on the moral argument that Colonialist Spain stole it from the Peruvian people.

Spain to Peru: It's Not About the Money, Really

Spain has rejected Peru's claims to the treasure retreived from the Black Swan wreck. According to the Washington Post,

On Thursday, the Peruvian government made an emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court seeking to block transfer of the treasure to give Peru more time to make arguments in U.S. federal court about its claim to being the rightful owner. But that appeal was denied Friday by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

Peru had argued the gold and silver on the ship was mined, refined and minted in its territory, which at the time was part of the Spanish empire.

But Carmen Marcos, deputy director of Spain�s National Museum of Archaeology, said Monday the coins were minted not just in Peru but also in Bolivia, Colombia and Chile. And the whole affair involved in claiming the coins was not about monetary value but rather history, she added. �These coins are not money. They are archaeological pieces,� she told reporters.

For more, see http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/spain-rejects-peruvian-claim-to-shipwreck-treasure/2012/02/27/gIQAFFcfdR_story.html

While this statement will no doubt warm the hearts of archaeologists everywhere, one would hope cash strapped Spain (which is only a little better off than Greece) will consider selling most of the coins after they are properly cleaned and recorded. If the coins really are worth $500 million as reported, why hoard them instead of using proceeds from their sale for the public good?

The Black Swan Wreck and the Untold Story of the Precedent Upon Which the Federal Court's Decision Was Based

I received an email from the author of "The Hidden Galleon," a book about Spanish shipwrecks on Virginia's Assateague island. He directed me to his blog:

http://www.thehiddengalleon.com/the-sea-hunt-case.htm

It states:

Some say you shouldn�t judge a book by its cover. No one can tell what story may lie behind a paper facade. Such is the case with the opinion of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in the Sea Hunt Case handed down in 2000. Two shipwrecks were awarded to Spain. And neither of them were Spanish.

The Sea Hunt case has been used as a battering ram against Odyssey Marine Exploration by the Kingdom of Spain in its effort to recover a purported half billion dollar treasure from the salvage company who brought up not only magnificent treasures and artifacts for the world to see but solved a historical mystery that is centuries old.



Since 2007, when Odyssey filed its claim to 17 tons of what appears to be Spanish treasure, Spain has asserted has a defense to that claim the precedent found in the Sea Hunt case. This was the first time that Spain had entered a claim in a treasure case. Just recently, Spain has argued that since the Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal in the Sea Hunt case that Odyssey will be reviewed the same way so they might as well hand over the treasure now. They would like to deny Odyssey rights that are available to them as they pursue equity in the recovery of Spanish treasures. Spain is demanding possession of the treasure before the case has run its full course.

It's author concludes,

This is a perfect example of how our government will sacrifice our own cultural heritage to win a battle against a treasure hunter.

John Amrhein, Jr.



It's well worth reading and deciding for yourself.