State Indirectly Funding War on Sotheby's?
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
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
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
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
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
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.