American archaeologists have been generally supportive of the repatriation efforts of countries like Egypt, Turkey, Greece and Italy. Although they may claim that they are disinterested experts that only support repatriation for moral reasons, the fact is their careers may very well depend on excavation permits issued by the cultural bureaucracies of these same countries.
But now the same cultural nationalism that has motivated Turkey's recent repatriation claims appears to have led the Turkish cultural bureaucracy to force German archaeologists out from excavations at Troy. See http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/german-team-leaves-ancient-site.aspx?pageID=238&nID=21959&NewsCatID=375 Although the above article points to "financial problems" as the reason German archaeologists are leaving the site, it also suggests that Turkey ultimately wants to replace German archaeologists with Turkish ones. Moreover, other sources suggest that move is part of a larger dispute between German state museums and Turkey over repatriation demands for artifacts in their collections. See http://www.thelocal.de/sci-tech/20110224-33323.html
Indeed, as quoted in the above article, a Turkish minister has stated quite bluntly, "Turkey has new universities, new archaeological institutes, not to mention engaged and successful archaeologists....When we don't see the cooperation we hope for in this area, then we won't hesitate to transfer digs to our own universities."
For now, American archaeologists' careers at Troy and other Turkish sites appear safe. But one can only imagine that Turkish authorities expect unqualified support from American archaeologists for their recent repatriation claims against US Museums. See http://chasingaphrodite.com/2012/03/30/scoop-turkey-asks-getty-met-cleveland-and-dumbarton-oaks-to-return-dozens-of-antiquities/
And what of the 1970 UNESCO benchmark that the AIA hoodwinked American museums into accepting in order to buy peace? That "safe harbor" has evidently suddenly become all but forgotten given what one reads about Turkey's claims in the archaeological blogosphere.
ACCG: AIA Under Fire on Open Access
Here is a revised press release from the ACCG critical of the AIA on its stand against "open access" to archaeological research: http://www.bizjournals.com/prnewswire/press_releases/2012/05/30/CL14513
At public meetings before the State Department's Cultural Property Advisory Committee, AIA members have claimed that import restrictions on cultural goods are necessary to promote archaeological research which is then shared with members of the public.
Isn't the AIA's stance against open access to federally funded research inconsistent with such claims? Should the AIA instead provide CPAC with a disclaimer that archaeological research is only made freely available to fellow members of the archaeological trade?
At public meetings before the State Department's Cultural Property Advisory Committee, AIA members have claimed that import restrictions on cultural goods are necessary to promote archaeological research which is then shared with members of the public.
Isn't the AIA's stance against open access to federally funded research inconsistent with such claims? Should the AIA instead provide CPAC with a disclaimer that archaeological research is only made freely available to fellow members of the archaeological trade?
We Buy Chinese Antiques
Oriental Heritage Inc., has announced a 7 day Antiques Buying Event in the Baltimore and Washington, D.C. Area. A prominent advertisement in the Washington Post exclaims, �The Chinese economy is booming. As a result, the market for Chinese antiques is red hot. Prices for many Chinese antiques have grown dramatically.� The advertisement also informs us that the Oriental Heritage Inc. is �backed up by major investment groups in China� and �has access to tens of millions of dollars of funds instantly.� Although not explicitly stated in the advertisement itself, the implication is that any art purchased in the United States will be repatriated to China.
Comment: While I support Oriental Heritage�s rights to purchase antiques in the United States and send them to China, its actions again underscore the utter foolishness of the State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Cultural Heritage Center�s effort to secure US import restrictions on Chinese cultural goods. Those restrictions have been pitched by State Department cultural bureaucrats and supportive archaeologists as necessary to protect Chinese archaeological sites. Yet, they appear to have in fact done little more than help redirect the trade in Chinese art back to China itself.
For more about Oriental Heritage, see http://orientalheritageinc.com/
Comment: While I support Oriental Heritage�s rights to purchase antiques in the United States and send them to China, its actions again underscore the utter foolishness of the State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Cultural Heritage Center�s effort to secure US import restrictions on Chinese cultural goods. Those restrictions have been pitched by State Department cultural bureaucrats and supportive archaeologists as necessary to protect Chinese archaeological sites. Yet, they appear to have in fact done little more than help redirect the trade in Chinese art back to China itself.
For more about Oriental Heritage, see http://orientalheritageinc.com/
CPAC Charter Renewed
The Federal Register (5/26/2012) belatedly reports that CPAC's Charter has been renewed:
DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 7897]
Renewal of Cultural Property Advisory Committee Charter
SUMMARY: The Charter of the Department of State's Cultural PropertyAdvisory Committee (CPAC) has been renewed for an additional two years. The Charter of the Cultural Property Advisory Committee is being renewed for a two-year period. The Committee was established by the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act of 1983, 19 U.S.C. 2601 et seq. It reviews requests from other countries seeking U.S. import restrictions on archaeological or ethnological material the pillage of which places a country's cultural heritage in jeopardy. The Committee makes findings and recommendations to the President's designee who, on behalf of the President, determines whether to impose the import restrictions. The membership of the Committee consists of private sector experts in archaeology, anthropology, or ethnology; experts in the international sale of cultural property; and representatives of museums and of the general public.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cultural Heritage Center, U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, 2200 C Street NW., Washington, DC 20522. Telephone: (202) 632-6301; Fax: (202) 632-6300.
Dated: April 27, 2012.
Maria P. Kouroupas, Executive Director, Cultural Property Advisory, Committee Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2012-12937 Filed 5-25-12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-11-P
Comment: CPAC was meant to provide useful advice to the Executive Branch Decision-maker, but unfortunately the body has become little more than a rubber stamp for the State Department Cultural Heritage Center�s efforts to impose the broadest possible restrictions on cultural goods. See http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/03/cultural-property-implementation-act-is.html. If anything, the situation has gotten worse under the Obama Administration because non-archaeological slots on CPAC have now become packed with archaeological supporters. See http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/11/cpacked.html
DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 7897]
Renewal of Cultural Property Advisory Committee Charter
SUMMARY: The Charter of the Department of State's Cultural PropertyAdvisory Committee (CPAC) has been renewed for an additional two years. The Charter of the Cultural Property Advisory Committee is being renewed for a two-year period. The Committee was established by the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act of 1983, 19 U.S.C. 2601 et seq. It reviews requests from other countries seeking U.S. import restrictions on archaeological or ethnological material the pillage of which places a country's cultural heritage in jeopardy. The Committee makes findings and recommendations to the President's designee who, on behalf of the President, determines whether to impose the import restrictions. The membership of the Committee consists of private sector experts in archaeology, anthropology, or ethnology; experts in the international sale of cultural property; and representatives of museums and of the general public.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cultural Heritage Center, U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, 2200 C Street NW., Washington, DC 20522. Telephone: (202) 632-6301; Fax: (202) 632-6300.
Dated: April 27, 2012.
Maria P. Kouroupas, Executive Director, Cultural Property Advisory, Committee Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2012-12937 Filed 5-25-12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710-11-P
Comment: CPAC was meant to provide useful advice to the Executive Branch Decision-maker, but unfortunately the body has become little more than a rubber stamp for the State Department Cultural Heritage Center�s efforts to impose the broadest possible restrictions on cultural goods. See http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/03/cultural-property-implementation-act-is.html. If anything, the situation has gotten worse under the Obama Administration because non-archaeological slots on CPAC have now become packed with archaeological supporters. See http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/11/cpacked.html
Closed "Open Access" Debate?
One of the archaeologists that has taken the AIA to task on its "Open Access" Position apparently feels free to edit my comments to his blog here: http://dougsarchaeology.wordpress.com/2012/05/25/petty-bull-and-open-access-pitbulls-how-to-control-your-message-online/
I'll let the reader judge whether his own attempt to steer the debate about "open access" away from its broader implications is warranted or not. Here is my comment in its entirety:
This actually appears to be a bit of a childish response to this press release. You admit the content is largely accurate; what you disagree with seems to be the fact that an advocacy group with a different perspective than your own has used the Open Access website for its own purposes-- welcome to the Internet! If you want, I can point out to you several archaeological blogs that regularly do the same thing. And why not? Your group put this statement out on the web for all to see. To change the link to change the message may have some "gotcha" appeal to people who agree with you, but it does also suggest that you think only fellow archaeologists have the right to criticize AIA policies.
As to what this has to do with import restrictions point, see my blog here: http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2012/04/aia-seeks-to-maintain-monopoly-on.html Basically, it is fair to point out that the AIA has suggested in public meetings before the State Department�s Cultural Property Advisory Committee that import restrictions are necessary to promote numismatic research which then can be shared with the public.
Incidentally, it is the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild, not the American Coin Collectors Guild as you state. (Though, of course, you are correct to point out the error related to the AIA.).
Sincerely,
Peter Tompa, ACCG Board Member
I'll let the reader judge whether his own attempt to steer the debate about "open access" away from its broader implications is warranted or not. Here is my comment in its entirety:
This actually appears to be a bit of a childish response to this press release. You admit the content is largely accurate; what you disagree with seems to be the fact that an advocacy group with a different perspective than your own has used the Open Access website for its own purposes-- welcome to the Internet! If you want, I can point out to you several archaeological blogs that regularly do the same thing. And why not? Your group put this statement out on the web for all to see. To change the link to change the message may have some "gotcha" appeal to people who agree with you, but it does also suggest that you think only fellow archaeologists have the right to criticize AIA policies.
As to what this has to do with import restrictions point, see my blog here: http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2012/04/aia-seeks-to-maintain-monopoly-on.html Basically, it is fair to point out that the AIA has suggested in public meetings before the State Department�s Cultural Property Advisory Committee that import restrictions are necessary to promote numismatic research which then can be shared with the public.
Incidentally, it is the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild, not the American Coin Collectors Guild as you state. (Though, of course, you are correct to point out the error related to the AIA.).
Sincerely,
Peter Tompa, ACCG Board Member
UNESCO Database of Cultural Property Laws
I received this solicitation, which I am happy to pass along:
Dear Sir or Madam:
I write to you regarding the UNESCO Database of National Cultural Heritage Laws. Created in 2003, the Database contains more than 2,350 laws of 180 countries, and is available on-line at www.unesco.org/culture/natlaws. It is easy to use and free of charge, and provides a unique tool for cultural authorities, museums, universities, law firms, and heritage professionals. More generally, the database can play an important role in fighting the illicit traffic of cultural heritage.
We believe that the content of the Cultural Property Observer Blog may benefit from this resource and that it is well-positioned to help promote the Database to a large audience of possible users. Accordingly, we invite you to share the above URL widely, and to promote its use among other relevant individuals and institutions.
....
Thank you, and best regards,
Jordan Jacobs
UNESCO Consultant
Comment: This is a useful resource. IFAR has a similar database, but it is probably not as complete. Of course, the fact that a law exists on the subject does not answer the specific question of whether it is just to all stakeholders, whether it is enforced at home or whether it should be enforced abroad. That, of course, is what much of the cultural property debate is about.
Dear Sir or Madam:
I write to you regarding the UNESCO Database of National Cultural Heritage Laws. Created in 2003, the Database contains more than 2,350 laws of 180 countries, and is available on-line at www.unesco.org/culture/natlaws. It is easy to use and free of charge, and provides a unique tool for cultural authorities, museums, universities, law firms, and heritage professionals. More generally, the database can play an important role in fighting the illicit traffic of cultural heritage.
We believe that the content of the Cultural Property Observer Blog may benefit from this resource and that it is well-positioned to help promote the Database to a large audience of possible users. Accordingly, we invite you to share the above URL widely, and to promote its use among other relevant individuals and institutions.
....
Thank you, and best regards,
Jordan Jacobs
UNESCO Consultant
Comment: This is a useful resource. IFAR has a similar database, but it is probably not as complete. Of course, the fact that a law exists on the subject does not answer the specific question of whether it is just to all stakeholders, whether it is enforced at home or whether it should be enforced abroad. That, of course, is what much of the cultural property debate is about.
Snobbery
Does snobbery help motivate the archaeological community�s support for clamp downs on collecting? One might conclude �yes,� based on this: http://paul-barford.blogspot.com/2012/05/what-they-collect.html
I�ve had the pleasure of being both a Trustee of the American Numismatic Society and the head of a local ancient coin club, the Ancient Numismatic Society of Washington, DC. Both have done excellent work fostering the appreciation and study of ancient coins. The work of the ANS is unparalleled. But the work of individual collectors has been important too. For example, members of the ANSWDC have written books that have ranged from the major work on Seleucid coins to another on an understudied area in Roman numismatics.
Now, more information is being placed on the Internet. Alfredo De La Fe should be commended for his new contribution. To mock it instead only betrays the academic snobbery behind the archaeological community�s opposition to collectors and collecting.
I�ve had the pleasure of being both a Trustee of the American Numismatic Society and the head of a local ancient coin club, the Ancient Numismatic Society of Washington, DC. Both have done excellent work fostering the appreciation and study of ancient coins. The work of the ANS is unparalleled. But the work of individual collectors has been important too. For example, members of the ANSWDC have written books that have ranged from the major work on Seleucid coins to another on an understudied area in Roman numismatics.
Now, more information is being placed on the Internet. Alfredo De La Fe should be commended for his new contribution. To mock it instead only betrays the academic snobbery behind the archaeological community�s opposition to collectors and collecting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)