By Wayne Sayles – Ancient Coin Collecting
Many readers of this blog have undoubtedly been to Disney World in Orlando, Florida and taken a course at the Imagination Institute sponsored by Eastman Kodak. Figment, a cute and colorful dragon accompanies the visitor on a “people-mover” journey through the land of dreams.

The whole experience is accompanied by a captivating musical composition in which the theme IMAGINATION spools repeatedly. That tune becomes so deeply imbedded in the subconscious that one finds themselves humming it for the rest of the day and truthfully for years after.

The Cyprus mail article, titled “US collectors to regain right to trade ancient Cyprus coins” was a tiny bit of an exaggeration, unless the author knows something that I don’t know.

When I read a recent press release on Cyprus Mail, I couldn’t shake that Disney tune. But, instead of IMAGINATION ringing in my ears it was EXAGGERATION!

The ACCG has merely begun the long and tedious challenge that will ultimately ensue. Even though it would be the prudent, honorable and decent thing to do, I don’t see Cyprus or the U.S. State Department folding their cards on this issue. But the Cyprus Mail article contains an interesting quote nonetheless. Maria Hadjicosti, Director of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus Museum Nicosia, said about the coins imported by ACCG for the subject test case:

“There is not much financial value in antiquities, but the coins are not just money….They are important archaeological items, because they can be accurately dated and used for historical study.” This is basically a true statement as it pertains to coins. While even archaeologists debate the utility of coins for dating strata, they obviously are of some value to anybody who finds them, including archaeologists. The most striking portion of the quote is however the admission that, relatively speaking, there is not much value in them—either financially or in terms of national heritage. Certainly not when compared to unique objects like the Rosetta Stone or the Euphronios Krater.

That revelation by Ms. Hadjicosti flies directly in the face of sensationalizing statements (exaggerations) by nationalist advocates who claim that the antiquities trade is third only in size to the illegal drug and weapons trades. These same nationalist gurus, mainly archaeologists, promote themselves and their “colleagues” as brighter, morally superior and specially ordained to promulgate their dogma.

(more…)

By Wayne Sayles – Ancient Coin Blog

Ancient coins have existed since the 7th century BC. They attracted the interest of collectors shortly after that and have continued to inspire ordinary people around the world for going on three millennia.

During the Italian Renaissance, the collecting of ancient coins became so popular that a sophisticated commercial market emerged and numismatic scholarship blossomed. Anyone with sufficient interest and erudition was able to study the past through its coins. The development of numismatics as a science is a result mainly of private collectors and their dedication to the pursuit of knowledge. When academia became aware of the value of coins as voices from the past, coin collectors and professional scholars found that they had much in common and worked closely together. Yes, that was a long time ago.

What we see today is a bitter turf war between private collectors, independent scholars, museums, nationalist governments and archaeologists. What happened to the symbiosis?

Deep within the collecting community, there is still a longing for cooperation and symbiotic support with those academics who dedicate their lives to study of the past. But, the mutual cooperation and respect of those halcyon days is all but gone. The only words that most private collectors hear from archaeologists these day are disparaging. And, in equal measure, the response is unfriendly.

As archaeological blog comments about the recent CPAC hearing on Italy reveal, the symbiosis is all but dead. It is unlikely ever to reappear to the extent that we saw in the 19th or 20th centuries. That is sad from a collector’s point of view, but is it equally sad from the academic archaeologist’s point of view? I am coming to doubt that it is. They have very little use for private collectors and are not reticent to say so. (more…)

By Wayne Sayles – Ancient Coin Collecting Blog

For the past five years I have read a nauseating stream of blog posts, news articles, discussion list comments and convention presentation reports that condemn the “illicit” trade in antiquities. The fact that anyone might condemn illicit activity is not in itself nauseating, but the ringing of the same bell 24/7 until the brain fogs over in biological rejection is not only nauseating but obnoxious. It reminds me of the parent in a grocery story who repeatedly harps (in the most irritating shrill cacaphony) “Johnny, don’t touch that!” over and over and over until you wish they would take little Johnny and paddle his behind (even though that is certainly not PC these days.) Really, it’s not little Johnny that needs paddling, it is the parent for not approaching the problem with a reasonable and effective solution.

When do the harpies of cultural property nationalism ever talk about the “licit” antiquities trade? From the ratio of ink spilled, one would presume that there is not even a legitimate trade in existence. Never mind that there are laws in Britain and the United States that protect private collectors and the legitimate trade in antiquities. Never mind that countries like Greece, Italy and Israel (among others) have state licensed and regulated antiquities dealers. Never mind that EC rules prohibit restrictions on the legitimate exchange of antiquities between private citizens and businesses within the European Union. Is there a legitimate trade? Of course there is, only an idiot would suggest that there isn’t. But is there any attempt among cultural property nationalists to work with the legitimate trade and private collectors to reduce incidents of archaeological looting? Very little if any, and none that I am personally aware of. In fact, as Executive Director of the ACCG, it has been my observation that the door is not and has not been open to any such collaboration for well more than a decade—and, in fact, the ACCG has tried.

The obsession among cultural property nationalists (especially those archaeologists who blog about the subject) has been to label everything without a documented provenance as illicit. Because much of the trade in antiquities does not require documented provenance, and because provenance is not especially valued by collectors of minor objects, it often does not exist. Consequently, the entire trade is painted with a broad brush as illicit. Excuse me, but that’s an asinine position and one that is a non-starter for any serious discussion. No legal system, short of autocratic government, recognizes a premise where something is illegal unto proven legal. In fact, attempts to create this sort of legal environment have led to several major upheavals in global society. A common coin or a clay pot, that is literally one of millions of surviving specimens, is treated by hardline nationalists in the same light as the Rosetta Stone. They can rave on about context and priceless information, but really, one doesn’t have to think very hard to see through that. (more…)