By Wayne Sayles – Ancient Coin Collecting Blog
One view in archaeology today is that private citizens of any given country have an ethical responsibility to preserve the cultural heritage of all countries. The foundation for this view seems to be that cultural property protection requires a global effort. In 1970, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) codified this view through a resolution designed to control the transfer of cultural property between nations through the application of implementing legislation in member states. Indeed, the adherents of UNESCO 1970 would like to see a more global approach to this legislation.

It is hard to deny that in the modern age we do see a dramatic increase in economic, political and social interaction between people of diverse national and social backgrounds which often is referred to as “globalization”. The internet is a prime example of how globalization actually transcends nationalism. One would think that this might, by default, lead to the evolution of global ethics, but that seems not to be the case.

Oddly, those dealing directly with objects classified by UNESCO as “cultural property” often reject a global view of culture. Instead, they advocate retentionist laws and policies that promote nationalism rather than globalism. The fervor with which these cultural property nationalists press their agenda seems directly proportional to the rise of globalism in all other aspects of life.

It seems incongruous that a nation like China, for example, should press for free trade of their export products and at the same time seek over-reaching restrictions on trade in former export products now deemed cultural property. It seems equally incongruous that a country like Cyprus can lay claim to everything ever made in the country’s classical past, no matter where it is today or when it left Cyprus. Is it unethical for someone outside of Cyprus to possess such an object without the explicit written permission of the modern government of Cyprus? (more…)

By Wayne Sayles – Ancient Coin Collecting

Anyone who pays the slightest attention to Washington doings can hardly avoid being struck by the operatic nature of governance. It may be humorous or tragic, by turns, but it can also be mysterious. How do rather consequential things happen? Better yet, who makes them happen? These are ageless questions that have inspired countless authors and playwrights—not to mention political analysts and lobbyists. The Ancient Coin Collecting community is no stranger to the sometimes bizarre world of Washington politics, where the largest cast and most Machiavellian plots are routinely encountered at the U.S. State Department.

It may strike some as humorous that an innocuous group like coin collectors can find themselves pitted against the Hydra of bureaucracy—an event of almost mythical character and proportions. But, not to be outdone by the Greeks, the DOS Hydra is also invisible! Rarely do the State Department and the Defense Department share techniques, but the cloaking of bureaucrats in Foggy Bottom bears all of the characteristics of invisible paint camouflage—making their actions unobservable to the radar of the public and the press. This invisible shield has been recognized for at least a decade, though getting a clear picture is obviously a challenge. The late Steven Vincent, in Art and Auction (March, 2002) labeled Maria Kouroupas, at the State Department’s Cultural Heritage Center as a “Stealth Fighter” who is “Washington’s smart weapon in its shadowy war on collecting antiquities.”

The cloaking of DOS bureaucrats has become readily apparent through (the lack of) documents released in response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by the numismatic community. In 2007, the State Department negotiated an agreement with the government of Cyprus to restrict the importation of ancient Cypriot coins into the United States. Though a landmark decision, in the sense that no previous Memorandum of Agreement (including an earlier one with Cyprus) had ever included a restriction on coins, this decision was apparently made in a vacuum. (more…)

From Wayne Sayles Blog Ancient Coin Collecting

Anyone who follows the media coverage of cultural property issues has hopefully been inoculated against IAB (infectuous archaeological bias). A prime example of how twisted the coverage can get is shared with us by Associated Press in a June 3o, 2008 article by Maamoun Youssef titled “Egypt retrieves ancient relief in London“. The sub title is “Egypt retrieves a 2,500-year-old stone relief from Bonhams auction house in London”, Here is Paragraph 1:

“CAIRO, Egypt (AP) — Egypt retrieved a 2,500-year-old limestone relief from London after its sale was blocked by Bonhams auction house because it had been looted from a pharaoh’s tomb, Egypt’s antiquities authority said Monday. A team of Egyptian archaeologists traveled to Britain to retrieve the artifact, which bears hieroglyphic text engraved in six rows and a cartouche of an ancient Egyptian queen, Egypt’s Supreme Council of Antiquities said in a statement.”

Now what sort of image does that conjure up? The only way I can read this is that Egypt’s Supreme Archaeologist, Zahi Hawass, forced Bonhams to turn over an artifact that Egypt claims is looted. One might just stop reading at that point—and indeed many do. Anyone in public relations or advertising knows that the first paragraph is often your only shot at the reader. Well, I did read on and much to my surprise I find that it was actually a staff member at the Metropolitan Museum in New York who alerted Bonhams about the piece and it was Bonhams who voluntarily withdrew the item before the sale.

Yes, it seems incredible doesn’t it! The same Metropolitan Museum that is getting slammed almost daily it seems by archaeologists and retentionist nations is protecting the interests of Egypt—the most aggressive cultural property nationalist in the universe (well, alright, some might have other candidates for that position). (more…)