Destroying the Numismatic Market

No Shipment to the USA

http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2012/01/no-shipment-to-usa.html

by Peter Tompa

The practical impact of import restrictions should be made crystal clear with these words, "No Shipment to the USA."

This German dealer will no longer ship this Syracusian Tetradrachm to the USA, presumably because of import restrictions on "coins of Italian type." See

http://www.vcoins.com/grotjohann/store/viewItem.asp?idProduct=820

There is no indication this coin is a "fresh find." Indeed, given its toning, this coin has likely been in a collection for years. Yet, since the dealer has not identified this coin as being pictured in an auction catalogue or price list dating from before the restrictions, the dealer cannot ship it to the USA lest it be seized by US Customs and returned to its presumptive supposed find spot, the modern day Republic of Italy. (Though US Customs is supposed to accept certifications that such coins were out of the country before the date of restrictions, even where this information is available, Customs has been known to reject them absent auction catalogue citations.)

Yet, the same coin can be shipped to collectors ANYWHERE else in the world, including within Italy. How then do the restrictions comply with the CPIA's "concerted international response requirement" that was meant to the ensure the comity and effectiveness of import restrictions and also thus preclude any such discrimination against American collectors?

*****************

COMMENTARY

*****************

As pro-collecting advocates have pointed out since the first proposal to include ancient coins in US import restrictions, such restrictions will not do anything at all to prevent or discourage illicit excavation and smuggling of ancient coins.

Their actual effect will be to divide the numismatic market into two zones: the USA and the rest of the world. It is difficult to believe that such a division can serve any purpose, other than a conspiracy to restrict and eventually destroy the licit international market for ancient coins.

Rescuing Artifacts from Destruction

Metal Detectorists Preserve Artifacts Archaeologists Often Destroy or Ignore!

http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2012/01/metal-detectorists-preserve-artifacts.html

by Peter Tompa

Karl also makes this interesting observation in his "Highway to Hell" article cited below:

But what are Austrian metal detectorists really digging up? Do they typically dig sizeable trenches, and do they dig down into stratified contexts? As far as can be ascertained from the results of my survey, they normally do neither. Rather, the overwhelming majority restrict their activities mostly to digging just the topsoil (Figure 10) and to digging pits of less than one-quarter of a square metre (Figure 11).

Yet, the topsoil is that part of an archaeological stratigraphy that is usually removed by a mechanical digger on the vast majority of Austrian excavations. This is true for pretty much all rescue excavations, and even for many, if not most, research digs. Manual removal of the topsoil is the rare exception to the rule, and even where this happens, the topsoil is rarely thoroughly searched for finds (least of all using a metal detector), if at all.

Thus, most of the activity of metal detectorists seems to be limited to those parts of archaeological stratigraphies neither observed nor documented in systematic archaeological excavations. It thus seems rather peculiar that we accuse these amateur archaeologists of intentionally destroying the archaeological contexts of their finds. After all, professional archaeologists rarely even bother attempting to recover the finds that derive from topsoil contexts; rather, they run them over with a large digger or remove them rapidly and with little regard for implementing intensive recovery strategies.

****************

COMMENTARY

****************

Pro-collecting advocates have for a long time endeavored to point out that charges that those who search for coins and other objects with metal detectors are not doing any significant damage to the archaeological record, contrary to sweeping allegations made by anticollecting [perhaps antisocial might be a more accurate term for such negative views] ideologues, who apparently regard every cubic inch of our planet as a sacred archaeological treasure reserved for archaeologists to excavate.

Here we have evidence from a respected archaeologist, that a rational examination of what "artifact hunters" [to use an emotionally charged pejorative term invented by anticollecting ideologues] are actually doing must conclude that they are preserving artifacts from the destructive activities of archaeologists.

Highway to Hell

On the Highway to Hell

http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2012/01/on-highway-to-hell.html

by Peter Tompa

Raimund Karl of Bangor University in the UK has written a thought provoking piece entitled, On the Highway to Hell: Thoughts on the Unintended Consequences for Portable Antiquities of Section 11 (1) Austrian Denkmalschutzgesetz. See http://www.ngoe.at/publikationen/HEN_Karl.pdf

He concludes that a change in Austrian law has led metal detectorists to stop reporting finds they would otherwise report:

By effectively outlawing the use of metal detectors by members of the public to search for archaeological finds through § 11(1) DMSG, the many responsible amateur archaeologists who would be both willing to assist and interested in assisting with the protection of the archaeological heritage have been criminalized. This has completely removed many people’s motivation to report finds, intended to be strengthened by § 8 DMSG awarding a half share in the ownership of legally found and reported finds to the finder. As a result, most have practically stopped reporting any of their finds: this would, after all, be an at least implicit admission of having broken the law, resulting in the loss of any ownership rights to the finds according to § 400 ABGB, and possibly even inviting prosecution.

After reading his article, one might conclude that Professor Karl seems to be blessed with common sense that has detoured him away from the "highway to hell" that has been taken by some of his more ideological colleagues in the archaeological community.

*****************

COMMENTARY

*****************

Dr. Karl, a highly respected archaeologist, has provided one more convincing reason to realize that the anticollecting ideological approach supported by radical archaeologists is inherently destructive both to protection of the archaeological heritage and to public support for archaeologists and their activities.

That ideological approach is indeed a "highway to hell" whose first major disaster was to irreparably destroy the once close relationship between the archaeological community and the collecting community, and which is now proceeding toward destruction of support for archaeology amongst the general public.

Quem deus vult perdere, dementat prius.