Skip to main content

"The Italian MOU creates a 'one way street' in terms of trade"

Last Friday's review of Article II of the MOU between Italy and the US was interesting. Kerry K. Wetterstrom, the President Elect of the ACCG and editor of the Celator, was speaking. His closing section talked not about Italy at all but the way that the ACCG is seeking to challenge the US State Department over its MOUs with Cyprus and China.
Of course, the major issue is not so much how difficult it is to export coins from Italy, but the unfair, unworkable burden import restrictions would place on unprovenanced coins of Italian type, of which there are millions already in the marketplace. By way of example, ACCG imported unprovenanced coins of Cypriot and Chinese type from the United Kingdom for purposes of a test case. The coins could have come from literally anywhere, but U.S. Customs has assumed they were exported from Cyprus and China contrary to the import ban. The coins were detained in April 2009, seized in August 2009, and Customs still has not brought an action in court to allow ACCG to contest the seizure. One can only imagine the chaos that would take place if the State Department reverses prior precedent and imposes import restrictions on coins of Italian type. ACCG, of course, plans to argue this point further when CPAC addresses Article I of the current MOU with Italy.
The MOU under discussion is about "the Imposition of Import Restrictions on Archaeological Material Representing the Pre-Classical, Classical and Imperial Roman Periods of Italy". Archaeologists are rightly concerned about the protection of archaeological contexts and heritage.

But what does the President Elect of the ACCG talk about? Trade.
In the MOU that is under discussion today, we are favoring Italian consumers to the detriment of American consumers of the same product. The Italian MOU creates a “one way street” in terms of trade. While commerce in common ancient and medieval coins faces relatively few restrictions within Italy itself, Americans can participate in this market only with great difficulty and patience. It would be an even greater travesty if they were precluded legally from that market while Italian dealers and collectors continue to experience the rewards of independent scholarship and private collecting.
Wetterstrom has revealed the real concerns for the ACCG. It is about the right to trade in the cultural remains of other nations.

Bookmark and Share so Your Real Friends Know that You Know

Comments

Actually, Kerry Wetterstom was primarily concerned with keeping specifically to an assessment of Italy's obligations under Art. II--including the obligation to make it easier for US collectors to buy ancient coins for export from Italy.

Frankly, while ACCG, IAPN, PNG, a represntative of the antiqutities dealers and the AAMD museum directors ALL followed the Federal Register's instructions to keep the discussion on Italy's obligations under Art. II, the representaives of the archaeological commmunity were allowed to meander far from that provision into whether import restrictions should be extended to coins.

Of course, IAPN, PNG, ACCG and others interested in the continued ability to study and preserve coins hope to be able to take the opportunity to comment on why the current exemption should continue at a future time.

Sincerely,

Peter Tompa
David Gill said…
Dear Peter
It would be so helpful if you could post your presentation somewhere. It looks as if you were primarily concerned with coins:
"Peter Tompa spoke on behalf of IAPN and PNG, two trade associations for the small businesses of the numismatic trade. First, he highlighted the failure of Italy to care for its own cultural patrimony, including coins. Second, he discussed Italy’s relative success in staunching looting, and its implications against the extension of import restrictions. Third, he advocated that CPAC again suggest that Italian authorities adopt a Treasure Trove law and Portable Antiquities Scheme. Lastly, he noted that Italy has not as promised made its own export controls more efficient."
Perhaps you could elaborate on "the failure of Italy to care for its own cultural patrimony, including coins".
Best wishes
David
David- The text belongs to my clients not me, but here is a summary of the main points in that regard:

 Coins in museums have historically suffered from major thefts and poor internal documentation.
 Institutional collections are poorly documented in published form.
 The publication record for coins found in Italian excavations is poor.
 Without publication it is almost impossible to know what has been found and what has become of the material.

If you check with your collegues, they should note Stefano De Caro did not dispute them-- nor did they for that matter.

Best,

Peter Tompa
With all due respect, it is inaccurate to say that members of the archaeological community introduced coins and the prospect of their inclusion.

I was present at the meeting and recall that Mr. Tompa made explicit reference to coins and the prospect of their being introduced in the renewal. The oral comments made by Mr. Tompa were direct enough that a member of the CPAC asked him how about the practicalities of potentially restricting coin types from Italy.

The comments made by Mr. Wetterstrom also addressed the prospect of considering coins in the future:

"Of course, the major issue is not so much how difficult it is to export coins from Italy, but the unfair, unworkable burden import restrictions would place on unprovenanced coins of Italian type, of which there are millions already in the marketplace. By way of example, ACCG imported unprovenanced coins of Cypriot and Chinese type from the United Kingdom for purposes of a test case. The coins could have come from literally anywhere, but U.S. Customs has assumed they were exported from Cyprus and China contrary to the import ban. The coins were detained in April 2009, seized in August 2009, and Customs still has not brought an action in court to allow ACCG to contest the seizure. One can only imagine the chaos that would take place if the State Department reverses prior precedent and imposes import restrictions on coins of Italian type. ACCG, of course, plans to argue this point further when CPAC addresses Article I of the current MOU with Italy."

Wayne Sayles'
letter
also expressed concern over the consideration of coins in the future:

"...Consequently, the renewal of this
MOU seems questionable and any extension to include common utilitarian objects like coins would be totally inconsistent with the terms of the present MOU and of the overall intention of the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act."


It is improper to assert that members of the archaeological community strayed beyond article II by discussing coins when the IAPN/PNG representative and also the ACCG representative made oral comments - before any member of the archaeological community spoke - raising the issue of coins and suggesting their protection under a renewal would be undesirable. The comments about coins made by concerned archaeologists and numismatists were counterpoints to arguments and insinuations already raised.

All best,
Nathan
David Gill said…
Dear Peter
I would not wish you to disclose text belonging to your clients, by which we should understand the IAPN and PNG.
Will the IAPN or PNG be posting "their" text on their websites?
Best wishes
David
Wayne G. Sayles said…
To Mr. Elkins, I would merely say thank you for further publicizing the views of the ACCG. It is quite helpful.

Regards,

Wayne
Dear Nathan-

You misunderstand my point. We did touch on coins, but in the context of Art. II. I am unclear what aspect of Art II. members of the archaeological community (other than Patty Gerstenblith) focused upon. The Committee in effect gave the archaeological community two bites at the apple as to Art. I. The Federal Register Notice was quite clear that oral comments were to be confined as to Art. II. In any event, it really does not matter all that much-- assuming we all get to comment on Art. I specifically at some point.

On a more substantive note relating to Art. II, it would be interesting to learn if you agree that Italian coin collections and finds are underpublished and that the state of Italy's stewardship over coins is in general quite poor. Let's keep in mind Italy is certainly one of the world's richest economies. I suppose you could say we are not all that great in that regard here either given the lack of public funding for numismatics, but then again, they are the ones asking for import restrictions based in part on their supposed stewardship over coins.

As to David's question, I doubt IAPN and PNG should release its paper while it is still under active consideration, but might change my mind if the archaeological community and Italy posts their papers somewhere on the web.

Best,

Peter Tompa

Popular posts from this blog

Marble bull's head from the temple of Eshmun

Excavations at the temple of Eshmun in Lebanon recovered a marble bull's head. It is now suggested that it was this head, apparently first published in 1967, that was placed on loan to New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art (Tom Mashberg, "Met Museum Turns Over Another Relic With Disputed Past to Prosecutors", New York Times August 1, 2017 ). The head is reported to have been handed over to the Manhattan district attorney after a request was received from the Lebanese authorities.

It is suggested that the head may have been looted from an archaeological storage area at Byblos in the 1980s during the Lebanese civil war. Mashberg has rehearsed the recent collecting history:
The owners of the bull’s head, Lynda and William Beierwaltes of Colorado, say they have clear title to the item and have sued Manhattan prosecutors for its return.  The Beierwaltes bought the head from a dealer in London in 1996 for more than $1 million and then sold it to another collector, Michael …

The Toledo skyphos and a Swiss private collection

The Attic red-figured skyphos attributed to the Kleophon painter in the Toledo Museum of Art (inv. 1982.88) is now coming under further scrutiny following the research of Dr Christos Tsirogiannis. The skyphos shows Hephaistos returning to Olympos.

Tsirogiannis has identified what appears to be this skyphos in five photographs in the Medici Dossier. The museum acknowledged that the skyphos had resided in a 'private Swiss collection'. Tsirogiannis suggests that this is probably a reference to Medici.

Enquiries to the museum by Tsirogiannis elicited the information that the skyphos had been acquired from Nicholas Koutoulakis (although that information does not appear on the museum's online catalogue).

The curatorial team at the Toledo Museum of Art will, no doubt, be contacting the Italian authorities to discuss the future residence of the skyphos.

For further discussion of the Toledo Museum of Art on LM see here.

Reference
Tsirogiannis, C. 2017. "Nekyia: Museum ethics an…

Metropolitan Museum of Art hands over Paestan krater

In May 2014 I commented on a Paestan krater acquired by New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art after it had been identified by Dr Christos Tsirogiannis in photographic images seized from Giacomo Medici. Tsirogiannis published his full concerns in the Journal of Art Crime in 2014, but it has taken a further three years for the museum to respond.

The krater showing Dionysos in a hand-drawn cart was purchased in 1989 from the Bothmer Purchase Fund (details from the Museum's website, inv. 1989.11.4). The krater surfaced through Sotheby's New York in June 1989.

It is unclear who consigned the krater to Sotheby's New York.

It has now been revealed that the krater has been handed over to the US authorities after a warrant had been issued (Tom Mashberg, "Ancient Vase Seized From Met Museum on Suspicion It Was Looted", New York Times July 31, 2018).

It appears that the museum did make an attempt to resolve the case in December 2016. Mashberg notes:
The Met, for its par…