Thread: Customs block coin movements

Hmm, are you referring to this topic?
Romania recovers really interesting set of coins

That article mentions "Koson gold coins dating from the year 42 BC, which were stolen during a public bid in 2011 at an auction house in Dublin". So apparently somebody has stolen stolen coins.

Christian

Originally Posted by chrisild

Hmm, are you referring to this topic?
Romania recovers really interesting set of coins

That article mentions "Koson gold coins dating from the year 42 BC, which were stolen during a public bid in 2011 at an auction house in Dublin". So apparently somebody has stolen stolen coins.

Christian

Ha! I didn't catch that they were previously stolen from the Dublin auction house. I would take the claim that they were stolen from Romania with a grain of salt, however. The Romanians have been vigorously pursuing these pieces lately, to the point that a Lanz auction was interrupted in progress to seize some coins of this type.

Originally Posted by Mat

Wow crazy.

Yet they cant stop the chinese fakes to come in...

I am not an expert on ancient coins but I seem to recall reading that some of the best quality ancient fakes originated in Bulgaria and were made by expert Bulgarian engravers. I think I read about it in one of Allen Berman's books. Is this true?

Originally Posted by Collect89

I am not an expert on ancient coins but I seem to recall reading that some of the best quality ancient fakes originated in Bulgaria and were made by expert Bulgarian engravers. I think I read about it in one of Allen Berman's books. Is this true?

Yes, the Bulgarians make some good quality fakes.

To Christian, the main problem with these laws, and I don't care if they are under UNESCO or not, is that Bulgaria cannot prove the coins actually came from there. If they can, its a normal theft case resolved through Interpol. However, they claim they own ALL coins ever minted in modern day Bulgaria, which we know is wrong. What if a coin was made in Bulgaria in 286 AD, but in 287 AD were traded to a traveling merchant and he took them to Cologne and spent them there. If the coins are found in Cologne today, Bulgaria still claims they own them. How is that fair? Coins were meant to be traded, and ancient roman coins are found in Sweden, India, China, all over asia, and all over Europe. Why does Bulgaria get to claim them simply because they were minted there 1800 years ago, (by culturally different inhabitants than live there today may I add)? Shouldn't the country where the coins are FOUND control them? How does Bulgaria PROVE the coins in Ireland were FOUND in Bulgaria and not found in Germany?

How did Bulgaria become an independent state? Shouldn't it be dissolved by the EU and folded into Greece?

Originally Posted by medoraman

What if a coin was made in Bulgaria in 286 AD, but in 287 AD were traded to a traveling merchant and he took them to Cologne and spent them there.

Of course this is a difficult and somewhat delicate issue, and yes, a "Roman" coin found in Germany for example is not necessarily Italian. (In fact, most probably not. ) But in these two particular cases we are talking about coins that, if the two articles are accurate, were found by customs officers when somebody wanted to smuggle them, and at an archeological site in Romania. That is against the law; now people may say the law is wrong, but if they therefore deliberately break it, well, they may have to face consequences.

The other, and in my opinion grave, problem is coins that in one way or another are "unearthed" elsewhere. An archeological find in the UK for example can and will usually be documented, and in many cases the context of the find will tell us something about since when (roughly) the coins have been in the ground. Don't see any reason why such finds should be, hmm, repatriated. There are borderline cases (think of the Lava Treasure; a while ago the French government wanted the government of Lower Saxony, DE to seize a Roman coin from the third century BC that was found in a ship near the Corsican coast) but fortunately seizing an object temporarily does not mean confiscating it.

The toughest cases are of course those where private collectors have old coins in their collections. Many of those do not come with a pedigree or proof of purchase, simply because they have been in those collections for many years, were inherited maybe and/or brought into the country (where the collector lives) a long time ago. After all, many ancient coins were mass products, not unique works of art. Seizing such coins, based on the assumption that they were imported recently and illegally, would be plain wrong unless there is some evidence. But we all know that there are collectors who simply want to have certain coins, no matter whether buying and importing them is against the law. Arnold Peter Weiss is a prominent example but certainly not the only one.

Christian

Hello

The whole approach is counter productive and harms both the history of the objects and their preservation. Can you imagine the Dutch Government seizing Van Goghs in private hands in Japan? This just encourages more destructive looting and a lack of cooperation between public and private interests which is critical for preserving the arts.

Really, think about it. It is insane. If archeological sites maintained private ownership of coins, then they can sell the coins to collectors or museums in order to fund more digs.

Amanda

Originally Posted by chrisild

Of course this is a difficult and somewhat delicate issue, and yes, a "Roman" coin found in Germany for example is not necessarily Italian. (In fact, most probably not. ) But in these two particular cases we are talking about coins that, if the two articles are accurate, were found by customs officers when somebody wanted to smuggle them, and at an archeological site in Romania. That is against the law; now people may say the law is wrong, but if they therefore deliberately break it, well, they may have to face consequences.

The other, and in my opinion grave, problem is coins that in one way or another are "unearthed" elsewhere. An archeological find in the UK for example can and will usually be documented, and in many cases the context of the find will tell us something about since when (roughly) the coins have been in the ground. Don't see any reason why such finds should be, hmm, repatriated. There are borderline cases (think of the Lava Treasure; a while ago the French government wanted the government of Lower Saxony, DE to seize a Roman coin from the third century BC that was found in a ship near the Corsican coast) but fortunately seizing an object temporarily does not mean confiscating it.

The toughest cases are of course those where private collectors have old coins in their collections. Many of those do not come with a pedigree or proof of purchase, simply because they have been in those collections for many years, were inherited maybe and/or brought into the country (where the collector lives) a long time ago. After all, many ancient coins were mass products, not unique works of art. Seizing such coins, based on the assumption that they were imported recently and illegally, would be plain wrong unless there is some evidence. But we all know that there are collectors who simply want to have certain coins, no matter whether buying and importing them is against the law. Arnold Peter Weiss is a prominent example but certainly not the only one.

Christian

Christian, you admit coins were mass produced, and we can agree they were made to be traded, frequently outside the borders of the country striking them, so I don't see how your answer really deals with this. You talk about them being "repatriated", you mean stolen from the lawful owners? If you find a coin in the UK you are the lawful owner. If Italy wishes to "repatriate" it, you are really saying that governments should have the right to steal it from the Englishman.

Sorry, but seeing how coins were mass produced and MEANT to be traded, and amply documented with untold dig sites that they DID flow freely throughout the world, the ONLY conclusion I can come to is the country in which they are found is the controlling law, and Italy, Bulgaria, and Greece have NO claim to a coin found in Germany simply because it may have been struck there. The original strikers of the coin traded that coin to the Germans 1800 years ago, they gave up all rights to it then.

Having said this, I am 100% in favor of doing this same very thing for most antiquities. Save for some known instances like Athenian export vases, almost all antiquities were made for local use. Therefor, it is mostly provable an Italian or Bulgarian antiquity would have been found in Italy or Bulgaria. THerefor, I very much am in favor of "repatriating" those items.

I simply believe coins are completely different than antiquities, and that is where I believe the error with these laws are.

Chris

Originally Posted by areich

Hello

The whole approach is counter productive and harms both the history of the objects and their preservation. Can you imagine the Dutch Government seizing Van Goghs in private hands in Japan? This just encourages more destructive looting and a lack of cooperation between public and private interests with is critical for preserving the arts.

Really, think about it. It is insane. If archeological sites maintained private ownership of coins, then they can sell the coins to collectors or museums in order to fund more digs.

Amanda

I agree completely.

Originally Posted by medoraman

Having said this, I am 100% in favor of doing this same very thing for most antiquities. Save for some known instances like Athenian export vases, almost all antiquities were made for local use. Therefor, it is mostly provable an Italian or Bulgarian antiquity would have been found in Italy or Bulgaria. THerefor, I very much am in favor of "repatriating" those items.

Factually, that is inaccurate, even into the stone age.

http://chasingaphrodite.com/excerpt/

Originally Posted by medoraman

You talk about them being "repatriated", you mean stolen from the lawful owners?

Basically yes; that is why I wrote "Don't see any reason why such finds should be, hmm, repatriated." In other words, if you find an ancient Roman coin in the ground, outside Italy, it is yours (or whatever the local law says about who the owner would be) and not property of the Italian government.

Side note: If I find a coin in the UK, I may be the rightful owner ... or not: "Finders have no ownership rights to any find they make in Scotland" http://www.treasuretrovescotland.co.uk/ But I know hardly any details about this; guess that our British members could help out here. In the meantime, let's replace "in the UK" with "in England and Wales".

Christian

Just to make two points. First on the Koson coins, It is always nice when coins and other artifacts are returned to the country of their origin. However, in this case there are a number of unanswered questions about where (and when) the coins actually originated.

The original hypothesis that the gold Kosons are medieval (C. PREDA, Istoria monedei în Dacia preromanã, Bucuresti, 1998:232) has more recently been ruled out by chemical analysis (Cojocaru et al, EDXRF and PAA analyses of Dacian gold coins of ‘Koson’ type. Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry, Vol. 246, No. 1 (2000) 185.190), which also ruled out a ‘Dacian’ origin, because the gold is not Romanian (Dacian) gold, since the latters features (very little Cu, no Sn and Pd, presence of As, Hg, Te) are missing. The conclusion is that the gold used for the kosons is not ‘Dacian’ gold.

So although the gold coins 'Dacian' coins are to be returned to Romania, the question of who actually made these strange coins, that have Roman iconography, a Greek inscription and a Persian weight system, is still a mystery. http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Retur...%2Egmr_4539706



On the Bulgarian coins, the situation is more serious. Recent evidence suggests that many of the 'plundered' coins from Bulgaria are not in fact being sold by 'treasure hunters', but from the museum collections themselves. http://balkancelts.wordpress.com/201...lovech-region/. So if the coins are returned to Bulgaria, it appears there is a serious chance that they are being returned to the people who sold them in the first place. Back to square 1!

If archeological sites maintained private ownership of coins, then they can sell the coins to collectors or museums in order to fund more digs.

And if I find a previously unknown archaeological site the coins are taken away from me and sold by the government to fund more digs. So I have two choices, report my discovery and lose everything, or don't tell anyone and plunder the site so I at least get something out of it.

Sorry, but seeing how coins were mass produced and MEANT to be traded, and amply documented with untold dig sites that they DID flow freely throughout the world, the ONLY conclusion I can come to is the country in which they are found is the controlling law, and Italy, Bulgaria, and Greece have NO claim to a coin found in Germany simply because it may have been struck there. The original strikers of the coin traded that coin to the Germans 1800 years ago, they gave up all rights to it then.

The problem is that these countries are signing onto the cultural heritage treaties which make the assumption that any coins from those countries are recent finds unless you can prove that they were legally taken out of the country before such and such a date. Typically about 100 years ago. And countries are signing onto these treaties saying that they will enforce these cultural heritage request from other coutries. So if you coins from one of those countries and you try to take it from one country to another, if you can't prove it's provenance back over 100 years it is assumed to be a recently discovered piece and is subject to confiscation by Customs at the border. For most coins this is impossible. Italy has been trying to get coins on the list. SO say you have a tribute penny of Tiberius. If you can't provably trace it's ownership collector to collector back to before 1912 to show that it left Italy before then, then it would be confiscatable. Now this is a fairly common, popular coin which has been treated as a generic item for probably over a hundred years. There are thousands of them out there but you probably couldn't provably trace more than a dozen or two. No one kept records describing each piece and a list of every collector that has owned it and when. SO no records, it belongs to the Italian government.

that is a common problem that laws are circumvented through treaties.