Is ancient-coin looting financing ISIS?

Discussion in 'Ancient Coins' started by Valentinian, Oct 13, 2017.

  1. Valentinian

    Valentinian Well-Known Member

    No.

    But that doesn't stop governments from proposing rules, supposedly justified by this concern, making it more difficult to collect.

    https://committeeforculturalpolicy....ies-so-lets-legislate-for-it-says-commission/

    Here is a quote from recent comments of Alan Walker from the Swiss firm NOMOS:

    "Recently the authorities in the EU undertook a major study to document the terrible threat of 'conflict antiquities' being on the market in the EU. Unfortunately, after a great deal of serious research, they could not find any! Here is a commentary on that subject https://committeeforculturalpolicy.org/no-eu-problem-with-terrorist-antiquities-so-lets-legislate-for-it-says-commission/. Again, what is going on? The classical archaeologists I have known in the past include the most outstandingly intelligent people I have ever met; I have always taken whatever they have had to say very seriously, indeed. However, things may have changed. Now we have scholars, who in the old days used to demand proof for every statement, apparently willing to believe that Islamic terrorists are financing themselves with immensely valuable coins that no one in the numismatic market place in Europe and America believes exist. They seem to firmly believe, as a matter of faith, not knowledge, that if there is truly virtually no sign of anything on the market, well, all these priceless treasures must be hidden somewhere, and will doubtless reappear in 10, 20 or 30 years, when "the heat dies down." This is unlikely in the extreme, but more next time."
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. John Anthony

    John Anthony Ultracrepidarian

    Hm. Should I express my opinion of EU leadership? Probably not. I like being on this forum. Here's a picture of sunshine, lollipops, and rainbows.

    sunshine.jpg
     
  4. Orfew

    Orfew Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus

    Please do not put all scholars in the same group. I am one and I do not ascribe to the feelings in earlier posts. Please try to remember that there are a great number of scholars who work very hard to the benefit of society as a whole. These posts are not the only anti scholar opinions voiced on this board. I have considered leaving this group because of it. Scholars are people first and scholars second. I have dedicated my life to scholarship and I hope I have made a positive difference along the way.
     
  5. GerardV

    GerardV Well-Known Member

    Fair enough. My statement is made out of frustration and is a generalized look at today's scholars.
     
    EWC3, Marsyas Mike and RAGNAROK like this.
  6. chrisild

    chrisild Coin Collector

    I like it here (both CT and EU) too, so I will refrain from commenting on that. :) The issue of whether collecting coins and other objects from "dark sources" supports terrorism is older than the IS. And the "threat" may very well be overestimated or exaggerated.

    Note however that recent legislation in the soon-to-be-ex-member UK is quite similar. See the link to the CCP article in the first sentence of this one: http://www.coinsweekly.com/en/News/...and-the-Size-of-the-Illicit-Market/4?&id=4923 So the British Cultural Property (Armed Conflicts) Act 2017 "makes it a crime to deal in unlawfully exported cultural property that a dealer knows or has reason to suspect has been unlawfully exported from an occupied territory".

    Christian
     
    RAGNAROK, Pellinore and Deacon Ray like this.
  7. Michael K

    Michael K Well-Known Member

    Politics doesn't interest me, it never has. To me they are all crooks.
    But there's no reason there can't be a separate political forum for people who want to discuss it. (I read the rules.) I am talking about a single separate forum, like the currency forum, world coins forum, etc. it's not going to hurt anyone.
    That would ensure to keep the political discussion out of the coin forums without having to edit/delete/moderate it as they would be booted over there.
     
    Carthago likes this.
  8. John Anthony

    John Anthony Ultracrepidarian

    I'm curious though...setting aside the problem of ISIS, don't you find it ironic that certain EU member states are so concerned about cultural property issues while espousing the ideology of open borders and open societies? If what's mine is yours, then what's yours should by all rights be mine as well. There should be no such thing as cultural property, right? We're all in this together. Humanity is one big happy family. :)

    If you have to delete that, here's a girl on a unicorn...

    unicorn girl.jpg
     
  9. Jwt708

    Jwt708 Well-Known Member

    I supported the Ancient Coin Collector's Guild this year.
     
    Last edited: Oct 13, 2017
  10. chrisild

    chrisild Coin Collector

    Seems to me that in countries that might be considered places of origin of many artifacts, legislation regarding cultural property focuses on their protection - at least in the sense of not letting rare artifacts out of the country. Does not have much to do with the European Union per se; many other countries, take Turkey or Israel for example, are also quite "protective" in that regard.

    As I wrote, using the IS as an excuse for stricter regulation regarding the export of cultural property is exaggerated in my opinion. Also, personally I do not mind (with few exceptions) if cultural artifacts are sold to museums or collectors in other countries. What I do not want is collectors who support or encourage illegal excavations by not caring about pedigrees.

    Christian
     
    RAGNAROK, Smojo, green18 and 2 others like this.
  11. Curtisimo

    Curtisimo the Great(ish)

    It seems to me that most ancient coins were always meant as commodities to be exported outside thier place of origin in exchange for goods/services. This is different than paintings or sculpture which were usually meant to beautify the city/state they were made in.

    That's why I just don't understand the application of cultural property law to coins. It would be like the US demanding that other countries have all thier citizens return trade dollars and ASEs.
     
  12. desertgem

    desertgem Senior Errer Collecktor

    I had to remove some posts that were on the political side. Looting has always benefited or supported someone or some objective through history, just the narrative changes. Whether it is good or bad depends on the side of the line one is. Discussing looting on other than financial side seems appropriate, but 'naming' possible looters and/or recipients is getting into taboo areas of the rules, so no.

    The reason is that the ownership does not wish forums of politics , religion, or world events, to be intermingled with the main subject areas. At his own expense, he started a site called "www.partisanlines.com" for such subjects, but most members do not want to go there , as ....well, they can say themselves...but it is not the same ambiance as here. Go there and sign up and give it a try. The good part is that I do not moderate on it :) Jim
     
  13. red_spork

    red_spork Triumvir monetalis

    Thats a very elitist attitude. The problem with this is that even the most expensive coins lose their provenance and lesser coins rarely have a verifiable provenance to begin with because until recently it was simply cost prohibitive to photograph them. Should those who can't afford to buy provenanced coins or pay others to research it for them be priced out of the hobby? Should inheritors of collections be punished because grandpa didn't keep notes on where he bought his coins or because he didn't keep receipts? Anyone who suggests that provenance should be a requirement is simply out of touch with the reality of collecting ancients.
     
  14. chrisild

    chrisild Coin Collector

    Who knows what they would demand if tons of ancient coins once circulated in what is now the US. ;) Seriously, is the NAGPRA (Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act) for example that different? No government praising or bashing please, but I think that most countries want to preserve witnesses of their past.

    As for Roman coins, I agree of course, they were intended to circulate in the entire empire, just as US coins circulate in the entire country and not just along the west or east coast. They were used - and even made - in many places in the "imperium". But doesn't that also apply to mass products such as Roman vases or jewelry?

    In my opinion, cultural property laws should always differentiate: Common objects can basically be exported, rare or unique ones require some kind of authorization. Yeah, defining what is "common" may be tough, but many ancient Roman coins are.

    Christian
     
    RAGNAROK and Curtisimo like this.
  15. Valentinian

    Valentinian Well-Known Member

    How about whole countries that do not take the steps likely to find out about pedigrees?

    If you penalize and do not reward finders, pedigrees disappear. Only England with its rational Treasure Trove law encourages finders to report finds. Many other countries confiscate finds, or reward them very poorly, so that most finds immediately go to the back market. For example, before the euro, one German found a hoard of about 1000 aurei and got 7 Deutschmarks apiece as his reward. So few finds are reported in Italy that the late Duncan-Jones (who was a quantitative historian/numismatist at Cambridge with whom I worked a bit) wrote he could not use Italy in his hoard studies--there were not enough hoards recorded.

    Anyone who follows hoard reports knows that many times as many coins are found in hoards outside of pre-existing archaeological digs as as found in them. If you read all the archaeological reports you would find almost no information from the coins in them other than we found such-and-such a coin (if that). The total information from archaeological sites related to coins is minuscule compared to the information from the coins themselves and hoards. Don't believe it when someone asserts coins are really important to archaeology or archaeology contributes a lot to numismatics by putting coins "in context". That's baloney. (If you disagree, don't point out that someone said it is so, point to actual information. It is very rare on the ground.)

    Countries other than England don't make a rational attempt to preserve pedigrees. The idea that making it harder to collect will help (help what?) is false and misguided. I invite you to google your favorite ancient-coin topic. When you find a good link, ask yourself it that info came from an archaeologist or a collector. Ask yourself if that info came from the mere existence of the coin or a hoard, or if pre-existing "archaeological context" contributed. (It didn't.)

    If hoards can be safely reported, as they are in England, wonderful scholarly work such as The Cunetio Treasure can result. Is there anything like it from Italy? No. From Turkey? No. From Greece? No.

    Collectors contribute to scholarship and knowledge of the past far more than collecting detracts. Making it harder to collect will not produce the results its proponents claim to desire.
     
  16. Deacon Ray

    Deacon Ray Artist & Historian Supporter

    Don't leave @Orfew ! We need our scholars. This forum is great because it's members present a spectrum of knowledge and opinions.
     
    jamesicus, 7Calbrey, TJC and 4 others like this.
  17. chrisild

    chrisild Coin Collector

    Should that be a convenient excuse for those who would like to buy coins or other artifacts from shady sources? Yes, I do think that collectors of older (ancient, medieval) coins should not make purchases that do not include such a pedigree. But of course in the case of pieces that have been in a collector's possession for a long time, there are viable solutions such as taking photos of what you have and get somebody to confirm that on this and that date you had them ...

    Christian
     
  18. chrisild

    chrisild Coin Collector

    In Germany we basically have two ways of dealing with such finds. Most states apply the "Schatzregal" principle, i.e. you have to report an archaeological find, and (depending on the state) get some reward. Bavaria is the only state where the "Hadrianische Teilung" (Hadrianic Division?) is still applied, i.e. the finder and the land owner can share the find while the state may, under certain circumstances, demand it and offer some fair compensation.

    But regardless of how you deal with found treasures - if you required dealers to always provide certificates along with the artifacts they sell, pedigrees would not disappear. ;) Of course such pieces may still be sold on the black market, but it would be tougher to "legalize" them.

    Christian
     
  19. Curtisimo

    Curtisimo the Great(ish)

    I know of at least one globe trotting ancient Roman that found its way to the US (rediscovered by our own @lordmarcovan!). o_O:D
    https://www.cointalk.com/threads/di...rom-one-of-my-old-treasurenet-threads.287141/
    In all seriousness though there have been Roman and Greek coins exchanged as currency found well outside the Roman Empire. The Indian imitations of the tribute penny come to mind as an example that illustrates how far ancient money traveled in large numbers.

    Laws that aim to protect the integrity of an archaeological site that was specifically intended to contain a certain set of items by design seems reasonable to me. When I visit cultural sites abroad I always enjoy it if the site is as intact as possible or has a museum nearby that allows me to learn more about it. However, coins don't even broadly fit into this category (except possibly grave finds). Most coins come from hoards that were buried in an economic and not a cultural context. With coins there is no site integrity to protect because they were always meant as portable commodities (essentially bullion).

    Vases and jewelry were personal items of more than economic value to the people that owned them. Almost all of the vases (and a good portion of the jewelry) that come down to us were found in graves so yes it seems at least defensible to protect these items.

    This is true but also raises the question of who has claim to the past under discussion. Is it the person(s)/state/country who currently owns the land? Is it the ancestors of the historical peoples who produced the objects? What if those peoples are no longer distinguishable? What if their ancestors have since migrated? What if the entity demanding their return is the party responsible for that groups displacement?

    I don't have the answers to any of the above I just think it demonstrates the hornets nest you can open when you try to start repatriating artifacts. Especially if those artifacts are being researched, studied and well cared for by foreign museums, scholars and collectors to the benefit of everyone.
     
    Volodya, Mikey Zee, RAGNAROK and 2 others like this.
  20. Valentinian

    Valentinian Well-Known Member

    For thousand-dollar coins that might be feasible. But I recently bought a batch of 245 coins (all legible, but obviously not very nice) for $550. There is no way anyone would attach and keep pedigrees to $2 coins. Besides, I argued above that pedigrees hardly matter, and certainly not as much as some people claim, and not for the reasons they claim. I argue this as numismatic scholar with many academic publications and many years spent reading articles with a quantitative side. I agree that finding and recording hoards is important, but I wrote above how to get that to happen, and opposing collecting or requiring pedigrees is not the way.

    Most numismatic Ph.D. theses with a quantitative side (and that is most theses) rely on analyzing coins using photos taken from dealer's catalogs (and, now, on-line sources). Restricted trade in coins would mean fewer data points for scholarship.

    I admit the other side of this issue asserts that requiring old pedigrees would help with the "problem." They don't have evidence, or a valid reasoned argument, to support that claim. What it can do is make trading in coins harder, which will have unintended consequences. That would lead to fewer dealers and collectors and fewer people interested in antiquity (collecting gets you interested in antiquity), resulting in fewer donors interested in supporting digs. Do archaeologists really think governments are anxious to give them enough money to dig and they don't need money from enthusiastic wealthy collector-donors? Look at the history of archaeology. Archaeology started as collecting.

    Now, foreign governments say to archaeologists, "Support our cultural heritage crusade or kiss your digging permit goodbye." No wonder they have lined up against collecting. Many actually believe collecting is negative, but I think they have not thought this through. Collecting is a positive for scholarship and our knowledge of antiquity.
     
  21. Severus Alexander

    Severus Alexander find me at NumisForums

    @Valentinian's posts should be put on flyers and distributed globally. Wow, evidence-based policy... imagine that!
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page