Is ancient-coin looting financing ISIS?

Most museum collections aren't fully photographed and you expect every single collector to fully photograph and document their entire collection? Once again you are completely out of touch with the reality of collecting ancients.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I also read the email today from Alan Walker and thought it was excellent. Kudos to Valentinian for sharing with the group and adding his weighty opinion on the subject, to which I agree 105% (note, I am not an empirical scholar so I can take liberties with math).

 

@Orfew I would be very upset if you left :'(.

 

no way! please!!

 

True, I do not collect what you collect. What you call "completely out of touch" was a suggestion for coins that already are in one's collection . Yes, I know that the ACCG also says "It is ... unreasonable to assume that a coin is 'stolen,' 'illegally exported,' or 'illegally imported' when full documentation of the coin's pedigree isn't available." (article from 2011)

But you may also know that what US Customs did in that case faces collectors of ancient (or rather "non-modern") coins elsewhere too. Take the case of Alexander Krombach vs the state of Hesse which went on for more than two years. 800+ coins were confiscated because Krombach had, in 2005, purchased five Roman coins (total value about €5) on eBay. Ultimately a court decided that Krombach is the rightful owner and he got his coins back. Something similar even happened to a police officer in Bavaria. Such lawsuits usually end with the collector getting his coins back, but they cost patience and money that not everybody has ...

So we do have a consensus among legal experts here in Germany that (and you may well add "of course" here) not every coin has to come with a pedigree. On the other hand, these days many collectors take good photos of their coins anyway - see the Coin Talk posts with excellent photos. Somehow documenting that this and that piece has been in your collection since that time makes sense to me, even if it is primarily for insurance or bragging purposes. With newly purchased coins it depends in my opinion; there are ancient coins that are common as dirt, and extremely rare pieces.

About a year ago, Nathan Elkins made a few suggestions regarding what he thinks could be "ethical collecting" here: http://www.coinsweekly.com/en/Build...llecting-and-Good-Ethical-Practice/4?&id=4354 Yes, I know that ACCG members tend to "love" Elkins But I do not think that it is unreasonable to expect from dealers here that they comply with the law ...

Christian

 

I believe that was the intent from the inception of the U.S. law, and until 2007 it was interpreted consistently. It was only from the appeal of (1) radical archaeologists and (2) source countries incapable of enforcing their own draconian laws, that our executive branch began imposing import restrictions on common, repetitious artifacts like coins. The radical archaeologists are in bed with the source countries, you see. The source countries issue their excavation permits. Follow the money...

Source countries do the complete opposite. By not recognizing any private rights in artifacts found on private land, they discourage reporting of finds and drive such finds to the black market. I believe their laws also fail to differentiate between true, clandestine looters of archaeological sites from innocent finders (i.e. gardeners or farmers working their fields). These countries don't have the resources to police their own borders, so they impose the burden on other countries' governments and taxpayers via import contols. Quite frankly, these source countries don't have the resources, financial or physical, to properly conserve, store and make available for study the common coins that are found within their borders. But how does letting the coins into commerce benefit numismatic study, you ask? The numismatic trade, through plated auction catalogues provides an important source of study material for amatuer and academic numismatists. It's the dirty little secret among the academics. Look at most of their publications and you'll see photos attributed to CNG, NAC etc. Back to the initial point, the U.K Portable Antiquities Scheme should be the gold standard - listen to Roger Bland describe its successes and you'll agree. Contexts preserved, hoards recorded, finders rewarded, and either museums or the trade getting the material. A win-win by any measure. Why source countries aren't clamoring for such a law is beyond my comprehension.

Agreed. Historically, there was a very good relationship between collectors and scholars. I've heard the radical archaeologists referred to as a "vocal minority". If true, it would be nice to see the silent majority speak-up more often in favor of ethical collecting, but I guess they don't want to be subjected to ridicule by the minority.

Please support the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild. I don't always agree with their strategies, but at least they're fighting the fight!

 

It is not unreasonable to expect compliance with law; but we should also expect reasonable laws. Government actions in response to "emergencies" of questionable foundation, like alleged ISIS looting, should be very carefully vetted. Edited: Discussion of politics not allowed!. READ post #11

 

Apologies, moderator. I had no idea that referencing something that occured in 1942 was "discussion of politics". I thought it was history. In fairness to you, it probably is within the lifetime of some board contributors who may have different views from mine.

 

Probably some powerful criminals and government insiders in source countries are opposed to a PAS because they won't be able to profit off a market that is on the up-and-up. This is a billion dollar industry.

 

Point taken, However the rules do not limit by age or time, so any country still existing should be considered as current to be safe. Even discussing the political activities of the US Revolutionary War or the Civil War are not allowed. A person can discuss the coins of any age as long as descriptive wording as to governmental involvement is left out. I realize many ancient entities would not conform to current thinking as to the definition of "country" so such is left to the moderators decisions. Jim

 

I'm referring to illicit antiquities, not just coins.

 

Here is a quote from that article: "Bulk lots of ancient coins with the dirt still on them, or lots marketed as “metal detector finds,” are loot. They come from one or more archaeological sites and represent significant damage and loss of information. Buying such objects rewards those who loot or who deal with looters, encouraging them to do more of it."

I wonder about "significant damage and loss of information." Anyone detecting in England can tell you that most sites where groups of coins are found were not pre-existing archaeological sites. They became archaeological sites only because of the detecting and we learned from them because of England's rational Treasure Trove law. The major cause of loss of information is not collecting, it is laws that encourage people to not report finds.

It seems archaeologists have decided it is easier to fight collectors than governments, even though it is clear a government's change in policy to one like England's would
1) actually work
2) yield far more information of the sort archaeologists claim to want
3) encourage both factions who love antiquity to work together, instead of fighting each other

Of course, there would be a cost. Governments would have to give up claims to all those valuable hoards they never find out about anyway, because what fool would report them? There is governmental greed, like a king's right to claim everything found in the soil. Are we still in the age of kings?

In some respects, yes. Governments behave like kings (It's mine! Mine! Mine!) and have archaeologists so cowed that they would rather fight their natural allies than speak the truth about coin finds and governmental policies.

 

Well put.

 

well, i know 1 thing for sure you can't get twinkies out of the US because of the damn patriot act!

 

That crosses the line. Life without Twinkies, particularly a frozen Twinkies is just not worth living.

 

it rates right up there with the examined life doesn't it...

 

Yep, I never thought I would live long enough to see Socrates conflated with Twinkies.

 

I am concerned that my 'page' might not be showing all that it is supposed to.

Post #4 shows as being from GerardV and goes

But the three prior posts were from @Valentinian , @John Anthony , and @Orfew ,
so, unless @Valentinian is also @GerardV , I cannot see this 'statement' that @GerardV refers to.
Can anyone elucidate for me please?
(I admit to being 'technology challenged'.)

 

I believe the original post was deleted by the moderators.

 

Ah. I see. That would explain it. Thank you.