NY billionaire returns stolen antiquities

Discussion in 'Ancient Coins' started by rrdenarius, Dec 8, 2021.

  1. panzerman

    panzerman Well-Known Member

    Probably, Spain has a valid claim/ their ship/ gold/ treasure on board. Spain should probably go after the UK for all the gold/ silver they plundered from Spanish shipping from1575-1806.
     
    john65999 likes this.
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Cherd

    Cherd Junior Member Supporter

    There's the law, then there are ethics, morality, and rationality. Unfortunately, laws cannot be written that objectively account for every nuance in every case, so these things will never fully align.
     
    john65999 and panzerman like this.
  4. DonnaML

    DonnaML Well-Known Member

    I think some ancient coin collectors damage our own cause by defending even goniffs like Steinhardt because they're so afraid of the slippery slope that supposedly ends with the men in black helicopters coming to confiscate their coins.
     
    Hookman, Restitutor, TuckHard and 5 others like this.
  5. spirityoda

    spirityoda Coin Junky

    Is there such a thing as the person(s) that found the coins/treasure gets half and the other half goes back to the country it belongs to ? Sounds rational to me... Or do the person(s) just get a name credit to the finds ???
     
    panzerman likes this.
  6. panzerman

    panzerman Well-Known Member

    The law is made up by leaders of sovereign nations. On the one hand, by Ghandi in 1948/ India or by Josef Stalin in 1938/ USSR. Only in the Papal States/ Vatican are laws inacted by the Pope/ in the name of God.
    I think in the UK/ if you find a hoard of Celtic/ Saxon/ Roman coins on a property owners land/ its split between you and landowner. Also, the museum can make both parties an offer. This is very fair. This way, the hoard can be analysed/ coins properly restored (cleaned) without damaging the coins/ also provenance is kept. Sovereign govts. that are draconian and confiscate your find= the find is kept secret/ and coins are kept by finders/ I would do the same in their shoes. The famed "Arras Hoard", the "finders" were not the brightest lites on the candle stick.
     
    spirityoda likes this.
  7. Cherd

    Cherd Junior Member Supporter

    "Gonif": haven't heard that one before. That'll be my new vocabulary word of the day! :pompous:

    There assuredly is some truth to your, "slippery slope, black helicopter" explanation as to why coin collectors might "defend" goniffs. But, a critical evaluation of stories and opinions on a particular matter doesn't equate to a defense of the subject.

    For instance, all of the statements below are accurate representations of my opinion on the matter:

    - If Steinhardt knowingly broke the law, then he is guilty and deserves to be punished accordingly.
    - His actions do not equate him to a, "Worldwide destroyer of cultures".
    - He doesn't deserve to be demonized for wanting to own (and being able to afford) historically relevant objects from antiquity.
    - He should not be held accountable for the origins of items purchased through dealers or auction houses.
    - His history or allegations pertaining to sexual harassment or Jewish philanthropy should have zero influence on my opinions with respect to this particular news story.

    I have a habit of, from other people's perspective, "over-thinking things". I also tend to assume that other people enjoy getting fundamental and philosophical on any given subject, which I have to learn over and over again is usually not the case. It typically always leads to misinterpretations and misunderstandings, but heck, it's still worth a shot! :wacky:
     
  8. GinoLR

    GinoLR Well-Known Member

    How convenient.
    There are dealers and auction houses who propose extremely rare coins, never seen before in any sale or collection, without any origin or pedigree. It even happened with unique coins nobody even knew they were minted. No pedigree, no origin, no questions asked. Even if the coin was obviously minted in or near a place presently controlled by terrorist organizations.
    They auction the coins, I ask no questions, I bid, I win, I pay (much !) and don't give a sh* about who will cash in my money. Not my problem.
     
  9. Cherd

    Cherd Junior Member Supporter

    I'm not exactly sure what you are saying. Are you talking about purchasing coins counterfeited by a terrorist organization through an auction site? Or purchasing coins looted by terrorists which, therefore, have no pedigree?

    Either way, it doesn't make all that much difference with respect to my statement. When I say "held accountable", I'm speaking from a legal perspective. You can make the argument that these types of purchases are irresponsible from a moral perspective, and I might agree, but legality and morality are not the same thing.

    If a person knowingly purchases stolen or looted items, then that is a legal problem.

    If a person buys items through a dealer but is unaware that they are stolen, then they should not be held legally accountable. This burden is the seller's to bear.

    If a person buys from a dealer knowing that there is a chance that the items could be stolen, but can't confirm either way, then this is a moral issue.

    You don't want to cast too large a net when trying to punish people for moral attributes that you find questionable. Considering the origin stories of a large portion of diamonds in the world, this type of argument could be used to condemn anyone with a wedding ring on their finger.
     
  10. DonnaML

    DonnaML Well-Known Member

    I strongly disagree. If you're reckless and you consciously disregard a known risk that the coins or artifacts you're buying are stolen and/or smuggled goods -- as when you're paying half a million in cash to a shady dealer for a completely un-provenanced item, but close your eyes to the obviously problematic nature of the transaction -- then of course you can still be held legally responsible, and it's way more than just a moral issue. Which is one of the reasons why I, like @GinoLR, dispute your assertion that as a general proposition a buyer "should not be held accountable for the origins of items purchased through dealers or auction houses." That simply doesn't hold water as a generalization, whether you think that should be the case or not. The only correct response to the question is "it depends on the circumstances."
     
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2021
  11. GinoLR

    GinoLR Well-Known Member

    Much more than just a moral issue ! Security is at stake.

    Let us take an example. This coin has been auctioned in January 2020 in New York City, by a major auction house. It was completely unpedigreed, not even the usual unverifiable "from a North American / European / Scandinavian collection". No, nothing, nada, no mention of previous owner, of any provenance. Just "A monumental discovery piece" : that's the least they could say.

    6670213.jpg

    This aureus is unique. Before it surfaced on the market, nobody knew that the Palmyrenian prince Vaballathus, son of Odenathus and Zenobia, ever minted gold coins. It belongs to the same coinage as the very common debased silver antoniniani minted in Antioch with Vaballathus on the obverse and Aurelianus on the reverse. This aureus is of exactly the same style, so we can say it was minted in Antioch too. Except for some scratches, it is mint-state, thus it most probably did not circulate very far from the mint.

    Where in the world is such a coin likely to be found? In Antioch itself (Antakiya, Turkey) or its surroundings which include the Hatay province of Turkey and the Idleb mohafazat in Syria, controlled since 2015 by militias belonging to the al-Qaeda organization. When the coin was auctioned in New York nobody seems to have been worried or suspicious. It is understandable: in New York City who has ever heard of... how did you say? "alkayda"?

    This unique coin, a major document concerning Roman history and also the history of Syria, sold for $ 250,000.00 no questions being asked. Antiquities trafficking is, after drug and human beings trafficking, the third main funding source of international terrorism.
     
    Restitutor, Scipio, Ryro and 3 others like this.
  12. DonnaML

    DonnaML Well-Known Member

    Now I actually disagree with you, to the extent of being highly skeptical of your final sentence. I think it's pretty well-established that that's a grossly hyperbolic statement for which no real evidence exists, and that the trade in illegal antiquities in the first place is not remotely as large as some people claim. I recommend the article by Randall Hixenbaugh (whom I know) as an introduction to the subject, at https://iadaa.org/wp-content/upload..._trade_an_art_dealers_perspective-09-2019.pdf. See also this older New Yorker article, at https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-real-value-of-the-isis-antiquities-trade.

    But it doesn't actually matter to Mr. Steinhardt's case or anyone else's. Theft and smuggling of antiquities are illegal whether the proceeds are used to fund terrorism, or the international drug trade, or otherwise. It's a red herring.
     
  13. Cherd

    Cherd Junior Member Supporter

    I fully agree with your sentiment. People that behave in these ways lack principles, are scummy, are a detriment to society, etc, etc.

    But, we can't allow subjective judgement calls about attributes that occur over a spectrum to influence outcomes in our legal system. For instance:

    "If you're reckless" <-- Who determines what is and isn't reckless?
    "and you consciously disregard" <-- Who determines what and to what extent something was disregarded?
    "paying half a million in cash" <-- Is it illegal to pay cash? Why does the amount matter?
    "completely un-provenanced item" <-- Is it illegal to buy un-provenanced items? I'd say that most of us are guilty of that.

    Again, I agree with what you are saying from an emotional and judgmental perspective, but as hard as it is, we have to put all that aside when talking about legality. I don't like it any more than you do when crappy people get away with slimey things, but if we make concessions on this front, the tradeoff could be that any of us could be put away for pretty much anything.

    Unless there is a law saying, "You cannot buy unprovenanced collectables for over X number of dollars from anyone that has ever been convicted of a crime", then being held legally accountable for these kinds of things is a bit problematic. If we go too far down that road, then we have to start worrying about:

    Should people wearing Nikes be put away for breaking child labor laws?
    Should people that buy stuff from pawn shops be put away for disregarding the risks?
    Should we all be forced to give up our real estate because it was stolen from indigenous people?
     
    Curtisimo likes this.
  14. DonnaML

    DonnaML Well-Known Member

    Who determines what is or isn't reckless in the context of buying stolen or smuggled goods and passing good title, whether they're coins or antiquities or anything else?? A court of law does. Every day, in multiple contexts. Come on now. That's what courts do. An entire body of commercial law, domestic and international, has built up on the subject for more than a century. As someone who practiced commercial law for almost 40 years in New York City, I think I'm qualified to tell you that you're wrong about this. All your slippery slope and parade of horrors assertions notwithstanding.
     
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2021
    Jim Dale and Scipio like this.
  15. Jim Dale

    Jim Dale Well-Known Member

    There are some interesting ideas bein bantered around, which confuses me even more about wife coins or artifacts are found by a man/woman just poking around some old ruins that may be thousands of years old. Many items take decades if not longer, to find out just what they have found. There has to be some legal guidelines on what is legally found by someone that is just what someone found when they saw a shiny widget. Many items that are found take decades if not centuries to find out what they are. Man (and woman) have been on this planet for years. There are treasures or trash all around this globe. Archaeologists and other "scientists" have been digging for centuries and only found a small amount of "trash" that generations have thrown out of the wind. Some poor little citizen finds a bowl and the archaeologists go into shock trying to figure out what they have found. Even if they find something that is 2 centuries old, they have only touched the surface. Then some poor slob sees something shiny and decides to take it home and show it to his friends. Inevitably, some slob of a friend decides to go to a Museum and tells some slob that keeps the glass shiny and the floor clean. He then wants to show them what his friend works. Well, then the storm troopers all in black breaks into the home of the poor slob that had something that he found, in a drawer in his bedroom. The storm troopers go through the house with a fine tooth comb and finds the artifact. He is then arrested and charge with a crime.
    My last words are, and have always been, 1) Don't tell anyone what you find. 2) Roll with the punches. If you fight it, you will have to pay thousands of dollars in legal fees, just because you find a rock or a piece of something and you wanted to be a show-off with your friends(?).
     
  16. GinoLR

    GinoLR Well-Known Member

    I had a very quick look at Hixenbaugh's article (sorry, it's very late, I must go to bed now) and there would be many things to discuss. For example assimilating Italy and Greece with Syria and Iraq !!! After all the author is an art dealer, it is normal that he defends his business. I could quote another kind of literature by policemen and archaeologists... And, most of all, expose at length the irremediable destruction of documentation caused by illegal digs and antiquities trafficking ! Concerning the importance of this source of funding for terrorists, I was just saying what police and intelligence say. Maybe they exaggerate?
     
  17. DonnaML

    DonnaML Well-Known Member

    Of course the police and customs officials exaggerate. The claimed numbers simply don't add up in terms of the known size of the market -- which is very much a drop in the bucket as compared to the art market as a whole -- or the value of many individual pieces (particularly when it comes to coins, but with respect to antiquities as well, as set forth in the New Yorker article). Steinhardt may be an exception, but he was very much at the high end of purchasers.

    I'm finding it somewhat difficult to hold to a middle ground between you and the "storm troopers in black" people, but I've been trying. I think I've pretty much said what I have to say, though.
     
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2021
  18. kirispupis

    kirispupis Well-Known Member

    Taking a bit more leveled approach with this:

    Some years ago, a friend of mine was arrested for fraud. I won't go into specific details because the case made national news, but he stole about $150k from the ordeal. Although he is my friend, he was extremely stupid and he was absolutely guilty.

    However, the government and media decided to make an example of him. The local paper listed his recent travels to such exotic destinations as France and Italy. They put a photo of his house on the front page and people soon started stalking him, yelling at him, and banging on his door. His professional licenses were revoked and he went to prison.

    The emotional anguish of the intense public ridicule led him to attempt suicide. For years the guy was a complete train wreck. He still hasn't fully recovered.

    Yes. What he did was wrong, but the media went out of their way to destroy him. There is absolutely no unbiased reporting in today's media. They can't just state the facts but need to rile you up for ratings.

    Personally, I don't know Mr. Steinhardt. Maybe he's a complete SOB and maybe he's a decent guy who did something stupid in not verifying the provenance of his artifacts. Maybe, like my friend, he knew that he was doing something wrong when he did it. Maybe, like my friend, he's still a decent person who did a bad thing. I really don't know and probably never will.

    Personally, I buy most of my coins without provenance. If I had as much money as Mr. Steinhardt, I would insist on provenance, but I don't. To my knowledge, no coin I own has been looted, but I really have no way of verifying that. I believe the odds are extremely small that a nation will decide that one of my modestly-priced coins is a national treasure, and guys with black suits will ring my doorbell and not be very nice.

    However, I do hope in the infinitesimal odds that the above happens, and the media blasts my coins, financial status, previous travels, and national original (I'm Luxembourgish - so we can't be trusted), that my friends and everyone here will remember that I'm still a decent person.
     
    Jim Dale, rrdenarius, Ryro and 3 others like this.
  19. Cherd

    Cherd Junior Member Supporter

    In a perfect world, courts and juries would not make subjective judgement calls, but of course they do, this unfortunately can't be avoided. And, I'm being nitpicky about verbiage and giving extreme examples (parade of horrors), but these are simply effective methods of getting the point across. The stability of society doesn't hinge on how this case is handled, and the guy probably deserves whatever he has coming to him and more. So, I'm not claiming that anyone is at risk of incurring some extreme injustice.

    The whole exercise has been in defense of the claims that we should be warry of how media influences our opinions on matters. And, that we should perpetually apply rationality and exclude emotion in formulating our opinions, which is especially important when it comes to the justice system.

    When people claim that cultures are being destroyed because someone owns an artifact...I see irrationality.

    When a person doesn't have a problem with one transaction for $100, but villainizes a person for making a similar transaction for $1M...I see irrationality.

    When a person looks past injustices imposed on people that they don't like, but don't realize that such concessions also put them at similar risk... I see irrationality.
     
    DonnaML and Curtisimo like this.
  20. Nicholas Molinari

    Nicholas Molinari Well-Known Member

    Many of the ancient Greeks did something like this—it was called ‘Koinos Hermes’ and is sometimes translated as ‘going halfsies’ but also ‘sharing the luck.’ One would say ‘Koinos Hermes’ when finding any sort of lucky treasure and split it with whoever was present. I write about it in a different context in this year’s Koinon editorial in fact.
     
  21. Curtisimo

    Curtisimo the Great(ish)

    Anyone who thinks that a person is a crazy conspiracy theorist for worrying that their low dollar collection might be at risk from questionable seizure would do well to read this article which was discussed in this thread earlier this year.

    These were low value coins that were seized and transferred to a university because they had no “legal provenance” and an “expert” took bronze disease as evidence of illegal excavation.
     
    buckeye73, Evan Saltis, Ryro and 2 others like this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page