A long-awaited ruling fails to address serious issues within the U.S. State Department bureaucracy.

US District Court Judge Richard Leon—well known for his pro-government views—has issued a ruling upholding the State Department’s refusal to disclose information about the controversial decisions to impose import restrictions on coins of Cypriot and Chinese type. The Ancient Coin Collectors Guild and the other Plaintiffs in this suit remain committed to seeking transparency and accountability from the State Department (DOS) bureaucracy and are considering whether to appeal this ruling to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Despite the disappointing decision, this litigation was in many ways a win for the plaintiffs. The mere fact that ACCG and the other Plaintiffs brought this FOIA action forced the State Department to process all the Plaintiff’s FOIA requests–including some that had been ignored by DOS for as much as three years. As a result of this action, literally hundreds of pages of requested text were released and the State Department was prompted to produce documents implicating high level political interference as the reason for the Cypriot decision. Other information stemming from this litigation suggests that State Department personnel added coins to the Chinese request without a formal request from China for that inclusion. The decision rendered by Judge Leon dealt with those items still remaining on the plaintiff’s list that DOS had refused to release. While the plaintiffs obviously would have been happier with a summary judgment on their motion, the process was not without considerable rewards.

The Ancient Coin Collectors Guild still plans to pursue a test case regarding whether those import restrictions were promulgated in an arbitrary and capricious fashion. A copy of Judge Leon’s Memorandum Opinion can be found here.

Related posts:

1. Import Restrictions Imposed on Cypriot Coins
2. Coin Collectors to Challenge State Department on Import Restrictions
3. State Department Adds New Import Restrictions

, Ruling in FOIA case condones DOS intransigence on ancient coin import restrictions, http://www.coinlink.com/News/world-coins/ruling-in-foia-case-condones-dos-intransigence/, http://feeds.feedburner.com/AncientCoinNews?format=xml, Coin Collecting News » Ancients, ,
Ancient Coin news, 7, ancient-coin-news

By Wayne Sayles – Ancient Coin Blog

Ancient coins have existed since the 7th century BC. They attracted the interest of collectors shortly after that and have continued to inspire ordinary people around the world for going on three millennia.

During the Italian Renaissance, the collecting of ancient coins became so popular that a sophisticated commercial market emerged and numismatic scholarship blossomed. Anyone with sufficient interest and erudition was able to study the past through its coins. The development of numismatics as a science is a result mainly of private collectors and their dedication to the pursuit of knowledge. When academia became aware of the value of coins as voices from the past, coin collectors and professional scholars found that they had much in common and worked closely together. Yes, that was a long time ago.

What we see today is a bitter turf war between private collectors, independent scholars, museums, nationalist governments and archaeologists. What happened to the symbiosis?

Deep within the collecting community, there is still a longing for cooperation and symbiotic support with those academics who dedicate their lives to study of the past. But, the mutual cooperation and respect of those halcyon days is all but gone. The only words that most private collectors hear from archaeologists these day are disparaging. And, in equal measure, the response is unfriendly.

As archaeological blog comments about the recent CPAC hearing on Italy reveal, the symbiosis is all but dead. It is unlikely ever to reappear to the extent that we saw in the 19th or 20th centuries. That is sad from a collector’s point of view, but is it equally sad from the academic archaeologist’s point of view? I am coming to doubt that it is. They have very little use for private collectors and are not reticent to say so.

There is no denying that a bitter antagonism exists between collectors and archaeologists. I’ve called it a Cultural Property War and have been criticized therefore as being “bellicose”. I didn’t start the Cultural Property War and I see it in the light of all wars—as a devastating and unwelcome event. Personally, I long for those symbiotic collaborations of the past. But, I am a realist and there seems to be little chance that the forces guiding and controlling the discipline of archaeology and the cultural ministries of nationalist nations will ever again embrace private collecting as a friend. I see that as their loss, but it is really a loss for all of us.

The die is cast, I fear, and the present struggle will continue until archaeology has established its dominance or private collecting its independence. I would predict that neither will happen soon nor without considerable animosity and a terrible loss of opportunity.

Nuance in New York

Yes, the unthinkable did happen. On Saturday, November 13th, Wall Street Journal ran an op-ed by Melik Kaylan headlined “Myths of Babylon.” four days later, The New York Times ran a piece by John Tierney titled “A case in antiquities for ‘Finders Keepers’ .” The mere fact that these editorially antithetical publications published back-to-back articles about cultural property is not so remarkable—the topic is, after all, becoming steamy. What is remarkable is that both were critical of cultural property nationalists. When these two publications share a common view, it is worth paying attention.

Melik Kaylan has been a New York based journalist for 25 years. His resume includes positions as Editor of the Village Voice, Associate Editor of Connoisseur magazine and Arts Editor at Forbes.com. He has written for numerous publications including Wall Street Journal, Vogue, New York Times, The Times of London and others. Kaylan has won Cultural Awards in Italy and Turkey for print and television work on antiquities smuggling. The Kaylan report mentioned above roundly criticizes nationalists and archaeologists for orchestrating massively overblown media hype over the military’s supposed failure to protect Iraq’s heritage. While not specifically charging archaeologists with willful deception, Kaylan leaves his readers with few alternate conclusions. He cites unfounded reports and “highly provocative” accusations flowing from their community without any exercise of what he calls “responsible judgement.”

John Tierney writes a twice-a-week column for The New York Times, where he has worked since 1990. He has written for The New York Times Magazine and The Times Metro Section, and has served as a correspondent in the Washington and Baghdad Bureaus. He has also written for The Atlantic, Esquire, New York Magazine, Newsweek and numerous other publications. In making a case for “Finders Keepers”, Tierney makes a bold statement that others have merely danced around. “…there is no doubt that the cultural-property laws have turned archaeological discoveries into political weapons.” In this respect Tierney echoes the conclusions of his colleague Michael Kimmelman, whose article “When Ancient Artifacts Become Political Pawns” appeared in The New York Times on October 23rd. He goes on to challenge several cultural property nationalist tenets, agreeing in many cases with Art Institute of Chicago Director James Cuno. Mr. Kimmelman and Mr. Tierney are probably unaware that the U.S. State Department treated ancient coins as political pawns in the Memoranda of Agreement with Cyprus and China, but they certainly have the situation pegged correctly.

In and of themselves, neither of these articles by Melik Kaylan nor John Tierney are breaking news. They are opinion editorials. In 2004, when the ACCG was founded, the press was almost exclusively dominated with condemnation of the antiquities trade, criticism of American museums and vilification of private collectors. Articles like the two mentioned above were virtually unheard of. Finally, that rush to judgement has come into question and the national press is beginning to realize that academic archaeologists are not the only interest group with a legitimate point of view. The pendulum may finally be starting to swing back.

Related posts:

1. Lost or found? – UK’s Portable Antiquities Scheme
2. The Philippine Numismatic And Antiquarian Society: “A Lost Legacy?”
3. Ponterio & Associates, Inc 2010 Auction Schedule Starts with New York International Numismatic Convention

, Symbiosis Lost and Nuance in New York, http://www.coinlink.com/News/ancients/symbiosis-lost-and-nuance-in-new-york/, http://feeds.feedburner.com/AncientCoinNews?format=xml, Coin Collecting News » Ancients, ,
Ancient Coin news, 7, ancient-coin-news

By Wayne Sayles – Ancient Coin Collecting Blog

For the past five years I have read a nauseating stream of blog posts, news articles, discussion list comments and convention presentation reports that condemn the “illicit” trade in antiquities. The fact that anyone might condemn illicit activity is not in itself nauseating, but the ringing of the same bell 24/7 until the brain fogs over in biological rejection is not only nauseating but obnoxious. It reminds me of the parent in a grocery story who repeatedly harps (in the most irritating shrill cacaphony) “Johnny, don’t touch that!” over and over and over until you wish they would take little Johnny and paddle his behind (even though that is certainly not PC these days.) Really, it’s not little Johnny that needs paddling, it is the parent for not approaching the problem with a reasonable and effective solution.

When do the harpies of cultural property nationalism ever talk about the “licit” antiquities trade? From the ratio of ink spilled, one would presume that there is not even a legitimate trade in existence. Never mind that there are laws in Britain and the United States that protect private collectors and the legitimate trade in antiquities. Never mind that countries like Greece, Italy and Israel (among others) have state licensed and regulated antiquities dealers. Never mind that EC rules prohibit restrictions on the legitimate exchange of antiquities between private citizens and businesses within the European Union. Is there a legitimate trade? Of course there is, only an idiot would suggest that there isn’t. But is there any attempt among cultural property nationalists to work with the legitimate trade and private collectors to reduce incidents of archaeological looting? Very little if any, and none that I am personally aware of. In fact, as Executive Director of the ACCG, it has been my observation that the door is not and has not been open to any such collaboration for well more than a decade—and, in fact, the ACCG has tried.

The obsession among cultural property nationalists (especially those archaeologists who blog about the subject) has been to label everything without a documented provenance as illicit. Because much of the trade in antiquities does not require documented provenance, and because provenance is not especially valued by collectors of minor objects, it often does not exist. Consequently, the entire trade is painted with a broad brush as illicit. Excuse me, but that’s an asinine position and one that is a non-starter for any serious discussion. No legal system, short of autocratic government, recognizes a premise where something is illegal unto proven legal. In fact, attempts to create this sort of legal environment have led to several major upheavals in global society. A common coin or a clay pot, that is literally one of millions of surviving specimens, is treated by hardline nationalists in the same light as the Rosetta Stone. They can rave on about context and priceless information, but really, one doesn’t have to think very hard to see through that.

The UNESCO resolution, and laws that stem from it, are based on a sliding threshold. Every year, the detritus of another year of civilization is added to the heap. In the year 2109, virtually everything made by the 6.95 billion (and counting) people on Earth today will become “cultural property” and will technically fall within the controls established by this resolution and set of laws. Look at the room around you, at your desk, at your garage, and multiply this times several billion. Is it important that every item be preserved to tell some future scholar how we lived? Now look backward in time 100 years. We are talking about 1909. There are countless objects among us at this moment that were made in 1909. There are garages that have not been cleaned out since 1909 and sometimes I think mine is one of them. Is all this “stuff” now “illicit” if it doesn’t have a recorded provenance? NO. It is not and any attempt to say it is merely highlights the absurdity of the philosophy.

The problem of archaeological sites being looted is real and deserves a concerted response. It is a concern to collectors and the trade as well as to archaeologists and nationalists. The approach of some, to characterize private collecting and the associated trade as “evil” or “illicit”, and as the “root cause” of looting, is simply not going to solve the problem. There are far too many people in the world who know better and that lie is simply not going to win the day. Instead, it hinders any real progress toward a rational response to the problem. The situation is not going to improve until the rhetoric changes and the legitimacy of any given view is accepted as a function of law, not of philosophy, dogma or desire. There are more than enough laws in place today to protect and control cultural property. When the existing laws are enforced, as legislated and intended, activists on both sides of the issue can go back to doing something constructive in the quest for broadened cultural awareness and interaction.

Related posts:

1. Lost or found? – UK’s Portable Antiquities Scheme
2. Collectors Universe – Trade Show Revenues Drop – Coin Warranty Claims Hit $822,000
3. Ethics, Law and Globalization

, The “illicit” antiquities trade, http://www.coinlink.com/News/ancients/the-illicit-antiquities-trade/, http://feeds.feedburner.com/AncientCoinNews?format=xml, Coin Collecting News » Ancients, ,
Ancient Coin news, 7, ancient-coin-news

The twitter around the cultural property nationalist blogs at the moment is that a rare tribal octadrachm of the Bisalti has been seized from an auction firm in Switzerland. One of these bloggers even uses the episode to disparage, by linkage and innuendo, the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG) and its allies in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation now in progress against the U.S. State Department. This is not the first such episode by any means. I have seen a lot of misguided enmity in my varied careers, but never in my memory have I seen such absolute drivel as I have over the FOIA suit. It really deserves a prize.

First of all, the FOIA lawsuit filed against the State Department by the ACCG, with the collaboration of the International Association of Professional Numismatists (IAPN) and the Professional Numismatists Guild (PNG), has absolutely NOTHING to do with the coin seizure. Mentioning them in the same breath is nothing less than ignorant—unless of course it is thought in some malevolent way that it might damage the ACCG. If that is the case, then we have a different issue, don’t we? Perhaps one would call that a volley in the cultural property war. Well, if so, the cannoneers haven’t quite got the range and bearing down.

The FOIA suit makes a complaint in U.S. Federal Court that an agency of the U.S. government failed to comply with the U.S. law governing release of information to the general public. This is a suit that is widely supported by academics and civil rights advocates, even some who advocate cultural property import controls, because every thinking person in America recognizes the importance of transparency in government. Even President Obama has made a very big issue of government transparency. That he has not been able to simply order the State Department to follow the law is telling in itself. Oh! Excuse me, he DID order them to, they just chose not to comply.

So, anyone who would criticize this FOIA lawsuit would seem to be either a confirmed anarchist or repressive nationalist. The latter is more to the point in this case, I believe. National pride is one thing, but the extreme fringe of nationalism is anti-social to say the least and dangerously arrogant in most cases. We ought to heed the words of Patrick J Geary (The Myth of Nations), “As a tool of nationalist ideology, the history of Europe’s nations was a great success, but it has turned our understanding of the past into a toxic waste dump, filled with the poison of ethnic nationalism, and the poison has seeped deep into popular consciousness.” At a time when cultural awareness and interaction should be at the top of our agenda, we oddly (and sadly) find the U.S. State Department promoting and rewarding repressive nationalism.

Secondly, what about the Octadrachm? Well, we don’t really know the whole story, do we? So, before we start dancing in circles or baying at the moon, why not let the laws of Switzerland prevail and hope that the Swiss law enforcement agencies and judiciary come to a just evaluation and resolution of the situation. There are laws in place that govern the situation. If the laws are unjust, then it is the duty of the Swiss people to seek redress. By the same token, if laws in the United States are unjust, or improperly enforced, it is our duty to seek redress through the courts. That is exactly what the ACCG is doing. For cultural property nationalists to mischaracterize this legitimate legal challenge is worse than distasteful, it adds another layer to that toxic waste dump.

Finally, I am beginning to wonder if anybody really pays any attention any more to this mindless banter. Some may have noticed a spell of silence in this blog recently. It is not for lack of activity, there has been plenty of that. It is more a feeling that time is an increasingly precious commodity and there is little point to hammering the same old tune on our dulcimers. Personally, I intend to concentrate on using my time to seek justice through the means at my disposal as an American citizen. A federal judge will soon be laying out the future path and we will take it from there.

I do intend to comment here from time to time, but I do not intend to waste any more of my time engaging in drivel control.

Best to all,

Wayne

Related posts:

1. FOIA Suit Filed Against US Dept of State
2. Lawsuit pries loose documents, more being contested
3. Ethics, Law and Globalization

, Drivel Control, http://www.coinlink.com/News/ancients/drivel-control/, http://feeds.feedburner.com/AncientCoinNews?format=xml, Coin Collecting News » Ancients, ,
Ancient Coin news, 7, ancient-coin-news

The Goldberg’s will be holding a World and Ancient Coin Auction on October 29th and 30th in Beverley Hills CA, and as with all of their sales, interest is high. The online catelog has been posted and there are several notable highlights.

The sale will be held in two sessions; Thursday the 29th Session 1, Ancient Coins & Antiquities and Friday the 30th, Session 2, World Coins.

The Top 10 rarest items are as follows:

1) Lot 1501 Ireland. Penny, 1938. Struck in bronze, Harp, with “eire” to left, date 1938 to right. Reverse: Hen left with chicks, 1d above, value in Gaelic in exergue, small PM to upper right (initials of Percy Metcalfe) toothed border both sides. The rarest coin in the Irish Series. PCGS graded MS-65 Brown. .

The design differs from the previous issue which was for the “Free State of Ireland” and stated that to the left of the harp in Gaelic.
This piece was the only known specimen until one further piece was discovered in a safe at the Irish Treasury Department in Dublin. That specimen is now on prominent display at the National Museum of Dublin, in Colm Barracks, Dublin, Ireland. Therefore this is still the only specimen available to collectors of the series as the prototype piece for the design of the Irish Republic Coinage. The design was used unchanged for the Penny from 1940 until Decimalisation in 1971.
Estimated Value $70,000 – 80,000.

2) Lot 118 Octavian and Julius Caesar. Gold Aureus (6.84 g) minted in Italy, 43 BC. Bare head right of Octavian. Reverse: Laureate head right of Caesar. Cr. 490/2; CRI 132. Striking irregularity. Very Rare. Very Fine with an excellent portrait of Julius Caesar. .

In assembling a set of the “Twelve Caesars” in gold, the two most difficult to find with appealing portraits are Julius Caesar and Otho.
Estimated Value $30,000 – 40,000.

3) Lot 86 Judaea. The Bar Kokhba War, 132-135 CE. Large Bronze (32. 5 mm.; 21.19 g), dated Year Two, struck 133/134 CE. Filleted olive wreath, Palaeo-Hebrew inscription in two lines within (”Shim’on”). Reverse: Twin-handled, fluted amphora; Palaeo-Hebrew inscription around (”Year two of the freedom of Israel”). Mildenberg 19 (11 examples cited); Hendin 705; Mesh. AJC II, p. 270, 39. Very rare. NGC graded Extremely Fine. This coin is essentially as struck, and so we consider the piece a Superb Extremely Fine at the least.

Leo Mildernberg, who wrote the important corpus analyzing the Bar Kokhba coin series, considered the reverse die of the large bronze series, bearing the fluted amphora (seen on the above coin), as the finest and most beautiful design “in the entire Bar Kokhba coinage.” .
Estimated Value $30,000 – 40,000.
Provenance: Illustrated in Money of the World, coin 25. Ex Millennia Sale, lot 55.

4) Lot 1022 Great Britain. Pattern Shilling or Half Florin, Struck in Gold, Undated. Similar to ESC-1395 (ESC-1391 on holder). Not in Wilson and Rasmussen. Plain edge. By C H Wiener and W J Taylor. Victoria, 1837-1901. Coronetted head facing left, with legend type VICTORIA REGINA. Reverse: Crowned shield in garter. Presumably Unique. NGC graded Proof 64 Ultra Cameo.
Estimated Value $22,000 – 25,000.
Provenance: Ex: Murdoch Collection Part III, Lot 536 (Evan Roberts was the buyer in the Murdoch sale and this coin has been sourced from the Grandchildren of Evan Roberts).

5) Lot 51 Kingdom of the Cimmerian Bosporos. Pharnakes II, 63-47 BC. Gold Stater (8.24 g), Panticapaeum mint, struck 53/52 BC. Diademed bust of Pharnakes right, with luxuriant hair. Reverse: Apollo, semi-draped, seated left on lion-footed throne, holding laurel branch over tripod, left elbow resting on kithara at his side; name and titles above and below, X monogram to right, EMS above (year 245, Pontic Era). Golenko & Karyszkowski, “The Gold Coinage of King Pharnaces of the Bosporus,” in Numismatic Chronicle, 1972, no. 6 (same dies); Fr-156. Finely centered on a spacious, nearly round flan. Lustrous. Exemplary, sensitive portrait — among the finest in this series. Very Rare. NGC graded About Uncirculated. .
Estimated Value $20,000 – 25,000.

Provenance: At the time of the Numismatic Chronicle survey, Golenko & Karyszkowski had assembled a corpus of 15 known specimens of the Pharnakes gold coins, ranging in date from c. 55-50 BC. Since then a few more examples have surfaced, with a total known population probably not exceeding 25. Of these, 10 are located within museum collections. The famed Hunt specimen, with nearly as fine a portrait, but of a somewhat lower grade (Extremely Fine), realized $29,700 (including the 10% premium) in the Sotheby New York sale of June 19, 1990 (lot 115). Illustrated in Money of the World, coin 22. Ex Millennia Sale, lot 35.

6) Lot 176 Lucius Verus, AD 161-169. Gold Aureus (7.33 g) minted at Rome, AD 162-163. Bare head right of Lucius Verus, wearing cuirass and drapery. Reverse: Salus standing left, feeding snake twined around altar. RIC 496. Lustrous; Virtually Mint State.
Estimated Value $15,000 – 17,500.

7) Lot 165 Hadrian, AD 117-138. Gold Aureus (6.92g). Bare head right of Hadrian. Reverse: Hadrian on horseback right, raising right hand. RIC 348a; Calicó 1219. Elegant portrait style, struck in very high relief. Lustrous, superb; Virtually Mint State. .

Possessing a most impressive and highly detailed portrait of Hadrian, this remarkable aureus was minted late in AD 128, when the emperor returned to Rome after visiting Africa as part of his provincial travels. During 12 of his reigning years, Hadrian ruled from Rome for no more than two or three years! At the close of AD 128, Hadrian and his entourage were again abroad, this time, visiting Athens .
Estimated Value $15,000 – 20,000.

Lot 197 Numerian, AD 283-284. Gold Aureus (4.39g). Laureate bust of Numerian facing right. Reverse: Abundantia standing left, emptying cornucopia. RIC V, part II, 451 [as R2]; C. 2. Well struck and perfectly centered. Lustrous, superb Nearly Mint State.
Estimated Value $15,000 – 20,000.

9) Lot 846 Roman Bronze Inscription Tablet. 1st Century A.D. Bronze document with inset inscription, the edges thickend, a boss on each of the handles. Tablet regards the purchase and subsequent gift of farmland to the priests of Zeus. Greek inscription:

“Under the rule of Sopyros (the son of Aristoss) for the year of Rhodon, bought from Zenon (the son) of Rhoizos a field through ______ and through, the public street for the price of 210 denarii which price the seller has declared to have received from the buyer. The ____ was gifted by the buyer to the Priests of Zeus.” Ends in a prayer “When from sacrifice the written Word”.
Estimated Value $15,000 – 20,000.
Provenance: Coll. Siblings. P. and F., Southern Germany. Slg. Geschwister P. und F., Suddeutschland (ca. 1970-1990).

10) Lot 1093 Italian States – Venice. Gold Medal, Undated. Similar obverse designs as Voltolina #1069 (Vol. II, 255) and Voltolina #933,#102. Weight 82 grams. 54 mm in diameter. Alvise Mocenigo II Doge CXX, 1700-1709. Obverse: Angel blowing horn left and woman figure holding leaf branch right; in center oval shield with legend: * S. C * / ALOYSIVS/ MOCENICVS / DVX. VEN/ ET. C. Reverse: Seated woman figure seated right placing hand on Wing Lion holding shield. Voltolina identifies such pieces as an award medal resulting from a decree of the Senate commending the doge for worthy service. Made with frame to be worn. This spectacular medal is certainly a museum-quality piece, of the highest rarity. Extremely Fine.
Estimated Value $12,000 – 15,000.

For more information on the sale or to view the online catelog, visit Goldbergs website at www.goldbergcoins.com

Related posts:

1. $7 Million of World & Ancient Coins Sold at NYINC
2. Goldberg Pre-Long Beach Auction Sale To feature The Millennia Collection
3. The Greatest World Coin Auction of All Time (Part 5): Gold Coins as World Currencies

, Ira and Larry Goldberg World and Ancient Coin Auction, http://www.coinlink.com/News/world-coins/ira-and-larry-goldberg-world-and-ancient-coin-auction/, http://feeds.feedburner.com/AncientCoinNews?format=xml, Coin Collecting News » Ancients, ,
Ancient Coin news, 7, ancient-coin-news

A small packet of inexpensive Chinese and Cypriot coins imported from England by the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG) have been seized by Customs in Baltimore, Maryland.

The coins were imported to test the legitimacy of State Department (DOS) imposed import restrictions via two Memoranda of Understanding (MOU). ACCG maintains that actions of DOS relating to implementation of the Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA) have been secretive, arbitrary and capricious and will contest the seizure in the U.S. Federal District Court in Baltimore.

Information from another Freedom of Information Act lawsuit suggests that the DOS failed to follow the recommendations of its own experts on the Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) in extending restrictions to Cypriot coins, and then misled Congress about this decision. Other information implicates DOS bureaucrats adding coins to the Chinese MOU even though Chinese officials never asked for their inclusion.

The Obama Administration has promised transparency and accountability in government. ACCG hopes its challenge to the ban on ancient Chinese and Cypriot coins will lead the Court also to address these and other concerns about the process for imposing import restrictions on cultural goods.

During a 2008 International Foundation for Art Research (IFAR) discussion, former CPAC Chairperson Jay Kislak (2003-2008) said, “I am not necessarily against any actions that were taken on any of the MOU’s which were recommended by the Committee and put into action. I am, however, opposed to the way it is done because I think it is absolutely, completely, un-American, and I don’t mind saying that. Not anywhere in our government do we do things this way, except with this group.”

Kislak also addressed government transparency by saying, “In every other branch of government, there is disclosure, and information is made public. We have a democracy, and it is government of the people, for the people, by the people, not by the bureaucrats over them.”

Another former CPAC chairperson, Jack Josephson (1990-1995), added, “…rarely has Committee membership been in conformity with the Act. During my experience on the Committee, this was not the only part of the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA) that was disregarded.” Former CPAC member Kate Fitz Gibbon (2000-2003) agreed, saying, “In many cases, from my ‘plain reading,’ the Committee has substantively altered Congressional intent.”

Contact: Wayne G. Sayles, 417-499-9831, director@accg.us, http://www.accg.us

This release was issued through The Xpress Press News Service, merging e-mail and satellite distribution technologies to reach business analysts and media outlets worldwide. For more information, visit http://www.XpressPress.com

SOURCE Ancient Coin Collectors Guild

Wayne G. Sayles, +1-417-499-9831, director@accg.us

Related posts:

1. Coin Collectors to Challenge State Department on Import Restrictions
2. FOIA Suit Filed Against US Dept of State
3. Ancient Coin Collectors Influence Expands

, Ancient Coin Collectors Challenge U.S. State Dept. Bureaucrats After Baltimore Seizure, http://www.coinlink.com/News/ancients/ancient-coin-collectors-challenge-u-s-state-dept-bureaucrats-after-baltimore-seizure/, http://feeds.feedburner.com/AncientCoinNews?format=xml, Coin Collecting News » Ancients, ,
Ancient Coin news, 7, ancient-coin-news

The latest auction organised by Baldwin’s auction department begins with an impressive selection of Ancient Greek, Roman and Byzantine coins featuring a very rare Greek Medallion (lot 105, pictured below). It is presumed that this medallion was produced to commemorate an African victory of the emperor Commodus, although it appears to have few details of any specific campaign, and it is thought that this could be the specimen illustrated in Gnecchi.

The British section of the auction comprises over 400 lots and includes a collection of 69 Maundy Sets from the period 1660 – 2008, 38 lots of Anglo-Saxon Pennies and a fine selection of 5 Guinea pieces. Alongside these coins are a selection of high grade British 19th Century copper tokens, including some rare and unpublished varieties. A small but well-formed group of rare English banknotes, includes as the highlight, an Isle of Man, Bank of Mona Specimen £5 from 1867 (lot 596).

The first day of the auction concludes with a highly comprehensive range of world coins including an outstanding collection of Danish coins and an interesting group of South American and Spanish American coinage. The Danish collection of coins features many incredible rarities, including lots 605 and 652, a Christian III (1535-1559) Gold Gulden and a Christian VII (1766-1808) Gold Ducat, both desirable pieces, and an exceptionally rare square gold 6-Daler from 1604 (lot 606), which is possibly a unique die combination. The highlight of the South American/Spanish American collection is lot 706, a gold 8-Escudos which is among the “top five known” in quality for this date. These two collections are complemented by nice groups of coins from modern Cyprus, medieval Georgia and modern Greece.

An outstanding collection of Scottish gallantry and campaign medals forms the basis of the first part of the second day of the auction. Awarded, in the main, to soldiers with the surname Rennie, the most notable amongst the group is lot 1104, an extremely rare Great War Military Medal with two bars (pictured above). This particular medal was awarded to Private W. Rennie Gordon, a member of the Gordon Highlanders who were renowned for their bravery.

He was only one of two people from his regiment to win this award and he was the only person to have won it three times on the Great Western Front (each bar on the medal denotes another award). Sadly the records detailing exactly what Private Rennie did to achieve such an accolade were destroyed during fire in 1940, and so we may never have full details of his achievements. A group of very attractive and extremely rare British Orders rounds off this part of the sale with lots 1192 and 1193 being sure to draw a lot of attention – both awards of The Most Noble Order of Garter, beautifully preserved and available to view by appointment at Baldwin’s London office in the two weeks preceding the sale.

The two-day auction will be held on the 29-30th September 2009 at CIPFA, the Conference Centre on Robert Street near their offices in Central London. Taking place in the same week as Coinex, the UK’s premier Numismatic Trade Show, this auction is sure to be a great event, with a room packed full of international buyers who fly in for the auctions and the show.

Auctioneer Seth Freeman commented that “… this auction demonstrates very nicely the diverse nature of our business at Baldwin’s – from ancient coins through to modern Greek; historical medals through to military medals and even a few English provincial banknotes for good measure. Over 2000 years of numismatics and something for everyone.”

For more information about any of the other lots in the sale please contact Seth Freeman on +44 (0)20 7930 9808 or at
seth@baldwin.co.uk

Sale Highlights

Lot 105  -  Commodus (AD 177-192), AE Medallion, AD 190-191, M COMMODVS ANTONINVS PIVS FELIX AVG BRIT, laureate and bearded bust of Commodus right, wearing paludamentum and cuirass, border of dots, rev COS VI (in exergue), Commodus standing right, wearing paludamentum and cuirass, holding parazonium and leaning on spear; before him, Africa reclining left, wearing peplum and elephant’s skin head-dress, placing her right hand on the back of a lion and holding corn-ears; in background, Victory standing right, erecting a trophy, border of dots, 83.22g, 42mm (Gnecchi 5, pl.78, 5; cf BMC 29, pl.XXXIII, fig 3; Cohen 69). Smoothing in fields, rather more extensive on the reverse, red-brown patina, good very fine and very rare.

ex Michele Baranowsky sale, Milan, 25 February 1931, lot 2218 ex Henry Platt Hall Collection (Part II), Glendining, 17 November 1950, lot 1636 It is not impossible that this medallion is the specimen illustrated in Gnecchi. However, the cataloguer finds it difficult to fully accept that the shield of the trophy is identical in appearance.

Commodus, an emperor infamous for his megalomania, does not have a reputation as a military leader, preferring to leave provincial campaigns to his generals. He had gained the title BRITannicus in AD 184, following the successes of Ulpius Marcellus in a war in Britain against the Caledonian tribes after they had crossed the Antonine Wall. This medallion was presumably issued to commemorate an African victory, although we would appear to have few details of any specific campaign. The reverse had first been used on a medallion of Antoninus Pius in AD 160 (Gnecchi plate 47, 1 and see plate 45, 7) after a revolt in Africa had been crushed. We know that Commodus had been planning to visit Africa in AD 188 (see also BMC clxxxii) and that in AD 186 he had instituted a regular fleet of ships to help safeguard the corn supply from Africa (Scriptores Historiae Augustae 17, 7).

An Aureus of Commodus (BMC 335, plate 99, 15), struck in AD 192 (COS VII) would appear to refer to the successful completion of a campaign in Africa. Commodus is shown togate, clasping hands with Serapis and Isis, and being crowned by Victory. As Commodus is depicted in civilian dress on this coin, as opposed to military dress on the above medallion, we can perhaps assume that a recently completed campaign had taken place, albeit on a minor scale, in AD 191.

Estimate: £18,000-22,000

Lot 596  – The Bank of Mona (Branch of the City of Glasgow Bank, incorporated by the Act of Tynwald), Specimen £5, 18-
- [1867], black and white, denomination at centre and top corners in blue, perforated “CANCELLED” twice (Quarmby 30). Jagged vertical 25mm crease top left and small tear in lower border, otherwise nice extremely fine and extremely rare.

After the closure of the Isle of Man Commercial Banking Company in 1849 the City of Glasgow Bank established a branch under the name of the Bank of Mona. This was the first time that a large modern bank had operated on the island.

Estimate: £1500-2000

Lot 605  – Christian III (1535-1559), Gold Gulden, Rhineland type, Gottorp, (15)36, 3.23g, CRISTIAN.D.G.D.HOLSACIE, St Andrew standing with cross, dividing “3” and “6”, rev trefoil, MON:NOVA:AVREA:SLEVICNSIS, cruciform shields of Holstein, Schleswig, Stormarn and Norway, shield of Oldenburg at centre (Galster 131; Sieg 23; F 18). A very fine example of this important coin, of the highest rarity.

ex Jens Dahl Knudsen collection, Thomas Hoiland auction, 7 November 2005, lot 1097 Only 18 or 19 examples are known, of which 13 are in public collections.

Estimate: £15,000-18,000

Lot 606  – Christian IV (1588-1648), Gold 6-Daler, 1604, 12.95g, CHRISTIANVS.IIII. D.G.DA, crowned and armoured bust right within three lines of dots, cross in each angle, rev .VI. .DAL. 1604 in three lines in a dotted circle within a dotted square, trefoil in each angle (H 11A; Schou obverse 2, reverse 3 var; F 45). A bold very fine and of the highest rarity.

ex Schlessinger (Berlin) 1933 ex Zinck V, lot 16 ex Jens Dahl Knudsen collection, Thomas Hoiland auction, 20 November 2006, lot 610 Only 425 examples of this extremely rare square gold coin were struck, and this specimen seems to be a unique die combination

Lot 652 – Christian VII (1766-1808), Gold Ducat, 1771, 3.47g, GLORIA EX AMORE PATRIÆ, wild man standing with shield, dividing date, rev four line inscription MON.AUR. ALTONAV. AD LEGEM IMPERII in an ornate square tablet (H 1; S 28; F 282). An extremely rare coin in extremely fine condition, a most desirable piece. only 341 pieces struck.

Estimate: £20,000-25,000

Lot 706 – Charles II of Spain (1665-1700), Gold 8-Escudos, 1699 R, Lima, obv castles and lions in angles of cross, rev crown over denomination and date. Choice uncirculated, a near perfect strike on the obverse cross and a full legend with very minor doubling on the reverse date. among the top 5 “finest known” of this date, an exceptional coin

Estimate: £10,000-12,000

Lot 1104  – The extremely rare Great War Military Medal with two bars, awarded to Private W Rennie, Gordon Highlanders, together with his 1914-15 Star Trio, group of four, comprising: Military Medal, Geo. V (2926 Pte W. Rennie. 1/7 Gord: Hdrs – T.F.) two clasps; 1914-15 Star (2926 Pte. W. Rennie, Gord. Highrs.); British War & Victory Medals (2926 Pte. W. Rennie, Gordons), group officially impressed. MM with a few light scratches and lightly polished, group good very fine overall. (4) M.M. London Gazette 21.9.1916 1st Bar to MM London Gazette 22.1.1917 2nd Bar to MM London Gazette 7.10.1918

The 1/7 (Deeside) Battalion, Gordon Highlanders were a Territorial Force Battalion raised from the Deeside area of Aberdeenshire, which served as part of the 51st (Highland) Division. This Division initially suffered from a lack of training and front line experience, fairing only moderately well at Festubert and Givenchy, but through the course of the war they gained a fearsome reputation on the Western Front through bold displays of bravery in the assaults on High Wood and Beaumont-Hamel. From this point on they were recognised for the quality of their infantry, and took a proud position on the German High Command’s ‘Most Feared’ list. The Division also took part in the Second Battle of the Marne (during which the 1/7 Gordons suffered 272 killed, wounded, missing or gassed) and was later chosen for difficult actions at Arras and Cambrai to name but a few.

All three of Private Rennie’s MMs were awarded for bravery during service on the Western Front, in France, but due to the loss of roughly 4 million regimental service records through fire in September 1940, we may never know the specific circumstances and details of each award. Groups of this type are extremely rare, with only 180 second bar MMs issued in the Great War, and only 1 issued in WWII. Private Rennie was one of only two members of this famous Scottish Regiment to win the MM on three occasions.

Sold with MIC and useful paperwork. ex Glendining’s, Thursday 20th of June 1991, lot 853, sold for £1,450.

Estimate: £6000-8000

Lot 1192 – THE MOST NOBLE ORDER OF THE GARTER, Garter Principal King of Arms Badge, in gold and enamels, c.1820, privately made, unsigned and without marks – but of excellent quality, cross of St. George beside quartered shield of arms bearing the Hanoverian shield, garter and legend surrounding, crown above, rev of the same design, fitted with hinged suspension loop (for a neck ribbon) with knurled locknut, height 119mm. Slight loss of enamel at junction with crown, otherwise extremely fine and extremely rare.

Estimate: £22,000-28,000

Lot 1193  – THE MOST NOBLE ORDER OF THE GARTER, KG sash badge or Lesser George, in gold and enamels, c.1850- 1880, privately made, unsigned and without marks, a piece of superb quality, St. George fighting the dragon on horseback in very fine detail, garter and legend surrounding, rev showing the reverse of the same scene, 89mm x 47.5mm (excluding suspension). Very slight wear to areas of the enamel, including one or two very minor scuffs or chips, otherwise extremely fine and extremely rare.

Estimate: £35,000-45,000

Related posts:

1. “Brand New” Ancient Roman Gold Coins in Heritage January 2009 NYINC Auction
2. CLASSICAL COLLECTORS’ NEW YEAR TRUMPETED IN WITH THE LAWRENCE R. STACK COLLECTION OF ANCIENT GREEK COINS
3. Baldwin plans 47th Hong Kong Coin Auction

, Baldwin’s Auction 62 & 63 to Feature Ancient Greek, Roman and Byzantine Coins, http://www.coinlink.com/News/ancients/baldwin%E2%80%99s-auction-62-63-to-feature-ancient-greek-roman-and-byzantine-coins/, http://feeds.feedburner.com/AncientCoinNews?format=xml, Coin Collecting News » Ancients, ,
Ancient Coin news, 7, ancient-coin-news

By Wayne Sayles – Ancient Coin Collecting

In browsing the web site of Saving Antiquities For Everyone (SAFE), an advocacy group for archaeologists and Nationalists, I recently found something surprising that caught my attention. On the organization’s page appealing for donations, is a sidebar about Ai Khanoum. This mysterious ancient city in Afghanistan was discovered in the 1960s and excavated by French archaeologist Paul Bernard between 1964 and 1978.

During the ensuing Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the site was heavily pillaged and was also damaged by military action and occupation. During the 1990s, according to the eminent historian Osmund Bopearachchi, the site was further devastated by “systematically planned illicit digs.” Bopearachchi published the sad tale of destruction in Afghanistan in his article “Vandalized Afghanistan” which first appeared in March of 2000 in the Indian periodical Frontline, and was reprinted in 2002 in Nomismatika Kronika the journal of the Hellenic Numismatic Society (comprised of private collectors, dealers and professional scholars). Much of the history of Ai Khanoum was lost during these two disastrous decades. SAFE quotes Bopearchchi’s comment about systematically planned illicit digs and illustrates the tiny infomercial with a rare tetradrachm struck by Diodotus during the reign of Antiochos II.

But, did they tell the whole story? Well, not really. They neglected to point out that Dr. Bopearchchi lays the blame for this devastation squarely where it belongs, on the political and religious zealotry that turned all of Afghanistan (not just ancient sites) into a waste land. Ironically, SAFE’s sidebar illustration tells more of the story. The tetradrachm by Diodotus is known and preserved (and yes recorded) today because it is in the hands of a private collector. Bopearchchi describes how huge hoards have found their way to the bourse of Peshawar in Pakistan, many of them apparently being melted down for the silver content, others migrating to collectors in “Japan, Britain and America”. A few local collectors, like Aman ur Rahman and Khurshid Ahmad Khan, saved some of the most important pieces from oblivion. They not only saved the coins, they collaborated with Dr. Bopearachchi on his important survey of Pre-Kushana Coins in Pakistan. Were the markets of Peshawar not mined by these collectors, even more of Ai Khanoum’s and Afghanistan’s history would have been consumed in the melting pots.

Of course this is not the sort of thing that SAFE really wants to highlight, so I doubt we will get that little sidelight to history in a SAFE sidebar. Nor will we hear that some archaeologists have actually advocated destroying ancient artifacts after they have been recorded. Why? Because they lack space to store them and destruction is deemed preferable to private ownership. Speaking of storage, one of the constant themes in anti-collector diatribe is that coins in private collections are not available for research and their “provenance” is usually not known. This is, in the first case, not true as there are scores of private collections published in the numismatic record (as well as online) and some of those publications are like the Bopearachchi study in the sense that professional scholars worked hand-in-hand with private collectors to produce them. The Levante Collection is a prime example, though only one of many. In the second case, private collectors are often better stewards of coins than institutions are and invaribly extract more useful information about the past from an unprovenanced coin than an archaeologist does from a perfectly measured find spot.

The hot buzz word these days is PROVENANCE. It is often suggested by archaeologists that without provenance an artifact loses its meaning and value. That is such a shallow argument that it really does not deserve a counter, but what about the recording of provenance? That surely does have some value when it is possible and practical to do so. Does the diligent recording of provenance by archaeologists give us a superior record of the past? Well, perhaps in some cases but certainly not in all and maybe not in most. Publication of archaeological site data is excruciatingly slow, if at all, and is normally not accessible to the general public without going to a major university or research center. The Swedish Institute at Athens reveals just how deplorable the situation can become. When attempting to develop the Database of Archaeological Material from Swedish Excavations in Greece (DAMSEG), the often hushed “museum basement” assets came under review. In their report on the process, which is in itself a laudable undertaking, they point to a widespread but rarely acknowledged problem that continues to grow as excavation material is now stored mainly in low budget, under staffed, regional state museums near the excavation sites in most countries. With typical Swedish candor, the report states: “What those who went into the storage found must have been chaos, for masses of archaeological material had lost its provenience and could often not be identified as coming even from a specific excavation, where publications did not exist. It turns out that some material was also lost… When all identifiable material had been taken care of, several tons of non-descript pottery fragments were dumped into the bay and what looked worthwhile keeping, was stored for the future.” We could hope that the Swedish experience were an isolated occurrence, but alas it is not. The President of the Association of Cypriot Archaeologists in a scathing assessment of Archaeology in his homeland wrote “”We dash everywhere in Cyprus to dig and then we dump things. If you don’t have space, don’t dig.” And there are similar reports, by archaeologists themselves, from virtually all countries where objects from the past are excavated. We might call them “Ethical Archaeologists.”

Now, back to Afghanistan, there is one more detail that ought to be mentioned before I close this already lengthy post. In the Spring of 2005, the ACCG advanced a proposal to the Government of Afghanistan that the guild launch a concerted effort within the hobby and trade to recover coins known to have been stolen from the Kabul Museum. This was a project to be funded entirely by the guild with no cost whatever to the Afghan people. Our overture was initially embraced with enthusiasm by Embassy personnel and a representative of the ACCG met in person on more than one occasion with the Afghani Cultural Attache, Mr. Elmi, in Washington. As the details began to solidify, the embassy indicated that it would be necessary to coordinate with the home Ministry of Culture. At that point, communication ceased and the project ran up against a stone wall. No explanation was ever given, but it was more than obvious what had happened. Cooperation between a collector advocacy group and a source country Ministry of Culture was radically inconsistent with the Collector = Looter stance that Nationalists had developed as doctrine. One can easily see why the government of Afghanistan would not want to become embroiled in a political tug of war between collectors in America and the U.S. State Department or the American archaeological community.

Yes, there is a lot more to the story of Afghanistan’s archaeological nightmare than just a mention of the looting, but SAFE did at least get it right in the sense that the losses are a monumental tragedy.

Related posts:

1. Gold futures close with gains on safe-haven buying
2. Keeping Tangible Assets Safe and Secure
3. ANA and Collectica, Inc. Enter Agreement to Create a Safe Online Auction Community

, SAFE gets it right! (sort of), http://www.coinlink.com/News/ancients/safe-gets-it-right-sort-of/, http://feeds.feedburner.com/AncientCoinNews?format=xml, Coin Collecting News » Ancients, ,
Ancient Coin news, 7, ancient-coin-news

A box of “old coins” purchased for $28.25 at an estate sale near Burlington, VT held an unexpected surprise: its contents are estimated to be worth more than $15,000 because it included one of the most important Armenian coins in existence.

It was Richard Martineit’s good fortune to be at that auction in October, 2007, where more than 1500 lots were sold in two days. One that caught his eye was lot 1597, a group of 13 coins in a box labeled “Roman & Ancient pieces.” It contained a variety of silver and base metal coins issued from the 3rd Century B.C. to the 11th Century A.D. Highlights included a Roman silver denarius of 41 B.C. with the portraits of warlords Marc Antony and Octavian, and three coins struck by Greek and Roman rulers of Egypt.

Seeking proper identifications and grading, Martineit sent his coins to NGC Ancients, a branch of the Numismatic Guaranty Corporation (NGC) dedicated to coins of the ancient world. On his submission form, the last three coins were described by the submitter as issues of the Byzantine Empire. Each had an image of Christ on the obverse and an inscription on the reverse. It was soon discovered that only two of them were Byzantine, and one in fact was Armenian.

The prize coin was an Armenian bronze follis of “Kiurike the Kouropalates” from the 10th or 11th Century A.D. Modeled after contemporary coins of the Byzantine Empire, it belongs to the first coinage with Armenian inscriptions. Martineit’s example is perhaps the finest of the 19 known, and its inscription has an unusual arrangement that until now may not have been documented.

“Even through I owned that box lot for 15 months I never looked at the three coins I identified as Byzantine until I mailed them to NGC,” Martineit says. “In fact, I bought the lot for the other coins and I was not going to send in those three coins until I realized I could never find a value for them until I knew what they were. So I added them to the submission at the last minute.”

As it turns out, one of these three coins was a hidden treasure.

“At first glance it appeared to be an ordinary Byzantine bronze,” says David Vagi, director of NGC Ancients, “but when I turned it over I knew it was something I had never handled before.” Vagi consulted with Robert W. Hoge, a curator at the American Numismatic Society, who confirmed its importance.

Martineit was overwhelmed when he got the news: “To say the least, David made my day with his phone call,” he says. “I cannot tell you how happy I am about this stroke of luck. I feel like a kid who just got the greatest train set it the world and cannot stop playing with it. NGC’s service went light years beyond anything I ever expected.”

Without proper identification, the Armenian coin might have remained unknown until it entered the marketplace as an ordinary Byzantine coin, valued at perhaps $50. “This is the kind of thing you expect to see on Antiques Roadshow – a discovery that makes what we do so rewarding. We normally do not grade Medieval Armenian coins, but this case was so unusual that we made an exception.” Vagi adds.

Originally, the surface of the coin was partly covered with encrustation. David Hendin, an expert in coin conservation, was enlisted as an outside consultant to help reveal the full detail of the coin. Conservation was especially important since the coin was a condition rarity, and the inscription needed to be fully visible.

The precise attribution of the coin is debated since it contains no indication of date or mint. Authorities generally agree that it is from Lori, a region in northeastern Greater Armenia, and that it likely was struck in the city of Tashir.

The inscription, which is the earliest appearance of Armenian language on a coin, translates to “May God aid Kiurike the Kouropalates,” and shows that the issuer claimed the title Kouropalates (”charge of the palace”), a rank awarded by Byzantine emperors to vassal rulers of Armenia. However, scholars are sharply divided over which Kiurike issued the coin, some preferring the dynast Kiurike I (c. A.D. 979-989) and others his grandson Kiurike II (c. A.D. 1048-1100).

For more information about NGC Ancients, visit www.ngccoin.com/ancients online. NGC Ancients can be contacted at 1-800-NGC-COIN (642-2646) or by email at ancients@ngccoin.com.

Related posts:

1. DGS Authenticates & Grades Rare Lafayette Dollar Variety
2. Desirable, Appealing Ancients and World Coins & Paper Money in Official ANA Auction
3. DGS Grades over 625 Coins in the First 3 Weeks of Operation

, NGC Ancients Grades Armenian Rarity, http://www.coinlink.com/News/ancients/ngc-ancients-grades-armenian-rarity/, http://feeds.feedburner.com/AncientCoinNews?format=xml, Coin Collecting News » Ancients, ,
Ancient Coin news, 7, ancient-coin-news

By Wayne Sayles – Ancient Coin Collecting

Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) argued that truth is a value judgement and questioned the premise that truth is always preferable to (or more valuable than) untruth. He also suggested that we should learn from the ancient Sphinx how to ask questions. Should a question always seek the truth as a response? One would normally think so, but what of the case where an untruth is valued more highly by someone than the truth? Is insinuation of an untruth in the form of a question a reflection of values and therefore acceptable? Nevermind, that’s a rhetorical question that has no truth or untruth in the answer.

In a news article headlined “Why are Ancient Coins From Cyprus Featured in a Suit Against the US Department of State?” archaeologist David Gill asks a misleading question. Of course, they are NOT featured in any such lawsuit (at least not yet). This question was posed by Gill in a press release filed through a commercial news service. It ran, as these releases always do, in scores of media outlets that reach a very wide spectrum of society.

Being a news medium, with certain standards of veracity, the reader might expect to find an answer based on truth. Unless, of course, the question is framed with a Nietzschean mindset. In that case, an untruth may be viewed by the author as a perfectly acceptable answer, irrespective of societal norms. The typical reader of a press release is not going to know much about Nietszche or about ancient coins, maybe not even about Cyprus. They definitely will not know much about the U.S. State Department, which is by design one of the most secretive agencies in the U.S. government.

For Gill’s answer to the headline question, the reader is referred to his most current blog posting. But, as a final teaser at the end of his press release Gill asks one more question: “Are these aggressive legal tactics really for the benefit of collectors, or are there other factors at work?” Once again, the reader expects a question to be followed by a truth. Instead, what they are fed is a potpourri of inaccuracies, untruths and insinuations. What poses as an innocent question is really the sort of catty insinuation that one comes to expect in blogs these days, not in the media.

Let me just outline a few specific inaccuracies in the Gill press release and blog. Speaking about the ACCG/IAPN/PNG Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, he writes: “The alliance objected to the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) restricting the import of ancient coins minted in Cyprus as part of a wider memorandum of understanding (MOU).”

The truth is that CPAC did NOT restrict the import of ancient coins minted in Cyprus. CPAC voted against adding coins to the extension of the existing MOU. The U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs added coins on its own volition, disregarding the advice of its own advisory committee. Moreover, the FOIA lawsuit is not about the Cyprus import restrictions as the sources that Gill himself quotes will attest.

It’s unfortunate that Dr. Gill chooses to argue against the actions of ACCG et al when he clearly does not understand how the U.S. government or legal systems work. The FOIA lawsuit is not about the Cyprus MOU, it is about a series of nine FOIA requests for information dating back to 2004. The requested information consists of documentation that should, under law, have been released to the general public. However, the State Department has in every case denied access to even the most mundane information. The plaintiffs in this lawsuit exhausted every possible administrative appeal prior to launching this suit. Since filing the suit, the State Department has voluntarily released hundreds of documents previously denied. Further releases of material still withheld may be mandated by the federal judge presiding over the case. To characterize this suit as commercially motivated is either ignorant of the facts or malevolent. But, even if it were commercially motivated, so what? Is commerce immoral or against the law? Dr. Gill is certainly not a member of the ACCG and has no standing to complain on that account. As a point of fact, not one single member of the guild has complained about this lawsuit or how it is being handled. On the contrary, they are funding it.

Gill asks on his blog: “Is this alliance of three organisations in reality acting over freedom of information? Could there also be an implicit commercial interest in the liberalisation of the market in ancient coins? This reference to “the liberalisation of the market in ancient coins” is actually a bit comical. The market is constantly being assailed and restricted in one action after another. I don’t quite understand how trying to deflect this onslaught is a liberalization of the market. He quotes the following phrase from a State Department filing in court: “Consequently, Plaintiffs’ claims that they are advocating the public interest are properly viewed with some skepticism given ACCG’s “two phase” “coordinated plan” to attempt to rescind the import restrictions, which would commercially benefit a number of its benefactors, who appear to be U.S.-based dealers and brokers of ancient coins.”

The Freedom of Information Act protects the rights of all U.S. citizens whether they be archaeologists, collectors or coin dealers. Gill ought to know this, since he is quoting above from court documents provided for the public on the ACCG web site. Although he states in his blog that the plaintiffs refuted the above statement, he chooses to post it anyway and conveniently neglects to post or link to the plaintiff’s response (below) from those same documents:

“Initially, it should be noted that Defendant spends a great deal of space in its reply/opposition discussing Plaintiff ACCG’s efforts to challenge import restrictions. Defendant’s reply/opposition at 4, 25-26. No matter how Defendant feels about these actions, they are completely immaterial and unrelated to this FOIA action (1). NARA v. Favish, 541 U.S. 157, 172 (“[A]s a general rule, when documents are within FOIA’s disclosure provisions, citizens should not be required to explain why they seek the information.”) reh’g denied, 541 U.S. 1057 (2004). The fact that Defendant is upset with one of the three Plaintiffs actions is not surprising when reviewed in the prism of this lawsuit. Defendant initially refused to process most of the requests at issue until Plaintiffs brought this action. See Compl. At Counts I to IX. And the releases grudgingly made by Defendant illustrate the lengths Defendant’s component controlling many of the responsive records, the Bureau of Education and Cultural Affairs (“ECA”), has gone to circumvent Plaintiffs and others with similar points of view from voicing their opinions on import restrictions.

(1) In fact, only one of the three named Plaintiffs in this matter, ACCG, is making the challenge to the import restriction as detailed by Defendant. At pages 4-5, Defendant claims ACCG is pursuing that matter in support of the “commercial interests” of some its benefactors. This tact, evidently cribbed from some of the more outspoken archaeological blogs, is not only inaccurate, but beside the point. See http://ancientcoincollecting.blogspot.com/2009/05/rose-is-rose.html (last visited June 2, 2009) and http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2009/05/whats-wrong-with-commercial-interests.html (last visited June 2, 2009). In any event, only U.S. Customs has the power to ensure that ‘test case” will proceed. To date, U.S. Customs has detained some 23 inexpensive, common, “unprovenanced” ancient Chinese and Cypriot coins properly declared before import from the United Kingdom into the “Port of Baltimore.” See http://www.accg.us/issues/news/coin-collectors-to-challenge-state-department-on-import-restrictions (last visited June 2, 2009). Customs will either return the coins or take the legal steps necessary to seize them either through an administrative process or through an “in rem” action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland.”

Gill further states in his blog: “The growing realisation that action needs to be taken about the antiquities market has been reflected in the work of the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC). The most noticeable action was over antiquities from Iraq in the wake of the Second Gulf War and the looting of the Baghdad Museum.”

This statement is really ludicrous as well as being one of those “untruths” that get tossed about with such wild abandon. Regarding CPAC, the committee was formed under law expressly to protect the rights of the trade and general public. That is why the seats on the committee are mandated by law to include representatives from the trade, museums, and general public as well as archaeologists. Any change of concensus that may be detected at CPAC in recent years is not a reflection of a change in market dynamics, but rather a product of the fact that pro-archaeology and nationalist leaning individuals had been appointed to some of the museum and general public slots, skewing the ideology and consequently the vote from its legally mandated representative base toward a special interest. Gill’s comment about CPAC and Iraq is profoundly off the mark. CPAC had no involvement whatever with Iraq and in fact could not have had under law. The temporary import restrictions on antiquities from Iraq (which are soon to expire) were authorized by specific legislative action, not by the State Department under CPIA.

He goes on to say: “The ACCG seems intent on criticising a policy that is intended to offer some protection to the archaeological heritage of Cyprus and China by placing restrictions on the movement of material that may have been derived as a result of illicit diggings on archaeological sites.” I would consider this an innocent misunderstanding had we not plowed this field so many times in the past. In the present light, I can only see it as a purposeful and malicious mischaracterization. The ACCG has never opposed CPIA and indeed has stated publicly and often that it is a fair and equitable law. The ACCG has opposed the tyranny, secrecy, and disregard for the letter and intent of CPIA evidenced repeatedly by the State Department’s arbitrary and capricious application of select provisions of the law while ignoring basic protections within that law. That Dr. Gill finds this objectionable seems odd to me since it is a matter between American citizens and the U.S. Government and he is neither. The ACCG has always condemned illicit digging on archaeological sites. That is a well known fact that Dr. Gill fails to admit. Instead, he suggest through his implicit language that the situation is otherwise. He is being neither coy nor subtle, he is courting his own distorted view of the truth.

Despite their erudition, Dr. Gill and his colleagues Barford and Elkins seem to know precious little about American law and even less about the ACCG court cases in progress and pending. They, in fact, know very little about the ACCG itself and obviously operate on presumptions made within their narrow ideological framework. They spread misinformation, like wildfire on the plains, often through pure murdering of the truth. I don’t think even Neitzche had that in mind. He did, however, say:

“To help a perception to achieve victory often means merely to unite it with stupidity so intimately that the weight of the latter also enforces the victory of the former.”

Related posts:

1. Lawsuit pries loose documents, more being contested
2. RIFT WITH FIRED EXEC LEAVES DEBT QUESTIONS
3. Ruling in FOIA case condones DOS intransigence on ancient coin import restrictions

, Questions and Truth, http://www.coinlink.com/News/ancients/questions-and-truth/, http://feeds.feedburner.com/AncientCoinNews?format=xml, Coin Collecting News » Ancients, ,
Ancient Coin news, 7, ancient-coin-news