I was really struck by this forthright message from an ancient coin collector in reply to some rouse-the-peasants tub-thumping from the ACCG. It is addressed to Dealer Dave on his Unidroit-L coiney discussion list and refers to his comments on Peter Tompa's blog post about the 'provenance' of the documents used by the projected Wikiloot project. I quote it with the permission of the author, Chris Rose (a former commentator on this blog):
Dave, Your and Peter's argument seems to take for granted that ancient coin collectors and dealers are on the side of looters. Why would they defend looting unless they profit from looting themselves? I doubt if you would defend people stealing your coins in the dark of night. Other people's? Foreigners? The ones that go into your collection, not out? Not so much?Readers interested to see what kind of an answer he got can find my discussion of it (with of course a link to the original) here.
The hobby of ancient coin/artifact collecting is "defending" itself into extinction with these kinds of efforts. Peter's question is principally silly because it throws collectors and dealers into a public alliance with looters. Furthermore, we are patently unwilling to verify the provenance of our coins. Who are we to examine anyone else's due diligence?
Looters -- thieves -- cannot logically argue that "stolen" documents cannot be ethically introduced against them. They lost that line of defense through their own actions. Not to mention that accessing public documents that should logically be publicly available -- and probably are, since you have not documented a single stolen document or document theft -- without denying their use to anyone else -- does not approach the culpability of stealing actual objects and thereby denying them to their owners and authorized parties (as defined by law).
If our public spokesmen keep this up, collectors WILL have their collections confiscated. It is criminal to buy items that a reasonable person would know are probably stolen. Purchasers have no title to items bought in those circumstances. Why would prominent members of the collecting community insist on implying the illegal origin of items in our marketplace? Even if we have no interest in doing anything about looting what could it possibly serve us to publicly proclaim our support of those who loot?
I would love to continue collecting ancient coins but I do not want to do business with thieves. I would like to know that I have clear title to coins that I purchase. Is this still possible?
5 comments:
This is an extremely good point - not all collectors feel the same way, just as not all archaeologists do. My experience with Loot Busters so far is that one collector wrote me what amounted to a polite "bog off" but all other reputable dealers and scrupulous collectors are leaping in to help - they don't want looting, nor are they trying to justify stolen items.
One a purely legal point, can one just throw out accusations of stealing papers? Particularly when those papers have been publicly available since before the publication of Chasing Aphrodite?
Well, this comes back to the question, just WHAT precisely is in Mr Felch's desk drawer, and what rights attend to them.
To come back to the collectors, it really does puzzle me why so few speak out against the damaging ACCG shenanigans.
I think that not all collectors belong to the ACCG, so may not be aware of their views to either agree or disagree.
An older cousin collects nice coins. I can't see inside his head, so can't tell if he's whiter than white, but he does his best to collect ethically and help museums and so forth. I doubt he's ever heard of the ACCG and he tends to deal with the MFA.
I bet if one collected ancient dug up coins in the US and has a computer, the name Ancient Coin Collectors Guild will have impinged on their consciousness. The decision to join or not depends on whether one collects coins like your cousin, or whether they want their cabinet filled with coins unlawfully exported and otherwise illicitly obtained and tainted items indiscriminately side by side with the other stuff.
I take comfort from the thought that so many collectors over there DO NOT belong to the ACCG-ranters because they are not pirates. Please do not disillusion me, I'd like to think that there are many more decent folk out there collecting antiquities than we see hidden by the dirty facade of the people I write about here.
I let my membership in the ACCG expire. Their statements make little sense to me, nor do I think their strategy protects the long term interests of ancient coin collecting. Any opinions of their members that do not conform to their positions get a very cold reception.
I am somewhat surprised that no dealers are offering to transfer whatever provenance information they have to purchasers (except references to major auctions).
Collectors who wish to avoid illicit coins have few options. I think the first dealers who strive to keep and transfer as complete a provenance as they have available would be rewarded by increased business.
I believe that individuals should be allowed to be guardians of cultural objects. Dispersing them does protect them and make them available to everyone. But it is a role of stewardship and responsibility. The interests of all current stake holders and future generations must be taken into account. As others have noted. historical sites are a vanishing resource. What about the interests of children and grandchildren? And theirs?
Post a Comment