
R. Bland 2013 'Response: the Treasure Act and Portable Antiquities Scheme', Internet Archaeology
33.
http://dx.doi.org/10.11141/ia.33.8
Lastly a US-based contributor, Wayne Sayles,
presents a defence of the private collecting of antiquities. Sayles is
Executive Director of the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild, a lobby group
that defends the rights of collectors and which fights a running battle
against attempts by foreign governments seeking bilateral agreements
with the US under the 1983 Cultural Property Implementation Act to
restrict the importation of antiquities from their countries.
I am afraid that there is much that is self-serving here. For
example, when Sayles condemns the 'intractable claims from the
archaeological community that no object from antiquity is of value to
society unless its precise archaeological context is known, recorded,
and verifiable', one wonders whether he has any appreciation of just how
important the information that can be gained from recording a find in
its context is. Even more sweeping is his claim 'even if an argument
might be made for national retention of certain types, or exceptional
examples, of certain artefacts, rarely can a case be made that
utilitarian objects like coins are culturally significant objects...'.
For someone who writes books about coins, this seems a strange statement
indeed.
Equally questionable is Sayles's evident outrage at the fact that
'some archaeologists argue that the looting of ancient sites would not
occur were it not for the private collector market': it is self-evident
that the reason people loot sites is to recover objects that they can
sell. What Sayles should have asked is whether it is ever practical to
suppress this market completely, since it has probably existed for
almost as long as the artefacts themselves. Even if a state could
successfully suppress this market within its own territory, it is highly
unlikely that it could ever prevent the outflow of cultural objects to
other countries where such a market exists. There may be a valid
argument to be made for a private market in antiquities, and the
Treasure Act and Portable Antiquities Scheme in England and Wales was
established within the context of a régime where such a market exists,
but Sayles's bombastic contribution totally fails to make that case.
I am unshaken in my conviction, whatever I may say in the specific context of matters I discuss on this blog, Roger Bland - whom I have never met - is a thoroughly decent bloke and it is a pleasure to find at least one time when I can say hand-on-heart that here, he is absolutely right.
No comments:
Post a Comment