Let us see the International Association of Professional Numismatists (IAPN) give an account of themselves. How "professional" are they if they support this kind of scandalous thing? Nathan Elkins has commented upon the tactics used in the IAPN lobbying, is this really the best these dealers can do?
Dear Mr. Van der Schueren,
On February 13th the IAPN, through you, assured me that if you found that you would "review" what your paid lobbyist Peter Tompa had published on his lobbying blog, you would "take appropriate action" if any of it you considered "inappropriate statements". I supplied you at your request with a list of such material. That was four months ago, and I would like to ask whether you have reviewed the material to which you were directed and what action you thought was "appropriate".
Since I have raised this matter publicly there, may I have a statement for my blog as the official IAPN response to the points I raised. The PNG, in their statement, washed their hands of responsibility for Mr Tompa's actions, - thus placing the IAPN in the position of being the main sponsor of this activity. Are you going to stand by your lobbyist? To what extent does what Mr Tompa writes on his blog as part of his lobbying on behalf of the coin industry represent the position of the IAPN? The IAPN whom (according to figures in the public domain) he represents to the tune of several tens of thousands of dollars annually. You might look at some of his more recent posts, which simply create a picture of the position of the entities he is lobbying for on "archaeologists" (generically and specifically). I need hardly add that this sort of talk hardly promotes an image suggesting a desire for collaboration to solve issues of ontention. Rather it seems an attempt to inflame opinions among collectors. Is this indeed IAPN policy? (posts open-medici-archives; Tariq-aziz-dies.html; Isis-had-book-with-pictures-of-coins-in; a-mystery-to-unravel)
While on the topic, can you tell me whether your lobbyist was in contact with Richard Stengel before his high level visit to Paris last week in the wake of the UNGA draft resolution "Saving the cultural heritage of Iraq" requiring "verifiable documentation of provenance as well as export certificates related to any cultural property imported, exported or offered for sale"? What representations were made by Mr Tompa to Stengel, UNESCO or the UN General Assembly on behalf of the dugup antiquity industry before they met to discuss this issue? Can you tell me why the IAPN is wasting time and money setting your lobbyist after the US CCPIA when there are far more fundamental changes going on in the background which will affect your "profession" but which your "cultural property observer" simply fails to even notice on the lobbying blog he conducts on your behalf? Instead when all this was happening, he has some half-brain post about a cat.
Is this really the best the IAPN can do?
A statement from the "professional numismatists" please.
Paul Barford (Archaeologist and unwilling target of your paid lobbyist and your paid lobbying)