Bulgaria Requests the US stop Buying Looted and Smuggled Artefacts from its Soil

.

Looting Matters draws attention 'CPAC: Belize and Bulgaria' to a document from the end of last month that we all seem to have missed (coineys too), but it turns out it was only published yesterday [link to the formal notice here]. After enduring having most of the accessible archaeological sites seriously looted - some of them on an industrial scale - over the past two decades, and the material smuggled out often by organized criminal groups, Bulgaria is at last seeking to impose import restrictions on archaeological and ethnological material on the massive US antiquities market which has greedily devoured this material. The legislation sought will restrict legal imports to those items which arrive in the US with the appropriate documentation confirming legal export from Bulgaria under the terms of the US CCPIA. This is the public summary of the request:

[Billing Code: 4710-05]
DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice 7599]
Notice of Receipt of Cultural Property Request from the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria.

Bulgaria, concerned that its cultural heritage is in jeopardy from pillage, [has] made a request to the Government of the United States under Article 9 of the 1970 UNESCO Convention. United States Department of State received this request in September 2011. Bulgaria’s request seeks U.S. import restrictions on archaeological and ethnological material from Bulgaria dating to the Neolithic Period (7500 B.C.) through the nineteenth century A.D. The specific contents of this request are treated as confidential government to-government information, consistent with applicable U.S. law. Information about U.S. implementation of the 1970 UNESCO Convention can be found at http://exchanges.state.gov/heritage. A public summary of Bulgaria’s request will be posted on that web site.
Date: September 30, 2011
Ann Stock, Assistant Secretary of State for Educational and Cultural Affairs,
Department of State [FR Doc. 2011-26643 Filed 10/13/2011 at
8:45 am; Publication Date: 10/14/2011]

Now, anyone who has been closely following the course of the conflict between the ACCG and the State Department can see, I think, in these two documents pretty clear signs that they've a few ideas how to deal with those pesky un-American dealers' lobbyists that want to get in the way of DoS foreign policy. Good. In fact, one wonders about the precise domestic political context of this request. Have not the coineys brought this upon themselves by kicking against the system instead of complying willingly with the law? I certainly hope so.


The metal-detector and bulldozer looting of Bulgaria and the Balkans was at the core of the expansion in the early 1990s of the US and worldwide "minor antiquities" market. The trade in ancient coins was given new impetus by the arrival in some manner of huge amounts of apparently freshly dug-up artefacts and coins from this region. This is when many of the dealers and collectors in the ACCG began to take an interest in this market. The coin trade which is now fighting import restrictions owes its existence, one might legitimately suspect, to the massive availability of coins almost certainly from the Balkans, and Bulgaria in particular, which appeared on the US market in the past two decades.

A meeting of the US Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) will be taking place on 15th-17th November to discuss this request from Bulgaria. The majority of the meetings will be closed sessions of the Committee, but on 16th November there will be a three hour public session which invites comments on the request from Bulgaria and Belize together... Methinks that's going to be a real barrel of fun when the coineys take the floor.

I expect, if they are true to the pattern established by the events surrounding the previous several MOUs, we will see the usual ACCG-promoted copy-and-paste philistinic fax-bombing campaign prompted by some amazingly crazy bluff with no basis in fact (probably penned by Peter Tompa who is good at that sort of thing) which will only showcase once again the profound intellectual limitations of the whole coiney crowd taking part. I wonder how many will note that:

"all comments must relate specifically to the determinations under Section 303(a) (1) of the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2602, pursuant to which the Committee makes findings [...] You may also send written comments to the Committee. Again, your comments must relate specifically to the determinations under Section 303(a) (1) of the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2602, pursuant to which the Committee must make findings."

The comments can be sent by Internet by November 2, 2011 (go to
http://www.regulations.gov and search on docket number DOS-2011-0115 for
Bulgaria). Comments by fax or by e-mail will not be accepted. Comments submitted in electronic form will be posted on the site http://www.regulations.gov.

State Department Notice of Receipt of Request from Bulgaria

Public Summary of Bulgaria Request

Vignette: Alexander Nevski Church, Sofia; Bulgaria map.

Commentary on the Nov 16th Public Session of the CPAC

.
The Archaeological Institute of America has published on its website two first-hand accounts of the November 16th public session of the CPAC concerning the initial requests for Memoranda of Understanding (MoU) between the United States and Belize and between the United States and Bulgaria under the Convention for Cultural Property Implementation Act (CCPIA). There are two of them, the second is by Nathan T. Elkins (Assistant Professor of Art History, Greek and Roman Art, Baylor University and member of the AIA’s Cultural Heritage Policy Committee.

He gives details of the presentation of several speakers, starting with Stephen J. Knerly ( an attorney who represented the Association of Art Museum Directors [AAMD]), then Peter Tompa (another attorney "and lobbyist representing the International Association of Professional Numismatists (IAPN) and the Professional Numismatists Guild (PNG), two international trade organizations for dealers in ancient coins"). As such, he of course "opposed Bulgaria’s request outright and suggested that if a MoU is signed, the designated list ought not to include ancient coins. Mr. Tompa began by pulling out a wooden ruler...." [Uh-oh...]. He apparently "insisted that looting [...] is no worse than a traffic violation" [ever seen a kid knocked off his bike by a speeding car Mr Tompa?].

Mr. Tompa [...] believes that recent cultural heritage legislation in Bulgaria in 2009 should not be taken seriously by the committee as it was “rammed through by ex-communists only with input from archaeologists.” He stated that metal detectors should be targeted as as opposed to collectors. In his view, there is too much undocumented material in American collections and dealer inventories to force such a burden on American collectors and tradesmen.

[See article 10(a) of the UNESCO Convention - one of the many the US refuses to implement]

Kerry Wetterstrom, a former auction director for Classical Numismatic Group (CNG), offered comments on behalf of the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild (ACCG), an organization governed by American dealers in ancient coins and with a broad base of collector membership. Mr. Wetterstrom made points similar to Tompa’s, although he added that it would be a better approach if Bulgaria were to adopt a scheme similar to the Treasure Act and Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS) in England and Wales. Under such a scheme, metal detectorists would be allowed to operate and would be encouraged to report their finds to the authorities, which may in turn record or remunerate them for their finds.

So Tompa says metal detectorists should be "regulated" (as if they are not in Bulgaria anyway) and another ACCG representative wants to see a liberalisation.

Elkins spoke next:

I indicated that Bulgaria is a primary source country for freshly discovered ancient coins and minor antiquities that enter the trade in the United States. In view of the precedents of Cyprus, China, and Italy, I suggested that a designated list include coins as there is great demand for fresh supplies of ancient coins in the United States and there is also a great deal of plunder in Bulgaria to feed the trade; I pointed to numerous seizures of ancient coins and metal artifacts that were smuggled from Bulgaria and destined for the U.S. as evidence. I also indicated that coins coming from Bulgaria are indeed the fruits of organized plunder and not casual or chance finds of isolated hoards as opponents of import restrictions have claimed in the past. This is illustrated by bulk lots or wholesale lots of ancient coins from Bulgaria that are advertised on dealer websites and eBay. I held up printouts of eBay auctions that were online at the time of the meeting; one dealer had numerous lots of earth-encrusted metal artifacts such as arrowheads, jewelry, and parcels of thousands of mixed Greek, Roman, Byzantine, and Ottoman coins. Such a mixture of objects from a diverse range of chronological periods represents multiple layers of archaeological sites, not isolated hoards or casual finds. In fact, the American eBay seller explicitly stated in many of his auctions that he received the material directly from “excavators” and metal detectorists in Vidin Province in Bulgaria. Vidin Province is an area that has historically been subject to a large degree of looting and which is also home to Colonia Ulpia Traiana Ratiaria, an important archaeological site that has been systematically targeted by looters. Restricting the flow of all other archaeological materials except coins would solve nothing as it is clear from the seizures and from wholesaler inventories in the United States that the material is derived from the same sources and from the same sorts of organized metal detecting activity.

Elkins then summarises what Christina Luke (Lecturer in Anthropology at Boston University and chairperson of the AIA’s Cultural Heritage Policy Committee), Brian Daniels (Fellow of the Penn Cultural Heritage Center of the University of Pennsylvania Museum), Kevin Clinton (Professor Emeritus of Classics at Cornell University and President of the Board of Trustees of the American Research Center in Sofia). All of these spoke in favour of the US helping Bulgaria stem the flow of unlawfully exported dugup antiquities and other cultural property from the country, which - despite efforts in Bulgaria being stepped up - was still a problem.

Elkins and his colleagues believe that:

those who support a MoU with Bulgaria made a compelling case for its enactment [...] proponents of the MoU better articulated their arguments with regard to the four determinations [of CCPIA art 2602[a](1) PMB] and the actual situation in Bulgaria. We trust that the CPAC will carefully weigh the substance of the commentary provided to the committee and will make a decision that will aid Bulgaria in the preservation of its cultural heritage.

It is quite remarkable that not only are the coineys quite incapable of addressing the actual directions of the CCPIA and CPAC about the nature of public comments required (something I have commented upon too, looking at the public records of their submissions), but that they cannot even agree among the members of the board of directors of their most active lobbying group the ACCG whether metal detectorists are to be encouraged and rewarded (the Wetterstrom-PAS approach) or punished (the Tompa-numismatic dealers approach). So what is teh ACCG's policy towards metal detecting, and the purchase of artefacts which derive from metal detecting?

Why Coineys Don't Want the US to Help Bulgaria With Antiquity Smuggling

.
SAFE urges: Say YES to Bulgaria

One might legitimately wonder why the coin dealers and collectors of the United States of America are so anxious that the CPAC gives a negative opinion on the request of the government of the Republic of Bulgaria for a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the United States of America to restrict imports of illicit archaeological and ethnological materials from that country. The SAFE webpage on the request has some details which might help unravel the mystery of why people who claim they are "interested in history", "learning about the past", "preserving relics of the past" and are "all against looting" in fact do not want to see the smuggling of artefacts out of Bulgaria stopped - at least not when it comes to stuff going into the USA. Certainly other people who are "interested in history", "learning about the past", "preserving relics of the past" and are "all against looting" do want to see the smuggling of artefacts out of countries like Bulgaria stopped as soon as possible.

The SAFE text includes a bibliography of just a few of the news items that have been coming out of the country in recent years about the successes of the Bulgarian authorities in apprehending smugglers and looters, and the sort of items that have been involved. Here we read for example:

The United States continues to be a major market for antiquities, especially those from the Greek and Roman world and particularly for coins. Quantifying the flow of goods in an illicit market is difficult; nonetheless, a handful of important recent studies show how the US market for antiquities which originate from Bulgaria remains strong.[...] looters in Bulgaria are eager to meet the international demand for antiquities with materials from their country. How much of this Bulgarian material do we know is bound for the United States? This is very difficult to say from the looting itself as often the looters on the ground do know the ultimate destination of the materials they find. Some recent border seizures, however, especially in the case of coins, have provided strong evidence for large quantities of fresh Bulgarian antiquities entering the United States for sale.

Of course if the US border authorities had been more vigilant (since 1983 the US has been a state party of the UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Cultural Property) and caught a larger proportion of those smuggling illicit artefacts into the the US and those importing illicit artefacts, we'd have a better idea of the US involvement in this trade. Despite huge numbers of 'erdefrisch' artefacts and coins being sold (sometimes sold in bulk by the kilogramme like potatoes) by dealers based in the US to US and foreign collectors, very few shipments have so far been challenged by the US authorities, and it would seem, none of the dealers handling this stuff been investigated.

As we can see it is US coin collectors and dealers who are most concerned that US does not pay more attention (through the issue of fresh regulations confirming US resolve to honour the obligations due to a fellow member state under the 1970 UNESCO Convention) to who imports what from Bulgaria and whether it is accompanied by the requisite export documentation. They claim that "coins are not cultural property" in the terms of the 1970 UNESCO Convention (which merely show they've not actually read the document) and curbing the imports of coins freshly smuggled from a foreign source country like Bulgaria would "destroy the hobby" and prevent collectors from getting their hands on ancient coins.

In an important study of the material and intellectual consequences of the trade in unprovenienced coins, it is reported that in 2002 one individual shipped approximately one ton of coins (approximately 340,000) from Bulgaria, through Frankfurt bound for the US (pg. 4). The same study points out another seizure which occurred in 2006, when the Bulgarian police unit for Combating Organized Crime intercepted a smuggling shipment of approximately 14,000 coins on a train from Sofia to Vienna, with the ultimate destination being the US (pg. 2). These reports point to two facts. One, that there are well-travelled illegal shipping routes which bring archaeological materials from Bulgaria for sale in the US. The second fact is that coins constitute a substantial proportion of this trade.

THIS would appear to be why US coin dealers are so concerned that their clients bombard the CPAC with negative opinions about curbing the trade in smuggled artefacts, or at least exclude smuggled coins from the list of items scrutinised at the US border for legality of origin.

UPDATE 24.10.11: In what must be, surely, the absolute peak of the stupidity of the arguments used by the dealers' lobbyists to justify the continuance of a bootleg trade in smuggled coins in the US, we now learn that one of them thinks (though whether sincerely is difficult to ascertain) that SAFE's advocacy of the US reinforcing its commitment to honouring its existing obligations under the 1970 UNESCO Convention is in reality a conspiracy to support corruption.

But, what will SAFE's campaign (and that of the AIA) for "no questions asked" import restrictions really do for Bulgaria and the protection of its cultural patrimony, but help support the corrupt status quo?

Tompa draws on a report on the involvement of organized crime in Bulgaria in the illicit antiquities and illicit drug trade and human trafficking (among other ) to suggest that "before" US dealers are required by their government to import only licit dugup artefacts, the Bulgarians should adopt the measures set out in this report. Oddly - though he gives page references to the places in the report supporting his case for the wholesale corruption the trade involves - he fails to do that for those recommendations. Probably this is because they included regulating the market (including a mention of the importance of the 1970 convention in this) page 188-9 and two sections on regulating the market in antiquities (pp 189-197). The measures which Tompa mentions are only part of the recommendations of the report as a whole. I presume Tompa is relying on the fact that coineys are not going to actually check for themselves whether his summary is a fair one of what it says or not. His blog however is not read only by shallow coineys. The rest of us will find that, on looking at the text to which Tompa refers, he covers up the fact that near the top of the list is this (page 196):

Improve international coordination to prevent the sale of contraband antiquities from Bulgaria at auction houses in Western Europe. This would probably deter attempts to traffic local cultural goods across the Bulgarian border.

Well, equally improving international coordination to prevent the sale of contraband antiquities from Bulgaria by dealers in the even bigger market in the United States of America would be an effective deterrent of attempts to traffic local cultural goods across the Bulgarian border. So sending a request to the US government asking for an MOU - which the Bulgarians have just done - is entirely within the scope of the recommendations of this report.

Tompa concludes that:

Under the circumstances, the US could best help Bulgaria(sic) by tabling any talk of import restrictions to allow Bulgaria time to act on the CSD report's recommendations. Though any looting of Bulgarian archaeological sites is regrettable, it is best addressed in Bulgaria itself through the regulation of metal detectors and serious consideration of CSD's other suggestions before import restrictions are imposed.

In the meanwhile US dealers can carry on buying coins and other antiquities from the market which Tompa has described in detail in his blog post. Some readers with a better grasp on reality than a ranting lobbyist may feel that Bulgaria can better be helped by could-not-care-less Americans being prevented from financing the illicit international deals of Bulgarian criminal groups.

On the basis of that text Tompa presumably would advocate the same about the other problems raised in the same report on transnational organized criminal activity, that the Bulgarians should be left to deal with their own drug, human trafficking and stolen vehicle problems by themselves and the American authorities should not lift a finger to stop these criminal gangs move their commodities across US borders. After all why punish consumers ("see what Prohibition did") and American free enterprise and small businesses when there is money to be made and obviously the sole fault anyway is those corrupt ex-commies over in Europe?

Vignette: Bulk lots of dugup ancient coins from the Balkans and Danubian regions are sold like potatoes in the US.

Photo: Bulgarian "tirówka" (roadside prostitute) a few years ago in Poland. Polish police fortunately do not follow the Peter Tompa "let the Bulgarians sort out their own problems with criminal gangs and not expect us to do anything at our end" school of thought, and a drive along the more notorious routes is now less colourful for lonely long-distance drivers.

Bulgaria Attempts to Recover from Effects of £25m-a-year Antiquities Export Racket

A timely article, coincident with the US ICE announcement the other day (coincidence?): Eric Randolph, 'Land of the tomb raiders: Bulgaria is trying to claw back tens of thousands of ancient artefacts plundered from its historic sites in a £25m-a-year export racket', Independent, Tuesday 10 September 2013. 

Bulgaria’s archaeologists are putting their country on the map of world history, but first they have to stop the mafia stealing its treasures. The illegal diggers come at night with shovels and sacks, hunting through the places where they know the professionals have been. They’re looking for the tonnes of ancient artefacts that lie hidden in Bulgaria’s soil. In the past two decades, Bulgarian law enforcement agencies say this plunder has turned into a €30m-a-year industry for local gangs, putting it a close third behind drugs and prostitution. The artefacts – gold Roman coins, ancient Greek silver, Thracian military helmets – wind up with falsified documents in auction houses in Europe and North America, or increasingly with wealthy Arab and Asian collectors. [...] Police say there are 300 criminal treasure-hunting gangs in Bulgaria at present, but as many as 50,000 people are thought to be involved in illegal digging in some form. Entire villages have been known to take part in some impoverished corners of Bulgaria. Belatedly waking up to the scale of the problem, Bulgarian authorities are trying to claw back some of their lost history from around the world.

Some of the countries where there is a market for such items are doing their best to help out by preventing their citizens buying these antiquities from the smugglers who are part of these organized criminal groups (see the post below about one US lawyer who opposes such moves by his own country). Professor Bozhidar Dimitrov, director of the National Museum of History in Sofia, has spearheaded efforts to reclaim lost relics:

 “The record so far belongs to the Canadians,” said Prof Dimitrov. “A couple of years back, they returned 21,000 artefacts in one go. “The Italians had so much to return that the minister of culture became worried about the cost of the shipment, so he ordered his entire delegation to carry two extra bags of luggage when they came here. He himself showed up at my office with two huge suitcases full of priceless artefacts.”

The current problems which Bulgaria has with antiquity looting are similar in exagerrated form to those from other areas of eastern Europe, formerly part of the Soviet Bloc and its satellites (Poland got through this period with surprising ease): 

The Communist legacy is part of the reason why only a quarter of Bulgaria’s treasures are thought to have been discovered so far. Trapped behind the Iron Curtain for half a century, Bulgaria had few tourists, which meant minimal investment in archaeology and preservation.  This was followed by a decade of political confusion and economic crisis after the fall of Communism, when organised crime groups had almost completely free rein. “In the Nineties, the police could stop only about 10 per cent of the stuff leaving the country,” estimates Prof Dimitrov. “Things have improved a lot. Now they get about 70 to 80 per cent. The police show up all the time with new hordes they have seized from shops in Sofia.” As if to prove the point, the professor cuts the meeting short to receive the deputy director of the police, who says he has 2,000 artefacts to hand over, discovered in the basement of a local antiques store.

It's interesting to compare this report with the claims of US dealers and their lobbyists who claim that Bulgaria is somehow "failing to fight" the illegal trade. I wonder on what they base this information? 'Independent' Journalist Eric Randolph has more details:  

Not all are happy with the government’s efforts to control the trade in historical artefacts, however. Bulgaria’s small shopkeepers complain about restrictions on selling any pre-twentieth century objects. “The police can shut me down for having just one old coin,” says Constantine Georgiev, owner of a small bric-a-brac store in Sofia. “But this just means the trade in antiques is controlled by around 10 very rich guys with political connections. No one goes after the big mafia bosses because they can afford the bribes.” Efforts to increase sentences for illicit smugglers have started to change attitudes towards a crime that was not taken too seriously in the past.  “Many used to see it as a fun adventure,” says Prof Dimitrov. “The men dig while the women do a barbecue. You had police and even priests taking part. Indeed, a 41-year-old priest from the northern city of Vratsa was busted in 2010 after conducting over 1,000 illegal sales of ancient coins and jewellery over the internet. 

Let us just compare that with the statement by Washington lawyer and coin dealers' lobbyist Peter Tompa yesterday that (US dealers should not be penalised for handling smggled material because) "coins can be freely traded" in Bulgaria. There seems to be a discrepancy between what a dealers' lobbyist across the sea says and what a British investigative journalist based in Sofia reports. Who is the more believable source of information? The high demand from outside buyers who will purchase smuggled items no-questions-asked is a destabilising influence and encourages the development of coorruption and finances the organized groups behind it: 

But despite these efforts, experts say that widespread corruption and the high demand from overseas means Bulgaria’s treasures will continue to disappear into private collections, while authorities face a relentless challenge trying to protect over 40,000 known archaeological sites across the country. “We lobbied for an amnesty a few years back so that private owners could declare what they had, on the condition it was not sold or exported. That was one of the first laws that was overturned when GERB [a right-wing Bulgarian political party] took power in 2009,” says Prof Ovcharov. “Rich collectors are a powerful lobby.”

So are their foreign counterrparts, but that does not make them in any way right.  Or their lobbyists any the more honest and well-informed in what they say.  It will be interesting to see whether US (and other) dealers will take part in any attempts to help Bulgaria move forward in their fight with these organized groups and corruption, or whether they will see their interests as lying in harping back about the turbulent past. 


Vignette: Tsar Boris I

 

Curiouser and curiouser

If, as I suspect, the Egyptian’s intention of only announcing Ali Aboutaam’s arrest in Bulgaria on January 15, several weeks after it happened was intended to prompt the Bulgarians into making an announcement, it seems to have succeeded.

On 21st January the Bulgarian daily Dnevnik daily carried a report about the fact that the Bulgarian court has rejected the request for extradition of Ali Abou'Taam, and only now makes known to its readers the allegations made earlier in the Arthur Brand Museum Security Network posting referred to in this blog. I suspect that these allegations will lead to more questions being asked in Bulgaria in the coming days.

This was followed up by a report by the Sofia Echo [Petar Kostadinov Bulgarian prosecutor, art collector conspired to free controversial art dealer - journalist alleges Wed 21 Jan 2009]. In it we are told:

When Dnevnik asked for more details on the story, authorities said that Abou'Taam was indeed arrested in Sofia. The Sofia City Court (SCC), however, said that because Bulgaria and Egypt did not have an extradition agreement, Abou'Taam could not be sent to Egypt. The court's ruling has been appealed but was denied and Abou'Taam was released. The Interior Ministry told Dnevnik that Abou'Taam left Bulgaria for Switzerland on January 7 2009 after his name was taken off the wanted list based on the SCC ruling.

In the “society” section of another Sofia Echo article written by Nick Iliev however there is another allegation: "Dnevnik quotes an anonimous Interior Ministry source as saying that one of Bulgaria's largest collectors of antiques was involved in arranging the release of Abou'Taam."

I am a bit puzzled about the reference to a lack of extradition agreement, because ten years ago, one or more terrorists was/were indeed extradited from Bulgaria to Egypt, but that was communist Bulgaria and not EU-member Bulgaria. It is odd that the reported version of Aboutaam's lawyers' statement seems not to refer to this aspect of the trial: "Bulgaria purely and simply refused to take up the extradition request, considering in substance that the Egyptian conviction targeting my client was illegitimate."

A somewhat puzzling aspect of all this however is when Mr Aboutaam actually left Bulgaria. On the 5th January, Arthur Brand suggested it had taken place soon after the arrest. The Dnevnik was told that this had happened on the 7th January. That things might perhaps not be quite as they seem is suggested by an article by New York journalist Nadira A. Hira, who works in a building just the other side of Central Park from tha Aboutaam brothers' Phoenix Galleries. The article (Really old money Fortune magazine Published: October 23, 2008 has the subtitle “The new darlings of the art market are ancient artifacts. It's a wild, high-stakes game with a shady past. Playing it could make you rich - or get you arrested”. What is interesting in this context is that it carries an interview with the Aboutaam brothers – and apparently both of them (they are photographed in their gallery), making no reference to the fact that since the 17th of September Ali was actually under arrest in Sofia. But the journalist is perhaps not entirely silent about the story. She says

In 2004 […] Ali was sentenced in absentia by an Egyptian court to 15 years in prison for alleged involvement in a smuggling ring. (The case was eventually dropped for lack of evidence.).

Well, no, it was not “dropped” because Ali was arrested in September on the basis of that Egyptian conviction – not until a Bulgarian court (according to his lawyer) said that the conviction was “illegitimate” – but then, who did Ms Hira learn that from before October 23rd , and when? Sadly she has not yet returned my email asking that question. Perhaps the article was written long before the fatal trip from Paris to Sofia, if so it is a shame (bearing in mind the headline) that it was not updated, but perhaps Fortune is not as well-informed as it likes to think?

See also David Gill’s continuing Looting Matters coverage of this curious connundrum.

Canada: 18 000 Stolen Coins Did Not Make it onto the North American Market as Planned

.
This Friday evening at a ceremony at the Canadian Museum of Civilization the Ministry of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages returned the largest ever Canadian seizure of stolen cultural property to the Republic of Bulgaria. Going back were 21,000 coins, pieces of jewellery, and other objects that were illegally exported to Canada and seized by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Vezhdi Rashidov, Minister of Culture of the Republic of Bulgaria, was present to accept the artefacts from the Government of Canada. Madame Irina Bokova, Director General of UNESCO, came over for the event. The usual speeches were made.

"The RCMP is pleased with this successful outcome. Our team in Montréal has worked long hours to investigate, locate, and retrieve these Bulgarian artifacts," said Bob Paulson, RCMP Deputy Commissioner.

In 2007, Canada Border Services Agency officials detained two imports of cultural property sent by mail from Bulgaria. These imports were referred to Canadian Heritage for further assessment, and the RCMP was asked to investigate. As a result of its investigation, the RCMP seized about 21,000 ancient coins, pieces of jewellery, and other objects in November 2008. In January 2011, the importer formally abandoned the cultural property, clearing the way for the Court ofQuebec to rule under the Criminal Code for the return of the seized antiquities to the Republic of Bulgaria. These objects, many of which were illegally excavated, cover more than 2600 years of the history of Bulgaria. This collection includes more than 18,000 coins, as well as a number of artifacts including bronze eagles, rings, pendants, belt buckles, arrows and spearheads, and bone sewing needles. They represent a mix of Hellenistic, Roman, Macedonian, Byzantine, Bulgarian, and Ottoman cultural heritage.

The "importer" involved in this attempted smuggling was not named. But there are not too many coin dealers selling this kind of stuff in that part of Canada, are there?

Canada and Bulgaria are signatories to the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Cultural Property, under which participating states agree to assist each other in the recovery of illegally exported and stolen cultural property. In Canada, the Convention is implemented through the Cultural Property Export and Import Act [1985], administered by the Department of Canadian Heritage. The Department works closely with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the Canada Border Services Agency to enforce and administer the Act and combat the illicit traffic of cultural property.

Huge numbers of such artefacts flow through the US market annually. In fact a substantial portion of the market seems to have been initiated by the flow of masses of cheap dugup coins precisely from Bulgaria. The USA and Bulgaria are signatories to the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Cultural Property, under which participating states agree to assist each other in the recovery of illegally exported and stolen cultural property. In the United States, the Convention is implemented through the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act 1983, administered by the Department of State (unlike countries like Canada, the USA has no Ministry of American Heritage). Despite this, very few shipments of looted coins and artefacts stripped from archaeological sites by gangs of criminals have ever been stopped at the US border, or investigated, located and retrieved by US law enforcement agencies (DHS, FBI etc).

Lesser, but still substantial numbers of such artefacts flow through the UK market annually and are openly sold alongside (and sometimes masquerading as) local finds obtained by metal detector use according to Britain's all-too-lax laws. The UK and Bulgaria are signatories to the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Cultural Property, under which participating states agree to assist each other in the recovery of illegally exported and stolen cultural property. In the United Kingdom, the Convention is implemented through the Dealing in Cultural property (Offences) Act 2003, administered by the Commissioners of Customs and Excise. Despite this, very few shipments of looted coins and artefacts stripped from archaeological sites by gangs of criminals have ever been stopped at the UK border, or investigated, located and retrieved by UK law enforcement agencies.

So well done Canada for doing what neither the UK nor the USA can be bothered to do for fear of upsetting the local collectors and dealers.

Source: Government of Canada Returns Its Largest Ever Seizure of Cultural Property to the Republic of Bulgaria

Vignette: RCMP commemorative coin (8000 minted).

.

US collectors on Bulgaria's Constitutional Court Ruling on Cultural Heritage Law

US collectors, especially those with heaps of ancient coins from "unknown provenance in the Balkans" are extremely excited about the recent ruling of the Bulgarian Constitutional Court. It turns out however that they do not really understand what the whole affair is about. Perhaps knowledge of Slavic languages is slight among US ancient coin collectors, and they are reliant on what coin-supplying colleagues with contacts in Bulgaria and an axe or two to grind for the inerpretation, but the exchange of views shows once again the total superficiality of the milieu and its concerns. Let's have a look at the threads as they developed. First of all, there was no interest throughout the year in the new cultural heritage laws in one of the principle source countries for ancient artefacts for the no-questions-asked market before last Wednesday. Then this appeared:
Blake Davies (collector):

I have just heard that the Bulgarian Supreme Court (or whatever is the top court in Bulgaria) has struck down the law prohibiting private ownership of coin discoveries and has legalized, retroactively, all ownership of coin finds. Does anyone else know anything about this?

Alfredo de la Fe (dealer):

I called a Bulgarian friend and he told me that this is true. The law was struck down yesterday [...] [it] basically stated that all coins and antiquities were the property of the state and that individuals could not own them. The Supreme Court has upheld the personal property rights of Bulgarian citizens and found the law to be unconstitutional. According to my friend it is now legal to collect, own, selland purchase coins and minor antiquities in Bulgaria.

[This "Bulgarian friend" would not be another dealer would it?]
R. Kokotailo (dealer):

Obviously a move in the right direction for Bulgarians.

[Sic, I presume he means dealers and collectors, it is not in the interests of "Bulgarians" as a whole to have their cultural heritage siphoned off into scattered private collections]

B. Davies (collector):

If true, the change in the law will have a great effect on the import laws of the United States, and the ability of individuals to import coins directly from Bulgaria. Why? Because, and this is my understanding, the Stolen Property Law, which is the latest tool of enforcement being used against importers of coins allegedly originating in Bulgaria, is dependant on the fact that the coins and/or antiquities are "stolen." The presumption that the US government is making is that ALL coins that can be proved to have originated from Bulgaria at any time in the past are presumed to be the property of the Bulgarian government under Bulgarian law. If that presumpion is incorrect, or cannot be proven, then a critical element of the offense is absent.

[Phew, eh? That'd be good news for all those who spent lots of dollars on coins that collectors KNOW are stolen according to the law in the country where they entered the market. Sadly for them, cultural property stolen in Bulgaria under laws before April 2009 remains stolen property].

Dave Welsh (dealer and cultural property activist): post on Unidroit-L: "Private Ownership of Coins and other Antiquities Legalized in Bulgaria"
[followed by a completely garbled presentation of what the decision says]

Simultaneously the same D. Welsh on the Ancientartifacts forum an identically garbled post entitled:"Bulgaria Legalizes Private Ownership of Coins and other Antiquities".

This was followed by an interesting exchange:
Steve Minor (minor dealer in Bulgarian metal detected tat and other assorted items) asks:

Once cleared, can they be exported?

[ "cleared"? Cleared from what? This ruling affected two paragraphs, neither of which affected export licencing procedure, and the legislation affecting sales was unchallenged by the Constitutional court].

Remarkably though Welsh replies:

That's still not clear, but there are some reasons to expect that such may be the case.

[What "reasons"? The guy is talking out of the back of his head, I bet he has not even been on the phone to his favourite Bulgarian coin suppliers yet]. He then later notes:

This is a huge change. Perhaps not least, because application of the US stolen property statute in the case of illicitly exported Bulgarian antiquities may now be in question.

This is quite remarkable. Here we can see how the collecting milieu develops its ideas. They have not bothered to check what the ruling says, they know there has been "some" ruling and all the rest is total wishful thinking. No doubt there's an element of "Chinese whispers" going on here, they cannot read the Slavic languages the ruling was published in, Bulgarian collectors are no doubt jubilant that they have won a case against "restrictive legislation", the US dealers who handle Bulgarian artefacts are no doubt repeating what they say to the people they supply in the States and they in turn are passing it on to their clients. At each stage of the relay process something is omitted, something added. A post in English is circulating which purports to contain the gist of the ruling (the author of the post even posted the full Bulgarian text on his own forum) but is totally garbled.

Now, if you were a responsible and ethics collector of Roman coins coming from another country (such as Bulgaria), does it not behove you to actually learn what the laws of that country actually say about the origins of those items? How much more so if you actually sell these items? How many people taking part in the discussions on three forums (Unidroit-L, AncientArtifacts, Moneta-L) actually know what the Bulgarian legislation says about clandestine excavation, ownership, the duties of finders, export procedure? That includes dealers. How can any client of any dealer who shows he has not the fogiest about what the legislation says be assured that the items he purchases from them have been acquired in accordance with the law - if the dealer has not even bothered to find out what that law is?

More than 30 000 ancient artefacts seized in crime bust to be returned to Bulgaria from Spain

More than 30 000 illegally exported ancient artefacts seized in a bust of an organised crime group in Spain and Bulgaria are to be returned to Bulgaria, the Prosecutor’s Office said on April 18 (Sofia Globe 'More than 30 000 ancient artefacts seized in crime bust to be returned to Bulgaria from Spain', April 18, 2019).

The items were seized in a joint Operation Serdika by Bulgaria’s Special Prosecutor’s Office, the anti-organised crime squad, national police and the Spanish police and judicial authorities, the statement said. The operation was carried out in October 2018, with the support of Europol and Eurojust, against a cross- border trafficking network trading goods on the illegal market. The joint investigation was into 16 Bulgarian citizens, eight of whom were currently in custody in the city of Torrent in Valencia. The evidence gathered showed that the group had been in operation since January 2016, initially buying artefacts from treasure hunters and antique dealers in Bulgaria. The group subsequently organised transporting the goods to Spain. The antique items were offered for sale via Ebay using fake profiles. During the joint operation, a total of 30 600 artefacts, about 600 of them in Bulgaria, were found and seized , including Greek and Roman pottery, helmets, funeral urns, arrows, coins, and 180 000 euro in cash. The results of the expert assessments to date indicate that these are authentic cultural and historical valuables originating in Bulgaria, which according to international agreements must be returned to the country after the trial of the group members. If the artifacts include counterfeits offered to customers as originals, they will also be charged with fraud. At a co-ordination meeting of investigators held on April 11 2019 at Eurojust headquarters in The Hague, it was agreed that the trial would be in Spain, where most of the suspects were held. Evidence gathered in Bulgaria will be provided to the Spanish judicial authorities and included in the pre-trial proceedings.

'Memorandum of Understanding with the Republic of Bulgaria Signed

Nathan Elkins has the story first: ('Memorandum of Understanding with the Republic of Bulgaria Enacted, Coins Included in the Protective Measures' Numismatics and Archaeology blog, Wednesday, January 15, 2014). Peter Tompa it seems wanted to keep this one quiet. Bulgarian news agencies are reporting that the United States and the Republic of Bulgaria signed a Memorandum of Understanding to prevent the trafficking of looted and stolen cultural items ("US, Bulgaria Sign Cultural Heritage Protection Memorandum," The Sofia Globe, January 14, 2014).

The MoU with Bulgaria is momentous.[...], Bulgaria is one of the primary source countries for illicitly traded metal artifacts and ancient coins.  Smuggled finds are imported and sold in the United States by the tens of thousands; the problem has been written about and studied extensively since the 1990s.

It was signed by both parties on January 14th

The agreement authorises the US department of homeland security to prevent the import into the United States of Bulgarian cultural heritage items without a licence issued by the Bulgarian government and commits the US government to publish a list of prohibited items, which are to be seized unless the importer presents such a license.

Commercial lobby groups in the United States and abroad have fought vigorously against the inclusion of ancient coins in Memoranda of Understanding.  It is, therefore, notable that coins that primarily circulated in and are found in ancient Bulgaria are subject to protection. The list includes post-Classical coins too which is interesting. The list reportedly includes: 

d. Coinage of the First and Second Bulgarian Empires and Byzantine Empire – Struck in gold, silver, and bronze by Bulgarian and Byzantine emperors at mints within the modern state of Bulgaria. Approximate date: 4th century A.D. through A.D. 1396.

e. Ottoman coins – Struck at mints within the modern state of Bulgaria. Approximate date: A.D. 1396 through A.D. 1750.

A big thank you to all those who lent their support to this measure.

 

Three pounds of Somebody Else’s History in Pieces

Ebay seller Danny Harris “empiredanny ”of Rocky Hills Drive Cordova,TN 38018, United States invites us:

Please visit my store [...]. I have fibulas, lock tumblers, spear and arrow heads, bracelets, medical or sacrificial instruments, Provincial and Imperial Roman coins, finger rings, Celtic proto money, and various unique, one of a kind, artifacts. I try to maintain over 1000 items in my store so you will have a good selection”.

Hmm. He currently also has four bulk lots of mostly metal artefacts sold by weight, like potatoes, two on eBay “3 POUND LOT Roman / Medieval ANCIENT ARTIFACTS” 300262285534 and another similar bulk lot 300261796660 and another two here and here, all four with a starting price of 99 dollars. The photos shows typical groups of “partifacts” such as are found by metal detecting on Roman and medieval sites in Europe and adjacent areas. The seller states openly that he has “many pounds of these artifacts available […] and more of these auctions in my ebay store at the same price for 3 pounds of items”. Where do all these apparently ancient artefacts come from? The seller frankly admits to the potential purchaser:

In Bulgaria, there are artifact searchers that search with metal detectors every day that weather is permitting. They search around Vidin, Bulgaria and the surrounding area. They find all sorts of items from over 20 centuries of rich Bulgarian history. They find complete great artifacts many times. I have many of these listed in my store. They also find many pieces of artifacts that have less of a value. My supplier, who purchases these items directly from the persons that find them, has been saving these types of items for over 5 years. I have purchased over 2000 pounds of these items. I will be selling these in small lots over the next year or so on a weekly basis. These lots have been searched thru to attempt to pull out any items that are less than a couple of hundred years old. The items are mostly metal, mostly bronze with good patinas. These lots contain many ancient items including Celtic, Roman, Greek, Byzantine and Medieval periods.

The US seller’s “2000 pounds” is just over 907 kilogrammes of archaeological artefacts with a total retail price of 66000 dollars. One wonders how many collectors buying this material are at all interested in how this stuff got to the US. I wonder how many assume they are from from legal exploitation of Bulgaria’s archaeological record and by legal export (no mention is made in any of the descriptions of the material for sale of any export licence). Few serious collectors can fail to be aware that the archaeological record of Bulgaria is suffering greatly from looting of many of the country's archaeological sites. I wonder how many of Mr Harris’ customers will have stumbled across Diana Simeonova’s article from April 5, 2006 “Looting and Smuggling Ravage Bulgaria's Cultural Heritage Sites” which refers directly to the scale of the looting around Vidin itself.

Treasure-hunting has become a profession in Archar, in north-western Bulgaria, where the 1,500 inhabitants, like many others around the country, earn their living by digging up and selling precious finds from the buried Roman settlement of Ratsiaria. "Treasure-hunting has gone wild since the state went bankrupt in 1989 (with the fall of communism). Police were downsized and demotivated while looters got literature, catalogues and modern scanning equipment," Bozhidar Dimitrov, director of the National Historical Museum in Sofia, told AFP. "It is the whole village that is digging out there […] 99 percent of the mostly gypsy population is unemployed," Antoaneta Nikolaeva, an expert at the History Museum in the nearby town of Vidin, said. […] Treasure-hunting fever broke out in 2000, locals told AFP. At night bulldozers combed the area around the village as people sifted dirt for precious objects. […] Six years later the area around Archar resembles the surface of the Moon, with furtive silhouettes disappearing at the sight of approaching cars. […] Some 300 cases have been filed against looters at the Vidin regional court alone but due to slow and inadequate legislature few sentences have been given out, court data show. Out of 15,000 ancient burial mounds in Bulgaria, dated between the 4th century B.C. and the 3rd century A.D., two-thirds have already been ravished and precious archeological data lost forever, Dimitrov said. "Digging is usually followed by smuggling abroad […] Vienna, Munich, Frankfurt and auction houses in Italy and Britain are major centers for trading Bulgarian antiques”, Dimitrov said.

A similar picture is presented by other newspaper articles such as Malcolm Moore’s Tomb raiders strip Bulgaria of its treasures (Daily Telegraph 29 Aug 2007 - the Byzantine plate mentioned is discussed in the Looting matters blog). The sale of even the scrappiest of scraps left over after middlemen and dealers have been cherry-picking the bulk lots bought from the artefact hunters seems an ample pointer to the collectors' market being the main motor of the digging. The collectors who buy this stuff no-questions-asked thus providing a market for hundreds of kilograms of it are responsible for the looting as much as the looters themselves. While it is nice of the Tennessee dealer to admit to the buyer where actually the material comes from, I suspect he does so in full knowledge that this is not in the least bit foolhardy not to mention in the next breath that he has all the required paperwork to make these items licit. Firstly he is unlikely to have any problems with US authorities, after all as these dealers all say, "no US law was broken". Neither do I think he is at all worried that US collectors who buy these "pieces of the past" will lose any sleep over buying artefacts looted from the Bulgarian archaeological record by Gypsies and crooks. Nor are they over-concerned probably that the trade and smuggling of antiquities (both real and fake) out of Bulgaria is in the hands of organized crime. As Malcolm Moore reports:

many of the digs are organised by the local mafia. Volodia Velkov, the head of the police unit that combats organised crime, said tomb-raiding was now generating about £4 billion a year for the crime syndicates [...] "Since last October, when we started the new department, we have seized 16,000 artefacts," he said. "More than 30,000 people are involved in tomb-raiding. The business is very well-organized and the expeditions are financed by rich Bulgarians living in the US, Britain and Germany [...] The main [smuggling] route is through Germany, where there are huge warehouses full of our antiquities," said Mr Velkov."

The recent report "Organized Crime in Bulgaria: Markets and Trends" (pp 172-198) places antiquities smuggling alongside drug and human trafficing, vehicle theft and other similarly dubious business opportunities. One wonders about the identity of this "supplier" whom Mr Harris deals with who "purchases these items directly from the persons that find them". Are these really the people his buyers are sure they want to be putting money in the pockets of? Should not any buyer of portable antiquities be concerned that the things they buy do not come from the "huge warehouses" full of looted Bulgarian antiquities by asking the supplier to show verifiable documentation of their legal origin and export?

CPAC Comments: Lost for Words? A How-to Guide for Conservationists (and coineys)

.

[I vowed never to get involved in another US MOU campaign, it costs me too many nerves and personally, as I have said many a time, I do not believe the US are using the 1970 UNESCO Convention in any laudable way. However the fact that this next one is one I have long dreamt of, the looting of archaeological sites in Bulgaria is a something I take very personally, and has historical connections with the rise of the US "minor antiquities" trade, it seems I cannot ignore this].

In my analysis of the coiney contributions to the debate yesterday, it became clear that virtually none of them actually addressed the issue at hand and this is because they were to a large extent cutting and pasting (if only mentally) from the [I now think deliberately] misleading propaganda given out by the dealers and their lobbyists.

So after being pretty negative about the coineys, I thought a positive contribution would be to give the people on my side of the fence something to help them put together something addressing the same issues. There is of course no reason why coineys cannot use this too, to make sure that they are addressing the actual issues in hand, please feel free, let's get some proper debate going on in place of the sad apology for one propagated by the ACCG and Moneta-L and their ilk.

In the public notice, comments were specifically and exclusively requested on Section 303 (a) 1 A-D of the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2602, pursuant to which the Committee must make findings. This Act is pretty badly written as prose and its layout and section numbering are tragic, but not too many minutes work suffice to untangle it. But some people are too busy to do that, so I thought it might help somewhat if I set out the main issues it raises and some guidelines to what one might consider saying in response. I am going to use Bulgaria as the example, but please use this to write a similar response for Belize too. Show the world you care.

Let us start off by noting:

(a) there is no "conspiracy",
(b) the aim is not to stop "collecting" but to halt at the US border, as far as is possible, the import of archaeological material and ethnographic objects which have been illicitly exported from Bulgaria [including, as far as possible, those cynically 'laundered' by being sent via other countries - such as Dubai],
(c) the United States has been a state party of the 1970 UNESCO Convention for 28 years, and according to article 3 of the Convention, any such transactions were all that time (and are) illicit in terms of the Convention (a fact most coineys conveniently ignore).
(d) for the same reason (190 countries are states parties) there is no "discrimination" here. The US is simply implementing the Convention it accepted in September 1983.
(e) the Act is intended to implement the Convention for all types of cultural property covered by the term "archaeological material and ethnographic items", most of the comments to the CPAC have concerned excluding one type of archaeological material (collectable numismatic material) from its scope. There is no authority for that either in the text of the Convention or the CCPIA.

Section 303 (a) asks (in fact, the US President) five questions. Let's go through them in detail.

303 (a).1A: Is the cultural patrimony of Bulgaria in jeopardy from pillage? Sadly, the archaeological sites of almost all (if not all) countries which have a 'productive' archaeological record are subject to this threat. Tragically this applies particularly to Bulgaria where whole sites such as the Roman city of Ratiaria (look it up on this blog) have been stripped on an industrial scale to produce "minor" artefacts and coins which have been OPENLY sold on the US market through internet shops and auction sites (eBay in particular - there's quite a bit about that on this blog too) for year after year with nothing being done about it by UNESCO-Convention-state-party the United States of America. How many arrests have there been in the US for this in the past twenty years? Yes, the cultural patrimony of Bulgaria is indeed in jeopardy from pillage, and much of it done by looters affiliated with criminal groups who organize the transport of the loot to foreign markets (Shentov, O., Todorov, B. and Stoyanov, A. 2007, 'Organized Crime in Bulgaria: Markets and Trends', Sofia, Center for the Study of Democracy - this thought-provoking report figures the antiquities trade alongside trade in drugs, prostitution and human trafficking, and vehicle thefts).

Coineys: here you have to answer "no, the archaeological heritage of Bulgaria is not in peril because of looting", but you are on your own justifying that in the face of all the evidence, and what the Bulgarian authorities are now saying in submitting this request. Also it seems to me you would have to come up with some pretty hard evidence to trump the conclusions of the Bulgarian archaeological authorities monitoring these sites lying behind this request.

303 (a).1B: Has Bulgaria taken measures consistent with the Convention to protect it?

It should be noted that the CCPIA refers ONLY to measures consistent with the context of the Convention which it implements. The Convention has a number of articles devoted to what states parties should do to protect the cultural patrimony of its territory. Bulgaria complies with the following: Art. 2, 1-2; Art 3, Art. 4, Art 5 (which the US has not); Art. 6 (which the US has not); Art 8; Art. 9 (it has just done so, please also note the obligations of the US already now invoked at the end of that article!); Art 10 (a) and (b); 14 (despite the typical economic difficulties common to most states in that regard, and we know the US also has its own problems there with regard the preservation of the archaeological heritage from looting)
[Articles 7, 11, 12, 13, 15 do not apply to this question, articles 16 onwards to the state party's relations to UNESCO - equally irrelevant here]Coineys: here you have to answer "no, Bulgaria taken measures consistent with the Convention to protect its archaeological", and give your reasons for saying so. Please though distinguish between intent and effect. The Bulgarians have for decades been faced with political difficulties and financial restraints, and criminal gangs with bulldozers and a lot of determination to profit from a lucrative market. Should their cultural heritage be penalised (stolen by outsiders) because of it?

303 (a).1C (i): Would the application of the import restrictions proposed be of substantial benefit in deterring a serious situation of pillage?
The ACCG claims that there are 50000 collectors of dugup coins in the US. ACCG officer, coin dealer Dave Welsh asserts confidently that it is "credibly estimated that roughly half of all ancient coin collectors in the world reside and half of the world's numismatic trade is carried on" in the United States. If true, that obviously means that if illicit exports can be prevented from getting to this half of the market, this would cut down the profits that ensue from such an activity. Most of the other countries of the other half of the market are already parties of the Convention and the sale of illicitly-exported archaeological artefacts is already illegal there (for example Britain with its 2003 Dealing in Cultural property (Offences) Act). Obviously vigorously prosecuting these policies in each of these state parties (Convention Art 3 and 13a-b) will substantially reduce the possibilities of smuggled goods finding a market.

Coineys: here you have to answer "no, the application of the import restrictions proposed will not deter a serious situation of pillage", and then trot out the old argument that it has never been proven that no-questions-asked collecting actually has any relationship to looting. I doubt whether the CPAC will accept that, but you can try.

[303 (a).1C (i) additional point: "if applied in concert with other nations having a significant import trade in such material" other nations already have legislation rendering trafficking in illegally and illicitly exported items of this nature illegal. While it is true that with no-questions-asked one can buy such material in countries such as the UK and Germany, it is not, in fact, legal to do so (see here, point 2 - the lawyer has not yet provided the list of countries). It is like driving faster than the speed limit, staying parked longer than the time limit, or jaywalking, you can do it, and generally nothing happens - unless you are caught doing it.]

303 (a).1C (ii): Are there available (to Bulgaria or the USA) other measures less drastic that would achieve the same aim?

Well, what is proposed is that US customs look at the paperwork concerning export of certain types of cultural property. That is hardly "drastic", it's what customs officers are for - to check that what is coming into a country complies with the law. In this case, articles 3 and 13a of the 1970 Convention should be being applied by the customs services and border guards of the US as a state party of the Convention since September 1983 in the case of cultural property from all other countries party to the Convention. Is there anything less "drastic" than customs officers taking more care to do what customs officers should be doing anyway? Once again, it is worth stressing, in terms of the CCPIA, articles with kosher paperwork pass through without a hitch and dealers and other importers should be encouraged (Art 6c, 7b, 10a and 13a) to strive for kosher paperwork.

Coineys have in the past suggested that a "less drastic" measure would be to have the source nations set up something which they characterize as "like the UK's Portable Antiquities Scheme and Treasure Act" which would allow lots of artefacts to enter the market licitly - in other words simply redefining what is "pillaging/ looting". Apart from the fact it is not their place to imperialistically tell other sovereign nations what they "should" do to suit US collectors, this is irrelevant. The setting up of such schemes and attendant legislation are not within the scope of the measures covered by a Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Cultural Property. What we are talking about here is export controls. The home of the PAS and Treasure Act, the UK, has quite stringent export controls on all dug-up archaeological material. A collector buying fresh dugup coins from Great Britain which have been exported without an export licence is committing an act as illicit as if they came from Greece or Bulgaria(and those coins too should have been stopped at the US border). The PAS and Treasure Act do not create an "export free-for-all", and certainly do nothing to protect the sites of England and Wales from looting by artefact hunters.

303 (a).1D: Would the application of these measure be consistent with the general interest of the international community in the interchange of cultural property among nations for scientific, cultural, and educational purposes?Obviously, yes. The large-scale importing of stolen and illegally exported cultural property by one country from another - while no doubt profitable for individuals - is not in the general interest of the international community. This, surely, is particularly the case when it seems it encourages or facilitates international criminal activities. Stopping the traffic in illegally exported cultural property would not have any negative impact on the "general interest of the international community in the interchange of cultural property among nations for scientific, cultural, and educational purposes" since this can surely be satisfied better through mutual licit and legal interchange of such items through the legal art market, museum loans, travelling exhibitions and other means. we should bear in mind that the Bulgarians themselves are part of the international community.
Coineys would have to show that curbing the large-scale importing of stolen and illegally exported cultural property by one country from another is not in the general interest of the international community, and that this would have a wholly negative impact on the "general interest of the international community in the interchange of cultural property among nations for scientific, cultural, and educational purposes". You are on your own there.

So that is five relatively simple questions that the CPAC is currently asking for some public comment on. The answers seem relatively straightforward. Given the scale of the damage already inflicted on the accessible parts of the Bulgarian archaeological heritage through the no-questions-asked buying of the ancient coins dug up by the bucketful from Bulgarian sites, I think the CPAC owe it to the international community to recommend the President apply import restrictions on archaeological artefacts (and let us not forget the ethnographic material - where stolen icons must probably figure highly on the list of priorities) as soon as practically possible. Let it also roundly condemn those that want to continue the disgusting bulk trade in freshly dugup archaeological material like this no-questions-asked.
.
Vignette: How to...

One Lot of Smuggled Dug-up Ancient Coins from Bulgaria off the US Market, but what of the Importer?

ICE press release, 'Federal authorities return ancient coins to Bulgaria May 21, 2013.

In September 2011, HSI special agents learned of a shipment of ancient coins from Bulgaria destined for the United States. HSI New York, in close coordination with CBP’s Customs Air Cargo Examination Facility, examined and seized the coins. An investigation of the coins revealed the shipment contained a false country of origin, a false description of the commodity and were undervalued. 

The 546 unlawfully taken coins have now been returned to Bulgaria  at the ceremony, James T. Hayes Jr., special agent in charge of HSI New York, said "Today our two countries send a message to those who mistakenly perceive cultural theft as a low-risk, high-return business." He did not explain what the risk was, and why it was "higher" just because a few dozen were seized two years ago. Nevertheless they say:

The return of the coins to Bulgaria is a result of the active cooperation between the General Directorate for Combating Organized Crime within the Bulgarian Ministry of Interior, the Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Bulgaria and the expertise of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security – both HSI and CBP – in its shared efforts to prevent, solve and document transnational cultural heritage crimes. HSI is continuing to look for connections to organized crime related to stolen illicit property out of Bulgaria. 

Absolutely nothing is said (as usual) of either the importer or exporter, were they identified? Who were they? Were they members of any professional bodies (IAPN, PNG, ACCG)?  Did the importer operate openly from a shop, through eBay or V-coins? How many more consignments of Bulgarian coins had this importer imported before this one was seized? Has he or she imported any more since? Is he or she continuing to import and offer for sale on the US no-questions-asked market more Bulgarian coins? Or is the importer awaiting trial?

Members of the public who have information about suspected stolen cultural property are urged to call the toll-free HSI tip line at 1-866-DHS-2-ICE or to complete its online tip form.

Meanwhile the ACCG seized coin forfeit case is going forward, once again I ask (maybe we will get an answer) was the importer in this recent case an ACCG member, or a donor to the ACCG benefit auctions? If the latter, what coins of his passed through ACCG hands?

See also: "US Returns to Bulgaria 546 Antique Coins", Novinite Crime, May 22, 2013. (with stock photo).

AIA Leader Found "thinking" Coineyly

.
Wayne Sayles gives: "Kudos to a thinking AIA leader". He represents a CPAC comment from an AIA "leader" from Washington DC, a "blinding flash of light". Why? because he'd cut and pasted some of Peter Tompa's coiney nonsenses into this comment. According to Sayles this was

one AIA member who spoke clearly with an enlightened understanding of the situation on the ground and an obvious concern for truth. This gentleman, Gerard Casale, is a current member of the Board of Directors of the Washington DC Society (George Washington University) of the Archaeological Institute of America.

Because it contains so many Tompaisms, Sayles calls Dr Casale's account:

a very nice summary of the points that the ACCG and Numismatic Trade have made regarding not only coins from Bulgaria but from virtually all source countries that produced coins in antiquity.

It is indeed a very typical coiney text. I am unaware of the field Dr Casale specialises in, Google scholar is no help. I would not mind betting he collects coins.

Mr. Casale considers that since "coins from mints in what is now Bulgaria are both common and usually very inexpensive" this does not mean that they are looted on a massive scale. Even though there are already "tens or hundreds of thousands of these coins existing in collections around the world", he sees no reason to stop fresh imports of illegally exported (for that is what the 1970 UNESCO Convention and the CCPIA are about) into the US. The numbers of coins there already are "not enough' for him.

Furthermore, Casale adds they: "have never have been through an auction or other transaction where precise provenance has been recorded". Whoops, slight deviation from the Tompa prepared text. But Mr Casale WHERE in the CCPIA is any mention whatsoever mentioned of "provenance"? Where is an importer required to document "provenance"?

The hapless AIA "leader" goes on "Nor is it vital to the interests of scholarship inside Bulgaria that such provenance be demanded now". Eh? Who is demanding "provenance" for the "benefit of Bulgarian scholarship"? Has Mr Casale ANY idea what we are discussing here? This is an AIA "leader"?

More Tompaism still:

Regulations at 26 USC Section 2601 (2). provided that for an artifact to be restricted under the CPIA, it must be of both archaeological interest and cultural significance. These coins exist in many multiples, already well represented in Bulgarian state collections and are therefore not of cultural significance within the meaning of the rule.

If the AIA "leader" would read the Act (and let's give the proper reference, "Section 2601(32)(C)(1)(I)" with a little bit of understanding, he'd see it is talking about something else. Excavations produce many types of material which are of "archaeological interest", such as snail shells, pollen, charcoal samples and pig bone fragments. These are very interesting for an archaeologist, helping to reconstruct environment, diet etc. They are however excluded from the CCPIA by the above-mentioned Section 2601(32)(C)(1)(I) because they are not what would be termed "material culture". That's what that section means. Mr Casale can import as many Roman pig and horse bone fragments and charcoal samples as he likes bought on the black market and derived from looted Bulgarian, Greek, Italian and Cypriot sites for his studies. They are not covered by the CCPIA. That is what Section 2601(32)(C)(1)(I) does, likethe Art. 1 of the 1970 Convention, so badly misrepresented in US collecting circles ("the Article one lie").

Coins are indeed of "cultural significance", as it is one of the staples of the coiney argument that by their study one can learn so much about ancient cultures (this is the core of the coiney's "cultural property internationalism" arguments - that the study of other cultures is being prevented by "retentionism"). As archaeological evidence they too carry much cultural information - look at the mapping of celtic coins in the UK, the mapping of coins beyond the Roman frontiers in Scotland (or within them in Wales), or in eastern European barbaricum, the flow of Islamic silver and Merovingian gold in the Early Medieval period. It beats me how any INFORMED archaeologist could say that coins are not material culture, are not of cultural significance. That their removal from the archaeological record has no consequences for our understanding of the past and its cultures. I wonder what Mr Casale's field is, lithics?

The Tompaisms continue: Since ancient coins circulated widely beyond the borders of modern Bulgaria, even in ancient times, one cannot assume that all coins of Bulgarian types, “were first discovered in” Bulgaria, as required by the CPIA. (26 USC Section 2601 (2) (c).)
Well, again, let us give the whole phrase: "was first discovered within, and is subject to export control by, the State Party". So, I assume that Dr Casale accepts (he does not say) that items dug up and illegally removed from Bulgaria (ie shipped directly to the US from a culture-criminal in Bulgaria) should be stopped by US customs under the CCPIA, yes or no? Certainly if he says "no" then he would be in clear opposition to AIA policy over the illicit antiquity trade.

What about antiquity 'laundering'? How does AIA "leader" Dr Casale and his fellow supporters of a no-questions-asked approach propose dealing with that? What Dr Casale is saying is if a Bulgarian looter can dig up some stuff and put it in a car boot and drive across to - say - Thessalonika, it should be perfectly legal and proper to import it into the US on the grounds that it "was not actually shipped from Bulgaria"? Even if the objects quite obviously came from Bulfgaria (like a tombstone with an inscription identifying the burial site?). What about artefacts which are found exclusively, almost exclusively, most frequently on sites with the borders of modern Bulgarian territory? (Like some of the coin [and 'primitive-money'] issues of the Greek colonies there which were for internal use, like some of the provincial issues of the Roman period). Should US authorities simply shrug their shoulders to the 'laundering' of antiquities through their illicit transfer on their way to the US markets? We've seen the use of Free Ports in this sort of antiquities laundering before, we've heard that some dealers may have been using a middleman in Dubai to cover the origins of material allegedly looted from Egypt (and one of those dealers was expelled from the ACCG before his case even came to court), we've heard that material looted in surrounding countries taken across the borders is laundered by being exported from Israel with an Israeli export licence. Metal detectorists claim that material being sold as "British antiquities" on eBay UK comes from other countries where metal detecting is illegal, and thus being "laundered" through the British system. Basically if Tedor Kradets the Bulgarian metal detectorist finds a hoard of solidi of Honorius in the ruins of the principia of a Danubian fortlet in Bulgaria, sticks it in a hollowed-out pumpkin and drives it in his little car to Herman Munzenwangler the notorious Munich fence who sends it to auction in New York, there is basically no way that the US barrier of bubbles which is its border control is going to spot its illegal export. If the hoard was of silver issues of a local despot of limited circulation primarily within the area of modern Bulgaria, then yes, the US border authorities should be stopping it and investigating what this freshly surfaced material is doing on its way to the US market. If it gets through the barrier of bubbles, it would be nice to think that somebody in the US would still be investigating freshly surfaced material on the open market (but they don't, do they?)

So, Dr Casale ends up by saying lamely:

"Less severe remedies must be considered before import restrictions are placed on Bulgarian coins."

Why? What about the arrowheads, encolpions, pendant crosses, finger rings, harness bosses, military fittings, earrings and all the rest of the Roman bric-a-brac metal detected on Bulgarian sites being sold at this moment [by the kilogramme some of it] by US sellers on ebay? What remedies can the US (the US) apply to deal with this? Why should the US NOT do something to resolve this scandalous discrepancy between what it says it will do (as a state party of the 1970 UNESCO Convention - see its article 3) and what it actually does?

I imagine we can all think of more severe remedies (involving questioning of dealers and collectors, detentions, arrests and seizing of computer hard discs and business records) that would certainly do more to resolve this problem. Most coin collectors seem happy to quote the report linking the trade in this material and organized crime networks, which seems sufficient reason why Homeland Security and the FBI should be looking very carefully at this trade which it seems they've virtually ignored (say it ain't so) for all these years.

It seems to me that US customs examining import documentation to check the proper export procedures have been followed is not exactly a measure that could be termed either "severe" or "drastic". Especially as all coin dealers say they are responsible and respectable businessmen who do everything they can to avoid dealing in smuggled and looted artefacts.

Sayles ends:

The statement of Mr. Casale is not only a ray of light, it is a very brave appeal for reason. I sincerely hope that it does not come back to haunt him.

Well, let us reason through it then. I invite his reply here.