tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6296486328660705853.post7220558408151806529..comments2024-02-13T08:10:28.552+00:00Comments on Ancient Heritage: False dichotomy: you're either with us or against usDavid Knellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13488678409144873954noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6296486328660705853.post-33102925892297514302010-06-08T12:56:10.458+00:002010-06-08T12:56:10.458+00:00My reply to the first comment is posted here:
htt...My reply to the first comment is posted here: <br />http://ancient-heritage.blogspot.com/2010/05/reply-to-peter-tompa.htmlDavid Knellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13488678409144873954noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6296486328660705853.post-67613734444451157572009-10-08T13:11:23.670+00:002009-10-08T13:11:23.670+00:00Excellent blog! There is clearly some ignorance a...Excellent blog! There is clearly some ignorance and suspicion on both "sides". Perhaps progress is hindered by an inability to articulate an appropriate goal.<br /><br />Possible Goal #1 – A common understanding between archaeologists, dealers and collectors<br /><br />Nice idea, but it's not exactly clear what I as an individual should be doing to promote this. Also, it's very easy to throw one's hands up and blame the intransigence of others for any lack of progress.<br /><br />Possible Goal #2 – A reduction in the amount of looting<br /><br />At least this makes it pretty obvious what a collector such as myself can do to help. I can keep my money in my pocket unless I have good evidence that the piece I'm looking at hasn't been recently looted. I can buy from those who are similarly careful, and try to pass on this ethos when I dispose of anything.<br /><br />I prefer Goal #2 because it directly addresses the big issue and I can do something concrete (though small) to help achieve it. Oh! I've just noticed that this is probably also my best contribution towards Goal #1!Tarquinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12720852818014132483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6296486328660705853.post-592762880403840372009-02-19T02:34:00.000+00:002009-02-19T02:34:00.000+00:00Your blog is interesting, but I think you are bein...Your blog is interesting, but I think you are being a bit naive. I can say quite forthrightly that collectors and dealers groups have attempted to reach out to the main archaeological groups to discuss the issues, but without any success or even much interest. Unfortunately, the AIA, the main archaeological group in the US, demands provenance information back to 1970. You don't have it and you are said to encourage looting. The current AIA administration is quite a bit more polite than its predecessor, but the message has not changed. The AAMD was basically bullied into accepting the 1970 date and I see no move to suggest anything otherwise for private collectors. One of the truly sad things is that archaeologists that do want to continue good relations with collectors and reach some accomodation have been intimidated from pursing the issue openly. A number of archaeologists I know refer to their bretheren as "radicals" themselves. You may not agree with some or all of the positions of groups like the ACCG, but the ACCG and coin dealers have no power to blackball collectors who disagree. "Hardline" archaeologists do. The prospect of having one's excavation license pulled by a source country based on complaints that an archaeologist is "soft on looting" by being "soft on collecting" has been enough to keep the silent majority in the archaeological community silent indeed about reaching an accomodation with collectors.Cultural Property Observerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05924359202414555962noreply@blogger.com