On the Unidroit-L list November 30, 2007 Mark Lehman, President of the Board of Ancient Coins for Education publicly thanked the Ancient Coin Collectors Guild and others for support of ACE programs over the past several years. ACE has been incredibly successful in bringing life back into the teaching of classics and classical history in Elementary and Secondary education programs. In the words of Mark Lehman, ACE has been able with the help of private collectors “to place tens of thousands of genuine ancient coins in the hands of thousands of students in hundreds of schools and educational venues across the US and Canada.” The effectiveness of this hands on approach to learning about the past is attested by glowing praise from teachers across the country and by the prestigious American Classical League which has hosted several seminar sessions based on ACE programs. The ACL’s Excellence Through Classics committee is chaired by ACE director and ACCG Education and Youth Programs Task Force member Zee Ann Poerio. It will suffice to say that ACE is doing a wonderful thing and their service to education is widely recognized and appreciated by people who have nothing whatever to do with the ancient coin market.

In response to this post by Mark Lehman (same link, same day) came a blistering and obnoxious attack from alleged archaeologist Paul Barford. Mr. Barford apparently sees himself as the Voice of Archaeology (add a little reverberation here for resonance). He is well known on the Unidroit list for his rambling, tedious and repetitive polemics against private collecting. Actually, that resonance is more like an echo. Professor Joan Connelly, a member of the Cultural Property Advisory Committee, levied the same broadside against ACE in a CPAC public comment period held two years ago during hearings on the Italian request for import restrictions. Both Barford and Connelly, it appears, are put out that children are allowed to touch and learn from coins that have no archaeological provenance. In fact, Professor Connelly reportedly characterized ACE as being “…the moral equivalent of drug dealers in our schools!” Barford (listen for the echo) says “…despite the fine words, the real underlying purpose of all this is an attempt to create a wider market for ancient coins (the analogy to a drug dealer you mentioned would therefor not be so far off the mark IMO).” He further demeans the ACE program by calling it the giving of “gee-gaws” in lessons.

It is very clear that on the one hand are ordinary people with a love of the past trying to pass on some of their infectious enthusiasm in a harmless and gratifying activity. On the other hand are some not so ordinary people who seem to have a downright nasty disposition and an elitist attitude that ought to repel even those of their own species. If this is the voice of Archaeology, then the cultural heritage of the world is in serious trouble. If the archaeological community refuses to distance itself publicly from this sort of fanatical and antisocial behavior then it must accept by association the stigma of being branded universally with the same iron. Painting ACE and its programs as some sort of scourge to cultural heritage is simply ignorant of the truth and mean spirited.

Readers of this blog could hardly escape the sense of frustration that I personally have felt over what I see as intransigence in a bureau of the U.S. State Department. I’m sure that it literally pours from these lines. For years, the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) has operated under a shroud of secrecy that becomes neither the Department nor those charged with fulfilling its mission. Several prominent journalists, including Steven Vincent, Nina Teicholz and Jeremy Kahn have raised questions about the lack of transparency at ECA regarding cultural property issues.

When the U.S. Legislature authorized implementation of parts of the 1970 UNESCO Convention, a well thought out series of safeguards was built into the process that we know as CPIA (the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act). These safeguards were intended to protect and preserve the rights of a broad cross section of society — including private and public collectors. The integrity of these safeguards is dependent upon transparency in the system where decisions affecting those various elements of society are made.

Today, we find a situation where that integrity is severely compromised by the internal policies of ECA. Repeated attempts to obtain basic information about the decision making process and specific information about various requests for import restrictions have met with rejection, denial and bureaucratic stonewalling. Requests from members of Congress and the Senate have not altered the bureau’s reticence to share information. Repeated requests under the Freedom of Information Act have come to naught and appeals to these requests have been denied. An appeal to the State Department’s Inspector General was summarily brushed off by forwarding it to ECA for an answer.

The Ancient Coin Collectors Guild joined by two trade organizations, the International Association of Professional Numismatists and the Professional Numismatists Guild, has taken this issue to another level by asking that the U.S. judicial system mandate the release of information that will provide the transparency necessary to assure fair and legitimate administration of the law. (See Coin Collectors Sue U.S. State Department) Yes, coin collectors are suing the U.S. State Department. This is an unprecedented action, but it has become necessary because of unprecedented threats to ancient coin collecting. Hopefully, this suit will open the window to an atmosphere of trust and cooperation that will serve all of society’s needs and interests.