AIAD » Uncategorized

Theft from Benghazi Bank

Stephen — Wed, 16 Nov 2011 15:44:54 +0000

Further to our publication of the article on the Libyan situation, we now have permission to disseminate the following update.

BENGHAZI ROBBERY

STOP PRESS!

More has emerged since this article was published in Antiques Trade Gazette. There were a large number of Byzantine and Islamic coins involved. What is missing in the Islamic coins is a large number of the Almoravid Dynasty. This stands to reason because it was this dynasty that ruled Libya (AD. 1062-1147). This is not exclusive. We should all be careful when handling any Islamic coins of what is to-day Libya.

UNESCO (www.unesco.org) is issuing lists of what is missing. However this is likely of necessity not to be complete. Readers will be kept up-dated. That said much of the missing property, not just coins but jewellery and other artifacts is unlisted. So, we must be diligent in any dealings with antiquities of any period which could come from Libya. It is worth noting that of course some of the antiquities and coins of this part of the world are “clean”. But diligence is the watch word.

Richard Falkiner

Libya

Stephen — Tue, 06 Sep 2011 15:30:17 +0000

Recent developments in Libya, with the ousting of the Gadhafi regime, the installation of the temporary interim government (NTC) and the refusal of some Gadhafi supporters to relent, combine to make the situation highly volatile. The fate of Libya’s rich archaeological heritage hangs in the balance.
The sites are not all well known in the west, due to nearly half a century of diplomatic isolation. In the south of Libya, in Acacus, 12,000 years old rock paintings are found across an entire mountain range. In the east, the city of Cyrene was once given to Cleopatra by the Roman general Mark Antony. Along the coast, the splendid ruins of Leptis Magna were buried for centuries under the sand, and were said to be one of the most beautiful cities of the Roman Empire. Recent gun battles took place among the ruins, with unknown consequences.
The eventual fate of these sites is cast into doubt by the Gadhafi regime’s track record. Additionally, once the fighting has ceased, typically there may be groups of armed men in a position to take whatever they wish. Antiquities may appear an attractive proposition for looting and sale. This is understood alkready to have taken place in Benghazi, the country’s second city and the base from which the NTC launched its operations. The so-called ‘Treasure of Benghazi’ was removed from the bank vault where it was stored.
UNESCO is preparing to send in an assessment team to examine the damage to the sites as soon as it’s safe to do so, and there are plans for a large international meeting in October to explore the future of Libya’s archaeological sites.

UK Treasure Trove Act Changes

Stephen — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 10:27:47 +0000

An amendment to the legal framework in the UK concerning finds which are classed as ‘treasure’ was passed on 12th November 2009. For the purposes of the law, ‘treasure’ means an object or group of objects more than 300 years old with more than 10 per cent gold or silver. There has for a long time been a legal duty to report finds of treasure to the authorities; a coroner will then conduct an inquest to determine wther the treasure was lost (and thus the property of the crown) or hidden with a view to recovery, in which case the coroner must try to trace the owner or any surviving legal heirs (and should non be found the treasure reverts to the crown).
The new law, incorporated in the ‘Coroners and Justice Bill 2009′, makes it the legal duty of the possessor of any item which is or might be treasure to report it within 14 days of acquiring it or becoming aware that it might be treasure. Previously the onus was on the finder of any such item, but now the duty of reporting (disclosure) rests with the person in possession of the item. This will obviously have implications for dealers who hold stocks of coins and antiquities with significant gold or silver content. The act applies to England and Wales, but the Scottish position is slightly different due to the automatic duty to dislose which already exists in that country.
The only defence in law appears to be (i) to demonstrate that the item is not treasure or (ii) to establish that the item has already been reported when acquired. Ignorance of the law is not a workable legal defence!
The act does allow for a defence that the defendant may have a reasonable excuse for failing to notify; until this is tested in court, there is no means of knowing what will qualify as a reasonable excuse.
The punishment for being found guilty of not reporting extends to up to 51 weeks’ imprisonment and / or a fine of up to GBP 5000.
While reporting of finds of antiquities (whether treasure or not) is a laudable aim, it seems likely that this change in the law will potentially capture many people who find objects while gardening, walking the dog, making sandcastles on the beach and so on. The case law established here will be interesting!