Cuno Conundrum: Whose Law Is It, Anyway?

A while back you expressed some interest in Jim and his book and I'd be happy to set up an interview or provide any additional material you may need for the blog.

All of the [source countries'] cultural property laws in force over the past four decades have not stopped---cannot stop---this [looting and destruction of archaeological sites]. They are a failed regime.

The best way to preserve the archaeological record...is to encourage scientific excavation...[and] broaden access to their finds through the restoration of partage.

I question the premise of nationalist retentionist cultural property laws: that it is the right of sovereign nations to legislate the protection of and access to whatever they consider to be their cultural property, that which they claim to be important to their national identities and self-esteem....Antiquities are ancient artifacts of times and cultures long preceding the history of the modern nation-state. And in all but a very few cases, they have no obvious relation to that state other than the accident of geography: they happen to have been found within its modern borders.

As for Mr. [Philippe] de Montebello's job [as director of the Metropolitan Museum], Mr. Cuno said nobody had contacted him about it. And if the Met were to call?

"It would be impossible not to have a conversation because of the importance of the museum and its role in the profession," he said. (In an e-mail message later that day, he put it somewhat differently: "I have not spoken with anyone at the Met nor do I intend to.")