Two new position statements from the American museums community on the ethics of acquisition in relation to collections On behalf of ICOM's Ethics Committee, I draw colleagues' attention to significantly changed guidelines from within the American museums community that strengthen standards in museum practice on the ethics of acquisition. In the last two months, two important new position documents on the acquisition of archaeological material and antiquities have been released by two different bodies within the museums community in the United States. I wish in this message to emphasise key aspects of these new guidelines for museum practice concerning acquisition of antiquities to collections in the USA, and then make brief comment on their wider significance from the international perspective of ICOM's Ethics Committee. (1) New AAMD standards on acquisition and provenance The first of the new position statements emerged from the Association of Art Museum Directors (AAMD) on 4 June 2008. Issuing a document entitled "2008 Report of the AAMD Subcommittee on the Acquisition of Archaeological Materials and Ancient Art", the AAMD has highlighted that this new Report: . "Recognizes the 1970 UNESCO Convention as providing the most pertinent threshold date for the application of more rigorous standards to the acquisition of archeological material and ancient art. Widely accepted internationally, the 1970 UNESCO Convention helps create a unified set of expectations for museums, sellers, and donors." . "States that AAMD members normally should not acquire a work unless research substantiates that the work was outside its country of probable modern discovery before 1970 or was legally exported from its probable country of modern discovery after 1970." . "Provides a specific framework for members to evaluate the circumstances under which a work that does not have a complete ownership history dating to 1970 may be considered for acquisition." . "Announces a new section of the AAMD website where museums will publish images and information on acquisitions of ancient works, in order to make such information readily and publicly accessible." . "Affirms the value of licit markets for the controlled sale of ancient art and archeological materials as an effective means of preventing looting." The complete "New Report on Acquisition of Archaeological Materials and Ancient Art Issued by Association of Art Museum Directors" (AAMD, 4 June 2008) can be downloaded at the following location: http://www.aamd.org/newsroom/documents/2008ReportAndRelease.pdf (2) New AAM standards on acquisition and provenance The second of the new position statements emerged from the American Association of Museums (AAM) in a media release on 13 August 2008. Issuing a document entitled "Standards Regarding Archaeological Material and Ancient Art", the AAM has highlighted that its new statement of standards: . "provides clear ethical guidance on collecting such material so as to discourage illicit excavation of archaeological sites or monuments"; . "emphasizes proper provenance of . objects and complete transparency on the part of the acquiring institutions"; . "require[s] museums to have a publicly available collections policy setting out the institution's standards for provenance - that is, history of ownership - concerning new acquisitions of archaeological material and ancient art"; . "[urges] museums . [to] make publicly available the known ownership history of all such objects in their collections"; . "recommend[s] November 17, 1970, the date on which the UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export, and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property was signed, as the minimum date to which museums should require a documented provenance for future acquisitions". The announcement of new "Standards Regarding Archaeological Material and Ancient Art" (AAM, 13 August 2008) can be accessed, and the full document downloaded, at the following location: http://www.aam-us.org/pressreleases.cfm?mode=list <http://www.aam-us.org/pressreleases.cfm?mode=list&id=147> &id=147 I now wish to highlight an aspect common to these new releases: namely that both bodies have taken the "1970 UNESCO Convention" as the threshold date around which their guidelines for museum acquisitions and stricter provenance research in the United States are now organised as a common standard. The year in which the United States formally endorsed the UNESCO Convention was in fact later - in 1983. Therefore, in a strictly legal framework, 1983 has until now tended to be the significant threshold around which tighter US controls on provenance of objects considered for museum acquisition were focused. However the American museums community has now generally moved the threshold date back to 1970. This enables me to highlight a crucial difference between the standards required by law and the standards of conduct to which an ethical consciousness within a strong museum profession aspires: it strives for standards of public good and collective care of heritage that may exceed what is required by law alone. The formal adoption of 1970, as the agreed year after which all ethical standards on provenance research for acquisitions in the US have been raised, reflects a desire by the American museums community to lend its strength to international norms. In publishing these new guidelines, the American community is demonstrating how an ethical consciousness in the work of museums can raise common professional standards higher in the concern for heritage, exceeding the position that may be required under national law alone. On behalf of the ICOM Ethics Committee, I emphasise the increased strength provided in this new position from the United States museums community - especially through AAM - and acknowledge its support to ICOM's own work on ethical standards through museum networks internationally. Numbering about 30,000 members (therefore somewhat exceeding ICOM's own membership), AAM represents the largest museums community operating within one country. That this community has resolved to tighten its own guidelines on the ethics of acquisition, in a shared effort against illicit trafficking of cultural objects through strengthened agreement around "international norms", is of the greatest support to museum standards on behalf of heritage protection internationally. While honouring AAM and its current President Ford W. Bell, I wish to pay tribute especially to the work of ICOM colleagues in the United States whose efforts over some years have been promoting closer links in the work of our two organisations concerning ethical standards for museums. Special thanks are due to former AAM President and a former Chair of AAM-ICOM (now ICOM-US), W. Richard West. As Founding Director of the NMAI within the Smithsonian's museums, Rick West's representation of the American museums community in ICOM's significant gatherings for a good part of a decade has been immensely significant in encouraging closer contacts between the two bodies. This has also ensured the presence of a significant AAM leadership voice in many conversations through which the fundamental work of museums (and especially concerning standards of professional practice) is shaped and advanced internationally. Tribute is due also to current Chair of ICOM-US, Nina Archibal, for continuing these efforts; and to Peggy Loar some years before her when holding the same position. Peggy Loar in the 1990s first raised discussions in CIMAM (ICOM's International Committee for Museums and Collections of Modern Art) around the need for higher standards and retroactive provenance research internationally on holocaust-looted works that had come into the permanent collections of art museums since World War II. Two further colleagues I particularly thank for recent advocacy work on ethical standards that has promoted closer liaison between the US and ICOM networks are Erik Ledbetter of AAM, and Dr Regine Schulz, of the Walters Art Museum and formerly Chair of CIPEG (ICOM's International Committee for Egyptology). Finally in this short, and by no means complete, list I acknowledge Gary Edson (of Texas Tech University), who served on the Ethics Committee of ICOM when the revised ICOM Code of Ethics for Museums (2004) was accomplished under the chairmanship of Geoffrey Lewis. Regine Schulz and Richard West (himself formerly a member of ICOM's Legal Affairs Committee, and most recently a member of the AAM ethics committee that has formulated the new AAM "Standards" on acquisition) both continue to serve for a second term on the Ethics Committee of ICOM. From the international vantage-point, all of these colleagues have significantly assisted international museum efforts in heritage care. They have offered their time and expertise, and carried the presence of the American museums community into many networks where international consciousness and cooperation around ethical standards are promoted. These efforts consolidate the museums community worldwide and crucially help to disseminate its work and underlying ethical values through more than 110 countries where ICOM National Committees advance such international efforts "on the ground" on a global scale. Many thanks are finally due to AAM's ethics committee itself, from the Ethics Committee of ICOM, for the new Standards on the ethics of acquisition that have been released in the last week. Along with the new AAMD Report released in June, the two documents accomplish new benchmarks supporting international efforts in highly significant ways. Bernice L Murphy Chair, ICOM Ethics Committee <[log in to unmask]> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Change ICOM-L subscription options, unsubscribe, and search the archives at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/icom-l.html