Comment on DOS-2026-0628-0001
AnonymousOpposeTrade association
Summary: The International Association of Professional Numismatists opposes the proposed extension of the Cultural Property Agreement with Nigeria if it results in new import restrictions on coins. They argue that many coins in Nigeria were foreign trade currency or late-period issues that do not meet the criteria for archaeological or ethnological objects.
Please accept this short comment re Nigeria on behalf of the International Association of Professional Numismatists.
1. There currently are no import restrictions on coins on behalf of Nigeria, and it would be inappropriate to use a renewal of the current Cultural Property Agreement (CPA) to place new import restriction on coins, particularly without any notice whatsoever that that new restrictions were being considered.
2. In any event, early coinage used in Nigeria was all foreign. These coins, Spanish, Mexican and Austrian silver dollars, were trade currency used throughout the world, including the US (for Spanish and Mexican dollars) and the Middle East and other parts of Africa (for Austrian ones). One simply cannot assume any such pieces were "first discovered" within Nigeria.
3. The first European style coinage were tokens issued by a British merchant in 1858. Such tokens cannot be considered either archaeological or ethnological objects. They post-date the 250 year threshold for archaeological objects and cannot be defined as ethnological objects because they were the products of European industrial operations.
4. After Nigeria became a British protectorate, the Royal Mint issued the first coins for Nigeria in 1907. Again, these and later issues cannot be considered either archeological or ethnological objects.
5. Though not coins, Manilla currency, which was used throughout West Africa, should also be mentioned. This currency in the form of bracelets was produced in Europe for Portuguese, Dutch, and British traders. It was used to buy slaves in the Kingdom of Benin, and was reformed by artisans into the famous "Benin Bronzes" that adored the Oba's palace. Manillas should not be treated as archaeological objects because most were held as stores of wealth above ground. Nor should they be considered ethnological objects because they were produced in Europe using what at the time were sophisticated industrial practices. The numbers produced must have been enormous because some 32 million were evidently turned into Colonial British authorities as part of a 1949 buy back program aimed to encourage the use of modern coinage.