Destroying artwork

estcrh · 17th May 2016, 01:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob A

Meanwhile, hold your politically incorrect antique artifacts closely, transfer them by inheritance, which is currently about the only legal course, and locate all those receipts which you kept since the 1970s.

Bob, inheritance does not give the current owner any rights as far as I can see until you do some further proving of the inherited item....there is no excape except for a few determined individuals who just happen to have the rare proof needed to be granted an exemption.

Rick · 17th May 2016, 01:43 AM

"What're you in for?"
"Inheriting a 200 year old Ivory handled sword."

estcrh · 17th May 2016, 02:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick

"What're you in for?"
"Inheriting a 200 year old Ivory handled sword."

They are all "bone" hilted swords and daggers as of now!!!

ariel · 17th May 2016, 11:33 AM

What about walrus ivory?
Rhino?

estcrh · 17th May 2016, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

What about walrus ivory?
Rhino?

Ariel, very problematic, rhino is now "horn" and walrus is bone, I have also seen several sellers lately that somehow forgot to mention the hilt material at all on items they were selling. I think if not sold soon we may eventually have almost no way of selling these items and will just have to keep them as momentos. I just went through what I owned and found several suspect items I forgot about, not sure what to do now.

Battara · 17th May 2016, 03:28 PM

As I see it, 4 things that contribute at a foundational level to this issue:

1. the problem of telling the difference between pre-ban 1976 and 1989 ivory versus recent "kill" ivory.

2. laziness of administrators not bothering to learn the difference between 100 aged ivory and recent ivory.

3. the question of fossilzed ivory

4. the problem of illegal black market ivory pumped into the US - a HUGE underground market

David · 17th May 2016, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Battara

As I see it, 4 things that contribute at a foundational level to this issue:

1. the problem of telling the difference between pre-ban 1976 and 1989 ivory versus recent "kill" ivory.

2. laziness of administrators not bothering to learn the difference between 100 aged ivory and recent ivory.

3. the question of fossilzed ivory

4. the problem of illegal black market ivory pumped into the US - a HUGE underground market

We did discuss this once before i believe, but a test has been developed for at least determining if an ivory object is pre-1947 or not though carbon-14 tests.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/environ...-ban-1-1363787
Obviously there should be no problem at all determining the legitimacy of fossilized ivory.

Bob A · 17th May 2016, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

What about walrus ivory?
Rhino?

The trend is for the various individual states to ban all forms of ivory, to keep it simple. (See link above).

Rick · 17th May 2016, 05:04 PM

Antiques incorporating ivory no longer cross the auction block in MA.

17th May 2016, 01:43 AM	#2
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,339	So? "What're you in for?" "Inheriting a 200 year old Ivory handled sword."

17th May 2016, 11:33 AM	#4
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	What about walrus ivory? Rhino?

17th May 2016, 03:28 PM	#6
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,280	As I see it, 4 things that contribute at a foundational level to this issue: 1. the problem of telling the difference between pre-ban 1976 and 1989 ivory versus recent "kill" ivory. 2. laziness of administrators not bothering to learn the difference between 100 aged ivory and recent ivory. 3. the question of fossilzed ivory 4. the problem of illegal black market ivory pumped into the US - a HUGE underground market

17th May 2016, 05:04 PM	#9
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,339	Antiques incorporating ivory no longer cross the auction block in MA.