Jump to content

France Returns Fossils to Morocco


Tidgy's Dad

Recommended Posts

Ammonites?  Trilobites?  Fish teeth?  Seems like a potentially profitable racket: sell common fossils to unsuspecting foreigners; seize fossils and return them to Morocco; re-sell to more unsuspecting foreigners; seize fossils; re-re-sell...

 

Of course before long no-one will buy, and all the people who dig/prep/sell will be out of a job.

 

Don

  • I found this Informative 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There seems to be an explicit focus on fossils and there are cross links in the article to other Moroccan fossil controversies. I'm not familiar at all with the case, so call be ignorant, but I feel like the archeological artifacts were the issue, and not the trilobites and teeth.

 

Not sure if this should be taken as a bad omen, or the article is just trying to capitalize on private collecting debate as it's fresh in people's minds via T-rex.

  • I found this Informative 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand what the basis was for returning these fossils, as opposed to the many thousands (millions?) of Moroccan fossils that get exported and sold in rock shops across the world. What's the difference?

  • I found this Informative 1

"In Africa, one can't help becoming caught up in the spine-chilling excitement of the hunt. Perhaps, it has something to do with a memory of a time gone by, when we were the prey, and our nights were filled with darkness..."

-Eternal Enemies: Lions And Hyenas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Paleoworld-101 said:

I don't understand what the basis was for returning these fossils, as opposed to the many thousands (millions?) of Moroccan fossils that get exported and sold in rock shops across the world. What's the difference?

A lot of context is missing in this article in regards to the incident itself leaving the reader to guess what went on at French customs 15 years ago. It may have been a lack of declaration at customs and the fossils were seized due to the lack of proof of purchase and what not. I think this was the case with that recent incident in Spain?

 

Why did they decide to return the fossils now? Who knows, perhaps a show of good faith to show support of Moroccan heritage movements while tensions are still high with private collections.

 

I wish they had pictures of the "illicitly trafficked" fossils. The way the notable specimens are described, I can't imagine it being valuable. If it was a thousand Flexicalymeme, janky looking Spino and Onchopristis teeth, and a Mosasuchus abomination, then it's less likely that the value/importance of the fossils themselves were the reason for repatriation.

  • I found this Informative 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kikokuryu said:

janky looking Spino and Onchopristis teeth, and a Mosasuchus abomination

Hey, a lot of hard work goes into making those fossils! :default_rofl:

  • I found this Informative 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some Moroccan "fossils" are more "art" than actual fossil, so maybe the cultural artifact label really applies? :D

 

Anyway it's true that much more information is needed to understand what happened here.  I suspect this might have more to do with EU politics than Moroccan law, but we will see.  The fossils were seized years ago, perhaps due to paperwork issues as Kikokuryu suggests, and have been held in storage ever since.  Maybe there was a couple of fossils of actual scientific importance in the lot, or maybe some archeological material that is covered by law, and it was easier to return the whole lot than to sort through it to pick out the important things and continue to warehouse a load of scientifically worthless fossils.

 

Don

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 16.10.2020 at 2:04 PM, FossilDAWG said:

Anyway it's true that much more information is needed to understand what happened here.  I suspect this might have more to do with EU politics than Moroccan law, but we will see. 

It has to do with UNESCO directives concerning national cultural properties, signed by most states of the world.

Unfortunately, definitions if fossils belong to "national cultural property" are 1. very different from country to country and 2. protecting acts are now sometimes taken more serious in other countries than by the administrations of the countries of origin or are a kind of overbaording even for middle-of-the-road-fossils. As fa as I know also a topic in the US concerning brasilian cretaceous fossils...

Very difficult and political sensitive story, esp. in Europe with its history of brutal colonialism in African, S-American and Asian regions.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One the articles linked to the Slate article posted by Tigy's Dad is interesting. It is:

Morocco Opens Investigation into Auction of Dinosaur Tail Fossils in Mexico by

Sana Elouazi, Morocco World news, January 19, 2018.

 

Related articles are:

 

Morocco probes dinosaur tail sold in Mexico auction AFP, Rabat Sunday 21 January 2018

 

Morocco probes dinosaur tail sold in Mexico auction, PhysOrg, January 21, 2018

 

The probe came up with some interesting findings of a "Tall Tail."

 

Tall tail: Morocco casts doubt on Mexico 'dinosaur' fragment, PhysOrg, January 22, 2018

 

Yours,

 

Paul H.

  • I found this Informative 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...