Cultural Heritage in Danger

Towards a Bibliography for Looted Antiquities

2010-07-22T16:42:00.000-04:00

One of the long established on-line bibliographies on looted antiquities was created by Hugh Jarvis at Buffalo ("Looting Question").

This resource is intended to be provide a comprehensive overview of what is often a controversial topic, for scholarly and classroom use. Coverage is intended to include extreme perspectives as well as more neutral or consensus-seeking views. The list is extensive, with the hope that users will be able to find a range of these items close to hand. While the main focus is on North America, materials from around the world are noted whenever possible (and certainly encouraged). Items are added as they come to my attention or are contributed by others. Annotations are mine except as noted, and are NOT intended to be incendiary. Comments and additions are most welcome!

Such a bibliography is helpful and is a useful starting point. There are bound to be some missing items. Among them various works by James Cuno, Peter Watson's Sotheby's: Inside Story and The Medici Conspiracy, or Sharon Waxman's Loot!

I have tried to note some key works on a public list ("Archaeological Ethics") through WorldCat. This list is ongoing and does not pretend to be complete - and tends to relate to books (the purpose of WorldCat). I would welcome further suggestions.

Kimberly Alderman noted Jarvis' list on her Cultural Property and Archaeology Law blog. What has surprised me is the reaction from some: "this site and its bibliography are a disgrace to academic research"; "This is a selective bibliography that leaves out opposing views".

Another bibliography ("Readings") has been posted by the Cultural Property Research Institute (CPRI). The emphasis is different though there is an unevenness. Again where is Peter Watson's Sotheby's: Inside Story and The Medici Conspiracy?

Readers are invited to add other online lists as a comment below.

SAFE congratulates David Gill and Looting Matters

2010-07-19T19:39:00.003-04:00

Thank you for sharing with us what really matters, and for using social media to broaden discussions about these important issues that affect us all. May your third anniversary be the beginning of many more to come.

Publicity Where Publicity is Due

2010-07-16T19:43:00.003-04:00

The PRNewswire has picked up on a story first aired by Fabio Isman, writing for the Art Newspaper, and now being disseminated and further investigated by David Gill on his Looting Matters blog. It concerns the serious allegation that "a number of antiquities acquired by the National Museum of Archaeology in Madrid appear to feature in the dossier of Polaroid photographs seized from dealer Giacomo Medici." The investigation has revealed that in 1999, the museum purchased 181 pieces from "Spanish financier Jose Luis Varez Fisa" for $12 million, boasting about the "great leap forward" this purchase would make to their collection. However, the work of the journalist, in conjunction with archaeological and photographic-assessment experts, have cast the original "surfacing" conditions of 22 of these artifacts into doubt, tentatively identifiable as they are within the Medici dossier, some still covered in soil or pre-restoration. As followers of this blog and Looting Matters will know, this is certainly not the first case of Medici objects surfacing again long after the legal case has finished. I doubt it will be the last. We eagerly anticipate further developments as this investigation moves forward.

Culture Beyond Oil: BP and Museum Sponsorship

2010-07-15T11:26:00.000-04:00

There is a short video on a protest in the Great Court of the British Museum over BP's sponsorship of museum exhibitions. This is in connection with the ongoing oil 'gush' in the Gulf of Mexico.

Responses to Natural (and human-made) Disasters

2010-07-10T11:47:00.008-04:00

It is no surprise that we are quick to react to the destruction of cultural heritage. With the growth of the heritage industry, the public has taken on the responsibility of cleaning up the mess: our own and that of Mother Nature.

In addition to SAFE’s public awareness campaign to highlight the destruction caused by the earthquakes in Haiti, other organizations have participated with assessment and initiatives focused on cultural recovery such as the U.S. Committee of the Blue Shield led by Corine Wegener. Recently, IMLS released a statement that paintings in Haiti are restorable, according to conservators participating in the Haitian Cultural Recovery Project.

Our reaction to the oil spill in the Gulf is still in the organizational stages or so it seems. There has been a call to the archaeological community by the Department of Interior for help to clean up and protect sites. The National Park Service (NPS) deployed personnel “to prepare for and respond to oil impacts along the Gulf Coast." The U.S. National Committee of the International Council on Monuments and Sites (US/ICOMOS) created an interactive map highlighting heritage sites at risk.

Other public statements focus on the protection of prehistoric sites like the shell middens along the Mississippi Gulf Coast. Finally, the Associated Press started asking questions about the possible damage to shipwrecks and "whether BP will be held responsible for ruining underwater sites."

While response to protect human, plant, and animal life comes first, I hope action to preserve cultural sites and to mitigate damage will immediately follow.

Image: National Park Service, produced by Cultural Resources GIS, 11 June 2010.

Size does not matter

2010-07-05T10:02:00.012-04:00

When it comes to looting and smuggling antiquities, size does not appear to matter. Not anymore, anyway.

Special Agent James McAndrew of the Department of Homeland Security mentioned in a recent presentation that the days are gone when only small portable artifacts are smuggled. Indeed, the case of the 27-ton Tang sarcophagus stolen from the tomb of Tang Empress Wu Huifei (AD 699-737) has taken this alarming trend to a new extreme.

How did a 27-ton stone coffin measuring 4 meters long, 2 meters wide and 2 meters high leave China unnoticed? It is huge (as the photo indicates) in size and weight, in addition to its obvious historical significance. How did it enter the US? Container ship?

Something this big had to have been hacked into many pieces before the looters and the smugglers could haul it, even with heavy machinery. Just think: if the coffin were cut up into 20 pieces, each would still weigh over a ton. How many people did it take? Who would display a huge stone coffin in a private home or was it going to be resold to some museum?

So, finally, what is all worth it? For the buyer in Virginia who reportedly paid $1 million for the piece, any price is too high when his purchase had to be returned. Given China's penalties (considered Draconian by some) the price the looter(s) pay could be life. For us all, the potential damage to the piece itself, the rest of the tomb and the history it contains can never be repaid. Even if the sarcophagus was not 27-ton heavy.

Looting at any size does not pay.

Iraq's Antiquities Police: The Bitter Fruit of US Indifference to the Looting of Iraq's Archaeological Heritage

2010-07-04T13:02:00.002-04:00

I have been putting off posting about this front-page New York Times story. In part I've delayed because I needed to check some of its facts with colleagues; in part because I and others have been pushing the story to contacts in the US government asking them to do something (and Iraqi colleagues have been mobilizing to do the same for their government); in part because I try to make it a principle to not write when too angry to think straight....

(post continues at The Punching Bag)

Giving "victims" of the antiquities trade a voice: science in the public's interest.

2010-07-04T05:19:00.012-04:00

It's been some time since I've written for SAFE, but an article discovered while searching the bioarchaeological literature for my own research struck me as so incredible, I felt I just had to share it here. This link will lead you to a recent Journal of Forensic Sciences article by Seidemann, Stojanowski and Rich, detailing how they put cutting edge bioarchaeological and forensic human identification techniques to use in an almost unbelievable case...the identification of a human skull almost sold on eBay!! Yes, you read that right! As the article explains, the investigation and research began when the Louisiana Division of Archaeology was informed by the National Park Service that someone was attempting to sell a probable Native American skull on eBay, from an undisclosed address in Lake Charles, Louisiana. The seller's photos made it clear that the skull had been unearthed at some point in the past, as soil was still adhering to or filling most major orifices. In this case, the seller was fortunately cooperative, both voluntarily turning over several artifacts believed to be associated with the skull, and claiming what was deemed to be "real ignorance" of prohibitions against selling human remains; thus direct charges were dropped.

The seller suggested that the skull might have come from within the grounds of the "Pohler Estate," formerly owned by Roy Pohler, a "well known antiquities collector in the early to middle 20th century." Items from his collection are still in circulation, for example Item DIOT5 here. His globe-spanning collection was mostly collected before relevant national and international conventions were put into place, and was almost entirely without specific provenance. Therefore, investigators rightfully concluded that there was no guarantee that the skull derived from within the boarders of the current state of Louisiana, and thus bioarchaeological, soil, palynological (pollen) and mineralogical analyses were deemed necessary to identify the likely ancestral affinity of the skull and pin-point its geographic origin with as much certainty as possible.

Work of this nature would be crucial to make certain that the remains were indeed Native American, and to determine which contemporary tribe (or the descendants of a tribe forcibly relocated in recent history) the skull should be repatriated to under NAGPRA (Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act). As the "Louisiana Unmarked Human Burial Sites Preservation Act" goes even further than NAGPRA in attaching severe civil and criminal penalties for the disturbance, trade or sale of human remains, regardless of ancestry, determining if the individual represented by the skull could have derived from a site or population currently within the borders of Louisiana took on even more significance.

Without going into too much detail, I can summarize the bioarchaeological analysis discussed in the article thusly: a general success! I emphasize the word general because, although the skull is one of the most telling regions of the human skeleton when it comes to determining age, sex, and population affinity, without as much of the rest of the skeleton as possible, conclusions can only be general. Unfortunately, no infracranial bones (bones below the skull) were recovered in association. General age and sex was easy enough to determine due to the skull's good condition, but the article stresses that the sparse and wide-spread nature of large collections of North American Native American remains that have been thoroughly analysed and published, in terms of the most common measurements of the skull, face, and teeth that can be used to place a skeleton of unknown ancestry into its statistically most probable population(s), are few and far between.

In this era of more carefully controlled collaborative excavations of Native American prehistoric sites (a good thing!) and, on the other hand, occasionally "premature" repatriation of skeletal collections before all possible information is obtained (a bad thing, in my opinion), the amount of published data useful to forensic anthropologists and antiquities trade investigators in cases like this is unlikely to skyrocket. Further confounding the assigning of this skull to a particular historic or contemporary population, the article notes, was the unknown radiocarbon (C14) age of the remains and the presence of deliberate cranial deformation, a practice common to many Native groups throughout the Americas, but one which limits the number of useful measurements. Nevertheless, the skull was identified as Native American (likely pre-contact).

What really intrigued me, however, was how the soil and pollen analyses came into play. First of all, soil sampled from the skull reacted "violently" when mixed with water and hydrofluoric acid, "typical of soils from the Atlantic Coastal Plain that contain a great deal of fine-grained mineral matter, including the clay mineral caolinite." Although no pollen was recovered, many charcoal fragments and fungal spores from several general Southeast US species were. Together with a very high presence of quartz (characteristic of loess soil), the small size of the charcoal particles, and the important lack of flowering plant pollen suggest that the individual "was interred in sediments that had accumulated in a xeric, fire-prone terrestrial environment that supported little in the way of higher plant life." Such a combination of factors, on the North American continent, pointed to the Middle Mississippi Valley.

The authors conclude that although scientific attempts at "fleshing out" this individuals' history, given only a skull, produced only general results, the science brought to bare was at the very least able to secure repatriation within Louisiana and, as important, the prompt action taken and the cooperation of the seller took one more "set" of human remains off the market. As the authors note, and as I've blogged about before here and on my own blog, the sale of human remains and/or directly associated artifacts on eBay continues despite eBay's own "Prohibited and Restricted Items Policy on Human Remains," which specifically targets Native American remains and associated grave goods. A 2004 article the authors cite adds to this concern by noting the ease with which unscrupulous eBay dealers can label prehistoric remains as modern medical specimens, the high prices remains can fetch, and the deliberately targeted looting this encourages. Lest we in the antiquities trade monitoring community think that only artifacts 'surface' here, the articles discussed above dismantle that illusion. Hopefully after the rather public expore of these loopholes by the cases discussed above, even more due diligance will continue and an actual ban on the sale of all human remains will be enforced. Thankfully in the Louisiana case above, concerned citizens and scientists intervened in time.

(Image courtesy of dl.keg.org).

Charges of looting used to punish environmental activist?

2010-06-25T09:23:00.007-04:00

In an interesting report from AP:

A Tibetan environmentalist once praised as a model philanthropist was sentenced to 15 years in prison Thursday on charges of grave robbing and dealing in looted antiquities, in a case supporters said was aimed at punishing his activism.

Would or could an environmentalist rob tombs and engage in the black market trade of antiquities? The relationship between natural and cultural heritage has been discussed on this blog and certainly elsewhere. As Paul Barford points out, Archaeological Looting is an Environmental Issue.

We obviously do not know all the facts of the case in question and we may never find out, but anyone who acts to protect the environment should understand that cultural heritage is everyone's birthright, as are clean air and fresh water.

Gulf Coast cultural resources protection

2010-06-23T17:36:00.015-04:00

In response to the Gulf Coast Oil Spill Disaster, the National Parks Service's Cultural Resources Geographic Information System Facility (CRGIS) provides an interactive map showing at-risk sites within the affected area as well as other pertinent information. According to their web site, "certain sensitive sites, such as archeological sites, are not displayed."

In addition, among the many laws that come into play in this situation there are two key federal statutes that cover cultural heritage and archaeological resources:

1. The Park System Resource Protection Act.
The National Park Service has responsibility for on-land and undersea cultural heritage sites that are on federal park land, pursuant to the Public Law 101-337, Park System Resource Protection Act (Title 16 U.S.C.19jj). This is the principal statute that requires the Secretary of the Interior to assess and monitor injuries to park system resources. The Act specifically allows the Secretary of the Interior to recover response costs and damages from the responsible party causing the destruction, loss of or injury to any cultural heritage or archaeological or historic site that is on National Park Service land or within the boundary of a NPS undersea resource. This Act provides that any monies recovered by the NPS may be used to reimburse the costs of response and damage assessment and to restore, replace or acquire the equivalent of the injured resources.

2. NMSA
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has responsibility for undersea resources at National Marine Sanctuaries (sometimes that jurisdiction may overlap with NPS, most of the time there is no overlap) pursuant to the National Marine Sanctuaries Act (Title 16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq). This is the principal statute governing the designation and management of protected marine areas of special significance (including historical, cultural, archaeological and scientific resources). The statute requires NOAA to designate National Marine Sanctuaries in accordance with specific guidelines and to develop and review management plans for these sites. It provides for the continuation of existing leases, licenses and other established rights in sanctuary areas, and for the development of research and education programs. The statute also prohibits destruction, injury or loss of sanctuary resources, and establishes liability for response costs and natural resource damages for injury to these resources. The NMSA was formerly referred to as Title III of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972.

Federal jurisdiction extends from the shoreline to the edge of the U.S.EEZ (Exclusive Economic Zone). According to usgs.gov "The EEZ extends up to 200 nautical miles (370 km) from the U.S. coastline. About 15 percent of this area lies on the geologic continental shelf and is shallower than 200 meters. Within its EEZ, the U.S. has sovereign rights over all living and non-living resources."

The laws are in place. What's next?

Buyers Beware

2010-06-19T09:01:00.012-04:00

Related to the New York Times story commented here, it's disheartening to see that nothing has changed since Roger Atwood's 2007 critique regarding U.S. media coverage of antiquities issues.

"Trophy Hunters With Their Eyes on Interiors" is a puff piece that glorifies adventurous exploits in search of the "ultimate" authentic-looking old objects. The story advertises and promotes architects, designers and contractors, and justifies their if-you-have-to-ask-you-can't-afford-them fees. Instead, the Times could have told its readers and trophy hunters alike a cautionary tale, which would be much more useful to everyone.

First, importing certain antiquities from countries which have signed bilateral agreements to restrict importation of antiquities is against the law. Not only that, buyers may have to return their coveted purchases to their countries of origin.

At the very least, the article could have mentioned the numerous international and local governmental and non-governmental efforts underway in these ready-for-the-taking-third-world-countries to PRESERVE their remnants of the past.

Finally, genuine history cannot be bought. It is lived. Rich people who seek rich-looking items might do better to live rich lives. Their cobblestones WILL in time acquire "just the right" moss. Theirs too will have the smoothness, color and patina that come from aging. In time, they too could have rich history to leave behind.

NYTimes Home & Garden FAIL

2010-06-17T12:20:00.011-04:00

I realize that Home & Garden isn't the section of The New York Times racking up the most Pulitzers, but that's no excuse for what was published there. In a piece entitled "Trophy Hunters With Their Eyes on Interiors," the reader is acquainted with a handful of daring "ultra-high-end contractors" who are tasked by their demanding clients to find all manner of old, ancient, antique, distressed and generally "very aged"-looking building materials all over the globe, preferably in third-world, war-torn countries. These include architectural elements, wood and stone reliefs, sculpture in the round and raw materials, such as stone and wood. Why? These (in at least one case) self described "modern-day Indiana Jones" contractors report it is mostly because you can "'get the merchandise for less money.'"

Heritage and natural resource protection issues are engaged in a staggeringly vague and naive way. When one of the profiled contractors is asked, "isn't he concerned that, in buying up old doors and walls from 100-year-old homes, he's taking a country's irreplaceable heritage?" his response is:

Tastes change, and people want what they see as new and better....Why should I dictate where and how people live, just because to me it seems charming or quaint? I'm not the one living there. I know what's beautiful to me and I want to make good use of it.

Ugh.

To be fair, the author, Joyce Wadler, shares enough anecdotal information to lead the reader to believe that natural resources, namely wood, can be tricky to get out of sources countries without the right papers. And, she offers, at the rock-bottom of the piece, a link to the Forest Stewardship Council. She is utterly silent about cultural resources. Would it have killed Ms. Wadler to spend a very little bit of time researching the law on this? She clearly has some sense that what is happening here isn't quite kosher.

By not doing this, by not setting the practice of looting the cultural resources of vulnerable swaths of the third world into some sort of legal and moral context she has delivered a story with a destructive message: The rich desire these things and because of that lots of other people should too. These "ultra-high-end contractors" and their extractive work is heroic and glamorous. This swells the trade which leads to the increasing destruction of cultural resources. And, no messy moral problems because the locals are happy to sell it to us - cheap!

The New York Times, the "paper of record," should know better and this is shameful.

Image: The New York Times

Oil in the Wake

2010-06-13T13:24:00.008-04:00

Since April 20, 2010 the world has been reeling from the shock of a massive disaster. Not a natural one, but one inflicted upon us by our own greed and desire to satisfy our way of life and need for petroleum. This disastrous oil spill was caused by British Petroleum’s Deepwater Horizon drilling rig that sank after exploding.

President Obama has been vocal about his interest in addressing efforts to clean up the mess. Additionally, the press has splashed the controversy across the headlines. We at SAFE wonder what steps have been taken to protect the archaeological heritage of the Gulf region?

The National Park Service of the U.S. Department of the Interior is responsible for reacting to this threat to our cultural resources. According to a fact sheet, issued on their website, eight National Parks are threatened by the oil spill. While the oil slick grows daily according to updated maps, many of the parks remain open to the public even though health concerns abound. The NPS response is to undertake an assessment of the potential threat. Is there more we can do to protect our shorelines and underwater cultural heritage? Do you have the answer?

A recent New York Times article focuses on the consequences the spill has on the tourist economy of Florida along with their campaign to lure scuba divers to visit the state. Nothing is mentioned about the possible damage to or initiatives for the protection of shipwrecks. Maps are tracking oil sightings and the effects on the wildlife, but there is no mention of possible damage to cultural sites.

This is the beginning of a SAFE initiative to research the efforts for the protection and preservation of the cultural heritage sites in the Gulf. We hope to promote awareness about the issue and encourage your support.

Soon to come are a Flickr campaign to post photos of sites, responses from archaeologists and cultural resource specialists, and updates on measures undertaken.

Let’s protect these sites before they are destroyed in the wake of this disaster.

Photograph by Sean Gardner, Reuters

SAFE congratulates Bob Wittman on "Priceless"

2010-06-04T11:51:00.011-04:00

Robert K. Wittman, who recently retired as Senior Investigator and Founder of FBI's Art Crime Team, has given us decades of service recovering stolen art and antiquities. He has now also told his story.

The new book takes the reader away from Hollywood fantasies and academic theories to the harsh, gritty reality of art crime. Described by Wittman as "a memoir, not an autobiography or exposé", Priceless: How I Went Undercover to Rescue the World's Stolen Treasures highlights the fact that the theft of cultural property is anything but a victimless crime. And Wittman's book recounts them all: from individuals, institutions, states, governments, countries, to history, memory and identity.

Deftly written by Wittman with John Shiffman, the book offers case studies of successful recoveries. And like every human story, it also includes disappointments and regrets. The trials and tribulations of undercover work are portrayed in a matter-of-fact style that is all the more remarkable given the accolades Wittman has received. The Wall Street Journal called him “a living legend.” The London Times dubbed him “the most famous art detective in the world.” But don't let the self-effacing style fool you. Priceless is full of valuable information rarely known outside the field, and insights only someone who has "been there and done that" could offer.

No wonder AP calls Priceless "absolutely, hands down, the best book ever written on art crime."

Christie's: "we plan to proceed with the sale of these lots"

2010-06-03T16:35:00.000-04:00

Dalya Alberge has written about the forthcoming antiquities sale at Christie's New York for the Wall Street Journal (June 3, 2010). She quotes Paolo Ferri, the Italian prosecutor, on the three lots that appear to have similarities with objects featured in the Medici Dossier.

Will museum displays tell it as it is?

2010-06-02T09:24:00.010-04:00

Derek Fincham's post Paracas Textiles makes an interesting point about an exhibition of endangered textiles from Peru in the Museum of World Culture, Gothenburg, Sweden. Entitled "A Stolen World", the exhibition not only highlights one of "the most sought-after heritage objects in the illegal market", it describes how the textiles were looted and donated to the Ethnographic Department of Göteborg Museum. In plain, simple language. No disguise, no nonsense.

When will the Museum of World Culture's U.S. counterparts follow suit? We think that they could do a better job educating the public simply by telling us what the museums themselves already know. One such rare example is described here where provenance was the topic of exhibit discussion.

The recent SAFE Tour led by Haidy Geismar brought this deficiency into sharp focus. The newly renovated Pacific Hall of the Rockefeller Wing at the Met is filled with objects with virtually no descriptive text about the people, and how the objects were used, or are still being used. A tiny map on the wall of one of the entrances is hardly visible and mostly overlooked. Left without information, a visitor can only respond to superficial qualities. If something pleases the eye, one can then imagine how an object would look in their home. Not much more.

Museum visitors deserve more. "All that matters is how it looks" doesn't work anymore.

Phoot: Museum of World Culture

Shelby White's Foundation Expansion

2010-06-01T11:24:00.005-04:00

In February 2010 the billionaire Shelby White created a selected group of individuals to function within the Leon Levy Foundation, its purpose to “make available information” from excavated sites that have not been published. But information only from nations having a partage system at the time of excavation, i.e. a division of finds between the host nation and the excavators, are eligible. But archaeologists—the Foundation’s new group excepted—knowledgeable of Plunder Culture actions are aware that they consider plundered antiquities to be a “partage,” exploiting its neo-logistic coinage by J. Cuno. An example is White’s refusal to return to Turkey half of a statue of Herakles plundered from Perge, purchased from an antiquity dealer, thus normal partage to this group. The Foundation’s statement suggests that the publication of unexcavated plundered antiquities will not be excluded from funding.

The Foundation’s new group has ten members. White is an antiquity collector, who is the Chair, determined by her financial gift. The other members include four museum Directors (T. Potts, R. Hodges OBE, J-F. Jarrige, and S. Herbert), and one ex-Director (de Montebello); one museum curator (D. Arnold); a number of “distinguished archaeologists” (Rose, Hodges, Potts, S. Heath and S. Minyaev). They will determine who gets/is denied publication funds. Four of the members are museum Directors, one an ex-Director, and one an antiquity collector: the majority of the members.

Brian Pennsylvania Rose, Deputy-Director of the University of Pennsylvania Museum, is the President of the said-to-be Archaeological Institute of America. He is infamous for crippling the AIA, smilingly reaching out to the plunderers, proclaiming that plunderers and archaeologists have a “Common Ground.” He first linked the AIA to plundering activities by declaring Indiana Jones, an archetype plunderer, as a model “in stimulating the public’s interest in archaeology….as a benefit to archaeology….archaeologists...dig Indy.” Rose celebrated the actor who played Indiana Jones at an AIA Gala “Honoring” party, and had him appointed a Trustee of the AIA (Personal disclosure: I resigned from the AIA last year after more than 50 years’ membership). And now he has carried his goals further by becoming a supporter of White. In published photos he is posed next to White, both collegially smiling. Rose has now added Shelby to his list of those plunderers he digs Query: will he soon get her an appointment as Trustee of the AIA? Hodges has written for and advised the antiquities dealer Jerry Eisenbergs’s plunder-defender journal Minerva, which for years contained advertisements from antiquity dealers. He was quoted in the New York Times 12/6/07: 10) condemning Fordham University’s Museum for accepting a gift of plundered antiquities: “The message it sends is there is nothing wrong with looting and buying illegal objects,” the very same message he now blithely proclaims: because he digs Shelby (and her potential gifts to his Museum).

Potts abandoned archaeology to become a plunder supporter as Director of the Kimball Art Museum to “build up” its antiquity collection; he is now Director of the Fitzwilliam Museum at Cambridge. Heath has served as Vice President of the Un-Professional Committee of The AIA. He is also a Visiting Scholar at White’s Institute. De Montebello is the group’s Special Advisor” At The Metropolitan Museum de Montebello has purchased hundreds of antiquities from all over the world, as “partage” from “source nations”. He has also named an MMA gallery in White’s name. Minayev may be an innocent bystander. No Foundation member will serve archaeology; they will defer to de Montebello and White.

Rose and Hodges have now brought the AIA and the University Museum further into the depths of the plunder culture. Query: are there any honest archaeologist members among the AIA’s Officers and Trustees who will react to this, impeach its President? Surely no member of the University Museum’s Governing Board will react to Hodges; he has an OBE. Furthermore, excavations conducted by Rose/ Hodges’ museum not under partage (its correct meaning) are not eligible for publication funding by the Foundation of which they are prominent members. Thus, sites like Gordion in Turkey that remain to be fully published will be denied Foundation funds!

My position on raising funds for publication has been stated by me for some time in lectures and publications. I have no objection, archaeological or moral, to archaeologists seeking funds from White (I even once asked her Foundation to fund an archaeological publication; she refused): provided they do not cater to her, or support her plunder activities as return payment, viz. Lawrence Stager of Harvard University. K. D. Vitelli received money from White, but never ceased to oppose her and other plunders, for which she was criticized for not supporting her in her partage activities. Further, I do not oppose the publication of antiquities, no matter where their modern provenance exists, provided that scholars disclose this information and note their unexcavated nature: one cannot ignore unexcavated objects, they exist, we cannot throw away the baby with the dirty bath water. The new Levy Foundation group will reject such disclosure. The archaeological discipline is fragmenting while too many scholars look the other way.

Oscar White Muscarella

Reflecting on Seized Antiquities from 2009

2010-05-26T17:39:00.001-04:00

In 2009 three antiquities were seized from a single New York auction-house: one just prior to the sale, and two subsequent to it (after being sold for c. $120,000). The auction-house co-operated fully in 2009 and subsequently stated (over the later seizure) that "the transparency of the public auction system combined with the efforts from the U.S. ICE and foreign governments, in this matter, led to the identification of two stolen artifacts".

Earlier this month (May 2010) the same spokeswoman stated that "we do not sell works that we have reason to believe are stolen".

Presumably any objects that have parallel collecting histories ("provenances") to those seized in 2009 will be dealt with in a similar fashion.

Image

Two of the pieces reported to have been seized in New York during 2009 [ICE].

Vanishing rupees for museums, yet another side of war and heritage

2010-05-26T14:13:00.012-04:00

After last week’s International Museum Day, I happened to see an article on the need for expanded media attention to promote museums in Pakistan (seen at http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/indepth/2010-05/19/c_13303427.htm). These are not places that suffered dramatic looting and destruction such as the headline grabbing ransacking of the National Museum of Iraq in 2003. Instead, the article draws attention to an understated but intractable plight of museums and heritage sites in areas of military conflict or instability: with far fewer tourists visiting, often a cycle of sharp decline begins. Tourists’ spending plummets, creating an obvious problem for funding and upkeep of museums and sites (including necessary security and maintenance). Further, the lack of visitation means that people will have less knowledge of and concern for the museum or site, and might then be less likely to support it in the future. Reduced security and public involvement can then leave the museum or site more vulnerable to deterioration and vandalism. While humanitarian and safety concerns remain at the forefront, maybe we with greater media access can help to slow down this process—before it becomes too late—by fostering virtual awareness and visitation in cases where sites are rendered inaccessible from conflict or other disaster.

For information on some of the places mentioned in the article above, visit
whc.unesco.org/en/statesparties/pk, www.harappa.com, www.moenjodaro.org

Speaking of partage….when’s the Met going to start digging?

2010-05-25T11:02:00.003-04:00

I had occasion to reread an article in The New York Times outlining the "Italian Agreement" and was reminded of something that surprised me at the time: part of the agreement includes the Met beginning excavations in Italy. From the NY Times, Feb. 22, 2006 (Arts section, "Italy and U.S. Sign Antiquities Accord"):

The agreement also allows the Met to conduct authorized excavations at its own expense in Italy, the fruits of which would be lent to the Met "for the time necessary for their study and restoration."

Mr. de Montebello said that because the museum's antiquities department was busypreparing for a major reorganization of its Greek and Roman collections, it had not decided which digs it would participate in.

Now that the reorganization of the Greek and Roman galleries is over, one wonders if this is in the works. And, for the Met, certainly partage would be a nicer arrangement than a long-term loan for study and restoration, as was the case with their Egyptian excavations at the beginning of the 20th century.

Talking about "partage"

2010-05-22T10:37:00.026-04:00

The May 21st Looting Matters post refers to a Leon Levy Foundation "early February 2010" gathering of "distinguished archaeologists, museum directors, and curators from around the world" on "how best to make available the trove of unpublished information from important ancient world sites excavated under “partage” agreements." "Partage" is the system "through which western universities and museums worked in concert with host countries on digs, then divided the discoveries..."

According to the photo caption from the Foundation web site, the attendees were "Top Row: Richard Hodges, Timothy Potts, Dorothea Arnold, Jean-Francois Jarrige, Sebastian Heath, Sergey Minyaev. Seated: Philippe de Montebello, Brian Rose, Shelby White, Sharon Herbert."

This photograph raises many questions from different angles. In this post, we will discuss one of these issues: The choice of participants.

1) It appears that all the attendees--at least all those who had their photograph taken--either dig in source countries, collect objects from source countries, or display them in western museums. Or all of the above. In other words, these are visitors to "important ancient world sites".

What about the hosts? If "partage" is indeed a partnership between hosts and visitors, an act of sharing, then why were representatives from the other side--the host side with the "important ancient world sites"--absent from this discussion? Were they not invited? Were they invited but did not attend? Did they attend but did not have their photograph taken? Surely it would be informative (and collaborative) to hear from those who attended the recent Cairo Conference what their views of "partage" might be.

2) Why did "distinguished archaeologists, museum directors, and curators from around the world" not include the Americas or the African continent? Or does "the ancient world" not include these parts? If so, how do the host countries feel about this?

While we look forward to the findings of this Leon Levy Foundation meeting of the experts, SAFECORNER urges the Foundation to consider a better represented conference. Surely the Leon Levy Foundation could attempt a true sharing of the views from both visitors and hosts of the ancient world.

Perhaps then, true discussion can begin about how information collected under "partage" should be disseminated.

Photo: The Leon Levy Foundation

Kwame Opoku reflects on Cairo Conference on cultural heritage

2010-05-08T11:52:00.006-04:00

We thank Dr. Opoku and the Museum Secruity Network for making these insightful REFLECTIONS ON THE CAIRO CONFERENCE ON RESTITUTION: ENCOURAGING BEGINNING available to us. The article contains very useful notes and references as well.

The April 7-8 Cairo Conference hosted by Zahi Hawass and Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities can be viewed on New Tang Dynasty Television.

David Gill said on Looting Matters "While it is important to air concerns over cultural property that left the countries of origin some years ago, there is an important issue relating to continuing looting."

SAFE respects the rights of sovereign nations to cultural property within their national boundaries. But we should be mindful of the fact that information lost from plunder of sites can never be repatriated.

Geneva... Singapore... now Red Hook?

2010-04-27T13:38:00.007-04:00

Known for its "industrial charm", New York's Red Hook section in Brooklyn will soon be home to Christie's Fine Art Storage Services--a subsidiary of the auction house. In Wall Street Journal's article "The Ultimate Walk-In Closet", Kelly Crow questions if Christie's "is walking a delicate line": balancing clients' desire for confidentiality and customs' desire to "deter potential smugglers and money launderers from hiding assets or stashing stolen or looted works."

According to Crow, "Christie's said it will run credit checks on customers and check stored items against registries of stolen art, but added that it can't police everything it brings into its new warehouse."

In light of recent events in New York and London where stolen objects were nearly auctioned off undetected, one can only hope that auction houses will check more thoroughly where items come from while providing safe storage for them.

Yet another one...

2010-04-24T18:24:00.009-04:00

This morning, while browsing the web for current Southern Hemisphere antiquities trade news to blog about, I came across the webpage of a company/auction house that, to me, seems as brazen in their sale of unprovenanced and/or recently surfaced artifacts as the world's largest wholesale auction houses. Indeed, they occasionally have their own auctions! This time I'm talking about Arte Mission (or artemission.com), based out of South Kensington, London, and specializing in "ancient art from Egypt, the Mediterranean and Mesopotamia, in Islamic Art and Ancient Coins." With apparently 40+ years in the business, and with "major galleries and museums" as both recipients and guest appraisers of artifacts, their website provides prospective buyers with everything from a Membership list, a searchable database, website translation into a number of different languages, a recommended reading list of books and articles at a "Reader's corner," two-day item reservation, and email contact.

If you'll allow me a brief segue, there's even a link to an online store called "Ancienne Ambiance," with the express purpose of fostering one's inner "antiquity sensibility." In the words of company founder Adriana Carlucci, after "having helped customers step back in time through the use of fragrance, extensive customer feedback to the site indicated a strong interest in even more luxury consumer products reflecting an ancient theme." She then teamed up with artemission.com and jewellery designer Claire van Holthe to offer jewellery "made using authentic beads, stones, amulets and pendants from different ancient civilizations and modern gold." Ironically, some of the proceeds of these sales are given to the charity PACT (diligently fighting against child abduction), but the "abduction" and reuse of the world's archaeological heritage is perfectly ok? As an archaeologist myself, I can assure readers that "antiquity" as I've experienced it (i.e. in graves, historic period privies, wells, ancient houses, research laboratories) certainly DOES NOT smell like lavender! In the end, the commercialization of products based on the smell of antiquitiy (whatever that is) is irrelevant, and there is honest disclosure that the use of the antiquities is to enhance the appeal of the jewellry, the end result is still the reuse of archaeological artifacts ripped from context so as to appease/enhance the status of the wealthy.

Returning to my original discussion of artemission.com itself, one can see that their catalog contains quite the diversity of artifacts within their stated geographic area of expertise. These range from cuneiform tablets, to Egyptian faience, shabtis, and scarabs, cylinder seals, numerous artifacts from various European cultures, plenty of jewellery, glass artifacts (primarily Roman), coins (Roman and Greek), weapons, manuscripts, and a separate category of "Under $400" miscellanea; "excellent to start or complement a collection, ideal as an interesting and unique gift." Besides the usual promise to include a "certificate of authenticity" with each purchase, two other aspects of artemission.com's "code of ethics;" namely, "we undertake to the best of our ability to make our purchases in good faith," and "we undertake not to knowingly deal in any cultural objects that have left Iraq after 6/8/90, in compliance with The Iraq (U.N. Sanctions) Order 2003 (S.I. 2003/1519)."

"Good Faith" implies trust that the middlemen providing the dealers with antiquities (or the dealers providing the customers) have done their part to double check the veracity of what they purport to sell. However, it seems that in this case "good faith" applies merely to questions of authenticity, as very few examples of past-provenance information was observed attached to online catalog entries for any item, and those that did once again derived "from an old collection," "private collection," or a different auction house, frequently post 1980s. However, to be completely honest, I must point out that a few items, such as a few cuneiform tablets, provide the name of the individual person who assembled the collection the item came from, and suggested pre-1970s surfacing. The catalog overall, however, suggests that secure provenance is more or less irrelevant to the modern trade, especially online. In strange contrast to that, they swear to uphold the recent U.N. sanction on the trade in looted antiquities from Iraq, probably due to fear of bad press over perceived "war profiteering." As this cylinder seal shows, for example, artemission.com readily acquired Iraqi (Mesopotamian) artifacts from the 1990s-present as long as they were said to have surfaced before then. To quote Dr. Chippindale from an earlier post of mine, "said by whom, to whom, under what circumstances, and with what intentions?" The separate coins webpage demonstrates that this dealer, like others, exhibits the cognitive dissonance required to not view ancient coins as "antiquities," let alone artifacts that once had their own unique contexts.

Discussion of a short article by Peter A. Clayton, FSA (Founding Chairman of the Antiquities Dealer's Association, 1982) is also relevant here; made available to all artemission.com potential customers in the "Reader's corner," for purposes of "education" and encouragement. It is important that this rhetoric be further exposed, as it is geared primarily towards those who might stumble onto their website (and into collecting) by accident, or with previous reticence to buy. The article primarily centers around the opinion that "it is often not realized that just because an object may be centuries, or even several thousand years old it does not have to be financially inaccessible;" stressing that recent very expensive auction sales only represent the "extreme end" of the market. If an amateur collector is willing to take on the "high degree of specialist approach" and "get to know dealers who stock items that interest them" (so that the dealer "can get to know his clients requirements and keep an eye on the market for available pieces"), then both parties can "enjoy and learn from the contact." Clayton distills the entire purpose of the trade thusly: "The point about collecting antiquities is that they provide the opportunity to reach back across the centuries and actually handle the past to, if you like, feel a rapport with the original ancient owner." Textbook summation of the "Connoisseur's View," is it not? To archaeologists and heritage professionals who monitor the trade, this is familiar rhetoric...but documents such as these in the hands of potential new buyers AND with a major catalog provided, is fuel for the fire.

What to do? I like to think of the multi-pronged response that S.A.F.E. and others are taking as the "Triple E" model: "Education, Exposure, Enforcement." This corresponds to education at the local supply level, education and exposure BEFORE new "customers" make that first purchase, and enforcement intervening at the local in-country level whenever possible, but at the very least BEFORE the artifact enters the (online) market place, where dispersal becomes very easy. I know, I know...easier said than done...but the more that major dealers/smuggling rings are either shut down, or brought into compliance with ALL global heritage laws, the greater the repercussions down the entire supply line. Constant vigilance!

Stolen Indian Statue Sold in New York, Despite being on Interpol Stolen Art Database

2010-04-24T16:40:00.004-04:00

Interpol news 22 April 2010, The statue of two Asian deities was stolen in September 2009 from the ruins of a temple in Atru in the Province of Rajasthan in Western India. At the request of the National Central Bureau (NCB) in New Delhi, the stone sculpture was added to INTERPOL’s Stolen Works of Art database. Despite that, it was sold by an " international auction house having bases in New York and London". It was only located in New York after it was spotted by somebody in New Delhi featured in a magazine advertising its sale. By this time the object was already in the port of New York while being prepared for shipment to England. In the nick of time, the sculpture was seized by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents (on Friday 16 April), and Indian and US authorities are now liaising over the return of the statue.

"While the inclusion of the statue on INTERPOL’s Stolen Works of Art database did not directly lead to its identification, the fact that an object is recorded does help facilitate and speed up investigations by involved countries,” said Karl Heinz Kind, Co-ordinator of INTERPOL’s Stolen Works of Art unit at its General Secretariat headquarters in Lyon. “This also underlines the necessity for auction houses and all those dealing in cultural property to regularly check INTERPOL’s Stolen Works of Art database, which is publicly available and free of charge, to ensure that they avoid taking possession of stolen goods,” added Mr Kind. INTERPOL’s Stolen Works of Art database has been available to the public since August 2009, and now has more than 1,300 individuals currently registered for free access.

It seems though from recent news items that there is very little evidence than major auction houses are at all concerned about where the items they sell come from.

Photo: the stolen relief seized at New York Airport.