The always astute Hugh Eakin concludes his review of Sharon Waxman's newly released Loot: The Battle Over the Stolen Treasures of the Ancient World, by noting that restitution is a sideshow that distracts from the real and pressing issue, which is the looting of archaeological sites:
The larger problem is Waxman's portrayal of the antiquities crisis as mainly a "tug of war" over coveted museum pieces. In fact, the more important battle concerns unprotected archaeological sites, and it is far less a matter of repatriating objects than of figuring out how to stop latter-day looters from destroying our collective past. That vital challenge remains unsolved.All of us who care about our collective past ought to be focusing now on generating and promoting realistic policy and legal measures that will reduce looting of sites in the most cost-effective way. I have suggested a few such solutions (impose a modest tax on antiquities sales with revenues dedicated to funding site protection in the countries or regions of origin; jawbone wealthy collectors to fund a non-profit foundation to develop low-cost anti-looting technologies and shunt assistance to those countries facing the most pressing difficulties; persuade countries, with the US leading the way, to contribute to the UNESCO fund dealing with the problem). Others have suggested market-based mechanisms that would incentivize site protection; public-spirited initiatives to spur cities, universities, or even facebook members to adopt particular archaeological sites; and, of course, cultural-sensitivity campaigns designed to tamp down on the demand side of the antiquities market by demonizing collecting as akin to buying baby seal fur.
With a new president -- from the University of Chicago, my home institution -- about to take office, there is a real opportunity to move forward. What we need now is a robust discussion where all these options and others are put on the table, critiqued, and refined. Weigh in now! Sphere: Related Content
Posts
2 comments:
I am every bit for protecting the material culture heritage of other countries by working to end the trade in antiquities. But I think it equally important that the professional archaeological community lobby for legislation to protect sites, be they Native or post-Contact, right here in the United States that are afforded no protection under current laws. We in the United States should realize the value of our material culture heritage is equally vulnerable to that of ancient civilizations and take steps to protect it rather than allowing it to be dug out of our own backyards.
I am currently an MA student in Historical Archaeology in Michigan. Just yesterday it was brought to the attention of my advisor via an emailed link to a webpage that a person in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan is looting a Contact Period site near the town of St. Ignace. He is recovering large quantities of trade goods. Subsequently, I did more online investigation found him selling his finds on ebay. It is not known yet whether he is looting from public or private land and therefore whether anything can be done to stop him. For more on this: http://doingmorebeingmore.blogspot.com/
Through online ecommerce sites such as ebay and Amazon small-time looters are readily finding buyers for their metal-detector finds, turning a hobby into profitable business. And in the U.S. (unlike Europe), as long as the goods themselves aren't illegal, it doesn't matter how they were obtained, the ecommerce sites will not sanction the sellers. The problem is, these small-time looters are destroying sites as thoroughly as those who supply big-time antiquities dealers. And with current laws, there is often nothing to stop them. Nor to stop them from making money in the process.
The current laws with regard to looting on public land (ARPA) do have enought teeth, with the caveat that one must prove that the perpetrator knew they were doing it on public land. This needs to be changed. As we've been told since we were knee high to Jesus, ignorance is no excuse for crime.
But also, the archaeological community needs to balance its zeal for research and vita building with an equal zeal for providing incentives for training in archaeological law enforcement and adding ethics classes to the classroom. When I hear that an archaeologist would refuse to assist law enforcement in a looting case because "his reputation would suffer" implies an institutional problem in the community.
Post a Comment