Looting and the World's Archaeological Heritage: the Inadequate Response Author(S): Neil Brodie and Colin Renfrew Source: Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol

Home , 1970 in archaeology

Looting and the World's Archaeological Heritage: The Inadequate Response Author(s): Neil Brodie and Colin Renfrew Source: Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol. 34 (2005), pp. 343-361 Published by: Annual Reviews Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25064889 Accessed: 27-03-2017 23:16 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms

Annual Reviews is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Annual Review of Anthropology

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:16:58 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Looting and the World's Archaeological Heritage: The Inadequate Response Neil Brodie and Colin Renfrew

'McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Cambridge CB2 3ER, United Kingdom; email: [email protected], [email protected]

Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 2005. 34:343-61 Key Words archaeology, antiquities, trade, museums The Annual Review of Anthropology is online at Abstract anthro.annualreviews.org doi: 10.1146/ The world's archaeological heritage is under serious threat from il annurev.anthro. 3 4.081804.12 05 51 legal and destructive excavations that aim to recover antiquities for Copyright 2005 by sale on the international market. These antiquities are sold with Annual Reviews. All rights out provenance, so that their true nature is hard to discern, and reserved many are ultimately acquired by major museums in Europe and 0084-6570/05/1021 North America. The adoption in 1970 by UNESCO of the Con 0343S20.00 vention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property created a new ethical environment in which museums and their representative as sociations adopted policies that were designed to guard against the acquisition of "unprovenanced," and therefore most probably looted, antiquities. Unfortunately, over the past decade, U.S. museum as sociations have been advocating a more relaxed disposition, and the broader archaeological and anthropological communities are in sig nificant measure responsible since they have met this unwelcome development largely in silence.

343

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:16:58 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms find their collecting activities tacidy encour Contents aged and even legitimized by some promi INTRODUCTION. 344 nent museums, notably in Europe, in the WORLDWIDE LOOTING United States and in Japan. This problem is TODAY. 345 by no means a new one, but it is one that LEGISLATION hasAND grown more acuteITS and also more clear EFFECTIVENESS. 347 cut in recent decades. Although some major WHERE DOES THE museums have put in place ethical acquisi RESPONSIBILITY LIE? THE tion policies which prevent their acquiring re ROLE OF MUSEUMS. 348 cendy looted artifacts, we argue here that in THE LYDIAN TREASURE. 349 recent years the academic and museum com THE ETHICAL RESPONSE. 350 munities have been insufficiendy active, and Repositories of Last Resort. 351 certainly ineffective, in persuading more mu THE 1970 RULE. 351 seum directors and trustees of their duty not THE IMPORTANCE OF to permit the acquisition by museums of "un ACQUISITIONS POLICIES provenanced" .... 353 artifacts that are, in all prob FROM STEINHARDT TO ability, looted. Indeed, we detect evidence of SCHULTZ: MUSEUM retrograde movement on this issue by the ma RECIDIVISM. 355 jor U.S. museum associations. Unless leading WHERE DOES THE museums, who are widely seen as the keepers RESPONSIBILITY LIE? of THEthe public conscience in this area, can be ACADEMIC WORLD AND persuaded to adopt more exacting standards THE PUBLIC. 356 and to end their cozy and acquiescent rela tionships with private collectors, it is likely that the looting will continue undiminished. Already in 1970 the matter had be come one of such international concern that INTRODUCTION UNESCO adopted its Convention on the We in the academic community, and in parMeans of Prohibiting and Preventing the Il ticular archaeologists and other serious stu licit Import, Export and Transfer of Owner dents of the human past, are failing in ourship of Cultural Property, and the University responsibility to conserve and to persuade of Pennsylvania Museum formulated a pio others to conserve the world's archaeological neering declaration stating that it would ac heritage. This heritage that is to say, the quirema "no more art objects or antiquities for terial remains of past human activities is thebe Museum unless the objects are accompa ing destroyed at an undiminished pace. Part nied by a pedigree" (Biddle 1980). In view of of that destruction is brought about by natu these two important statements, the year 1970 ral agencies such as erosion and inundation. has come to be regarded as something of a Part comes from agricultural activities, which watershed insofar as "unprovenanced" antiq involve the reworking of the earth's surface, uities are concerned, and academic and mu or from mineral extraction, and part from seum ur treatments of such material that were ban development including the cons ruction unquestioned in the years before 1970 are now of buildings and of motorways. But distress often frowned upon. Moralities have evolved ingly a significant proportion of the ongoing (Renfrew 2000, pp. 77-80). Yet although since destruction is brought about by looters, acting then some legislative provisions have been from commercial motives, who are financed established, both nationally and internation indirectly by private collectors of antiqui ally, to restrict the traffic in "unprovenanced" ties. Moreover, these collectors sometimes antiquities, and ethical guidelines have been

344 Brodie Renfrew

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:16:58 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms made available to guide museum acquisitions, Museums, proclaimed in December 2002 by there are still many museums and private col 18 major museums (Lewis 2004), decries the lectors who, by their failure to exercise due illegal trade in cultural objects, it makes no AIA: the diligence [for instance by applying the "1970 clear statement about how it might be abated Archaeological Rule" (see below)], continue to give indirect by due diligence in continuing museum acqui Institute of America sition. It seems ironic that the ethical debate support to the looting process. Despite clear SAA: the Society for calls from many archaeologists, anthropolo currently focuses on the issue of restitution American gists, and museum curators and directors of antiquities looted decades ago, where the Archaeology and the clear positions adopted and energet contextual damage and associated loss of in ICOM: ically advocated, for instance by the AIA, the formation is long since accomplished, whereas International Council of Museums SAA, and ICOM, which will be noted below it largely ignores the much more urgent issue most museums continue to lack clear and of ongoing looting and the continuing loss of ACCP: the American Council transparent ethical acquisition policies. Some information about the past. for Cultural Policy museums continue to purchase or to accept It is disquieting also that the Presi AAMD: the loans or gifts of artifacts whose origin and his dent of a new organization, the ACCP, Association of Art tory has not been clearly established. And yet Ashton Hawkins, a former legal counsel to the Museum Directors they manage to do so without the widespread Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, public condemnation and apparendy with despite offering general words of support for out the evident concern among their trustees the 1970 UNESCO Convention, has argued which might be expected, and which may be for the relaxation rather the enforcement of the only way of putting an end to such traffick control in the acquisition of "unprovenanced" ing, and of reducing the looting upon which artifacts by collectors and museums in the it feeds. Although nearly all museums pro U.S. (D'Arcy 2002). The AAMD (2004) Re claim that they will not acquire cultural ma port of the AAMD Task Force on the Acqui terial emerging from Iraq in the aftermath of sition of Archaeological Materials and Ancient the war, we predict that, within a few years, Art is disturbing too in advocating acquisition some museums will do just that, either claim guidelines that are less stringent than those ing ignorance of the origins of the objects, adopted by the University of Pennsylvania or perhaps even claiming that they are sav Museum 34 years earlier. ing the cultural heritage of humankind. Some We first review the scale of the ongoing museums have already acquired material looting. We then describe the legislative and from Afghanistan. ethical responses that followed in the train Recendy, the focus on the destruction of of the 1970 UNESCO Convention. Next we the archaeological record through looting, consider where the responsibilities lie for the and the role of museums in acquiescing to current crisis. Finally, we conclude that un the flow of "unprovenanced" antiquities, has less the world of scholarship in general gets its been obscured by the arguments concerning act together and works to influence museums the repatriation of antiquities which were re and hence collectors, the long-term hopes of moved long ago, well before the 1970 water learning more about the human past from the shed. This might be described as the "Sec archaeological record look bleak indeed. ondary Elgin Marbles Syndrome," where in resisting claims for restitution of cultural ob WORLDWIDE LOOTING TODAY jects long established in their collections, such museums manage to turn a blind eye to the on Information about the commercial trade in going looting today and to the need for rigor archaeological heritage and its deleterious in ensuring that new acquisitions have not consequences for our understanding of past been recendy looted. Thus although the Dec societies, not to mention the outright theft, laration on the Importance and Value of Universal vandalism, and destruction of private and

www.annualreviews.org Looting and the Worlds Archaeological Heritage 345

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:16:58 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms public property that it entails, has been gath 1989 and 1991 a regional survey in Mali dis ered in a large number of papers and authored covered 830 archaeological sites, but 45% had IARC: Illicit and edited books (see for example Atwood already been damaged, 17% badly. In 1996 a Antiquities Research 2004, Brodie et al. 2000, Brodie & Doole sample of 80 were revisited and the incidence Centre 2004, Coggins 1969, Gill & Chippindale of looting had increased by 20% (Bedaux & SAFE: Saving 1993, Graepler 1993, Kirkpatrick 1992, Rowlands 2001, p. 872). A survey in a district Antiquities for Meyer 1973, O'Keefe 1997, Renfrew 2000, of northern Pakistan showed that nearly half Everyone Schick 1998, Stead 1998, Toner 2002, the Buddhist shrines, stupas and monasteries SPACH: Society for Watson 1997; and papers in Brodie et al. had been badly damaged or destroyed by ille the Preservation of 2001, Brodie & Tubb 2002, Heilmeyer & gal excavations (Ali & Coningham 1998). In Afghanistan's Eule 2004, Leyten 1995, Messenger 1999, Andalusia, Spain, 14% of known archaeolog Cultural Heritage Schmidt & Mclntosh 1996, Tubb 1995). ical sites have been damaged by illicit exca Archaeology magazine has published many vation (Fernandez Cacho & Sanju n 2000). well-illustrated articles on the subject, many Between 1940 and 1968, it is estimated that of which were reprinted in Vitelli (1996). something like 100,000 holes were dug into More information is also available in the the Peruvian site of Batan Grande, and that "Antiquities Market" section of the Journal in 1965 the looting of a single tomb produced of Field Archaeology, which ran from 1974 something like 40 kg of gold jewelry, which to 1993 and has recendy been revived, accounts for about 90% of the Peruvian gold and in Culture Without Context, the bian now found in collections around the world nual newsletter of Cambridge University's (Alva2001,p.91). IARC. Many other papers are available in The continuing destruction of Iraq's ar the literature and some will be mentioned chaeological heritage is particularly well below. Web resources include David Gill documented. Between the end of the Gulf and Christopher Chippindale's "Loot War in 1991 and 1994, 11 regional mu ing Matters!" at Swansea University (http:// seums were broken into and approximately www.swan.ac.uk/classics/stan7dg/looting/), 3000 artifacts and 484 manuscripts were IARC (http://www.mcdonald.cam.ac.uk/IA stolen, of which only 54 have been recovered RC/home.htm), SAFE (http://www.savi (Symposium 1994). Assyrian palaces in north ngantiquities.org/index.htm), Heritage Iraq were also targeted. Pieces of at least Watch in Cambodia (http://www.herita 14 relief slabs from Sennacherib's palace at gewatch.org/over.htm), and SPACH Nineveh were discovered on the market, and (http://spach.info/). Finally, special mention bas-reliefs from the palaces of Ashurnasirpal should be made of the work of ICOM II and Tiglathpileser III were stolen from the (http://icom.museum/). ICOM has acted storeroom at Nimrud (Russell 1997). Then, for the international museums' community following the outbreak of the most recent hos in developing an ethical disposition towards tilities, in April 2003, the National Museum the antiquities market, and highlighted the in Bagdhad (along with several libraries) was associated cultural destruction with their ransacked. The official U.S. investigation re series of "100 Missing Objects" publications, ported that at least 13,515 objects had been and their "Red Lists." stolen from the museum (Bogdanos 2003), Some quantitative information about the of which by June 2004 something like 4000 destruction of archaeological sites and mon had been recovered. Since then, archaeolog uments "on the ground" has been provided ical looting has become endemic throughout by archaeological surveys of regions and in south Iraq. Surveys were carried out by the dividual sites. In 1983, one study showed that National Geographic in May 2003 (Wright 58.6% of all Mayan sites in Belize had been et al. 2003) and UNESCO in June 2003, damaged by looters (Gutchen 1983). Between which discovered that many sites had been

346 Brodie Renfrew

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:16:58 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms badly damaged. It was estimated, for example, is that they have only recently entered circu that 30-50% of Isin had been destroyed lation and are probably stolen, looted, or fake. by illicit digging (UNESCO 2003, 8). The Auction houses and dealers object to the CCPIA: destruction in Iraq has been paralleled in automatic equation that archaeologists are Convention on Afghanistan, and for much the same rea prone to make between "unprovenanced" and Cultural Property sons (Feroozi & Tarzi 2004). Despite the looted antiquities, and point out that prove Implementation Act Taliban's high profile demolition of the nances are often not revealed because of a ven Bamiyan Buddhas for "religious" purposes, dor's request for confidentiality, or because of most of the destruction in Afghanistan has the commercial requirement to keep a source been wrought by the search for saleable an secret. Nevertheless, although there is some tiquities and manuscripts, and has continued truth to these claims, it is hardly likely that if not actually worsened since the Taliban's re commercial or personal reasons can account moval from power. for all the missing provenances that have been Some information about the material scale recorded by the aforementioned studies. of the illegal trade is forthcoming from official police statistics. In Turkey for example, be LEGISLATION AND ITS tween 1993 and 1995 there were over 17,500 EFFECTIVENESS official police investigations into stolen antiq uities (Kaye 1995). Greek police reported that Many nations have legislation which pro between 1987 and 2001 they recovered 23,007 tects their own cultural heritage, sometimes artifacts (Doole 2001, p. 19). From 1969 to determining that all ancient cultural ob 1999 the Italian Carabinieri seized 326,000 jects discovered within their boundaries be artifacts from illegal excavations, of which long to the state, and making it an offense nearly 100,000 were recovered between 1994 to export antiquities without a government and 1999 (Pastore 2001, p. 159). In one year, approved permit. Other nations, such as the 1997, German police in Munich recovered United Kingdom or the United States, do not 50-60 crates containing 139 icons, 61 fres protect their indigenous antiquities in such a coes, and 4 mosaics that had been torn from sweeping way, although they do have some the walls of north Cypriot churches; Swiss legislative protection. The recent convic police seized something like 10,000 antiqui tions of Tbkely-Parry in the United Kingdom ties from four warehouses in Geneva Freeport and Schultz in the United States, which we that belonged to an Italian antiquities dealer discuss below, have confirmed that it is a (Watson 1998, p. 11); and Italian police ar criminal offense under those countries' re rested a dealer who was found to be in illegal spective stolen property laws to trade in an possession of between 10,000-30,000 antiqui tiquities that are known to be stolen pub ties (Doole 1999, p. 11). And in global terms, lic property. But very few nations currently 1997 was not an unusually bad year. have specific legislation which effectively pro Although the statistics quoted above have tects the antiquities of other countries, and established beyond doubt that archaeological which makes it an offense to import antiqui sites and monuments are being deliberately ties that have been illegally excavated within, stripped of artifacts and sculpture, companion or illegally exported from, their country of studies of exhibition and sales catalogues have origin. Such might well be the implied re shown that upwards of 70% of archaeologi sponsibility underlying the 1970 UNESCO cal objects that come onto the market or that Convention, but its ratification by a na are contained in recendy assembled collec tion does not in itself introduce a new legal tions are without any indication of provenance framework. (Chippindale & Gill 2000, Elia 2001, Gilgan The United States'CCPIA of 1983 offered 2001, Norskov 2002). The clear implication a very constructive response to the problem.

www.annualreviews.org Looting and the Worlds Archaeological Heritage 347

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:16:58 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms It implements the 1970 UNESCO Con time, neither the United States nor the vention with respect to the United States United Kingdom has ratified this convention, by establishing the possibility of bilateral although in May 2004 the United Kingdom agreements with individual states to restrict Government announced its intention to do so. the importation into the United States of There are two further international con specified classes of archaeological and ethno ventions that offer protection to movable graphic artifacts from those states. There cultural heritage, although as neither has are currendy agreements with Cyprus, Italy, been ratified by the United States or Britain, Bolivia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, we shall mention them only in passing. Nicaragua, Peru, Mali and Cambodia. The first is the 1995 UNIDROIT Con After its very late accession in 2002 vention on Stolen and Illegally Exported Cul to the 1970 UNESCO Convention, the tural Objects, which rectifies a perceived United Kingdom did in 2003 take the signif weakness of the 1970 UNESCO Conven icant step of enacting the Dealing in Cultural tion by harmonizing the different stolen Objects (Offences) Act. This now makes it a property laws of civil code and common criminal offense knowingly to deal in tainted law countries. The 2001 UNESCO Conven cultural objects. An antiquity or other cultural tion on the Protection of the Underwater Cul object is defined as "tainted" if it has been ille tural Heritage extends protection to cultural gally excavated or removed from an archaeo heritage on the international seabed. logical site anywhere in the world after the Act came into force. This for the first time makes WHERE DOES THE it a specific offense under British law to deal RESPONSIBILITY LIE? THE (knowingly) in illicit antiquities of overseas ROLE OF MUSEUMS origin. In Europe more generally there have been We have consistendy sought to argue that encouraging moves by other laggard coun although the acts of looting take place in re tries, like the United Kingdom, to ratify the mote places, and often in developing coun 1970 UNESCO Convention. In view of its tries, the responsibility for those acts lies, at role as a market place, the ratification by least in part, elsewhere. The incentive for the Switzerland is of considerable significance. looting derives from the market, from the cir Denmark and Sweden have also now rati cumstance that the looted objects can be sold fied, and it is believed that Germany, Belgium, for significant profit. It has, however, been Holland, and perhaps Norway are in the well documented (Brodie 1998) that it is not process of ratification. That certainly repre the looters themselves who reap the full finan sents progress, although without supplemen cial benefit of their activities. The price of the tary legislation in each country (as exemplified objects in question increase as they move up by Switzerland's passage of the Federal Act on the chain: from regional dealers to metropoli the International Transfer of Cultural Prop tan dealers in the country of origin, to dealers erty in 2003), the move is of more symbolic trading clandestinely in international centers, than practical consequence. to dealers and auction houses trading openly The recent conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, when the objects have changed hands suffi and the former Yugoslavia have taken a heavy ciendy often that their illicit origin can no toll on archaeological and other cultural her longer be firmly documented. It is there that itage, and have drawn attention back toward the public international price is established. the protection that might be offered during And it is there that the high sale value is de wartime by the Hague Convention, and par termined which is such a powerful incentive ticularly its 1954 First Protocol and 1999 Sec to ongoing looting back at the beginning of ond Protocol. Unfortunately, at the present the chain.

348 Brodie Renfrew

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:16:58 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Dealers, private collectors and the majority so-called "Lydian Treasure") which had been of museums are in general willing to proclaim covertly acquired by one of the world's great that they will never purchase antiquities or museums (the Metropolitan Museum of Art). other cultural property knowing the mate The Metropolitan steadfastly refused to re rial in question to have been stolen [though turn it, although the discovery process in the in practice this principle may be ignored, as court proceedings revealed that the museum the case of the Lydian Treasure (see below) did indeed have knowledge of the real prove revealingly illustrates]. But it is all too easy nance of the entire looted hoard. for a collector or curator to state that he or The story of the Lydian Treasure is well she did not realize that an "unprovenanced" known (Kaye & Main 1995), but is worth cit object was in fact looted, and very difficult ing here because it is of pivotal relevance to actually to establish the contrary. It is the our theme and because it has apparently not continuing indiscriminate acquisition of "un yet led to any public decision by the Trustees provenanced" antiquities by private collectors of the Metropolitan Museum of Art to for and by museums that lies at the root of the mulate and announce an ethical policy on ac looting problem. As museums are often the quisitions comparable to that adopted by the recipient of private collections, by gift, be University of Pennsylvania Museum in 1978 quest, or purchase, it is there that the ultimate (Biddle 1980), or to incorporate the 1970 Rule responsibility lies. (see below) into such a policy. From the standpoint of the archaeologist The facts seem clear. In the mid-1960s tu or anthropologist, it is not simply the arti muli in the U ak region of western Turkey facts themselves that are important, but the were broken into and looted by villagers. information which their study and publica Some of the finds, including more than 360 tion can offer when taken into considera objects of silver and gold from the sixth tion along with the detailed circumstances century BC, were acquired between 1966 of their discovery. By rewarding the looters and 1970 by the Metropolitan Museum. The through the acquisition of "unprovenanced" Museum's own documents, which it was material, museums are directly subscribing to forced to disclose in the court case in 1987, the ongoing process of clandestine excavation revealed that its curators did in fact know and hence to the destruction of the contex where the finds had come from, although they tual information which is the central compo were not put on permanent display until 1984 nent of the world's archaeological heritage. under the deliberately misleading caption of By allowing the acquisition of such material, the "East Greek Treasure." The Republic of museum directors and trustees are betray Turkey took action in the New York court in ing the principle that archaeological heritage 1987, whereupon the Museum tried to have should not be destroyed, and, as Gerstenblith the case dismissed under the statute of lim (2003 a) has recently suggested, they are also itations. The motion to dismiss was denied failing in their duty to the institutions they by the court on the grounds that the Mu serve. seum should have exercised due diligence at the time of acquisition. This then allowed the THE LYDIAN TREASURE parties to the case to undertake the pretrial discovery process, and thus to request and The case of the Lydian Treasure is a reveal then examine the documents maintained in ing one because it is a rare instance of the a files of the other party. As Kaye and Main national government (that of Turkey) actually (1995, p. 153) recount, going to a court of law in a foreign country (the United States) in order to recover pos [T]he documents produced by the session of a major collection of antiquities (the Metropolitan included minutes of meetings

www.annualreviews.org Looting and the Worlds Archaeological Heritage 34c

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:16:58 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms of the acquisitions committee of its Board article 2.1 of the ICOM Code of Ethics for Mu of Trustees at which the purchases of seums (2004), the professional body to which AAM: the American the objects were approved, and purchase most of the world's major museums belong, Association of recommendation forms submitted by the clearly states: "2.1 Collections Policy. The gov Museums Department of Greek and Roman Art to erning body for each museum should adopt the acquisitions committee describing the and publish a written collections policy that artifacts. addresses the acquisition, care and use of collections." When this evidence was revealed, the Mu The AAM 1993 Code of Ethics is less seum settled the case out of court, and the specific, but asks that each member museum artifacts in question were returned to Turkey. should prepare its own institutional code, The Lydian Treasure case is particularly elaborating certain practices, which would, significant in showing that in some cases the we presume, include an acquisitions policy. allegedly "unprovenanced" antiquities can in This recommendation was necessary. When deed come with sufficient information that the J. Paul Getty Museum began developing their place of discovery, and therefore the de its own acquisitions policy in 1986, it found structive and illegal nature of their "excava that "such a policy did not really exist in any tion," is actually known to the purchaser, al one of the major collecting institutions in though of course never acknowledged. To the America" (True 1997, p. 139). Unfortunately, committed archaeologist, that appears as the we have seen nothing to persuade us that extreme of corruption that a museum of the situation has significantly improved since ficial should purchase "unprovenanced" an then, despite the advice of ICOM and the tiquities while actually having to hand in AAM. formation documenting the circumstances of The problem in practice is that potential their looting. We find it a troubling ques acquisitions, even if recently looted, rarely tion why the museum officials concerned, in carry with them evidence of that looting. cluding the Director, who knowingly acquired This inevitably implies that any artifact lack such looted material, were not dismissed when ing a well-documented provenance may well their conduct was brought to light, and why be the product of illicit excavation and of il the Board of Trustees of the day, if they were legal export from its country of origin. At aware at the time of the circumstances of first sight the appropriate response would the acquisition, did not resign in shame at be to avoid acquiring any antiquity what so manifest a dereliction of their public duty ever whose provenance could not be fully when their complicity, if such it had been, was documented. That is indeed implied by Ar revealed in the New York court. ticle 2.3 of the ICOM Code of Ethics for Museums: THE ETHICAL RESPONSE 2.3. Provenance and Due Diligence. Every ef The 1970 UNESCO Convention prompted fort must be made before acquisition to en museums and their representative associations sure that any object or specimen offered for to examine their ethical obligations, particu purchase, gift, loan, bequest or exchange has larly as regards the acquisition of cultural ob not been illegally obtained in or exported jects, and since then codes of practice have from, its country of origin or any interme been developed that ensure a correct ethi diate country in which it might have been cal disposition. The critical feature of these owned legally (including the museum's own codes, as they relate to the antiquities market country). Due diligence in this regard should at least, is that every museum should formu establish the full history of the item from dis late a written acquisitions policy. For example, covery or production.

3$o Brodie Renfrew

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:16:58 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms But the ICOM Code of Ethics goes beyond ered specimens and objects from the terri ensuring the legitimacy of a potential acqui tory over which it has lawful responsibility. sition. It recognizes the damage that looting CAA: the College causes to archaeological heritage when it asks The central point here is that the artifacts Art Association of that: in question should originate from the territory America in which the museum is located and which it AAA: the American 2.4. Objects and Specimens from Unauthorised serves: there is nothing here which sanctions Anthropological Association of Unsdentific Fieldwork. Museums should the acquisition of unprovenanced antiquities not acquire objects where there is reason originating from outside the museum's own able cause to believe their recovery involved regional or national territory. the unauthorised, unscientific, or intentional destruction or damage of monuments, ar THE 1970 RULE chaeological or geological sites ... In 1971 the Harvard University Art Museums The AAM's equivalent stipulation is formulated an acquisitions policy that intro weaker: duced the idea of a date threshold. As regards a possible acquisition, the policy states that ".. .the Curator should have reasonable assur [the museum ensures that] Acquisition, dis ance under the circumstances that the object posal and loan activities are conducted in was not exported after July 1, 1971, in viola a manner that respects the protection and tion of the laws of the country of origin and/or preservation of natural and cultural re the country where it was legally owned" sources and discourages illicit trade in such materials. (AIA2000,p. 129n.42). Harvard's introduction of the 1971 date threshold was significant. It recognized that, This requirement is open to a broad range in practice, nearly every museum in the world of implementations, which makes it neces is willing to acquire antiquities which were sary for member museums to codify their own unearthed long ago, for instance in the nine policies in this area, as the AAM recommends. teenth century, however dubious the circum Not all museums have done so. stances of their discovery at the time. It is generally accepted that objects from old col lections of antiquities are freely traded and ac Repositories of Last Resort quired and that to refrain from acquiring them For a national or a regional museum there is now would do nothing to diminish the flow of one other important exception which needs to more recendy looted material. be specified. For when antiquities which have Then, in 1973, the AIA joined with the been excavated illicitly and in contravention of AAM, the U.S. Committee of ICOM, the the law within the country in question come CAA, the AAMD, and the AAA to adopt to light, it is clear that they must be curated a resolution asking that museums should somewhere, in what has come to be called a refuse to acquire through purchase, gift, "repository of last resort." This point is well or bequest any object exported in viola made in Paragraph 2.11 of the ICOM Code of tion of the laws of a country of origin, Ethics for Museums: and urging adherence to principles con tained within the UNESCO Convention 2.11. Repositories of Last Resort. Nothing in (AIA 2000, pp. 106-7, 122). The AIA at first this Code of Ethics should prevent a museum imposed a date threshold of December 30, from acting as an authorised repository for 1973, the date of the resolution, but subse unprovenanced, illicitly collected or recov quendy changed it to December 30,1970, the

www.annualreviews.org Looting and the Worlds Archaeological Heritage 351

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:16:58 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms date of an earlier resolution. Article 2 of the possible for a museum to follow in practice, current ALA Code of Ethics reads, and which can be strictly applied. In Britain the Museums Association has now adopted [Members should rjefuse to participate in the 1970 Rule as a general policy, and it is the trade of undocumented antiquities and applied also by the National Art Collections refrain from activities that enhance the Fund, which helps to fund museum acquisi commercial value of such objects. Undoc tions, as one of its standard criteria for sup umented antiquities are those which are port. It should be understood that the Rule not documented as belonging to a public is only a pragmatic guideline, in that it offers or private collection before December 30, protection but does not guarantee immunity 1970.. .or which have not been excavated against legal action by a dispossessed owner. and exported from the country of origin in Nevertheless, we regard it as a key principle accordance with the laws of that country. precisely because it is one which is enforce able, and which therefore does lead museums The inclusion in an acquisition code of the with an ethical acquisitions code to decline strict (because enforceable) requirement that to buy, or even to receive by gift or bequest, they will not in principle acquire antiquities any material which is or may be tainted. It which lack a clear and documented history also prevents museums from accepting gifts back to 1970 denies museums the opportu of such material from private collectors, and nity of acquiring antiquities which have been therefore prevents private collectors from ob illicitly excavated after that date, and prevents taining tax relief or other marks of recognition them acquiring antiquities that are the prod for donations or bequests of such tainted ma uct of recent looting, but does not stop them terials. It therefore has the status of a bench from acquiring antiquities that were in cir culation before that date. This "1970 Rule" mark, and one that is likely to be contested vigorously in the future. seems an effective and practical response to There are signs that such contestation is al an ethical problem, and one that is capable ready taking place, and signs too of slippage. of rigorous enforcement. It was adopted by the British Museum in 1998 in its statement There have been suggestions that a more suit able date threshold would be 1983, the date on the acquisition of antiquities, and is now of U.S. ratification of the UNESCO Con enshrined within its Policy on Acquisitions vention. The J. Paul Getty Museum has an (as revised in March 2004), where paragraph nounced that it will not acquire material that 4.2.5 states, had not been documented prior to 1995 (True

Wherever possible the Trustees will only ac 1997, p. 139). The recently established ACCP quire those objects that have documentation claims to support the principles underlying to show that they were exported from their the 1970 UNESCO Convention, but does country of origin before 1970 and this policy not openly endorse the 1970 Rule, or any will apply to all objects of major importance. other date threshold. Worse still, in 2004, the AAMD suggested that although museums This is a crucial provision in practice be should not acquire any object from an offi cause it sets out a rule that can be enforced cial archaeological excavation and known to stricdy (although the British Museum's pol have been removed illegally from its county icy explicidy excludes minor antiquities from of origin after 1970, it would be permissible this strict provision, without explaining how for them to acquire an unprovenanced object the archaeological significance of an unprove of unknown origin (i.e., most probably a nanced piece can realistically be assessed). looted object) provided that it can be docu Thus the 1970 Rule is an important one mented to have been outside its country of because it establishes a standard which is quite origin for at least ten years (AAMD 2004, p. 4).

5J2 Brodie Renfrew

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:16:58 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms This rolling "ten year rule," whereby muse tiquity transfer chain that specific knowledge ums would be able to acquire antiquities which of the circumstances of discovery should in have a documented history extending back not deed be securely lost. For if they were not lost, to 1970 but simply to a date ten years before good tide could be contested (as in the case the time in question (i.e., currently back to concerning the Lydian Treasure) and restitu 1995), in our view amounts effectively to a tion might be demanded. The deliberate loss looters' charter. It would be necessary only for of information is an integral and deliberate looted antiquities clandestinely to enter a pri part of the illicit market in "unprovenanced" vate collection, to be documented, and then antiquities. to wait there for ten years until the time limit Many other cases can be cited of impor on any possible claim for restitution has ex tant groups of material, or of significant indi pired, in order to be available for acquisition vidual pieces, where archaeological materials by a museum. whose looted status can be securely asserted Even when museums have announced or at least plausibly suspected have come to their adherence to a date threshold, there public attention. Prominent amongst them have been accusations of backsliding. In 1995 in recent years would be the Sevso Silver Harvard's Arthur M. Sackler Museum bought (Renfrew 2000, pp. 46-51), the Kanakari 182 Greek vase fragments of uncertain prove Mosaics (Gerstenblith 1995), the Aidonia nance, despite its strong acquisitions policy of Treasure (Howland 1997), the Steinhardt 1971 (Robinson & Yemma 1998). Why has phiale (see below), the Lydian Treasure, the the academic community at Harvard not taken Boston Herakles (Rose & Acar 1995), the steps to ensure that the Harvard Art Muse Getty kouros (notable as probably a fake an ums adhere to their policy? In 1998, the Boston tiquity: Kokkou 1993), the Cleveland Apollo Globe revealed that although the Boston Mu (Litt 2004), and the Euphronios vase (Meyer seum of Fine Art had adopted an acquisitions 1973, pp. 86-100). Such a list can easily be policy in 1983, it had nevertheless between compiled even before one goes on to look at 1984 and 1987 purchased 73 classical Greek some of the private collections which have and Roman antiquities, of which only ten had been publicly exhibited and which contain any clear provenance (Robinson 1998a). many "unprovenanced" antiquities of which a number are probably the product of recent THE IMPORTANCE OF looting. Prominent among these are the col lections of George Ortiz (Ortiz 1996), Leon ACQUISITIONS POLICIES Levy and Shelby White (von Bothmer 1990), It must one hopes be unusual for curators the Alsdorfs (Pal 1997), and the Fleischmans, or trustees actually to have before them docu now in the J. Paul Getty Museum (True & mentary evidence indicative of looting at the Hamma 1994). The museums which have ex time of purchase of the apparently "unprove hibited these dubious materials bear a heavy nanced" antiquities. That is a special feature responsibility, for exhibition in a prominent which gives particular and deserved notoriety museum in effect launders a tainted antiquity, to the Lydian Treasure case. by implication establishing, or at least going More often, when the acquisition of some way to establish, both its authenticity unprovenanced antiquities is contemplated, and its respectability. there is simply no direct evidence of the spe Recendy, attention has been drawn to the cific find circumstances of the objects in ques practice of some collectors and some mu tion, which have been deprived of all context seums of arranging that recendy purchased by the long sequence of transactions in the and hitherto unknown and unpublished "antiquity transfer chain" mentioned above. antiquities whose status as looted must al Indeed it is one of the functions of such an an ways be suspected, even if it can rarely be

www.annualreviews.org Looting and the Worlds Archaeological Heritage 353

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:16:58 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms definitively proved should first be publicly who have benefited from this laundering pro exhibited in a well-known museum, along cess sometimes pay substantial sums towards side the museum's own well-established col new museum galleries, which are in some lection (Renfrew 2004). The collector gains cases named in their honor. And third, the in this way because when he or she goes on collector in question is sometimes rewarded to exhibit this hitherto entirely unrecorded by being made a trustee of the museum in and "unprovenanced" piece in a display of the question, a position which is sometimes held personal collection, its entire lack of recorded to confer a significant honorific status. That history can be covered by citing its display in there may be an inherent conflict of inter the museum in question, often with reference est is rarely suggested, and the cozy collu to publication in the museum's catalogue of sion between collector and curator generally its exhibition. So the collector profits from overlooked. this laundering process, in that the newly It might seem invidious to put all the blame acquired "unprovenanced" antiquity gains re for this situation on the shoulders of museum spectability and acceptance through its display curators and directors, but they should, as in a well-known collection. The museum's trained professionals, see the requirements of benefits are less immediately obvious, for with a decent ethical position more clearly than a skeptical and well-informed viewing pub the private collector. It is these profession lic, its lack of an ethical acquisition and dis als who give the lead, and all too many of play policy would be openly exposed. But them have not yet recognized that the moral with the present culture of acceptance, muse ity of the nineteenth century with its pol ums often avoid censure, although the Boston icy of unrestricted acquisitions has long since Museum of Fine Arts (Robinson 1998a), the been superseded. But it is this failure to re J. Paul Getty Museum (Kaufman 1996), the alize that times have changed, and that co Louvre (Henley 2000), and the Metropoli herent ethical codes for acquisition are now tan Museum have been publicly criticized for needed, that makes so distasteful the appear their dubious and very questionable ethical ance on the 2002 Declaration on the Importance positions. and Value of Universal Museums of the signa But in some cases the benefits to the mu tures of the directors of institutions, includ seum appear to them very real. Collectors ing the Art Institute of Chicago, the Cleve show their gratitude to the museum for ex land Museum of Art, the Louvre Museum, hibiting, and in effect laundering, their col the Metropolitan Museum of Art, and the lection of "unprovenanced" antiquities in a Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. Each of these number of ways. First, they often donate some has been publicly criticized (see the sources or all of the antiquities (not infrequently the cited above) for the failure to exercise due most obviously looted ones) to the museums, diligence and apply a proper ethical code in thereby often obtaining substantial tax bene relation to dubious acquisitions. Indeed we fits from the tax authorities by virtue of their wonder whether the three museums on the "charitable" donation. (The specialist cura list of signatories which do collect antiqui tors of the museums should not supply val ties (unlike some which focus exclusively on uations in such cases, but former director of paintings or contemporary art) and which do the Metropolitan Museum, Thomas Hoving indeed have publicly stated acquisition poli (1996, pp. 287-88), records that during the cies, namely the State Museums, Berlin (Eule 1970s and 1980s the now fired curator of the 2004), the British Museum, and, though not J. Paul Getty Museum, Jiri Frei, was respon adhering to the 1970 Rule, the J. Paul Getty sible for collectors receiving benefits in excess Museum, are wise to associate themselves in of what they had themselves paid to acquire polemical declarations in such ethically ques the object in question). Second, the collectors tionable company. The 2002 Declaration has

354 Brodie Renfrew

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:16:58 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms been criticized in a number of quarters for reasons: first, that archaeological heritage in its stand on restitution (Lewis 2004, O'Neill Italy is state property and that therefore ar 2004). But despite the apparent consensus on chaeological objects that are removed from NSPA: National the issue of restitution, the museum world ac Italy without authorization constitute stolen Stolen Property Act tually stands divided on the much more urgent property under the U.S. NSPA; second, that ASMD: the theme of current acquisition urgent because the import of the phiale into the United States Association of this is crucial to the issue of the ongoing loot had been facilitated by false statements on cus Science Museum ing. Our argument here is that some of these toms forms. Its place of origin was there given Directors self-appointed "universal museums" which we as Switzerland instead of Italy, and its value AASLH: the have mentioned are condoning and even in was given as $2 50,000, when in fact Steinhardt American Association for State directly promoting the continuing looting of had paid $1 million. and Local History the heritage. This reduces what might other Steinhardt appealed against the District wise have been coherent arguments in their Court's decision, at which point the U.S. mu Declaration to little more than pretentious seums' community intervened. In 1998 the sophistry. AAM submitted a brief of amid curiae in sup port of Steinhardt in its own right, and acting FROM STEINHARDT TO also on behalf of the AAMD, the ASMD, and SCHULTZ: MUSEUM the AASLH, which represents history muse RECIDIVISM ums. A counter brief was submitted by the AIA, on behalf of the AAA, the United States The disquieting current position of U.S. mu Committee for the International Council on seums as regards illegally excavated and/or Monumentsex and Sites, the SAA, the American ported archaeological material can be gauged Philological Association, and the Society for from a brief of amid curiae ("friends of theHistorical Archaeology. The AAM's brief dis court") submitted in support of the New York tanced itself from the issue of false customs collector Michael Steinhardt's defense of hisdeclarations, stating that museums "would not ownership of an ancient gold phiale (Lyons condone any improper conduct, including the 2002, Shapreau 2000). The gold phiale (bowl) making of false statements on Customs forms" in question dates to the third century B.C. (AAM 2000, p. 77). The main thrust of the and was discovered in Sicily sometime during brief was that foreign patrimony statutes (na the late 1970s. It "surfaced" in 1980 when tionalit laws vesting ownership of unknown and was acquired by the Sicilian antiquities dealer undiscovered archaeological heritage in the Vincenzo Cammarata. In 1991 Cammarata state) should not be recognized in U.S. courts traded the phiale to the then Swiss-based of law. The issue of patrimony laws had been dealer William Veres, who arranged for its a vexed one since a court decision in the 1970s sale to Steinhardt through the mediation of(Gerstenblith 2002, p. 27), and the AAM's another dealer, Robert Haber. Steinhardt isbrief argued that patrimony laws are counter a generous benefactor of the Metropolitan to both U.S. law (which allows private own Museum, and the phiale was authenticated ership of archaeological heritage originating by the Metropolitan's conservation labora on land that is not federal property) and U.S. tory before Steinhardt took possession of publicit policy (as they place a restriction on the in 1992. Then, in 1995, acting on a com free trade of cultural objects). plaint submitted by the Italian government The remarkable thing about the 2000 brief that the phiale had been illegally exported is that it constituted a complete reversal of the from Italy, U.S. Customs agents seized the AAM's previous policy. In 1985 the AAM had phiale, and Steinhardt was forced to estab opposed an ultimately failed amendment to lish ownership in a New York District Court. the NSPA, which had proposed that publicly The Court ruled against Steinhardt, for two owned antiquities should be excluded from

www.annualreviews.org Looting and the Worlds Archaeological Heritage 555

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:16:58 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms the category of stolen property. The amend tried and convicted in a British court of han ment would, the AAM at that time argued, dling stolen Egyptian antiquities, and sen NADAOPA: "encourage the depredation of archaeological tenced to six years' imprisonment. Schultz had National Association sites and the illegal export of cultural mate also provided advance funding for some of of Dealers in rial from its country of origin" (AAM 1985, Tokely-Parry's operations. Ancient, Oriental p. 156). Schultz's trial hinged upon the applica and Primitive Art It is a further surprising feature of the 2000 bility of the Egyptian patrimony law, passed AAM brief that, although it condemns the in 1983, and in February 2002 Schultz was looting of archaeological sites (AAM 2000, judged guilty as charged, and sentenced to pp. 80, 99 n.6), nowhere does it address what a 3 3-month imprisonment. He appealed but should be the central and contentious fact of in June 2003 the Second Circuit Court of the Steinhardt case that the phiale in ques Appeals upheld his conviction. The Schultz tion is, in all probability, a looted object. Yet decision reaffirmed the precedent set by the by defending the right of a private citizen to 1970s decision that U.S. courts can enforce purchase and own such an object, the AAM, foreign patrimony laws. This decision is the together with the AAMD, the ASMD, and the one that had been feared by the museums AASLH, has, in effect, condoned the looting in the Steinhardt case, but there is no sign process, despite protestations to the contrary. yet that U.S. museums are "besieged by civil We consider that their position implies a scan replevin claims from foreign governments" dalous disregard for the archaeological her as predicted by the AAM's Steinhardt brief itage and the need for its conservation. But the (AAM 2000, p. 97). It is true that U.S. mu further issue we wish in particular to consider seums will in future have to be more careful here is that what would appear to be the entire about acquiring "unprovenanced" antiquities U.S. museum community, without any clear on the market, but that is no bad thing. exception or protest, and notwithstanding the campaigning tradition of some museums in WHERE DOES THE actively opposing the illegal trade, threw its RESPONSIBILITY LIE? THE support behind Steinhardt in his fight over ACADEMIC WORLD AND THE the phiale. PUBLIC In the event, in 1999 the Second Circuit Court of Appeal ruled against Steinhardt, al Although the major U.S. museum or though it sidestepped the thorny problem of ganizations are clearly not exercising an the applicability of the Italian patrimony law adequate leadership role, it is likely that they when it decided that the false customs dec would take a lead from the public, if the larations constituted in themselves sufficient wider public subscribed to and supported grounds for the phiale's forfeiture. But the is a well-defined ethical policy. And here the sue of foreign patrimony laws did not go away focus of attention must turn to the educa with the phiale. It was back in contention two tionalists. Well-informed specialist voices, years later at the trial of Frederick Schultz. especially in the United States, have indeed In 2001, Schultz, a Manhattan antiq drawn attention to these issues for many uities dealer and former president of the years. Clemency Coggins (1969) was one NADAOPA, was charged with conspir of the first to develop the theme, which ing to receive, possess, and sell antiquities has been strenuously developed over the stolen from archaeological sites in Egypt years since by such writers as Hester Davis, (Gerstenblith 2002, 2003b). Schultz had Karen Vitelli, Patty Gerstenblith, Ricardo obtained at least eight antiquities from Elia, and others to whose work we have the British antiquities restorer Jonathan referred here. In Europe, until recendy we Tokely-Parry, who in 1997 had himself been have looked to Christopher Chippindale,

55 > Brodie Renfrew

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:16:58 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms David Gill, and Daniel Graepler. Since 1978 Part of the problem is the reluctance of the AIA has maintained the policy that the the academic community to become engaged editors of the American Journal of Archaeology in the debate. As long ago as 1979, while she would not publish articles or reports based on was editor of the Journal of Field Archaeology's artifacts acquired in contravention of the 1970 "The Antiquities Market," Karen Vitelli was UNESCO Convention (Ridgway & Wheeler forced to ask "What have you done about 1978) and the SAA has adopted a similar the antiquities market today?" (Vitelli 1979, position. pp. 75-77). She was dismayed by the volume Yet somehow the voice of professional ar of complaints she was receiving about the chaeology, effectively and authoritatively ex antiquities trade, all asking her to "do some pressed in this way, has not yet prevailed. thing." Vitelli answered that she was not the This must in large part be the consequence head of a large organization, able to mobilize of the failure of the professional archaeolo resources at will, nor was it her personal vo gists and the ethically-based museums, such cation or crusade. Doubdess, Ellen Herscher as the University of Pennsylvania Museum, and Timothy Kaiser, Vitelli's successors at to persuade museum directors and trustees "The Antiquities Market," suffered in similar in the United States that there is a signif fashion. We know from our own experience icant problem here which can only be ad at the IARC that far too many archaeologists dressed by codified acquisition policies that think they have discharged their responsibil follow the 1970 Rule, as advocated by the ities in that direction by complaining to us or AIA. It seems extraordinary that in 1998 rep advising us of what they see to be an appropri resentatives of the AAMD met privately with ate course of action. But, like Vitelli, there is Frederick Schultz in his capacity as President a physical limit to what we alone can achieve. of NADAOPA (Robinson 1998b), at a time In retrospect, the years 2002-2004 will when he was already under investigation by come to be seen as years of ethical crisis for our the FBI, to discuss support for the position of treatment of the world's archaeological her Michael Steinhardt in the matter of the gold itage, but nobody yet seems to have noticed. phiale. In 2002 the ACCP was formed, with a Coun Something is wrong somewhere. How is it cil composed of museum-associated lawyers that the professional view has not prevailed? and curators, and a Board of Advisors con How is it that a group of art museum directors, sisting of wealthy private collectors and di supported by a number of wealthy collectors, rectors of large museums. Two years later, in can work against the evident long-term inter 2004, the AAMD published the report of its est of the world's archaeological heritage in Task Force enquiry into the acquisition of ar this way? And why is not the entire academic chaeological materials and ancient art, which community in the United States expressing contains the revisionist guidelines referred to shock and horror that a group of museum di above (AAMD 2004). Perhaps some members rectors can claim to be representing all U.S. of the Task Force were also members of the museums in filing their amid curiae brief in ACCP's Board of Advisors? Unfortunately, the Steinhardt case? How is it that the Schultz like so many things in the antiquities trade, conviction does not make them feel that some we have not been told, although it would be in thing is wrong somewhere when the recent the public interest to know. One thing is clear President of NADAOPA, from whose mem though: the new AAMD guidelines, which are bers the museums which they direct have been in complete contradiction of the ICOM Code purchasing antiquities for many years, is jailed of Ethics, and which therefore threaten to iso for an offense relating to "unprovenanced" late U.S. museums from their larger interna (in fact, stolen and falsely provenanced) tional community, will no doubt receive the antiquities? powerful and influential backing of the ACCP.

www.annualreviews.org Looting and the Worlds Archaeological Heritage 557

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:16:58 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Unless action is taken now to oppose this com world in the United States will give coherent bined initiative, there is a danger that many and sustained support to SAFE, as well as to museums will feel able to lapse back into what the ALA and to the other professional associ Thomas Hoving would call a "second age of ations, and to their officials who, already 25 piracy." years ago, were clearly defining the issues. The only new and constructive responses When we submitted an early draft of this to this crisis that we can see developing are article to the Annual Review of Anthropology, SAFE and the Lawyers' Committee for Cul one editorial response was: "Don't preach to tural Heritage Preservation, and these organi the choir." The problem is that although the zations were the initiatives of concerned me choir has been in tune for a long time now, dia professionals and of lawyers, respectively, some of the congregation do not yet seem to not academic or professional archaeologists. be singing from the same hymn sheet. Per Nevertheless, SAFE is attracting the support haps it is time that they are persuaded to take of the archaeological and ethical museums more interest in these matters, and brought communities, and we hope that the academic into effective harmony.

LITERATURE CITED

AAM. 1985. Testimony of the American Association of Museums before a hearing of the Committee on Judiciary Subcommittee on Criminal law. In Hearing Before the Committee on Criminal Law of the Committee on the Judiciary United States Senate Ninety-ninth Congress on S.605. Ser. No. J-99-27, pp. 156-59. Washington, DC: US Gov. Print. Off. AAM. 2000. Brief o amid curiae American Association of Museums, et al. in support of the appeal of claimant Michael H. Steinhardt. Int. J. Cult. Prop. 9:76-105 AAMD. 2004. Report of the AAMD task force on the acquisition of archaeological materials and ancie nt art. http://www.aaind.org/papere/docurnents^unelOFinalTaskForceReport_001. pdf AIA. 2000. Memorandum of law o amid curiae Archaeological Institute of America, et al., in support of appellees United States of America and Republic of Italy. Int. J. Cult. Prop. 9:105-30 Ali I, Coningham R. 1998. Recording and preserving Gandhara's cultural heritage. Cult. With out Context 3:10-16

Alva W. 2001. The destruction, looting and traffic of the archaeological heritage of Peru. See Brodie et al. 2001, pp. 89-96 Atwood R. 2004. Stealing History: Tomb Raiders, Smugglers, and the Looting of the Ancient World. New York: St. Martin's Biddle M. 1980. New directions. Exped. 22:2-3 Br. Mus. 2004. British Museum policy on acquisitions, http://www.thebritishniuseuin.ac.uk/ corporate/guidance/Acquisitions.pdf Bedaux RMA, Rowlands M. 2001. The future of Mali's past. Antiquity 75:872-76 Bogdanos M. 2003. Iraq Museum investigation: 22Apr-8 Sep 03. http://www.defensemik.mil/ news/Sep2003/d20030922fr.pdf Brodie N. 1998. Pity the poor middlemen. Cult. Without Context 3:7-9 Brodie NJ, Doole J. 2004. The Asian art affair: US art museum collections of Asian art and archaeology. In Material Engagements: Studies in Honour of Colin Renfrew, ed. NJ Brodie, C Hills, pp. 83-108. Cambridge, UK: McDonald Inst. Archaeol. Res.

3$8 Brodie Renfrew

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:16:58 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Brodie NJ, Doole J, Renfrew C, eds. 2001. Trade in Illicit Antiquities: The Destruction of the Worlds Archaeological Heritage. Cambridge, UK: McDonald Inst. Archaeol. Res Brodie NJ, Doole J, Watson P. 2000. Stealing History. Cambridge, UK: McDonald Inst. Ar chaeol. Res. Brodie NJ, Tubb KW, eds. 2002. Illicit Antiquities: The Theft of Culture and the Extinction of Archaeology. London: Roudedge Chippindale C, Gill DWJ. 2000. Material consequences of contemporary classical collecting. Am. J. Archaeol. 104:463-511 Coggins C. 1969. Illicit traffic in Pre-Columbian antiquities. ArtJ. 29:94-98 D'Arcy D. 2002. Legal group to fight "retentionist" policies. The Art Newsp. 130:3 Doole J. 1999. In the news. Cult. Without Context 4:5-14 Doole J. 2001. In the news. Cult. Without Context 9:16-23 Elia R. 2001. Analysis of the looting, selling and collecting of Apulian red-figure vases: a quantitative approach. See Brodie et al. 2001, pp. 145-54 Eule JC. 2004. 15 Jahre Berliner Erkl rung, In Illegale Arch ologie?, ed. W-D Heilmeyer, JC Eule, pp. 96-104. Berlin: Weissensee Verlag Fernandez Cacho S, Sanju n LG. 2000. Site looting and illicit trade of archaeological objects in Andalusia, Spain. Cult. Without Context 7:17-24 Feroozi AW, Tarzi Z. 2004. The impact of war upon Afghanistans cultural heritage. http://www. archaeological.org/ Gerstenblith P. 1995. The Kanakari mosaics and the United States law on the restitution of stolen and illegally exported cultural property. See Tubb 1995, pp. 105-21 Gerstenblith P. 2002. United States v. Schultz. Cult. Without Context 10:27-31 Gerstenblith P. 2003 a. Acquisition and deacquisition of museum collections and the fiduciary obligations of museums to the public. CardozoJ. Int. Comp. Law 11:409-65 Gerstenblith P. 2003b. The McClain/Schultz doctrine: another step against the trade in stolen antiquities. Cult. Without Context 13:5-8 Gilgan E. 2001. Looting and the market for Maya objects: a Belizean perspective. See Brodie et al. 2001, pp. 73-87 Gill DWJ, Chippindale C. 1993. Material and intellectual consequences of esteem for Cycladic figures. Am. J. Archaeol. 97:601-59 Graepler D. 1993. Fundort: Unbekannt. Raubgrabungen Zerst ren das Arch ologische Erbe. Munich: Walter Bierung Gutchen M. 1983. The destruction of archaeological resources in Belize, Central America. J. Field Archaeol. 10:217-27 Heilmeyer W-D, Eule JC. 2004. Illegale Arch ologie? Berlin: Wei ensee Henley J. 2000. Louvre hit by looted art row. The Observer, Apr. 23:25 Hoving T. 1996. False Impressions. London: Andre Deutsch Howland RH. 1997. Mycenaean Treasures of the Aegean Bronze Age Repatriated. Washington, DC: Soc. Preserv. Greek Herit. ICOM. 2004. Code of Ethics for Museums. Paris: ICOM Kaufman JE. 1996. Getty decides publishing equals provenance. The Art Newsp. 6(61): 17 Kaye LM. 1995. The view from the Bosphorous. Presented at Art Theft Control, Nov. 14 15, London Kaye LM, Main CT. 1995. The saga of the Lydian Hoard antiquities: from Usak to New York and back and some related observations on the law of cultural repatriation. See Tubb 1995, pp. 150-62 Kirkpatrick SD. 1992. Lords ofSipan. New York: Morrow

www.annualreviews.org Looting and the Worlds Archaeological Heritage 359

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:16:58 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Kokkou A, ed. 1993. The Getty Kouros Colloquium. Athens: N.P. Goulandris Found./J. Paul Getty Mus. Lewis G. 2004. The Universal Museum: a special case? ICOM News 2004(1): 1 Leyten H, ed. 1995. Illicit Traffic in Cultural Property: Museums Against Pillage. Amsterdam: R. Trop. Inst. Litt S. 2004. A god of myth clothed in mystery: museum takes heat over ancient Apollo. The Plain Dealer, Sept. 12 Lyons CL. 2002. Objects and identities: claiming and reclaiming the past. In Claiming the Stones. Naming the Bones, ed. E Barkan, R Bush, pp. 116-40. Los Angeles: Getty Res. Inst. Messenger PM, ed. 1999. The Ethics of Collecting Cultural Property. Albuquerque: Univ. N.M. Meyer KE. 1973. The Plundered Past. London: Hamilton Norskov V. 2002. Greek Vases in New Contexts. Aarhus: Aarhus Univ. Press O'Keefe PJ. 1997. Trade in Antiquities: Reducing Destruction and Theft. London: Archetype/UNESCO O'Neill M. 2004. Enlightenment museums: universal or merely global? Mus. Soc. 2:192-202 Ortiz G. 1996. In Pursuit of the Absolute, Art of the Ancient World from the George Ortiz Collection. Berne: Benteli Pal P. 1997. A Collecting Odyssey. Indian, Himalayan and Southeast Asian Art from the James and Marilynn Alsdorf Collection. Chicago: Art Inst. Chicago Pastore G. 2 001. The looting of archaeological sites in Italy. See Brodie et al. 2 001, pp. 15 5-60 Renfrew C. 2000. Loot, Legitimacy and Ownership. London: Duckworth Renfrew C. 2004. Thoughts on the impact on the Swiss accession to the 1970 UNESCO Convention. In Not for Sale, a Swiss-British Conference on the Traffic in Artifacts from Iraq, Afghanistan and Beyond, ed. M Kimmich, pp. 8-10. Berne: Br. Counc. Ridgway BS, Wheeler TS. 1978. Editorial statement. Am. J. Archaeol. 82:1 Robinson WV. 1998a. New MFA link seen to looted artifacts. The Boston Globe, Dec. 27:A1, A3 0-31 Robinson WV. 1998b. Museums' stance on Nazi loot belies their role in a key case. The Boston Globe, Feb. 13:A1 Robinson WV, Yemma J. 1998. Harvard Museum acquisitions shock scholars. The Boston Globe, Jan. 16:A1 Rose M, Acar O. 1995. Turkey's war on the illicit antiquities trade. Archaeology 48:45-56 Russell JM. 1997. The modern sack of Nineveh and Nimrud. Cult. Without Context 1:6-20 Schick J. 1998. The Gods are Leaving the Country: Art Theft from Nepal. Bangkok: Orchid Press Schmidt PR, Mclntosh RJ. 1996. Plundering fricas Past. London: Currey Shapreau CJ. 2000. Second Circuit holds that false statements contained in customs forms warrant forfeiture of ancient gold phiale hotly contested foreign patrimony issue not reached by the Court: United States v. An Antique Platter of Gold. Int. J. Cult. Prop. 9:49-76 Stead IM. 1998. The Salisbury Hoard. Stroud: Tempus Symposium 1994. The international symposium on the looted antiquities from Iraq during the war of 1991. Final Rep. Baghdad, Dec. 10-12 Toner M. 2002. The Past in Peril. Tallahassee: Southeast Archaeol. Cent. True M. 1997. Refining policy to promote partnership. In Antichita Senza Provenienza II, ed. P Pelagatti, PG Guzzo, pp. 137^-6. Bolletino D'Arte Suppl. 101-2. Rome: Minist. I Beni Cult. Ambientali

True M, Hamma K, eds. 1994. A Passion for Antiquities: Ancient Art from the Collection of Barbara and Lawrence Fleischman. Malibu: J. Paul Getty Mus.

360 Brodie Renfrew

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:16:58 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Tubb KW, ed. 1995. Antiquities Trade or Betrayed: Legal, Ethical and Conservation Issues. London: Archetype/UKIC UNESCO. 2003. UNESCO second assessment mission to Iraq, 28 June-7 July 2003. http://port d.unesco.org/culmre/eri/ev.php-URLJD=14658&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL _SECTION=201.html Vitelli KD. 1979. What have you done about the antiquities market today? J. Field Archaeol. 6:75-77 Vitelli KD, ed. 1996. Archaeol. Ethics. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira von Bothmer D. 1990. Glories of the Past, Ancient Art from the Shelby White and Leon Levy Collection. New York: Metrop. Mus. Art. Watson P. 1997. Sotheby's: Inside Story. London: Bloomsbury Watson P. 1998. The sequestered warehouses. Cult. Without Context 2:11-14 Wright HT, Wilkinson TJ, Gibson M. 2003. The National Geographic Society s Cultural Assess ment. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/06/0611 _030611 _iraqlootin greport.html.

www.annualreviews.org Looting and the Worlds Archaeological Heritage 361

This content downloaded from 165.123.34.86 on Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:16:58 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms