Illicit Antiquities

Concerned Parties

Archaeologists are concerned about the trade in illicit antiquities because the method of their acquisition entails destruction of archaeological context and a loss of archaeological provenance. In other words, if it is not known with what other objects an antiquity was found, or even where it was found, its potential as an object of historical study is sharply diminished. For example, the monetary value of a small Roman pot can be readily established, but the historical interest of such a pot found in India far outweighs that of an identical specimen found in Italy. When details of the find spot are lost, so is the historical interest. Furthermore, archaeologists rely on meticulous recovery and examination of all available evidence, the microscopic and everyday as much as the beautiful and valuable; yet fragile material or material thought to be of no value is routinely destroyed during illicit excavation. Again, archaeologists view this as a loss of historical knowledge.

Collectors and dealers disagree; they argue that their actions are not harmful because they are “rescuing” material that would otherwise be destroyed during agricultural, urban, or industrial development projects. They also suggest that the aesthetic merit of a piece—its beauty—may outweigh its historical interest, and that its destructive or clandestine excavation can therefore be justified. Better to be seen than left in the ground, they claim.

Governments are concerned about the trade in illicit antiquities, because it is a challenge to the sovereignty of the state and an attack on the national heritage. This heritage increasingly is seen to have an economic potential, because intact archaeological sites and monuments can provide a base for the development of cultural tourism. Gaping holes in the ground and mutilated temples make poor tourist attractions.

...