Egypt’s rich and ancient history has been standing for over 5000 years, as evidenced by the great pyramids.  Who would suspect that it could ever be threatened?  In actuality, looters have been picking away at the antiquities of Egypt for thousands of years, like ocean waves lapping at the base of an intricate sand castle.  Recently, however, there has been a disconcerting uptick in this attack on our world’s shared culture.

Political unrest in Egypt has set the stage for loss of control over the land’s artifacts.  According to U.C. Berkeley archaeologist Carol Redmount, who has been excavating and examining sites in Egypt for over 20 years, the increased looting of these archaeological sites began when former President Mubarak was forced to leave the country in early 2011 and has not slowed in the year and a half since.

During the regime change, many police, military personnel, and local guards were re-deployed to deal with the intense rioting.  Some even walked off the job.  Consequently cultural sites, precious artifacts, museums, and tombs were left unprotected.  In June 2012, Dr. Redmount invited NBC News Richard Engel to ride with her through Al-Heba, a town 180 miles south of Cairo where she has been working, so that he could see for himself the extent of this wanton destruction.  Here, at one tomb site, the entire hillside had been dug up in hundreds of places by looters.  On the ground were randomly discarded mummified bodies that had been unearthed in the race for anticipated treasures.

Microsoft.com Stock Photos

The Temple of Luxor

South of Cairo is not the only area where this is transpiring.  Thieves have even looted areas around the Great Pyramids in Giza and the Luxor temples, reports Major-General Abdel-Rahim Hassan, commander of the Tourism and Antiquities Police Department.

In May 2012, Egyptian police arrested two men for digging a 10-meter deep hole under their homes, which were just behind the temple of Khnum in the southern town of Esna, There police found hieroglyphic inscriptions dating back to the Ptolemaic dynasty and ancient clay pots.  Had these artifacts been removed and sold illegally, both Egypt and the world community would have lost another irreplaceable piece of its history.

Egypt’s Interior Ministry has reported 5697 cases of illegal digging since the anti-Mubarak uprising began shortly into 2011.  This is a shocking 100 times more than the previous year.  During this time, illegal trading in antiquities has mushroomed to 1467 cases.  According to the AP, these are only the cases that the Interior Ministry was able to track down.

With so little manpower to staunch the flow of antiquities out of Egypt, this situation continues to grow worse.   Amid political turmoil, a recent disputed election, and police and military personnel preoccupied elsewhere, what can be done to protect and preserve the ancient Egyptian culture?

Egypt’s loss is our loss because Egypt’s history is an integral part of our global history.  We need to act.  As SAFE continues to expand its influence and be joined by archaeological activists and patrons, we will work to support local government organizations like the Interior Ministry and the Tourism and Antiquities Police Department to stem this illegal activity and to provide security for Egypt’s antiquities. Join our cause on Facebook and Say YES to Egypt’s Heritage.

One of the easiest ways to think about the damaging effects of looting ancient sites is to consider what we stand to lose. Or simply put: what if?

In celebration of Howard Carter’s 138th birthday and his discovery of the tomb of Tutankhamun in 1922, a most important point should not be forgotten: what we now know about the young king would be impossible had tomb robbers found the coffin first.

In a 2005 Dig Magazine article, Adrienne J. Donovan of SAFE wrote:

In ancient times, robbers entered Tutankhamun’s tomb twice, but not his coffin. They took what was most valuable at the time, unguents and oils. After it was covered by rubble from the cutting of another tomb, Tut’s tomb was left untouched until Howard Carter began digging in 1922. It is the intactness of the finds and of Tut’s untouched mummy that have allowed the young king to be so well understood today.

 

Untouched by tomb raiders, the artifacts in King Tut’s intact tomb continue to stimulate public interest in ancient Egypt. Rather than “beautiful but dumb”*, the objects speak volumes about the ancient world in general. Among the many possibilities this wealth of information brings, technology can now even deduce what King Tut looked like, impossible to achieve had his tomb been plundered and its contents traded in the illicit antiquities trade

*Professor Clemency Coggins used the term to describe archaeological objects removed out of context. Professor Coggins of Boston University has worked on problems of Cultural Property preservation and law since 1968. She served on the US committee involved in drafting the 1970 UNESCO convention, and worked many years for the US ratification and implementation of the Convention.

The St. Louis Museum of Art (SLAM) filed a complaint in federal district court on February 15, 2011 asking for a declaratory judgment to prevent federal authorities from seizing a 19th Dynasty Egyptian mask popularly known as Ka-Nefer-Nefer.

The mask, excavated at Saqqara in 1952 by Mohammed Zakaria Goneim, was sold to SLAM in 1998 by Phoenix Ancient Art in Geneva. According to the New York Times, in 2006 Egypt first claimed that the mask was stolen and asked the museum to return it; and in 2008, U.S. Department of Homeland Security was “looking into the case.” While the museum insists that there is no documentation to prove that Ka-Nefer-Nefer is Egyptian property, stolen, or smuggled, many think otherwise. In a comment to our post, Dr. Peter Lacovara wrote:

The St. Louis Art Museum was informed by me soon after the purchase of that Mask that it came from Goneim’s excavations, was published and where, and that although it was not registered in the Cairo Museums’ inventory, the only means by which it could have legally left Egypt was if it had been retained by Goniem and later legally sold by him or his heirs and they would need to investigate this. They did not.

Another telling fact is that the name of the owner of the mask Ka-nefer-nefer was written in hieratic on the hand of mask and was scratched out and over painted to disguise its identity. If this were a painting published in a European catalog no one would dream of trying to justify keeping it without a clear and legitimate history. The Museum never undertook due diligence in trying to determine the provenance of this piece despite being told there was a cloud over it from the beginning.

They have no justification in retaining this mask and it should be returned to Egypt and the Museum should underwrite the cost of a conservator removing the over paint and restoring the inscription on the hand.

When SAFECORNER asked in an informal poll last March what should happen with the lawsuit, the results were:

• 26% said “SLAM should continue legal action in federal court.”
• 46% said “SLAM should produce documentation proving that the mask was legally exported from Egypt.”
• 45% said “SLAM should acknowledge Egypt’s claim of ownership.”
• 25% said “SLAM should drop the lawsuit.”

The curious case of St Louis Art Museum vs the United States may have just become “curiouser and curiouser” with the U.S. District Court’s dismissal of the government’s effort to forfeit the disputed Ka Nefer Nefer mask, but what about the case of St. Louis Art Museum vs public opinion?

According to Associated Press,

U.S. Attorney Richard Callahan said a decision on whether to appeal has not been made.

“We’re just looking to make sure we haven’t missed the tiniest bit of circumstantial evidence,” Callahan said. “We’re back to the drawing board and studying it.”

Meanwhile, the SLAM Attorney Linenbroker is said to be confident “we’re the rightful owner.”

The American Association of Museum (AAM) Code of Ethics for Museums says that a museum must make a “unique contribution to the public by collecting, preserving, and interpreting the things of this world.” How is the public served in the case of Ka-Nefer-Nefer? What do you think?

Add your voice to our latest poll: Should the St. Louis Art Museum return the disputed Ka-Nefer-Nefer funeral mask to Egypt?

Photo: AP

The CNN story on the burning of the library in Egypt contains a telling vignette:

At least one demonstrator was unaware that the structure was a library containing historical documents.
“We had no idea it was a library. We love our country. Why were the military thugs on the rooftop of the building in the first place, throwing debris and rocks at us? They destroyed it, not us, and now they will use it to turn public opinion against us and label us thugs,” said Ahmed Ali, a student and activist involved in the clashes.

“Since when are buildings or manuscripts more important than the lives of humans?” he added.

The demonstrator’s comments hold several lessons one hopes will be learned by heritage protection advocates…

(For more, go to The Punching Bag)

The burning of the Egyptian Scientific Institute in the midst of the chaos in Cairo is a cultural disaster on a par with the worst acts of destruction of heritage in recent years, arguably worse than the losses to the Iraq Museum (since stolen artifacts can still be recovered, whereas the burned original manuscripts are gone forever). Whether the fire was started by a Molotov cocktail or, as some have asserted, was set by the soldiers inside the building, is not yet clear, and may never become clear. What is clear, however, is that the burning of this library reflects yet another abject failure of heritage policy to protect heritage when it is most at risk.

It is not as if this eventuality was unpredictable. After the Cairo Museum was robbed in the midst of similar chaos last January, the Egyptian government, and the military leaders who run the country, should have been able to work with international heritage protection agencies and organizations such as UNESCO, the Blue Shield, and others — including the many, many Egyptian citizens who care deeply about their heritage (and showed it by joining hands to cordon off the Cairo Museum in January) — to put in place contingency plans to keep cultural institutions secure during periods of unrest. Last but not least, the US government, which subsidizes Egypt’s military to the tune of billions, ought to have demanded the Egyptians secure their cultural institutions and sites as a condition of aid. But of course, since we have no carabinieri-like forces ourselves to do this sort of thing, and little interest ourselves in securing cultural sites apart from major tourist attractions such as the Baghdad Museum or Babylon, chances are that no one from the Pentagon was even thinking about the problem, even after the looting of the Cairo Museum.

That was in January. Did the fate of the Cairo Museum provide a wakeup call that site security needed to be an urgent policy priority? It was not until mid-October, after months of bureaucratic chaos, that the government announced it had set up a committee to develop security plans, so the answer is most likely no. Nor did any citizens’ groups evolve out of the noble ad hoc handholding at the museum.

The result? If this CNN report is accurate, the military did not set up a perimeter around the building. Instead, a small number of soldiers stood on the building’s roof and goaded the protestors:

The library was a scene of intense confrontation Saturday.

A dozen men dressed in military uniform were positioned on the library roof and threw cement blocks and rocks on the protesters and sprayed them with water hoses to push them away from the building.

But protesters hurled back rocks as well as Molotov cocktails. Then a massive explosion erupted, apparently originating from inside the building, and black smoke billowed.

Firefighters were busy putting out another fire in a nearby building.

Protesters were bleeding from rocks thrown at them.

What is to be done going forward, beyond the important immediate task of salvaging the remnants of the library?

First, the courage, energy, and passion that Egyptian citizens have shown in responding to the disasters at the museum and now at the library needs to be channeled into civic organizations that can be mobilized proactively next time around.

Second, UNESCO needs to either shift resources from conservation and development or supplement them with additional funding focused on securing cultural sites during periods of political unrest.

Third, the United States needs to exercise some leadership and influence, where it has leverage or ties with militaries in countries undergoing transitions or crises, to induce them to do the right thing.

Fourth, NGOs and foundations that support cultural heritage conservation need to begin thinking about how they can work directly with nascent heritage site protection NGOs in-country.

Charles Q. Choi of LiveScience tells the story of illegal smuggling of mummies – a practice with a long history – which is a growing segment in the worldwide black market trade in illicit antiquities worth “billions of dollars” today. In “NY Mummy Smugglers Reveal Vast Antiquities Black Market” Choi showcases the July 13 announcement from Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) about the dismantling of the first international smuggling ring of this type to reach the U.S.

In the informative story, Egyptologist Regine Schulz, curator of ancient art at the Walters Art Museum in Baltimore talks about the history of mummification and how “mummies were seen as objects back then, not people,” until “[p]eople began to say, ‘Wait a moment, this is a person that should be treated in a respectful way, not a thing[.]‘” Moreover, “people are more interested in their coffins or maybe a nest of coffins, in what is around the mummy. The mummy itself is not the highest priority.” In other words, human remains of persons, who happen to be people’s ancestors, have become collateral damage to feed the black market antiquities trade.

According to Choi, while the black market for mummies and Egyptian antiquities has diminished somewhat due to strict laws nationally and internationally, the recent uprising “may have made it easier for criminals to loot the country.” (Please see our posts on this subject here, here and here.) This is why we care about the cultural heritage of Egypt – now.

The situation in Egypt parallels others around the world; for example, Utah’s “Four Corners” cases, where looters tore apart American Indian burial sites and scattered human remains in search of funerary objects; and Damien Huffer’s reports of Vietnamese funeral jewelry being sold at a gallery in Australia with human remains still attached.

We are confident that more publicity and reports like these the idea that “this is a person…not a thing” will sink in. Disrespect for the law and human dignity will be no longer be tolerated. As one commentator to the article “Widow sues over husband’s suicide in artifacts case” said:

“…robbing a grave in Utah is the same as robbing a tomb in Egypt.”—slippast

In a highly unusual legal maneuver by a U.S. museum seeking to retain recent acquisition, the St. Louis Museum of Art (SLAM) filed a complaint in federal district court on February 15, 2011 asking for a declaratory judgment to prevent federal authorities from seizing a 19th Dynasty Egyptian mask popularly known as Ka-Nefer-Nefer. Attorney Ricardo St. Hilaire has posted a helpful summary of SLAM’s complaint and legal arguments, in which he points out important ownership information that is missing from SLAM’s complaint. According to St. Hilaire, “the museum essentially argues that the US government cannot legally take the mask because the statute of limitations has run out and because there is no reason to believe that the mask is Egyptian property or that it was illegally stolen or smuggled into the United States.” Looting Matters also discusses the complaint and questions whether SLAM is adhering to the American Association of Museum Directors‘ Code of Ethics, which says “A museum director should not knowingly acquire or allow to be recommended for acquisition any object that has been stolen, removed in contravention of treaties or international conventions to which the United States is a signatory, or illegally imported in the United States.”

Here are some known facts about the controversy:

• All sides agree that the mask was excavated at Saqqara in 1952 by Mohammed Zakaria Goneim, then chief inspector of antiquities.

• All sides agree that the mask was sold to SLAM in 1998 by Phoenix Ancient Art in Geneva for US$499,000.

• Phoenix Ancient Art and SLAM contend, based on oral testimony, that the mask was given to Egyptologist M. Zakariya Goneim, who excavated the Saqqara necropolis in 1952, as part of the “division of finds” (partage) agreement that permitted archaeologists who do fieldwork to a share of the objects that are found. The mask reportedly appeared in a Brussels gallery in 1952. Then, according to the museum’s provenance, the mask entered the Kaloterna (or Kaliterna) Collection sometime in the “early 1960s” and was then resold to a “Private Collection, Switzerland.” The SLAM provenance ends with a letter dated July 2, 1997 stating that Zuzi Jelinek in Geneva, Switzerland sold the mask to Phoenix Ancient Art in or about 1995. (But Malcolm Gay, a reporter for the St. Louis-based Riverfront Times, dialed the telephone number at the top of the 1997 letter and spoke to a man identifying himself as Jelinek’s son, Ivo Jelinek, who said his mother never owned the Ka-Nefer-Nefer mask. ‘This is completely false information. . . .’)

• Zahi Hawass, Egyptian Minister of Antiquities, refutes the claim that the mask was given to Zakariya Goneim. That scenario is impossible, Hawass says, because according to the Egyptian law no “division of finds” was allowed with Egyptians. And Goneim, as an Egyptian excavator who worked with the Egyptian government, could not have offered the mask to anyone. Hawass also denies that the Ka-Nefer-Nefer mask appeared in the 1952 Brussels gallery, because that same year, and for the next seven years, the mask was listed in the Saqqara inspectorate’s registered book as a stored item until its transfer to the Egyptian Museum in Cairo for exhibition in 1959. An image showing the mask in the Egyptian Museum acquisition register has been posted on the Stanford Archaeology Center website. According to Egyptian Museum records, the mask never arrived. And no export permit has surfaced showing that the mask was legally removed from the country in accordance with Egyptian cultural patrimony law (Egyptian Law No. 215 on the Protection of Antiquities) that was in force at the time.

• Neither SLAM nor Phoenix Ancient Art has produced any documentation that the Egyptian government gave the mask to M. Zakariya Goneim, and they do not mention that Goneim’s own writings indicate that he did not own the mask. In the acknowledgements section of his 1956 book The Buried Pyramid, Goneim thanks the Egyptian Department of Antiquities in Cairo “for permission to reproduce” two photographs of the mask. SLAM and Phoenix Ancient Art also fail to mention that Goneim was falsely accused of stealing and smuggling antiquities by Egyptian authorities in 1957-58 after his return to Egypt from a lecture tour of the U.S. Subjected to intense police interrogation alleging that Goneim had stolen a large and valuable vessel that had been discovered at Saqqara two years earlier, Goneim proclaimed his innocence. In January 1959 French Egyptologist Jean-Philippe Lauer found the vessel in a corner of the Egyptian Museum’s vast depository and hurried to deliver the good news to authorities, only to discover that Goneim (a broken man) had committed suicide by jumping into the Nile. Of all the people in the world that SLAM and Phoenix would choose (without any proof) to link to the stolen Ka-Nefer-Nefer mask, the last person, it seems, would be M. Zakariya Goneim.

We feel strongly that SLAM has not undertaken a full, rigorous and systematic due diligence procedure to exclude the possibility that the mask was not removed illegally from the Saqqara store. In addition, SLAM has so far been unable to present authenticated documentation to demonstrate that the mask did leave Egypt in the 1950s as has been suggested.

What do you think? Add your view to the SAFE poll.

We thank Dr. Joris Kilas for sending us a report from the Association of National Committees of the Blue Shield and the International Military Cultural Resources Work Group which reflects the findings from a mission conducted February 12-16, 2011 “to assess possible damages and looting attempts to Egyptian Heritage sites and museums after the recent unrests.

Many contradicting messages were reported regarding looting and vandalism, without the possibility of properly checking the real situation. Therefore there was an urgent need to send a mission especially to those sites that were supposedly affected by criminal acts, in order to document the situation, to state damages incurred and to encourage the parties involved to further efforts in protecting the invaluable Cultural Heritage of Egypt.”

More images are available by clicking on the Egypt 2011 tab at the Austrian National Committee of the Blus Shield’s web site.

Alexander Joffe’s article (Feb. 2) on the, fortunately minor, looting of the Cairo Museum is misleading and, indeed, paradoxical for an archaeologist, omits to mention, let alone discuss, the sole cause for this and all other looting and worldwide plunder. It exists to acquire “treasures” to be sold to customers: no customers, no looting or plunder. This reality is the beginning and end of all discussions on local plunder and looting. Such actions are initially conducted by thieves, not the “people” (“Iraqis,” “Egyptians”), who, as Joffe unfortunately claims, should “decide whether to preserve or destroy” their heritage. Both the thieves and local plunderers (who often commit violence in their activities), are employed by antiquity dealers, who arrange the smuggling abroad, and in turn sell their goodies to, museums and private collectors worldwide. The former purchase the plunder seeking to be labeled “encyclopaedic museums,” and “Guardians of the Past,” which goal in the United states is unknowingly and unwittingly paid for (many millions of dollars a year) by taxpayers; the later for social, prestige reasons. These are the plunderer’s employers, the very sponsors of all looting and plundering. Joffe mentions the looting of the Baghdad and Kabul museums, but not the five museums looted in 1991 under Saddam Husseins’ reign, or that at Corinth: all sold to their sponsors abroad.

Joffee and I agree that plundered artifacts “must be returned,” but clearly, if inadvertently, seems to support plunder in general by assuming they will be “safer in Europe or America,” again omitting to mention how the countless thousands of plundered antiquities reached Europe and America in the first place. Joffe’s attacks on Egypt’s Zahi Hawass conflate his justified claims for return (yes, the Nefertiti head was stolen from Egypt by the German archaeologist Ludwig Burchardt) with his flamboyant claims, and, crucially, does not mention that Hawass’ demands for return were made before the present chaos in Egypt, and were in some cases not “misguided.”

Oscar White Muscarella,
Archaeologst
New York City

Photo: Associated Press

No one knows what the future holds for Egypt. Our hearts and hopes are with the Egyptian people as they struggle toward genuine democracy. The first priority now must be the country’s stability, its citizens, their safety, their dignity.

While politicians work out ways to address the demands of the people, attention must also be focused on efforts to protect Egypt’s ancient cultural heritage, out of respect for the Egyptian people and all citizens around the world. Some may think this premature, even insensitive. We don’t. Here’s why:

– As the current government in Cairo gives way to a new political regime, and Egypt begins the process of renewal, it is essential that cultural heritage of the people – the touchstone of their cultural memory and identity - remains intact. We must work together to ensure that the new Egypt is not built on the rubble of robbed museums and plundered tombs. 

– Also, protecting and preserving cultural heritage is now recognized as a key development priority for all nations: If we are truly concerned about Egypt’s social, political and economic future, we should strongly support the protection of their museums and heritage sites.

– The ancient and sacred structures and artifacts that make up the cultural heritage of Egypt represent the ultimate non-renewable resource. The world community must do everything it can to protect these treasures for all humanity and prevent irreparable damage that may that result in the destruction of ancient sites and loss of materials.

Join SAFE in solidarity for the people of Egypt and their cultural heritage.

In response to the looting which took place in the aftermath of the invasion of Baghdad in 2003, the United States House of Representatives proposed HR 2009 (initiated by Congressmen Phil English and James Leach and later implemented as S. 671), to prohibit the importation into the United States of any archaeological or cultural material removed from Iraq without appropriate documentation. This law works to keep the cultural heritage of Iraq in Iraq, and seeks to eliminate the supply of freshly looted or stolen materials to the antiquities trade. Will similar legislative actions be taken given the current situation in Egypt?

The circumstances in Egypt are different in many regards from that which existed in Iraq in 2003. Absent the sense of responsibility which came from an overt US presence on the ground and a UN Security Council Resolution, where is the political will to back up the need for such legislation? Congressmen Phil English and James Leach are no longer in office; who might sponsor such a bill?

Are emergency legislative reactions necessary? Given the Schultz decision clarifying Egypt’s national ownership law, there already exists the legal basis for seizing looted Egyptian antiquities in the US.

Whether or not legislation is required, until order is restored, we believe that if the demand for Egyptian antiquities is curtailed, if not stopped, the loss of Egypt’s cultural patrimony during this tumultuous time would be curbed. We are happy to see that Salima Ikram, professor of Egyptology at The American University in Cairo, agrees.

Also, we hope that Egypt (as of 1973, party to the 1970 UNESCO Convention) would make a request for a bilateral agreement to restrict importation of antiquities into the US.

What do you think? Please cast your vote.

The many accounts of looting and destruction in Egypt in the last few days have been alarming and at times, confusing. Reports about the nature and extent of the damage – and who caused the damage – have been numerous and sometimes conflicting. What are rumors? What are facts?

One recalls a similar situation in 2003 when the Iraq Museum was looted, and the number of objects became a source of confusion. Matthew Bogdanos’s article in The American Journal of Archaeology “The Casualties of War: The Truth About the Iraq Museum” (and the 2005 book Thieves of Baghdad) recounts that situation in great detail, and goes a long way to dispel early misconceptions.

As with the Iraq situation, we will probably not know all the facts for some time. But while information about the exact scope of the destruction – and who did what – is still being assessed, what we do know for certain is that one of the world’s richest and oldest cultural heritages is at risk. One artifact looted or destroyed is one too many.

We also know this: Egyptian antiquities can fetch huge sums. In December, 2010 alone, 13 artifacts reportedly sold at Sotheby’s for a total of $9,789,500.

So how will we respond?

A number of organizations have issued a statement that includes a “call on United States and European law enforcement agencies to be on the alert over the next several months for the possible appearance of looted Egyptian antiquities at their borders.” SAFE believes that we should also alert dealers, collectors, conservators, auction houses, museums, antique galleries. Any artifacts looted from Egypt during this tumultuous time will presumably end up on the antiquities market outside the country.

Will the trade exercise restraint or curtail its appetite for Egyptian collectibles during this time? Will it perform special due diligence? We hope it will.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

A Euronews video shows Cairo residents forming a human shield to protect the Egyptian Museum, which houses tens of thousands of objects including most of the King Tutankhamen collection. “We are standing here and calling for the army to come as soon as possible and we will not leave until the army arrives.” The people demanded, determined to safeguard it from fire and looters, according to the article “Egyptians form human shield to protect museum”. A report from Reuters indicates that looters had managed to enter and destroy two of the mummies.

By early early Saturday, Associated Press reported that the Egyptian army had surrounded the building and also moved inside to protect the collections.

Another indication that bilateral agreements prohibiting “export, import or transfer the ownership of cultural properties” is an effective solution to protecting cultural property is illustrated in the latest accord between China and Egypt. Both parties to the 1970 UNESCO Convention, China and Egypt “have suffered heavily from thefts, illegal excavating and trafficking of cultural heritages.” The agreement also allows each nation to seek the return of stolen cultural properties, according to this report from Xinhua.

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.

It was recently reported that looting of archaeological sites in parts of Peru had declined due to an increase in the production of cheap fakes. I suggested in a previous post that Peruvian archaeology had found an unusual alley in online auction, sites such as eBay, because local thieves could make more money manufacturing cheap fakes than they could by looting unexcavated sites. However, the production of fakes should not be encouraged as a means to prevent the looting and destruction of cultural heritage. Fakes confuse real history and people are misled. The Royal Ontario Museum’s exhibition “Fakes & Forgeries: Yesterday and Today” (which is running until April 4, 2010) underlines this point. For example, forgeries of Egyptian antiquities often deceive individuals who do not know what to look for; eager buyers frequently do not have the proper education. Fake Egyptian statues and reliefs, such as that pictured (above left), have flooded the illicit antiquities market. The sandstone on this forgery is tinted with a reddish pigment to give the appearance of old age. The artist has also depicted the crown of Upper Egypt incorrectly – it is supposed to cover the nape of the pharaoh’s neck. Moreover, the carving of the facial features is very rough leading the Royal Ontario Museum to describe it as a “crude and contrived representation”. This example highlights how information is confused when it is manufactured.

The urn pictured (above right) is from Mexico and is also a fake. It is possible to decipher that this is not authentic by its style; thermoluminescence dating is not required. An examination of the motifs shows this to be a fake. The Royal Ontario Museum tells us that “a forger might copy the feathers from one genuine item, the tunic from another and the pedestal from yet another. Though each part seems authentic, the forgers combined them together in ways that don’t make artistic sense”. Fakes of this kind can create a great deal of confusion by mixing styles from different eras or locations.

Peruvian archaeology has found an unusual ally in the battle against looting in the internet and websites such as eBay. This is according to Charles Stanish, a UCLA archaeologist, writing in the June 2009 issue of Archaeology. Stanish has excavated for 25 years at fragile archaeological sites in Peru. It was feared that online auction sites would increase looting as the looter could sell directly to the buyer eliminating costly middlemen. In fact, online auction websites have actually helped reduce looting as the average looter or craftsman can now make more money selling cheap fakes online rather than spend weeks digging for the real thing and running the risk of not finding anything. It is less costly to transport a fake and the risk of arrest is removed. Moreover, workshops churning out cheap fakes and replicas can also produce elaborately detailed fakes which can be so authentic even experts are deceived. Locals can use original ancient moulds, often found during excavations but of no real value themselves, to create exact replicas using clay from original sources and local minerals to make paint for decorating the pottery. The only way to know for sure if a piece is genuine is through thermo-luminescence dating which calculates when the pottery has been fired. But this is expensive for the buyer and many sellers will not offer refunds on pottery that has undergone “destructive” analysis. Ten years ago the ratio of real to fake Peruvian artefacts for sale online was roughly 50:50. It is now thought that only 5% of items are authentic, 30% are fakes and the rest are too difficult to judge from online photographs. This turnaround emphasises how paradoxically online auction sites have helped to combat the trade in illicit antiquities. Also, its not just Peruvian fakes that are flooding the illicit antiquities online market; Chinese, Bulgarian, Egyptian and Mexican workshops are also producing fakes at a frenetic pace.

To read my thoughts on fakes, please read my follow up article.

Reference: http://www.archaeology.org/0905/etc/insider.html

Zahi Hawass put pressure on the Louvre to return fragments from a tomb at Thebes.  The items had been acquired in 2000 and 2003. An expert panel recommended their return this week.

Looting Matters: Egypt Puts Pressure on French Museum

In August 2007 I speculated about the scale of the market in antiquities. I have now posted some analyses of the scale of the market based on Sotheby’s New York:

• Percentage of Egyptian antiquities at auction (1998-2008)
• Trends in the sale of Egyptian antiquities (1998-2008)