Archaeology Magazine - March/April 1984 - 84

THE

FORUM

Antiquities
Collecting:
New Conflicts
of Values
by Ellen Herscher
the firstcenturyB.c.,greatRomancargo
shipsbegan regulartripsfrom Greece
In to supplythe aristocratichouseholdsof
Rome with statues and paintingswhich
were already hundreds of years old. The demand was so great that these ships were
often overloadedand reached the bottom of
the Mediterraneaninstead.
The Mediciof Florencewere considered
great publicbenefactors,as their collections
of antiquitiesbecame a source of fifteenthcenturyartisticinspiration.Innovativepractices-such as the "mining"of Pompeiihelped supplythe Renaissancemarket.
When the MetropolitanMuseumof Art
opened in NewYorkin 1880, its firstdirector
was LuigiPalma di Cesnola. Most of what
was on displayon that opening day was Cesnola's own collection,acquired during 11
years as a diplomatin Cyprus.
These are highlightsof the traditionof antiquitiescollectingin the westernworld.
Collectingsignifiedpersonal taste, superior
education,and the altruisticmotiveof preservingculture.On the national level,great
museumswere establishedwithpatriotic
pride:the foundingof the Metropolitanconfirmedthe UnitedStates as a civilizedcountry.
Glossymail-ordercatalogues stilldirect
their pitchto the collectoras a person of
cultivation,but recent reports in the news
media are turningthis image upside down.
MelinaMercouri,for example,callsLord Elgin
a thief and demands the return of the Parthenon marbles.Newsweekfeatures an exposé of "archaeologicalplundering"and
"smuggledart."ABC Newsdocuments the
effortsof internationallawenforcementagencies to controlthis traffic.Withincreased
frequencyand acrimony,collectingis being
characterizedas theft,greed and exploitation.
And this new negativeimage is being
reflectedin recent U.S.laws,treatiesand court
decisionswhich have struckfear into the
hearts of art dealers,privatecollectorsand
some museum officials.Such developments are difficultto comprehend,sincemost
of us grew up witha strong dose of those
Renaissancevalues.
First of all, it is important to remember
that there were alwaysa few unsavory
aspects,even in the idealizedtradition.The
avid Roman antiquariansMarkAnthony
and Sulla simplyproscribedrivalswhose collectionsthey coveted.Forgerywas rampant
duringthe Renaissance,one of the most
famous examplesbeing Michelangelo's
"SleepingCupid" - the sculptorreceiveda
higherprice for it after it was colored,buried
and "discovered."The Metropolitanwas
embarrassed by accusations that some statues in Cesnolas collectionhad heads and
bodies that didn't belong together, and
84

Archaeology

Thecontroversial
Elginmarbles
at theBritishMuseum.

States v.McClain(1977 and 1979).
4. Treatiesof CooperationwithMexico
(1971) and Peru (1981) Providing
for the Recoveryand Return of Stolen
Archaeological, Historiealand Cultural
Properties.These treatiesdo not contain
any additionallegal measures,but they
havecausedincreasedU.S.Customsvigilance in intercepting antiquities from
these two countries and more active
applicationof alreadyavailablelaws.Not
surprisingly,other countries are now
pressingfor similartreaties.
5. The UNESCOConventionon the
Means of Prohibitingand Preventing
the IllicitImport,Export, and Transferof
Ownershipof CulturalProperty (1970).
In December 1983, the United States
became the 53rd countryto ratifythis
internationalagreement,which forbids
the import of materialstolen from cultural institutions(churches,museums,
etc.) in other signatorystates. U.S.implementinglegislation(PL 97-446) also
sets up procedures for placingtemporary importrestrictionson specifically
designated classesof material threatened by pillage.Whileno requests have
yet been made to the U.S.to fulfill
these new obligations,in future the
UNESCOConventioncan be expected
to play an importantrole in regulating
the import of antiquities.
Importersshould also be aware that they
continueto be liableto seizure,forfeiture
and criminalprosecutionif it is later found
that they have brought goods into the U.S.
illegally.
Another constrainton collectingpractices
is a trend among Americanmuseumstoward
new ethical policies.onacquisitions.Many
privatecollectors,seekinga tax deduction
through the traditionof publicbenefaction,
are findingtheir giftsand bequests no longer
acceptableif they lack a proper pedigree.
Thus there existsa situationin whichall
interestedpartiesseem to havewithdrawninto
armed camps. Antiquity-richnations feel
their national pride is threatened. Art dealers
feel their livelihoodis threatened. Collectors
feel their portfoliosand publicreputations
are threatened. Archaeologistsand museum
curators feel knowledge is threatened. And
touristsfeel that their peaceful return from
vacationis threatened.
Yet all agree on the importance of preservingmankinds culturalheritage.Perhaps
this common goal willdirectthe current
chaos toward a more orderlymovement of
the world's artifacts for the enjoyment and
education of all.D

that the allegedfindspotof his "CuriumTreasure" did not seem to exist.
Nevertheless,fundamentalchanges haue
taken place. One of these is the nature of
archaeologyitself,which until the end of the
nineteenth centurywas technicallylittledifferent from what today is called"looting."Increasingly,however,archaeologistshave emphasizedthe recoveryof contextualinformation, not simplyobjects.Thus the uncontrolledquest for collectibleantiquitiesis now
recognizedas destructiveto the knowledge
that could have been gained by scientific
excavation.
The second fundamental change lies
in late twentieth-century
internationalpolitics.
Manyemergingnations are recognizing
that the remains of their past constitutean
integralpart of their nationalidentity- as
wellas a tangibleresource for tourism- and
have passed protectivelaws.Such countries
viewthe illicitremovalof their antiquitiesto
the wealthierdeveloped states as an offensive vestigeof colonialism.The traditional
argument that the collectorscan do a better
job of preservingculture merely adds insult
to injury,as Third Worldnations struggleto
preserve their own culture with the means
they have available.
These concerns have led to the following
frameworkof legalconstraintson the import
of antiquitiesinto the United States:
1. Standard U.S.Customs requirements
for proper declarationand evaluation.
False declarationalone can result in
forfeitureof property.
2. Law Regulatingthe Importationof
Pre-ColumbianMonumentalor ArchitecturalSculptureor Murals(1973).Prohibitsthe import of Precolumbian
monuments,sculptures,murals,or fragments of them, from Bolivia,Belize,
Colombia,Costa Rica,DominicanRepublic,Ecuador,ElSalvador,Guatemala,
Honduras, Mexico,Panama, Peru,
and Venezuela,withouta permitfromthe
countryof origin.
3. NationalStolen PropertyAct.Prohibits
the transport of stolen propertyworth
EllenHerscher
$5,000 or more in interstateor foreign
is Program
commerce.Since many countries (for
Coordinator
for
example,Mexico,Peru, Ecuador,Costa
the International
New
Rica,Turkey,Egypt,Jordan,
Councilof
Zealand, Iraq, and Lebanon) have laws Museums(ICOM)
Committeeof
declaringall antiquities- even those still
undiscovered- to be the property of
theAmerican
Association
the state,any objectremovedfromthose
of
Museums.
countrieswithoutan export permit can
be considered "stolen."This principle
was establishedin U.S.courts in United

Archaeology Magazine - March/April 1984

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Archaeology Magazine - March/April 1984