10 Years After...

This month marks the ten year anniversary of the tragic looting of the Iraq Museum in Baghdad during the initial days of the US occupation. Numerous pieces remain missing from this event, and the museum remains closed to the general public. Only the work of the late Donny George and his staff, with the assistance of the US military, prevented the complete loss of the museum's entire collections and archives. Work to restore this institution is, understandably, very slow going.

To commemorate this event and why it still matters in terms of the global looting crisis and continued discussion of the role of museums and concerned private citizens in preventing the trade, SAFE is running a virtual candle lighting campaign so that the world community can honour what was lost and look towards the future. Candle lighting and other, written or multi-media contributions will be accepted until July, and hosted on the website.

You, too, can light a candle here, as well as watch a relevant video here and read my own reflections here (as part of SAFEs additional campaign to collect personal reflections from heritage professionals and concerned citizens alike). Please help me spread the word, and join the cause yourself! What future, without our past?

The "tomb raiding" crisis in China continues.

As I gather my thoughts and photos together from Vietnam to soon begin a series of posts discussing the antiquities trade in Hanoi as I observed it last month, this interim post concerns the following article. It concerns the continuation and apparent escalation of organized, literal tomb raiding in several provinces around China, specifically highlighting the situation in Shaanxi province. Criminal gangs from several nearby provinces have descended on the province in droves, with local police having solved 250 cases of raiding/smuggling since 2009 alone.

However, it is clear from the article that this is a drop in the ocean of what's really going on. What was most disturbing, and obviously the most challenging for local and national archaeologists and non-corrupt officials to deal with, is the degree and extent to which these gangs form "alliances" with either local villagers or even local police. This is not a new phenomenon, nor is it confined to China, but the situation again indicates why the severity of looting in China is among the worst in Asia; similar to what's going on in Peru.

On the upside however, the article suggests that increased village patrols, police presence, and even the self-induced reformations of former gang members/leaders while in prison appears to be having some effect. Note as an example the case of Pan Baocheng, the 53yr old gang member from Henan. He started to loot out of greed, was caught, and saw the error of his ways in prison. Or, the case of Pan Liusuo (see photo above left), also from Henan, serving time in the Dafeng detention centre. Sometimes, if the stolen and smuggled antiquities are "high profile" enough (like the grave goods of Wu Huifei, sold in 2006 to US collectors, but later returned to the Shaanxi History Museum), they can be tracked down and repatriated. Perhaps a similar fate would have awaited the Baphuon lintel described in my last post (if authenticated), should it have been purchased and shipped? It is common knowledge, however, that such high profile pieces are a tiny fraction of the global trade.

The legal punishments mentioned in the article strike me as very fair (and I would never advocate the death penalty), but at the end of the day, the task remains to stop these crimes before they start. Like anywhere else, increased vigilance, education, transnational cooperation and (where possible) the fostering of greater responsibility on the "demand" side. However, it can't be stated enough: the only way to avoid complacence in the destruction of global heritage and the archaeological record and/or avoid scams, fakes and individual ties to additional criminal activities is to NOT PURCHASE ANTIQUITIES!

"Other People's Treasure" and Looting in the Philippines

This post will be the first in a series focusing on the topic of the collection of "other people's treasure" (or the alleged reclamation of "treasure" thought to affiliate with ones' own ethnic or national history) as an ongoing motive for looting and antiquities trading in the Southern Hemisphere. In this instance, I'm referring to a new case of looting that recently occurred (sometime last year, from what I understand from the article) at the sites of Maulohin Cave and Istar Cairn, on Imorigue island in New Ibajay town, Palawan province, Philippines. Dr. Victor Paz (in full disclosure, a colleague of mine) first reported this incident to get the National Museum of the Philippines involved in the investigation, noting that these 500 year old remains, with clear contextual affiliation with Metal Age ceramics and iron weapons, were "stolen by Japanese descendants of missing World War II soldiers."

Paz, acting in his capacity as a representative of the National Museum and member of the Palawan Island Palaeohistoric Research Project, convinced the Museum Director, one Cecilio Salcedo, to send additional experts to Palawan to work with local authorities to investigate what occurred, when, and the extent of the damage. Not surprisingly, but in my opinion rather suspiciously, the Japanese Embassy is refusing to comment and feigning ignorance.

Although reports of what occurred still seem unconfirmed, or based upon a few "known facts" and several interviews and "unconfirmed reports," it appears that in May last year, Japanese Nationals with local guides visited the sites and carefully "sorted and sacked" all the bones for removal, but guards stopped the removal before it could go ahead, and the remains were eventually turned over to the Palawan Island Palaeohistoric Research Project team who returned them to their original sites, with bilingual signs placed "in clear view" stating that these re-deposited remains were those of prehistoric ancestral Philippinos. Apparently, another sack of mostly material cultural items and shell was also produced, coming from a site no one on the excavation team recognized...suggesting that other nearby sites have also been hit. Dr. Paz, doing his part as a true advocate of archaeological education and anti-looting outreach in his country, has discussed looting issues with concern before, noting again (in light of this case) that "at the rate the looting is going, we will have nothing left for future generations of Filipinos to protect and learn from."

Despite this, the article suggests (if I read it right) that the remains have just recently been removed again, thus sparking the outrage and calls for thorough investigations discussed in the article. As Dr. Paz and others who've worked in the Philippines have personally informed me, many looting cases like the above relate to the story of "Yamashita's Treasure," the likely-mythological burial of immense quantities of gold and other spoils of war 'stolen' by the Japanese fleet from various locations around Southeast Asia and then hidden in caves, tunnels and booby-trapped enclosures throughout the Philippines. The legend has been thoroughly spread by local and American population culture sources (TV, books, video games etc.), but Philippino historian Ambeth Ocampo (among others) has observed that both foreign and Philippino "treasure hunters" have been looking for 50yrs, using every supposed map and bit of oral history testimony they can find, and have still recovered nothing substantial. Yet the dissemination of(ahem) "revisionist" history fueling the search continues apace (e.g. here).

So, here we have the theme of "other people's treasure" seen from two angles: Locals (especially, it seems, foreign nationals and rural villagers) exposed to such legends by foreign and local media and aware of the prices that gold etc. could fetch on the open market, continue to search, occasionally looting prehistoric sites in the process. On the other hand, the Japanese students and nationals allegedly connected to the initial (and perhaps subsequent) removal of bones and artifacts from archaeological context at Maulohin and Istar Cairn destroyed another piece of the Philippines' non-renewable archaeological heritage (i.e. "other people's treasure") to reclaim "ancestors" they erroneously believed to be theirs. The end result is the same. Although this example does not involve a clear intent to sell "other people's treasure" (i.e. human remains and artifacts) on the antiquities market, this motive deserves further investigation where actual looting with intent to sell is concerned.

Forthcoming posts in my first series built around a theme will deal with justifications and influences currently affecting the Southern Hemisphere antiquities trade. Not just the import of antiquities from abroad into source countries (primarily Australia and New Zealand, but also Africa or South America where relevant), but also the trade in Aboriginal or Maori artifacts, remains, or pieces of historic "Australiana" and "Kiwiana" which might find markets amongst the new middle class in Asia. Of course, Southeast Asia remains a primary focus. Is the desire to own a tangible piece of the past of a country with a much longer written and/or unwritten history that yours enough of a reason to support the trade? How is the concept of "other people's treasure" used in antiquities marketing down here, or even the marketing of local prehistoric artifacts overseas (where observable)? Is the non-Indigenous collection of Indigenous artifacts still tied to "exoticization" of the "other?" Stay tuned for some semblance of an answer, hopefully with concrete examples to boot. Onwards!

Continued Tragedy in Iraq

Although I'm aware that Iraq is not in fact in the Southern Hemisphere, I want to post a link to this video here to do my part to give it further coverage in the media and blogosphere.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76yWh3ongT0&feature=player_embedded

I originally encountered the video here. The source is AlJazeera's English Language broadcast. It is only by further investigations and reporting like this, but in other heavily threatened locations around the world as well (Cambodia, for example), that the "Big Lie" perpetuated by die-hard antiquities dealers can be further exposed. Can anyone, especially anyone claiming to be a "responsible collector," look at videos like this and still not think that fresh loot is fueling the global market? Wouldn't one have to at least become a little "suspicious" as to the authenticity of that "Old Collection" provenance lable seen on yet another cylinder seal or cuneiform tablet? Yes, broken up musuem and private collections pre-dating 1970 do exist, but those items too are especially likely to have left their context through what would today be defined as looting, given the near-complete lack of heritage laws and systematic, scientific archaeology at the time. Seeing essentially the same activities continue today in war-torn countries like Iraq and Afghanistan, or those still reeling from the effects of war 35yrs on, could lead only the most willfully ignorant to the conclusion that the looting threat is "over exaggerated!"

Gandhara Galleries: "Statue-ary Rape"

Another gallery has come to my attention as of two days ago, well deserving of more intense scrutiny. The word "unscrupulous" comes immediately to mind! Gandhara Galleries, based out of an undisclosed location in Australia, boasts on their website of 20 years experience in the acquisition, appraisal, and sale of stone, wood, and bronze statuary from "Gandhara," that is Afghanistan to China to Southeast Asia, with a stated specialty in, and strong representation of, pieces from Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar (Burma). On their website, they take pride in the fact that they've "developed a client list, who return to buy from us again and again," and boast about their offering of pieces "at the same price as the dealers, galleries, museums, and auction houses," which "can of course amount to considerable savings."

Yet again, authenticity is emphasized above all else, and extensive description of the art historical background to Gandhara region sculpture is provided, with emphasis placed upon the uniqueness, and time-consuming manufacturing methods, of every piece offered. To whit: "All pieces are unique, individually hand-crafted by master sculptures using ancient techniques and driven by Buddhist religious ideology and merit, carved and sculptured for religious purposes. Bronzes were produced using the lost wax method, a highly innovative process requiring great skill, experience and patience." Despite the underlying truth that such sculptures (and indeed all artifacts traded as "antiquities," to one degree on another) would've been made with refined and well-practiced techniques, it is statements such as these that directly appeal to the "Connoisseur's View" guiding those who would repeatedly purchase antiquities on the global black market, especially something as bulky, difficult to smuggle, and expensive as complete statues.

Let's talk about the issues of authenticity and provenance as displayed (or not) on this site. First of all, I highlight the following: "Please note: all pieces for sale through Gandhara are in Australia at the time of advertising for sale, unless stated otherwise" (italics mine). The heyday of the wholesale looting and removal of temple frescoes and statuary (or just the heads from said statues), at least in Cambodia, occurred in the 1980s/early 1990s, although statuary looting incidents were known during French colonial days as early as 1924. With more stringent APSARA (local Cambodian Heritage police) and U.N. protection now in place around the major temple complexes, tourism has greatly increased, as have collaborations between Cambodian, regional, and Western authorities to implement new legal and educational measures. As a result, confiscations and apprehensions have begun to occur. Evidence from both Gandhara galleries and others, such as BC Galleries, suggests such apprehensions are nowhere near enough.

If the majority of the pieces left the country many years ago, even pre-1970s, and have been moving from legitimate owner to legitimate owner since then, then where's the evidence up front? Why no provenance history (even as suspicious as "private collection," "Old collection," or "Ex Christies or Sothebys") for all of them? It is readily apparent to anyone who views their website that what they offer for sale could never have 'surfaced' "accidentally" as a "field find." Regardless of when the destruction occurred, or if any actual digging was required to get the piece out of the ground, the mere fact that they had to be located, transported, packaged and shipped is proof positive that these artifacts are 'victims' of organized efforts. I point out again that their own website only puts them in business for 20 years!

Where were all these pieces hiding before that if they weren't instead taken out of their source countries recently? I found a scant few examples of artifacts with minimally stated provenance identifying it as part of a previous auction (e.g. this c. 12th century Naga balustrade), or this pre-Angkorian head of Vishnu, and these bronze statuettes (appraised, but purchased in the "late 1970s" From whom?). The catalog entries for many objects mention published sources to check and similar examples sold at auction elsewhere, yet even the robbery of monasteries as an act of looting to provide the market with, for example, these colossal Lao bronze Buddha statues, is unsurprisingly completely ignored. In countries currently experiencing warfare and ethnic strife, such as Afghanistan in this case, the antiquities trade can operate all the more openly.

Note how almost none of the objects have stated prices (except for a few small items, such as these coins), bur are rather "P.O.A." (price on application). At the same time, on the Guarantee page, they state "We are constantly offering quality Gandharan and Asian artifacts at extremely competitive prices, a fantastic opportunity for private collectors and people interested in ancient objects to acquire truly unique works of art, all of which are almost 2000 years old, only previously believed to be accessible to museums and art galleries." So why not state your prices upfront? On what basis do they determine the price of the priceless art/artifacts they sell?

Further adding to my sense of an underlying "caveat emptor" (buyer beware) attitude is that, for all the emphasis they place on statements of authenticity (highlighting soil accretion, weathering, damage, and a few T.L. dated objects), a disclaimer is provided stating that a customer can return the object within five days (in its original packaging) if it's not found to match the description. "After this initial five day period any goods you wish to return must be accompanied by a written evaluation from an internationally recognized dealer of Asian Antiques stating that the item(s) purchased are not authentic pieces as described within our description." Why offer this service at all? Have they themselves been fleeced by in-country middle-men before? Just who would be acceptable to provide the second opinion and appraisal needed? That segment of the professional academic archaeological/art historical community with the relevant specialization for pieces such as these isn't exactly large... All things considered, I fear that in this respect at least, they're doing 'honest business.'

I will close this expose post with description of what might be Gandhara gallery's most galling affront to heritage laws and humanity's shared past of any I came across; namely the advertised sale of fragments of the original Bamiyan Buddhas! As discussed on their "Talaban destruction of ancient Buddhist Art in Afghanistan" page, they first 'set the scene' by describing the role of central Afghanistan as a major cross-roads (when once the Kingdom of Kushan), with "one of the world's greatest archaeological treasures;" namely, the Bamiyan Buddhas, at its heart. Lamenting a few previous attempts by Muslim individuals (the "fanatical trader Yaqoub") and groups (the Hezb-i-Whadat and Taliban political parties) to destroy these and other related statues both during antiquity, and during the recent/ongoing wars. The description closes with the final destruction of the Bamiyans, to the horror of the international community.

The very last sentence in the text shocked me. "In the days that followed we were offered a number of pieces mainly stucco, in order to preserve these rare historical artifacts we now offer them for sale on our website in Gandhara Afghan galleries." Although nothing on offer in the relevant galleries is specifically identified as formerly part of the Bamiyan Buddhas, what the above makes clear is that the Afghan pieces for sale would almost certainly have left the country after the Taliban resurgence c. 2001! Although no antiquities related M.O.U. exists between Afghanistan and major demand countries yet, an IUCN Redbook has since 2006...yet, here these artifacts are...languishing in some undisclosed warehouse somewhere, rotated on and off line until they're bought, forgotten about, or perhaps, someday, returned to where they belong. Constant vigilance!

By Way of Introduction....

So, where to begin? How can one blog written by one person help the world to better get a handle on the scope of the global antiquities trade today, the trickery and outright greed that keep it going, and the urgency and necessity of keeping up the fight?

Not sure yet....but this blog will represent my best efforts to join with others by presenting a forum for keeping tabs on at least one half of it; that overlooked portion of the trade that increasingly flows through galleries, warehouses, auction houses, and private hands throughout the Southern Hemisphere.

Although the gist of my blogging will pertain to galleries operating out of, news stories emanating from, and general facts and opinions about, dealing and dealers from Australia and New Zealand, eventually I can see this blog covering the entire breadth of the hemisphere, in which, in my opinion (and much discussion and, I hope, debate to follow), the wealthy "first-world" countries have been long overlooked as destinations for illicit loot, while specific regions, like Southeast Asia and South America, remain active sources. Yet even with the "bad-old-days" of, say, the wholesale dismantling of an entire Angkorian temple wall in Cambodia largely curtailed due to at least somewhat increased UNESCO monitoring, local law enforcement, the gradual bolstering of museums, and ongoing local public outreach, the antiquities trade (in Cambodia and throughout Southeast Asia) has shifted focus to survive, and unfortunately remains as active as ever. Indeed, my Heritage Watch colleagues continue to rightly state that looting in Cambodia "has reached epic proportions." All evidence points to a similarly active trade in South America...and the situation in Africa (outside of Egypt and Roman North Africa) is even more sparsely reported on!

This blog will also seek to touch on that oft-discussed meme of "Who owns heritage?," as it uniquely applies to relationships between richer and poorer countries of this region. What does having a predominantly wealthy, "European" derived population, these days becoming increasingly multi-ethnic (and with much of that ethnic diversity coming from Asia), with "exotic" Southeast Asia "in its back yard" imply for the continued fueling of the Southern Hemisphere trade? Why is evidence for the looting and sale of Pacific Island prehistoric artifacts so infrequently encountered? Is the sale of Australian Aboriginal or Maori prehistoric artifacts (and the deliberate looting or surface collection on private property that implies) as severe (or high profile) as that affecting Native American sites in North America? And again...outside of Egypt and Mali...what's going on in Africa? Especially Southern Africa, with its more entrenched European-derived population and a more lingering legacy of colonialism.

Finally, I hope to include one other aspect (feature, if you will) of this blog. Where the situation warrants, I will do my best to provide examples of exactly what kinds of information and data have been lost to provide the market with a looted artifact (to borrow Paul Barford's term, a "dugup"). Sure, we in the archaeological/heritage preservation community always talk about "context" (and our detractors use their overall misunderstanding of the term, and what we archaeologists mean when we say it, to perpetually deride us), but to me it seems that understanding of this concept for most people, especially those who are still indecisive about whether to purchase antiquities or not, is still rather abstract. I'm convinced that a blog is an appropriate multi-media enabling format to convey the deeper meanings of what context can tell an archaeologist, or a bioarchaeologist. To take one very recent and gruesome example, the photo above left is one of two catalog entries recently on sale by BC Galleries, out of Melbourne. As you can see, a late Iron Age (c. 500AD or so) bronze bangle with grave fill and human bones still inside was on offer for $650AUD! It was recently taken down....but where has it gone?

If you arrive at this blog because you have previously read my posts for SAFECorner, then great! Rest assured, I will remain active in my roles with SAFE as well.

So there you have it, future readers! I do hope you'll check back regularly as I get the blog up and rolling. I'll leave it to you to let me know if I'm doing my job, and feel free to send blog-worthy content my way. Constant vigilance!

Sincerely,
Damien