| Introduction | |
|
I first took an interest in the illicit trade of antiquities when Channel 4's 'Dispatches' screened Peter Watson, an investigative journalist, revealing the subject to viewers on national television. 2 Since then I have kept an eye open for further information relating to the trade and settled upon it as an ideal subject for a dissertation.
Throughout my investigation I have had to apply the question 'WHY?,' to every aspect of the trade in antiquities so that I could understand the motives behind the network of collectors, dealers, auction houses and thieves who may have participated in the illicit trade of ancient artefacts. This has led me to discover many reasons, from psychological to financial, for the existence of such a trade.
I repeatedly found myself questioning the use of provenance to verify the authenticity and legality of an antiquity. Provenance is the documented ownership history of an object - from creator to eventual recipient - and is a very important topic throughout this report. By tracing the owners of an object we can hopefully discover its full history and the context in which it was originally intended to exist.
For example, I own an Egyptian shabti and have provenance relating to that item which includes e-mail communications, letters, purchase receipts, a certificate of authenticity and the original catalogue from the dealer. The documentary evidence of how I came to own that piece is the current provenance of the shabti.
![]() Figure 1: Egyptian shabti, c: 3rd - 1st century BC Author's collection.
However, this is only a partial provenance of the object. I could extend my investigations to discover who owned the shabti before me and then try to trace the item back to its place of origin. This would establish its full history and context within the surroundings it was found. The vision of trying to trace such an object back to its original location is idealised especially in a market which is so prolific and reveals the distinction between the academic and commercial value of an object. When an archaeologist excavates an object he will carefully record the location of the item and identify it, before removing it from the ground along with any other articles that are with it. This creates documentary evidence, which supports any provenance, of where the object came from and the context in (important for archaeologists to learn more about ancient culture) which it was found. However, a dealer will accept excavated objects, for example, from a metal detector, identify it and sell it. This creates tension between academics and dealers because the academic feels the need to record and preserve every item of antiquity, whereas the dealer, who does not have time to discover every owner of an item, wishes to make a profit within a healthy market.
The illicit trade in antiquities prevents us from tracing the provenance or history of an item because they have been illegally excavated, stolen or pillaged from their original location - thus forfeiting all chance to record their history and losing any academic value. It is also damaging to the dealer because they are limiting the commercial value of antiquities by not having any documentary proof of their origins. Past owners of objects, especially if famous, can greatly increase the commercial value of an item. Geri Haliwell sold a dress for a charity auction which was valued for having the provenance of her ownership, but also gained from being worn at a Spice Girls concert, coming from a well known designer and being a tangible object of current popular culture.
I have investigated the market for antiquities to examine how much of this trade is possibly processed through auction houses. We should not forget the investigations of Peter Watson, who revealed that one employee within Sotheby's, Milan was responsible for setting up the smuggling of an old master painting or that documentary evidence revealed the acceptance of smuggled antiquities from India and Italy. 3 Further research by Dr.'s Gill and Chippendale have also revealed that up to 90% of antiquities for sale at auction are without documented provenance. 4 ~
With the scale of Fine Art and Antiques theft currently valued at anywhere between £300 million - £3 billion, 5 it becomes difficult to understand the lack of interest in this specific division of theft. The UK only has the Yorkshire and Metropolitan Art and Antiques Squads remaining out of 42 Police forces that as little as two years ago had several squads across the country. 6 In America the F.B.I. has a Fine Art Division that covers internationally important stolen art and has its own 'wanted' list of items to be recovered. Neither of these groups have a specific interest in antiquities and this lack of regard results in a chance for increased looting and smuggling. However, I have discovered and assessed a variety of organisations that are taking a greater interest in the illicit trade and will try to show how this problem has become more widely recognised.
I believe that technology has reached a point where it is a viable tool to assist in the fight against art crime. The introduction of electronic database services, available over the Internet, 7 has greatly enhanced the speed with which enquires can be processed, advertised and dealt with. All the important organisations relating to antiquities have an Internet presence, for example, UNESCO, 8 who has a very good archive of all their documents and conventions. This can make some organisations more accessible and easier to approach as an individual.
Information technology has been used extensively as an integral part of this thesis, whether it be for research, publishing or communication. Through the Internet and various discussion groups I have discovered many issues that would not have been come to light from reading texts. In this regard I have had to constantly update my dissertation as new arguments arise or revisions in the law occur. For example, whilst writing I have seen the ratification of the 1954 Hague Convention and the implication of the Code of Due Diligence, both which have had an effect on this thesis. | |
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
| - 2 - |