From the Wall Street Journal via Andie Byrnes’ Blog – Link to original article
by James Cuno
For years, archaeologists have lobbied for national and international laws, treaties, and conventions to prohibit the international movement in antiquities. For many of these years, U.S. art museums that collect antiquities have opposed these attempts. The differences between archaeologists and U.S. art museums on this matter has spilled over into the public realm by way of reports in newspapers and magazines, public and university symposia, and specialist—even sensationalist —books on the topic.
At the center of the dispute is the question of unprovenanced antiquities. In conventional terms, an unprovenanced antiquity is one with modern gaps in its chain of ownership. As it pertains to the United States, since in most cases we are an importer of this kind of material, this means there is no evidence that the antiquity was exported in compliance with the export laws of its presumed country of origin (these are always modern laws, hence the qualifi cation above, modern gaps). Archaeologists argue that unprovenanced antiquities are almost always looted from archaeological sites or from what would become archaeological sites.
A very interesting book review from the Wall Street Journal. Another one for the Amazon wish list, I think. This is a very important subject, and very high charged for everyone involved. However it is also extremely complex, and not just legally, which is what this book mainly focuses on. Hopefully I shall have the chance to write more on this soon.
