Putting a Price on the Priceless: Measuring the Illicit Antiquities Trade in Data and Dollars

On July 26, 2021, the Antiquities Coalition and George Mason University Terrorism, Transnational Crime and Corruption Center (TrrACC) conducted an on-line discussion about measuring the illicit trade in antiquities.

 The participants included Louis Shelly (LS) (TrrACC), Neil Brodie (NB) (Oxford), Layla Hashemi (LH) (TrrACC), and Ute Wartenberg-Kagan (UWK) (American Numismatic Society).  Patrick Costello (PC) (Council on Foreign Relations) served as the moderator.

 LS explained the discussion is part of a “big data analysis” performed by TrrACC under a State Department contract.  It looked at both the low end and high-end markets using methods including advanced technologies developed by DARPA to review the Dark Web. 

 Their findings evidently will be published in a book by Rutledge.

 In 2013, NB valued the antiquities market at $64-300 million.  The coin market is valued at $56-$300 million.  RAND’s study did not value the coin market.

 UWK indicates that the coin market comprises of a low-end and a high-end market.  The low-end market found on eBay is huge with over 2 million pieces offered valued at $40-$100 million.  The low-end market represents a significant problem that collectors, archaeologists and the trade should address.

 NB says valuing the trade is a fool’s errand and we should instead focus on the damage the trade causes.  There are ways to estimate the values of artifacts extracted from archaeological sites. 

 LH indicates one must also assess tangible and intangible impacts to cultural heritage, links to terrorism, and funding conflicts.  Technology lowers the barriers to entry into the market meaning gray market participants can act with impunity.

 There is some discussion of free ports.  However, coin traders do not appear to use free ports.

 LH indicates the total illicit trade of all goods (not just antiquities and coins) is $2-$3 trillion.

 NB indicates looting during conflicts does not only harm cultural heritage directly, but the conflicts also drive qualified academics out of countries where they could assess the damage.

 UWK indicates that it is difficult to explain to villagers why it is not a good idea to loot.  In places like Turkey this is even more difficult because those who work the land often do so for absentee landlords.

 UWK indicates the coin trade still purchases fresh coins where it believes it is legal to do so under U.S. law.  She also indicates there are disagreements whether the proper date to assess the provenance for a coin should be the 1970 date of the UNESCO Convention or the date of a Memorandum of Understanding with a source country.  She indicates the focus should be to keeping coins that have been illicitly excavated recently off the market.

 LS indicates that the antiquities trade will soon be subject to Anti-Money laundering regulations, but the art and coin trade should also be subject to such regulations. 

 NB indicates that he is doubtful that established antiquities dealers sell recently looted artifacts, but he indicates that they regularly sell artifacts looted decades ago.

 LH indicates that much of the low-end market is sold on Facebook despite rules against selling antiquities on that platform.

 There are not many antiquities on the Dark Web, but that is because they are sold openly on other platforms. If there is a crackdown on these platforms, it is possible business will move onto the Dark Web.

 There also is some use of crypto currency to purchase antiquities which may raise some issues.

 NB indicates it is hard to get people motivated to protect sites unless tourist dollars are at issue.  Farmers typically aren’t interested in preserving sites.  It is difficult enough to convince people not to loot, but impossible when there is a conflict and people are desperate.

 Prosecutions are helpful to disincentivize unlawful activity.  There are members of DHS law enforcement on the zoom call. 

 NB believes training the military about cultural heritage is a waste of resources. 

 UWK indicates a major problem is the lack of resources directed at enforcement.  She is pessimistic eBay or Facebook can be convinced to stop allowing their platforms to sell coins.

 NB believes antiquities sales should be taxed with the funds going to enforcement.

 LS again states her belief that art in addition to antiquities should be subject to anti-money laundering regulations. 

 LH states her belief that there are some unsavory actors behind the trade on Facebook.

 UWK indicates that Covid has made it harder to move illicit goods. 

 NB does not believe the Portable Antiquities Scheme or Treasure Act is an answer.  He maintains that finds in the UK are grossly underreported, and that the PAS encourages looting.

 Comment:  Very little new information came out of this presentation.  All the participants except for UWK seemed generally hostile to collecting.  LH seemed to be reading Antiquities Coalition talking points throughout much of the presentation.  The content of this seminar should raise fundamental questions about how studies with inputs solely from activists are prepared.  Additionally, one suspects funding considerations may also impact how problems are viewed.  Here, all the focus on discouraging demand for antiquities and coins is not surprising because a holistic approach focused primarily on addressing the causes for looting at the source would require an acknowledgement that source country practices are often a major part of the problem.  No wonder TraCCC came up with a series of excuses why its staff could not to meet with representatives of the coin trade to discuss these issues from a different perspective while its study was ongoing.

Hipster Internet Art Newsletter Raises Alarm About Antiquities being "Weaponized" for Political Purposes

"Hyperallergic,"  an Internet "forum for playful, serious, and radical perspectives on art and culture in the world today" has joined the Committee for Cultural Policy in taking on fantastical claims about ISIS funding itself with looted antiquities, albeit from a far different perspective.  Tellingly, the post by archaeologist Michael Press -- though well researched-- avoids the elephant in the room.  Who was responsible for "weaponizing" antiquities in the first place?  The ISIS killing machine was bad enough to justify military intervention, particularly given its terror threats not only in the region but to Europe and the US as well.  

Of course, the answer is quite apparent to those who represent the interests of collectors, museums and the trade.  It is the State Department's Cultural Heritage Center, which worked along with ASOR, the  State Department contractor mentioned in the article, and the Antiquities Coalition, a well-funded archaeological advocacy group with ties to ASOR, the Archaeological Institute of America, as well as authoritarian Arab regimes. These groups were quite successful in laundering their dubious narrative not only through mainstream media (NY Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, CBS, etc.) but through the foreign policy establishment as well (think tanks and Foreign Policy Magazine).  The goal was threefold.  First, getting Congress to pass permanent import restrictions on Syrian cultural goods (which was achieved through these scare tactics).  Second, creating and funding an "Antiquities Czar" position that would elevate these groups' influence even further within the US Government.  (A goal that was not realized.)  Third, convincing Congress to lower the bar for criminal prosecutions based on foreign cultural patrimony laws.  (Another  goal that was not realized.) Meanwhile, those representing the interests of collectors, museums and the trade that raised the exact same issues about the credibility of these fantastical numbers early on have become targets for abuse from some of the very same individuals Press acknowledges for their contributions in exposing the truth.  

Special Report on Grossly Overstated Claims that ISIS Funds itself with Antiquities Sales.

The Committee for Cultural Policy has issued a report demonstrating how news media and advocacy groups associated with the archaeological lobby have spread disinformation (including some from Russian and Syrian sources) about the value of artifacts looted by ISIS.  A must read.

Addressing Looting at the Source by Remote Viewing

Archaeologist Sarah Parcak has decided to use her Ted Prize to fund crowdsourcing and remote satellite viewing to protect archaeological sites from looters.

CPO commends any effort to address looting at the source.   However, for the situations in places like Egypt to improve, issues of poverty and encroachment by development must also be addressed not by more dictatorial measures, but by engaging local people and encouraging an appreciation of past cultures.  

How Much Money is ISIS Making from Antiquities?

The Gates of Nineveh blog contains this comprehensive analysis of the issue.  The answer, something, but nowhere near as much as has been claimed.

Debunking the ISIS Antiquities Funding Myth

Kate FitzGibbon writes on debunking the ISIS antiquities funding myth for the Committee for Cultural Policy website.  Hopefully, others as well will start calling the State Department and archaeological lobby into account for their ongoing efforts to exaggerate the value of ISIS looted antiquities.

Michael Danti Speaks

Michael Danti, who runs the State Department-ASOR Syrian Cultural Heritage initiative, spoke about his activities on an ABA Cultural Heritage Law Committee "telecoffee"  discussion.  Michael McCullough, the Committee Chair, acted as moderator. A link to the talk, which was recorded, will appear on the Committee's website.  See here.  The below is based on my hurried notes so CPO readers are encouraged to listen to the program themselves if they want more than CPO's impressions of the event. 

Danti dug in Syria from 1991-2010.  He has also worked in Iraqi Kurdistan.  He has been associated with Boston University and the University of Pennsylvania.  He oversees the initiative that not only monitors the ongoing situation in Syria, but has also been involved in disaster planning and training initiatives for Syrian cultural heritage officials.

The conflict response includes 40-50 people and there are 5-10 reporters about what is going on within Syria itself.  (The initiative also relies on Arab media sources.)

Danti indicates that press reports focus too much on ISIL's destruction of classical sites and too little on its destruction of houses of worship of other Islamic sects as well as the destruction of Yazidi shrines and places of worship.   (Danti did not mention destruction of Christian houses of worship.)

There also has been a tendency to imply that all looting has been done on behalf of ISIS when in fact it has been done on behalf of all belligerents as well as desperate individuals.  This includes the Assad regime and Kurdish forces.

Digital media has been used to try to sell looted materials to individuals abroad.  Other Syrians who immigrated abroad and who are now fairly prosperous are particular targets of such sale pitches.  Part of the pitch is to save Syrian cultural heritage from destruction.

ISIS has an "antiquities office" that is in charge of looting.  It sells licenses that allow individuals to loot in ISIS territory.  The Abu Sayef raid shows that looted material is being stockpiled.

The initiative has documented approximately 1,000 cases of individuals trying to sell looted material with cell phone images.  Most of the material that is being sold is either classical or early Islamic.  Lebanon and Turkey are transshipment points.  Material goes on from there to Cyprus, Bulgaria, Austria or Greece and then into other EU countries. Coins, sculpture and mosaics are among the material that is for sale.  Refugees also bring material with them.  Once out of Syria, material looted from ISIS territory is mixed up with material looted from elsewhere.

The material does not appear to be going to established auction houses but coins are appearing in on-line auctions. 

Material is being offered to dealers in Turkey and Lebanon and in on-line chat rooms.  Lebanese Customs is doing a good job stopping material while Turkish Customs could do more. 

ASOR's contract with the State Department has been extended for another year.  In the second year of the contract, they plan to focus more on documenting the illicit trade in objects.  

Open the Medici Archives

The Art Newspaper reports on pressure to open up the Medici archives to the public to assist collectors and dealers in their due diligence efforts.  The archives have already been disclosed selectively, so its unclear why the archaeological blogoshere is so opposed to their release.  In any event, shouldn't those who claim to act in the public interest and often demand transparency of others, promote rather than oppose transparency here?

Poor Timing in Cairo

On May 14, 2015, the Antiquities Coalition and Middle Eastern Institute joined with the Egyptian Military Dictatorship and some other authoritarian Arab governments to announce a "Cairo Declaration" aimed at clamping down on sales of Middle Eastern antiquities just two days before Egypt's military controlled court system imposed a death sentence on Egypt's first Democratically elected President, Mohamed Morsi, for his part in a prison break that took place before he achieved high office.

While CPO supports tackling looting at the source, it's a fair question whether private property rights and rule of law will be respected in the process.

Or, is it far more likely that the effort will have all the same hallmarks of the Morsi persecution where “Due process, regard for evidence, and minimum standard of justice have been tossed aside in favor of draconian injustice.”

And it's also a fair question, does the archaeological lobby much care?

ISIS Iconclasm a Mere Cover Story for Looting?

So says an Iraqi official based on unnamed sources.  But Iraqi sources were also the basis for the now widely discredited claim that ISIS has netted $36 million from one site in Syria alone. 

So, is this new claim as well as other unsupported claims that there must be warehouses full of material looted by ISIS to be believed?  Or, is it possible that ISIS came up with far more "dry holes" than artifacts to be put into "cold storage?"

If the 2003 Iraq war proved anything, it was that "experts" could be dead wrong not only on the existence of weapons of mass destruction, but on the nature and extent of looting.  So caution should be warranted-- particularly where such information is being used to justify the creation of a new State Department bureaucracy and new import restrictions on all things "Syrian."

Meanwhile, on the ground in Syria, Palmyra, another UNESCO World Heritage site, is under threat of capture by ISIS.  What is needed is not more talk or even legislation, but concrete action to save the city from ISIS or at least a cost to pay for anyone who seeks to destroy its ruins.

Archaeo-Blogger Defends Sensationalist Reporting

Archaeo-blogger David Gill has taken Chris Maupin, a knowledgable antiquities dealer, to task because Maupin has questioned sensationalist reporting by the BBC.  That BBC report repeats the oft cited claim that looting provides a major ISIS funding source.  Gill maintains that Maupin's critique is unfair.  After all says Gill, the reporter and his producer evidently attended an academic conference which discussed the issues!   But we should also be skeptical of academics with an axe to grind.  And there is every reason to be particularly dubious of "proof" originating with sources friendly to the Assad regime.  As we've already seen, that murderous regime is keen on attributing looting to ISIS for its own political purposes.   In any case, the values of looted material from Syria casually thrown about appear highly inflated.  Under the circumstances, Maupin's concerns about sensationalist reporting are warranted and he should be praised, rather than condemned for his efforts.

Let's Blame White Collectors for Looting...

So says archaeologist/blogger Donna Yates.  According to Yates,

“It’s a situation in which extremely rich and wealthy white people take complete advantage of people who can’t fight back, and then blame them for it. I see it as double victimisation – these people are not only having their property taken from them, they are having their ability to construct their own identities taken from them by people who have all this power, who don’t even consider it to be a problem.”

Yet, Yates herself almost came to harm from Bolivian villagers who could very well have been angry that "white" foreign archaeologists show up for a few months a year, "steal" valuable artifacts that could otherwise be sold for necessities like food and then haul them off for an uncaring national government that, of course, shows little concern when local "rich and wealthy white people" build up stupendous collections of such material.  

Instead of blaming "white collectors" for looting, archaeology would be better served if "white archaeologists" addressed the abject poverty that motivates looting by paying local diggers they employ a living wage, paying for site guards in the long off-season, and ensuring significant items they find stay and get displayed in local communities rather than being packed off to store rooms in some far off national museum.  And yes, really what's wrong with selling off some duplicates for the benefit of the local community after they have been properly recorded?

Fantasyland

In far off Poland, one archaeo-blogger fantasizes about vast treasure houses of looted material in the deserts of Iraq or Syria:

One possibility remains that the 2003+ looting in Iraq (documented on the ground and in satellite photos) resulted in stockpiles of antiquities, bought cheap at source and mothballed in a secure store as an investment, say a retirement nest-egg for some local wiseguy - intended to be sold piecemeal when the fuss dies down in a decade or so. We know holes were dug, stuff hoiked, US and European dealers tell us it never arrived on any market they know -  postulating such warehouses is therefore one (pretty good) way of explaining that evidence.  What's more nobody can say that there are not such warehouses.

Somewhere in Iraq, what's in this building?

If they exist, they could be veritable treasure houses, the buyer had the pick of a vast amount of numbers of objects from the tens of thousands of holes dug in 'productive' areas of productive sites. They could afford to buy the best of the best, sawn-up Assyrian friezes, glyptic  material, cunies, Sumerian statues, Akkadian jewellery, Seleucid bronzes, and coins, loads of coins. You can just imagine it. Rather like a Swiss freeport, just somewhere at the end of a dirt track in the Middle Eastern desert.

You can also imagine it when one day some armed thugs bust their way into the hoarder's house, thrust an AK in the face of his daughter and bawls out that he'll pull the trigger if he does not hand over the keys - and when he gets the keys anyway blows a hole in her head. And then his. They'd come with some guy who knows the trade - ISIL has access to specialists in many fields - who picks out the pieces that give more bucks per transport costs, load them up on some trucks and off they go with them to some market. They can come back for more with impunity until they empty the store of the best bits. Them they might use informants to tell them where the next one is. Plausible? You bet. Did it happen? Could have.

You can imagine too, can't you, the smiling Lebanese dealer shaking hands with the well-dressed man offering him some prime antiquities. The seller is an ISIL political officer, suave and well-groomed in a suit. The dealer is anticipating a good profit, he has some clients on his list (15000 people, you know) who he knows will be very interested in those Assyrian reliefs, no need to put them on open sale, he can sell directly. The coins he can shift too, to America - nobody there asks any difficult questions. Plausible? You bet. Did it happen? Could have.

And he goes further.  Not content to fantasize himself, he also fantasizes that a serious, knowledgeable commentator on the subject shares that same fantasy.  Yet, the fact that this archaeo-blogger does not link to what the commentator actually said, though it is available on the Internet, should raise yet another red flag.  Once again, caveat emptor.

Tackle the Problem at the Source

Jim McAndrew, a former senior special agent with Homeland Security, warns against assumptions that looted Syrian material is coming here in any quantity.  In so doing, he rightly concludes the best place to focus resources is on Syria's borders.

Cold Storage?

Now that claims that looting is "the most important funding source for ISIS after 'hot oil'" and "$36 million in looted antiquities were taken by ISIS from one area in Syria alone" have been thoroughly debunked, the archaeological blogosphere is desperately seeking an easy explanation for where all those stolen antiquities must have gone. 

That easy "answer?"  "Cold storage." 

But, once again, caveat emptor.  This red herring first appeared after the initial phase of the Second Gulf War in 2003-2004 to explain why a promised avalanche of  looted Iraqi antiquities never surfaced in the United States and other Western markets.  As of 2013, before the rise of ISIS, these stolen artifacts still had not appeared in quantity.

In any event, while it is true at least one such infamous storage space did exist for looted Italian artifacts back in 1980's Switzerland, is it reasonable to assume similar secret facilities exist in today's Iraq and Syria?  Or, is it more reasonable to believe that no rational middle man would create such "cold storage" in a "hot war zone" where one bomb or mortar shell could easily turn a treasure house into dust. 

But what of all those holes at Apamea (a site the archaeological lobby is also loath to admit is controlled by the Assad regime)?   CPO agrees satellite imagery appears to show looter's holes, but notes again reports out of Iraq after the Second Gulf War suggest all may not be what it seems.

Under the circumstances, isn't it at least possible most of holes at Apamea (and other sites like Dura Europos) were "dry," i.e., they produced little of value or that the excavations were actually for military purposes, i.e., "fox holes" for the troops of the warring factions?

Or, is this again yet another case where such obvious possibilities cannot be seriously considered because they would  further undermine the archaeological lobby's efforts to encourage government decision makers to impose the "devil's proof" on collectors of ancient artifacts?

They Shoot Looters, Don't They?

While the general public probably views looting as no worse than a traffic violation, incredibly they are actually debating in the archaeological blogosphere whether execution is an appropriate sanction for disturbing archaeological context for personal gain.   To be fair, the author is opposed to it and even has sympathy for subsistence diggers, but the fact that some in the archaeological lobby have supported the ultimate sanction in the past should give everyone pause.  The death penalty was imposed selectively in Saddam's Iraq; while those associated with the regime apparently looted with the Dictator's blessing, others without connections forfeited their lives if caught.  The same kind of selective  prosecution also  apparently lives on in today's Iraq, but at least no one is getting executed for looting in areas under government control.  And isn't that a good thing?

Archaeo-Blogger Blames US for Damage to ar Raqqha Museum?

Anti-American Archaeo-blogger Paul Barford, apparently oblivious to reports from Human Rights organizations, has suggested that US warplanes were  behind the bombing of the museum in ar Raqqha, Syria.  US warplanes have indeed been active in the vicinity,  but no credible sources have suggested that these strikes against ISIS targets were in the area of the museum.  Rather, it seems far more plausible that the Assad regime was behind the carnage and damage to the Museum, specifically targeting a nearby market in revenge for recent losses to ISIS and ISIS' executions of Syrian troops.

Barford goes onto rant that CPO is using the Syrian tragedy to attack "conservationists" like himself.  But, of course, it is the archaeological lobby that has been using the on-going tragedy in Syria, to not only justify major changes in the law in both Germany and the United States, but additional funding for archaeologists as well.

Meanwhile, "conservationists" seem reluctant to point the finger at the Assad regime for any damage to Syria's cultural heritage at all.  But why?  The reasons given-- fear for the safety of observers on the ground-- seem contrived when evidence of Assad's war crimes are available from open sources.  Perhaps, if it's not a hope to get "back to business as usual" if Assad wins the civil war, it's an unwillingness to do so for fear of undercutting the fundamental UNESCO assumption that UNESCO State Parties are the best stewards of "cultural property."  After all, to whom does the archaeological lobby think any "cultural property" seized by German or US Customs should be returned?

Shooting at Easy Targets

Professor Stephanie Mulder, an archaeologist who evidently excavated in Syria as a guest of the Assads, points her finger at those she considers to be easy targets behind the ongoing tragedy in Syria.

But one should be skeptical of blame heaped on Western collectors by those with an ax to grind against private collecting.  And no one in the mainstream media has yet asked the the question if the archaeological community's unqualified support for dictatorship's absolute control of the past has made antiquities the target of the disaffected.

Addendum:  A CPO reader pointed out that the Jewish artifact mentioned in the article has a provenance dated back to 1913!  If anything, this shows that "Syrian artifacts" have been collected for a long time and it's wrong factually (and ethically CPO would argue) for them to be characterized as a class as "blood antiquities."   

Be Skeptical

It's a good time to be skeptical because governments plant propoganda using social media or friendly press outlets.   Certainly, a recent story on RT News, a press organ for Putin and the Russian Government, comes to mind.  That story featured suitably large, fake Greek coins that were purportedly being sold by a rebel from the Free Syrian Army to help purchase weapons.  Russia, of course, supports Assad, the enemy of the Free Syrian Army, so one should be skeptical about a report that portrays these rebels in a bad light.

And what of the vast sums of money ISIS supposedly makes from the illicit antiquities trade?  Even some in the archaeological lobby are rightly skeptical too.

Cuno's Case Against Repatriation

James Cuno has made a well-reasoned case against repatriation.  What a welcome contrast to the blatant propaganda that has become associated with the archaeological lobby.

If Cuno fails at all, it's in his ignoring the interests of collectors, who have traditionally supported healthy museums.

And then there is his failure to reach as a conclusion the all too obvious end result of the cultural nationalism he decries:  if anything, the reality on the ground in Egypt, Syria and Iraq proves that sites are looted and museums are destroyed precisely because angry, disenfranchised locals associate state owned antiquities with hated dictatorial regimes who have appropriated the past to serve their own purposes.