8.4: Selling Archaeological Finds


In many countries the private ownership of archaeological finds is restricted or forbidden by law. In those countries where the selling of archaeological finds is allowed, archaeologists see it as unprofessional to engage in it and tend to see this as one of the features that defines the discipline. Calvin Cummings (1983)in a paper titled “A Matter of Ethics” summarised the positions taken by eight of the main archaeological societies in America. All of them opposed the selling of artefacts from sites for profit or to enhance personal collections.  Interestingly, the Code of Conduct of the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists does not contain any reference to this, presumably taking it as granted. It does however (1.7) contain the following:
A member shall not knowingly be employed by, or otherwise contract with, an individual or entity where the purpose of the contract is directly to facilitate the excavation and/or recovery of items from archaeological contexts for sale, and where such sale may lead to the irretrievable dispersal of the physical and/or intellectual archive, or where such sale may result in an undispersed archive to which public access is routinely denied.
While accepting that the practice is not illegal, it is widely disapproved among archaeologists in  the English speaking world on several grounds. The sale of archaeologically procured finds means that they disappear into the private domain, where their integrity is no longer assured. Furthermore, there are no constraints over what then happens to them, there are no international legal protections and no accepted obligations related to ownership of cultural property in private possession (Stevenson 2017). Another area of concern is that such sales confer an air of legitimacy to the whole antiquities trade, yet this market is in fact to a large extent a “grey” one. Alongside material arguably of licit origins there are on the same market illicit items (artefacts with no known provenance or with opaque ownership histories, accompanied by fake documents, or outright fakes). The most serious issue is that making material available fuels market demand in Europe, North America and Asia and become an incentive for looting. For the trade, see among others, Brodie 2006.

Some artefact hunters keep all the artefacts they find, but others intend to build a more selective collection and therefore decide to sell surplus items to other collectors.

The Portable Antiquities Scheme gives advice for people buying archaeological objects from the UK. Unfortunately, instead of "don't, because...", it is to advise the responsible buyer to make certain determinations of the circumstances of the sale for each object offered for purchase:
1. The responsible purchaser should be supplied with proof of legal title to sell. If the object has been recently discovered and the person selling the object is the finder, then they will need to document the permission of the landowner on whose land the object was found before they can sell it. If the person selling the object is not the finder or landowner, then the purchaser must have proof that the seller in fact has legal title to sell.
2.The responsible purchaser should determine and obtain documentation of where and when the object was found, and from this ascertain what laws applied at the findspot. The seller must have documentation verifying their account of the item's provenance and their legal title to sell.
3  The responsible purchaser should determine whether there was a legal obligation to report the find, and whether it was before it came on the market. A copy of all appropriate documentation should be made available if there was a legal obligation to report the find.

Obviously, the responsible artefact hunter is one that - if the objects are sold - can provide the full details and documentation along the above lines of each and every object they regard as superfluous to their own collection.

In Our Portable Past (Section 5) Historic England addresses the question of 'Trade in Antiquities':
Historic England strongly supports the United Kingdom Government’s position that trade in illicit antiquities should be stopped, and this statement conforms to the standards set out in international conventions [...] To facilitate this:
- Historic England will not participate in or condone any illicit international or national trade in material arising from archaeological activities or fieldwork;
- Historic England will support the general principle that archaeological material should not be sold for profit (in exceptional cases such sales might be acceptable as part of a properly formulated and agreed disposal policy);

References
Brodie, Neil, ed. 2006. Archaeology, Cultural Heritage, and the Antiquities Trade. Gainesville: Univ. Press of Florida.

Cummings, Calvin 1983, 'A Matter of Ethics. SOPA Newsletter 12(2) 1-3.

Cummings, Calvin R. 1986 'A Matter of Ethics'. In Underwater Archaeology: Proceedings of the 14th Conference on Underwater Archaeology, edited by C. R. Cummings, p. 1-5, Fathom Eight, San Marino, California.

Historic England 2018, 'Our Portable Past: Guidance for Good Practice' (3rd edition, 20 February 2018)

Stevenson, Alice 2017, ' Why archaeological antiquities should not be sold on the open market, full stop', The Conversation July 13, 2017
Tamara Kroftova comments:
"Again, it is difficult to see why the responsible collector is not taking the lead in setting patterns that would aid cleaning up the antiquities market, yet they are consistently failing to do so."


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

2.1: What is archaeology?

Image
Archaeological research   as a process There are many possible ways to define the subject and object of study. This is the definition of archaeology used here: Archaeology is the study of aspects the human past through the documentation and analysis of physical remains and traces, their associations and contexts, by the methodology of archaeology and dissemination of the results and conclusions. 1) " The study of aspects of the human past ", The past might be very remote, from the Lower Palaeolithic, where it may intercalate with palaeontology (but archaeologists don't do dinosaurs), to almost the present day (periods when other but not all aspects of the past are amply documented by other sources), 2)  " aspects of the human past ", many areas of the human past are arguably beyond the reach of even the most creative of archaeological thought, 3) " through the documentation ", the archaeological evidence does not exist in a vacuum, curran...
Read more

3.3: Archaeological layers

Image
In talking about archaeological context we tend to think of it in terms of being composed of individual layers. These are discrete units of sediment, debris, rock, and other materials that form or accumulate as the result of natural processes, human activity, or both. In order to describe them and indicate their position on a site and in its sequence, these layers are generally numbered sequentially (with the lowest number being that removed first). An individual layer or deposit may be termed (following geological nomenclature) a stratum, and multiple layers are called strata. Therefore the study of their sequence is called stratigraphy (description of what we call the stratification). One of the simplest ways to depict layers is to depict them as a vertical sequence and this is frequently done in the form of a section (or 'profile') through them. Here is an explanation from Michigan State University 'Campus Archaeology' page "Archaeology 101: Reading strati...
Read more

4.1 What the archaeological record looks like in the Ground

Image
If the responsible artefact hunter is to  record the bits of the archaeological record destroyed in removing artefacts in collection-driven exploitation of a site, obviously they need to know what it is they are looking for, in other words, what the archaeological record looks like. At this point, many textbooks would show the reader a section or two showing the superimposed layers ("like a cake"). But that actually is not the way the stratification of a feature are actually encountered in the field. The suggestion that it is the section that is always paramount in the recording and interpretation of a site is a very damaging one. This is despite the prevalence of s ingle-context recording in the standard excavation methodical toolkit for over half a century. The main manner in which the stratigraphical units of a site are met is from above, from the working surface. The first point that this raises is that this should at all times be kept clean of loose soil, trample ...
Read more