The Rampant Rape of Israel’s Archaeological Sites

038

The scene was more like a moonscape than a landscape. Starlight highlighted the dark gaping holes of robbed-out tombs and collapsed underground chambers. These tombs and chambers were the reason we were here. They belonged to a necropolis in the Judean Hills that had been systematically plundered for months. We had never been able to catch the robbers in the act. But this night was to be different.

Earlier that day we had received a phone call from a local kibbutznik whose suspicion had been aroused by a pickup truck parked for several nights near the fields of his kibbutz. An archaeology lover, he called the Anti-Plunder Task Force of the Israel Department of Antiquities. So we were here, waiting.

Soon we saw the headlights of the pickup. Four men got out with digging tools and burlap sacks, made their way up the pock-marked slope, and disappeared below the horizon. We approached and heard muffled sounds of pickaxes, hammers and hoes inside one of the underground chambers. Cameras ready and pistols drawn, we made our move: We closed off the opening to the chamber and shouted down to the robbers to come out and surrender. What we didn’t know was that this particular chamber led into an extensive underground tunnel system that was probably dug by Jewish rebels during the Second Jewish Revolt against Rome, the so-called Bar Kokhba revolt (132–135 A.D.).^a The robbers, however, knew it well; they threaded their way through the subterranean maze in an attempt to avoid us. We pursued. A cat-and-mouse game continued until 3:30 a.m., when we cornered them in an underground cul-de-sac. Within an hour the pillagers were consigned to the nearest police station. Their bag of Second Temple period lamps, coins and glass vessels was impounded as evidence, before being registered at the Department of Antiquities.

Successes like this, however, are few. We knew that the robbers—probably the very same people—would be back at work in a few weeks.

Many of you have probably visited the home of a friend who has just returned from Israel and who proudly showed you a pottery oil lamp, a glass ointment jar or a silver shekel coin purchased in one of the more than 100 antiquities shops in Israel. There is something awesome and inspiring in grasping such things in one’s hands, something akin to making physical contact with one’s forefathers. This is the feeling that brings most people to acquire antiquities; one purchases a piece of heritage and thereby becomes closer to that heritage.

039

But there is a sinister side to the antiquity trade, a side that actively destroys the very heritage we seek to perpetuate. How many readers have ever paused to consider the wider effects of buying these ancient artifacts in the shops?

Fascination with relics of the past is not a new phenomenon. The ancient Romans copied Greek works of art, not just because they were aesthetically superior, but because the Romans regarded themselves as successors of Greek culture and as guardians of the Hellenistic ideal. Modern imperialism brought a renewed interest in ancient objets d’art and ancient epigraphy, the latter happily resulting in the decipherment of ancient Egyptian, Sumerian and Akkadian. In the last half of the 19th century, many objects of great artistic and historical value were transported from their countries of origin to the museums of Europe. Western institutions and scholars have claimed that the removal of these treasures from their homelands was motivated by a desire to preserve them and to make them available for study. This claim is valid in many instances (for example, the removal of the Elgin marbles from the Parthenon to the British Museum), but has no relevance to the pillage going on today.

The 20th century has seen the rise of modern archaeological investigation based on controlled stratigraphic excavation and comprehensive recording of finds. We learn far more from an object excavated in this way than we would from the same object robbed and removed from its context.

Unfortunately, institutions and individuals alike are willing to pay inordinate sums for artifacts that lack provenance. If the profits to be made are great, the damage done is even greater.

The burgeoning demand for antiquities naturally stimulates the search for a constant and reliable supply. Such a supply is to be found in Israel’s archaeological sites—tells and, most important, tombs. The relationship between the booming antiquities trade and the rampant plunder of archaeological sites is well established throughout the world.¹

Although archaeological excavation without a permit is against Israeli law, the incentive is tremendous and the penalties minimal. Since 1967, more than 11,000 archaeological sites have been plundered, most of them 040ancient tombs—Canaanite, Israelite, Jewish and Christian. At least 6,000 ancient tombs have been robbed in the Judean foothills within the pre-1967 borders of Israel. Entire tells have been denuded. Among them is Tell Beit Mirsim (Tell Bate MEER-seem), where the great American archaeologist William Foxwell Albright carried out the first truly scientific excavations in the 1920s and 1930s. Another is Betar (Bay-TAHR), the site of Bar Kokhba’s last stand against the Romans.

Despite the fact that all of this digging is illegal, selling antiquities is not. Selling antiquities requires only a license from the Department of Antiquities, which is granted almost automatically and without charge. More than 100 shops in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza sell antiquities.

Herein lies the absurdity of the present antiquities laws: Digging without a permit is illegal, but the overwhelming majority of the antiquity dealers’ inventory comes from these illegal and unrecorded excavations. The final irony is that Israel’s Ministry of Tourism allows its seal of approval to be placed in the windows of these antiquities shops.

How can we stop the continuous, massive robbing of tombs and tells? The obvious answer is to prohibit the sale of antiquities.

The Association of Archaeologists in Israel (AAI), together with the government’s Department of Antiquities and the Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel is supporting legislation that will prohibit sale or trade in antiquities. But the outcome of this legislative battle is far from clear. Many powerful voices oppose this legislation. The Antiquities Traders Association is mounting a lobbying effort in opposition, and several prominent archaeologists, including Professors Dan Barag, Amnon Ben-Tor, and Avraham Negev of the Hebrew University, and Dr. Yaakov Meshorer of the Israel Museum are actively opposing changes in the antiquities laws that would outlaw trading in antiquities. High-powered politicians and collectors are also opposed: Teddy Kollek, mayor of Jerusalem and Chairman of the Israel Museum Board of Directors, and Reuven Hecht, owner of the Dagon Grain Corporation in Haifa, oppose the legislation.²

Joining the opposition are some of the most influential curators at the Israel Museum in Jerusalem and the Land of Israel Museum in Tel Aviv. These two national museums continue to buy antiquities on the open market, to accept donations of collections of plundered artifacts, and even to provide consulting services for evaluating plundered artifacts, in open opposition to the International Council of Museums’ (ICOM) unanimous condemnation of such practices.³ Israel’s national museums are in the process of making themselves outcasts from the international community of museums.

What are the objections of those who oppose this legislation?

The first objection is one of principle: An individual should have the right to deal commercially in antiquities—to buy or sell them. However, a democracy must also consider the rights of society at large. To paraphrase John Marshall, “My rights end where my brother’s begin.” Antiquities trade brings monetary benefits to the few at the expense of the public interest. The antiquities trade consistently deprives a much larger public of a more comprehensive, true-to-life understanding of that past. Antiquity lovers are themselves better served when ancient artifacts are researched by scholars as part of an organic assemblage. Individual items of unknown origin usually have little, if any scientific value. And forgery is always a possibility—even experts cannot always detect a fake.

A second objection to outlawing the antiquities trade 041is that dealing in antiquities will simply go underground; unique objects will be smuggled out of the country or be otherwise lost to us. However, recent surveys by our Anti-Plunder Task Force show that the vast majority of purchases from antiquities dealers are made by individual tourists who buy a single pottery lamp or jug, a glass vessel, or a coin. These purchases represent the overwhelming majority of artifacts plundered from archaeological sites. Together, these assemblages would reflect ancient people’s way of life and even their frame of mind. Separated and sold, they lose this meaning.

Outlawing trade in antiquities could remove the main incentive to plunder tombs—the large market for relatively commonplace objects bought mainly by tourists. Once this incentive is removed, illegal digging will be much less profitable, and the effort to find rare, unusual items would be hardly worth the risk attached.

A law banning trade in antiquities may not stop illegal excavation completely, but at least the hemorrhage will be staunched.

Why, you may ask, are the existing laws inadequate? It’s simply a question of logistics and budget. There is an enormous demand for antiquities out there, and hundreds of robbers are working to fill that demand. Israel’s 15,000 antiquity sites cannot be policed constantly and simultaneously. Illicit excavation is usually carried out at night, or in a forest, with elaborate advance warning setups, by those who know the terrain better than anyone else. Moreover, the present law is riddled with loopholes. In one case, a team of robbers returning from a night’s foray were apprehended with the goods in their vehicle. But we could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they had actually plundered the artifacts. The robbers were released. In the rare event that an antiquities robber is convicted, the penalties imposed by the courts are so minor as to make them no more than an acceptable nuisance.

On the other end, if you ask a dealer where his stock comes from, he’ll say his inventory dates to before 1978, when it was still legal to excavate on private property and collect artifacts from the surface. It’s difficult to prove otherwise without extensive detective work and the budget such work requires. However, the volume of trade in the antiquities market, both worldwide and local, corresponds closely to the volume of plunder. Over 100,000 ancient artifacts leave Israel each year; only a fool would believe all this comes from pre-1978 inventories.

By law, antiquities dealers must register all transactions and all inventory. In theory, this would give the Department of Antiquities (and the Income Tax Authority!) a gauge of the dealers’ volume. In fact, most dealers seem to prefer that the authorities not know the true volume of their business. One prevalent technique is to transfer a registry number (for a pre-1978 artifact) from item to item.

Most of our neighbors—Egypt, Jordan, Cyprus, Turkey—have enacted laws forbidding the sale or purchase of artifacts outside of government auspices. Israel should do likewise.

A few countries—Greece, for example—sponsor government-run antiquities shops. This option, suggested by BAR editor Hershel Shanks (“BARview: A Radical Proposal: Archaeologists Should Sell Ancient Artifacts,” BAR 11:01), is worth considering. We are against it, however. Although it was a constructive suggestion when he made it, Shanks was unaware of the volume of antiquities purchases. If the present volume is maintained, the Department of Antiquities’ storerooms would be emptied of small objects within a year. (The Department of Antiquities has approximately 120,000 registered items, other than coins). Then where will we be? In addition, we could expect illegal counterfeiting of government authenticity certificates—and the plunder would continue. Finally, we are against Shanks’s proposal because part of our master plan to stamp out the plunder is educational: Our heritage is not for sale. People should be made to feel embarrassed at having a collection of antiquities. To allow government-regulated commerce will only cloud the issue. We should add, however, that we are in favor of reciprocal “permanent loans” between states and institutions.

042

On the whole, in Mediterranean and Near Eastern countries where the antiquities trade has been outlawed, the observable volume of illegal trade is relatively small, certainly when compared to the outflow of artifacts from Israel. No country in the world has rescinded laws prohibiting the antiquities trade. By their laws, these countries have openly declared war on the antiquities trade and have taken concrete, successful steps to limit illegal dealing. Israel, on the other hand, ultimately sanctions the decimation of its national treasures.

The antiquity trade is destroying Israel’s national heritage, a heritage that represents the foundations of western civilization. The pace of the destruction is frightening and requires immediate action. The future of Israel’s archaeological resources also depends upon you, the reader. You are a potential educator, a potential buyer of antiquities and a political voice. Don’t buy antiquities—from any country.

The scene was more like a moonscape than a landscape. Starlight highlighted the dark gaping holes of robbed-out tombs and collapsed underground chambers. These tombs and chambers were the reason we were here. They belonged to a necropolis in the Judean Hills that had been systematically plundered for months. We had never been able to catch the robbers in the act. But this night was to be different. Earlier that day we had received a phone call from a local kibbutznik whose suspicion had been aroused by a pickup truck parked for several nights near the fields of his […]