If you steal a tube of toothpaste at the local drugstore, you are likely to end up at the police station. If you dig up a rare vessel from Biblical times at an archaeological site in the Near East, you are likely to get away with it.
Why the difference? The answer is simple. A security camera in the drugstore will catch you in the act.
Much of the archaeological establishment will tell you not to buy the looted vessel, as if that would discourage thieves from plundering archaeological treasures. Worse still, leading archaeological institutions won’t allow the plundered vessel to be published in their professional journals. The reasoning goes something like this: Publication increases the vessel’s value; if it’s worth less, collectors are less likely to buy it; if it’s worth less, thieves are less likely to steal it. If you don’t follow this, neither do I.
I’ve been urging for years to concentrate on catching the thieves and putting them in jail. This is the best way to discourage looting. It’s not easy, but it’s better than turning a blind eye to the loot. Why not try something like hidden security cameras at archaeological sites that are being plundered?
Well, it’s finally being done—no thanks to me. At Alacahöyük in central Turkey, rich finds have been recovered from 13 shaft graves that have been dubbed royal tombs, dating to the Early Bronze Age (2350–2150 B.C.E.). The site, which is being excavated by Professor Aykut Çinaroğlu of Ankara University, is now protected with security cameras.
This could be a relatively inexpensive way to protect vulnerable archaeological sites. It’s not the whole solution, but it’s better than refusing to look at or publish unprovenanced, probably looted, artifacts.
You might say that the first thing the looters would do would be to destroy the security cameras. Not so easy. The destruction of the security cameras would trigger an alarm back at the police station that, hopefully, might lead to an immediate raid that would catch the looters. With new advances in technology this should be easy to do.
And a good way to reduce the cost would be to plant lots of fake security cameras at numerous vulnerable sites but with triggers back to the police station. And the thing that would most discourage the looters would be to catch a few of them and mete out appropriate judicial punishment.
This is surely not the whole solution to this vast problem. And I am hardly an expert. But the important thing is to start thinking about the problem in this direction. It is in this direction that the solution—or at least a partial solution—lies.
If you steal a tube of toothpaste at the local drugstore, you are likely to end up at the police station. If you dig up a rare vessel from Biblical times at an archaeological site in the Near East, you are likely to get away with it. Why the difference? The answer is simple. A security camera in the drugstore will catch you in the act. Much of the archaeological establishment will tell you not to buy the looted vessel, as if that would discourage thieves from plundering archaeological treasures. Worse still, leading archaeological institutions won’t allow the plundered […]
You have already read your free article for this month. Please join the BAS Library or become an All Access member of BAS to gain full access to this article and so much more.
