Kudos to PhDiva for describing what's missing from the so-called Benghazi Treasure. For more, see http://phdiva.blogspot.com/2011/10/antiquities-missing-from-libya.html
Rather than all the usual speculative blather about shadowy Western collectors organizing the looting of the world's treasures, its nice to see someone associated with the archaeological community making such a timely and positive contribution to describing what is lost.
Kudos to PhDiva for doing so.
We would be all better off if others took her cue.
Showing posts with label Libya. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Libya. Show all posts
Treasures Stolen from Benghazi Vault-- But When and By Whom?
The Sun Newspapers and others have reported that a treasure trove of gold artifacts and coins was stolen from a Benghazi bank vault. See http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3903581/Priceless-gold-of-Benghazi-is-stolen.html?OTC-RSS&ATTR=News
Collectors and dealers in ancient art should obviously report any efforts to sell such materials to the authorities. Here are some other thoughts.
1. Although some will apparently use this news as a basis to claim there is a need for "emergency import restrictions" on Libyan cultural material, these objects would already be treated as stolen under US and other law.
2. While the theft of this material is said to have happened during revolution, if what happened in Iraq is any guide, it's also possible that the material was stolen earlier by officials associated with the former regime, and the loss is only coming to light now.
3. It would have been easier to identify this material if it had been properly recorded by either the Italian authorities who returned it to Libya back in 1961 or the Libyans themselves. Unfortunately, this does not appear to have been the case, so all we will be left with is some general descriptions of the material. Hopefully, Libyan authorities will put out as detailed as possible descriptions of the missing artifacts soon.
Collectors and dealers in ancient art should obviously report any efforts to sell such materials to the authorities. Here are some other thoughts.
1. Although some will apparently use this news as a basis to claim there is a need for "emergency import restrictions" on Libyan cultural material, these objects would already be treated as stolen under US and other law.
2. While the theft of this material is said to have happened during revolution, if what happened in Iraq is any guide, it's also possible that the material was stolen earlier by officials associated with the former regime, and the loss is only coming to light now.
3. It would have been easier to identify this material if it had been properly recorded by either the Italian authorities who returned it to Libya back in 1961 or the Libyans themselves. Unfortunately, this does not appear to have been the case, so all we will be left with is some general descriptions of the material. Hopefully, Libyan authorities will put out as detailed as possible descriptions of the missing artifacts soon.
Leptis Magna Safe
This video proves that Leptis Magna is safe despite claims to the contrary publicised by scare mongers from the archaeological community with a vested interest in seeking "emergency import restrictions" on cultural goods. See
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14983921
Will the archaeological blogs now report on this good news in an effort to help correct the record? I doubt it.
Still, this does not change the fact that there have been no credible reports about widespread looting or destruction of Libyan archaeological sites. Under the circumstances, it is a disservice to the new Libyan government and the Libyan people to continue to claim otherwise.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14983921
Will the archaeological blogs now report on this good news in an effort to help correct the record? I doubt it.
Still, this does not change the fact that there have been no credible reports about widespread looting or destruction of Libyan archaeological sites. Under the circumstances, it is a disservice to the new Libyan government and the Libyan people to continue to claim otherwise.
You Need Us, You Really Do
That, at least, seems to be the message behind a seminar organized by Italian cultural officials to address the future of archaeological sites in Libya. See
http://www.independent.com.mt/news.asp?newsitemid=131877
As the report states,
Before the conflict started there were over twenty archaelogical missions operating in Libya. By far the largest number, thirteen, were Italian missions, but there were also French, British, American and Polish missions amongst others. Most of those missions were represented at the meeting that was held in Caserta.
The meeting was entitled �For the Preservation of the Cultural Heritage in Libya, a Dialogue among Institutions�. Malta�s Ambassador and Permanent Delegate to UNESCO, Dr Ray Bondin, was the only Ambassador invited to the meeting both because of Malta�s importance to Libya and also because of his extensive contacts with the heritage authorities in Libya. Malta�s agreements with Libya cover also substantially collaboration on the heritage field. He had in fact last year made two missions to strengthen the collaboration with Malta. Because of his extensive experience in World Heritage he was giving his assistance on the site of Cyrenea, one of the major archaelogical sites in Libya. Representatives of the new transitory authories based in Benghazi were also present at the Caserta meeting. The meeting discussed the theft of heritage from Libya, the sites needing major attention, and in particular listened to the Libyans as to their immediate needs. Though the humane situation is the obvious priority at the moment the new Libya will most certainly invest more in tourism and therefore their archaeological sites are of the utmost importance.
Although much of this is all well and good, one really has to wonder whether the participants are even more interested in ensuring that they get in the good graces of Libya's new government. After all, Italy and Malta had especially cozy relations with the deposed Colonel's regime, and presumably many of the archaeological delegations that excavated in the country did so as well.
http://www.independent.com.mt/news.asp?newsitemid=131877
As the report states,
Before the conflict started there were over twenty archaelogical missions operating in Libya. By far the largest number, thirteen, were Italian missions, but there were also French, British, American and Polish missions amongst others. Most of those missions were represented at the meeting that was held in Caserta.
The meeting was entitled �For the Preservation of the Cultural Heritage in Libya, a Dialogue among Institutions�. Malta�s Ambassador and Permanent Delegate to UNESCO, Dr Ray Bondin, was the only Ambassador invited to the meeting both because of Malta�s importance to Libya and also because of his extensive contacts with the heritage authorities in Libya. Malta�s agreements with Libya cover also substantially collaboration on the heritage field. He had in fact last year made two missions to strengthen the collaboration with Malta. Because of his extensive experience in World Heritage he was giving his assistance on the site of Cyrenea, one of the major archaelogical sites in Libya. Representatives of the new transitory authories based in Benghazi were also present at the Caserta meeting. The meeting discussed the theft of heritage from Libya, the sites needing major attention, and in particular listened to the Libyans as to their immediate needs. Though the humane situation is the obvious priority at the moment the new Libya will most certainly invest more in tourism and therefore their archaeological sites are of the utmost importance.
Although much of this is all well and good, one really has to wonder whether the participants are even more interested in ensuring that they get in the good graces of Libya's new government. After all, Italy and Malta had especially cozy relations with the deposed Colonel's regime, and presumably many of the archaeological delegations that excavated in the country did so as well.
Libya: What Emergency?
There they go again. Only months after apparently receiving assurances from their buddies at the State Department about "emergency import restrictions" on Egyptian cultural artifacts, archaeological trade groups are again taking advantage of another supposed emergency to call for yet another round of emergency import restrictions, which of course, are just the first step towards a permanent ban. See http://www.archaeological.org/news/aianews/6415
Yet, the facts seem to conspire against them. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2011/sep/11/tripoli-museum-antiquity-shattered-gaddafi-image (noting that there was no looting of archaeological artifacts at the Libyan national museum).
If I were a member of the Libyan provisional government, I might be a bit peeved that foreign academics are implying that the Libyans themselves are incapable of caring for their own cultural patrimony (despite considerable evidence to the contrary) and view this call for import restrictions as nothing more than a paternalistic violation of Libyan sovereignty.
One also has to wonder what, if any contacts, members of these groups had with the deposed regime. If past history in places like Egypt and Iraq are any guide, these relations could have been considerable. And certainly, this should be considered by Libyan officials as well in determining whether the help of these groups is necessary or desirable.
But do the facts on the ground and the desires of the Libyans really matter when the cronies of these groups run the State Department's Cultural Heritage Center? Or, will Libyan cultural officials be convinced to go along whatever the true facts and what the need for emergency restrictions says about Libya's own competence to care for its own cultural patrimony?
Yet, the facts seem to conspire against them. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2011/sep/11/tripoli-museum-antiquity-shattered-gaddafi-image (noting that there was no looting of archaeological artifacts at the Libyan national museum).
If I were a member of the Libyan provisional government, I might be a bit peeved that foreign academics are implying that the Libyans themselves are incapable of caring for their own cultural patrimony (despite considerable evidence to the contrary) and view this call for import restrictions as nothing more than a paternalistic violation of Libyan sovereignty.
One also has to wonder what, if any contacts, members of these groups had with the deposed regime. If past history in places like Egypt and Iraq are any guide, these relations could have been considerable. And certainly, this should be considered by Libyan officials as well in determining whether the help of these groups is necessary or desirable.
But do the facts on the ground and the desires of the Libyans really matter when the cronies of these groups run the State Department's Cultural Heritage Center? Or, will Libyan cultural officials be convinced to go along whatever the true facts and what the need for emergency restrictions says about Libya's own competence to care for its own cultural patrimony?
Crying Wolf
UNESCO has issued an alarm that Libya's cultural heritage has become the target of looters and a Russian journalist is claiming that the Museum in Tripoli has been sacked and that NATO warplanes have bombed important cultural sites. See http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/26/libyas-cultural-heritage-_n_938405.html and
http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/article2406278.ece
Not so fast. In fact, the museum in Tripoli appears to be under rebel guard. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/aug/29/letter-from-tripoli And there have been no credible reports about either extensive looting of archaeological sites or attacks by NATO aircraft.
Indeed, to the extent Libya's cultural heritage has gone missing, isn't it more likely to have happened due to the sticky fingers of Libya's former ruler and his family?
Under the circumstances, perhaps we should not jump to conclusions.
Addendum: Andrew Lawler has also written an article, entitled "Claims of Mass Libyan Looting Rejected by Archaeologists," Science Magazine (Sept. 1, 2011). See http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2011/09/claims-of-mass-libyan-looting.html?ref=hp
http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/article2406278.ece
Not so fast. In fact, the museum in Tripoli appears to be under rebel guard. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/aug/29/letter-from-tripoli And there have been no credible reports about either extensive looting of archaeological sites or attacks by NATO aircraft.
Indeed, to the extent Libya's cultural heritage has gone missing, isn't it more likely to have happened due to the sticky fingers of Libya's former ruler and his family?
Under the circumstances, perhaps we should not jump to conclusions.
Addendum: Andrew Lawler has also written an article, entitled "Claims of Mass Libyan Looting Rejected by Archaeologists," Science Magazine (Sept. 1, 2011). See http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2011/09/claims-of-mass-libyan-looting.html?ref=hp
Egypt, Libya and Tunisia: UNESCO to the Rescue?
UNESCO is belatedly celebrating the 40th Anniversary of the 1970 UNESCO Convention with a conference in the City of Lights, Paris. See http://www.artsjournal.com/culturegrrl/ And what better way to show UNESCO is still relevant than to address the crisis in the Middle East?
The cultural bureaucrats are rightly concerned about the effect of unrest in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya on those nations' cultural patrimony, but one can only hope there is more emphasis on nipping the problem at the source rather than on taking advantage of situation to further an anti-collecting agenda. "Emergency import restrictions" that effectively shift the burden of proof onto the holder virtually guarantee seizures of perfectly legitimate artifacts that don't have detailed collection histories. Good police work combined with more effective efforts to record what is missing is a better, far less controversial approach.
The cultural bureaucrats are rightly concerned about the effect of unrest in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya on those nations' cultural patrimony, but one can only hope there is more emphasis on nipping the problem at the source rather than on taking advantage of situation to further an anti-collecting agenda. "Emergency import restrictions" that effectively shift the burden of proof onto the holder virtually guarantee seizures of perfectly legitimate artifacts that don't have detailed collection histories. Good police work combined with more effective efforts to record what is missing is a better, far less controversial approach.
Labels:
Egypt,
Emergency Import Restrictions,
Libya,
Tunisia,
UNESCO Convention
The Uncertain State of Libya's Archaeological Treasures
Libya boasts five UNESCO World Heritage sites with well-preserved Greek, Punic, and Roman architecture. See http://www.unescoworldheritagesites.com/libya-unesco-world-heritage-sites.htm
What reports there are suggest they remain undisturbed for now. See
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/02/27/us-libya-protests-heritage-idUKTRE71Q0M520110227?pageNumber=1 However, one has to wonder about their fate, particularly if the Qaddafi regime holds on for an extended period of time.
When Libya was an Italian colony, Mussolini lavished money on archaeology; excavations at Roman sites helped buttress his regime's claim to be the heir of ancient Rome. In reaction, Qaddafi largely ignored Libya's ancient past, labeling it as colonialist. Although there have been recent efforts to rehabilitate some sites for their potential as tourist destinations, Qaddafi and/or his cronies have also allegedly sold off statuary from ancient sites like Leptis Magna for personal profit. See http://phdiva.blogspot.com/2011/02/libyan-archaeology-scandals.html Like many despots, Qaddafi seems unable to distinguish between public property and his own.
Let's hope Libya's well preserved ancient ruins stay safe, and the Libyan people prevail in their death match with their eccentric tyrant, Col. Qaddafi, and his cronies.
What reports there are suggest they remain undisturbed for now. See
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/02/27/us-libya-protests-heritage-idUKTRE71Q0M520110227?pageNumber=1 However, one has to wonder about their fate, particularly if the Qaddafi regime holds on for an extended period of time.
When Libya was an Italian colony, Mussolini lavished money on archaeology; excavations at Roman sites helped buttress his regime's claim to be the heir of ancient Rome. In reaction, Qaddafi largely ignored Libya's ancient past, labeling it as colonialist. Although there have been recent efforts to rehabilitate some sites for their potential as tourist destinations, Qaddafi and/or his cronies have also allegedly sold off statuary from ancient sites like Leptis Magna for personal profit. See http://phdiva.blogspot.com/2011/02/libyan-archaeology-scandals.html Like many despots, Qaddafi seems unable to distinguish between public property and his own.
Let's hope Libya's well preserved ancient ruins stay safe, and the Libyan people prevail in their death match with their eccentric tyrant, Col. Qaddafi, and his cronies.
Reflections On Cultural Politics After Tunisian, Egyptian and Libyan Revolts
A madman is still killing his people in Libya. Autocrats in Tunisia and Egypt have been deposed, but the democracy the people have died for remains elusive. Oddly, Western archaeologists seem more focused on trying to tie any looting of archaeological sites and stores to mysterious Western dealers and collectors than on criticizing the regimes whose policies have caused the societal unrest that unleashed any looting in the first place.
Anyway, here are some observations based on recent events in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya:
1. Draconian cultural patrimony laws are natural expressions of authoritarian regimes;
2. Such laws are applied to common people and foreigners, but not to cronies of the regime;
3. Such systems also hide financial improprieties, i.e., skimming of public funds that should go to archaeological projects;
4. Educated elites are less likely to loot than the poor and uneducated;
5. Looting and vandalism can also be used by the authorities to try to justify their repressive measures;
6. Foreign archaeologists will not speak out against regimes that offer them excavation permits;
7. The prospect of jobs or funding can silence source country archaeologists from expressing their own concerns.
Anyway, here are some observations based on recent events in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya:
1. Draconian cultural patrimony laws are natural expressions of authoritarian regimes;
2. Such laws are applied to common people and foreigners, but not to cronies of the regime;
3. Such systems also hide financial improprieties, i.e., skimming of public funds that should go to archaeological projects;
4. Educated elites are less likely to loot than the poor and uneducated;
5. Looting and vandalism can also be used by the authorities to try to justify their repressive measures;
6. Foreign archaeologists will not speak out against regimes that offer them excavation permits;
7. The prospect of jobs or funding can silence source country archaeologists from expressing their own concerns.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)