Focus 580; Giving Voice to the Past: Conserving and Protecting Our Cultural Heritage

Good morning and welcome to focus 5 8. This is our telephone talk program My name's David Inge and we're glad to have you listening this morning. Here's something that that might surprise you and you look at illegal activities around the world. The leading two are no doubt the trade in drugs and in arms. But perhaps the third biggest. Illegal international activity is in fact the trade in smuggled art. We'll be talking this morning a bit about that and about what governments and international organizations are trying to do to stop that. It is a significant problem because for the countries that are losing things particularly antiquities it is it means they're losing their cultural heritage and it's also something of a loss for the world when objects are removed from the places where they originated. Then if they get away from there we really don't know very much about them where they came from perhaps who made them how old they are so it's also a loss of knowledge about the world's artistic heritage. And our

guest this morning is someone who's spent a lot of time thinking about this and writing on these issues. Our guest is Patti Gersten Blyth. She's professor of law at DePaul University. She's an internationally known specialist in law and cultural heritage and has taught and published widely in the areas of law and the arts. She came to this actually through art history. She went to Harvard where she got a degree in art history and did work as an archaeologist for a while before she started to become interested in the legal aspects of the subject and though so then she went back to law school she went to Northwestern and got her law degree there and has been working in this area now for some time. She's visiting the campus gave a talk last night has been meeting with students and faculty and was good enough to include a stop here on the program so we're pleased to have her here. And as we talk questions and comments from people who are listening are certainly welcome. All you have to do if you'd like to be part of the program is to pick up the phone and dial the number here in Champaign Urbana 3 3 3 9 4 5 5. We do also have a

toll free line so no matter where you're listening it would be a long distance call. I will pay for the call so you can use that number that's 800 to 2 2 9 4 5 5 and any all questions are welcome all we ask of callers as people just try to be brief so we can get in as many people as we'd like to be included. Well good morning and thanks for being here. Good morning thank you for having me here. I'm sure that if you had asked me the question OK what are the what are the biggest illegal activities around the world. I probably would have guessed drugs. Maybe I could have gotten the arms trade but. I think probably I never would have guessed that stolen art would be such a big thing. How much money are we talking about. Well of course it's very difficult to estimate the amount of money because much of the trade is illegal and underground and also the agencies the police agencies like Interpol are very tight lipped about this information. But the estimates have ranged from between 2 billion to 6 billion a year. That includes not just antiquities

but other kinds of artworks that are stolen as well as the illegally exported the smuggled antiquities that you mentioned. And I guess we should make sure people understand we are talking about a broad range of things probably. When you say a phrase like stolen art people think of thieves breaking into a museum for example and taking something off the wall or breaking into someone's house and taking something for their private collection we're also talking about people taking taking antiquities going to sites temples or other sorts of things and taking whole pieces of buildings statuary taking things out of the ground. They might be things that had been discovered and cataloged already they might be things that were perhaps were not were not widely known so that there was no record of it which probably makes that easier too. To traffic again but here we're talking about a very wide range of things and some of these objects in fact very very large large things

that you would think this would be difficult to remove the ship to. It's not like something you could you could put in your pocket or put a suitcase right we do have examples of monumental wall reliefs and sculptures that have come from places like ancora OUAT in Cambodia Chinese to me leaves that were on sale in New York by Christie's to be auctioned off and monumental reliefs that have actually been taken out of Iraq not only facing the difficulties you mentioned but also defying the boycott against things exit in from Iraq as well and some of these reliefs are larger than than human size. So it is quite remarkable that they managed to overcome logistical as well as legal impediments to transport these things and yet it is done. And as you said whether they range from things that have been documented in place and therefore are known to things that were completely unknown before. In either case there is great destruction of the world's cultural heritage through this kind of illegal activity.

When you look at the various kinds of thefts and I guess I guess I'm thinking about going back to what the what people would mostly think of if you talked about art theft is there indeed still a lot of theft either from museums or from private. Collections there are certainly theft from museums. We can think of back 10 years ago to the theft of the paintings from the Gardner Museum in Boston. Theft of paintings that are unique and easily documented and well known they have never surfaced. They would not be saleable in any kind of public setting. Nobody knows where they are. We assume they're sitting on somebody's wall in somebodies basement or a private room and someone is enjoying them. Perhaps there's been speculation that this is a way of laundering money perhaps connected with the drug market. There is evidence that the routes that illegal art stolen art follows parallels the routes that particularly the illegal trade in drugs parallels through parts of Europe. So perhaps this is a way of converting illegal money into

a hard asset. But since they're not saleable on the market publicly they would have to be part of clandestine transactions. There has been more recently for instance just over Christmas this year there was a theft from one of the museums in skin a Navia where some people came in at gunpoint and held up the guards and paintings were taken. Now the people have been apprehended but the paintings have not been returned yet. So there is ongoing theft from museums and the issue of museum security insurance is prohibitive to a lot of museums because these paintings can be worth millions of dollars and they are not replaceable. So this is certainly a real issue theft out of museums but as you said it's something that's easier for most people to understand than the other kind of theft which is the looting from sites of unknown material which is saleable on the market because as you said it's not documented it's not known to be hot items. So there's a real difference in the way those kinds of theft work.

Yeah. Well for governments around the world what are some of the problems that they have in controlling the removal of their important. Cultural material having people come and either people who who live there thinking Well this is a way that we can make some money by selling this or outsiders thinking the same thing as yours. Here's a very marketable commodity we can come and we can scoop it up and we can take it. What are some of the problems that the governments have in in preventing that. Problems are of course poverty a pot dug up somewhere in South America or Asia might be worth the equivalent of a month's salary or even more than a month's salary to some local person. So poverty is certainly a problem. Education is a problem people need to understand that this is part of their heritage and they would in fact benefit in the long term economically more through preservation of this information insights and material than through selling off something. Of course policing activities having adequate funding of police to be able to

monitor sites the sites are very numerous they're spread out many of them are unknown. And so to adequately police them is very difficult. We actually have the same problem the United States something that we often think of only happening in third world countries but it happens particularly in the southwestern part of the United States where sites are also looted. And I don't think we have the same excuse of level of poverty or even lack of education but inadequate law enforcement I think is a universal problem. We have a caller here bring him into the conversation and probably I should introduce Again our guest We're talking with Patti Gersten bles. She's professor of law at DePaul University and this is her area of specialty law and the Arts Law and cultural heritage that we're talking here about the international market and stolen art and antiquities. And if you have questions you can call with three three three wy alowe or 9 4 5 5 toll free 800 2 2 2 9 4 5 I'm calling to talk with in Champaign line 1.

I had a great issue and I think you raised a couple of points but one of the ones that I would think is pretty thorny is that that there's a large precedent that's been set by many of the developed nations I'm thinking of the former imperialist powers that you say England going into for example Turkey I visited Turkey several years ago and you know the British Museum has countless numbers of sarcophagi and other relics that they just appropriated and took for themselves and I don't see any yet any effort on their part to return them to their rightful owners I mean you can go right up to the crown jewels which they took from the fact that some of them from the Taj Mahal in India I mean I don't see that. I'm planning to return to them any time soon. So I think an argument could be made that it. I mean I'm not condoning any of it but the people who are stealing this now at least they live in the country then and they are poor and they need it they need to eat. I mean in the case of anger a lot many I've heard that many of the best really individuals not

not so organized but that they're just you know sort of selling them to middlemen then who are organized and they end up in Bangkok or Christies or wherever so but you know we as the you know speaking for the West we've set a precedent for this by going in and sort of plundering these cultures before they had any sort of organization. How do we address that when we tell them to stop. Telling her you're certainly right that many of the Western museums benefited from colonialism and imperialism that led to looting throughout much of Asia Africa South and Central America. One thing is that I think that although we look at the individual who may plunder something today and say well we are have sympathy for them because of course their dire economic circumstances but perhaps unwittingly they are part of still a market which takes those objects through almost the same path that you're talking about. They still end up with organized rings

maybe the original person is acting individually but when the object is sold up the line through various middlemen and dealers to smugglers and ultimately to museums and private collectors. This is still an organized ring and activity that is in a sense a kind of cultural imperialism recalling a lesson that is still going on today. So I think we need to recognize that connection. Public pressure is certainly being brought on some museums such as the British Museum to return at least some of the objects. So far the British Museum has certainly been intransigent about that. But public opinion in Britain for example favors a return of the marbles to the Acropolis to the Parthenon in Athens and whether that will eventually produce a return of some of these objects. Of course I'm not sure but it is a possibility. I should say also that several museums particularly in the United States have been the subject of claims for more recently taken material such as from Turkey and Italy. And the those some of those objects have been

returned and I think that those have an effect to deter future looting at least I would hope that they do. I think you're right I mean I think if we return some of the things some say you know we were wrong and we'd like them to go back to their iPhone and then at least you have a case to be made to people who are taking today their own heritage. But I'll just raise one last point and I hope I missed and that is that I'm not so sure you can make the argument that by leaving these these cultural icons and place items in place that they benefit in a long time economically I mean you can make that argument but if I pay 10 bucks to go. I think if for example in Mexico that goes to the government and I would wager that it's not trickling down to the Mayans to send. Who live in the area. I mean it goes to government. It's filtered through various levels of bureaucracy largely corrupt in the case of many lot of accountants. Certainly it's a salvation. These people never see a dime of that. If you have the same problem with the cocoa farmers and in Colombia How do you tell them to grow coffee or something else when they can make you know 5 bucks a month for coffee and $500 a month going

Coakley. I think it's a difficult argument to make it to ground. We have to figure out some way of doing otherwise. I mean just you know unless you have a moratorium which is hard for us like say in the case of ivory it's just not going to buy. Right certainly bribery and corruption is a problem throughout the world but you Nasco and other kinds of international organizations are working on trying to create a sustainable cultural heritage within many third world countries and I think the way that the as you refer to it as trickle down can occur is through the opening of local museums the hiring of guards and people to work in the museums and guides through the sites. So I think it might be easier to see a an economic benefit accruing than what we get for example in trying to turn to other kinds of crops when we discourage people from drought from growing illegal drugs. So it is hoped that through more education and understanding of these issues by

international funding agencies as well as technical technical expertise that can be provided through agencies such as us go that in fact we can convert into a sustainable local economic benefit to local populations to help them come out of the extreme poverty that does lead them to their own heritage. So certainly we know there is a long history of looting associated with with colonialism but also with war that people who you know the victors they round up everything that's not tied down it's worth anything and they take it home with them and have been doing that for as far as we know probably forever. Is that still happening. Is there still looting associated with war and is it going on now. There is less of it I don't want to say that it doesn't go on but there is at least now an international recognition in both international conventions and what's called customary international law that art works and cultural objects should no longer be war

booty. I think that the bigger threat today is when one country or one group within a nation. It destroys part of a cultural heritage that belongs to a different group as a way of trying to obliterate the memory of that group. And of course we see that going on today in Afghanistan with the Taliban that is trying to destroy the statuary that belongs to a different culture. We certainly saw that in the conflicts in the former Yugoslavia where churches and mosques were being destroyed by the other side or the library of Sarajevo was bombed. But this is being done not to take objects as war booty. It was plunder obviously but a destruction to carry out a political and national heritage purpose to show that one group is the victor over some other group. Of course this is something very much condemned by the world community. And there are possibilities now of war crimes being brought against people who perpetuate this kind of thing since World War 2 because of course in World War 2 we saw this on a massive scale.

And since World War Two both at the Nuremberg trials and in 1054 Hague Convention that intentional destruction of cultural property during war time is now considered an international crime against humanity. You know that's just since you you touched on it. And I'm not sure how much more there is to say about the Afghan case. People are very concerned about the stated intention of the Taliban in Afghanistan to destroy and the thing I've heard about recently is as Buddhist stat.. And they they are Muslim and they believe that these are idols of false god and that they shouldn't even exist and that people around the world are very concerned about there have been offers to go and to remove the material so that it can be preserved. Some people might just like to stash that in their museum or they might say they might genuinely say some day this will go back and I think so far that the Taliban in Afghanistan have not seemed particularly interested in that and it's not an easy place to

find out what to get into and find out what's going on. Anyway it seems that there's a it's a situation that there is no good answer for it is there in fact anything that. That the outside interests might do. Well I think you've mentioned what people are trying to do I know that you NASCAR has been trying to get into Afghanistan in order to find out what the situation is. My understanding is that so far there are no firsthand accounts of what is actually happening in Afghanistan so we don't know the extent of the destruction. Much of what's been in the news has focused on the Buddhists because of the two monumental sculptures that are carved into the cliff side of balmy on which happened to be buddhist the largest in fact Buddhist sculptures that are known. But I believe that there are certainly sculptures in other museums smaller statuary in other museums in Afghanistan not just in Kabul but in other places that are not only remnants of Buddhist culture but also earlier Greek influenced Greek influenced cultures such as the Gondar and

civilization. So I think there is more at risk here even than just the Buddhist as as significant as that is some museums such as the Metropolitan Museum and I believe perhaps the Field Museum in Chicago have offered to go in and remove the sculpture I don't think that the Taliban have displayed any interest yet in those offers perhaps on the theory that just their mere existence of these sculptures anywhere in the world is an affront. On the other hand Islamic scholars that I've talked to and I'm not an Islamic scholar myself by any means have said that in fact the presence of these sculptures is not an affront to Islam. So. I think there is a lot of question and uncertainty is just what exactly is going on here. And I think we should also add to for anyone listening I would want to make it sound like I or you or anyone was making some sort of blanket indictment of Islam based on the attitudes beliefs intentions of one particular group of Muslims.

But you know in fact Islam I believe advocates tolerance of other religious views and so I think that the Taliban is considered to be an aberration. My guess is this does touch on the issue of national sovereignty. And if a particular country takes a particular attitude to what they have I would I would expect that it would be difficult to for outside powers to make some argument that they should be doing something different at least that country could say look it's our country these are our artifacts we can do whatever we want with them. And so don't tell us what what we should be doing you can make the argument that there is something like. The cultural heritage that belongs to all of humankind. But you still have the problem I'm sure with government saying well that's all well and good but that's but it's our country. Certainly there is nothing that can be done within a particular country from a legal point of view. There is no international tribunal before which you can bring a particular country

although individuals as I said before could be brought for war crimes afterwards. However I think that in some situations at least there is indirect pressure that can be brought. There's certainly the what we call the court of world opinion and that can be persuasive in some situations. I also think that when we talk about destruction caused by development which is very difficult to say to a country don't engage in economic development don't build a dam don't engage in hydroelectric power projects. But I do think that world funding agencies or governments for instance of the United States that may be involved in helping to fund different kinds of development projects could condition the funding. On actions being taken to preserve the cultural heritage and years ago we saw a very good example of this with the OSS one dam in Egypt that when the lake level was raised as part of development project museums and international organizations contributed funds and ancient temples and sculptures that were located in the valley that would have been destroyed were razed and in

fact some Egyptian antiquities were then given in gratitude to institutions outside of Egypt and that was a perfect example of a cooperative effort that benefited everyone. And we need to come back to that we don't have enough of that going on today so that in cases like the Three Gorges Dam project in China and some other development projects things are being lost. But if funding agencies on the international national level were made more aware of these issues I think we could make some progress where we'd be in a win win situation about our midpoint here. Again I'd like to introduce our guest We're talking with Patti Gersten Blyth. She's professor of law at DePaul University and her area of interest is law and the Arts Law and cultural heritage. And if you have questions you can give us a call 3 3 3 9 4 5 5 toll free 800 to 2 2 9 4 5 5. It's it's sort of my understanding and you can correct me if I'm wrong in law that the principal is if I buy something that's stolen. Even if

I don't know that it's stolen. If it can be established that it is. I'm out that object if the if the owner can come along and establish the fact that it was stolen from them it has to go back and if I paid somebody money for it that's that's I'm out that money is that have I got it right that's basically what the law says yes you have it right at least as far as the United States is concerned and some other countries that follow the British property law system so that a thief can never convey a good title can ever transfer title so your right if you buy something whether you buy it or you believe in good faith or not or knowing about the uncertain background. The buyer will have to give it back. The exceptions to that are that we have something called statutes of limitation which say that any kind of a law suit. This applies in personal injury and other kinds of actions as well that there is a time limit within which a suit must be brought to recover the stolen property so that in theory some of these claims could be barred by the passage of time. And this

time period is relatively short in much of the United States. The maximum time being about six years. But it's interesting that most of the courts that have confronted this issue have found ways of essentially delaying that time period and saying that that six year or some cases it's four years or three years time period will not start until the original owner has an opportunity to find out where in fact the stolen artwork is not fair if you don't know where it is and you don't know whom to sue. And six years goes by you lose your rights in the object. And a lot of courts are very sympathetic to that problem because it's easy to hide artworks they're small and you can stick them away someplace and just let a couple years go by. Suddenly you have effectively good title. So courts have found ways of delaying that time period. And in almost every case brought in the United States the original owner of stolen art works has been able to recover them. And if you have a situation where an individual steals a worker

of art and they sell it to somebody else and they sell it to somebody else and they sell to somebody else and that person sells it to me the original owner comes along to me and says this This belongs to me. Does the accountability eventually still come down with me because I've got it or can I say well look it's not my problem go back go back a couple of people here go back to the person that sold of the person that I bought it from. Well you're going to be out the object. You're going to have to give the work back. However depending on how smart you were in the first place you might have gotten some kind of warranty or contractual agreement with your seller that said that if you have to give it back if the seller did not give you good title then in fact you can go back and get your money back from your seller in theory that could work its way back up the line. So you might well be able to get your money back but you would probably have to give up the object in most cases these objects are unique you'd probably rather have the object or the painting then your money back. But that's your problem because you chose to buy something without being absolutely certain that you were getting good

title to it. And is it always clear that something. It has been stolen or is that sometimes. For people who would who would make the argument that indeed something something was stolen and should be returned to original owner or family of original owner or somebody who has a claim is it sometimes difficult actually to establish what what really did happen and how it got from point A to Point B as a fact. As a matter of fact yes because a lot of these go back to transactions that may have happened many many years ago. The documentation may not be available and of course we have the example of all the artworks that were looted during the Holocaust is now very difficult in some circumstances to determine just what happened was a painting sold or was it stolen and when sold was it sold as a forced sale. I mean if some Somebody said told you can get out of Germany if you will sell us your paintings at a tenth of the price of what they were actually worth is that the kind of sale that today we want to say was a legitimate sale

or not. So with artworks these transfers and thefts take place over a very long period of time 50 years is not that unusual. So it may be difficult to reconstruct what happened all those many years ago but still the courts try to do that. That's their job. Let's have a KOA here in Belgium. One number for you. Hello. Well I have a question about the art of art. Seems so. Look at look at Britain. Britain looted enormous amounts of artwork from India and Greece and I saw Egypt at different times when they control these areas. Now the crown jewels in their effect are some stolen items. Get right down to it. The Star of India being one. If so how does that

go along with this. Everybody knows that these people all get out of this country and took it back to India or Britain to the British Museum and have these frescoes on showing off from Greece in the Acropolis and stuff. How does that work into it. We did actually an earlier caller raised the same question but that's OK I mean there is might be some other people who didn't hear that I think it's certainly an interesting issue that that museums all over the world certainly in the West in this country and in Europe have objects that were taken from as as the caller says were taken from the Middle East and taken from Africa from East Asia for from all over the place. And I'm sure for them it's very complicated because if they actually had to give them back to the countries that they came from there their museums might be pretty empty. Definitely. But in this particular we talk a bit about the marbles and the British Museum of the fact that the people in Britain if you go out and you ask them they say well yeah I think we should give these back the museum so far it doesn't seem to

be real interested in giving them back. Is that a big issue it not only that museum but museums around the world. It certainly is a fear. Museums are always saying that they are afraid that their galleries will be emptied by all of these claims being brought. The truth is though that countries don't necessarily want everything back in some cases they want the highly unique objects that are emblematic of their culture and civilization. And certainly Greece does want to get the Parthenon sculptures back because I think that they are emblematic of the Greek civilization and their placement on the Parthenon in the center of Athens was certainly symbolic to them. But I guess I would also like to focus attention on the fact that rather than trying to go back two or three centuries and undo everything and right all the wrongs and I do have certainly a lot of sympathy for the countries that whose heritage was removed through colonial imperialistic activities. But I

think we should also focus attention on what's going on today. The sites that are being looted today museums that are being things are being pillaged out of museums and I think that what we should really focus on is prospects of what can we do to stop these activities that are happening today or they're likely to be happening over the next several years. And so just talking about things that are currently in museums and whether they should go back is a bit of a diversion to some extent in my view from the real issues which is how do we stop what's going on today. So we should be talking about both educational efforts legal efforts public opinion efforts to change the way our museums operate in our private collectors operate to reduce the effect of the market on the looting and theft which is going on at this time. Could I ask you one other question. And it deals with art but not exactly art. What's going on with the Taleban in Afghanistan now and their

destruction of these enormous Buddhas that were carved centuries ago. We talked about that too. Yeah you sort of should turn it in for the first half and then I mean and there unfortunately I think the answer is that while there is a lot of concern around the world there doesn't really seem to be very much that that outsiders can do. Truly a shamanic because there are many areas that are being looted just like that. Thank you very much. OK. Thanks for the call. Other questions certainly welcome. We like to call in and talk with our guest Patti Kirsten Blyth from DePaul University 3 3 3 or 9 4 5 5 and toll free 800 to 2 2 9 4 5. Just for a second staying with with this issue of for example the the material that was taken from Greece and is now on in Britain is is there some precedent have there in recent years been any sort of. Any sort of deals worked out government to governments a government of one country a

government of other. If there is something that a government regards as an important part of this country's important cultural heritage that previous no matter what it was was removed and the government is really arguing that it should be returned and that they managed to work something out. There have been some examples there was a sculpture called the office home that was returned to Africa from the United States several years ago because of its religious and cultural significance. There have been things certainly returned it within Europe. The crown of St Stephen I think is the name of it was returned I believe was to Hungary a couple of years ago. Some things have been returned within. For instance England giving back things to Scotland is part of the devolution of government within the United Kingdom so there have been some examples of that and we also have had some examples of museums returning things as part of settlement of lawsuits or under legal pressure in some cases even

complete trials and legal suits to governments abroad as well and we have some cases where the United States government has assisted other countries to obtain return objects as well. We have others here. Now let's go to Urbana line 1. Hello. I would think that England could make copies. Of the Elgin marbles and send the originals back but I also have read them. The fact that they were removed from England is part of what saved them from destruction or from Greece or from Greece. The argument from Greece to England is sort of a double one thanks you never know when removal is going to say something but I think it really is truly a shame when things get stolen from a particular country. We lived in the fall for a while and you could see places where things were just missing. Just a lot of the religious art is is in very public places and

are at least out in the open and things were just sometimes gone and it's truly a shame that he is in one of the arguments that. That is sometimes made for the removal of this material from from its place of origin. There some people would argue well taking it from there and putting it in a museum somewhere means that it will be preserved and that there's that's there something you know that's that's you know I suppose trying to put a positive spin on looting. But. People have made that argument. Well certainly and in some cases I guess the individual object may be preserved as far as the Parthenon sculptures are concerned. There was also a lot of destruction done in the process of removing them to both the building and the sculptures themselves. So which way they would have done better or worse is of course very difficult for us to judge today in hindsight and second guessing what was going on. But I think that the issue that we should focus on is that in the removal of

objects today whether from architecture monumental sculptures or things being looted out of the ground there is a lot of other information that's being lost. And this is the crux of the issue I think it's not just a question of whether an individual object is preserved in some pristine condition in a museum. But all of the context of information that can be gathered through the archaeological and scientific excavation of a site that is what is being lost is this information that tells us about the object and object by itself does not give us full information. And a lot of times we don't know what the object was used for. We don't know what it was found with. We don't know for instance if it comes out of a tomb. We can study the relationship of the objects how were they they were placed to each other what else was in the tomb we can study the skeleton and how the skeleton was located and a lot can be learned from the study of the bones themselves and all that is lost if let's say the tomb

group has been looted. The smaller objects may be destroyed. The skeletal remains may be destroyed. Certainly the soil that could be analyzed to tell us about diet and other kinds of agricultural information that comes or particularly out of a habitation site. So a lot more is lost. So the question becomes is preservation the physical preservation of the single object worth the destruction of the rest of the information and other objects that would come with it objects that may not be as attractive to be sold on the market leaving objects buried in the ground does not generally destroy them. They've been there for hundreds or thousands of years and they will in most cases unless there's a major earthquake or some other calamity that we can't help leaving them in the ground does not hurt them. And at some point presumably they will be excavated sometimes they are found of course through development projects as we talked about earlier in the show. But eventually they can be excavated scientifically.

So this is the real question. Individual isolated objects versus the whole context of information that we can gain. We have about 10 minutes left and one more call and we'll get right to another certainly are welcome we're talking in this part of focus 580 with Patty Gersten Blyth. She's professor of law at DePaul University and this is her area of specialty law and the arts and questions are welcome 3 3 3 W wild toll free 800 1:58 W L L. Next caller is in Rantoul. Line 3. Hello. My interest is not necessarily on the looting of nations but just recovery of life. Just stolen art in general is there a clearing house that shares information I had read something in the St. Ian about agency that were coding information for stolen artists or something like that or. There are now several computerized databases. Perhaps the best known and the one you may be referring to is

run by the International Foundation for art research and they do compile lists of artworks that have been stolen so for instance if you own a painting and it's stolen you can give the information and register it with I far. And if you're thinking of buying something. Many dealers and certainly the auction houses will routinely run objects through the eye far computerized database to find out if there has been a claim listing these as stolen. But there are several other computerized databases as well that are not necessarily as well known. Also today several museums are conducting research into objects that have a gap in their history during the period of World War Two and they are starting to place the objects with those gaps on their own websites so that people can search to see if they something from their family may show up in one of these museum collections. But none of these databases are complete. Yeah and so it's still somewhat of a haphazard process. Also they do not work for things

looted from the ground they only work for things taken from private and public collections. I was thinking what to write everything up conversation they had privately with like looting of a nation on a wide scale and I was thinking of just like the family the family jewels or whatever so I dunno whatever you have. Having knowledge of their not so I thank you. Thank you and will go again to another call here champagne county line for hi. Since you brought up this idea of sort of damage in the process of taking other things out I think that I recall that some major archaeological associations have sort of condemned some practice I don't know how widespread it is and that's what I meant. Asking about in Israel where. Earlier. More recent. Well anyway the way it's escalated is that you know basically the Palestinian will sign whatever artifacts are not regarded as that valuable or important and

in other words a dig down and go to a deeper level to look for signs of Chaldean I don't know. Earlier earlier stuff I do you know anything about the specifics of that and I'll listen off the air but I also want to comment at the top of the show. David you said that the trade illicit trade was arms drugs and hard work but actually just recently and I guess on International Women's Day it's good to point out that trade in illicit trade in women has actually surpassed the dollar amount of the citrate. Drugs. So I think maybe art might be down there at 4. Not that that you know takes away from the seriousness of it. I was not aware of that. Let me ask your next question. And I want to do it so well. Thanks for the call. And you want to comment on any of that. Well on the first point some archaeologists particularly what I would call older style archaeologists would go into the field primarily interested in a certain time period and

if there were more recent layers representing more recent civilizations above those there might be cases where material was lost and not as carefully excavated or in some cases even bulldozed. I think that most archaeologists or at least those who were trained in scientific field techniques no longer follow those practices today. But I can't deny that it goes on in various parts of the world there have certainly been allegations that it goes on in Israel there's been allegations that it goes on in the Arab countries as well. I don't myself know specifically whether these have been documented but in any kind of destruction whether it's caused by archaeologists or by looters I would certainly condemn them and I think the major archaeological organizations would do that as well. I have not seen the statistics about the trade in women or children although there certainly is an international slave trade in those and it would be nice if we could in fact get the statistics out of working ization such as Interpol so that we could have a

better idea of what we're talking about. Well sir certainly we know that the trade and smuggle artist is big business where there's a lot of money here and you to all the things you talked about in your talk was some of the things that might be done and you talked about perhaps one of the things that that should be done is to make sure that we really put the burden of proof so to speak really on the buyer that before people buy something they should be the ones to make sure that the seller has clear title. And this has not been obtained illegally although based on what we talked about earlier I would think that buyers would already be doing that because if it was established that it was stolen not only would they lose the object they'd lose what they paid for it so if it was me I would I would want to do everything that I could to make sure. That the person who sold it to me had got this thing legally.

So one would think. But we find that there are private collectors and even museums in the United States that ignore this. The truth is that it takes a lot of money to get an object back legal representation is expensive litigation is expensive and very often use IEMs and the private collectors have greater financial resources available to them to defend themselves in such lawsuits. And it seems that a lot of them are willing to take that chance. I think particularly where museums are concerned where whether they are publicly or privately funded but even are privately funded they're getting in direct public benefits. Museums should have a responsibility to conserve their resources they should not be taking these risks use IEMs should be working out acquisitions policies to try to ensure that they are not buying anything illegal both because of their public educational role but also because they have a responsibility to be financially sound and a lot of these decisions do put them at risk for losing a great deal

of money. But not all museums the United States have taken that position as yet. But the other thing that you add that's really connected with that you'd suggest is there really ought to be a clear. Stigma attached to knowingly buying something that stolen or maybe buying something and just not caring. And again that maybe we're touching already but that's sort of a little bit disappointing to hear that there seemed to be apparently people who just they really don't care. They want something. They want it bad enough. They've got the money. They don't care where it came from. Right. And it is surprising because as I've mentioned over 90 percent of the American public that was polled about a year ago and their attitudes towards archaeology over 90 percent said that museums and people United States should not be buying things that are illegally obtained. Yet we do find at least some of our leading museums in this country as well as private collectors whose actions are more difficult to control really engage in what at best is willful ignorance closing their

eyes to what most people really do know is going on and it will require a lot of public pressure I think and education boards of trustees as well as the professional curatorial staffs of museums need to be brought to understand as I said both the educational loss and scientific loss as well as the legal risks that they are running. You know and I guess also gets to the question about whether or not the governments particularly our government thinks that this is a problem or not. Why do you think our government does think so. Certainly some parts of the government our State Department is working with other nations to try to help with that. I think the other problem becomes that there is a lot of lobbying and political influence by some museums and again and private collectors who have the money to not only engage well-heeled lobbyists and lawyers but who have close ties with some of our legislators. So I think this is part of a bigger problem but we see it even in this part of the world that issues like campaign finance reform and control of lobbying are things

that would help us on this issue as well. Well at that we're going to have to stop. I want to say thanks very much. Thank you. Very interesting to talk with our guest Patti Gersten Blyth. She's a professor of law at DePaul University.