Another Repatriation Case

It appears there has been another successful thwarting of human remains smuggling from Southeast Asia to the West, according to an article that has come to my attention today (courtesy of Museum Security Network). Additional coverage is here. ICE and Homeland Security authorities in New York investigated the suspicious origins of a package shipped from Bali, Indonesia (declared customs value of $5!), found to contain five carved and decorated "head-hunting" trophy skulls, believed to ethnographically originate with one of the many Dayak tribes in Borneo (Kalimantan). The skulls are believed to have been collected sometime during the 18th-19th centuries, although it is highly unlikely that any specific written records would tie these particular skulls to a specific location or time period; instead, appraisers would be required to rely on decorative motif analysis.

Because the total price exceeded $20,000 after a local appraiser "evaluated" what are acknowledged by the authorities, rightly in my opinion, to be priceless human remains, Customs could stop shipment at port in New Jersey. Amidst the usual speeches by officials of both nations, consultants etc. when repatriations are made, I find it unfortunate that these specifically Dayak ethnological artifacts (read stolen ancestral remains/heirlooms) were glossed as the "heritage of the Indonesian people" in this article. I have yet to find any information on whether or not community officials or leaders from one or more Dayak villages (i.e. longhouses) were on hand to witness the repatriation or claim the remains? I suspect not... The article merely suggests that they will be conserved in Indonesia...somewhere.

No information is given on the original shipper or intended destination, so perhaps that is still under investigation as part of prosecutory efforts. From what I can gather, this has yet to receive any independent press in Indonesia itself (the skull returned on the 16th May). Unfortunately, gallery webpages like this (the source of the photo above left) strongly suggest that a market for human remains still exists, with or without the participation of "independent," individual below-boards dealers on e-commerce sites like eBay. At least the above represents one more apprehension and, hopefully, ensures the conservation of these skulls for both future study and perhaps even eventual return to the appropriate community(s).

A SAFE Haven

Just a reminder to my readers to please support the efforts of SAFE (Saving Antiquities for Everyone) in whatever way you can. The antiquities trade is a global crisis, and SAFE remains one of the only full-time organizations dedicated to education and outreach around the world; doing their (our) best to demonstrate and communicate that looting and the antiquities trade are deleterious wherever they occur. Furthermore, by now several other regionally-specific antiquities trade/heritage conservation focused blogs or organizations, including this one, connect to SAFE, and we all must stand in solidarity.

Statue Thievery Spreads to Bangladesh

Just a quick post on a new incident of statue and idol thefts and attempted smuggling, this time out of Bangladesh, according to a recent article in the Daily Star (here). All involved were arrested in Bangladesh's main airport in Dhaka after being busted by customs before they could board flights to Bangkok. According to the articles, many of the confiscated statues were made of touchstone, metal or terracotta and depicted Hindu motifs. Amazingly, it appears that the guilty individuals were attempting to transport these bulky items in their luggage, although it's not clear if "luggage" in this case would actually refer to shipping crates.

A related article published in the Financial Express (another apparently prominent newspaper out of Bangladesh) came to my attention (once again) through Museum Security Network, and details that events of this nature have an active recent history in the country. It now seems that museums, and even archaeological sites exposed through planned excavation or development projects, are being deliberately targeted. Despite the somewhat strident tone of nationalistic rhetoric (in my opinion), the article makes a fair point that no nation should have to sit by and watch its heritage sites crumble, its archaeological sites be threatened by poorly planned development, and its movable cultural heritage be siphoned off, due to both local corruption and international avarice. Perhaps India, Nepal and Bangladesh can now work together on increasing enforcement and improving legislation to restrict cross-border trade in what is now apparently a subcontinent-wide problem. At the very least this should reduce the numbers of South Asian antiquities available to unscrupulous dealers and collectors overseas.

Not only the environment at risk...

A recent news article published by Africa Review (out of Kenya), once again coming to my attention through Museum Security Network, clearly implies that not only natural resource/habitat destruction and forced human migration can result from seemingly rushed 'development,' but that it undiscovered archaeological sites might also be at risk. The project in question is the Ambatovy mine (targeting nickel and cobalt sources in the east of the island; slated to be the world's largest nickel mine by 2013), a joint venture with Canadian, Korean and Japanese partners (see photo above left).

Operational since earlier this year, it has already come under some criticism, according to the article, for clearing thousands of hectares of forest and displacing 'traditional' villages, due to the 220km long pipeline laid to connect the mine to treatment plants on the coast. This pipeline, adn the disturbance created to install it, occurred very close to several UNESCO World Heritage sites, according to the article. This is despite the apparent implementation of "conservation programs" to offset habitat losses, trumpeted by the Sherrit International Corporation, the mine's primary financial backers. However, the main point of the article is to publicize an international meeting that recently took place at the Malagasy Academy (in Antananarivo) to discuss the apparently 4,851 archaeological objects, ranging from ceramic to bone to "tumblers" to plastic (?), discovered during construction of mining facilities.

Unfortunately, the article gives no information as to context, level of previous disturbance or amount of archaeological material on the surface. The description provided makes it seem to me that the 'site' destroyed might even be a late historic-modern midden (trash mound). If any genuinely prehistoric or historic sites have been, or will be, uncovered during future mining expansion, the publicly available Ambatovy "code of conduct" should prevent the willful destruction of sites or sale of artifacts, if enforced. What more comes of this, how increased public exposure affects or reshapes operational procedures in the future, and how many new archaeological sites are even present in the area to discover...all appear to be unknowns. Thorough and up to date archaeological survey and excavation work around Madagascar has been growing in recent years, despite episodes of unrest and the continuous need to negotiate with/around development and conservation projects (here, here, and here for examples). What this history means for any future excavations, salvage or otherwise, in relation to Ambatovy, is unclear. Once again, time will tell...

On to Bangkok?

In the same vein as the numerous recent examples of Hindu statues and idols I've posted about (e.g. here), two recent news articles suggest that a waive of Buddhist statue thefts have been occurring throughout Thailand (here and here). Apparently, dogs and alarm bells guarding many of these temples were not sufficient to prevent the thefts, which feed into a wide-spread network of illegal smuggling and sale. Fortunately, however, authorities have been on the ball, moving quickly to apprehend the perpetrators of the most recent reported theft (the Luang Phor Chiang Saen Buddha image, stolen from Wat Makok Simaram, Muang district). Their efforts netted two suspects and recovered 50 previously unaccounted for stolen items. Furthermore, the thieves confessed to eight other robberies since 2009, all targeting Buddha statues and temple paraphernalia. What is unfortunate is that the article reports that 36 registered statues have been stolen between 1996 and 2011, but only three have been retrieved. 531 unregistered statues (from smaller temples or rural villages?) have also been stolen, with only five recovered. Although in the case of the Chiang Saen statue, its final recipient and destination were within Thailand, it is unknown and unmentioned how many other stolen statues have found their way onto the international market. Although the villagers tried everything "metaphysical" within their power to ensure the statue's return, from 'merit-making' at the temple, to "cursing the robbers," in the end, the swift action of police came through. Let's hope this most recent arrest heralds increased vigilance and resources devoted to guarding these temples at all hours and recovering as much of what's already been stolen as possible.

The Repatriation of...wait for it...Chinese artifacts!

Another quick offering here, as a follow up to my February 19th post. Turns out that the artifacts mentioned in that post (the seizure reported in Paramus, NJ, daily newspaper) have joined others confiscated in Alaska and New Mexico in being officially repatriated to China this past Friday, according to a new article released yesterday. A country wide operation dubbed "Operation Great Wall," netted two Northern Wei dynasty terra cotta horses, a Ming dynasty stone frieze and a Song dynasty Bodhisattva head; all priceless pieces of China's movable cultural heritage (although given their size, arranging for their clandestine shipping would most likely have proven difficult). An example can be seen in the photo above left. A bilateral agreement (an M.O.U.) was signed between Beijing and Washington in 2009, yet there is still much work to be done to prevent antiquities from leaving China in the first place, let alone reaching their intended destination. As with all examples of successful repatriation reported in the media, they unfortunately represent only the tip of the iceberg. Nevertheless, a job well done!

Recent News of Interest...

This is a quick post about a few recent news items of interest which once again have come to my attention through Museum Security Network. It is in advance of a post on the SAFECorner blog which will detail my own personal participation in the "hand back ceremony" for several looted Iron Age bronze artifacts, many still containing human remains, that occurred two days ago at the Cambodian Ambassador's residence here in Canberra, Australia. Lead-in information can be found here, and in this blog post by a friend and co-attendee of the ceremony, Mr. Noel Hidalgo-Tan, also of the ANU. More to come on this!

The first article of interest appeared in the New York Times March 10th edition, and details how the members of three separate archaeological organizations (unnamed in the article) have written to the secretary of the Smithsonian Institution to express concern over its planned hosting of an exhibition centred around the artifacts recovered from a 9th century shipwreck of an Arab dhow, sunk in the Java Sea, but "salvaged" by a German company called Seabed Exploration GbR, according to the article. The critics attest that, due to this company's alleged faulty methods, valuable information was lost in the 'salvage,' as opposed to what can be gained through more controlled excavation, even in a challenging underwater environment. Issues surrounding methodology and ethics in shipwreck archaeology are not new concerns. Furthermore, the article attests that most of these artifacts were sold to a private company in Singapore for $32 million, and the exhibit just happens to now be on display in the ArtScience Museum there. A panel meeting to discuss the archaeological community's concerns is scheduled to occur in advance of a final decision to display the exhibit.

The next article concerns the repatriation of the skeletal remains of 138 Indigenous people, likely from Torres Straight Islanders, although only 19 individuals have been thoroughly provenanced to "one of the Torres Straight Islands," according to the article. The rest are believed to derive from either the Torres Straight, southern Papua New Guinea or northern Cape York Australia. The exact details of the 'testing' done to confirm this prior to repatriation is not stated, but from the range of possible points of geographic origin, I would assume that minute samples of tooth enamel have been tested for isotopic 'signatures' of the elements strontium and/or oxygen; a by-now common means of 'sourcing' skeletal remains, although not without controversy.

From ethnographic accounts, none of the remains are posited to be more than 200 years old, and most were collected from caves, although a few "trophy skulls" are part of the assemblage. I personally feel that good points were raised on both sides as to why repatriation should eventually occur, but also why and how new developments in archaeological and bioarchaeological science (my field, after all) can continue to shed light on ancient remains. The state of mutual cooperation and agreement reached in this case is arguably the best possible outcome, but one that still occurs far too infrequently when debating repatriation cases. All parties involved should be commended on reaching such an equitable decision!