I want to make it perfectly clear that I personally am not in favor of publishing unprovenanced artifacts whether they are inscribed or uninscribed. However, at least for Israel, so long as dealers and collectors are going to be allowed to function under the existing law, a proper and more efficient system for authentication and dissemination of important information must be devised by the government agency in charge of the antiquities authority, in the case of Israel, the Ministry of Education and Culture.

In respect to the question of looted Iraqi antiquities and the unprecedented amounts of cuneiform coming on to the market subsequent to the Iraq War, ASOR and other scholarly bodies have a moral obligation, it seems to me, to see to it that this material does not go unrecorded, untranslated, and lost in some private collection. I believe too much is at stake here. First, I believe the Iraqi Antiquities Authority would welcome the offer of ASOR or AOS to publish in a timely fashion important new artifacts in cuneiform that come on to the market, and they should be approached right away (See ASOR web site for resolution passed in San Antonio, November 2004). JCS, ASOR’s premier journal of cuneiform studies, could serve as a major location for such publication. ASOR or AIA’s policies have not and cannot possibly positively impact what has happened and what is happening daily in Iraq today. That is to say, whatever we do will hardly have any impact on the looting and sale of illicit antiquities when people are starving in the area and can easily loot important sites in broad daylight or at night. I believe the urgency of the situation is such that a temporary solution must be found and an interim protocol developed until the crisis is past. The government might even help facilitate this process with some additional funding since it concerns the rescuing of Iraq’s past history. My Assyriological colleagues tell me there is hardly any possibility of forgery in the case of cuneiform since it is virtually impossible to replicate even in a mold. Several of them are in the process of creating new journals and new monograph series because traditional outlets for publication have been prevented from publishing unprovenanced, and most probably, looted cuneiform tablets and other artifacts of ancient Mesopotamian heritage. In other words, I see the Iraq situation as requiring special and urgent attention. My recommendation regarding Iraq is the following: ASOR should encourage Assyriologists to train Iraqis in the field of cuneiform studies so that they are better able to understand and disseminate knowledge of their own past; ASOR should publish cuneiform materials only upon the promise of repatriation to the lawful government of Iraq. Such publication should not occur until after the material is returned to Iraqi control and they have approved publication. Such a transfer could occur at an early stage if the materials in question could be turned over to the "Friends of the Iraq Museum" in the US so that individuals could receive tax credit for their gifts and only then could publication proceed in a timely fashion.^[4]

I was not asked about how we can prevent looting or even slow the antiquities trade. Without huge sums of money to create large supervisory staffs of the antiquities authority or police unit that guards sites and prosecutes offenders in individual countries, I cannot see how anything a scholarly body can do will completely stop the looting. However, it has been presupposed in most discussions of the question that non-publication or non-authentication by scholars would help to reduce the volume in such illicit activity if not eradicate the problem altogether. Perhaps the suggestions I have made regarding cuneiform will assist in both the matter of publication and reduce the amount of looting. I am in the camp that believes it will help but not eradicate. In Israel, as I have indicated, a byproduct of the ’67 War is the legal existence of antiquities shops. These shops and private collectors are the major outlets for looting, and until the law is changed in Israel with respect to them, not a lot can happen. The law is quite specific about some items, however, especially inscribed items, and it needs to be rigorously enforced.

I believe what I have suggested, following ASOR’s original policy, adopted in 1992, is a step in the right direction. Let us put pressure where it belongs: on the departments and authorities that are in charge of protecting their national heritage. Let us at the same time push toward repatriation of the cuneiform record along the lines I have suggested. We all have to fight looting in every way possible, and we must prevent unethical dealers and collectors from taking advantage through legal loopholes to promote their own collections and the value of individual artifacts, thereby significantly enhancing their net worth. We should not take any steps, however, that will allow important and properly authenticated artifacts and inscribed materials from seeing the light of scholarly publication, albeit with the provisos I have noted. Surely any policy that impedes true enlightenment of the past through careful publication is one in need of some adjustments, either legal or ethical.

Eric M. Meyers

Duke University

See Eric Meyer's Setting the Record Straight: A Short Response to BAR