The urban legend has been around since the 1970s. “The illegal trade in antiquities is the third largest in the world,” it is repeatedly claimed. Even UNESCO and Interpol have accepted this claim, despite the fact that there is no evidence to support it.
Researchers from the international organization Trafficking Culture assure that, precisely, accepting “uncritically this factoid has the potential to divert policies and make it more difficult to fight against this type of trade,” as they explain in an article published in the journal Antiquity.
Academic articles, the mainstream press, and even the political literature have taken this point for granted for more than 50 years. “That the illicit traffic in antiquities is the third largest, second only to arms and narcotics, is something that is constantly repeated,” explain doctors Donna Yates and Neil Brodie.
Both have carried out a systematic review and have concluded that academics, legislatures and the general public have largely accepted a thesis that “is not based on any original research or statistics, nor has it issued from any competent authority.”
The authors traced the false belief back to a note published in the Journal of Field Archeology in 1974. The text stated that international art trafficking was second only to drug trafficking. Despite the fact that this statement was not corroborated with any evidence, from that moment it began to spread rapidly.
A few years later, in the 1980s, the assumption became embedded in both academic literature and the media, experts say. And, later, it went from second to third place on the list of international crime after drugs and weapons, although again without evidence.
Since then, Yates and Brodie say, the claim has been accepted even by such influential international organizations as UNESCO and Interpol. As a result, this urban legend has come to have a serious impact on government organizations and those responsible for promoting response actions.
“Public understanding and policy should be based on evidence, not rhetoric,” the researchers say in a statement. “A good policy can only be developed from good research; if it is based on factoids and false information, it cannot be successful”, they add.
Donna Yates and Neil Brodie believe that “unsubstantiated” facts should not “influence policy making in major international bodies” because it “undermines the importance of hard data and potentially leads to ineffective action against the illicit trade in antiquities”.
Experts also understand that this type of action sets a dangerous precedent to quantify the damage caused by this criminal activity. “The idea that the severity of crime should be measured in comparisons through monetary value and not through damage to society is disturbing,” say the study authors.
“Antiques and other cultural objects are fundamental components of our heritage and identity. We do not need to financially classify their illicit trade to make the social damage very important ”, he concludes.
