Looting and trafficking of archaeological objects is a worldwide problem, which often becomes more severe during armed conflicts – two examples being the looting of Iraqi museums and archaeological sites after 2003, and the plunder of Syrian heritage during the civil war. Shocking images of archaeological destruction have attracted significant media attention in so-called ‘Western’ countries. In some situations, the reporting of European news media on the obliteration of what is perceived as ‘world heritage’ can even inspire public outrage. Between 2014 and 2015, the shock value of cultural destruction wrought by the terror group IS was used to draw attention to conflict-related antiquities trafficking, portraying the illicit antiquities market as a main income source for the terrorists. This sensationalist reporting has roused public concern and arguably even led to a moral panic. The antiquities market has reacted defensively to this portrayal, and used the overblown figures and tenuous allegations of terror financing seen in the media to discredit research into and regulation of the antiquities trade. In this paper, I discuss the consequences of this discourse and the continuing lack of voices from Western Asia therein.
Luise Loges (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: