Trends in Organized Crime

, Volume 14, Issue 1, pp 1–29 | Cite as

Organized criminal involvement in the illicit antiquities trade



From the ”glocal” perspective of a large sample of archaeologists conducting fieldwork throughout the world and working on the very sites of interest to looters, this paper explores the question whether and to what extent organized crime is involved in the theft and illicit export of archaeological resources. Two major findings are presented: first, archaeologists tend almost unanimously to consider that organized crime operates within the ‘global’ antiquities market, but when asked about their own personal experiences with looting on the sites where they work, many fewer report observations of organized crime; second, however, it is apparent that respondents’ conceptions of “organized crime” involve media-driven, stereotypical representations of mafia-style structures. Therefore, although in their reporting of observed local activities they do not provide substantial survey evidence of the presence of organized crime so defined, they do report appreciable “organization” among those who have looted their sites—which, again, they have almost unanimously experienced. This paper considers the implications of such findings for both the definitional debate on organized crime and the academic analysis of the trade in looted antiquities.


Archaeological theft Organized crime Antiquities trafficking 


  1. Alder C, Chappell D, Polk K (2009) Perspectives on the organisation and control of the illicit traffic in antiquities in South East Asia. In (Ed. S. Manacorda), Organised Crime in Art and Antiquities (pp. 95–108). Milan, Italy: International Scientific and Professional Advisory Council of the United nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme.Google Scholar
  2. Alder C, Polk K (2002) Stopping this awful business: the illicit traffic in antiquities examined as a criminal market. Art Antiq Law 7(1):35–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alder C, Polk K (2005) The illicit traffic in plundered antiquities. In: Reichel P (ed) Handbook of Transnational Crime and Justice. Sage Publications, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  4. Babbie E (2002) The Basics of Social Research, 2nd edn. Wadsworth, BelmontGoogle Scholar
  5. Bator, P. (1982). An essay on the international trade in art. Stanford Law Review 34(2).Google Scholar
  6. Bowman B (2008) Transnational crimes against culture: looting at archaeological sites and the “grey” market in antiquities. J Contemp Crim Justice 24(3):225–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brathwaite J (1993) Business Regulation and Australia’s Future. Australian Institute of Criminology, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  8. Brathwaite J (1989) Crime, Shame, and Reinegration. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Brathwaite J (1985) To Punish or Persuade: Enforcement of Coal Mine Safety. State University of New York Press, AlbanyGoogle Scholar
  10. Brodie N (2006) An archaeologist‘s view of the trade in unprovenanced antiquities. In: Hoffman B (ed) Art & Cultural Heritage: Law, Policy, & Practice. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  11. Brodie N (1998) Pity the poor middlemen. Culture Without Context 3 (Autumn): 7–9. Retrieved December 21, 2007 from
  12. Brodie N, Doole J, Watson P (2000) Stealing History: The Illicit Trade in Cultural Material. The McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  13. Bullock K, Chowdhury R, Hollings P (2009) Public concerns about organised crime. Home Office Research Report 16. Retrieved March 1, 2010 online at:
  14. Cannon-Brookes P (1994) Antiquities in the market-place: placing a price on documentation. Antiquity 68(295):349–50Google Scholar
  15. Chiricos T, Padgett K, Gertz M (2000) Fear, TV news, and the reality of crime. Criminology 38(3):755–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Coggins C (1998) United States cultural property legislation: observations of a combatant. Int J Cult Prop 7(1):52–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Coleman R, Thorson E (2002) The effects of news stories that put crime and violence into context: Testing the public health model of reporting. J Health Commun 7:401–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Conklin J (1994) Art Crime. Praeger, WestportGoogle Scholar
  19. Cook B (1991) The archaeologist and the art market: politics and practice. Antiquity 65:533–37Google Scholar
  20. DeBoer W (1999) Metaphors we dig by. Anthropol News 40(7):7–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Edwards A, Gill P (2002) Crime as enterprise? The case of “transnational organised crime. Crime Law Soc Change 37(3):203–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Edwards A, Levi M (2008a) The organization of serious crimes: developments in research and theory. Criminol Crim Justice 8(4):359–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Edwards A, Levi M (2008b) Researching the organization of serious crimes. Criminolo Crim Justice 8(4):363–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Federal Bureau of Investigation (2007) Art Theft Program. Retrieved 12/20/07 at:
  25. Fidler S (2003) A black art: how the trade in stolen artifacts aids money laundering, organized crime, and terrorism. Financial Times. Retrieved February 1, 2008 from
  26. Field A (2005) Discovering Statistics Using SPSS, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar
  27. Finckenauer J (2005) Problems of definition: what is organized crime? Trends Organize Crime 8(3):63–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Flaherty T et al (1998) Exploring text-based electronic mail surveys as means of primary data collection. The 1998 Academy of Marketing Science National Conference Proceedings, 260-4Google Scholar
  29. Gill D, Chippindale C (1993) Material and intellectual consequences of esteem for Cycladic figures American. J Archaeol 97(3):602–673Google Scholar
  30. Golash D, Lynch J (1995) Public opinion, crime seriousness, and sentencing policy. 22 American Journal of Criminal Law 703Google Scholar
  31. Guo Z, Zhu J, Chen H (2001) Mediated reality bites: comparing direct and indirect experience as sources of perceptions across two communities in China. Int J Public Opin Res 13(4):398–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hagan F (1983) The organized crime continuum: a further specification of a new conceptual model. Crim Justice Rev 8(2):52–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hill T, Lewicki P (2007) Statistics: Methods & Applications. Tulsa, OK: Statsoft, Inc. Retrieved May 18, 2008 from
  34. Hobbs D (1998) Going down the glocal: the local context of organized crime. Howard J 37(4):407–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Holtorf C (2005) From Stonehenge to Las Vegas: Archaeology as Popular Culture. Rowman & Littlefield Publishing, LanhamGoogle Scholar
  36. Howitt D (1998) Crime, the media and the law. Wiley, West SussexGoogle Scholar
  37. INTERPOL (2007) Stolen works of art: frequently asked questions. Retrieved December 20,2007 from
  38. Kenney D, Finckenauer J (1995) Organized Crime in America. Wadsworth Publishing, BelmontGoogle Scholar
  39. Kitzinger J, Skidmore P (1995) Playing safe: Media coverage of child sexual abuse prevention strategies. Child Abuse Rev 4:47–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Latour B (1993) We Have Never Been Modern. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  41. Liddick D (1999) An Empirical, Theoretical, and Historical Overview of Organized Crime. Edwin Mellen Press, LewistonGoogle Scholar
  42. Lowry D, Nio T, Leitner D (2003) Setting the public fear agenda: A longitudinal analysis of network tv crime reporting, public perceptions of crime, and FBI crime statistics. Journal of Communications, March, pp 61–73Google Scholar
  43. Lyman M, Potter G (2006) Organized Crime, 4th edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  44. Mackenzie S (2009) Identifying and preventing opportunities for organized crime in the international antiquities market. In (Ed. S. Manacorda), Organised Crime in Art and Antiquities (pp. 95–108). Milan, Italy: International Scientific and Professional Advisory Council of the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme.Google Scholar
  45. Mackenzie S (2005) Going, Going, Gone: Regulating the Market in Illicit Antiquities. Institute of Art and Law, LeicesterGoogle Scholar
  46. Mackenzie S, Green P (2009) Criminalising the market in illicit antiquities: an evaluation of the Dealing in Cultural Objects (Offenses) Act 2003 in England and Wales. In: Mackenzie S, Green P (eds) Criminology and Archaeology: Studies in Looted Antiquities. Hart Publishing, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  47. Macleod M (2002) Archaeology is new target for Ukraine's mafia gangs. Scotland on Sunday (Edinburgh, Scotland). Retrieved 10 March 2010 online from,
  48. Maxfield M, Babbie E (2005) Research Methods for Criminal Justice and Criminology. Wadsworth Thomson Learning, BelmontGoogle Scholar
  49. McCalister A (2005) Organized crime and the theft of Iraqi antiquities. Trends Organize Crime 9(1):24–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. McCorkle R, Miethe T (2002) Panic: The social construction of the street gang problem. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  51. Meyer K (1973) The Plundered Past. Atheneum, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  52. Moser S (2007) On disciplinary culture: archaeology as fieldwork and its gendered associations. J Archaeol Meth Theory 14:235–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Mutz D (1998) Impersonal Influence: How Perceptions of Mass Collectives Affect Political Attitudes. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  54. Neuendorf K (2002) The content analysis guidebook. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  55. Nistri G (2009) The experience of the Italian Cultural Heritage Protection Unit. In (Ed. S. Manacorda), Organised Crime in Art and Antiquities (pp. 95–108). Milan, Italy: International Scientific and Professional Advisory Council of the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme.Google Scholar
  56. Paoli L (2002) The paradoxes of organized crime. Crime Law Soc Change 37(1):51–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Paolo T et al (2000) Response rate comparisons of e-mail and mail distributed student evaluations. Teach Learn Med 12(2):81–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Passas N (2003) Cross-border crime and the interface between legal & illegal actors. Secur J 16(1):19–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Passas N (1999) Globalization, criminogenic asymmetries and economic crime. Eur J Law Reform 1(4):399–423Google Scholar
  60. Raffles H (2005) Towards a critical natural history. Antipode 37(2): 374–8. Retrieved 11 August 2010 from, Google Scholar
  61. Reuter P (1985) Organization of Markets: An Economic Analysis. National Institute of Justice, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  62. Robertson R (1995) Glocalisation: time-space and homogeneity-heterogeneity, pp. 25–44. In: Featherstone M, Lash S, Robertson R (eds) Global Modernities. Sage Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar
  63. Rossi P, Simpson J, Miller J (1985) Beyond crime seriousness: fitting the punishment to the crime. J Quant Criminol 1(1):59–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Salant P, Dillman D (1994) How to Conduct Your Own Survey. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  65. Sheehan K (2001) E-mail survey response rates: a review. Journal of Computer- Mediated Communication 6(2). Retrieved 20 July 2007 at:
  66. Sheehan K, McMillan S (1999) Response variation in e-mail surveys: An exploration. J Advert Res 39(4):45–54Google Scholar
  67. Sheley JF, Ashkins CD (1981) Crime, crime news, and crime views. Public Opin Q 45:492–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Tijhuis E (2006) Transnational Crime and the Interface between Legal and Illegal Factors: The Case of the Illicit Art and Antiquities Trade. Wolf Legal Publishers, NijmegenGoogle Scholar
  69. Tyler T (1984) Assessing the risk of crime victimization: the integration of personal victimization experience and socially transmitted information. J Soc Issues 40:27–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Tyler T (1980) Impact of directly and indirectly experienced events: the origins of crime-related judgments and behaviors. J Pers Soc Psychol 39:13–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. United Nations (2000) United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime. Retrieved October 17, 2006 from,
  72. van Duyne P (1996) The phantom and threat of organized crime. Crime Law Soc Change 24:341–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. von Lampe K (2006) The interdisciplinary dimensions of the study of organized crime. Trends Organize Crime 9(3):77–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Williams P (1998) Organizing transnational crime: networks, markets, hierarchies. Transnat Organize Crime 4(3 & 4):57–87Google Scholar
  75. Woodiwiss M (2006) Transnational organized crime: the global reach of an American concept. In: Edwards A, Gill P (eds) Transnational Organised Crime: Perspectives on Global Security. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Criminal JusticeVirginia Commonwealth University, Wilder School of Government & Public AffairsRichmondUSA

Personalised recommendations