Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 5
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Blythe Bowman Proulx, 2013. Archaeological Site Looting in "Glocal" Perspective: Nature, Scope, and Frequency. American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 117, Issue. 1, p. 111.

    Papa-Sokal, Marina 2011. Who “Owns” the Euphronios Krater? Nationalism and Internationalism in the Protection of Archaeological Heritage. Present Pasts, Vol. 3, Issue. 1,

    Kersel, Morag M. and Kletter, Raz 2006. Heritage for Sale? A Case Study from Israel. Journal of Field Archaeology, Vol. 31, Issue. 3, p. 317.

    Lowenthal, David 2005. Why Sanctions Seldom Work: Reflections on Cultural Property Internationalism. International Journal of Cultural Property, Vol. 12, Issue. 03,

    Prott, Lyndel V. 2005. The International Movement of Cultural Objects. International Journal of Cultural Property, Vol. 12, Issue. 02, p. 225.

  • International Journal of Cultural Property, Volume 4, Issue 1
  • January 1995, pp. 13-60

A Licit International Trade in Cultural Objects

  • John Henry Merryman (a1)
  • DOI:
  • Published online: 01 June 2007

Retentive nationalism has until recently dominated thinking about the international movement of cultural property, while the international interest in an active licit trade has been ignored and the interests of museums, collectors and the art and antiquities trade have been denigrated. An active licit market in cultural property advances the international interest, provides income to source nations and reduces the harm done by the black market. Trade in “culturally moveable” objects in private hands serves the international interest and is internationally licit, even when it offends national export controls. Source nations can reduce the damage from clandestine excavations by employing more sophisticated domestic controls and feeding surplus archaeological objects to the licit market. The “commodification” objection to an active trade in cultural objects lacks substance. Market nations can provide the most effective political force for development of an active market. They, and the art and antiquities trade, can help source nations finance organization of their cultural property resources for effective participation in a licit international trade.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

International Journal of Cultural Property
  • ISSN: 0940-7391
  • EISSN: 1465-7317
  • URL: /core/journals/international-journal-of-cultural-property
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *