It isn't every day that we add a new rule to the sub. However, conscious of our role in public history online and our responsibilities to promote ethical practices in history and archaeology, the mod team has formulated a new policy and rule to discourage the sale and commercialization of historical artifacts.
The global market for historical artifacts is destroying parts of the historical record. Organizations like the Society of American Archaeologists have long recognized that when objects are bought, sold, or otherwise exploited for personal enjoyment or profit outside their historical and archaeological context, much of the information they hold about the past is lost forever. The market for historical and archaeological artifacts drives looting and the destruction of historical sites and of the contextual information that is essential to understanding the archaeological record, and places historical artifacts in private collections outside the reach of those who seek to study them. Beyond the irrevocable loss of knowledge through the destruction of the historical record, the commercialization of historic artifacts has contributed to a littany of issues for the present day. The illegal antiquities trade funds everything from organized crime to ISIS, and robs vulnerable cultures of their heritage and a chance to learn about their past.
While AskHistorians is not a forum to buy and sell things, we are aware that there are ways in which we may unknowingly and unintentionally facilitate the commercialization of cultural artifacts. When someone comes here and asks us for an appraisal, or merely asks for authentication or more information about an object in their possession, any answers they receive may enhance the value of that object and contribute to this global problem. While there are several national and international laws against the sale of historical artifacts, our intent is to go beyond meeting the minimal legal standards and to approach these issues from an ethical standpoint.
With that in mind, the following text will be added to our list of rules:
The goal of /r/AskHistorians is to provide an educational forum for people who have questions for experts. Often, those questions include inquiries about items or artifacts which have come into their possession. It is our policy to disallow posts asking for further information on artifacts where there is a likelihood that the acquisition or possession of the item might be illegal, unethical, and/or run contrary to sound, historical practices. This includes, but is not limited to, items possibly taken from archaeological sites, or requests for appraisal in preparation for sale. It should not be taken as a ban on questions about any items, such as family heirlooms, or common collectibles such as books, stamps, or firearms.
Note that this does not constitute a blanket ban on questions about particular objects. With the exception of requests for appraisals, which are against the spirit of the community anyways, the mod team will evaluate things on a case-by-case basis. We encourage members of the community who have concerns about a particular question to contact us via modmail or the report function.
Out of curiosity, has this actually been an issue here?
I really wish /r/arthistory would adopt a similar rule. A huge chunk of posts over there are from people who somehow gained possession of a painting and ask questions like "who is this artist?"; "what is this worth?"; "what can you tell me about this painting?" It's almost always from people who don't seem to have a real interest in art history, but want to know if their painting is a forgotten masterpiece or created by a recognizable artist. In other words, it definitely appears as though they simply view their artwork-in-question as a commodity and seek to know how much money it's worth. It's upsetting to wonder what they do when they realize their painting isn't what they hoped it would be. The commodification of artwork and artifacts essentially destroys their historical integrity and intrinsic value.
Thank you for making this a rule here.
As an archaeologist, thanks for this.
It looks like I won't be bringing my family's cuneiform tablets to /r/AskHistorians "Show and Tell" day, after all.
Can I ask if this rule also applies to "book breakers" as well? I had a roommate who worked in the book department of Sotheby's for years, and was furious about people who bought old books to tear out and sell the prints in them.
Wait a minute here. There are some realms of trade of historical artifacts where private trade significantly expands our knowledge of history.
As a collector of 20'th century small arms and author and historian on the subject, maintaining a personal reference collection and interacting with others who do as well is the only way to study these things. Governments sold off surplus and destroyed huge amounts of military arms which are now almost exclusively in private hands.
While it is true we may be able to study the macro function of small arms and their overall physical appearance through the glass of museums there are vast amounts of information which tell the story of economics and the rise and fall of countries in the fine details of machine marks and stampings of each individual piece. Only through observing vast numbers of examples can we piece together a unique and often obscured vantage through which we can view other historical events and provide valuable context into the governance of nations at the most murky of hours. While I appreciate the spirit of this rule and support the intent, I advocate that the case-by-case basis be carefully evaluated and not taken lightly.
Y'all are great mods. Keep up the good work.
Would this rule apply to objects that were extremely common and are still around in great numbers in historical context? I mean I have a ton of WW2 equipment from the Western front (mostly American) and while I love history I don't see them as fairly valuable simply because how common authentic WW2 infantry gear is today (pricey but common).