All

What are you looking for?

All
Projects
Results
Organizations

Quick search

  • Projects supported by TA ČR
  • Excellent projects
  • Projects with the highest public support
  • Current projects

Smart search

  • That is how I find a specific +word
  • That is how I leave the -word out of the results
  • “That is how I can find the whole phrase”

Legal definitions as a cornerstone for protecting archaeological finds from illegal export and trade

The result's identifiers

  • Result code in IS VaVaI

    <a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216224%3A14220%2F25%3A00140608" target="_blank" >RIV/00216224:14220/25:00140608 - isvavai.cz</a>

  • Result on the web

    <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14655187.2024.2425575" target="_blank" >https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14655187.2024.2425575</a>

  • DOI - Digital Object Identifier

    <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14655187.2024.2425575" target="_blank" >10.1080/14655187.2024.2425575</a>

Alternative languages

  • Result language

    angličtina

  • Original language name

    Legal definitions as a cornerstone for protecting archaeological finds from illegal export and trade

  • Original language description

    European countries define ‘archaeological finds’ in various ways: even individual archaeologists might distinguish between different types of finds and their value. A particular issue is the legal terminology used — archaeological finds might be defined as ‘antiquities’, ‘cultural property’, or ‘treasure’, each term creating different protection. Especially in law, it is necessary to be clear about what is being protected and why, as differences and inconsistencies can be exploited by those who loot and trade in antiquities. This is particularly evident with archaeological finds since these were often transported great distances at the time they were made, and therefore it is difficult to prove their provenance. This paper will explore the differences between definitions used by archaeologists and law-makers in terms of ‘archaeological finds’. Case studies in example countries will demonstrate how similar objects might vary in their legal protection from one jurisdiction to another. It will then show how legal differences can be exploited by the illegal trade. Finally, it will be considered how Europeans might frustrate this trade, from a theoretical to a practical level, albeit noting the obstacles to converging legislative frameworks to protect the exploitation of archaeological finds for personal gain.

  • Czech name

  • Czech description

Classification

  • Type

    J<sub>imp</sub> - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the Web of Science database

  • CEP classification

  • OECD FORD branch

    50501 - Law

Result continuities

  • Project

  • Continuities

    S - Specificky vyzkum na vysokych skolach

Others

  • Publication year

    2025

  • Confidentiality

    S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Data specific for result type

  • Name of the periodical

    Public Archaeology

  • ISSN

    1465-5187

  • e-ISSN

    1753-5530

  • Volume of the periodical

    2024

  • Issue of the periodical within the volume

    23

  • Country of publishing house

    GB - UNITED KINGDOM

  • Number of pages

    20

  • Pages from-to

    1-20

  • UT code for WoS article

    001382097500001

  • EID of the result in the Scopus database

    2-s2.0-85212791469