Home » Opinion » Opinion Columns
A few decent acts belie need to hike rewards for people who turn in artifacts
Print Edition
WOULD you turn in an artifact to authorities when you stumble upon one? Most people would presumably say yes, since it is an act of decency.
That is what a young man in northern China’s Shaanxi Province did recently. Li Lei, a worker at a cement factory in Danfeng County, found an ancient bronze sword that dated to the Warring States Period (475-221BC) about 3,000 years ago. The blade, 46.5 centimeters long and 4 centimeters wide and weighing 0.61 kilogram, was retrieved from a mound of clay.
Li turned the sword over to local relic preservation authorities, who presented him with a certificate of honor and a 500-yuan (US$83) cash reward. Li said he voluntarily handed in his find after learning from TV that artifacts belong to the state. But he found the 500-yuan reward “too little” and said “it should have been several times as much.”
While it’s unclear how much the blade is worth, the compensation certainly is a tiny fraction of its value as a millennia-old artifact.
Li revealed that someone had approached him with an offer to buy the sword for 100,000 yuan, which he rejected. He was mocked for being an economic innocent who spurned a quick fortune. His deeds are indeed commendable, compared to those who eagerly sell Chinese relics to smugglers or actively take part in tomb-raiding themselves.
The curious thing about this episode is that most of the people who are ostensibly on a high moral plane are openly questioning Li’s decision, saying his contribution is disproportionately rewarded.
Varied remuneration levels
The standards of remuneration for turning in artifacts vary across provinces. They range from 200 yuan to 5,000 yuan. Given the often enormous cultural and economic value of artifacts, the standards are simply too arbitrary, and thus open to debate.
China’s Law of Preservation of Relics stipulates that individuals who turn artifacts over to authorities in a timely fashion, thereby contributing to their protection, are worthy of an appropriate amount of moral encouragement and tangible rewards.
And whoever conceals or refuses to hand in their finds will be warned or fined by police and made to give up the ill-gotten possessions, the law says.
Here lies the crux of the problem. The definition of “an appropriate amount of moral encouragement and tangible rewards” is too vague to be applicable, and even this half-baked standard is occasionally ignored altogether.
A graphic instance of official indifference to remuneration claims concerns a Henan Province farmer named Huo Xiangyu, who uncovered 15 artifacts in his own persimmon orchard in 1975. He was promised a reward after handing in the finds, but authorities never delivered on the pledge. He has since embarked on a 40-year quest to demand 1 million yuan in remuneration, which has been futile so far.
Technically, since China’s land is owned by the state, anything that lies underneath belongs to the state. Artifacts ought to be turned over to the state, for they are part of a nation’s patrimony.
If one chooses to pocket his find, he or she could face a fine of up to 50,000 yuan, according to Professor Gao Menghe at Fudan University, a relics expert.
‘Small carrot, big stick’
The penalty is justified, but apparently this policy of “small carrot, big stick” won’t do much to enhance people’s commitment to relic protection.
Hence the clause on incentives needs to be a lot more clear-cut, and tantalizing, if it is to be taken seriously. Lawmakers might do well to consider an amendment entitling individuals who return artifacts to a cash reward equivalent to 50 percent of their estimated value, some suggest.
After all, conscientious as one claims to be, he cannot be expected to hold fast to a moral compass when presented with the hard choice between 500 yuan and millions of yuan.
To encourage voluntary handover of artifacts, authorities need desperately to increase the incentives, even link them to the market value of artifacts. Doing so will result in huge payouts, to be sure, but this might prevent relics from being smuggled overseas and bought back by Chinese moguls at astronomical prices in foreign auction houses.
A 500-yuan reward for a 3,000-year-old sword is a good deal (for the state), and good publicity with which to lambast greed, but no sensible person will think it provided an exemplary role model.
In fact, the ownership of artifacts has only become a problem fairly recently, as a result of changing times and concepts.
According to Dong Zhen, a curator at Beijing’s Palace Museum, there’s no point in accusing someone of greedily concealing artifacts. Instead, why not reflect on why so many Internet users stopped believing in the nation’s sovereign right to confiscate artifacts?
In the absence of laws that keep up with the times, the row over ownership of artifacts will only continue to rage and bode ill for preservation work.
Li’s choice to hand over the ancient sword is laudable, but it doesn’t suffice as a catalyst for a popular drive to protect relics. A move to amend a law that has become a relic itself will do.
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 沪ICP证：沪ICP备05050403号-1
- |
- 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120180004
- |
- 网络视听许可证：0909346
- |
- 广播电视节目制作许可证：沪字第354号
- |
- 增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-20120012
Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
