Attack on Becchina

There is a report in the Italian press that the house of Gianfranco Becchina in Castelvetrano has sustained a shotgun attack ("Escalation di attentati intimidatori a Castelvetrano e Campobello", Marsala.it, January 24, 2012). Becchina has been linked to a number of antiquities that passed through Switzerland on the way to North American public and private collections.

Broughton Coin Theft

I know that a number of numismatists read LM ... so perhaps they could do their bit to help solve the theft of some coins from a house in the Scottish Borders.

An orphan in the larger picture

I have been reflecting on the announcement of fragmentary Greek pots to Italy. And it strikes me that a fragment acquired by the J. Paul Getty Museum in 1984 and its relationship to other fragments of the same Athenian red-figured cup probably give us a clue.

The significance lies in the list of donors and former owners who held the fragments.

And have any pieces from the same cup been returned to Italy in the latest batch of material?

Planet Princeton Comments

Source: MiBAC

Planet Princeton comments on the return ("Princeton University Returns Art to Italy", January 26, 2012).

But what is more interesting is the response from Robert Steven Bianchi and I give a flavour here:

The repatriation of these objects is absurd in the extreme ... the Italians cannot take care of their own so they launch witch hunts against those who cherish, protect, preserve, and educate the world about that heritage in order to conceal their own disregard for and indifference toward their own cultural property.

Why did Princeton hand over this material? Had the objects been known before 1970? Where had the architectural fragments been found?

Sabratha portrait head returned to Libya

Source: MiBAC

A Roman portrait of Domitilla Minor that was found at Sabratha in Libya will be returning home. The head had surfaced at Christie's in London where it appears to have been provided with a falsified collecting history that had placed it in a Swiss private collection in the 1970s. In fact the head had been stolen from the Sabratha Archaeological Museum in 1990.

The head was handed over by Professor Mario Monti, the Italian Prime Minister.

The return raises serious issues about the rigour of the due diligence process conducted by auction-house. Will Christie's be revisiting their procedures?

The handover ceremony [press release from MiBAC]

The significance of the von Bothmer return

Source: MiBAC

Chasing Aphrodite has a very useful discussion about the nature of the ex Dietrich von Bothmer fragments that have been returned to Italy. It suggests a possible link with the material returned from Princeton as they seem to be derived from a common source.

What has Princeton returned?

Source: MiBAC

Princeton has been reluctant to provide specific details of what has been returned to Italy. So here is a possible list based on the MiBAC and Princeton press releases. I have also looked back to the original report that appeared in the New York Times (see here). It appears that the returned items were acquired between 1993 and 2002.

a. "a black-glazed askos" / "un askos a forma di astragalo". Apparently 2002-156. "Gift in memory of Emily Townsend Vermeule, Honorary Degree Holder of the Class of 1989". [Published 2003]

b. "a pair of female statuettes" / "due statuette di donna, di cui una che suona un tamburello e l'altra la lira". Apparently y1993-28, and y1993-28. Canosan "statuette of a woman playing a tambourine" and "playing a lyre". Both Museum purchase and source unstated. [Published 1994]

c. "four fragments of a red-figure calyx krater" / "quattro [frammenti] di un cratere a figure rosse" / "a calyx krater attributed to the Attic vase painter Euphronios". I have noted before: "The calyx-krater fragments, attributed to Euphronios by Padgett, appear to be the ones that were acquired in 1997: J. Michael Padgett, "Ajax and Achilles on a Calyx-Krater by Euphronios", Record of the Art Museum, Princeton University 60 (2001) 2-17 [JSTOR]." Acquisition: 1997-488 a-d. "Four fragments from a red-figure calyx-krater, attributed to Euphronios [Padgett]". "Museum purchase, Fowler McCormick, Class of 1921, Fund". Padgett had noted: "The findspot of the fragments is unknown".

d. "fragments of an architectural relief" / "cinque [frammenti] di rilievi architettonici". This appears to be this group: Etruscan "fragment of an architectural relief (joins 1995-127)". Gift of Edoardo C. Almagià, Class of 1973 (1999-4). Edoardo C. Almagià gave four architectural reliefs in 1995: 1995-125, 126, 127, 128. [It should be noted that 1995-129, "Etruscan fragment of a polychrome architectural relief of a centaur", gift of Ali and Hicham Aboutaam, has been returned to Italy on a previous occasion.]

e. "a pithos in white-on-red style" / "un pithos a figure rosse e bianche, raffiguarante animali". Apparently 1999-8. Gift of Edoardo C. Almagià ... in honor of Allen Rosenbaum. [See here]

f. "a group of fragmentary architectural revetments"  / "un gruppo di 157 elementi architetettonici con figure di tori" / "a group of Etruscan architectural terra-cottas". These would appear to be: Group of Etruscan "fragmentary revetments with painted and relief decoration ... Gift of Edoardo C. Almagià, Class of 1973 (1996-343.1-57)" and group of Etruscan "fragmentary revetments with painted bulls ... Gift of Edoarod C. Almagià, Class of 1973 (1996-48.1-100)". This makes 157 fragments.

It appears that the reliefs and the pithos were derived from Almagià. Who sold the krater fragments and the two terracotta statuettes? Who gave the askos?

It is clear from the New York Times that other material appears to have come from the same source.

Princeton now needs to make clear its position on antiquities acquired through Almagià. Readers would do well to read the Princeton interview with Almagià in the light of the recent returns. There was also an interview with curator Michael Padgett who joined the museum in 1992.

Princeton Issues Statement

Source: MiBAC

Princeton University has issued a limited statement that does little to provide information about the return of material to Italy ("Princeton University Art Museum, Italy reach new antiquities agreement", January 25, 2012, press release). There is no comment about the donor or the vendor of the pieces.

The transfer agreement is an addendum to an agreement with Italy that the University entered into in 2007. It builds upon the museum's history of successfully resolving ownership claims for works of art in its collections.

Under the agreement, six works were returned to the Republic of Italy in December 2011. The transfer of title for the six returned items is an important aspect of the agreement because it recognizes that legal title rested with Princeton before the transfer and that the works were acquired by Princeton in good faith.

The items that were transferred are a black-glazed askos; a pair of female statuettes; four fragments of a red-figure calyx krater; fragments of an architectural relief; a pithos in white-on-red style; and a group of fragmentary architectural revetments.

"The spirit of these negotiations has sought to maintain scholarly access to important works of art while honoring international agreements relative to the disposition of cultural property," said James Steward, director of the Princeton University museum. "As with our previous agreement, the museum and the University established a matrix of criteria to evaluate the status of these objects, including such factors as the object's probable site of discovery and place of manufacture."

Princeton maintains silence

Source: MiBAC

Princeton University seems to be avoiding commenting on the fact that the Princeton University Art Museum has returned a major block of antiquities to Italy. Earlier in the week the spokesperson seemed to be unsure how to respond to the Italian press release.

Chasing Aphrodite has now written an extended comment on the return and specifically notes the role of the press team at Princeton:

In response to a previous request for information, Princeton Museum spokeswoman Cass Cliatt took pains to distance the museum from the Padgett/Almagia case: “The[re] were not and have not ever been any allegations against the University related to the current investigation, and the Italian authorities at no point contacted the University about the current investigation. Great care should be taken about implying a connection.” It is not clear how a criminal investigation into the museum’s curator and a major donor (and alum) have nothing to do with the museum, and these returns only raise further questions.

Cliatt adopted a similar policy back in June 2010 when the story broke in the New York Times. Cliatt also seemed to avoid making useful comment when Princeton returned antiquities back in 2007.

How can a major North American University museum return so many objects to Italy without some comment? Or is the university distancing itself from the issue?

Princeton: identification

Source: MiBAC

The Etruscan white-on-red pithos seen in the front of the image issued by the Italian Ministry of Culture appears to be the one given by Edoardo Almagià in 1999 (inv. 1999-8). [JSTOR]

Such an identification raises issues about Princeton's apparent failure to provide a press release.