Skip to main content

So-called Research Institute Fails to Deliver?

In 2009 the Cultural Property Research Institute (CPRI) was launched with a proposed number of projects. In November 2009 the CPRI published its first preliminary report, "Project on Unprovenanced Ancient Objects in Private US Hands". There were serious flaws. The CPRI has yet to to publish the names of the authors of the report, the sources for information, the extent of the data, or the nature of the peer review process.

In January 2010 I discussed the potential use of a register of antiquities in private hands. The CPRI was due to deliver a report on "Developing different models for a registry that can be applied to privately-owned objects" by the end of 2009. It has yet to appear.

The CPRI also promised to announce the details of another project by the end of 2009, "Exploring the effect of source country policies on damage to archaeological sites and objects".
Source country policies toward development, private ownership, enforcement and export, among other matters, can have profound consequences for the integrity of archaeological sites and the preservation of individual objects. Using a small, selected group of source countries, the CPRI will seek to gather and collate information on such policies, their effect on site damage, and possible remedies. This will be an ongoing research project with milestones and publication outcomes to be determined before the end of 2009.
Perhaps something has been determined but it has not been made public.

At the same time a director of the CPRI (and Washington lobbyist) has shown ignorance of the basic academic literature on looted antiquities.

Are the CPRI's board of directors unable to deliver?

Bookmark and Share so Your Real Friends Know that You Know

Comments

Damien Huffer said…
Hmmm.... The fact that they won't even release the author's names so that potential colleagues can contact them is most suspicious. I'd like to know how they chose which countries to examine.
The ignorance of the CPRI extends not just to ignorance of the academic literature, but ignorance of basic principles of scholarly discourse (authorship, source of data, etc.). So why would anyone take this organization seriously? In some cases it can be difficult to distinguish objective scholarly research from biased propaganda; in this case the status of the work of CPRI seems pretty clear.

Popular posts from this blog

Marble bull's head from the temple of Eshmun

Excavations at the temple of Eshmun in Lebanon recovered a marble bull's head. It is now suggested that it was this head, apparently first published in 1967, that was placed on loan to New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art (Tom Mashberg, "Met Museum Turns Over Another Relic With Disputed Past to Prosecutors", New York Times August 1, 2017 ). The head is reported to have been handed over to the Manhattan district attorney after a request was received from the Lebanese authorities.

It is suggested that the head may have been looted from an archaeological storage area at Byblos in the 1980s during the Lebanese civil war. Mashberg has rehearsed the recent collecting history:
The owners of the bull’s head, Lynda and William Beierwaltes of Colorado, say they have clear title to the item and have sued Manhattan prosecutors for its return.  The Beierwaltes bought the head from a dealer in London in 1996 for more than $1 million and then sold it to another collector, Michael …

Sardinian warrior from "old Swiss collection"

One of the Sardinian bronzes of a warrior was seized from an as yet unnamed Manahattan gallery. It appears to be the one that passed through the Royal-Athena Gallery: Art of the Ancient World 23 (2012) no. 71. The collecting history for that warrior suggests that it was acquired in 1990 from a private collection in Geneva.

Other clues suggested that the warrior has resided in a New York private collection.

The identity of the private collection in Geneva will no doubt be telling.

The warrior also features in this news story: Jennifer Peltz, "Looted statues, pottery returned to Italy after probe in NYC", ABC News May 25 2017.

Attic amphora handed back to Italians

The research of Dr Christos Tsirogiannis has led to the return of an Attic red-figured amphora, attributed to the Harrow painter, to Italy (Tom Mashberg, "Stolen Etruscan Vessel to Be Returned to Italy", New York Times March 16, 2017).

The amphora is known to have passed through the hands of Swiss-based dealer Gianfranco Becchina in 1993, and then through a New York gallery around 2000 (although its movements between those dates are as yet undisclosed).

During the ceremony, Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., the District Attorney stated:
“When looters overrun historic sites, mine sacred spaces for prized relics, and peddle stolen property for top dollar, they do so with the implicit endorsement of all those who knowingly trade in stolen antiquities” More research clearly needs to be conducted on how material handled by Becchina passed into the North American market and into the hands of private and public collectors.