Skip to main content

Bolton and the "Amarna Princess"

Last week's announcement that a couple had pleaded guilty to selling a forged Egyptian alabaster statue to the Bolton Museum raises some interesting issues (Paul Stokes, "Couple sold fake Egyptian statue for £400,000", Daily Telegraph, October 20, 2007).

The sculpture was purchased back in 2003 for £440,000 with support from the National Arts Collection Fund [£75,000], the National Heritage Memorial Fund [£360,767] and the Friends of Bolton Museum and Art Gallery (story).

It came with the following history:

The sculpture was bought and brought to Bolton by the owner's great grandfather in 1892 at a sale of the contents of Silverton Park in Devon, the home of the 4th Earl of Egremont.

When the police started their enquiries last year it was noted:
It was bought by the museum from a local family in Bolton, Greater Manchester, who wanted to remain anonymous.

The NACF website also adds this information:

"Vendor: Through Christie, Manson and Woods Ltd".

One of Bolton's councillors, Laurie Williamson, was quoted as saying (probably now with much regret):

"This was a once in a lifetime opportunity to secure an important Egyptian treasure."

So we have the following elements:
a. a purchase too good to be true.
b. a purchase from an anonymous collection.
c. a distinguished pedigree.
d. the link with a well-known auction-house.

And are we surprised at the outcome?

But, more importantly, what checks were made? Who made them? And who double-checked in the two Funds?

Comments

David Gill said…
For a report in the Bolton press:
Edward Chadwick, "Couple plead guilty to passing off fake artwork", The Bolton News, October 19, 2007, http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/display.var.1774397.0.couple_plead_guilty_to_passing_off_fake_artwork.php
FROM JONATHAN TOKELEY, author of RESCUING THE PAST: THE CULTURAL HERITAGE CRUSADE

I apologise for disturbing the Liberal pieties here, but a little common-sense is in order.

Firstly, there is not a single European dealer---and I have checked most of them---who would have bought the Bolton Amarna Princess---that is, risked his own money on it. It was NOT a good fake, as fakes go. As a restorer of Egyptian antiquities, I could have 'knocked it up' in my spare time, AND avoided the give-away iconographic mistakes. I also worked for ten years in Egypt as a trader, where I saw ten fakes for every genuine piece, and I would have laughed in the face of anybody who had tried to sell this one to me---however lachrymose and convincing his story.

As I say, there are obvious mistakes in the piece, which should have been immediately spotted---and which WERE spotted by almost everybody in the trade---and by senior European academics---hence their outrage tempered by amusement that it should ever have been fobbed off on the Bolton Museum.

But the trade was not consulted, and the only reason the forgery came to light was because the same Bolton 'cottage-industry' were discovered to have been distributing their eclectic products in various other directions.

Their arrest, and the shock horror revelation that the Amarna Princess was a fake, therefore owes nothing to the British Egyptologists, and everything to Dick Ellis's tenacious memory. The credit is his.

But for those embarrassed now to claim that "there are no scientific tests for stone", and that therefore by implication it was nobody's mistake, is disingenuous.

So, whose mistake was it, this absurd purchase, at the taxpayuer's expense? Ultimately, the British Museum. They were responsible for 'authenticating' the Bolton Princess, that is, declaring it genuine and thus a fit subject for public funds. The incompetence was theirs, and in using this word I am merely quoting John Harris, Emeritus Professor of Egyptology, the University of Copenhagen, who it was trained most of what he calls the "British Museum crowd", and who bemoans their lack of 'object-mindedness', which is roughly synonymous with 'connoisseurship', but not quite the same.

Students who study Egyptology in this country do not, as they do in Europe, and as an integral part of their training, handle objects with the object of learning their techniques of manufacture, the processes of ageing, of patination, of decay, and thereby getting 'a feel' for genuine antiquities, as opposed to mere copies. These are all intangibles, but it is only thus Egyptologists will ever develop what we call 'the eye', by which they can come to feel that an object is "wrong", with the same degree of surety that you, as a layman, can understand that the silver glimpse you catch sight of from the corner of your eye was a Volvo, and not a Porsche. It would take you ten thousand words, as a layman, to try and justify your decision, but the you are sure you are right (and you almost certainly are).

It is exactly the same with forgeries. Those of us who have worked with antiquities over the years, and committed our funds to them, cannot afford to make such elementary mistakes as the British museum made over the Bolton Princess. It is said that every collector buys a fake in every class, during his time. But he only buys one, because his wallet pays the penalty for his mistake. He never makes that mistake again.

And if he, the collector or trader, is uncertain, he can ask his restorer, who sees things as it were from the inside, with an eye to techniques, and material, and the chemistry of decay, who can usually put him right.

But academics can go through their careers making such mistakes, and never pay any price, never even realize they've been making the mistakes.

So for them to claim that the modern forgeries are better, and that's "it's all spinning out of control" is merely indicative of their own dubeity. The forgers are NOT getting any better; their products are merely merely benefitting from better documentation and better parallels. And to meet their challenge---a challenge which they've been making for rather a long time, please note---only requires that the people concerned---the people gifted the effective control of the public's purse---learn to do their job, or hand it over to someone else who can do it.

For this is not their only recent large mistake. Readers may care to consult the first chapter of my book (see www.jonathantokeley.com and follow the links to 'sample chapter' of RESCUING THE PAST)

Popular posts from this blog

Codename: Ainsbrook

I have been watching (UK) Channel 4's Time Team this evening. The programme looked at an undisclosed field (under a potato crop) where a Viking burial had been found. The location in Yorkshire was so sensitive that it was given a codename: Ainsbrook. Here is the summary:
In late 2003 two metal detectorists were working in a field in Yorkshire. They found 'treasure' buried just beneath the surface – a collection of Viking material next to a body. Although they had been detecting on the site for a number of years, during which time they had made large numbers of finds, nothing they had uncovered previously compared with this. They decided to share their discovery with archaeologists.The programme explored the tension between metal-detectorists and the English Heritage sponsored archaeologists putting six trenches into the field based on a geo-physical survey. Finds made by the metal-detectorists did not easily map onto the archaeological features.

Part of the programme had an …

The scale of the returns to Italy

I have been busy working on an overview, "Returning Archaeological Objects to Italy". The scale of the returns to Italy from North American collections and galleries is staggering: in excess of 350 objects. This is clearly the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the material that has surfaced on the market without a history that can be traced back to the period before 1970. 

I will provide more information in due course, but the researcher is a reminder that we need to take due diligence seriously when it comes to making acquisitions.

Stele returns to Greece

The Hellenic Ministry of Culture has announced (Saturday 8 September 2018) that a stele that had been due to be auctioned at Sotheby's in London in June 2017 has been returned to Greece (Friday 7 September 2018). The identification had been made by Cambridge-based forensic archaeologist Dr Christos Tsirogiannis.

It appeared that the stele had been supplied with a falsified history as its presence with Becchina until 1990 contradicted the published sale catalogue entry. It then moved into the hands of George Ortiz.

A year ago it was suggested that Sotheby's should contact the Greek authorities. Those negotiations appear to have concluded successfully.

The 4th century BC stele fragment, with the personal name, Hestiaios, will be displayed in the Epigraphic Museum in Athens. It appears to have come from a cemetery in Attica.