Skip to main content

AAMD and Antiquities: A Revised Position

On the 3 June 2008 the Association of Art Museum Directors (AAMD) issued a new report on "Acquisition of Archaeological Materials and Ancient Art" (see AAMD Pressroom). This acknowledges the usefulness of the 1970 UNESCO Convention (as I have argued) as "the most pertinent threshold date for the application of more rigorous standards to the acquisition of archaeological material and ancient art". Michael Comforti, the incoming president of AAMD, is also quoted:
We also believe it is important to go beyond the letter of the law in considering the acquisition of antiquities and ancient art and that the acquisition of these works must be responsible and ethical as well as legal.
The whole tone of the report is conciliatory and there is talk of co-operation with archaeological organisations.

There are a couple of outstanding matters.
  1. There are concerns about the place of long-term loans (see "Loans of Archaeological Material"). I have a particular interest in the long-term loan of a monumental bronze krater (of Trebenishte type) to Houston Museum of Fine Arts ("A Bronze Krater in the Levy-White Collection"; "A Bronze Krater on Loan to Houston").
  2. Where does this leave the Cleveland Museum of Art as a member of AAMD? Will there be a resolution over the contested antiquities in the near future?
I also disagree with the wording "illicit and unscientific excavation" in the AAMD report. Looting is not "excavation".

In general I think the AAMD should be congratulated for moving in the right direction. But will member institutions adopt this report as the basis for their acquisition policy? That is the more important issue.

Comments

David Gill said…
See the report in the New York Times. It reports:

Michael Conforti, the new president of the directors’ association, said the new policy — which is not legally binding on the member museums, though he predicted that all of them would abide by it — would send a powerful signal to the antiquities market.

“If there are those out there who see this as just some kind of veiled license to collect, then they’re going to have to explain that to me,” he said. “I think this is a more than honorable stance, and one that will actually help the archaeological field.”

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.