Skip to main content

Good Faith: A Common Phrase?

I find myself in agreement with James Cuno: "due diligence and good faith inquiries are no longer sufficient" (the quote is now published in Who Owns Antiquity? [2008] 4). He continues:
It means only that unprovenanced antiquities are not being acquired by U.S. art museums to the extent that they were in the past. Instead, undocumented antiquities are going elsewhere in greater numbers, either remaining in the private domain of private collectors and dealers or being sold or donated to museums in countries that do not enforce foreign patrimony laws as the United States does. (p. 5)
And how often have we heard the phrase "good faith" in the last year as antiquities have been returned from museums, auction-houses and private collectors in Europe and North America?

For example, Bonhams offered an Egyptian fragment removed from the Tomb of Mutirdis (TT410) that has now been returned to Egypt. A spokesperson for the auctioneers said that they "would not identify the seller who tried to put the artifact up for auction, but said it appeared to have been bought 'in good faith'." (He actually fogot that the vendor was supposed to have inherited the piece from his seafaring father ...)

As Princeton University Art Museum returned antiquities to Italy, the university spokesperson claimed that all had been acquired in "good faith".

And back in 2006 Shelby White was asked to comment on her collection (Jason Horowitz, "How Hot Vase It?", The New York Observer, February 19, 2006):
We bought in good faith, we published everything, we supported archeology, and we supported conservation ... We acted in good faith, and if we did anything wrong, I am prepared to address that.
Then earlier this month as Shelby White announced the return of the fragmentary marble funerary stele and the bronze calyx-krater to Greece, the press statement claimed that the pieces had been acquired in "good faith".

What does "good faith" mean?

That the pieces were purchased from a "reputable dealer" in Europe or North America?

Both Princeton and Shelby White have been reluctant to share the information about their sources in marked contrast to the exemplary curatorial generosity of the MFA in Boston and the J. Paul Getty Museum.

How can Princeton and Shelby White help other museums and private collectors avoid buying recently-surfaced antiquities?

Comments

Larry Rothfield said…
There are at least two things that the collectors and dealers could do to help others avoid buying recently-surfaced (or to be more precise, illegally excavated or illegally exported) antiquities:

1. Push for and fund a provenance review board that would be accredited by the AIA, WAC, or some other professional association of archaeologists. That board could set standards for what counted as a legitimate provenance, and could empanel experts to examine artifacts and either certify or disqualify them as saleable. (There would have to be fees paid for this services, I presume.) Ideally, this certification would be legally required to permit an antiquity to be sold.

2. Lend financial support for efforts to clamp down on looting at the source. One straightforward way to do this would be for a wealthy individual or group to establish and fund a non-profit foundation with site protection and anti-looting/anti-smuggling efforts as its sole focus; another would be to go to Charles Schumer and urge him to impose a tax on sales of legal antiquities, with tax revenues dedicated to fighting looting, smuggling, and illegal sales of antiquities. If looting can be controlled -- and we have some hope that it can if adequate resources are provided -- then fewer illicit artifacts will come to market.
Larry Rothfield said…
There are at least two things that the collectors and dealers could do to help others avoid buying recently-surfaced (or to be more precise, illegally excavated or illegally exported) antiquities:

1. Push for and fund a provenance review board that would be accredited by the AIA, WAC, or some other professional association of archaeologists. That board could set standards for what counted as a legitimate provenance, and could empanel experts to examine artifacts and either certify or disqualify them as saleable. (There would have to be fees paid for this services, I presume.) Ideally, this certification would be legally required to permit an antiquity to be sold.

2. Lend financial support for efforts to clamp down on looting at the source. One straightforward way to do this would be for a wealthy individual or group to establish and fund a non-profit foundation with site protection and anti-looting/anti-smuggling efforts as its sole focus; another would be to go to Charles Schumer and urge him to impose a tax on sales of legal antiquities, with tax revenues dedicated to fighting looting, smuggling, and illegal sales of antiquities. If looting can be controlled -- and we have some hope that it can if adequate resources are provided -- then fewer illicit artifacts will come to market.

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.