Skip to main content

Cleveland Museum of Art: "convincing evidence of wrongdoing"

Steven Litt has been covering the story surrounding the return of antiquities from the Cleveland Museum of Art ("Cleveland Museum of Art will return tainted antiquities to Italy Wednesday", The Plain Dealer April 22, 2009). Today's return has been played down by the Museum: there is no press release relating to the return.

Timothy Rub, the museum's director, was quoted by Litt,
"I look upon this as a kind of mechanical thing ... The big news for me was the signing of the agreement."
Litt concludes his report with this:
Rub said the lesson of the negotiations with Italy is that the museum will return objects to foreign countries only in the face of convincing evidence of wrongdoing.
Does this imply that the management team at the Cleveland Museum of Art has accepted that the objects returned to Italy were acquired against a background of "convincing evidence of wrongdoing"?

If that is the case the museum - and Rub in particular - has a responsibility to disclose the collecting histories of the returning pieces.

Litt has earlier suggested that (according to Italian sources) the objects had been acquired from Fritz Bürki, Robert Hecht, Giacomo Medici, and Robin Symes. Is this correct? Do any other pieces in the collection come from the same sources?

Comments

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.