Skip to main content

Does blogging matter?

Chuck Jones has raised the issue of blogging ("Does Blogging Matter?") on the Ancient World Bloggers Group. This coincides with the third post of Looting Matters on PR Newswire (a topic that in itself has attracted discussion).

So why blog about archaeological ethics?

Here are some preliminary thoughts ...

First, it allows a day by day response to what is happening on the antiquities market. And things can happen quite suddenly. Take Friday October 26 2007: Bonhams withdrew a piece of Lydian silver from a sale in London, an article was published on incantation bowls at UCL, and then to finish the day, Princeton announced that it would be returned some of its antiquities to Italy. Web 2.0 technology allows for a swift response; without it, the response would have to be submitted to a journal, and the piece would appear months (at best!) later.

Second, it allows a commentary to develop about issues. The July 2008 announcement that Bonhams would be selling antiquities from the Graham Geddes collection in October 2008 gave an opportunity for a sustained series of comments on the sale. It brought about calls from Italy for lots to be withdrawn - and they were.

Third, it allows a dialogue to develop with interested parties. Web 2.0 permits people to interact with comments and to post questions. I was even invited to take part in a videoconference seminar on cultural property - and the live discussion had as its background the press release for the return of antiquities from the Cleveland Museum of Art.

Fourth, it provides a resource for those involved in discussing cultural property whether in academic books and articles or in the wider media. The post can provide links to academic articles as well as to news reports.

Fifth, it is a resource that people are using. There were just under 100,000 visits to Looting Matters in 2008 and that excludes email subscribers or those who view through a reader. Visitors range from academics, museum curators, dealers, government officials, and members of the public. Virtual visitors come from right round the globe, though there is an emphasis on North America and the UK (sharing just over 70% of the visits). A story from Looting Matters that was released earlier today had 66 links by the evening.

But blogging is no substitute for academic research that passes through a process of peer review. During the life of Looting Matters related research has appeared in, for example, the International Journal of Cultural Property [link] and the Journal of Field Archaeology [link] as well as chapters in books [link]; there has also been a major review article in the American Journal of Archaeology. There are advanced plans for a study of "toxic antiquities" (and earlier this week we had a lively videoconference to go through the issues); essays on "provenance" and the material and intellectual consequences of collecting the Euphronios krater are in press.

Finally, while the destruction of archaeological sites continues, I hope that Looting Matters will be there to offer comment.

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 …

George Ortiz collection to be displayed in London

Christie's is due to display part of the former collection of the late George Ortiz in London in a non-selling show to mark the 25th anniversary of the exhibition at the Royal Academy. There is a statement on the Christie's website ("The Ortiz Collection — ‘proof that the past is in all of us’"). Max Bernheimer is quoted: ‘Ortiz was one of the pre-eminent collectors of his day’.

We recall the associations with Ortiz such as the Horiuchi sarcophagus, the Hestiaios stele fragment, the marble funerary lekythos, and the Castor and Pollux.

Bernheimer will, no doubt, wish to reflect on the Royal Academy exhibition by reading Christopher Chippindale and David W. J. Gill. 2000. "Material consequences of contemporary classical collecting." American Journal of Archaeology 104: 463-511 [JSTOR].

Bernheimer will probably want to re-read the two pieces by Peter Watson that appeared in The Times: , "Ancient art without a history" and "Fakes - the artifice b…

Tutankhamun, Christie's and rigorous due dligence

It was announced today that the Egyptian authorities would be taking legal action against Christie's over the sale of the head of Tutankhamun ("Egypt to sue Christie's to retrieve £4.7m Tutankhamun bust", BBC News 9 July 2019).

The BBC reports:
Egypt's former antiquities chief, Zahi Hawass, said the bust appeared to have been "stolen" in the 1970s from the Temple of Karnak. "The owners have given false information," he told AFP news agency. "They have not shown any legal papers to prove its ownership." Christie's maintain the history of the piece as follows:
It stated that Germany's Prince Wilhelm von Thurn und Taxis reputedly had it in his collection by the 1960s, and that it was acquired by an Austrian dealer in 1973-4. However the family of von Thurn und Taxis claim that the head was never in that collection [see here].

Christie's reject any hint of criticism:
"Christie's would not and do not sell any work whe…