Skip to main content

Madrid: Three Pots from the Geddes Collection

The October 2008 sale of part of the Graham Geddes collection was disrupted when the Italian Government requested that some of the lots be withdrawn on the eve of the auction in London.

I note that (at least) three ex-Geddes pieces appear in the Várez Fisa collection now on display in the National Museum of Archaeology in Madrid.


  • no. 53: Athenian black-figured amphora showing departing chariot, attributed to the painter of Vatican 365 (inv. 1999/99/61). Although the collecting history is not mentioned in the catalogue, the Beazley Archive [no. 7462] lists the amphora noting that it passed through Sotheby's London 13-14 December 1982, lot 255 and subsequently 8 December 1986, lot 327.
  • no. 137: Apulian pelike showing Eros in a garden, attributed to the Siren Citharist painter (inv. 19999/99/142). The catalogue notes that the piece had been sold at Christie's New York on 4 June 1998, lot 233 [entry], where it fetched $16,100. The Madrid catalogue does not note that the pelike had passed through Sotheby's in London: 9 December 1988, lot 171; 8 December 1994, lot 328.
  • no. 147: Paestan lebes gamikos showing two women either side of a basin, attributed to Asteas (inv. 1999/99/146). A Paestan lebes gamikos attributed to the Asteas / Python workshop had resided in the Geddes collection. This surfaced at Sotheby's London, 21 May 1984, lot 372. It was subsequently sold at Christie's New York on 18 December 1997, lot 149 [entry], for $10,925.


The December 1982 Sotheby's sale is significant. Two pieces that surfaced through it have now been returned to Italy: a Lucanian nestoris from Boston (and once loaned by Geddes) (lot 298) and an amphora attributed to the Berlin painter returned from New York (lot 220). Bonhams had to withdraw an Apulian hydria from auction in October 2008; it had originally surfaced at the May 1984 sale at Sotheby's.

See my list of items linked to Graham Geddes at auction where two of these pieces appear to be listed.

Who consigned these three pieces to Sotheby's in 1982, 1984 and 1988? Why is the Madrid catalogue incomplete?

Bookmark and Share so Your Real Friends Know that You Know

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…