Skip to main content

Toxic Antiquities: Concern for Dealers

One of the issues that is likely to become significant during the next few weeks relates to toxic antiquities. There are thousands of antiquities that can be identified from images seized during police raids in Geneva, Basel, and on the island of Schinousa. How can dealers avoid handling them? The easy solution would be to insist on an authenticated collecting history that can be traced back to the period before 1970.

But what if you had sold the material to a private collector a decade or so ago? And now the collector (or their heir) had asked you to sell the collection for them? And what if you knew the original source for the collection?

Do you refuse to handle the objects? But would that indicate that you knew that the items had an "interesting" collecting history?

Or do you agree to sell them and hope that nobody will notice that the items feature in one of the photographic archives? And as Marion True has so recently reminded us, some of these images were made available on the Carabinieri website.

Bookmark and Share so Your Real Friends Know that You Know

Comments

kyri said…
pre 1970s paper trail is very rare.20-30 years ago provenance was not a major issue in collecting antiquities so to say that every antiquitie without a pre 1970s paper trail is "toxic"is a rather simplistic view considering the collecting habbits of the 1950s-60s collector.it is only in the last 5-10 years that provenance has become paramount.calling any piece "toxic"makes a good headline but doesnt do anything to solve the problem that demand is driving the looting.as collectors we can all bury our head in the sand ,like some do,but i realise there is as a link between illicitly excavated pieces and the antiquities market [the medici affair proved as much]
i am a collector and try to buy as ethicaly as posible,as long as a piece has at least 15-20 years solid provenace and i know it was not dug up yesterday,thats about as good as it gets im afraid.
kyri
Paul Barford said…
Why?

What does it mean "not a major issue?"

Who made it not a major issue, and why?

Obviously in the wider art market, provenence is everything - to avoid for example Nazi-stolen art and link works with authors and patrons, so why was the antiquities-art market any different?

Why did dealers and buyers NOT want a check that the objects on the market were not - in one way or another - stolen?

Why did nobody involved in this trade seek the answer to these questions 15-20 years ago?

We are constantly assured that the market is full of licit items, the problems begin when we ask to have them demonstrated to us and it turns out that for a market allegedly "full of" them, demonstrable examples are REALLY thin on the ground... cal".

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.