SLAM has yet to demonstrate in a convincing way how the mummy mask moved from the archaeological store in Egypt to the antiquities market in Switzerland. Was the collecting history provided by the vendor fabricated?
SLAM's apparent unwillingness to consider the possibility that it had been provided with information that was possibly flawed could mean that it will face some difficult questions through the legal process.
1 comment:
Do you know whether or not the dealers have ever offered to take it back and return the money and fight the case themselves? After all it is the documentation which they supplied the buyer which is at the root of the problem. Are the Aboutaams willing to stand by it themselves?
Post a Comment