Rick St Hilaire has covered the response of the St Louis Art Museum (SLAM) to the dispute over the Egyptian mummy mask. It is perhaps significant that there is no official press release on the topic.
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.
Discussion of the archaeological ethics surrounding the collecting of antiquities and archaeological material.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The Met returns three antiquities to Iraq
Source: Manhattan DA New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art has returned three antiquities to Iraq ( Manhattan DA Press Release ). The th...
-
Source: Sotheby's A marble head of Alexander the Great has been seized in New York (reported in " Judge Orders Return of Ancien...
-
If international museums can no longer "own" antiquities either through purchase on the antiquities market or through partage , wh...
-
The Fire of Hephaistos exhibition included "seven bronzes ... that have been linked to the Bubon cache of imperial statues" (p. 1...
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