I have discussed earlier this year the issue of due diligence and what auction-houses could do when objects are identified from seized photographic archives (April 2011). I have also addressed the issue of whether or not the Italian authorities should release images that were seized (June 2011).
Auction-houses are quite capable of conducting their own due diligence searches when they are alerted to potential problems (April 2011). Some choose not to do so.
So what are the issues:
a. Are buyers provided with the full and accurate collecting histories ("provenance") for the objects they acquire?
b. Are buyers alerted to potential problems over disputed ownership?
c. Who are the anonymous vendors?
Discussion of the archaeological ethics surrounding the collecting of antiquities and archaeological material.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
An Analysis of the Stern Collection of Cycladicising Art
The loan exhibition of the Leonard N. Stern collection of Cycladicising art at New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art has been drawing mu...
-
Source: Sotheby's A marble head of Alexander the Great has been seized in New York (reported in " Judge Orders Return of Ancien...
-
Tarentine funerary relief Source: Metropolitan Museum of Art The Manhattan DA has provided limited details about the recent return of antiqu...
-
If international museums can no longer "own" antiquities either through purchase on the antiquities market or through partage , wh...
No comments:
Post a Comment