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)
Francavilla Marittima and the links to Switzerland
Fragment of plate formerly in the Michael C. Carlos Museum In 1979 the J. Paul Getty Museum acquired ‘a large collection of fragments of Cor...
-
Source: Sotheby's A marble head of Alexander the Great has been seized in New York (reported in " Judge Orders Return of Ancien...
-
The Fire of Hephaistos exhibition included "seven bronzes ... that have been linked to the Bubon cache of imperial statues" (p. 1...
-
It appears that a bronze head acquired by the J. Paul Getty Museum from Nicolas Koutoulakis has been removed from display and appears to be...
No comments:
Post a Comment