Skip to main content

Polaroids and Munich

My attention has been drawn by a fellow researcher in East Anglia to the appearance of objects in a forthcoming sale in Munich that appear to feature in one of the seized polaroid dossiers. Does this suggest that German dealers have a less rigorous due diligence process? Or are fewer questions asked about collecting histories? Or are owners of such material trying to sell objects in markets other than London and New York?

Bookmark and Share so Your Real Friends Know that You Know


kyri said…
german auction houses are way behind british ones when it comes to asking questions and in their due diligence operations.i cant realy put my finger on the reason why but this is a fact.i know many british dealers consign to german auction houses rather than british ones.on many ocasions when i have enquired about a piece i have been told that it has been consignd by someone in the uk and i could never realy understand why when bonhams and christies are on their doorstep.i think the lack of due diligence by the germans may have something to do with it.i also see more fakes sold than in the uk in german auction houses.
David Gill said…
I wonder if this article from 2009 is relevant. It is suggesting that Germany is a key hub for recently surfaced antiquities.
kyri said…
david,we both know it is.i think the very large turkish population with their links with relatives back home in turkey has something to do with it.i certainly know that many looted icons and mosaics from cyprus ended up travelling through turkey and ended up in germany.its easier to smuggle looted artifacts to turkey and with the due diligence being practically nonexistent,the pieces once legitimized by being published with a bogus provenance can be exported to the rest of europe and the usa.
Paul Barford said…
It should be recalled that the US coin dealer lobbyists when pressed about whether they possess copies of export licences for coins from a certain south European country for coins they have in stock have said they "do not need them" because they were bought through German sources.

We also recall an infamous letter to the US State Department about imports of illegally exported coins from south Europe written by no less than the Bavarian trade minister on behalf of the Munich coin dealers.

There is obviously urgently needed a concerted effort to create common EU standards and policies on illicit antiquities.
kyri said…
im sory paul but to me there is a big difference between a greek sculpture looted from asia minor worth 100k and a coin worth a few £s when it comes to documentation.i know you dont agree with this but i do think there should be some monetary limit.if i go into coincraft oposite the bm and buy an apulian pot i would ask and expect to recieve provenance but in the corner were they have a tray of low grade roman bronze coins selling 3 for a pound[which they do have],i wouldnt ask or expect a paper my opinion any coin worth over £500 should have full doumentation.there are just to many low grade coins on the market to expect documentation for all of them.of course i understand that to an archaeologist the smallest coin or pot shard is as important as the greek sculpture but i do think it is unrealistic to expect anything else.there are millions of low grade coins out there allready.if they were buying and importing gold tetradrachms from germany than that is a different thing alltogether.
Paul Barford said…
So Joe Thugwit the Northumberland Nighthawk can get rid of his pocketfuls of sestertii looted all along Hadrian's Wall on a totally no-questions-asked market simply by bringing them to London and selling them to a shop keeper as long as it's for less than 500 quid each for them?

And the same goes for fibulae looted on the Danubian limes, grave pots, glass vessels, crucifixes and signet rings, metal detected and bulldozed in countries like Bulgaria in industrial quantities (which is why they are so cheap on the current market)?

No, source countries have export licencing procedures for even what the market calls "minor objects" (which Kyri you seem to be forgetting also does the UK - irrespective of value). Any transaction which bypasses that procedure - however it is done - is ILLICIT (Act 3 of the 1970 UNESCO Convention).

Should not the seller of such coins - irrespective of value - be constrained to be able to show that such items which they are selling have not been obtained through disregard of the relevant legislation?

Note, I was talking about export procedures, not "provenance".
kyri said…
paul,what you say is true and your %100 right but at the moment governments cant even control the big ticket items being launderd,what chance have they got policeing the sale of a roman coin worth me it is a matter of priorities. if a policeman stops me on the street,smoking a splif,he would give me a caution and send me on my way,if i had a kilo of marijuana on me than i would be in trouble.its not that the splif is less important,im still breaking the law,its a matter of scale.
richard ellis,the policeman that formd the art squad at scotland yard and has been fighting antiquities looters/smugglers for decades[now retired but he still pops up on the lecture circuit],says.
"blanket bans dont work as they will drive the trade underground,it is a question of ballance,an unballanced treaty,convention or law will result in theft ,smuggling and associated crimes and result in the uncontrolled haemorhage of a countrys heritage".
i agree with this.
there are millions of low grade coins on the market which are legal but with no paperwork at all.
for me its when a 50k vase comes on the market that seems to have poped out of thin air that alarm bells start ringing.mind you,talking about unballanced laws,it can go to far the other way,because of the "unballanced" treasure laws we have in the uk at the moment we are haemorhaging artifacts by the thousands and some of them very important mr ellis says a ballance needs to be found and demanding a paper trail for a 50p coin or even a £20 one ,for me is unreasonable and rather than confrontation is the way forward.

Popular posts from this blog

Marble bull's head from the temple of Eshmun

Excavations at the temple of Eshmun in Lebanon recovered a marble bull's head. It is now suggested that it was this head, apparently first published in 1967, that was placed on loan to New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art (Tom Mashberg, "Met Museum Turns Over Another Relic With Disputed Past to Prosecutors", New York Times August 1, 2017 ). The head is reported to have been handed over to the Manhattan district attorney after a request was received from the Lebanese authorities.

It is suggested that the head may have been looted from an archaeological storage area at Byblos in the 1980s during the Lebanese civil war. Mashberg has rehearsed the recent collecting history:
The owners of the bull’s head, Lynda and William Beierwaltes of Colorado, say they have clear title to the item and have sued Manhattan prosecutors for its return.  The Beierwaltes bought the head from a dealer in London in 1996 for more than $1 million and then sold it to another collector, Michael …

Sardinian warrior from "old Swiss collection"

One of the Sardinian bronzes of a warrior was seized from an as yet unnamed Manahattan gallery. It appears to be the one that passed through the Royal-Athena Gallery: Art of the Ancient World 23 (2012) no. 71. The collecting history for that warrior suggests that it was acquired in 1990 from a private collection in Geneva.

Other clues suggested that the warrior has resided in a New York private collection.

The identity of the private collection in Geneva will no doubt be telling.

The warrior also features in this news story: Jennifer Peltz, "Looted statues, pottery returned to Italy after probe in NYC", ABC News May 25 2017.

Attic amphora handed back to Italians

The research of Dr Christos Tsirogiannis has led to the return of an Attic red-figured amphora, attributed to the Harrow painter, to Italy (Tom Mashberg, "Stolen Etruscan Vessel to Be Returned to Italy", New York Times March 16, 2017).

The amphora is known to have passed through the hands of Swiss-based dealer Gianfranco Becchina in 1993, and then through a New York gallery around 2000 (although its movements between those dates are as yet undisclosed).

During the ceremony, Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., the District Attorney stated:
“When looters overrun historic sites, mine sacred spaces for prized relics, and peddle stolen property for top dollar, they do so with the implicit endorsement of all those who knowingly trade in stolen antiquities” More research clearly needs to be conducted on how material handled by Becchina passed into the North American market and into the hands of private and public collectors.