Skip to main content

Christie's and the Art Loss Register

The Art Loss Register (ALR) states on its website that it "searches all auction catalogues and private sales for Christies to identify before sale any items which are registered as stolen, fake, missing, looted". The ALR continues: "This is the foundation of due diligence to ensure that the buyers obtain good title free of disputes."

This is a bold claim. Are all looted antiquities documented and photographed? Do looters submit their photographs to the ALR? So the statement assumes that looted antiquities have to be registered.

And what if objects in one of the auctions are identified from one of the photographic dossiers seized in Switzerland and Greece? Will Christie's only respond if the ALR makes the identification?

And does the work of the ALR guarantee that "buyers obtain good title free of disputes"? What if the Italian authorities make the identification themselves and approach the auction-house directly?

The wording is clearly intended to reassure potential buyers. But does it?

Bookmark and Share so Your Real Friends Know that You Know


While an item that happens to have a photograph in one of the "dossiers" (Medicci is one) certainly would give reason for caution, you are making a pretty bold assumption that all of the photographs found were of items which had been "recently" looted. (As opposed to looted prior to whatever cutoff date is valid for the country in question - but for the sake of argument let's say 1970)

All dealers maintain photofiles. Some items may have been offered to said dealers and a photograph taken to obtain opinions on specific pieces before they were purchased and/or sold. Or, photographs could have been taken before and after restoration work of pieces that are from "old" collections.

While I certainly agree that a photograph from the "Medicci dossier" should be of concern, it does not establish that a specific item is "looted" as fact. It is only one piece of evidence that must be taken into consideration.

While it would be irresponsible to dismiss the fact that a photograph exists in one of these dossiers it is also irresponsible to label all items in those photographs as positively looted.
Paul Barford said…
How about treating items in such a "dossier" as items known to be have been sold by a dealer who is known to have dealt in looted objects?

If that is the ONLY verifiable provenance that object now has, it is tainted.
I agree, thus, it is reason to be cautious. But a much bigger issue is that these photos have not been made available to the public in their entirety.
Paul Barford said…
Most dealers in dugup antiquities do not reveal to the public the details of where the individual objects they handle actually come from.

Popular posts from this blog

Codename: Ainsbrook

I have been watching (UK) Channel 4's Time Team this evening. The programme looked at an undisclosed field (under a potato crop) where a Viking burial had been found. The location in Yorkshire was so sensitive that it was given a codename: Ainsbrook. Here is the summary:
In late 2003 two metal detectorists were working in a field in Yorkshire. They found 'treasure' buried just beneath the surface – a collection of Viking material next to a body. Although they had been detecting on the site for a number of years, during which time they had made large numbers of finds, nothing they had uncovered previously compared with this. They decided to share their discovery with archaeologists.The programme explored the tension between metal-detectorists and the English Heritage sponsored archaeologists putting six trenches into the field based on a geo-physical survey. Finds made by the metal-detectorists did not easily map onto the archaeological features.

Part of the programme had an …

The scale of the returns to Italy

I have been busy working on an overview, "Returning Archaeological Objects to Italy". The scale of the returns to Italy from North American collections and galleries is staggering: in excess of 350 objects. This is clearly the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the material that has surfaced on the market without a history that can be traced back to the period before 1970. 

I will provide more information in due course, but the researcher is a reminder that we need to take due diligence seriously when it comes to making acquisitions.

Stele returns to Greece

The Hellenic Ministry of Culture has announced (Saturday 8 September 2018) that a stele that had been due to be auctioned at Sotheby's in London in June 2017 has been returned to Greece (Friday 7 September 2018). The identification had been made by Cambridge-based forensic archaeologist Dr Christos Tsirogiannis.

It appeared that the stele had been supplied with a falsified history as its presence with Becchina until 1990 contradicted the published sale catalogue entry. It then moved into the hands of George Ortiz.

A year ago it was suggested that Sotheby's should contact the Greek authorities. Those negotiations appear to have concluded successfully.

The 4th century BC stele fragment, with the personal name, Hestiaios, will be displayed in the Epigraphic Museum in Athens. It appears to have come from a cemetery in Attica.