In "1993-94 [Ernst-Ulrich Walter] recovered the statue's remaining fragments" from the Leutwitz estate (p. 54).
Yet Lucia Marinescu claims, in a 2004 publication, that she saw the statue in 1992.
Why did Michael Bennett fail to address this significant discrepancy? Why did Marinescu claim in a letter (September 2003) that she saw the statue in 1994? Or did Bennett misquote Marinescu's letter?
What is the evidence for due diligence?
Perhaps the Cleveland Museum of Art could release the letter and place it on its website for public scrutiny.
Discussion of the archaeological ethics surrounding the collecting of antiquities and archaeological material.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Worcester Art Museum Returns Hecht-linked Pots to Italy
Photo: Worcester Art Museum The Worcester Art Museum has returned two Attic pots to Italy; they are now back on loan to the museum (" W...
-
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