St Louis Art Museum: The Egyptian Mummy Mask

The legal decision (conveniently discussed by Rik St Hilare here) that the Egyptian mummy mask acquired by the St Louis Art Museum will not be returning to Egypt leaves some questions unanswered.

I have discussed this mask elsewhere. But if we summarise, we can state that we know that it was excavated at Saqqara.

But what about these issues?

What is the authenticated documented collecting history of the mask between 1952 and 1995?

What is the Kaloterna collection?

Can Zuzi Jalinek's testimony be considered trustworthy?

How could the mask be in Cairo and form part of the Kaloterna collection at the same point in time?

Have SLAM curators checked the Cairo register and explained the anomaly in the "received" collecting history?

The officials at SLAM may feel that the legal case is closed.

But if the testimony by Jalinek is flawed, as it clearly appears to be, then the Director and Trustees of SLAM have an ethical obligation to return the mask to Egypt.

Comments

Heather Lee said…

I agree that those questions have not been fully answered, at least to the concerned public and archaeologists. These gaps in the provenance provided by SLAM, as you point out here, prompted me to think more about how this conflict could come to an end: http://www.savingantiquities.org/can-ka-nefer-nefer-dispute-ended/. Thanks for the great post!

6 July 2014 at 20:11

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.

"Beating sites to death"

Policy decisions for protecting archaeological sites need to be informed by carefully argued positions based on data. Dr Sam Hardy has produced an important study, “Metal detecting for cultural objects until ‘there is nothing left’: The potential and limits of digital data, netnographic data and market data for analysis”. Arts 7, 3 (2018) [online]. This builds on Hardy's earlier research.

Readers should note Hardy's conclusion about his findings: "they corroborate the detecting community’s own perception that they are ‘beat[ing these sites] to death’".

Pieterjan Deckers, Andres Dobat, Natasha Ferguson, Stijn Heeren, Michael Lewis, and Suzie Thomas may wish to reflect on whether or not their own position is endangering the finite archaeological record.

Abstract
This methodological study assesses the potential for automatically generated data, netnographic data and market data on metal-detecting to advance cultural property criminology. The method comprises the analysi…

Looting Matters

Search This Blog