Skip to main content

ADCAEA: an association for dealers and collectors

Paul Barford's post on the Association of Dealers & Collectors of Ancient & Ethnographic Art (ADCAEA) has attracted my attention (adcaea.wildapricot.org). It is not clear why a new body is needed. One of the two dealers, Hixenbaugh Ancient Art, is already a member of the International Association of Dealers in Ancient Art (IADAA).

I would like to focus on one point in the Code of Conduct.
All members undertake not to purchase, sell or exhibit an object until they have exercised, to the best of their ability, due diligence to ensure such object was not knowingly stolen from excavations, architectural monuments, public institutions or private property.
It is remarkably similar to the one from the IADAA:
The members of IADAA undertake not to purchase or sell objects until they have established to the best of their ability that such objects were not stolen from excavations, architectural monuments, public institutions or private property.
Both the ADCAEA and the IADAA seem to condemn removal of archaeological or ethnographic material from "excavations". But what about from known or even scheduled archaeological sites that have not been excavated?

So, for example, imagine a known Roman urban site that is covered by arable fields. Would it be acceptable for members of ADCAEA (or for that matter IADAA) to handle material that had been removed from that site on the grounds that the structures had not been "excavated"? I am sure that they would say no.

So why use the word "excavations" rather than "archaeological sites" in the formulation?

I am sure that both bodies have taken legal advice to avoid careless wording. So we can only presume that in the case of ADCAEA that this is intentional.

And those who observe these things will note the presence of a paid lobbyist on the list of officers for ADCAEA. What signal does that send out about this new association?

Bookmark and Share so Your Real Friends Know that You Know

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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.



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 …