Skip to main content

"There is a far greater awareness of the problem of trafficking in looted antiquities"

I was very struck by Timothy Rub's comments to reporters from The New York Times in the discussion over whether or not North American museums should "repatriate" --- a loaded word? --- antiquities to their countries of origin (Tom Mashberg and Graham Bowley, "Islamic State Destruction Renews Debate Over Repatriation of Antiquities", March 30, 2015). Rub is quoted:
Timothy Rub, director of the Philadelphia Museum of Art and former president of the art museum directors association, said acquisition scandals, including those involving the Getty before Mr. Cuno’s tenure, had put his peers on the defensive when it came to holding on to items. 
He added, however, that “there is a far greater awareness of the problem of trafficking in looted antiquities and the role that American museums can and should play in discouraging this.”
Then in response to a comment by Gary Vikan, former director of the Walters Art Museum in Baltimore, who suggested that antiquities that surface on the "black market" should be "ransomed back".
Mr. Rub said that approach was warranted only in rare cases when “an item was in fact taken out of harm’s way and would be at risk if returned to the country of origin.” 
“That’s when museums and philanthropies and governments should work together,” he said, “to ensure that the item is acquired and cared for and kept safe until it can be returned to its rightful owner.”
Mashberg and Bowley miss a key point here. It was not just the J. Paul Getty Museum that was involved in an "acquisition scandal". There was also the Cleveland Museum of Art where Rub had been director from 2006 to 2009. Indeed Rub was director when it was agreed to return objects (that had been acquired prior to his directorship). Yet he also declined to disclose the collecting histories of the return items (unlike Boston or the Getty). Rub has also had a confused position over the return of antiquities, placing "clear blue water" between himself and James Cuno (see here).

But have we seen major museums working with the governments of countries to see the rightful return of archaeological material? The case of the Ka-Nefer-Nefer mummy mask is a case in point especially now that the internal emails and memoranda have been released.

Have senior museum directors of North American museum appreciated the scale of the problems that have developed over the last 45 years? Perhaps they should read something on the "scandal" that would help them to focus their minds.

Newspaper reports such as this demonstrate that there continues to be a lack of genuine awareness of the problem of trafficking in looted antiquities by some in the North American museum, antiquities market and legal communities.

Bookmark and Share so Your Real Friends Know that You Know

Comments

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.