Skip to main content

Surfacing Antiquities in New York: Becchina and Medici

Hydria from Medici Dossier. Courtesy: Christos Tsirogiannis.
The present due diligence process adopted by some auction houses is not fit for purpose. I made this point at a recent meeting of the All Party Committee on Cultural Heritage.

Dr Christos Tsirogiannis has now identified three pieces due to be auctioned at Christie's New York tomorrow (12 April 2016). The fact that part of the collecting histories have not been included in the details suggests that either the auction house had not been diligent in establishing the collecting history (inappropriately called "provenance") or that this information had been inappropriately stated (and that the due diligence search had not picked up the discrepancy).

The three pieces are as follows:

Image from the Becchina archive.
Source: Christos Tsirogannis.
1. A Roman stone mosaic panel (lot 9). Estimate: $200,000-$300,000. 'Property from an important European collection'. Collecting history: Private Collection, U.S.;  an American Private Collector; Antiquities, Sotheby's, New York, 17 December 1998, lot 182; with Royal-Athena Galleries, New York, acquired from the above; Acquired by the current owner from the above, 2000.

Tsirogiannis has identified that the mosaic appears to feature on an Ariadne Galleries leaflet that forms part of the Becchina archive.

We should recall that the association between Becchina and Ariadne Galleries has been noted elsewhere. (And the Ariande Galleries are linked to the unreturned Icklingham Bronzes.)

Christie's needs to disclose where the Ariadne Galleries fit into the collecting history. Are they represented by the US Private collection? Was the mosaic consigned by Becchina? What was Becchina's source?

2. South Italian black-glossed ('black-glazed') hydria (lot 36). Estimate: $8,000-$12,000. 'Property from the collection of Charles Brickbauer, Baltimore'. Collecting history: Antiquities, Sotheby's, London, 10 December 1987, lot 243; with Royal-Athena Galleries, New York; acquired by the current owner from the above, 1988.

The 1987 Sotheby's London auction should have alerted anybody conducting a due diligence search. Tsirogiannis has identified this hydria from the Medici Dossier. Did Christie's contact the Carabinieri to double check that the hydria did not feature in the photographic archive? And will the Charles Brickbauer collection be returning the hydria?

Janiform here from Becchina archive. Source: Christos Tsirogannis.
3. A Roman marble janiform head (lot 70). Estimate: $40,000-$60,000. 'The Property of a Lady'. Collecting history: Private Collection, New York, Boston and Texas, acquired prior to 1995; thence by descent to the current owner.

Tsirogannis has identified this head showing Zeus Ammon and Alexander the Great from the Becchina archive.

Christie's should have been aware of the issues as they auctioned another janiform head in 2009 that had to be returned to Italy. Again it suggests that the due diligence process lacked the appropriate level of rigour.

Christie's once again has managed to offer objects at auction that should have been picked up in a rigorous due diligence process.

Perhaps members of Christie's staff could learn from a similar case at Bonhams back in 2010, i.e. some six years ago.

Bookmark and Share so Your Real Friends Know that You Know

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Getty Kouros: "The moral is, never ever buy a piece without a provenance"

In the wake of the 1992 Athens conference to discuss the Getty kouros (85.AA.40), one of the delegates, a "distinguished" American museum curator, was quoted ("Greek sculpture; the age-old question", The Economist June 20, 1992):
The moral is, never ever buy a piece without a provenance.
The recent discussions about the return of antiquities from North American museums to Italy and Greece may seem far removed from the acquisition of what appears to be a forged archaic Greek sculpture in the 1980s. However, there are some surprising overlaps.

The statue arrived at the Getty on September 18, 1983 in seven pieces. True (1993: 11) subsequently asked two questions:
Where was it found? As it was said to have been in a Swiss private collection for fifty years, why had it never been reassembled, though it was virtually complete?
A similar statue surfacing in the 1930s
A decision was taken to acquire the kouros in 1985. The official Getty line at the time (and reported in Russell…

Marble bull's head from the temple of Eshmun

Excavations at the temple of Eshmun in Lebanon recovered a marble bull's head. It is now suggested that it was this head, apparently first published in 1967, that was placed on loan to New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art (Tom Mashberg, "Met Museum Turns Over Another Relic With Disputed Past to Prosecutors", New York Times August 1, 2017 ). The head is reported to have been handed over to the Manhattan district attorney after a request was received from the Lebanese authorities.

It is suggested that the head may have been looted from an archaeological storage area at Byblos in the 1980s during the Lebanese civil war. Mashberg has rehearsed the recent collecting history:
The owners of the bull’s head, Lynda and William Beierwaltes of Colorado, say they have clear title to the item and have sued Manhattan prosecutors for its return.  The Beierwaltes bought the head from a dealer in London in 1996 for more than $1 million and then sold it to another collector, Michael …

The Getty kouros: a modern creation?

The refurbished galleries of the J. Paul Getty Museum no longer include the Getty kouros, a sculpture purchased in 1985 (Christopher Knight, "Something's missing from the newly reinstalled antiquities collection at the Getty Villa", LA Times April 19, 2018). Knight explains:
Unexpectedly, the Getty kouros, a controversial sculpture even before the museum acquired it more than 30 years ago, has been removed from public view. The work is now in museum storage.   For decades, the life-size carving of a standing nude youth carried one of the most distinctive labels of any work of art in an American museum: “Greece (?) about 530 B.C. or modern forgery.” The label encapsulated puzzling issues about the work, whose questionable status as dating from the archaic dawn of Western civilization had been the focus of scholarly and scientific research, debate and international symposiums for years. It is ten years since I provided an overview of the kouros here on LM. And over 20 year…