Hobby Lobby and the Cylinder Seals

In a letter of 17 January 2018, an attorney for the US Department of Justice has indicated that "Hobby Lobby" has handed over additional cuneiform tablets.

As stated in the enclosed Stipulation, and pursuant to the July 20, 2017 Stipulation of Settlement, Hobby Lobby has delivered to the United States an additional 245 cylinder seals which comprise part of the December 2010 order and consents to their forfeiture. Upon the Court so-ordering the Stipulation, the United States will commence publication of notice of forfeiture on the grounds that the 245 cylinder seals constitute merchandise that was introduced or attempted to be introduced into the United States contrary to law, and are therefore subject to seizure and forfeiture to the United States, in accordance with 19 U.S.C. § 1595a(c)(1)(A), as alleged in the Verified Complaint in Rem. Accordingly, the United States respectfully requests that the Court so-order the enclosed Stipulation.

This case is in addition to the material seized in July 2017.

The material forms part of an order dating back to December 2010 (see documentation from ARCA; see also discussion by Roberta Mazza). The material seems to have passed through UAE.

Hobby Lobby should now disclose the sources for its purchases along with the authenticated supporting documentation.

The Becchina archive, a Minoan larnax, and the Michael C. Carlos Museum

Left: Becchina archive. Right: Michael C. Carlos Museum

More than 10 years ago, back in 2007, Dr Christos Tsirogiannis identified two pieces in the Michael C. Carlos Museum, a Minoan larnax and a pithos, with photographs from the Becchina archive. There is a case number with the General Secretary of the Greek Ministry of Culture: prot. no. 61/1-6-2007.

Source: MiBAC

In 2015 the Italian authorities revealed a major collection of antiquities, worth some 50 million Euros, seized from Becchina in Switzerland. The Becchina archive itself contains some 10,000 photographs and 200 bundles of receipts. These images have led to the identification, largely by Tsirogiannis, of a substantial number of items in public and private collections as well as from auction houses and galleries.

A museum director who was faced with the identification of objects, i.e. more than one object, in their collection from this contentious source would no doubt wish to resolve the issue, not least because there is an obligation under the AAMD guidelines (2013). These state:

If a member museum, as a result of its continuing research, gains information that establishes another party’s right to ownership of a Work, the museum should bring this information to the attention of the party, and if the case warrants, initiate the return of the Work to that party, as has been done in the past. In the event that a third party brings to the attention of a member museum information supporting the party’s claim to a Work, the museum should respond promptly and responsibly and take whatever steps are necessary to address this claim, including, if warranted, returning the Work, as has been done in the past.

Given that the identifications have been made public in the Greek press as well as elsewhere on the internet, it seems unlikely that the director of the Michael C. Carlos Museum is unaware of the issue. In fact it is very unlikely as the museum issued a press release in 2008 on this very case.

There are some questions to be raised. Has the director of the Michael C. Carlos Museum contacted the Greek authorities in the light of the information that came to light after the acquisition of the larnax and pithos? Has the director of the Michael C. Carlos Museum ignored the issue and hoped that it would go away?

Has the AAMD responded to the situation relating to one of its members?

What do academics in the rest of Emory University think of the situation?

I suspect that the Greek authorities may wish to take the case further.

A Mosaic from an Anonymous Collector

In September 2013 the Michael C. Carlos Museum installed a mosaic showing Achilles and Penthesilea before Troy in the galleries. A little more information appeared in the Fall 2013 / Winter 2014 number of the journal of the Michael C. Carlos Museum [online]. The Director, Bonnie Speed, was full of praise for the "monumental third- to fourth-century Roman mosaic, offered to the Museum on long-term loan by a very generous donor".

Who is this anonymous donor? There was a time when the museum at Emory University was leading the way in ethical loans of archaeological material (see here). 

We are told the panels "once decorated the floor of a sumptuous Roman villa". Where was that villa?

What is the history of the panels? When did they surface?

The answers to these questions are not provided in the publications of the Michael C. Carlos museum. If they were known, the information would have been stated.

Speed is a member of the AAMD. In 2013 the AAMD revised the Guidelines on the Acquisition of Archaeological Material and Ancient Art (2013) [online]. (Note the loan was post-2008 mentioned in the Guidelines.) The 2008 Guidelines [online] and 2006 Guidelines are also important [online], notably, "Long-term loans should be assessed according to criteria comparable to those for acquisitions" (2006). It continues, "Potential long-term loans (i.e. loans not part of visiting exhibitions) with incomplete relevant provenance histories should be evaluated under criteria comparable to those for acquisitions (see 2004 Report, Section II, E)" [2004 Report].

If this is indeed an ancient mosaic, what is its history? What due diligence has been undertaken, and shown to have been undertaken?

These are important issues especially in the light of the three disputed objects that were acquired by the museum.

The Steinhardt collection and the Medici dossier

Left: Medici Dossier, courtesy of Dr Christos Tsirogiannis
Right: New York State District Attorney Office

Among the antiquities seized from Michael Steinhardt was a Protocorinthian owl that had been acquired in 2009 for $130,000 (see Search Warrant).  A comparison can be found in the Louvre.

The Steinhardt owl appears in the Medici Dossier. How was it acquired by Steinhardt? What was the migration route?

See also the 20th century "imitation" donated to the J. Paul Getty Museum by Jiri Frel in 1979.

I am grateful to Dr Christos Tsirogiannis for sharing the image with me.

Sources for Steinhardt seizure revealed

Attic white ground lekythos
Source: Schinousa Archive

I am grateful to Dr Christos Tsirogiannis for sharing information about the items seized from the collection of Michael Steinhardt and from the displays at Phoenix Ancient Art in Manhattan.

The Attic white-ground lekythos has been identified from images in the Schinousa Archive showing that it was part of the stock of Robin Symes. Notice the deposits still on the lekythos. When was the lekythos cleaned? Who did the cleaning?

The other Steinhardt pieces are identified in the Medici Dossier as well as the Becchina Archive.

The pieces from Phoenix Ancient Art include items identified from the Medici Dossier (at least 3 items) and the Becchina Archive (at least 1 item).

I expect that the routes through which these pieces passed will be revealed shortly.

Phoenix Ancient Art responds to seizures

Source: ARCA

A spokesperson for Phoenix Ancient Art has responded to the seizures of antiquities that took place last week (see Search Warrant listing the items). In a statement to Artnet News ("New York Antiques Dealer Phoenix Fine Art Raided on Suspicion of Selling Looted Artifacts", 11 January 2018) it was stated:

“We immediately notified the US private collection that consigned the works to us of the situation, and we do know that the works have a long museum exhibition history spanning from the Geneva Musée d’art et d’Histoire, 1978–1981, and at the Getty Museum, Los Angeles, 1984–1996.”

The temporary display of recently surfaced antiquities in public museums is an interesting one. How are these documented? What about the display of the Ka Nefer Nefer mummy mask in Geneva? And was the (anonymous?) loan to the J. Paul Getty Museum by a dealer or a collector? This recalls the loan of fragments of the Berlin painter krater, a pot that was subsequently returned to Italy.

Should museums be accepting loans for antiquities that do not have documented and authenticated histories that stretch back to the period before 1970?

North American museums will be aware of The Association of Art Museum Directors Releases New Guidelines on Loans of Antiquities and Ancient Art  (2006) that states "Potential long-term loans (i.e. loans not part of visiting exhibitions) with incomplete relevant provenance histories should be evaluated under criteria comparable to those for acquisitions". This should now be read against Revisions to the 2008 Guidelines on the Acquisition ofArchaeological Material and Ancient Art (2013), and specifically, "Member museums normally should not acquire a Work unless provenance research substantiates that the Work was outside its country of probable modern discovery before 1970 or was legally exported from its probable country of modern discovery after 1970".

Steinhardt collection under scrutiny

The seizures from the Steinhardt collection last week, as well as the connection with the Eshmun sculptures, the Paestan tomb fragment, and the gold phiale from Sicily, means that gifts from that source will now be under scrutiny.

When questions were raised about objects associated with Edoardo Almagià, some museum curators took the matter seriously. Maxwell Anderson, who did so much to address the issue of looting when he was at Emory University, took the initiative and returned a series of objects that had been acquired by the Dallas Museum of Art.

What are the full histories for the objects that have been donated by Steinhardt?

Further seizures in Manhattan

Source: ARCA

Last Friday the New York State District Attorney's Office raided Phoenix Ancient Art in Manhattan and removed six items (see "List of 6 (additional) objects and warrant details on objects seized from Phoenix Ancient Art by New York State District Attorney's Office", ARCA 9 January 2018). The items include Protocorinthian and East Greek perfumed-oil containers, an Attic head jug, and a Teano ware dove. The dove is almost certainly from an Italian context, and the other objects are types frequently found in funerary contexts in Italy. Together the items are valued at $450,000. The objects appear to be the ones noted in the New York Times: "another six pieces on display at the Phoenix Ancient Art Gallery on 66th Street".

The seizure appears to be linked to the case of Steinhardt.

The full histories of the objects have not been disclosed. What is the authenticated documentary history for each of the items? Did each one surface prior to 1970?


I am reminded that this case of seized Steinhardt material can be traced back to December 2014. This is a reminder that dealers should have been aware of the issues in handling material from this source.

Ward and the Balkans in the 1990s

Some years ago I reflected on the Aidonia Treasure and the way that it was displayed by Michael Ward in New York (1993). The treasure was subsequently returned to Greece.

I then wrote about a silver repoussé plaque that surfaced through Ward and Company Works of Art, New York, in the mid-1990s, and three bronze helmeted warriors that appeared in 1998. It has been suggested to me that these items were found with the so-called Koreschnica Krater (although its route to the market has not been disclosed). 

I am intrigued by the extremely rare gold-figured phiale showing Thetis and the armour of Achilles that surfaced through Ward and Company in 1990. Some of the best known examples of gold-figured silver plate were found at Duvanli in Bulgaria.

Where did Ward and Company Works of Art acquire these pieces? What is the authenticated documentary history for them?

Greece commenting on the return of the Steinhardt lekythos

Source: Manhattan District Attorney's Office

The Hellenic Ministry of Culture has issued a press release noting its interest in the Attic white ground lekythos (αττικής λευκής ληκύθου) seized from the collection of Michael Steinhardt last week ("Ενημέρωση σχετικά με την κατάσχεση ελληνικών αρχαιοτήτων στην Νέα Υόρκη", January 7, 2018). Lekythoi such as this are normally found in cemeteries of Attica. 

It appears from the earlier report that the lekythos was among a group of antiquities acquired from William and Lynda Beierwaltes, who are known to have purchased items from Robin Symes.

The Steinhardt oinochoe

The seizure last week of at least 9 antiquities from the collection of Michael Steinhardt raises questions about other items in his collection. I am particularly concerned about an unpublished oinochoe (shape) attributed to the Berlin painter by Robert Guy (although not apparently in the Beazley Archive). It shows a youth with a Maltese dog.

Those who follow these matters will know that pots attributed to the Berlin painter have featured in the returns to Italy, among them an amphora once in New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art (with added fragments from a private collection).

Steinhardt's apparent links with Robin Symes now raise questions about this oinochoe. How was it acquired? When was the attribution made?

Steinhardt seizure in Manhattan

Source: Manhattan District Attorney's Office

It has been reported that at least nine antiquities were seized from the Manhattan apartment of Michael H. Steinhardt (James C. McKinley Jr., "Looted Antiques Seized From Billionaire’s Home, Prosecutors Say", New York Times January 5, 2018). The pieces included:

• a Protocorinthian owl
• a Protocorinthian duck
• an Ionian ram's head
• an Attic white-ground lekythos
• an Attic aryballos
• an Apulian head vase

The Attic lekythos is likely to have come from a funerary context in Attica, and should therefore be linked to activity in Greece. 

Steinhardt has been linked to material from Eshmun in the Lebanon, a gold phiale from Sicily, a tomb fragment from Paestum, a Sardinian figure, and a Faliscan askos. 

Which dealers were the sources for these seized objects? Are these derived from Robin Symes?

The Eulenbruch honorific statue

New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art inv. 2001.443
© David Gill

The history of objects in collections are fascinating: the movement of objects between different owners. This bronze honorific statue was received by the Metropolitan Museum of Art as a partial gift from Renée E. and Robert A. Belfer in 2001, with the remainder in 2010 [online catalogue entry].

The MMA's catalogue entry (2007)  [no. 212] dates the figure to the mid-2nd–1st century BC, and identifies it as an honorific statue of a "prominent" individual. The city where this statue was erected is now unknown, although the online entry (but not the print catalogue) notes that it was "said to have come from Syria". The authority for this statement is not provided.

Paul Zanker, in his Roman Portraits: Sculptures in Stone and Bronze in the Collection of The Metropolitan Museum of Art (2016) no. 3, identifies the figure as an orator and dates it to c. 50–30 BC. Zanker observes that the folds of the drapery contain "many traces of soil" suggesting to him that the figure comes from "an excavation". The so-called excavation is not likely to have been a scientific one, or the statue would have been known. One also wonders why a statue that has been out of the ground for so long is presented as if it is fresh out of the ground. There is no mention of any analysis of the soil that could perhaps have given an indication of the findspot. Zanker suggests that the statue "presumably" was found in "western Turkey or neighbouring Syria". Does Zanker reject the MMA's view that the statue was (said to have been) derived from Syria?

The statue was purchased from Phoenix Ancient Art in 2001, the same year that it was donated (anonymously) to the MMA.

Phoenix Ancient Art has been the source of some other notable pieces:

• The head of Drusus Minor acquired by the Cleveland Museum of Art, and now returned to Italy after it was shown to have been removed from an archaeological store; it had been provided with a history that had placed it in Algeria in the 19th century.
• The Leutwitz Apollo acquired by the Cleveland Museum of Art; the bronze statue had been provided with a history that had placed it in Leutwitz before the Second World War. A discussion of the history can be found here.
• The Egyptian mummy case excavated (and published) at Saqqara in 1952, and was acquired by the St Louis Art Museum; it was provided with a history that placed it in a dealer's gallery in Brussels. The full history can be found here.

It is also important to remember the Etruscan architectural terracotta that was returned to Italy from the Princeton University Art Museum. 

It is claimed both by the MMA's online catalogue entry and in Zanker, that the statue was "Reported to be the property of A. Weber of Eulenbruch, near Cologne, Germany, from the late 1970s". The word reported suggests that there is no actual authenticated evidence that it did indeed come from Herr Weber, otherwise the entry would have said something like this, "Formerly the property of ...". 

The MMA felt that it could make the further acquisition in 2010 as it had received "part" of the statue as a gift in 2001. (See the AAMD Guidelines for 2008.) The exception made was: "The work was accepted as a partial gift in 2001 and has been exhibited publicly since 2007. Such over life-size bronze statues are extremely rare, especially ones of the quality of this piece. It represents a major class of Hellenistic honorific statuary not otherwise represented in the Museum’s collection."

The history of this bronze statue in the period before 2001 appears to be unconfirmed. Should the MMA reveal the nature of its due diligence process prior to the acquisition of the bronze?

Journal of Art Crime 2017: overview

The latest number of the Journal of Art Crime 18 (Fall 2017) has been published. There are a number of papers relating to antiquities:

• Julia Weiler-Esser, The New German Act on the Protection of Cultural Property: A Better Protection For Archaeological Heritage in Germany and Abroad?, pp. 3-10
• Uche Uwaezuoke Okonkwo & Omon Merry Osiki, Global Art Traffi cking and the Nigerian Experience: A Historical Analysis, pp. 51-55
• Christos Tsirogiannis, Nekyia. Unethical Actions, Inactions and Reactions by the Museum and Market Community to the Seizure of the Met’s Python Krater, pp. 65-68.
• David W. J. Gill, Context Matters. Recently surfaced antiquities: ignoring the evidence?, pp. 69-73.
• Jehane Regai, Fake Art on the Rise in Egypt, pp. 75-79.
• Christos Tsirogiannis, The Metropolitan Museum of Art and Illicit Antiquities in New York, p. 81.
• David Gill reviews Tiffany Jenkins, Keeping Their Marbles: How the Treasures of the Past Ended up in Museums … And Why They Should Stay There, pp. 87-90.

London auctions to 2017: Christie's

Unlike the sale of antiquities in New York, Christie's has seen a growth in its sale of antiquities in London. Sales grew from £5.5 million to £7 million in 2017. This is still less than the amount realised in 2014.

However this figure for 2017 is lower than the £7.4 million for Sotheby's in London for the same year.

New York auctions to 2017: Christie's

This is the time of year that I try to give an overview of the auction of antiquities on the New York market (see January 2017). This year I am only returning the sales from Christie's in New York. This is the seventh year of decrease for the sale of antiquities, and the value for 2017 ($8.6 million) is only slightly better than that for 2007 ($7.9 million). This is perhaps reflecting the move of the sale of antiquities from New York back to London, worth some £7.5 million (between Christie's and Sotheby's).

Looting Matters: Looking Ahead to 2018

©David Gill

I attended the APPG on Cultural Property at Westminster in December and it is clear that there will be an increasing emphasis on the protection of cultural property in time of war and conflict. It is clear that the Ministry of Defence is keen to engage with the academic community to understand the potential issues and sensitivities. I anticipate that there will be some additional discussion over archaeological material moving from Syria and northern Iraq to markets in Europe. 

In the UK the DCMS has made it clear that it wants to work more closely with the heritage community (and this will be covered on the companion blog, 'Heritage Futures', co-written with Professor Ian Baxter). The impact of metal-detecting on scheduled and unrecorded sites continues to give some archaeological groups in the UK a cause for concern.

I would be surprised if objects known from the Medici, Becchina and Symes archives do not surface on the antiquities market. These cases now seem to be met with co-operation, perhaps tinged with resignation, by those linked to the market. It would be good to see those in the market adopting a more enhanced due diligence process.

Historic cases can drop of the agenda. It would be good to see the Michael C. Carlos Museum at Emory University negotiating the return of three disputed items with the Hellenic authorities.

There is likely to be renewed emphasis on the intellectual consequences of looting. How does the acquisition of looted archaeological material have an impact on the understanding of the past? This includes work on the problem of forged antiquities.

LM is always grateful to its readers for feedback, suggestions and comments.