The statement by the EES that some 120 papyri fragments from its collection are missing is raising concerns in the academic community. 19 of the fragments have been identified in a public museum and a private collection in North America, and these will apparently be returned to the EES.
There are questions that need to be answered. What authenticated documentation was supplied with the sale of the papyri? What due diligence was undertaken? Who had access to the EES collection?
why has the acquisition of papyri fragments been seen as different from that of antiquities? Are they not seen as part of the archaeological record?
Discussion of the archaeological ethics surrounding the collecting of antiquities and archaeological material.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
An inscription from Kos
In 1983 the J. Paul Getty received the anonymous donation of a Greek inscription from Antimachia on Kos (J. Walsh, "Acquisitions/1983...


-
Christie's is due to display part of the former collection of the late George Ortiz in London in a non-selling show to mark the 25th a...
-
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...
-
It was announced today that the Egyptian authorities would be taking legal action against Christie's over the sale of the head of Tuta...

No comments:
Post a Comment