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)
The Met returns three antiquities to Iraq
Source: Manhattan DA New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art has returned three antiquities to Iraq ( Manhattan DA Press Release ). The th...
-
Source: Sotheby's A marble head of Alexander the Great has been seized in New York (reported in " Judge Orders Return of Ancien...
-
If international museums can no longer "own" antiquities either through purchase on the antiquities market or through partage , wh...
-
The Fire of Hephaistos exhibition included "seven bronzes ... that have been linked to the Bubon cache of imperial statues" (p. 1...
No comments:
Post a Comment