A new website has appeared in the blogosphere called "Art You Will Never See." The website highlights the "orphan artifacts" problem created by the AAMD's recently adopted 1970 Rule for acquisitions.
According to the website,
ART YOU WILL NEVER SEE seeks to advance public education and understanding of issues affecting museums with particular respect to the collecting, conserving, displaying and publication of cultural artifacts. It is the specific purpose of this website to help the public understand what the AAMD�s rule-making means, It is the hope of ART YOU WILL NEVER SEE that the objects shown on these pages will underscore the importance of the orphans issue and point the way toward change in guidelines that were enacted by an organization with little understanding of their consequences.
The objects shown here need few words. The images speak for themselves. Historically or artistically, all are of exceptional importance. If they were offered today, however, even as a donation, the AAMD says they should be rejected by the art museums of America. They are only tip of the iceberg, however: beneath them lies an extraordinary depth and breadth of material in private hands that you will, now, never see in an American museum.
Showing posts with label Provenance information. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Provenance information. Show all posts
New Work on Etruscan Coinage
I'm looking forward to coin dealer and scholar Italo Vecchi's new work about the enigmatic coinage of the Etruscan city states. I understand that Lord Renfrew collects this series. One wonders if all Lord Renfrew's coins have a demonstrable provenance back to at least 1970.
Object Registry Fragment Foolishness
Archaeo-Blogger David Gill wants more details of the Met�s 10,000 or so vase fragments placed en masse on the AAMD�s object registry. Presumably Gill wants each pictured separately to facilitate detailed study of their potential origin so additional pieces can be repatriated to Italy or perhaps Greece or Turkey. But why should the AAMD�s procedures be the same for the $10,000,000 artifact as for the $10 artifact? Gill�s confidant Nathan Elkins has already recognized that coins�given the sheer numbers that have survived-- should not be treated as the AIA treats other artifacts. Gill should give vase fragments the same break.
Peru Wants Artifacts that Left Country after 1822
Peru has asked French authorities to stop an auction of Peruvian artifacts that left the country years ago. Sotheby's used to auction off such material in New York, but U.S. import restrictions on pre-Colombian art has driven that business overseas.
President Sarkozy made a concerted effort to increase France's share of the auction business. Perhaps, the Peruvian Government is hoping that France's current "soak the rich" Socialists will be more amenable to repatriation demands, however stale the claim.
Whether French authorities take the Peruvian claim seriously or not, all this is just more evidence that museums and others were snookered into accepting a 1970 date for acquisitions of artifacts. If they thought such a concession would quiet repatriation demands, they were very, very wrong. If anything, such concessions have only encouraged further demands-- the slippery slope rule applies yet again.
President Sarkozy made a concerted effort to increase France's share of the auction business. Perhaps, the Peruvian Government is hoping that France's current "soak the rich" Socialists will be more amenable to repatriation demands, however stale the claim.
Whether French authorities take the Peruvian claim seriously or not, all this is just more evidence that museums and others were snookered into accepting a 1970 date for acquisitions of artifacts. If they thought such a concession would quiet repatriation demands, they were very, very wrong. If anything, such concessions have only encouraged further demands-- the slippery slope rule applies yet again.
NYT on Orphan Artifacts
The New York Times has published an article on so-called orphan artifacts without the long collection histories increasingly required by museums and high end auction houses based on pressure from the archaeological community.
Given all their finger wagging, the New York Times should also have queried archaeologists about the quality of the record keeping on the millions of artifacts in the inventories of archaeological digs and source country museums around the world.
Given all their finger wagging, the New York Times should also have queried archaeologists about the quality of the record keeping on the millions of artifacts in the inventories of archaeological digs and source country museums around the world.
AIA Young Patrons Treated to Undocumented Coins at ANS
AIA Young Patrons have been treated to a visit of the ANS and its vast collection of ancient coins, which includes hundreds of thousands undocumented coins of the sort the AIA has condemned before the State Department's Cultural Property Advisory Committee. See http://www.archaeological.org/news/aianews/8634
The ANS only exists because of the generous contributions of collectors and dealers, though archaeologists associated with the AIA have also condemned them as no better than looters.
Yet, condemning collectors and dealers has not stopped the AIA from profiting from the ANS' wonderful collection of unprovenanced coins.
Hopefully, the more inquisitive of the AIA's young patrons will question the hypocrisy of the the AIA's actions.
Or, perhaps, this experience will be treated as a bit of a "guilty pleasure."
The ANS only exists because of the generous contributions of collectors and dealers, though archaeologists associated with the AIA have also condemned them as no better than looters.
Yet, condemning collectors and dealers has not stopped the AIA from profiting from the ANS' wonderful collection of unprovenanced coins.
Hopefully, the more inquisitive of the AIA's young patrons will question the hypocrisy of the the AIA's actions.
Or, perhaps, this experience will be treated as a bit of a "guilty pleasure."
Egypt: No "Emergency" After All, Just More Exaggeration
Less than a month after Egyptian Antiquities Pharaoh Zahi Hawass suggested on his blog that archaeo-lobbyists of the "Capitol Archaeological Institute" had been given agreement authority by the US State Department to draft a MOU imposing "emergency import restrictions" on Egyptian cultural goods, see
http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/05/hawass-says-emergency-import.html, Hawass has blogged that there really is no "emergency" in Egypt after all. See http://www.drhawass.com/blog/can-egypt-protect-its-ancient-monuments
Hawass now states, " I have been distressed by recent reports that exaggerate the damage done to our antiquities...."
And so am I, but for different reasons.
This again just goes to show that archaeologists are simply not credible sources when it comes to reports of looting in countries where the facts are difficult to verify. Archaeologists have previously exaggerated looting in places like Afghanistan and Iraq to justify emergency import restrictions. Here, they have apparently done so again-- this despite Minister Hawass' own view that the situation is under control.
Emergency import restrictions are unnecessary here. Egyptian and US authorities are well able to interdict looted artifacts.
But archaeological fanatics want more: they see import restrictions as a way to drive unprovenanced artifacts off the market in the United States, at least.
And ginning up an "emergency" is their best way to assist their cronies in the State Department's Cultural Heritage Center to get the job done. Based on their exaggerations, yet another collecting area will likely become off limits to all those but the wealthy who can afford to purchase the limited number of artifacts with detailed collecting histories.
http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/05/hawass-says-emergency-import.html, Hawass has blogged that there really is no "emergency" in Egypt after all. See http://www.drhawass.com/blog/can-egypt-protect-its-ancient-monuments
Hawass now states, " I have been distressed by recent reports that exaggerate the damage done to our antiquities...."
And so am I, but for different reasons.
This again just goes to show that archaeologists are simply not credible sources when it comes to reports of looting in countries where the facts are difficult to verify. Archaeologists have previously exaggerated looting in places like Afghanistan and Iraq to justify emergency import restrictions. Here, they have apparently done so again-- this despite Minister Hawass' own view that the situation is under control.
Emergency import restrictions are unnecessary here. Egyptian and US authorities are well able to interdict looted artifacts.
But archaeological fanatics want more: they see import restrictions as a way to drive unprovenanced artifacts off the market in the United States, at least.
And ginning up an "emergency" is their best way to assist their cronies in the State Department's Cultural Heritage Center to get the job done. Based on their exaggerations, yet another collecting area will likely become off limits to all those but the wealthy who can afford to purchase the limited number of artifacts with detailed collecting histories.
Smithsonian Magazine Now Under Attack
Archaeo-bloggers Gill and Barford now have Smithsonian Magazine in their sights for publishing pictures of undocumented Mayan artifacts. See
http://lootingmatters.blogspot.com/2011/06/publishing-recently-surfaced-mayan-pots.html
and http://paul-barford.blogspot.com/2011/06/looted-pots-in-smithsonian-magazine.html
This is yet more overkill. The AIA's policy against publication of undocumented artifacts was originally meant to ensure that papers were properly documented from a scientific perspective. But Smithsonian Magazine is meant for a general audience. And, as a subscriber, I'm happy Smithsonian does not limit its illustrations only to artifacts from documented archaeological excavations.
http://lootingmatters.blogspot.com/2011/06/publishing-recently-surfaced-mayan-pots.html
and http://paul-barford.blogspot.com/2011/06/looted-pots-in-smithsonian-magazine.html
This is yet more overkill. The AIA's policy against publication of undocumented artifacts was originally meant to ensure that papers were properly documented from a scientific perspective. But Smithsonian Magazine is meant for a general audience. And, as a subscriber, I'm happy Smithsonian does not limit its illustrations only to artifacts from documented archaeological excavations.
AIA Gala-- Are the AIA's Donors Informed of the AIA's Postions on Collecting?
The AIA's annual gala has attracted the notice of the Wall Street Journal:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704187604576289372374487528.html#articleTabs%3Darticle
Such events underscore the elitist nature of the organization, something that carries over to the AIA's approach to ancient artifacts: small time collectors and the small businesses of the coin and antiquities trade are vilified. Meanwhile, collectors wealthy enough to afford high end antiquities with demonstrable provenances back to 1970 attract little criticism-- particularly if they give money to support archaeological research.
Still, one wonders to what extent the AIA's donors are informed of the AIA's position that unprovenanced antiquities should be deemed stolen.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704187604576289372374487528.html#articleTabs%3Darticle
Such events underscore the elitist nature of the organization, something that carries over to the AIA's approach to ancient artifacts: small time collectors and the small businesses of the coin and antiquities trade are vilified. Meanwhile, collectors wealthy enough to afford high end antiquities with demonstrable provenances back to 1970 attract little criticism-- particularly if they give money to support archaeological research.
Still, one wonders to what extent the AIA's donors are informed of the AIA's position that unprovenanced antiquities should be deemed stolen.
Cut and Paste Journalism at the Huffington Post?
Archaeo-Blogger Paul Barford and friends are busily promoting Daniel Grant's advocacy piece on the Huffington Post as yet another "well written" expose of the antiquities trade, museums and the need for provenance research. See http://paul-barford.blogspot.com/2011/04/antiquities-only-area-of-art-world-that.html and http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-grant/antiquities-collecting-due-diligence_b_844838.html
The article features such luminaries from the archaeological world as Clemency Coggins, Ricardo Elia, and Professor Patty Gerstenblith.
Writers of such advocacy nonetheless often also contact representatives from the "other side"of an issue to give the piece "balance." And so Grant appears to have done based on the quotes from attorney Bill Pearlstein, who according to the article represents "the National Association of Dealers in Ancient and Oriental Art." There is, however, one problem. When I forwarded the article to Bill Pearlstein, he indicated he did not recall speaking to Grant. And, he has not represented the National Association of Dealers in Ancient, Oriental and Primitive Art for some five years. Is it possible that Grant used an old quote from somewhere else to provide perceived balance?
The article features such luminaries from the archaeological world as Clemency Coggins, Ricardo Elia, and Professor Patty Gerstenblith.
Writers of such advocacy nonetheless often also contact representatives from the "other side"of an issue to give the piece "balance." And so Grant appears to have done based on the quotes from attorney Bill Pearlstein, who according to the article represents "the National Association of Dealers in Ancient and Oriental Art." There is, however, one problem. When I forwarded the article to Bill Pearlstein, he indicated he did not recall speaking to Grant. And, he has not represented the National Association of Dealers in Ancient, Oriental and Primitive Art for some five years. Is it possible that Grant used an old quote from somewhere else to provide perceived balance?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)