Showing posts with label Smithsonian. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Smithsonian. Show all posts
Richard Doty, Smithsonian Curator and Collector, Passes Away
Coins Weekly has reported on the passing of Richard Doty, the senior numismatic curator at the Smithsonian Institution. The well-deserved tributes will focus on Dr. Doty's scholarship, but I also think it's worth noting that Dr. Doty was also a fixture at coin shows in the Washington, D.C. area. Like his predecessor, Elvira Clain-Stefanelli, Dr. Doty was both a scholar and a collector. I'm sure he will be much missed.
Roads of Arabia at the Sackler
Today, Saudi Arabia is known as the religious center for the world's Muslims and the World's major supplier of petroleum products. In past times, however, the Arabian Peninsula was known for the trade in incense and copper. The Sackler has organized an excellent exhibit that focuses on Arabia's early cultures, but also touches on Saudi Arabia's more recent Islamic past. Some of the more interesting objects include anthropomorphic steles and altars from the 4th C. B.C. as well as some classical Greek and Roman objects that were imported in trade.
Kudos to the Sackler, the Saudi Government, Exxon Mobile and Saudi Aramco for arranging this excellent exhibit of unusual artifacts from the Arabian Peninsula. I'm only sorry that there were no early coins on display from the pre-Islamic period.
Kudos to the Sackler, the Saudi Government, Exxon Mobile and Saudi Aramco for arranging this excellent exhibit of unusual artifacts from the Arabian Peninsula. I'm only sorry that there were no early coins on display from the pre-Islamic period.
Archaeological Lobby Sinks Sackler Exhibit
The archaeological lobby has succeeded in sinking an exhibit at the Sackler Gallery that would have given the American public an opportunity to learn something about early international trade routes in the Orient. See
http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/sackler-gallery-cancels-controversial-exhibit-of-tang-dynasty-treasures-from-shipwreck/2011/12/15/gIQAnlyjwO_story.html?wprss=rss_style
The exhibit was supposedly sunk because the excavation work was not up to professional standards-- though one suspects that the real reason was to appease archaeologists who have little use for commercial salvers, whether contracted by a foreign government or not.
I've previously covered this dispute here:
http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/06/smithsonian-caves-on-shiprwreck-exhibit.html and http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/06/none-of-their-business-ii.html
For a thoughtful critique of the archaeological establishment's views on this topic, See http://www.culturalheritagelaw.org/blog?mode=PostView&bmi=711550
Supposedly, the plan now is to "re-excavate the wreck" using AIA approved archaeologists no doubt. But money has to be raised first. Hopefully, taxpayer dollars won't be tapped for such project, but it will not surprise me if the US Government is ultimately expected to foot the bill for what probably is little more at this point than a vanity project.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/sackler-gallery-cancels-controversial-exhibit-of-tang-dynasty-treasures-from-shipwreck/2011/12/15/gIQAnlyjwO_story.html?wprss=rss_style
The exhibit was supposedly sunk because the excavation work was not up to professional standards-- though one suspects that the real reason was to appease archaeologists who have little use for commercial salvers, whether contracted by a foreign government or not.
I've previously covered this dispute here:
http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/06/smithsonian-caves-on-shiprwreck-exhibit.html and http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/06/none-of-their-business-ii.html
For a thoughtful critique of the archaeological establishment's views on this topic, See http://www.culturalheritagelaw.org/blog?mode=PostView&bmi=711550
Supposedly, the plan now is to "re-excavate the wreck" using AIA approved archaeologists no doubt. But money has to be raised first. Hopefully, taxpayer dollars won't be tapped for such project, but it will not surprise me if the US Government is ultimately expected to foot the bill for what probably is little more at this point than a vanity project.
Smithsonian Caves on Shiprwreck Exhibit
The New York Times reports that the Smithsonian Institution has indefinitely postponed its plans to mount an exhibition of Chinese artifacts salvaged from a shipwreck because of opposition from archaeologists who say the objects were collected by a commercial treasure hunter in a manner that violated professional standards. See http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/28/shipwreck-show-postponed/
The Smithsonian has a long history of caving into various interest groups so this is not a surprise. But it is an unfortunate decision nonetheless.
The public could have learned something useful about early international trade whether or not the exhibit met the stringent standards of some in the archaeological community.
If the material cannot be exhibited as a group, perhaps it should be sold off wholesale to collectors just to annoy these archaeological purists.
The Smithsonian has a long history of caving into various interest groups so this is not a surprise. But it is an unfortunate decision nonetheless.
The public could have learned something useful about early international trade whether or not the exhibit met the stringent standards of some in the archaeological community.
If the material cannot be exhibited as a group, perhaps it should be sold off wholesale to collectors just to annoy these archaeological purists.
None of their Business II
The AIA has issued a manifesto condemning the Smtihsonian for planning to exhibit artifacts from the Belitung shipwreck. See http://www.archaeological.org/news/advocacy/5260
As stated previously on this blog, the archaeological community has been fond of saying at CPAC meetings and elsewhere that it is no business of others to lecture source countries on how to manage their cultural resources.
But, apparently, all that goes out the window when the AIA hierarchy issues pronouncements about public-private partneships to salvage wrecks.
For more, see http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/search/label/Indonesia and
http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/04/none-of-their-business.html
For the Smithsonian's view of the controversy, see
http://www.asia.si.edu/exhibitions/SW-CulturalHeritage.asp
As stated previously on this blog, the archaeological community has been fond of saying at CPAC meetings and elsewhere that it is no business of others to lecture source countries on how to manage their cultural resources.
But, apparently, all that goes out the window when the AIA hierarchy issues pronouncements about public-private partneships to salvage wrecks.
For more, see http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/search/label/Indonesia and
http://ordinarymag.blogspot.com/2011/04/none-of-their-business.html
For the Smithsonian's view of the controversy, see
http://www.asia.si.edu/exhibitions/SW-CulturalHeritage.asp
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.
Archaeologists Seek to Sink Indonesian Treasure Exhibit
For years, archaeologists have taken the position at CPAC hearings that Americans have no right to lecture foreign countries about how their legal systems treat cultural property. Apparently, however, this does not extend to places like Indonesia, which allows commercial treasure hunters to exploit wrecks as long as they also record their findings.
See
http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2011/03/smithsonian-shipwreck-exhibit.html?ref=hp Archaeologists hope the exhibit will be cancelled because the Indonesian government partnered with commercial treasure hunters rather than funding some university to do the work.
The exhibit itself should be interesting. The artifacts provide a testament to the extensive international trade in Chinese goods during the Tang period. See
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/08/arts/08iht-singshow08.html?_r=1 I for one hope it makes it to the Smithsonian.
See
http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2011/03/smithsonian-shipwreck-exhibit.html?ref=hp Archaeologists hope the exhibit will be cancelled because the Indonesian government partnered with commercial treasure hunters rather than funding some university to do the work.
The exhibit itself should be interesting. The artifacts provide a testament to the extensive international trade in Chinese goods during the Tang period. See
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/08/arts/08iht-singshow08.html?_r=1 I for one hope it makes it to the Smithsonian.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)