Antiquities – Page 19 – Illicit Cultural Property

3,000 Object Slated for Return to Italy

Today the FBI and the Berwyn Police Department will hold a news conference announcing the return of 3,000 religious objects, books, and antiquities that were illegally removed from Italy and found in a home in Berwyn. This comes two years after John Sisto’s, the homeowner, died. On Friday the FBI said “many of the items … were determined to have been removed illegally from Italy and will be repatriated to Italian authorities later next week.”

“The house was filled with old books . . . ,” said Berwyn Police Chief William Kushner. “I am told that there are also papal documents dating back to the 13th, 14th and 15th centuries.”

Authorities have been researching the authenticity of the items and trying to determining how Sisto came to have them.

“We can’t question a dead man,” said Kushner. “We are just going to return the items to the Italian authorities.”
Sisto was born in Bari, Italy and immigrated to the United States at 29. After the items were discovered in his home in March 2007, the tidy brick bungalow was under constant protection by police for 15 days.

FBI agents contacted Italian authorities, and agents specializing in stolen art were seen entering the home. Rumors that the Swiss Guards of Vatican City were coming to the working-class suburb to collect their items caused media and neighbors to swarm the block for days, but the Swiss Guards never came.

When he lived in Chicago in 1958, Sisto had complained that someone stole 72 rare books worth $40,000 from the basement of his home. Many of them were later recovered.

He told police the books were given to him by his father, Giuseppe Sisto, a history and geography professor at the University of Bari.

Questions or Comments? Email me at derek.fincham@gmail.com

Stolen Antiquities Recovered With the Help of the Art Loss Register

The Art Loss Register—though not a cure-all for what ails the antiquities trade—is an invaluable tool for the recovery of stolen objects so long as they have been documented and reported. I have received a couple of press releases from the ALR highlighting recent recoveries of antiquities. Though it cannot help aid the recovery of antiquities which have never been documented, it can help in the recovery of stolen antiquities which have been documented and reported missing, underscoring the need I think for museums and nations of origin to do a better job documenting and reporting the stores of objects which they currently have. A couple recent seizures by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) highlight this.

Yesterday ICE announced a wall panel fresco which had been stolen in 1997 was recovered. I found the history of the site interesting:

The panel, rectangular with a white background depicting a female minister, white wash on plaster with a modern wooden frame, was previously located at the excavation office in Pompeii and was reported stolen with five other fresco panels on June 26, 1997.

The investigation revealed that, between 1903 and 1904, the Italian government authorized a farmer, Giuseppe De Martino, to restore his farmhouse, which was located on an archeological site in Boscoreale, province of Naples. During the restoration, six important frescos, originating from Pompeii were found.

On July 12, 1957, the Government of Italy purchased the frescos. On June 26, 1997, after the completion of work to the excavation site, the Italian government observed that the six frescos were missing and subsequently reported the theft.

This follows soon after the recovery of seven Egyptian antiquities which had been stolen from the Bijbels Museum in Amsterdam in 2007:

The investigation received significant help from the Art Loss Register (ALR) of New York, an organization that maintains a database of stolen works of art. The ALR discovered the artifacts at the Manhattan auction house, which turned the artifacts over to the Register and ICE agents.

One of the pieces recovered is a 7-inch-high depiction of a mummy with arms folded over the chest and hoes in each hand. It dates to between 1307 and 1070 B.C. The other recovered artifacts were an bronze figure of Imhotep, artchitect of the first pyramid, and one of Hapokrates, and an Egyptian painted Wood Osiris, all dating as far back as 712 B.C.

“The recovery of these artifacts sends a strong message to thieves that the market to sell stolen antiquities in the United States is freezing up.” said Peter J. Smith, special agent in charge of the ICE Office of Investigations in New York. “ICE is committed to working closely with foreign governments and organizations like the ALR to recover priceless works of art and antiquities so they can be returned to their rightful owners.”

Questions or Comments? Email me at derek.fincham@gmail.com

Voluntary Returns

A couple interesting returns of objects, both of which which appear to be completely voluntary.

First is a letter by Abraham Lincoln:

An extremely valuable letter by Abraham Lincoln dated November 14, 1863 — missing from public records for maybe 100 years — has been donated today by a private collector to the National Archives.

The brief note on Executive Mansion letterhead in the President’s handwriting signed “A.Lincoln” was sent to Treasury Secretary Salmon Chase. It was written five days before Lincoln delivered the Gettysburg Address, providing insight into the president’s regard for a personal friend and his interest in West Coast politics even in the midst of the Civil War.

National Archivists discovered the Lincoln letter being sold online in 2006. It originally had been torn or fallen from an 1880 bound volume of government correspondence to the Treasury Department. There is no evidence that the letter was ever stolen, and how it went missing remains a mystery.

When contacted by Archivists, the letter’s owner, Lawrence Cutler, a private collector in Tempe, Arizona decided to donate it during the bicentennial of Lincoln’s birthday. Cutler would not disclose what he paid for the letter at auction three years ago, but said a similar Lincoln letter sold for $78,000.

The next is a group of objects donated to Eton College, which have been returned to Egypt:

Four sons of Horus, New Kingdom, 19th Dynasty or later after ca 1295 B.C.

LONDON. Eton College, in the south of England, has returned more than 450 antiquities to Egypt, after it was realised that many had probably been illegally exported. Last month we reported that the main part of the school’s collection, bequeathed to the school by Major William Myers in 1899, is going on long-term loan to Birmingham University in the UK and Baltimore’s Johns Hopkins University in the US (The Art Newspaper, May 2009, p7).

The returned antiquities had been donated to Eton over a century later, in 2006, by the family of the late Ron Davey, a London-based Egyptologist. He in turn had received most of them as a bequest from his friend, Peter Webb, who had died in 1992.

When the antiquities arrived at Eton three years ago, they were examined by curator Dr Nicholas Reeves. The donation comprised 454 items, including ushabti figurines, beads and amulets, textile fragments, potsherds, coins and other small objects.

Both the letter and the Egyptian antiquities do not seem to be terribly valuable, but the individual dealer and Eton College have both seemingly unilaterally decided to return the objects to their proper stewards. But one wonders if either the letter or the antiquities are particularly valuable or noteworthy. If they had been, would the decision to return them been more difficult? I think it probably would have been.

Questions or Comments? Email me at derek.fincham@gmail.com

More on Looted Antiquities on Ebay

Mike Boehm has a piece in the LA Times which does a good job following up with Charles Stanish, author of the recent piece in Archaology Magazine discussing looted antiquities on EBay which I discussed earlier here. Stanish argues that the internet is not quite the haven for looted antiquities some may have feared, but instead a substantial amount of the antiquities for sale online are likely fakes. The piece offers a counter to many of Stanish’s assertions, including:

Usher Lieberman, a spokesperson with Ebay:

“We take very seriously any claims that items sold on the site aren’t genuine. . . . This isn’t something we’re hearing a lot about.”

Oscar White Muscarella, an archaeologist:

“The guy who has money and a lust for antiquities is going to buy them . . . What’s going to decrease plundering is not forgeries, it’s only if governments take more action.”

Finally, Jerome M. Eisenberg,owner of the Royal Athena Galleries in New York is quoted in the piece:

“[A]nybody with a decent amount of intelligence isn’t going to buy on EBay unless they know who they’re dealing with.”

Questions or Comments? Email me at derek.fincham@gmail.com

Italian Authorities Showcase Recovered Antiquities

Italian authorities yesterday displayed two medieval frescos and other objects recovered during antiquities investigations reports the AP and ANSA. The medieval frescos were recovered as a part of the investigation into Marion True, which were found at the home of a Greek woman, Despoina Papadimitriou on the island of Schoinoussa in 2006. Also displayed were some of the objects recovered from Operation Phoenix in which “goods were handed over to Italian authorities by two Lebanese brothers who operated a Geneva antiquities gallery.”

More impressive work from the Carabinieri, but will there be an end to the cycle of looting, seizures and arrests?

Questions or Comments? Email me at derek.fincham@gmail.com

More on the Admissions Prices at the Art Institute Chicago

Tyler Green noted last week that the Art Institute Chicago has decided to scale back some of its admissions prices for certain groups of Chicago residents. In doing so he draws some connections between this policy, and the arguments James Cuno has made about the proper place for art and antiquities. I made a similar kind of point last week, and Green argues the rate reductions don’t really sit well with this Cosmopolitan view of heritage:

All of these rollbacks are for Chicago (city) residents only. In other words: For the AIC, providing access to the cultural treasures in its store isn’t a priority… but a quick-sorta-fix for the sake of narrow political expediency was.

That’s kind of ironic given that AIC director Jim Cuno is well-known for arguing that it really doesn’t matter where antiquities are because they’re part of our shared, global cultural heritage. Well, there are tens of thousands of other objects at the AIC that are part of our shared cultural heritage too. It’s too bad that the AIC refuses to make broader public access to those treasures a priority . . .

Questions or Comments? Email me at derek.fincham@gmail.com

Student Note on Restricting the Import of Cypriot Coins

Derek Kelly has written a note Illegal Tender: Antiquities Protection and U.S. Import Restrictions on Cypriot Coinage, 34 Brooklyn Journal of International Law (2009). He argues one of the reasons the United States protects antiquities is because they may be used as a kind of “political” bargaining chip, particularly on the international stage. The author does a nice job discussing the imposition of restrictions on Cypriot coins, and he even digs deeply into many related blogs and other sources highlighting the competing views.

It is a thought provoking piece, and a nice student note. Here’s an extract from the introduction.

In one of the Bush administration’s final acts before leaving office, the United States concluded an agreement with China that banned the import of Chinese antiquities into the United States. This agreement, known as a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”), was the most recent of fourteen bilateral accords the United States has signed with other countries for the avowed purpose of protecting cultural heritage. One important aspect of the new agreement with China is the inclusion of a number of ancient coin-types among the protected materials. This is significant because it is only the second time that an MOU has included coins and demonstrates the increasing breadth of these agreements as the United States attempts to use cultural heritage protection for politicalgain.

The author makes some interesting points, and I think he is certainly right in a sense that many nations use antiquities and heritage policy as a political issue, but of course we could say that about every issue confronting every representative form of government. He takes up James Cuno’s argument that these objects “have political meaning.” I think one aspect of the argument which I would have liked to have seen expanded perhaps is the idea that the U.S. does not really unilaterally impose these restrictions. A nation makes a request, and they have always been granted.

Questions or Comments? Email me at derek.fincham@gmail.com

Presentation at the University of Chicago Cultural Policy Center

The Cultural Policy Center at the University of Chicago has had a terrific speaker series on the antiquities trade this Spring, and I’m excited to get a chance to present a bit of my own work there next Thursday. Here are the details:

Thursday, May 14
3:30 – 5:00 p.m.
Harris School of Public Policy Studies, 1155 E. 60th Street
Room 140C

Ideally, before an individual or institution purchases an antiquity or a work of art, a diligent enquiry into its origins can confer “good faith” status. This allows the buyer to acquire good title and provides the legal right to seek compensation if the seller proves unscrupulous. Despite these important advantages, good faith has been used to promote commercial convenience and economic efficiency at the expense of public enjoyment and understanding of the world’s cultures. Though an existing body of law prohibits and punishes a variety of activities which further the illicit trade, these measures are severely hampered by the mystery surrounding antiquities transactions. At present, details regarding authenticity, title, or even more basic questions such as the origin of an object are intentionally hidden and disguised from public view.

How did a family of art forgers fool both Sotheby’s and the Art Institute of Chicago into believing that they had purchased a work by Paul Gauguin?
Should we hold museums to a higher standard when they acquire works of art and antiquities?
Do countries that over-regulate the export of antiquities actually harm our common cultural heritage by exacerbating the demand for stolen and looted pieces?
Should economic models of art markets account for the preservation of heritage and context?

In order to decrease the theft of antiquities and looting of archaeological sites and increase the effectiveness of existing legal measures, we need a new theoretical foundation for increased scrutiny of the antiquities trade. When an object is acquired without a rigorous due diligence process, that acquisition defrauds our heritage by distorting the archaeological record; harms the legitimate acquisition of antiquities; perverts the important role museums play in society; and ultimately warps the understanding of our common cultural heritage.

Questions or Comments? Email me at derek.fincham@gmail.com

Iraq Troops Recover Antiquities

From Bloomberg:

Iraqi commandos smashed a smuggling ring, recovering 235 looted Babylonian and Sumerian artifacts that they turned over to the Tourism and Antiquities Ministry.

The soldiers arrested a gang of seven thieves who were preparing to smuggle the objects outside of Iraq, according to a statement e-mailed today by the U.S. military in Baghdad. They were tipped off by residents in the southern Iraqi towns of Abu al-Kahsib, Bab al-Tawael and al-Amir.

Among the artifacts presented to the ministry in a ceremony this week were gold jewelry, ceramics and stone figurines, the military said. They weren’t marked with museum serial numbers, suggesting they were illegally dug up from one of Iraq’s estimated 40,000 archeological sites.

“The Iraqi Army is putting extraordinary pressure on smuggling gangs that steal Iraq’s history to finance terrorist operations,” Defense Minister Abd al-Qadir said in the statement. “The recovery of the artifacts was a joyous occasion because they could not be replaced with money and represented 5,000 years of Iraqi history.”

Questions or Comments? Email me at derek.fincham@gmail.com

"Appropriating the Past: the uses and abuses of cultural heritage"

To inaugurate the new Durham University Centre for the Ethics of Cultural Heritage, there will be a “multi-disciplinary conference” to be held at Durham University, UK from the 6th-8th of July. Here is the description:

This two-day conference should be of wide appeal to archaeologists, anthropologists, philosophers, lawyers and others with an interest in the ethical principles and problems associated with the concept of cultural heritage. The meeting will open with four invited lectures to introduce the conference theme and relate it to the specific aims and methods of the new Centre.

In recent years, the right of archaeologists to erect ‘Keep Out’ signs around what they conceive of as the archaeological record has come under increasing challenge from other interest groups which may assert equal or superior rights to access, utilise and manage those remains, or to determine their significance. So a decorated bronze vessel which for an archaeologist is primarily a source of information to be extracted by academically approved methods may be, to other eyes, a sacred or tabooed object, an anchor of social or cultural identity, a work of art, or a legitimate source of hard cash. These different perceptions correspond to different forms of appropriating the past, and they can give rise to sharp practical conflicts.

This conference will explore some of the key ethical issues raised by the competing modes in which archaeologists and others appropriate the past. These include: rights to interpret the past and tell stories about it; handling the sacred; the concept and ethics of birthright; local versus national versus international rights over sites, antiquities and artefacts; roles and responsibilities of museums; duties/rights of international intervention to defend antiquities; study and custodianship of human remains; looting and the antiquities trade; the economic exploitation of sites and resources; duties of preservation for future generations; the use of destructive research techniques; the roles of codes of ethics and of legal frameworks.

Keynote Speakers

Professor James O. Young (Philosophy, University of Victoria, Canada)
Professor Robert Layton (Anthropology, Durham University, UK)
Dr John Curtis OBE (Keeper, Dept. of Middle East, British Museum, UK)

Ms Janet Ulph (Law, Durham University, UK).

Questions or Comments? Email me at derek.fincham@gmail.com