Can the Hopi Thwart the Sale of Sacred Objects in Paris Next Week?

A Hopi helmet representing the Crow Mother (more slides via NYT)

Next week the Néret-Minet auction house in Paris will auction a number of Hopi objects, many of which are more than 100 years old, and many of which are considered sacred. Leigh J. Kuwanwisiwma, director of the Hopi Cultural Preservation Office in Kykotsmovi, Arizona says of the objects: "Sacred items like this should not have a commercial value. . . . The bottom line is we believe they were taken illegally.”

The auction house claims that the objects were purchased as early as the 1930's, and that all the objects were sold as long ago as the 1960's.

Tom Mashberg reports for the New York Times that:

Historians say many Hopi artifacts were taken long ago by people who found them unattended in shrines and on altars along the mesas of the Southwest. Others were confiscated by missionaries who came to convert the tribe in the late 19th century. Some were sold by tribe members. But even those sales were not legitimate, Hopi leaders say, because they may have been made under duress, and because the tribe holds that an individual cannot hold title to its religious artifacts — they are owned communally.

This of course is why many of these objects were acquired in the last century. The Hopi have a fundamentally different view of property and sacred objects. They have a communal relationship to these objects. When that view of objects is linked with western legal systems, the results can be messy. But I think there are a number of legal challenges that can be made to the auction of these objects.

Possible action could include an action for the recovery of stolen property. The Hopi would have to establish that they have a relationship to these objects that is sufficient to allow a French court to deny the sale. Or the United States government could intervene and protest the sale on the grounds some of the objects were removed from Federal or tribal lands and are considered stolen under the Archaeological Resources Protection Act. But the difficulty with both of those legal options is the problem of proof.

The best chance for a quick resolution to the sale may be to generate enough headaches for the auction house, the consignor, and any potential buyers. The New York Times piece will help raise the profile for the auction, but it will also require some vocal and I'm sorry to say expensive, actions on the part of the Hopi or their advocates.

In a case like this, it is true that seldom have we seen works of art from the United States exported and sold in a way which upsets the creator culture. If the market for Native American art continues to be this robust, it may take more concerted action on the part of the Federal government to intervene. I don't think this is an issue of uneven application of international cultural heritage law, much of which is soft. The reporting and some reaction seems to suggest the U.S. does a better job of helping foreign nations in their efforts to repatriate. I don't get the sense that that is right. Rather I'm not sure we have a good robust set of tools to seek repatriation from abroad when it is warranted. And there are a number of reasons for that. For one, I don't think Native American tribes have been confronted with this problem very often either because it didn't happen or they weren't aware. But also we don't have a good organized cultural apparatus in the United States. We rely on lots of very capable Museums and other organizations. But in the case of international repatriation. It really helps to have an active and organized set of voices acting in concert. We just don't have that in the United States. So there are challenges for the Hopi here, but other similar groups have shown that patient and persistent appeal to reason can impact the disposition of these objects.

Mashberg, Tom. “Hopi Tribe Wants to Stop Paris Auction of Artifacts.” The New York Times, April 3, 2013, sec. Arts / Art & Design.

A Hollow Victory for Mexico in the Barbier-Mueller Sale

Lot 137, which did sell,
for 2,001,500 Euro

On Friday and Saturday in Paris Sotheby's auctioned a number of allegedly Pre-Columbian objects from the Barbier-Mueller collection.

Nord Wennerstrom reports that many of the lots sold for less than the low estimate, and 79 of 151 lots failed to sell. His take: the auction ended as "inauspiciously as it began". Sotheby's lists its sale results here.

The auction generated considerable interest last week. In anticipation of the sale Mexican officials protested and noted: "Of the 130 objects advertised as being from Mexico, 51 are archaeological artifacts that are (Mexican) national property, and the rest are handicrafts". In this case "handicrafts" is a very polite way of pointing out that some of the objects are fakes or forgeries. In this case the sale continued, but the considerable notoriety surrounding the sale certainly diminished the market value of these objects, and in many cases made these objects too toxic perhaps for some buyers.

French diplomats last week did not intervene in the sale noting that none of the objects had appeared on the Interpol database, or the "red list" published by the International Council of Museums.

Sotheby's Paris on its website stated the collect was started in 1920 by Jose Mueller. His son-in-law Jean Paul Barbier-Mueller broadened the collection. Sotheby's described Barbier-Mueller as "a great aesthete and man of culture".

Here's an extended quote from the overview given by Sotheby's:

In 1908 and 1909 Josef Mueller acquired major works by Hodler and Cézanne in Paris. While initially focusing on Western masterpieces of universal appeal, he soon became attracted by important works of Pre-Columbian art, his first purchase being an Aztec ‘water goddess’ in Paris in 1920. His son-in-law Jean Paul Barbier-Mueller, a great aesthete and man of culture, brought this high standard of collecting to other fields, such as African Art, Oceanic Art and Cycladic Art. His dedicated focus has resulted in the well-deserved reputation for excellence that the collections have today. Mr. Barbier-Mueller and his wife Monique Barbier-Mueller (Josef Mueller’s daughter), who has pursued modern and contemporary art, have achieved one of the foremost collections of art in private hands, one defined by their sophisticated knowledge and refined eye.

Some of this collection had been in existence since the early part of the 20th century. But not all of it. In a case like this, Mexico and other nations of origin have a limited range of options here. Their best way to attack the sale of these objects is exactly what it did. Make a public protest over the sale, and enlist the power of the press to reduce the market value of these under-provenanced objects. We are unsure now what will happen to the objects which did not sell. Contrast this situation with what might have happened had this auction occurred in the United States.

Increasingly unprovenanced objects are being regulated by Federal prosecutors, at least in New York and St. Louis. We certainly don't know if a forfeiture would have happened in this case, or indeed if that was even a consideration in the decision to sell these objects in Paris rather than New York. But it is yet another example of the complex web of legal rules and norms which apply to the antiquities trade.

1. Mark Stevenson, Mexico demands Sotheby’s halt auction of artifacts, The Washington Post, March 23, 2013, http://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/mexico-demands-sothebys-halt-auction-of-artifacts/2013/03/21/e5d18316-9274-11e2-bdea-e32ad90da239_story.html (last visited Mar 25, 2013).
2. Mike Boehm, Mexico trying to stop antiquities sale at Sotheby’s in Paris, Los Angeles Times, March 22, 2013, http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/culture/la-et-cm-mexico-wants-to-stop-sothebys-precolumbian-art-auction-20130321,0,5085665.story?track=rss (last visited Mar 25, 2013).

France Seizes Painting Stolen in 1818

Christ Carrying the Cross, Nicolas Tournier

The owner of Weiss Gallery in London is in "complete shock" after officials from the French ministry of culture have refused to allow The Carrying of the Cross, by Nicolas Tournier to be taken from France back to England. The gallery purchased the painting at a Maastricht art fair last year for 400,000 Euros. The gallery took it to a small old master art fair in Paris called Paris Tableau, but France has now detained the work of art.

Mark Weiss, the owner of the gallery stated "I've been in communication with the director of the Toulouse museum since I acquired the painting in 2010, and at no stage has he ever stated that the picture was a stolen painting." The work originally hung in a chapel in Toulouse, but during the French Revolution the work was confiscated and moved to a museum. It was then apparently stolen from a museum in 1818. It would be interesting to know more about what those conversations were like between Weiss and the Toulouse museum.

France has argued this is the rediscovery of a long-lost work, yet it was stolen nearly two centuries ago. Have there been persistent claims for its return? I'm not sure. It is difficult to envision the French have the legal right to seize the painting so long after its theft. They do have the de facto power perhaps to temporarily detain the work, and make life very difficult for the gallery owner. Any experts in the area of French law care to offer any opinions? The newspaper accounts have merely focused on the seizure, without diving into the merits.

1. AFP: British gallery rejects France’s claim to painting, (2011) (last visited Nov 9, 2011).

Is an Electrician the greatest Picasso Thief?

Pierre Le Guennec and his wife

It would be hard to top 271. Police in France have charged a man and his wife with selling 271 stolen Picassos. He claims Picasso gave them as a gift:

Pierre Le Guennec, 71, was caught and sued along with his wife when he contacted the late Spanish painter's estate seeking to authenticate the works, which he had kept in his garage for nearly 40 years, Le Monde newspaper said.

The local public prosecutors's office declined to confirm the report to AFP and Le Guennec and his lawyer could not be reached for comment.

The report said Le Guennec claimed Picasso and his wife and muse Jacqueline had personally given him the works when he was working at their farmhouse in Mougins, not far from his own home in Mouans-Sartoux, southeastern France.

Investigators found however that some of the works -- which include collages, sketches and prints -- disappeared from another location, Le Monde said. They seized the works and charged the couple with handling stolen goods.

Another Theft in Marseille

Another theft in France, this time from a private residence in Marseille.  Five works, including a Picasso lithograph were stolen in a violent theft.  The owner was assaulted during the robbery.  Reports indicate that two men managed to get past the home's security gates and take the works.  Mark Durney asks:  "Was this theft inspired by the audacious theft from Paris's Museum of Modern Art?"

1. Art thieves strike in Marseille, BBC, May 22, 2010, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/europe/10142303.stm (last visited May 24, 2010).

Five Important Works Stolen from Paris Musee d'Art Moderne

L'Olivier pres de l'Estaque, Georges Braque, 1906

 Very early this morning in Paris a thief stole these five works from the Musee d'Art Moderne near the Eiffel Tower.  CCTV cameras have reportedly caught one person breaking through a window.  Lots of figures will be thrown around about the value of these paintings, as for the reasons for the theft.  The value estimates are very rough, ranging already from 100-500 million Euro.  Yet these works can never be sold in a legitimate market, so in one sense their market value means little.  They have a kind of value in that they are so precious, museum and the authorities may be willing to take—or at least the thief thinks they will take—the unwise step of paying a ransom.  Or other criminals may try to launder some or all of the works through different individuals, in much the same way the Leonardo Yarnwinder was transferred. 

Why were the works stolen?  There are many reasons, but the simplest one may be the the most likely.  It is really not that hard, despite the loss we all suffer when works are damaged or lost forever. 

La Pastorale, Henri Matisse, 1906

Nature Mort au Chandelier, Fernand Léger, 1922

The Pigeon with Peas, Pablo Picasso, 1911-12

La femme a l'eventail, Amadeo Modigliani

1. The Paris art theft has robbed us of some truly great paintings | Jonathan Jones | Art and design | guardian.co.uk, (2010), http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2010/may/20/paris-art-theft-picasso-matisse (last visited May 20, 2010).
2. Catherine Hickley & Craig A. Copetas, Picasso, Matisse Paintings Stolen From Paris Museum - Bloomberg, http://preview.bloomberg.com/news/2010-05-20/picasso-matisse-modigliani-paintings-worth-123-million-stolen-in-paris.html (last visited May 20, 2010).
3. AFP: Thief lifts 500 mln euros of art from Paris museum, , http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5irIRZ91WXBYeoJF1elwGm7XVV4Eg (last visited May 20, 2010).

France Decides to Return Tatood Maori Remains

Last week the French National Assembly made the decision to return the mummified heads of 16 Maoris.  Maoris kept the tatooed heads and preserved them to honor their forebears.  When Europeans encountered these, many of the heads were taken back to Europe and put on display in museums.  New Zealand has requested these heads—as many as 500 heads may have been taken by colonial powers—since the 1980's, but the issue gained widespread attention in 2007 when a city council voted to return one head.  The decision was overturned by the French Culture Ministry in part because these objects had ceased to become only human remains but had also become works of art.  The French Assembly has overwhelmingly decided to return the heads to New Zealand within the next year. 

1. Maori Heads - Top 10 Famous Stolen Body Parts - TIME, http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1988719_1988728_1988720,00.html (last visited May 14, 2010).
2. France to return 15 Maori heads, BBC, May 5, 2010, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8661231.stm (last visited May 14, 2010).
3. AFP: French parliament votes to return Maori heads to New Zealand, , http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jtL1CzbXXwAe2W9N6IedQHuTPawg (last visited May 14, 2010).

Auction Houses and the Sale of Heritage

"You have to know the dirty tricks, there are dirty tricks".


So says Claude Pariset an antiques dealer from Champagne, discussing the art trade in the New York Times yesterday. 

A number of recent stories of this ilk continue to show why the auction house system of the sale of art and antiquities, with its anonymous sellers and buyers has had devastating consequences on our heritage.  As I've argued, these auction houses play an important role in the market, know exactly what they are doing, and yet the anonymity continues to shield their practices, and allow for the sale of looted and stolen pieces of heritage. 

First, an update on the wrongdoing at the Hôtel Drouot auction house in Paris.  Late last year French authorities had uncovered stolen artworks, and an art-trafficking network.  Now there are further reports of corruption, including faking bids, collusion to keep prices down, and theft as well. 

This comes as Bonham's auction house tries to find some antiquities to sell in its auction today.  It has withdrawn a marble statue which was included amongst the notorious Medici polaroids. It has also withdrawn some Roman funerary sculptures that bore signs that they had recently been illegally excavated, pictured above.  An Anglo-Saxon stone was also removed from auction.

After concerned authorities and archaeologists contacted Bonham's, these objects have all been withdrawn from auction.  But that does not mean they won't be sold again privately, and does not mean that we know who the sellers were. 

1. Scott Sayare, Chatter of Swindles and Scams at Auction House, The New York Times, April 26, 2010.
2. Dalya Alberge, Roman sculptures withdrawn from auction amid fears they are stolen, The Guardian, April 27, 2010.
3. Mike Pitts, Save our Anglo-Saxon stone!, The Guardian, April 24, 2010.

Forfeitted Pissarro Returning to France

A federal jury has ruled that this Pissaro painting, "Le Marché," was stolen from the Faure Museum in Aix-la-Bains in France.  The work was seized by ICE agents from Sotheby's in 2006, after its theft in 1981.  The thief took the work from the museum under his jacket.  The work has a storied history as the Department of Justice Press Release describes. 

It seems that in 1985 the thief, Emile Guelton, sold the work to Sharyl Davis who was using space art gallery in San Antonio owned by Jay Adelman.  Mr. Adelman seems to operate an antiques shop on the Riverwalk, and operate a website.  In 2003 the work was consigned to Sotheby's by Davis.  Davis paid $8,500 for the painting in 1985, and estimated an auction price of $60-80,000.  However Sotheby's asked about the history of the work and was told it was purchased from someone named "Frenchie". But then Davis asked for "Frenchie's" real name from Adelman, who told her it was Guelton and that he was from Paris.  That information appeared in the auction catalog with an image of Le Marché."

Just before the auction, French federal law enforcement officers learned that Le Marché was at Sotheby's. Based on the information in the auction catalog, the French officers located, contacted, and interviewed Guelton. Guelton confirmed that he knew Adelman, was living in Texas in 1985, sent a container of artwork from France to the United States in 1984, and sold Adelman paintings. The French officers, using a prior arrest photo of Guelton, created a six-person photo array, which they showed to the Faure Museum guard in October 2003.

 The Pissarro was then forfeited under the National Stolen Property Act.  Forfeiture allows prosecutors to bring a suit against an object which was part of a crime, and all claimants to the object come forward to challenge the forfeiture.  It is a powerful tool for prosecutors, and thus should be used carefully, else we may risk losing works of art for many years.  It seems like the right result was achieved in this case.  Mark Durney rightly points out that this round-about story reveals a lot about how difficult recovering stolen art is and how easy it is to acquire in "good faith".

2,000 Art Thefts in France in 2008

That is the estimate given by French police Colonel Stephane Gauffeny.   2,000 is a staggering number, but apparently is a dramatic reduction from a decade ago.  He tells Roland Lloyd Parry of AFP:  "We concentrate our energy on the biggest thefts or the biggest criminal rings".  One example is the Drouot investigation, which is taking precedence and resources away from some other thefts.  Italy is often a victim of art theft, but France is as well, with the recent holiday thefts and last year's Picasso Museum theft just some recent high profile examples. Pictured here is the Cantini Museum in Marseille where a Degas was "unscrewed" from a wall over the hiliday season, yet there were no signs of forced entry. 

What happens to these stolen works?  The mundane objects are stored until they can be sold later.  The rare and valuable works are exported abroad illegally.  Yet the rate of recovery for many of these works is very low.  Yet the work of Colonel Gauffeny and others is key, and one of the important steps law enforcement agencies can take is to start keeping track and compiling statistics on art theft. 

1. Lloyd Parry Roland, AFP: France battles theft of cultural treasures, AFP, January 10, 2010.

Holiday Art Theft in Southern France

Two high-profile art thefts occurred in Southern France in and around the New Year. 

The first was the theft of this work, Les Choristes by Edgar Degas which was reported missing from the Cantini Museum in Marseilles.  The theft was discovered when the museum reopened after the holiday, and was on loan from the Musée d'Orsay which was set to end on January 3rd.  The painting was unscrewed from the wall, and there was no evidence of forced entry.  Mark Durney points out that 2009 began much the same way, with thefts from a Berlin art gallery, and Southern France is no stranger to art crime.  The easy access the thief had to the work has led to the arrest of a night watchman at the museum. 

The second theft occurred in in La Cadière d’Azur, a village in Provence.  As many as thirty paintings were taken from a private home, including works by Picasso and Rousseau.  The owner was on holiday in Sweden. 

Big holidays are a difficult time for security.  Police, owners and the public all have different priorities during these festive days, which makes art particularly vulnerable. 

1. Picasso, Rousseau works stolen in France days after Degas drawing taken, Telegraph.
2. AFP: Picasso, Rousseau paintings stolen in France, January 2, 2010.
   

Ceremony for Egyptian Relics

Pictured here are French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Egypt's Hosni Mubarak during a ceremony today.  The French returned some relics taken from Egypt in recent years which were purchased by the Louvre in 2000 and 2003.  Egypt had made a dramatic call for the immediate return of the objects, ordering the removal of all French archaeologists from Egyptian sites if the objects were not returned.  They were returned quickly.

Egypt demanded the return of the stolen fragments in October and broke off relations with the Louvre. Afterwards, France agreed to hand back the works, which are from Luxor's Valley of the Kings.  "France is particularly committed to fighting the illegal trafficking of works of art," Sarkozy said, in a statement.  The other four artefacts were to be given to the Egyptian embassy in Paris during Mubarak's visit to Paris, French officials said.  The French president emphasized that the Louvre museum had acted in good faith when it purchased the artefacts and said that doubts were only raised in November during archaeological work at the site.  Egypt had produced photographs from the mid-1970s showing the fragments in place on the tomb's wall.

1. AFP: France returns stolen Louvre relics to Egypt, December 14, 2009.

Update on the Drouot Arrests

The AP reported yesterday that charges have been filed against nine employees of the Drouot auction house. French authorities last week found a stolen work by Gustave Courbet.

An auctioneer and eight commission agents were given preliminary charges, including ''organized theft,'' the prosecutor's office said.
Three others detained last week in the police raids on Drouot, its warehouses and homes of employees were released with no charges filed against them.
When the bust was announced last week, there was initial confusion about which Courbet work had been recovered. The painting -- stolen several years ago from a collection whose owner had recently died -- was not clearly identified, and the heir had confused it with another work, an official close to the inquiry said. He spoke on condition of anonymity because the case is ongoing.
Police initially identified the recovered Courbet work as ''La Vague'' (The Wave), worth euro900,000 ($1.3 million), but officials said Monday it was actually ''Paysage marin sous un ciel d'orage'' (Marine Landscape Under a Stormy Sky), worth about euro100,000.
The stolen Courbet -- one of several paintings by the convention-smashing realist master with a stormy ocean theme -- was found at the home of one of the commission agents being investigated. Other pieces recovered in the sweep included artworks, frames and furniture.
Under French law, preliminary charges give the judge more time to investigate and determine whether to send the case to trial. Three commission agents were jailed in the case, with the prosecutor's office accusing them of deep involvement in thefts dating back to 2001.
The auctioneer was released pending the investigation with the stipulation that he stop hosting sales.

1. The Associated Press, Preliminary Charges vs 9 in Paris Auction Sweep, The New York Times, December 7, 2009.

César Baldaccini and the Definition of Art

One of the ways criminal defendants can often try to evade "art crime" offenses is by challenging the definitions of art.  The most recent example is the Piedoie brothers.  The two are accused of pawning off 130 of their own creations as genuine works by César Baldaccini Baldaccini.  Baldaccini died in 1998, and was known for his sculptures which were made by compressing consumer goods like cars or refrigerators into metallic blocks, like this one.

During a trial this week, the brothers will attempt to argue that made these César works as a kind of imitation, but not fakes.  In a report by a French magistrate, the "lack of seriousness" of several auction houses was blamed, and the French prosecutor has expressed dismay that the French art market has been "flooded" with these kinds of fakes since the artist's death in 1998. 

The investigation into these forgeries began in 2001 by mistake:

Police in the south of France searching for stolen art works, including a Chagall and a Magritte, bugged several suspects in a world of high-living, cocaine-taking art lovers and dealers. They stumbled on evidence that Eric Piedoie was flooding the Côte d'Azur with fake Césars.

The appearance of so many unknown works enflamed feelings within César's family and entourage. The artist's wife Rosine Baldaccini and daughter Anna Puységur Baldaccini were disputing his inheritance with his mistress Stéphanie Busuttil. Each side accused the other of selling off works before the dispute was settled in court.

Mme Busuttil was allegedly approached by the Piedoie brothers to sign certificates of authentification for some of their works. She says she did so in good faith: a claim accepted by the prosecution.

In other words, both César's own mistress and the art critic who catalogued his work could not tell authentic "compression" sculptures from fake ones knocked off in a garage. Awkward questions therefore arise. Were César's "compression sculptures" really art? Are the Piedoie brothers con-artists or true, accidental artists themselves?

 

1. On trial: the question of what is modern art, The Independent, December 1, 2009.

Paris Auction House Searched

In more news which seems to reflect poorly on the French art trade, the AP is reporting that 12 people have been "detained" from the Hotel Druout auction house in Paris.  Police found a stolen Courbet painting, the Wave, which was stolen in 2004. 

"It's about emotion, not airtight logic and consistent policy."

So argues Michael Kimmelman in the New York Times in describing the recent calls for repatriation of works of art.  He takes as examples the recent repatriation claims made by Egypt against Germany and France.  He makes two points that I'd like to draw out of the article.

First, he claims that globalization has intensified "cultural differences" between nations.  This allows nationalism to "exploit culture".  He may be correct in some cases, but he fails to note that the frescoes returned by the Louvre had been purchased recently, with little history.  Given what we know about the antiquities trade, this means they were likely illegally exported or looted. 

Second, he argues these claims are often based on emotion.  That is certainly true in some cases, because after all works of art are often designed to convey emotion.  One example of this would be Scotland's desire for the return of the Lewis Chessmen.  But not all of these claims are without merit.  Moreover, why is it that only claimant nations are "emotional".  Are not museums and other groups "emotional" when they make arguments that works of art should stay where they are currently situated?  Kimmelman makes the argument that justice has shifted.  But I think that is a good thing.  We are closer to better justice for all nations, not merely the wealthier market nations via International treaties like the 1970 UNESCO Convention, and important decisions like the Schultz and Barakat decisions in the United States and the United Kingdom.   

Michael Kimmelman, When Ancient Artifacts Become Political Pawns, The New York Times, October 24, 2009.

China to Research Foreign Museum Archives for Chinese Artifacts

  China seems to be taking a new approach to repatriation, creating research teams which will inspect the holdings of museums to "document" the archives.  This has led to speculation that China may use its growing economic clout to demand the return of objects.  

Peter Foster reports for the Telegraph:

The sacking of the Old Summer Palace – or 'Yuanmingyuan' – as punishment for the torture and execution of 18 emissaries sent by western powers to Beijing, remains an emotive subject in China, where it is still viewed as one of the nation's great humiliations.
The decision to try and document the millions of items now scattered round the world comes as China takes an increasing interest in retrieving artefacts that were removed from China during the colonial period and in the early 20th century.
"We don't really know how many relics have been plundered since the catalogue of the treasures stored in the garden was burned during the catastrophe," the palace's current director Chen Mingjie told the state-run China Daily newspaper.
"But based on our rough calculations, about 1.5 million relics are housed in more than 2,000 museums in 47 countries." China's sensitivity towards such 'looted' treasures was demonstrated in March when a Chinese collector sabotaged the auctioning of two bronze heads taken from the Old Summer Palace, bidding £13.9m for each, but later refusing to pay.

Peter Foster, China to study British Museum for looted artefacts, Telegraph.co.uk, October 19, 2009.

Louvre to Return Egyptian frescos

Egypt's decision to force France to return the potentially looted frescos has proven very successful.  The objects, allegedly stolen from Egyptian tombs in the 1980's had been purchased by the Louvre in 2000 and 2003.  At least two consequences of this decision will soon emerge.

First, how many other nations of origin will attempt to make similar claims?  Egypt ceased all ongoing archaeological digs by French archaeologists.  Was this a threat only reserved for objects which may have been looted recently?  Will this set the precedent for this kind of treatment by German archaeologists if the bust of Nerfertiti isn't returned to Egypt?

Second, might this signal renewed scrutiny of the acquisition practices of museums outside the US?  Much of the discussion has rightly focused on wrongdoing by some American museums and dealers.  But what of their counterparts around the world?  Shouldn't they be subjected to the same scrutiny?

Louvre to return Egyptian frescos, BBC Oct. 9, 2009.

Picasso Sketchbook Stolen in Paris

More evidence that Picasso is a favorite among art thieves.  A sketchbook containing 33 drawing by Pablo Picasso was stolen from the Picasso Museum in Paris.  The theft was discovered this afternoon.  It is believed that the book was held in an unlocked (!) display case on the first floor of the museum.  There are not many details at this point, but I wonder if perhaps a visitor walked off with it?  Or it may have been an after-hours break-in.   

Not Paying for the Bronzes

I'm catching up on all of the reactions to the decision by Cai Mingchao, the general manager of Xiamen Harmony Art International Auction Co. and the winning bidder on the two Chinese bronzes which were recently sold at Christie's Yves St. Laurent auction in France.  Art Observed does a great job collecting many of the reactions which appeared in the press.

Tom Flynn asks the right question I think, "Are we entering an era of guerilla activism, where sabotage of art auctions becomes another weapon in cultural heritage repatriation disputes?"

I think Christie's is scrambling along with other major auction houses to make sure something similar cannot or will not happen again.  Mingchao is of course subject to civil penalties under French law, perhaps even criminal as well.  If Christie's pushes that approach, they may risk a difficult public relations battle, as Mingchao has quickly become a sort of national hero in China.  But it is hard to see how they can just do noting.  If one bidder can disrupt the process in this way, all a nation of origin needs to do is enlist a wealthy or sympathetic bidder to disrupt the process of any future object which might be similarly sensitive. 

I think it is another indication of the increasing role that nations of origin are playing in the heritage marketplace.  I'm not sure how many wealthy bidders would be willing to stake their reputation or future ability to bid on such a move in the future, but this was a cunningly simple, very shrewd strategic move by Mingchao and the Chinese.  They wanted to disrupt the market in these objects which had been looted, and did a brilliant job doing so. 

From AlJazeera English: