http://tinyurl.com/32tf92 (iht.com)
"A Barcelona museum of Egyptian artifacts on Wednesday denied charges that one of its statues may have been stolen from Egypt, a dispute that has prompted the Cairo government to dispatch experts to examine the piece as a possible step toward claiming it.
The limestone artwork — a 43-centimeter-tall (17-inch) depiction of a princess named Nefert — is on display at the Egypt Museum of Barcelona, which says it will return the piece if it turns out to have been stolen.
The charges come from a Spanish Egyptologist who used to work at the museum but left about two years ago, Ildefonso Falcones, the museum's lawyer, said in an interview from Barcelona.
When the archaeologist stopped working at the museum, she demanded payment of damages for alleged psychological abuse on the job. When the museum refused, she went to Egyptian authorities with her suspicions that the statuette was removed from Egypt illegally. . . . Zahi Hawass, general secretary of the Superior Council of Antiquities of the Egyptian government, told The Associated Press in Cairo on Wednesday that he is sending a delegation of three experts to Barcelona next week to examine the statuette.
But he said the issue is whether the piece is authentic, not whether it was stolen, and that if it is real, Egypt will claim it."
The limestone artwork — a 43-centimeter-tall (17-inch) depiction of a princess named Nefert — is on display at the Egypt Museum of Barcelona, which says it will return the piece if it turns out to have been stolen.
The charges come from a Spanish Egyptologist who used to work at the museum but left about two years ago, Ildefonso Falcones, the museum's lawyer, said in an interview from Barcelona.
When the archaeologist stopped working at the museum, she demanded payment of damages for alleged psychological abuse on the job. When the museum refused, she went to Egyptian authorities with her suspicions that the statuette was removed from Egypt illegally. . . . Zahi Hawass, general secretary of the Superior Council of Antiquities of the Egyptian government, told The Associated Press in Cairo on Wednesday that he is sending a delegation of three experts to Barcelona next week to examine the statuette.
But he said the issue is whether the piece is authentic, not whether it was stolen, and that if it is real, Egypt will claim it."
See the above page for more details.
1 comment:
You can't pick up a newspaper or visit an art blog these days without running into a story about some country suing a museum or institution or country over the return of some artwork or antiquities which may have made their way to that country through either shady means or even forgotten formal agreements.
Bloomberg reported a while back that the government of Peru plans to sue Yale University, over hundreds of artifacts taken from the ancient city of Machu Picchu nearly a century ago.
And this may be the straw that breaks the camel's back (or in this case the llama's back).
The artifacts made their way to the US through Yale archeologist Hiram Bingham. One side claims that the artifacts were on loan. Yale contends the artifacts were legally excavated and exported "in line with the practices of the time."
And if these artifacts were sent to the US through some agreement with the Peruvian government nearly a century ago, then Yale has a case for keeping them; otherwise -- in the event that the American archeologists simply found them, crated them and shipped them to the US - all on their own -- then today's courts may well rule in Peru's favor.
And that straw that may break the camel's back may also unlock Pandora's box (which Greece will soon be suing for).
First: let's get one thing clear: Nazi art loot should and must be returned to their original owners or descendants.
But for most of all the other demanding of artwork returns: where does it stop?
Because unless you have some official paperwork signed, stamped and approved (and recognized as valid) then...
Does every Roman artifact in museums around the world have to be returned to Italy? And do Italian museums have to return Roman antiquities that were made in other parts of the Roman Empire to the nations that now exist there? And Italy better start packing the 13 Egyptian obelisks that are all over Rome: Cairo is clearing out some spaces for them.
Every Greek vase back to Greece? But do Greek museums have to return Cypriot antiquities to Cyprus?
Does every mummy have to find its way back to Egypt?
That "official" cadaver of Christopher Columbus in the Havana Cathedral? Sorry... back to Spain; or is it Italy, or Portugal? All three of those nations currently claim him as a native son, although I suspect that the Grand Admiral's descendants, currently living in Spain, have first dibs on Chris' bones.
And the fake Columbus cadaver in the Seville Cathedral? Back to Genoa, even if it's fake (just in case).
After all, that fake Scottish Stone of Destiny has made its way back to Scotland (God only knows where the real one is), but there are probably hundreds of thousands of antiquities (if not millions) from all over the world disseminated... all over the world.
Our own Smithsonian in the US has over 100,000 pre-Columbian antiquities in its inventory (most of which are not even on display). Do the ones that were created by pre-Columbian artisans from north and south of our border have to be returned to the countries that now exist there?
Unless these museums have a provenance with lots of country of origin stamps authorizing the removal of the antiquity, I'd be pretty nervous if I was one of those museums.
And even if you have such a paper, what's to stop today's version of a country's government from saying that they do not recognize the authority of their predecessors to allow the removal of a national treasure from their nation.
And where does it stop?
Frida Kahlo was essentially ignored by Mexico while she was alive, and yet decades after her death she was deified outside of Mexico, and eventually the government of Mexico made her works a national treasure and forbade the export of any of Kahlo's works from Mexico. I think that this is a good (if late) thing for Mexico and Mexicans.
But what's to stop a future Mexican government from demanding the return of any and all Frida Kahlos outside of Mexico back to her mother nation.
It would just be a case of this "return" trend being pushed a little more.
As an American, personally, I think that from now on, when I visit foreign museums, I will be making a list of American Indian artifacts in those museums, and they better damned have a piece of paper somewhere full of stamps and signatures from the Sioux, or the Walla Walla, or the Cheyenne, or the Seminoles or the Oneida or whatever indigenous Native American nation that currenly lives in the USA created them.
Official export paperwork from the United States government is not valid, and will not be accepted, regardless of how many non-Indian Washington, DC officials have signed it.
Of course, that may also mean that every non-Indian museum in the USA itself, would have to return every Native American Indian artifact back to their tribes.
Makes my head hurt...
Post a Comment