Just Ancient Egypt

Corvidius

Ad Honorem
Jul 2017
3,047
Crows nest
I'm thinking that after the let down of the previous flurry of excitement a few years back, would the SCA go with this again without better grounds than previously. If this were to fall flat again they will become a laughing stock and nobody will ever believe them again.
 

Corvidius

Ad Honorem
Jul 2017
3,047
Crows nest
Egypt to sue Christies over the sale of the Tutankhamun bust. Egypt to sue Christie's over Tutankhamun bust

From the article Christies says,

Christie's would not and do not sell any work where there isn't clear title of ownership and a thorough understanding of modern provenance.

In the same article we have this about Christies

It stated that Germany's Prince Wilhelm von Thurn und Taxis reputedly had it in his collection by the 1960s, and that it was acquired by an Austrian dealer in 1973-4.
Can't help notice the use of the word "reputedly" and comparing it to their use of the word "clear", and wonder if their use of "reputedly" fits with their protestations of not selling any work "where there isn't clear title of ownership and a thorough understanding of modern provenance". Hm.
 

AlpinLuke

Forum Staff
Oct 2011
27,265
Italy, Lago Maggiore
Egypt to sue Christies over the sale of the Tutankhamun bust. Egypt to sue Christie's over Tutankhamun bust

From the article Christies says,




In the same article we have this about Christies



Can't help notice the use of the word "reputedly" and comparing it to their use of the word "clear", and wonder if their use of "reputedly" fits with their protestations of not selling any work "where there isn't clear title of ownership and a thorough understanding of modern provenance". Hm.
Legally auction houses like Christies protect themselves from consequences like this one with declarations and procedures of control. Anyway, pay attention, they find it easy, before of a court, to remind that an auction house is not an intelligence agency or a state police connected with interpol ... so that the conception of "clear title of ownership" has to be interpreted within the limited possibilities of control of the auction house. This means that usually they show a legal declaration issued by a lawyer or better a notary stating the owhership and the provenance of the object. Just to say ... Why shouldn't they trust an act of an Italian notary stating the ownership and the provenance of a medieval sword?
 

Corvidius

Ad Honorem
Jul 2017
3,047
Crows nest
The point I'm making is that they have said they do not sell without provenance being "clear", but in relation to this bust specifically have used the word "reputedly". Those two words have different meanings, and "reputedly" is far from "clear".
 

AlpinLuke

Forum Staff
Oct 2011
27,265
Italy, Lago Maggiore
The point I'm making is that they have said they do not sell without provenance being "clear", but in relation to this bust specifically have used the word "reputedly". Those two words have different meanings, and "reputedly" is far from "clear".
It's reputedly clear ... they have prepared room to move the responsibility of a "mistake" on someone else: may be an auction house in Germany which issued a legal declaration about the origin of the object [or anything else].
 

John B

Ad Honorem
Mar 2016
3,883
Canada
The point I'm making is that they have said they do not sell without provenance being "clear", but in relation to this bust specifically have used the word "reputedly". Those two words have different meanings, and "reputedly" is far from "clear".
That is a walkback of a subtle form. That tells me they may have a doubt. It also tells me they do not have hard tangible documentation. A certification by a lawyer without supporting documents or proof is just toilet paper. Collectors that are true to form keep a file on their legit items to keep their value. Me think something may smell here. This world is filled with forged documents and magic papers. Such as the Roman silver horde now in the UK.
 

John B

Ad Honorem
Mar 2016
3,883
Canada

John B

Ad Honorem
Mar 2016
3,883
Canada
I wonder that antiquities should be treated under law as a "controlled good" under legislation? That any transfer has to be validated under standardized criteria. There would have to be taken into account times when exports were legal and not etc.

I wonder if there should be an ISO raised on art and antiquities provenance? I would also like to see legislation on mandatory heritage item provenance audits. Both in private and public collections.