Getty Had Signs It Was Acquiring Possibly Looted Art, Documents Show

LATimes.com ^ | 9/25/05 | Jason Felch and Ralph Frammolino,

[Republicanprofessor]

Attorneys for the J. Paul Getty Museum have determined that half the masterpieces in its antiquities collection were purchased from dealers now under investigation for allegedly selling artifacts looted from ruins in Italy.

Italian authorities have identified dozens of objects in the Getty collection as looted, including ancient urns, vases and a 5-foot marble statue of Apollo.

The Italians have Polaroid photographs seized from a dealer's warehouse in Switzerland that show Getty artifacts in an unrestored state, some encrusted with dirt — soon after they were dug from the ground, Italians officials say.

In response to the Italian investigation, Getty lawyers combed through the museum's files and questioned staff members over several months in 2001, trying to assess the legal exposure of the world's richest art institution

[Republicanprofessor]

Woofie found this (and two other great articles) and suggested I post them, so here goes.

[Republicanprofessor]

Art Ping.

Let Sam Cree or me know if you want on or off this ping list.

[battlegearboat]

And to think my sainted grandmother dated that guy way back when in Bartlesville.

[calrighty]

Ya can't make this stuff up.

[ndkos]

You're right. You would think that with all the money they waste on useless modern art they would be able to buy genuine "art". The Getty museum has more money than practically any other art museum!

[konaice]

Dug from the ground does not mean looted in my book. That is a position held by history snobs without the money or the facilities to adequately care for the antiquities, who want it handed to them for nothing.

Anyone that thinks antiquities are better off in the hands of government has a very short memory.

An artifact buried and forgotten is lost to history, but placed in a Museum it becomes available to the ages. The guy should get a medal for his selfless act of preservation.

The idea that artifacts should become the property of government and remain in the country where they were discovered is bogus. These things should visit the four corners of the earth to educate people of different cultures, the overwhelmingly vast majority of which will never make it to Rome.

Private collections have a way of showing up in public displays over time. A person who pays a million bucks for a vase will protect it far better than a government that confiscates it under some antiquities act.

Even our own Smithsonian has warehouse after warehouse of history packed away never to be seen by the public, and only occasionally studied.

[NutCrackerBoy]

Dug from the ground does not mean looted in my book.

Perhaps. Let's make sure private property and the rule of law are respected. I don't believe Italy has a moral right to nationalize all treasures within its borders, but it does have the right to protect private property and to regulate archeological activity. The ones who removed the artifacts were apparently in violation of the law.

[Republicanprofessor]

Very good points. I agree.

[Republicanprofessor]

Comments by konaice made me think you might be interested in this post.

[Siena Dreaming]

A person who pays a million bucks for a vase will protect it far better than a government that confiscates it under some antiquities act.

True!

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks for the ping (wipes eye), a good topic for GGG. I'd seen something about this, and the remarkable thing of course is, chronology, IOW, at what time the Getty did this stuff. Because every museum has unprovenanced stuff (including some very well-known pieces) in their collections.

[SunkenCiv]

I have to take the middle ground on what you said. Private collectors do indeed cause a number of things to be preserved, but in the case of (for example) large, inscribed stones, often the artifacts are found by the looters / pothunters in great condition, but are shattered in order to move them. In some cases, they're busted up because the gang of thugs couldn't agree on how to split the money, and reason that a larger number of similar artifacts, no matter how damaged, will fetch a higher price.

The obvious way to deal with the problem is to bring the process out in the open (which is Herschel Shanks' position and part of the ed policy of BAR), but since most countries have laws prohibiting export of antiquities, and are very unlikely to change them, it's a moot point at best. Furthermore, the looters don't want competition, and don't document anything, which just makes the problem of provenance (and fakery) that much worse.

[konaice]

I have to take the middle ground on what you said. Private collectors do indeed cause a number of things to be preserved, but in the case of (for example) large, inscribed stones, often the artifacts are found by the looters / pothunters in great condition, but are shattered in order to move them. In some cases, they're busted up because the gang of thugs couldn't agree on how to split the money,.

Yes, lets rush to the worst case example shall we?

Getty does not smash things to raise the value. Governments have engaged in smashing things on more than one occasion.

[MinuteGal]

How the heck can you NOT purchase any antiquities from a guy named "Medici"?

Leni

[SunkenCiv]

I didn't rush to the worst case example. So long.

[Polybius]

An artifact buried and forgotten is lost to history, but placed in a Museum it becomes available to the ages.

Without a provenance, an object has no history. It is merely an object of undetermined date from an undetermined geographic region.

This past summer, I was at the ruins of the ancient Mayan city of Calakmul just north of the Guatemalan border.

One hundreds years ago, the site had stelae that were masterpieces of ancient Mayan art.

Today, many of those stelae have nothing on their front except saw-marks made by looters in order to sell the sculpture fragments to private art collectors.

For an American perspective, imagine Frenchmen coming in the dead of night with chainsaws to cart off and sell pieces of Mount Vernon to Japanese historical artifact collectors.

[konaice]

Without a provenance, an object has no history. It is merely an object of undetermined date from an undetermined geographic region.

So then why is Italy all up in arms about Getty? After all, if they dug it up, or purchased it from someone who did, why would Italy care. After all Italy was not planning to dig for it. Nor does it have a provenance, therefore it must be valueless.

This so called "provenance" seems like a code word for "our blessing".

[Polybius]

Without a provenance, an object has no history. It is merely an object of undetermined date from an undetermined geographic region.

So then why is Italy all up in arms about Getty? After all, if they dug it up, or purchased it from someone who did, why would Italy care. After all Italy was not planning to dig for it. Nor does it have a provenance, therefore it must be valueless. This so called "provenance" seems like a code word for "our blessing".

Your reply is a string of non sequiturs.

Direct quote from the article” “…..half the masterpieces in its antiquities collection were purchased from dealers now under investigation for allegedly selling artifacts looted from ruins in Italy.

Who is the "they" you are talking about?

Archeologists carefully documenting their dig or looters digging, grabbing and running in the dead of night?

Is it your contention that an Italian looter qualifies as a "they" but that an American archeologist digging with Italian Government approval qualifies does not?

So, Italy is "not planning to dig" at .......pick a site....any site in the next 10, 20 50 or 100 years.

You know that, .......how?

An antiquity without a provenance is not "valueless", It has a dollar value to some collector. However, its historical value has been destroyed. You have absolutely no idea where it came from, when it was made or even if it is a fake.

[woofie]

another art bump

[Republicanprofessor]

This is the one you sent me yesterday. I even gave you credit in the first post or so.

It is a fascinating development; I especially like the lines about being "encrusted with dirt," and all the responses by FReepers.