The real truth about Peter Nash

[drcy]

Side tracking a bit-- but since it was brought up--, for Egypt and China there are recent laws put in place (1983 for Egypt and 1991 for China) making it illegal for certain types of artifacts to be exported-- and those laws are respected internationally. If you are a foreigner and bought the item before the year of law-- or the item you bought was originally exported before the date-- you are the legal owner and the item can be bought and sold any number of times (though it's good if there is proof that it was originally purchased before the date)-- after the year, you've broken the law and don't own it and can't sell it. The laws aren't retroactive. You'd likely be prosecuted pretty hard by those countries too for illegally exporting items that are considered part of their national heritage.

On PBS’s Antiques Roadshow, someone brought in a valuable ancient Egyptian figure. A sticker on the bottom showed that not only had it once been purchased from a well known and respected old time dealer of Egyptian antiquities, but that it was purchased before 1983 and was legal to own and resell. Good news for the guy who brought it to the show . . . On the flip side, I saw a guy on the show bring in an item where the appraiser told him that it was very nice but that he couldn't legally resell it.

Also, China does still allow antique but not ancient items to be sold to people outside their country, and the government puts a red sticker on those items indicating that they were legally exported. But, as said, if you have a relic that your parents bought on a 1960s vacation to Cairo or Bejing, you are the legal owner and can sell it as you wish.

In museum studies, we had a big section on the international law and ethics of items of important national heritage that are in museums all around the world-- many taken by foreigners, including foreign governments, from the countries years and sometimes centuries ago. The Elgin Marbles of Ancient Greece in the British Museum is probably the most famous case study that is still hotly debated between the two countries. Often times, the law is clear, while the ethics, along with other practical and philosophical considerations, is what is the matter for debate. I believe Britain has legal right to the marbles, but many, including the Greek government, said they should still return them. And the ethical and related issues often are not black and white, with compelling arguments from both sides-- I could detail Britain's non-legal arguments why they should keep them.

I could also go into the rules and ethics of museums deaccessioning (selling) items, but I've already bored you enough in this post-- though I can say that most non-profit museums, and all the major ones, are licensed/accredited and there are strict rules about how, when and what for they can sell items from the permanent collection. For example, one rule is they can only sell items from the permanent collection to purchase other items for their permanent collection. They aren't allowed to sell permanent collection items even to cover the operating or building budget or to hire new employees. If the Museum of Modern Art sells a Modigliani to finance the procurement of a Rembrandt that would be okay rule-wise, but if they sell the Modigliani to finance a new cafeteria it would lose its accreditation. This issue came to head when the City of Detroit wanted the public Detroit Art Museum to sell valuable art to cover city debt, but museum rules forbade it. Luckily, it was worked out and the art kept by the museum.