PostHeaderIcon The Road From Cicero to Marion True: What "Chasing Aphrodite" Reveals About the Getty's Notorious Antiquities Trafficking Controversy

By Noah Charney

Published: July 8, 2011


In the current issue of the New York Review of Books, Hugh Eakin reviews the recently-published "Chasing Aphrodite: The Hunt for Looted Antiquities of the World's Richest Museums" by James Felch and Ralph Frammolino. The Review is the kind of publication where its reviews are as much Op-Ed pieces as critical commentaries, and to a great extent they summarize the key points of the books they cover. That is the case with this review as well. But this review is of particular interest to me, as is the book in question, because it features a number of individuals who have collaborated with the Association for Research into Crimes against Art (ARCA), the nonprofit research group on art crime and cultural heritage protection of which I am the founder.

The review begins with a mention of the Verrine Orations, a famous trial begun August 5, 70 BC, in Rome (at 1:30 p.m. in the afternoon, if you're keeping score) in which the young Cicero lead the prosecution against a corrupt former governor of Sicily, Gaius Verres, who was charged with extortion and misrule. Since 212 BC Rome had been fascinated with Hellenistic art, thanks to their introduction to it after the sack of Syracuse — then a Greek colony — in Sicily. Cicero himself was a voracious collector of Hellenistic art. In addition to laying out various charges of general corruption, wrongful imprisonment and execution, embezzlement, and general nastiness, Cicero focused his accusations on Verres's looting of Sicily's art and monuments. As Eakin quotes:

"Ancient monuments given by wealthy monarchs to adorn the cities of Sicily… were ravaged and stripped bare, one and all, by this same governor [Verres]. Nor was it only statues and public monuments that he treated in this manner. Among the most sacred and revered Sicilian sanctuaries, there was not a single one which he failed to plunder, not one single god, if only Verres detected a good work of art or a valuable antique, did he leave in the possession of the Sicilians."

Verres didn't stick around for the trial — he fled and never returned to Rome. Cicero published his trial notes, and became praetor two years after.

This is probably the first legal case wherein the right of a people or nation to retain their own cultural property was asserted in a court of law. According to Cicero, Verres should have left these valuables in "the possession of the Sicilians." At the time, Sicily was a Roman colony, with its cities primarily of Greek origin, with a smattering of other ancient peoples, like the Phoenicians, in the mix. It was certainly a multi-ethnic hub. So whose cultural heritage was Cicero referring to? He was associating cultural objects with a geographic location. The possessions belonged to whoever was living there. And there they should remain, he implied. (For more on the subject of looting art in the ancient world, I recommend Margaret M. Miles's "Art as Plunder: The Ancient Origins of Debate about Cultural Property Cambridge."

Eakin's review, and the book in question, relate the story of the Italian trial against Marion True, the Getty curator who was charged with taking part in a criminal conspiracy (pactum sceleris) to traffic in looted Greek and Roman art. Most Italians related to the case are open about saying that True was being made an example of — she was only the most prominent of many curators and dealers suspected of, or proven as, having been involved in the traffic of illicit antiquities. Much of "Chasing Aphrodite" focuses on True as the evil protagonist, one whom the Getty threw under the bus in their own dealings with Italian prosecutors. Many of the figures mentioned in the book, including Italian lawyers Maurizio Fiorilli and Paolo Ferri, have collaborated with ARCA (Fiorilli spoke at the ARCA Conference in the Study of Art Crime in 2010 and Ferri is speaking at our conference this year, this Saturday the 9th in fact, where he is receiving an award from ARCA).

Other books have focused on the criminal side of this case, and the phenomenon in general. Peter Watson and Cecilia Todeschini's "The Medici Conspiracy" is probably the best known and it tells the story of the ringleader to whom multiple gangs of tomb raiders sold their choicest finds, Giacomo Medici, who then sold them to world museums. Vernon Silver's "The Lost Chalice" tells the story of one object in particular handled by Medici and the Getty, the Euphronios kalyx. In Italian, Fabio Isman's "I Predatori di Arte Perduta" tells the perspective from Italy's standpoint. Watson, Silver, and Isman are all speaking this weekend at the ARCA conference.

In fact, Marion True is more scapegoat than supervillain, the one who got caught with her hand in the cookie jar and was made an example of to deter the world's museums, and to show that the source countries like Italy, and later Greece, mean business when they seek not only to curb the flow of illicit antiquities leaving their shores, but also to bring cases for the repatriation of looted antiquities already on display in world museums. The focal point of "Chasing Aphrodite" in terms of an object is the Morgantina Aphrodite statues, bought by the Getty for $18 million. An internal Getty memo was found, published in "Chasing Aphrodite" (which was written by a pair of Los Angeles Times reporters who covered this case for years), which reads (sic): "We are saying we won't look into the provenance. We know it's stolen. Symes a fence." They were referring to Robin Symes, the British art dealer whom Italian authorities have been seeking to prosecute for years for his supposed involvement in trafficking looted antiquities.

Chasing Aphrodite lays out the elaborate case against True and the Getty, packed with notes and scrupulously detailed accounts (occasionally more scrupulous and detailed than a lay reader might enjoy, but of great value to researchers). In the end, the statute of limitations on True's trial ran out just last year. Getty paid her $3 million, essentially in order not to bring the Getty down with her. Her reputation is in tatters, and the Getty's is certainly pockmarked — the museum has unfortunately been involved in a few too many art-world scandals. They accidentally bought a kouros statue for $1 million that turned out to be a modern fake (if you've read Malcolm Gladwell's "Blink," you'll know that story), and they got blacklisted one of their own curators, Nicholas Turner, after he went public with his belief that the Getty had just purchased Old Master drawings that were not by Old Masters but were by renowned forger Eric Hebborn.

It may surprise some readers, but ARCA's trustees and the editorial board of our peer-reviewed academic journal, the Journal of Art Crime, actually nominated Marion True for an award for her efforts to curb the looting of antiquities. True has been a spokesperson for better museum practices since before her trial began. That is not to say that she did not behave inappropriately, but she has been made a scapegoat to an excessive degree and her stance on better museum acquisitions practices over the past decade-plus, taking her unfortunate prominent role and trying to recoup some good from it, is should be duly noted as admirable.

Noah Charney is the author of "The Stealing of the Mystic Lamb" and other books. To see more of his writing, read his ARTINFO blog The Secret History of Art.

 

PostHeaderIcon Xtralis and HeiTel joining forces to develop the Intelligent Remote Monitoring Market

Xtralis New Update

Xtralis Solidifies its Position as the Premier Provider for the Fast-growing Global Intelligent Remote Monitoring Market

Xtralis is pleased to announce the acquisition of Germany-based HeiTel Digital Video GmbH. This acquisition enhances significantly Xtralis’ position as the premium manufacturer of video surveillance and central monitoring solutions globally.

HeiTel is based in Molfsee, near Kiel in northern Germany. The company was founded in 1990 and has developed into the dominant central monitoring solutions provider in Germany and a significant player in the European security market. There are more than 70,000 HeiTel systems installed worldwide.

The HeiTel team is engaged in the design, development and sale of video monitoring technology including:

  • Digital video remote transmission via computer networks
  • Digital recording integrated into their video transmission concept for local long-term storage
  • Integration of video receiver technology into security monitoring centres, emergency call and serviced centres

HeiTel’s executive team will continue to manage the HeiTel business reporting directly to Samir Samhouri, CEO Xtralis.

The Intelligent Remote Monitoring market is one of the fastest growing segments of the maturing video surveillance market due to quickly advancing technology and industry standards. Intelligent Remote Monitoring provides proactive protection through video verified alarms and controlled response at much lower annual costs than alternative solutions.

Like ADPRO by Xtralis, HeiTel has a very strong presence with Central Monitoring Stations. By joining forces Xtralis and HeiTel will provide a complete Intelligent Remote Monitoring platform including video verification, analytics and perimeter protection to the global market. The addition of HeiTel will help the Xtralis group of companies excel and expand in the early detection marketplace in both geographic areas and market segments. The HeiTel and ADPRO product offering, channels, and geographic presence complement each other. This acquisition will not impact the current operating model, channel or go to market strategy of HeiTel. The HeiTel management team will continue to manage and direct the operations and strategy of the business for the foreseeable future. Xtralis intends to help HeiTel improve the services provided to the HeiTel customers through additional investment that Xtralis will be making over time in the infrastructure of HeiTel. Xtralis and HeiTel will both work to expand the awareness of the intelligent remote monitoring technology but will operate as two separate business entities working with their respective channel partners.

We look forward to continuing to provide you with the reliability and quality you’ve come to expect from Xtralis and together grow our businesses.

For more information about HeiTel, visit the Web site – www.heitel.com.

Have a question about Xtralis or HeiTel? Contact us for the answer.

APAC | EMEA | Americas

 

PostHeaderIcon Researcher Access Policy and Procedures: Access to Archive Collections

Excerpt from Northern States Conservation Center: The Collections Caretaker 2-Newsletter


by Peggy Schaller

Archival Collections Found in Museums

Museums have two kinds of archives.

'Museum archives' are internal archives and for the most part should be reserved for staff. Unless a member of the public is doing a project relating to the history of the museum (and the staff should be involved in such a project), it is unlikely that these materials will be in any great demand. Access criteria will also be different for these records.

'Collection archives' are the materials that the public will want to access and use. These are documents related to the collections or collection items themselves. Procedures for access should be set up so that both staff and patrons are comfortable and the collections are protected from theft and vandalism.

Work Area

Establish an area for researchers. Make sure it is clean, clear and uncluttered, well lit and can be monitored by staff.  If you expect to allow laptops, there should be an accessible electrical outlet.

When is Access Granted?

When is the collection accessible? Are you willing to drop everything, interrupt meetings or end a phone call to accommodate a researcher who has dropped in to see the collection? Two solutions strike a balance between convenient access and security.

Some institutions require an appointment. The researcher writes or calls to make an appointment at a time convenient for the researcher and the staff. When making the appointment, the researcher informs the museum about what he or she would like to see or use and the reason for the request (writing a book or paper; genealogical research; etc.). Requesting the type of information desired ahead of time allows the museum to determine if it has the information. This saves the museum and the researcher time.

Other institutions have scheduled research hours. Having set hours when the archives or collection is open for walk-ins may be your solution. One afternoon a week, for example, when a designated staff person could be available to 'drop everything' and accommodate a walk-in researcher.

No one should be allowed (for security reasons) to access the collection on their own. A copy of the access rules should be provided to a patron prior to accessing the collection. One folder at a time should be pulled by a staff person and presented to the patron for review. Emphasis should be placed on the patron maintaining the order of the material within the file and instructions given for photocopy requests. Staff should be present or at least within visual range of the patron during their use of the collection.  Staff will replace the folder when the patron is finished.

It is important that the advanced arrangement policy be enforced without exception. This allows staff to assist researchers without the frustration of having to drop everything or interrupt an important project to fulfill a request. They can plan ahead to devote the necessary time and energy to providing assistance to the patron.

To make the transition from 'access anytime' to enforced 'appointments' more comfortable to its patrons, the museum might consider setting aside one afternoon or morning a week when the archives will be open to the public without appointment. Assign a staff person to be 'on call' for walk-ins during that time. This no appointment period does not alter any of the other rules of access.

Who Has Access/Purpose of Access

Establish an application process for researchers. Ask them to fill out a form explaining their research area, needs and what it is they want or need from your collection. What will be the final product of the research? Will the museum receive a copy of the research product for its records? "I just want to see what you have" is not a specific enough reason for allowing access and may in fact be a fishing expedition for valuable artifacts.

For patrons from out of town who are just passing through, create a research request form that they can fill out that includes their contact information and what specific questions the patron wants answered. This request can then be researched by a staff person at a more convenient time and the patron can be contacted with a list of material relevant to their research and a price for copies of the material. Copies can then be sent once the payment has been received.

Security

Staff monitoring is an important security procedure to prevent damage or theft of materials.  Staff should be able to see what the researcher is doing at all times.

Record keeping and logs of items used and researcher/purpose

Create a researcher log to track the types of uses for which the archival materials are accessed. This log should include the researcher's name and contact information, the purpose of the research and the items requested and used, as well as the date and time of the access.  Tracking which materials are used the most (or the least) will give the museum a better feel for the level of processing (cataloging) that might be appropriate for which materials.

This will also be invaluable should something turn up missing. You will be able to narrow down who was the last person to access the material and when.

Quantity of items pulled at one time

Pull only one item, folder or box at a time. Instruct the researcher that he or she will be allowed to view one set of records (single folder or one box from a collection with the requested topographical material) or one artifact at a time. The materials are to be kept in the same order received and when they are returned, another set of records will be brought out.

If the researcher is doing a side-by-side comparison of related or similar artifacts, a staff member should be present to assist with the handling of the items and make sure no harm comes to them.

Allowed/disallowed items in research area

Create a list of items allowed in the research area.

Backpacks, briefcases, purses, coats, etc. should not be allowed.  These are easy places to hide artifacts, papers and photographs. You might provide lockable lockers, outside the research area, for researchers to put these items.

No food, drinks, or smoking in research areas. Not even water.

No pens. Pencils are ok. Pad of paper is ok. If an electric outlet is available, a laptop is ok.  The case, however, is not allowed.

Handling

Require the researcher to read or listen to verbal handling instructions (do's and don'ts of handling museum artifacts) and sign that they have understood the instructions.

Handling instructions should include:

  • clean hands/gloves required
  • pencils only
  • no food, drink or smoking
  • proper handling of artifacts
  • proper handling of documents
  • importance of keeping documents in order
  • proper handling of photographs

Photocopies

Photocopies of any materials requested by the researcher will be made by museum staff.  The item(s) to be photocopied will not be removed from the file without staff approval. A placeholder sheet will be placed in the file by the staff person while the copy is being made to insure that the document is returned to the proper location within the file.

Costs

You do not need to insert the actual cost of making photocopies in your policy, but should state that there will be one. The actual costs should be reflected in the procedure (which is easier to change, should circumstances require it, than policy). The uses permitted for copies should be outlined here. This section of the policy should be included on the information provided to the patron prior to accessing the collection.

 

Peggy Schaller, founded Collections Research for Museums in 1991 to provide cataloging, collection-management training and services. Peggy is the instructor of MS207: Cataloging your CollectionMS007: The Mission Statement, and MS218: Collection Inventories.  She has worked with a large variety of museums and collections for more than 18 years. Peggy has a bachelor's degree in anthropology with minors in art history and geology from the University of Arizona in Tucson. She has a master's degree in anthropology with a minor in museum studies from the University of Colorado in Boulder and is a Certified Institutional Protection Manager II. She provides workshops and project services to museums and historical societies all across the country. The mission of Collections Research for Museums is to inspire museums to improve their professional standards, collections stewardship and service to their constituency through training in, and assistance with, documenting, preserving, protecting and managing their collections.


 

PostHeaderIcon FEMA, FCC ANNOUNCE NATIONWIDE TEST OF THE EMERGENCY ALERT SYSTEM

June 9, 2011
No.: HQ-11-099
Contact: FEMA HQ News Desk
Phone:   202-646-3272

News Release

FEMA, FCC ANNOUNCE NATIONWIDE TEST OF THE EMERGENCY ALERT SYSTEM

Similar to local Emergency Alert System Tests, this Test is Scheduled to Take Place on November 9, 2011

WASHINGTON - The U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will conduct the first nationwide test of the Emergency Alert System (EAS). The nationwide test will occur on Wednesday, November 9 at 2 p.m. eastern standard time and may last up to three and a half minutes.

The EAS is a national alert and warning system established to enable the President of the United States to address the American public during emergencies.  NOAA's National Weather Service, governors and state and local emergency authorities also use parts of the system to issue more localized emergency alerts.

Similar to local EAS tests that are already conducted frequently, the nationwide test will involve broadcast radio and television stations, cable television, satellite radio and television services and wireline video service providers across all states and the territories of Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands and American Samoa.

On November 9, the public will hear a message indicating that "This is a test." The audio message will be the same for both radio and television. Under the FCC's rules, radio and television broadcasters, cable operators, satellite digital audio radio service providers, direct broadcast satellite service providers and wireline video service providers are required to receive and transmit presidential EAS messages to the public. A national test will help the federal partners and EAS participants determine the reliability of the system and its effectiveness in notifying the public of emergencies and potential dangers nationally and regionally.

"A national test of our Emergency Alert System, with the vital communications support and involvement of participants, is a step towards ensuring that the alert and warning community is prepared to deliver critical information that can help save lives and protect property," said Damon Penn, FEMA's Assistant Administrator of National Continuity Programs. "Because there has never been an activation of the Emergency Alert System on a national level, FEMA views this test as an excellent opportunity to assess the readiness and effectiveness of the current system.  It is important to remember that this is not a pass or fail test, but a chance to establish a baseline for making incremental improvements to the Emergency Alert System with ongoing and future testing.  It is also important to remember that the Emergency Alert System is one of many tools in our communications toolbox, and we will continue to work on additional channels that can be a lifeline of information for people during an emergency."

"The upcoming national test is critical to ensuring that the EAS works as designed," said Jamie Barnett, Chief of the FCC's Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau.  "As recent disasters here at home and in Japan have reminded us, a reliable and effective emergency alert and warning system is key to ensuring the public's safety during times of emergency.  We look forward to working with FEMA in preparation for this important test."

Over the past two years and as part of ongoing national preparedness planning efforts, FEMA, the FCC and other federal partners, state, local, tribal and territorial governments, Emergency Alert System participants and other stakeholders have been working toward making this test a reality.

As the federal, state, tribal, territorial and local governments prepare for and test their capabilities, this event serves as a reminder that everyone should establish an emergency preparedness kit and emergency plan for themselves, their families, communities, and businesses. Anyone can visit www.Ready.gov for more information about how to prepare for and stay informed about what to do in the event of an actual emergency.

FEMA's mission is to support our citizens and first responders to ensure that as a nation we work together to build, sustain, and improve our capability to prepare for, protect against, respond to, recover from, and mitigate all hazards.

 
More Articles...



Members Login