The Photograph and the Connoisseur

Connoisseurship is done through extensive research and comparing individual pieces with one known to be from the attributed artist’s oeuvre. This is a difficult and often expensive task, because the connoisseur has to compare artworks by viewing one for which he takes extensive notes and then traveling, often internationally, to view the other. In this scenario the connoisseur conducts the comparison with nothing but a few notes and his memory. This is hardly a perfect system. When connoisseurs were relatively new they may have had access to a sketch or print copy of one or both works, but these were only as good as the copier was skilled and presented the copier’s interpretation of the work. The connoisseur had quite the task to complete. In the 1820’s his task seemed to become easier with the advent of modern photography.

Photography allowed connoisseurs to view and compare works together, under the same conditions, without the difficulties of travel, the deficiencies of memories, and the interference of a copier’s interpretation. This meant that the connoisseur could compare brushstrokes and make a more accurate comparison. However, this was not the case. Connoisseurs believed that they were making accurate comparisons, and thus their dedications were beyond doubt, but they soon realized they were still dependent upon the interpretation of the photograph and the quality of the image. The lighting, angle, and distance of the photograph can affect what the connoisseur sees and does not see. Photography is a deceptive aid. While it is more practical than travelling great distances to see two works separately, and more accurate then a drawn or printed copy, photography is still just a copy.

While photography does not provide accurate copies for traditional connoisseur methods, these copies are useful for non-traditional comparison methods. An example of a non-traditional method is discussed in the article “Fractal expressionism.” Through the use of photography the abstract paintings of Jackson Pollock were analyzed. A computer grid was placed over a scanned photograph to analyze the dispersal pattern of paint in Pollock’s works. Through this method a pattern was discovered that could not have been proven without the use of photography. This pattern can now be used to determine the authenticity of paintings attributed to Jackson Pollock.


A primary task of the connoisseur is to judge the authenticity of an
As photographic technology has developed the role of photography in connoisseurship has expanded. Since the birth of modern photography art has been studied through photographs. While the majority of people experience artworks solely through photographs, professional connoisseurs recognize the limitations of a photo and prefer to see the artwork in person and then use a photograph in addition to notes to aid their memories. In this fashion, photography will continue to be used by connoisseurs. It will also be used in conjunction with science to find new tools for authenticating artwork. The photograph is welcome to stay, but only as an advisory tool. It will not be used as the primary source for comparison.

3 Types of Prints

The three major categories of printmaking techniques are Relief, Intaglio, and Lithographic.

The oldest known printed book, the Diamond Sutra from China, was made from relief prints. It is currently held in the British Library. Relief is the oldest printmaking category and has undergone many adaptations creating multiple techniques including but not limited to: woodcut, wood engraving, photoengraving, mezzotint, anastatic printing, stipple engraving, and linocut. Relief printing developed separately in ancient times in China and Egypt. When working in relief artists remove the areas of the matrix that will not be printed. This leaves the lines and “image” to be printed on the surface plane, while the “white” space, or area that is not going to be printed below the surface plane. The surface of the matrix is then coated in an even layer of ink, and then pressed onto paper or linen. This process does not require large amounts of pressure to create a print.

Intaglio prints are made from matrixes similar to relief prints, however the area to be printed is carved out of the surface. This leaves the “white” area of the print on the surface and the “colored” area depressed. In the printing process ink is pressed into the plate and then wiped off of the surface of the matrix. This process is typically done with a printing press to ensure that high, even pressure is placed on the matrix. The press pushes the paper into the inked crevices. The pressure creates an outline or indentation in the paper along the edge of the matrix. This technique was invented in the 1430’s. Intaglio prints were used to create multiple copies of books and art before the advancement of photography and the digital age. Intaglio prints are still used today, though they are less fashionable. An example of a recent intaglio print can be found at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Roger Vieillard’s 1963 Horse. The print clearly shows how the depth of a carved line in the Matrix effects the resulting shade and clarity of the print. The cactus in the image is carved deeper than any other line, making it pop out on the page.

Lithographic prints are made from a smooth porous stone or plate. The image is made with a grease pencil on the surface of the stone. The stone is then wetted, which will stop the oil-based ink from adhering to the stone when spread across the surface for printing. This technique is the only one that will produce a printed image that is in the same direction as the original. The other techniques produce mirrored reflections. This technique was invented in 1796 by Alois Senefelder and became popular in the early 19th century. Artists such as Manet, Redon, and Goya composed lithographic prints during this time. The MoMA currently has Redon’s L’Oeil comme un ballon bizarre se dirige vers l’infini from 1882. The piece is an excellent example of the shades of gray in a lithographic artist’s repertoire as well as the detail and clear lines possible with this technique.

Loot: The Battle Over the Stolen Treasures of the Ancient World

“They were made by other civilizations and found in Turkey. It’s the heritage of all humanity, the heritage of the whole world. This land belongs to us, but what we find under the soil, if we can’t look after it, maybe other people should.” –Mr. Kazim Akbiyikoglu

Whether one agrees or disagrees with the above statement, Sharon Waxman’s book, Loot: the Battle over the Stolen Treasures of the Ancient World will facilitate an understanding of the points of view about repatriation. Sharon Waxman attempts to accurately depict the multitude of opinions concerning repatriation. Whether or not she has been successful is debatable, but Loot definitely hits close to the mark. Waxman focuses her efforts on four countries: Egypt, Turkey, Greece, and Italy. All four of these have had objects repatriated to them from major Western museums, such as the Museé du Louvre, the British Museum, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, and the J. Paul Getty Museum. By focusing on these four countries, Waxman provides a balanced array of opinions pertaining to repatriation, a hot topic in today’s art world as museums and collectors are forced, for the first time, to answer to countries of origin for questionable past collection policies.



These origin countries want the return of the art of past civilizations which has been removed from their country under questionable circumstances. They argue that the art of ancient civilizations, such as Egypt, is their heritage first, before the heritage of western civilization and the world. Museums that are currently in possession of such objects argue that these pieces belong to the whole world and should be housed where the most people will have access to them. These museums frequently try to support the actions of the past by arguing that modern day inhabitants of these ancient sites are not direct descendants of the civilizations that created the art and therefore lack understanding and appreciation for the artifacts in question. The local inhabitants are portrayed as current inhabitants of the land who see ancient art as a price tag and perpetuate the looting of priceless art. Waxman present these two conflicting points of view and the variances in between without showing her personal opinion.

In Loot, Sharon Waxman approaches repatriation as a veteran journalist. She wrote for the Washington Post for ten years, reporting on Middle Eastern and European politics and culture. She went on to be a New York Times cultural correspondent, primarily focusing on Hollywood. Prior to her journalism career, she received a Master’s from Oxford University in Middle East Studies. Waxman’s approach to researching repatriation reflects her background in journalism because it was primarily focused on collecting first person narratives. She used literary sources to gather an understanding of the history of the four countries presented, but the information regarding present day situations stems from the interviews she conducted. The individuals interviewed were impressive and abundant. Interviewees include current museum staff, past museum staff, national cultural directors, law enforcement, art smugglers, and community members. Waxman provides her readers with the uncommon opportunity to see a panoramic view of repatriation that includes the perspectives of people who have had first hand experiences with repatriation. These experiences are often conveyed in their own words.

These interviews allow her to present the various perspectives held by individuals as well as the different approaches to achieving repatriation used by the four countries she focuses on. Egypt, Turkey, Greece, and Italy follow strategies with various levels of aggression. According to Waxman, Egypt’s strategy has been directed by Zahi Hawass, the secretary-general of Egypt’s Supreme Council of Antiquities. Hawass has proved to be a formable figure for museums to contend with. He prefers to use the media to grab the public’s attention and support. This is an unconventional approach that is typically looked down upon by museum professionals who believe these issues should be solved through direct communication with the museum. He often surprises people with his candor and spontaneous outbursts in situations when the media is present. While he is often over the top, it has proven to be an effective technique. Today every museum with an Egyptian collection knows his name and is weary of his attention.



Turkey’s approach has traditionally been subtler than Egypt’s. Waxman focuses on the return of the Lydian Hoard to Turkey from the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City to show Turkey’s approach. In this example, repatriation was the result of the hard work of civilians with sparse support from the government. While the government has recently increased its role in repatriation, the return of the Lydian Hoard was the result of one journalist’s persistent effort. Waxman presents this example by showing how the Lydian Hoard originally left Turkey as the result of greed and a lack of understanding and respect by the local community. Even after its return, the Lydian Hoard was not safe from greedy hands and the prize piece of the collection was stolen from the museum. Today Turkey’s museums are underfunded and lack security, space and qualified personnel.



Greece has approached repatriation by individually tackling the arguments used against them. The primary example that Waxman uses is the Elgin Marbles held in the British museum. One argument the British Museum has used in the debate over where the marbles belong is that Greece lacked a place where the marbles could be properly cared for and shared with the public. However, this is no longer the case. A new Acropolis museum that meets these provisions is scheduled to open in the summer of 2009. Whether the marbles return to stand in this new facility is yet to be determined. In Greece’s effort to have the Elgin marbles and other artifacts returned, they have attempted to meet the standards of the international museum community and use international laws to support their claims.



Italy has traditionally ignored the use of investigation and law. The primary example Waxman provides is the Italian government’s interaction with the J. Paul Getty museum. In this situation, the Italian government collected evidence that many of the objects held in the Getty’s antiquities department were illegally exported from Italy. Italy pressured the Getty into returning these objects by threatening legal action. Italy eventually followed through on its threat and filed charges against one of the museum’s curators, Marion True. This seems to have worked as a large portion of the requested artifacts have been shipped to Italy, while other objects are awaiting the result of continuing negotiations.



Loot is an engaging read as one is welcomed into a world of intrigue. Waxman is able to show why repatriation is an important and highly debated issue. Whether or not the reader is familiar with the world of museums, they will enjoy the time spent within the pages and go away with new knowledge on the subject. Because of Waxman’s talent as a writer and knowledge of the subject, the reader is able to understand the different and often contradicting perspectives of individuals, institutions, and countries involved.

Book Review: Museum of the Missing: A History of Art Theft

Museum of the Missing: A History of Art Theft by Simon Houpt addresses the art world’s worst nightmare and threat, art theft. Art theft has been on the rise since the 1950’s when art began to sell for over hundreds of thousands of dollars. Thieves and their buyers are part of an intricate underground network that is overlooked by the general public. Houpt emphasizes the cultural and moral importance of dissuading the buying and selling of stolen art by providing a general history of art theft.



The book’s publication in 2006 occurred at a relevant time in the history of art theft, as evidenced by the recovery of Edvard Munch’s Madonna and The Scream by Norwegian police shortly thereafter. The two pieces, stolen on August 22, 2004, were one of the various examples used by Houpt to convey the dramatic history of art theft.

Edvard Munch's Madonna

Houpt structured his book to address the history of art theft from various angles. He examines the subject from the point of view of the collector, the thief, the investigator, museum security, and the law. By covering these perspectives Houpt provides the reader with a general overview of who is concerned with art theft and why while maintaining a narrative voice. Houpt notes that the individual art thief did not play a large role in stealing art until the 1950’s when art started to sell at auctions for noteworthy prices. Although Houpt’s voice is clearly biased, his view is generally accepted by professionals in the art world. Before high prices caught the attention of the average thief, stealing art was typically the result of conquering kings and the looting of armies. Houpt reserves one chapter, about a third of the book, for the topic and explains how kings took art from conquered lands as proof of the victor’s strength and superiority. His primary example of such activity is Hitler’s treatment of cultural property in World War II. The chapter, “Theft in the Time of War,” dedicated to looting can appear out of place despite its length because the rest of the book is focused on the effect of the common thief in the art world. The chapter appears to be a side story that grows out of proportion as compared to the primary plot. The remainder of the book is dedicated to art theft conducted by an individual or small band of thieves.

The book continues to explore the history of common art thieves through pertinent examples. One of his examples was Adam Worth, a successful art thief based in London. Worth created a rich persona that allowed him to move through London society at ease, investigating potential thefts. His story and those of others reflect the romanticism Houpt believes the general public associates with art theft. In balance to Worth’s villain, Houpt introduces his readers to Charley Hill, a Scotland Yard investigator who worked undercover to recover stolen art, including Goya’s Portrait of Doña Antonia Zárate. Houpt uses Hill’s real life experience to show the public what art professionals already know, that art thieves are not romantic characters looking for expensive thrills, they are criminals and purveyors of corruption. These criminals take the world’s cultural heritage away from the public, the rightful heirs of these works.

Goya’s Portrait of Doña Antonia Zárate.

Houpt uses these examples to demonstrate that art is a part of our cultural heritage that illistrates the great potential and achievements of mankind. Great works of art should be preserved to inspire all aspects of life. A sacred relic inspires the religious to believe. A landscape painting inspires the preservation and enjoyment of nature. It is important to protect these inspirations for future generations. This leads Houpt to address one of the many difficulties that arise in defending art from thieves. Because of the influence and importance of art, Houpt and other art professionals believe it should be easily accessible to the public. This may sound simple in theory, but it proves to be difficult in practice. Making art accessible, yet safe and secure raises many security issues. Methods of security used by museums to secure artwork include motion and heat sensors, video surveillance, trained security, alarms, and protective glass cases, however, these methods can be expensive and are not foolproof. In addition to the expense these methods bring to a museum, they also decrease the accessibility of the objects to the public. Houpt used an example of how glass was used to protect artwork, but the glass made it difficult for visitors to view brushstrokes. These difficulties are elegantly presented by Houpt, but he never provides a solution or best practices that can guide museums.

Beyond traditional security measures, Houpt places responsibility for object security on museum registrars. The public rarely sees the museum registrar and may not recognize their role. By placing a spotlight on the registrar, Houpt introduced the public to their role and reminds the registrar of the importantance of their job, especially in respect to security. Museum registrars can defend their museum from theft by maintaining a current and accurate catalogue of all objects in their collection. This will aid in realizing a theft, identifying the missing piece, and orchastraiting the recovery. Incomplete catalogues are an issue that many museums face. Another practice that helps registrars protect museum collections from art theft is to research and demans proper provenance for all incoming objects. The collection and general reputation of a museum will be tarnished if it acquires an artwork that lacks proper provenance. The public trust holds museums to a high moral standard; the purchasing of stolen art work damages this trust. In addition to lowering the public’s trust in the institution, purchasing objects without proper provenance increases the demand for stolen pieces. Beyond these methods to deter theft, registrars should reference stolen art databases when acquiring artwork.

In the end, Houpt listed a few ways that museum professionals can help to minimize and fight art theft, but he did not present any new methods or ideas. While the book does address an important topic that is often overlooked by the general public, it does not present information that is useful for the museum professional. Houpt’s casual style and vocabulary are more appropriate for the layperson. The book is eloquently written and uses well chosen examples to convey important ideas. Anyone looking for an introduction of the world of art theft would be satisfied with this book, however, it is not for the museum professional who is looking for guidance on how to handle situations in their job related to art theft.

Houpt, Simon. Museum of the Missing: A History of Art Theft. Sterling Publishing Co.: New York, NY. 2006.

International Relations

The following are news articles that discuss various international relations issues that effect museums.

Taiwan and China

Dr. Hawass and the Bust of Nefertiti

Ethiopian Crown and British Museums

Kenyan Memorial Statues

Museum of Egyptian Antiquities in Cairo

Get up there son.
You too Jen, climb on top.
Now smile for the camera.
Click

Although the language and names spoken vary from time to time this is a typical conversation outside of the Museum of Egyptian Antiquities in Cairo, as tourists climb onto the marble sphinx that stand guard in the Museum's garden for a photograph.



Recently I was lucky enough to travel to Egypt. This was a dream vacation that lived up to my greatest expectations. During my travels up the Nile and across the East Desert I saw monuments that I have studied in books since high school. While the pyramids were just as imposing as I had imagined and the temples more intricate and detailed than pictures can give justice there was one place in Egypt that did disappoint me, The Museum of Egyptian Antiquities in Cairo. As the primary museum for a country buried with history I expected to see great works of art and culture in an environment that supported their development and preservation.

It was to my great disappointment to see that this is not the case. Not only did the example above occur twice while I waited outside for my ticket, but inside the museum visitors had free reign, touching and leaning on ancient artifacts. The museum's conservation efforts began and seemed to end with their no photography policy. A few signs were located sparingly through out the museum saying "Do not touch", but this was not enforced, never mind followed. There was a beautiful statue of a Pharaoh from the Old Kingdom that was an example of beautiful workmanship. You could see the detail of a kneecap under thin drapery. While I was examining this piece a woman approached an noticed the same detail. She then proceeded to rub her hand across the knee of the statue. How can we expect these objects to survive for another thousand years if they are exposed to this kind of treatment? If visitors hands do not eventually rub away the workmanship of the ancient Egyptians, the chemicals left by their hands will.

Objects were crowded together with out any information pertaining to their history or significance. A few pieces did have labels, but these are few and far between and only offered in Arabic, with the occasional English comment.

This museum fell short of fullfilling the generally accepted fundimental roles of a museum: conservation, research, and education.

Museum of Islamic Art in Doha, Qatar

The new Museum of Islamic Art in Doha, Qatar was deigned by I.M. Pei. He has also designed the pyramid at the Louvre, the East wing of the National Gallery of Art in D.C. and many other museum spaces. The Museum opened in late November of 2008. The museum houses an encyclopedic collection of Islamic art. The Museum of Islamic Art is dedicated to being the foremost museum of Islamic art in the world, and as well a centre of education and information in the field of the arts of the Islamic world.

The building’s austere, almost primitive forms and the dazzling collections it houses underscore the seriousness of the country’s cultural ambition.