The Freer Gallery of Art and the Arthur M. Sackler Gallery have announced the digitization of ancient near eastern inscriptions. The inscriptions currently preserved as Squeezes of text from archaeological sites such as Bastam, Persepolis, and Samarra.
The original inscriptions were preserved by Ernst Herzfeld, a German archeologist in the early 20th century. He developed a technique of layering a series of moistened sheets of paper to create a wet pulp which was then pressed upon the inscriptions to create a 3-dimensional mold. The Freer and Sackler archives currently hold 393 squeezes.
In 2010 the Smithsonian received a grant to electronically preserve the squeezes. Using a new imaging technique, Reflectance Transformation Imaging (RTI) allows digital copies to be made which allow the viewer to zoom in and enhance the image without damaging the original squeeze.
The Freer and Sackler Archives is dedicated to furthering the study of Asian and Middle Eastern art and culture. RTI has aided it in providing world wide access to a section of its collection to scholars and history enthusiasts.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Missing Museum Items
Over 240,000 items missing in Russian museums
English.news.cn 2010-09-08 20:34:46 FeedbackPrintRSS
MOSCOW, Sept. 8 (Xinhua) -- Russian museums were missing more than 242,000 items, only 24,500 of which were reported as stolen, an expert from the Cultural Ministry said Wednesday.
According to Lyubov Molchanova, another 219,000 items were absent for unknown reasons, with mismanagement as likely a culprit as thieves.
Russia's Interior and Cultural Ministries were currently conducting a joint audit of the national museums' treasures after three major robberies happened in the largest museum, the Hermitage, in St. Petersburg.
They checked 1,881 museums, responsible for 73 million items.
The expert told a museums conference that some missing items might be actually still stocked in the museums but "just had been forgotten".
She referred to disorderly work and mismanagement in the museums as a reason for the mess.
Molchanova complained that some items had been transferred to governors and state institutions, who had refused to return them.
"Museum workers often are too humble to resist the officials' demands," said the expert as quoted by the RIA Novosti news agency.
Editor: Deng Shasha
This article was posted on English.News.cn on 2010-09-08
This article was sadly not surprising. The sheer number of missing artifacts is shocking, because that many items should never go missing, but it is not surprising. There are 73,000,000 objects under the care of Russian Museums and only 242,000 objects are missing. That is less than 1%.
Yes the number is large and somewhat overwhelming, but we have to keep it in perspective. I am willing to guess that most museums, after going through an inventory like the Russian museums just did would find that they were missing at least 1% of their objects.
I do not condone this, but I do want us to put this article in perspective. We, as readers, should not take away from this article the idea that the Russians have not been caring for their objects. This is not true. There are many factors involved when an object is missing. The most horrifying is theft, but more often than not the object was simply missplaced, and is actually still inside the museum. What we should take away from this article is that we as an overall community should place more importance on the preservation of our cultural heritage.
The article said "that some items had been transferred to governors and state institutions, who had refused to return them." out of the 219,000 objects missing, but not reported stolen, a good chunk of them would not be missing if we as a culture placed more pressure on these political figures to return their objects once the period of the loan was completed.
Friday, July 30, 2010
Introduction to Herodotus
I read excerpts of Herodotus' The Histories back in college. It was mixed together with several other ancient literary works and received minimal attention from me and my professor. At this moment I can barely recall which sections I read. Because f my poor recollection I have decided to "re-read" (a slight exaggeration since I never really read it the first time) The Histories.
I have barely scratched the surface of this great work and I am already amazed. Herodotus was from Helicarnassus, though he spent his later years in Athens. Helicarnassus was located on the border of the Persian empire. His location provided Herodotus with a unique view of the Persian and Greek cultures. I have yet to see how this effected his writing, but it must have provided him with some of respect for the Persian community because he introduces them as the "best informed in history." A mighty fine compliment from a man who would become known as the Father of History. His acknowledgement of the Persians superior historical view is surprising because I was led to believe that the Greeks, especially those of Herodotus' time, shared a general dislike of everything Persian.
Herodotus starts his history with brief recap of kidnappings of famous Greek and "Barbarian" women, which he considers the start of poor Greek and Persian relations. These women played important roles in Greek mythology, but are portrayed by the Persians, and Herodotus in a very different manner. Herodotus lists who was kidnapped by who in a very matter of fact manner, and leaves their entire story within the realm of mankind, leaving the gods in their seats on Mount Olympus. Below I have listed the mythologies surrounding these women as given by Wikepedia.
Io
Europe
Medea
Helen
I have barely scratched the surface of this great work and I am already amazed. Herodotus was from Helicarnassus, though he spent his later years in Athens. Helicarnassus was located on the border of the Persian empire. His location provided Herodotus with a unique view of the Persian and Greek cultures. I have yet to see how this effected his writing, but it must have provided him with some of respect for the Persian community because he introduces them as the "best informed in history." A mighty fine compliment from a man who would become known as the Father of History. His acknowledgement of the Persians superior historical view is surprising because I was led to believe that the Greeks, especially those of Herodotus' time, shared a general dislike of everything Persian.
Herodotus starts his history with brief recap of kidnappings of famous Greek and "Barbarian" women, which he considers the start of poor Greek and Persian relations. These women played important roles in Greek mythology, but are portrayed by the Persians, and Herodotus in a very different manner. Herodotus lists who was kidnapped by who in a very matter of fact manner, and leaves their entire story within the realm of mankind, leaving the gods in their seats on Mount Olympus. Below I have listed the mythologies surrounding these women as given by Wikepedia.
Io
A priestess of Hera in Argos, Io was a nymph who was seduced by Zeus, who changed her into a heifer to escape detection. Her mistress Hera set ever-watchful Argus Panoptes to guard her, but Hermes was sent to distract the guardian and slay him. Heifer Io was loosed to roam the world, stung by a maddening gadfly sent by Hera, and wandered to Egypt, thus placing her descendant Belus in Egypt; his sons Cadmus and Danaus would thus "return" to mainland Greece.
Europe
A Phoenician woman of high lineage, from whom the name of the continent Europe has ultimately been taken. She was abducted by Zeus in the form of a white bull.
Medea
Medea's role began after Jason arrived from Iolcus to Colchis (The old kingdom of Georgia) to claim his inheritance and throne by retrieving the Golden Fleece. Medea fell in love with him and promised to help him, but only on the condition that if he succeeded, he would take her with him and marry her. Jason agreed.
Helen
Helen of Troy was the daughter of Zeus and Leda. She was abducted by Paris and brought about the Trojan War.
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Ethics of Remembrance: Sachenhausen
Sachenhausen, as an institution, is a reflection of modern Germany’s attempt to balance recognizing the past actions of the Third Reich with the current need to minimize the connection between Germany’s current government and past governments. There are many contributing factors which German institutions have to weigh when finding an adequate balance. Institutions, such as the Sachenhausen concentration camp, need to consider the feelings of the site’s victims and their families, the feelings of those who acted as practitioners, the response of the international community and the local community, and historical accuracy for future generations. Officials at Sachenhausen are constantly working to create a balanced presentation of the site’s history despite the politically and emotionally charged atmosphere. Sachenhausen has come to articulate the past and the sense of victimization that plays a role in what it is like to be German.
Germany: A History
After Hitler became Chancellor of the Reich in 1933 he began to fill his government with like minded individuals. One of these was SS Heinrich Himmler, who Hitler appointed as head of the SS in 1936. Concentration camps in the first few years held prisoners who were considered enemies of the Reich. It was not until 1937 that prisoner populations began to include groups, such as Jews and Homosexuals, who were considered inferior to the Aryan race. In 1939 foreign nationals began to appear in concentration camps as the German War Machine conquered surrounding countries. Towards the end of the war Germans led prisoners on death marches to avoid the approaching Allied armies.
After the fall of the Third Reich governance of Germany was split between the Allies. Communist Russia was responsible for East Germany, which included the areas surrounding Berlin. Under the leadership of GDR concentration camps where used as prisons for members of the Nazi party and the SS. Some camps were also used as memorials to commemorate German resistance fighters who had been persecuted at those camps.
With the unification in 1989 came the end of the GDR in East Germany. The new government wanted to show its investment in democracy. One way it did this was by restructuring the way it showed awareness of the past. This involved a decentralization of the memorial system. Concentration camps where now to encompass three roles: documentation, preservation, and commemoration. The focus was shifted away from commemoration and towards the former two roles, while memorials were constructed in Berlin and elsewhere to commemorate victims. Individual concentration camps did this in different ways.
Sachenhausen: A History
Reichsführer – SS Heinrich Himmler had prisoners from small local detainment camps build the Sachenhausen Concentration camp in Oranienburg Germany during his first year as Chief of Police. Sachenhausen was the first concentration camp to be run by the SS and became a model for concentration camps built by the Nazis. In 1938 Himmler moved his offices from Berlin to Sachenhausen, making it the center of all concentration camp operations. Sachenhausen’s close proximity to Berlin, approximately 34 kilometers (21 miles), made it influential in the removal of political opponents to the Third Reich. These political prisoners made up the majority of the camp’s population in the first few years, until the Third Reich began to declare certain groups to be biologically inferior to the Aryan race. Between 1936 and 1945 between 140,000 and 200,000 prisoners entered Sachenhausen. Approximately 30,000 prisoners died at Sachenhausen during its eleven years of operation under the Nazis.
Sachenhausen was not a death camp; instead it was used primarily as a labor source. Prisoners were forced to work in the local brickworks, supplying the German war machine. Others were used to test various German products, such as the boots made for soldiers. Some were killed with prototypes of mass murder techniques, including the gas chamber. The primary victims of these machines were Soviet Prisoners of War. In 1945 the Nazis led 3,000 prisoners on a death march in an attempt to hide what they had been doing from the Soviet army who liberated the camp.
After the Soviets liberated the camp they began to use the facilities for their own purposes. In 1945 the camp was used to hold Nazi functionaries and political prisoners. It became the largest Soviet camp in Germany by 1948. By the time of the camp’s closing in 1950 it had held approximately 60,000 prisoners. On August 22, 1961 the camp was inaugurated as the Sachenhausen National Memorial. This memorial focused on political prisoners and resistance fighters held in at the camp during the Nazi era. The memorial was designed in a way that ignored the fact that Sachenhausen held other types of prisoners. After unification in 1989, Sachenhausen transformed into what it is today: a museum and a memorial.
The Issue
Under current administration Sachenhausen is dedicated to the “preservation of remnants; extensive documentation and differentiated presentation of the historical events…; promotion of a critical confrontation with history; and a critical evaluation and accurate reworking of the GDR Memorial design.” Sachenhausen is attempting to present visitors with its whole story, not just a single perspective. This is in line with the German political agenda to present their history in a way that recognizes the horrors that occurred, but separates modern Germans from those horrors. This is done by showing the past of the Germans who fought against Nazi propaganda and those who suffered because of that propaganda. Historically there has been a tendency to forget that the victims, especially those in Sachenhausen, were more than Jews, Homosexuals, and Gypsies; they were Germans. With the exception of foreign prisoners who came to the camp after the start of the war, the camp held people who considered themselves to be Germans. These people had lived their entire lives in Germany; they owned businesses, went to school, and paid taxes until one day the government decided that they were not German.
The idea that Germans were victimized during the Holocaust is only part of the story. Memorial sites, such as Sachenhausen, hold the responsibility to recognize that some Germans were not victims, but practitioners. For German politicians and the public it is easier to identify with the victims.
The fact that Germans played multiple roles during the Holocaust leaves today’s leaders at Sachenhausen and other memorial sites in the precarious position of deciding which stories to tell and which stories to not tell. This balance is important for the political and cultural stability of modern Germany as well as the acknowledgment and commemoration of victims and their families.
Sachenhausen achieves this balance through preservation, documentation and commemoration. The site is preserved by to a limited extent. The buildings have not been reconstructed, instead they are left to the elements. The staff use preventative measures, such as weather sealant on some buildings to help lessen deterioration, but nothing more is done. One site tour guide explained this process “consideration for the victims. We do not want to be seen as ‘rebuilding’ the concentration camps.” This would be a horrible slight against victims and a political nightmare, especially when the proximity of Sachenhausen to Berlin is considered.
The site has maintained the few records available about the site. While the Nazi’s were meticulous record keepers, they were also desperate to remove any trace of what they had done at Sachenhausen. Most documents exist from outside sources, and are maintained by site staff. This information is shared with the community through the on-site museum. It is a solitary building, standing in place of what was one the camp kitchen. The museum is focused on telling the story of the site from multiple angles, although the Jewish victim dominates the scene. The exhibit design tries to balance perspectives by presenting individual stories to visitors. A visitor can hear the thoughts of a Nazi soldier stationed at Sachenhausen in his letters home. The letters sit next to photographs of guardsmen, and an old uniform. Across the room are peak holes into the lives of the prisoners in the form of wooden toys and hidden notes. In a separate room you can hear prisoners and ex-guards tell their stories over a computer monitor.
Sachenhausen commemorates its history and those who died there with a memorial garden. Interestingly, the garden is not officially part of Sachenhausen. It lies outside of the camp gates, and has been built and added to by private groups. By keeping the commemorative side of the camp separate, both physically and symbolically, the site can maintain a ‘historic’ or ‘factorial’ appearance, but still recognize people’s emotional attachment to the site.
The staff at Sachenhausen believe balance is being maintained. My tour guide still noted that work needed to be done is certain areas, but the overall affect was a success. I agree with this assessment, and so do most visitors. The museum section of the site still needs to clarify who was kept prisoner here, and provide a little more depth to the side of the guard. Why did one become a guard? What happened to the guards after the war? These are questions that were never answered. Did the site purely house Jews? Russian soldiers? Political prisoners? The materials presented to the visitor answer these questions, but the visitor has to dig to find a complete answer, one is not readily available. Overall, Sachenhausen is a reflection of Germany’s attempt to find balance. There is the initial appearance of balance, but work still needs to be done around the edges before the scales of history can be perfectly even.
Germany: A History
After Hitler became Chancellor of the Reich in 1933 he began to fill his government with like minded individuals. One of these was SS Heinrich Himmler, who Hitler appointed as head of the SS in 1936. Concentration camps in the first few years held prisoners who were considered enemies of the Reich. It was not until 1937 that prisoner populations began to include groups, such as Jews and Homosexuals, who were considered inferior to the Aryan race. In 1939 foreign nationals began to appear in concentration camps as the German War Machine conquered surrounding countries. Towards the end of the war Germans led prisoners on death marches to avoid the approaching Allied armies.
After the fall of the Third Reich governance of Germany was split between the Allies. Communist Russia was responsible for East Germany, which included the areas surrounding Berlin. Under the leadership of GDR concentration camps where used as prisons for members of the Nazi party and the SS. Some camps were also used as memorials to commemorate German resistance fighters who had been persecuted at those camps.
With the unification in 1989 came the end of the GDR in East Germany. The new government wanted to show its investment in democracy. One way it did this was by restructuring the way it showed awareness of the past. This involved a decentralization of the memorial system. Concentration camps where now to encompass three roles: documentation, preservation, and commemoration. The focus was shifted away from commemoration and towards the former two roles, while memorials were constructed in Berlin and elsewhere to commemorate victims. Individual concentration camps did this in different ways.
Sachenhausen: A History
Reichsführer – SS Heinrich Himmler had prisoners from small local detainment camps build the Sachenhausen Concentration camp in Oranienburg Germany during his first year as Chief of Police. Sachenhausen was the first concentration camp to be run by the SS and became a model for concentration camps built by the Nazis. In 1938 Himmler moved his offices from Berlin to Sachenhausen, making it the center of all concentration camp operations. Sachenhausen’s close proximity to Berlin, approximately 34 kilometers (21 miles), made it influential in the removal of political opponents to the Third Reich. These political prisoners made up the majority of the camp’s population in the first few years, until the Third Reich began to declare certain groups to be biologically inferior to the Aryan race. Between 1936 and 1945 between 140,000 and 200,000 prisoners entered Sachenhausen. Approximately 30,000 prisoners died at Sachenhausen during its eleven years of operation under the Nazis.
Sachenhausen was not a death camp; instead it was used primarily as a labor source. Prisoners were forced to work in the local brickworks, supplying the German war machine. Others were used to test various German products, such as the boots made for soldiers. Some were killed with prototypes of mass murder techniques, including the gas chamber. The primary victims of these machines were Soviet Prisoners of War. In 1945 the Nazis led 3,000 prisoners on a death march in an attempt to hide what they had been doing from the Soviet army who liberated the camp.
After the Soviets liberated the camp they began to use the facilities for their own purposes. In 1945 the camp was used to hold Nazi functionaries and political prisoners. It became the largest Soviet camp in Germany by 1948. By the time of the camp’s closing in 1950 it had held approximately 60,000 prisoners. On August 22, 1961 the camp was inaugurated as the Sachenhausen National Memorial. This memorial focused on political prisoners and resistance fighters held in at the camp during the Nazi era. The memorial was designed in a way that ignored the fact that Sachenhausen held other types of prisoners. After unification in 1989, Sachenhausen transformed into what it is today: a museum and a memorial.
The Issue
Under current administration Sachenhausen is dedicated to the “preservation of remnants; extensive documentation and differentiated presentation of the historical events…; promotion of a critical confrontation with history; and a critical evaluation and accurate reworking of the GDR Memorial design.” Sachenhausen is attempting to present visitors with its whole story, not just a single perspective. This is in line with the German political agenda to present their history in a way that recognizes the horrors that occurred, but separates modern Germans from those horrors. This is done by showing the past of the Germans who fought against Nazi propaganda and those who suffered because of that propaganda. Historically there has been a tendency to forget that the victims, especially those in Sachenhausen, were more than Jews, Homosexuals, and Gypsies; they were Germans. With the exception of foreign prisoners who came to the camp after the start of the war, the camp held people who considered themselves to be Germans. These people had lived their entire lives in Germany; they owned businesses, went to school, and paid taxes until one day the government decided that they were not German.
The idea that Germans were victimized during the Holocaust is only part of the story. Memorial sites, such as Sachenhausen, hold the responsibility to recognize that some Germans were not victims, but practitioners. For German politicians and the public it is easier to identify with the victims.
The fact that Germans played multiple roles during the Holocaust leaves today’s leaders at Sachenhausen and other memorial sites in the precarious position of deciding which stories to tell and which stories to not tell. This balance is important for the political and cultural stability of modern Germany as well as the acknowledgment and commemoration of victims and their families.
Sachenhausen achieves this balance through preservation, documentation and commemoration. The site is preserved by to a limited extent. The buildings have not been reconstructed, instead they are left to the elements. The staff use preventative measures, such as weather sealant on some buildings to help lessen deterioration, but nothing more is done. One site tour guide explained this process “consideration for the victims. We do not want to be seen as ‘rebuilding’ the concentration camps.” This would be a horrible slight against victims and a political nightmare, especially when the proximity of Sachenhausen to Berlin is considered.
The site has maintained the few records available about the site. While the Nazi’s were meticulous record keepers, they were also desperate to remove any trace of what they had done at Sachenhausen. Most documents exist from outside sources, and are maintained by site staff. This information is shared with the community through the on-site museum. It is a solitary building, standing in place of what was one the camp kitchen. The museum is focused on telling the story of the site from multiple angles, although the Jewish victim dominates the scene. The exhibit design tries to balance perspectives by presenting individual stories to visitors. A visitor can hear the thoughts of a Nazi soldier stationed at Sachenhausen in his letters home. The letters sit next to photographs of guardsmen, and an old uniform. Across the room are peak holes into the lives of the prisoners in the form of wooden toys and hidden notes. In a separate room you can hear prisoners and ex-guards tell their stories over a computer monitor.
Sachenhausen commemorates its history and those who died there with a memorial garden. Interestingly, the garden is not officially part of Sachenhausen. It lies outside of the camp gates, and has been built and added to by private groups. By keeping the commemorative side of the camp separate, both physically and symbolically, the site can maintain a ‘historic’ or ‘factorial’ appearance, but still recognize people’s emotional attachment to the site.
The staff at Sachenhausen believe balance is being maintained. My tour guide still noted that work needed to be done is certain areas, but the overall affect was a success. I agree with this assessment, and so do most visitors. The museum section of the site still needs to clarify who was kept prisoner here, and provide a little more depth to the side of the guard. Why did one become a guard? What happened to the guards after the war? These are questions that were never answered. Did the site purely house Jews? Russian soldiers? Political prisoners? The materials presented to the visitor answer these questions, but the visitor has to dig to find a complete answer, one is not readily available. Overall, Sachenhausen is a reflection of Germany’s attempt to find balance. There is the initial appearance of balance, but work still needs to be done around the edges before the scales of history can be perfectly even.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Theives of Baghdad by Matthew Bogdanos
"One marine's passion for ancient civilizations and the journey to recover the world's greatest stolen treasures."
That is the one sentence cover description for Matthew Bogdanos' book Thieves of Bagdad. It is an interest grabbing sentence and an very accurate statement. If I had zero previous knowledge about museums and the history of the fertile crescent I could have read this book and still feel the immensity of the lose and understand the need to protect these antiquities. This is primarily due to Bogdanos' ability to present his own obsession and love for these objects on page in an approachable manor.
Bogdanos explains that the media made many false reports about looting and thefts that occur ed at the Iraq Museum in Baghdad during the initial seizure of Baghdad. I remember being frustrated reading articles about the looting. At first my frustration was over the looting, but then the changing and conflicting reports brought greater confusion, until I didn't know what to believe. That is one reason why this book was so rewarding. Not only was it easy and fun to read, but it laid to rest the questions I had about the entire situation.
Bogdanos was the lead investigating officer at the museum. His background as a New York City District Attorney and Classicist gave him a unique perspective of the events in Baghdad.
I loved reading this book. I recommend this book to everyone, and hope all of you enjoy it as much as I did.
That is the one sentence cover description for Matthew Bogdanos' book Thieves of Bagdad. It is an interest grabbing sentence and an very accurate statement. If I had zero previous knowledge about museums and the history of the fertile crescent I could have read this book and still feel the immensity of the lose and understand the need to protect these antiquities. This is primarily due to Bogdanos' ability to present his own obsession and love for these objects on page in an approachable manor.
Bogdanos explains that the media made many false reports about looting and thefts that occur ed at the Iraq Museum in Baghdad during the initial seizure of Baghdad. I remember being frustrated reading articles about the looting. At first my frustration was over the looting, but then the changing and conflicting reports brought greater confusion, until I didn't know what to believe. That is one reason why this book was so rewarding. Not only was it easy and fun to read, but it laid to rest the questions I had about the entire situation.
Bogdanos was the lead investigating officer at the museum. His background as a New York City District Attorney and Classicist gave him a unique perspective of the events in Baghdad.
I loved reading this book. I recommend this book to everyone, and hope all of you enjoy it as much as I did.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Global Antiquities Conference
Cairo is hosting a two day International conference on the protection and repatriation of looted artifacts. The Global Antiquities conference had representatives from countries all over the globe, from countries who are typically the destination of these artifacts to origin countries.
The representatives where there discussing the issues and how they could improve security. While discussing the issue they sat in the presence of several artifacts that had recently been repatriated including a 3,000 year old wooden sarcophagus recently intercepted by U.S. customs.
The U.S. is one of the many western countries that have typically been recipients of the antiquities trade. This is clear when we compare the comments made by U.S. representative, James McAndrews, who said international communication is improving, and Syrian representative Ayman Slaiman, who is pushing for better International communication. This is not to say that McAndrews doesn't understand the situation and is undeservedly optimistic.
I'm sure he understands the situation, but his perspective is from that of law enforcement. They are seeing results, aka pieces are being confiscated and returned, while in Syrian thousands of objects are stolen when only a handful are being returned. It's a very different and disheartening perspective.
Second to improving communication between countries and law enforcement agencies, the conference is dedicated to trying to amend the 1970 UNESCO conference to include objects stolen prior to 1970. Up until now that conference had not been retroactive.
It is very unlikely that it will become retroactive now as many countries, including the U.S. and Great Britain, who has been in a long standing battle with Egypt over the Elgin Marbles, would have to return many objects in their museums. Nearly all of the Greek, Roman, and Egyptian collections held by foreign countries would have to be returned to their host countries.
Below is coverage of the conference by New Tang Dynasty Television.
Global Antiquities Conference: Illegal Trade Should Stop
Uploaded by NTDTV. - News videos hot off the press.
Here is an additional article about the conference with comments by Zahi Hawass.
The representatives where there discussing the issues and how they could improve security. While discussing the issue they sat in the presence of several artifacts that had recently been repatriated including a 3,000 year old wooden sarcophagus recently intercepted by U.S. customs.
The U.S. is one of the many western countries that have typically been recipients of the antiquities trade. This is clear when we compare the comments made by U.S. representative, James McAndrews, who said international communication is improving, and Syrian representative Ayman Slaiman, who is pushing for better International communication. This is not to say that McAndrews doesn't understand the situation and is undeservedly optimistic.
I'm sure he understands the situation, but his perspective is from that of law enforcement. They are seeing results, aka pieces are being confiscated and returned, while in Syrian thousands of objects are stolen when only a handful are being returned. It's a very different and disheartening perspective.
Second to improving communication between countries and law enforcement agencies, the conference is dedicated to trying to amend the 1970 UNESCO conference to include objects stolen prior to 1970. Up until now that conference had not been retroactive.
It is very unlikely that it will become retroactive now as many countries, including the U.S. and Great Britain, who has been in a long standing battle with Egypt over the Elgin Marbles, would have to return many objects in their museums. Nearly all of the Greek, Roman, and Egyptian collections held by foreign countries would have to be returned to their host countries.
Below is coverage of the conference by New Tang Dynasty Television.
Global Antiquities Conference: Illegal Trade Should Stop
Uploaded by NTDTV. - News videos hot off the press.
Here is an additional article about the conference with comments by Zahi Hawass.
Museum Transparency
In the March 2010 edition of MUSEUM Maxwell L. Anderson presented his thoughts on Museum Transparency. His take seems to reflect his current position as the Melvin & Bren Simon Director and CEO at the Indianapolis Museum of Art. His article was very interesting. Anderson's Thesis was that museums could be transparent and successful if they are true to themselves. He presented five truths in the article that I agree with:
I would like to elaborate on two of these points. First, is that the museum is not part of the entertainment industry. Over the years this has gotten lost. First the public changed its viewpoint of museums, then the museum leaders changed with them. When museums began they were primarily intended as places of learning. Curiosity Cabinets where collected as, admittedly, a show of wealth, but also as a way to view the amazing wonders of the world in your own back yard. Scholarly insights were made at museum, where research and study flourished. Over time much of this has transferred from the museum to universities, but museums are still places to learn. Parents bring their kids to see an exhibit about dinosaurs on a rainy day. The kids are having fun seeing real dinosaurs and that fun and play may not look like education, but that is exactly what it is. (For more information about this just look at Mary Ellen Flannery's article in the same issue of MUSEUM.)Every notice that after a little boy leaves a dinosaur exhibit he can tell you the most amazing things about dinosaurs. Things you may not have known. That is because he is having fun in the museum, and when you interested in what your seeing AND doing you remember and notice more than if your read it out of a book. Museums are educational institutions and should not be judged by attendance records like the entertainment world. You would never judge a school or library by how many people enter the door, instead you judge it by how much they take out of it. Judge the museum the same way you would judge a library.
The second point I would like to elaborate on is that the government should support culture. Anderson notes that in Western democracy "cultural offerings are indispensable to their citizenry". He says this is how it is in every Western Democracy except for the U.S. Everywhere else "they define a nation's identity and shape a national conversation about what matters most." Why is the U.S. different. Why do we put less importance on preserving and spreading the culture that got us to where we are today? In Germany it is impossible to avoid knowing and facing the country's past. They have monuments, museums and cultural institutions everywhere that discuss their past and present. What is even more impressive is that when walking down the street you can ask any local about these monuments and they will be able to give you some information. It is not like that here in the U.S. Here late night TV hosts can walk down the street and ask people questions focused on U.S. culture and history and will find many blank stares or completely wrong answers. Why is the U.S. so drastically different? How can we fix this? How can museums make the public see them for what they are, educational cultural institutions. Anderson and many others think that the first step is museum transparency.
Anderson is leading by example. At the Indianapolis Museum of Art he and his colleges are practicing what they preach. It is not perfect, but it is closer than most, and a step in the right direction. One thing that they are doing there that I think is worth noting is providing the public with a complete list of all past and current deaccessioned objects. You can find the list on their website It shows any interested party the object, date of deaccession, the recipient, and how it was removed (aka sold, auctioned, transfer to another institution, etc.). This publicity is not required by museums, but I would include it in my best practices. What is especially nice about this is you can use it to follow, and prove an item's provenance. Many objects have a clouded provenance, and museum clarity in the accessioning and deaccesioning processes would help to remove some of the clouds. A quote of Anderson'a that I particularly like is "if we acquire and sell objects for and from our collections with only secondary regard for potential claims on ownership, ethical dilemmas or sources and destinations of funds, we are exposing our institutions to great risk." This is an important idea for museums to take to heart. The movement of elicit art and artifacts is an ancient, yet still blooming segment of the black market. Museums can not support this trade if we have any chance of minimizing its effects on the entire world's cultural heritage.
The size of a museum's audience should not reflect the amount of public financial support it receives,
Museums are not a part of the entertainment industry,
A museum's exhibits and activities should reflect its mission not its need to pay the bills,
A non-profit museum is a red-ink business,
It is appropriate for the government to financially support culture.
I would like to elaborate on two of these points. First, is that the museum is not part of the entertainment industry. Over the years this has gotten lost. First the public changed its viewpoint of museums, then the museum leaders changed with them. When museums began they were primarily intended as places of learning. Curiosity Cabinets where collected as, admittedly, a show of wealth, but also as a way to view the amazing wonders of the world in your own back yard. Scholarly insights were made at museum, where research and study flourished. Over time much of this has transferred from the museum to universities, but museums are still places to learn. Parents bring their kids to see an exhibit about dinosaurs on a rainy day. The kids are having fun seeing real dinosaurs and that fun and play may not look like education, but that is exactly what it is. (For more information about this just look at Mary Ellen Flannery's article in the same issue of MUSEUM.)Every notice that after a little boy leaves a dinosaur exhibit he can tell you the most amazing things about dinosaurs. Things you may not have known. That is because he is having fun in the museum, and when you interested in what your seeing AND doing you remember and notice more than if your read it out of a book. Museums are educational institutions and should not be judged by attendance records like the entertainment world. You would never judge a school or library by how many people enter the door, instead you judge it by how much they take out of it. Judge the museum the same way you would judge a library.
The second point I would like to elaborate on is that the government should support culture. Anderson notes that in Western democracy "cultural offerings are indispensable to their citizenry". He says this is how it is in every Western Democracy except for the U.S. Everywhere else "they define a nation's identity and shape a national conversation about what matters most." Why is the U.S. different. Why do we put less importance on preserving and spreading the culture that got us to where we are today? In Germany it is impossible to avoid knowing and facing the country's past. They have monuments, museums and cultural institutions everywhere that discuss their past and present. What is even more impressive is that when walking down the street you can ask any local about these monuments and they will be able to give you some information. It is not like that here in the U.S. Here late night TV hosts can walk down the street and ask people questions focused on U.S. culture and history and will find many blank stares or completely wrong answers. Why is the U.S. so drastically different? How can we fix this? How can museums make the public see them for what they are, educational cultural institutions. Anderson and many others think that the first step is museum transparency.
Anderson is leading by example. At the Indianapolis Museum of Art he and his colleges are practicing what they preach. It is not perfect, but it is closer than most, and a step in the right direction. One thing that they are doing there that I think is worth noting is providing the public with a complete list of all past and current deaccessioned objects. You can find the list on their website It shows any interested party the object, date of deaccession, the recipient, and how it was removed (aka sold, auctioned, transfer to another institution, etc.). This publicity is not required by museums, but I would include it in my best practices. What is especially nice about this is you can use it to follow, and prove an item's provenance. Many objects have a clouded provenance, and museum clarity in the accessioning and deaccesioning processes would help to remove some of the clouds. A quote of Anderson'a that I particularly like is "if we acquire and sell objects for and from our collections with only secondary regard for potential claims on ownership, ethical dilemmas or sources and destinations of funds, we are exposing our institutions to great risk." This is an important idea for museums to take to heart. The movement of elicit art and artifacts is an ancient, yet still blooming segment of the black market. Museums can not support this trade if we have any chance of minimizing its effects on the entire world's cultural heritage.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
The Linguist & the Emperor by Daniel Meyerson
The Linguist & the Emperor; Napoleon and Champollion's Quest to decipher the Rosetta Stone by Daniel Meyerson
History is made through chance encounters. I often find myself thinking what would the world be like today if Rosa Parks never met that bus driver, or Caesar and Cleopatra had remained strangers. Would the world be dramatically different or would have history progressed the same way? A tough question to answer, if not impossible. This is the question the drew me to read The Linguist & the Emperor Daniel Meyerson did not attempt to answer this question, but he did show how the intermingling of the lives of two men opened the secrets of a long lost civilization to the examination of scholars.
Meyerson's description of these two men's lives reads like a historical fiction rather than a traditional history. He weaves the story like a novelist, yet it is all true. The power of history happily puts itself in Meyersons sure brushstrokes.
Meyerson's intricate knowledge of the personal letters of both men is presented to the reader as Napoleon and Champollion's thoughts. The reader sees the progress of the two men through their own eyes.
Napoleon's career is intermingled with his interactions with Josephine. Napoleon yearns for his own future prosperity while surrounding himself with the wealth of the past. He strives to live a romantic life; one with political and military success, a worldly education and a perfect love. He fails to reach his ultimate goal in each of these categories.
The most impressive part of Meyerson's work is how he presents the development of Champollion. Champollion becomes a vision in the reader's mind. A shy, almost neglected child grows into an uncertain nerd whose obsession leads to a seemingly impossible linguistic achievement. The reader becomes connected to Champollion, willing him to succeed. Of course he does succeed, we know he will, we just don't see how. That is the magic of Meyerson.
The book is a true page turner. Well written and well supported, this book is a great read for anyone looking to learn about French history and the significance of the Rosetta Stone.
History is made through chance encounters. I often find myself thinking what would the world be like today if Rosa Parks never met that bus driver, or Caesar and Cleopatra had remained strangers. Would the world be dramatically different or would have history progressed the same way? A tough question to answer, if not impossible. This is the question the drew me to read The Linguist & the Emperor Daniel Meyerson did not attempt to answer this question, but he did show how the intermingling of the lives of two men opened the secrets of a long lost civilization to the examination of scholars.
Meyerson's description of these two men's lives reads like a historical fiction rather than a traditional history. He weaves the story like a novelist, yet it is all true. The power of history happily puts itself in Meyersons sure brushstrokes.
Meyerson's intricate knowledge of the personal letters of both men is presented to the reader as Napoleon and Champollion's thoughts. The reader sees the progress of the two men through their own eyes.
Napoleon's career is intermingled with his interactions with Josephine. Napoleon yearns for his own future prosperity while surrounding himself with the wealth of the past. He strives to live a romantic life; one with political and military success, a worldly education and a perfect love. He fails to reach his ultimate goal in each of these categories.
The most impressive part of Meyerson's work is how he presents the development of Champollion. Champollion becomes a vision in the reader's mind. A shy, almost neglected child grows into an uncertain nerd whose obsession leads to a seemingly impossible linguistic achievement. The reader becomes connected to Champollion, willing him to succeed. Of course he does succeed, we know he will, we just don't see how. That is the magic of Meyerson.
The book is a true page turner. Well written and well supported, this book is a great read for anyone looking to learn about French history and the significance of the Rosetta Stone.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Super Bowl XLIV
Now, many of us have bets on the Super Bowl. The Super Bowl is a part of our American identity. So as American tune in on Super Bowl Sunday they will have bets on the line. Most of these bets involve the exchange money or maybe a case of beer, but the New Orleans and Indianapolis art museums have taken it to an entirely different level. They are betting their collections' masterpieces.
Where has our society gone to that those who are entrusted to protect our cultural property are betting that property on a sporting event. Now this particular bet isn't really a bad thing. The artwork involved will be sent to the winning city for three months and then returned to the loser. While this is a great way to grab the public's attention, I do not see how this fits into either museum's mission statement.
The pieces being put up by the Indianapolis Museum of Art (IMA) include "The Fifth Plague of Egypt," painted in 1800 by legendary English artist William Turner.
While the New Orleans Museum of Art (NOMA) include Claude Lorrain's treasured 1644 painting "Ideal View of Tivoli".
Anderson, NOMA's Director, stated that his confidence in the Colts and Peyton Manning when he said
Where has our society gone to that those who are entrusted to protect our cultural property are betting that property on a sporting event. Now this particular bet isn't really a bad thing. The artwork involved will be sent to the winning city for three months and then returned to the loser. While this is a great way to grab the public's attention, I do not see how this fits into either museum's mission statement.
The pieces being put up by the Indianapolis Museum of Art (IMA) include "The Fifth Plague of Egypt," painted in 1800 by legendary English artist William Turner.
While the New Orleans Museum of Art (NOMA) include Claude Lorrain's treasured 1644 painting "Ideal View of Tivoli".
Anderson, NOMA's Director, stated that his confidence in the Colts and Peyton Manning when he said
Obviously we wouldn't presume to place one of our greatest masterpieces on the road for three months, unless we were sure we wouldn't have to.No pressure Peyton.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Eris Goddess of Strife
Strife:
1.: bitter sometimes violent conflict or dissension
2.: an act of contention : fight, struggle
3.: exertion or contention for superiority
Eris was the Greek goddess of strife and discord. Her Roman counterpart was the goddess Discordia. Her parents are thought to be Zeus and Hera, making her the sister of Ares, but a conflicting myth states that she is the daughter of Erebos, the primeval god of darkness, and Nyx, the night. She was also the mother of the Kakodaimones, the plagues of humanity released by Pandora.
"But abhorred Eris (Strife) bare painful Ponos (Toil), and Lethe (Forgetfulness), and Limos (Starvation), and the Algea (Pains), full of weeping, the Hysminai (Fightings) and the Makhai (Battles), the Phonoi (Murders) and the Androktasiai (Man-slaughters), the Neikea (Quarrels), the Pseudo-Logoi (Lies), the Amphilogiai (Disputes), and Dysnomia (Lawlessness) and Ate (Ruin), who share one another's natures, and Horkos (Oath) who does more damage than any other to earthly men, when anyone, of his knowledge, swears to a false oath."Hesiod
A vicious and unyielding goddess, Eris was feared by all men. Her standing amongst the gods was shaky as well, most tried to keep their distance. All of the gods and goddesses were invited to the wedding of Thetis and Peleus, except for Eris. When she attempted to attend the wedding anyways she was kicked out. In her need for revenge she quietly tossed a golden apple into the foray. It was inscribed "To the Fairest." Hera, Athena, and Aphrodite all believed that the apple Jove to name a mortal to judge who should receive the apple. That mortal was Paris, Prince of Troy. He chose Aphordite in exchange for the love of Helen. Thus began the Trojan War.
Eris (Hate) whose wrath is relentless, she is the sister and companion of murderous Ares, she who is only a little thing at the first, but thereafter grows until she strides on the earth with her head striking heaven.Homer
This is how Eris took her revenge and grew in power as both men and gods fought a battle inspired by a little golden apple.
Friday, December 4, 2009
The Bible
"We must not read our own meaning into scripture, but must make the sentence of scripture ours."
Hugh of St. Victor
The following is based on information found in Karen Armstrong's book "The Bible". The book is very well written and is highly informative. I have read about religion and the Bible many times and I feel this book would be good for anyone interested in how the Bible became THE Bible.
The Israelites began as a tribal nation. These tribes kept their legends and histories alive through an active oral tradition. Most tribes would focus on local events and heroes, which tended to be part of or similar to the broader Israelite history. In 1000BCE the tribes united into two monarchies: Judah and Israel.
Durring the 18th century BCE the area underwent a literary revolution. In Greece Homer's poetry was recorded and in Israel and Judah the oral traditions were recorded. These records morphed the old tribes' tradions into national sagas. These sagas were subject to the needs of the time, and adapted throughout history to fit the contemporary situation. The sagas were constantly changing until the time of Ezra, who used these teachings as the foundation for his work, legitimizing and formalizing them into the Torah.
In the Third century BCE Jewis scriptures began to be translated into Greek. Myth surrounds the first translation of the Torah. Ptolemy Philadelphus, Greek King of Egypt, wanted a Greek copy of the scriptures and gathered seventy priests to write a translation. It was agreed that the translation was perfect and named the Septuagint. Another variation of the myth had the seventy priest write seperate translations, but when they brought them together they found that the had all written the same translation, word for word. It was the allegorical treatment of this translation by Greek readers that produced the idea that scripture could have more than its literal meaning. Scripture had a deeper meaning.Paul developed this further, saying the scriptures were there to teach something. His letters, later includded in the Bible, were mean to bring these lessons to light.
The Bible was not canonized until the fourth century. It includded the gospels by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, the Acts of the Apostles, Epistles by Paul, James, Peter, John and Jude, Hebrews and Revelation. Jerome, a fluent western exegetes translated the Bible into Latin. This became known as the Vulgate. The Vulgate was the standard European text until the sixteenth century. the Vulgate was copied and re-copied by monks until their copying errors became compounded and texts they wrote varied from the original.
Mineral Exhibits
Recently I visited the Houston Natural History museum and was able to peruse their natural mineral exhibit. Impressive is a dramatic understatement. It is not surprising that a natural history museum situated at the center of the American oil industry would have an impressive collection, both in size of the pieces and their quantity. The museum has rooms upon rooms of uncut stones. I still am unsure if I walked through all of the rooms, as many of them are hidden around corners. I can not begin to imagine what natural wonders sit protected in museum storage.
The exhibit, while mesmerizing was less than fascinating. The exhibit listed what each object was, but gave little or no information about how the mineral was formed. The exhibit was designed to showcase the collection rather than educate the visitor. The floors were covered with red carpeting. The lights were turned down, as jazz music played through unseen speakers. The ambiance reflected that of a jewelry store, not a museum.
On the other side of the spectrum is the Natural History Museum in New York city. This exhibit is clearly designed to educate the visitor. The mineral collection is less impressive than the one in Houston, but what they have has been put to good use. The exhibit is designed to educate, but the last time I was able to see the exhibit some of the educational tools where out of service. The exhibit seems to really on the fact that the visitor will already have a basic knowledge of minerals, or that they will be with someone who does.
The exhibit, while mesmerizing was less than fascinating. The exhibit listed what each object was, but gave little or no information about how the mineral was formed. The exhibit was designed to showcase the collection rather than educate the visitor. The floors were covered with red carpeting. The lights were turned down, as jazz music played through unseen speakers. The ambiance reflected that of a jewelry store, not a museum.
On the other side of the spectrum is the Natural History Museum in New York city. This exhibit is clearly designed to educate the visitor. The mineral collection is less impressive than the one in Houston, but what they have has been put to good use. The exhibit is designed to educate, but the last time I was able to see the exhibit some of the educational tools where out of service. The exhibit seems to really on the fact that the visitor will already have a basic knowledge of minerals, or that they will be with someone who does.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Pergamon Altar
The largest altar known to man, the Pergamon Altar sits majestically on Museuminsel in Berlin, Germany. The altar was dedicated to Zeus by the ancient Greek city of Pergamon (modern day Bergama in Turkey) in the 2nd century BCE. It was shipped to Germany between 1879 and 1904 by Carl Humann. The Pergamon Museum was built between 1910 and 1930 to hold the Altar as well as other works from antiquity, especially Middle East and Islamic art.
The altar was originally used for religious and civic purposes. The 40 foot high structure is imposing by today’s standards and would have impressed the feeling of power over any ancient visitor. Its grandeur led to its recognition in Revelation 2:12-13 as “Satan’s Throne.”
When visiting the altar it is easy to forget that the entire structure is an altar, and not a temple with a small altar inside. Visitors climb up a tall flight of stairs to find themselves standing upon the sacrificial altar, i.e. the floor which is an intricate mosaic.
The experience is one of wonder. How did these ancient civilizations create such masterpieces? How is it that Germany was able to move this great structure from Turkey to Germany in 1879?
The altar was originally used for religious and civic purposes. The 40 foot high structure is imposing by today’s standards and would have impressed the feeling of power over any ancient visitor. Its grandeur led to its recognition in Revelation 2:12-13 as “Satan’s Throne.”
When visiting the altar it is easy to forget that the entire structure is an altar, and not a temple with a small altar inside. Visitors climb up a tall flight of stairs to find themselves standing upon the sacrificial altar, i.e. the floor which is an intricate mosaic.
The experience is one of wonder. How did these ancient civilizations create such masterpieces? How is it that Germany was able to move this great structure from Turkey to Germany in 1879?
Friday, May 8, 2009
Theft at the Historical Society of Pennsylvania
The Historical Society of Pennsylvania (HSP) has a tremendous collection of 12,000 objects which tell the story of Pennsylvania through the civil war. The collection was moved and the catalogue was digitized in 1997. After the collection was moved Artifact Collections Manager, Kristen Froehlich, was reconciling locations for all the objects when she noticed something peculiar. She could not locate four items from the collection. Three swords presented by the citizens of Philadelphia to Civil War General George G. Meade, David Bell Birney, and Andrew A. Humphreys and a 1785 long-rifle were missing. After establishing that these artifacts were no longer in the museum the FBI was contacted by staff members to investigate.
Ms. Froehlich submitted a Notification of Theft form to the FBI on November 13, 1997. This document required her to submit valuable information to the FBI that could be found in the catalogue. For accession number P-4-9, the long-rifle, the form contained the known name of the object, the rifle’s previous owner, the date it was made, a photograph, the manufacturer, a description with measurements, a list of the materials the object is made from, unique decorations, engravings, a condition report and a list of publications mentioning the item. This information was also dispersed to other museums and dealers in the hopes that they would have information regarding the items’ location.
The FBI took this information to one of the largest Civil War weapon shows on the East Coast, the Great Southern Weapons Fair. The agent assigned to the case, Robert K. Whittman, dispersed the photographs and histories of the objects to the various experts and collectors present. It was at this fair that the FBI caught a break in the case. An expert on presentation swords, Bruce Brazelon, recognized at least one of the swords as being part of a group that had been offered for potential sale in 1994. This particular sword had been noted as missing during a previous inventory check. The museum had noted the misplacement of several items over the years, but was unable to prove if they had been stolen or simply misplaced. These items had not been included in the Notification of Theft form, but the list was provided to FBI as additional information. Including this list of missing objects proved to be invaluable in the recovery of the stolen materials. This sword had not been included in the list of thefts, and would not have been recognized by the sword expert if it had not been included in the list of objects with unknown locations. FBI agent Whittman brought information about all of the missing works to the weapon show, not merely the ones thought to be stolen.
Brazelon could not confirm if the items had been sold, but he did know who was trying to make the sale, a Poconos flea market dealer. With this new information in hand the FBI agents contacted the Poconos flea market dealer. The dealer was able to provide the FBI with the name of the person who tried to sell him the swords, George Csizmazia. Csizmazia was an electrical contractor from Rutledge, Pennsylvania, who had been briefly employed by HSP ten years earlier. At first Csizmazia denied any knowledge of the sword and other objects missing from HSP. The FBI had to break down his story, starting with his denial of knowledge of the swords. Eventually Csizmazia admitted the truth and brought the agents to his home where they found the stolen artifacts and approximately 200 of the “missing” artifacts. Csizmazia’s collection was strewn about his home. Objects, including a ring with a lock of George Washington’s hair, cigar holders, and the telescope used by Elisha Kent Kane to locate the Polar Sea were haphazardly placed on coffee tables, shelves, and on the walls. He even admitted to trimming his hedges with a sword from the 1600’s.
At this time Kristen Froehlich and Robert K. Whittman met with the objects and confirmed that the artifacts found in Csizmania’s home were the same pieces that belonged to HSP. They did this by reviewing each piece and comparing it to the photograph HSP had on file and the catalogue information. They had to make sure that each piece matched the museum’s records down to every inscription. This process did two things. First, it proved that the pieces had originated at HSP and the museum would be able to reclaim the objects after the case was closed. Second, it provided the FBI with an exact list of all the items stolen which affected the charges they would place against the suspect.
After further questioning, Csizmazia informed Agent Whittman of how he gained possession of the artifacts. About ten years earlier the subject had met a janitor, Earnest Medford, at HSP while Csizmania had been contracted to do some electrical work. The two men became friends. Medford eventually learned of the other man’s interest in history, particularly the civil war era and military antiques. At one of their meetings Medford presented Csizmania with a gift, a small artifact he had picked up at HSP. After this the security guard continued to “pick up” items for the collector, who paid him a small stipend. Over the years the security guard was paid around $8,000 for the items he stole. It turns out the thief was being severely under paid by his friend. The objects were worth between two and three million dollars. Csizmania and Medford were convicted of theft of culturally significant historical artifacts and were sentenced to spend four years in jail.
Ms. Froehlich submitted a Notification of Theft form to the FBI on November 13, 1997. This document required her to submit valuable information to the FBI that could be found in the catalogue. For accession number P-4-9, the long-rifle, the form contained the known name of the object, the rifle’s previous owner, the date it was made, a photograph, the manufacturer, a description with measurements, a list of the materials the object is made from, unique decorations, engravings, a condition report and a list of publications mentioning the item. This information was also dispersed to other museums and dealers in the hopes that they would have information regarding the items’ location.
The FBI took this information to one of the largest Civil War weapon shows on the East Coast, the Great Southern Weapons Fair. The agent assigned to the case, Robert K. Whittman, dispersed the photographs and histories of the objects to the various experts and collectors present. It was at this fair that the FBI caught a break in the case. An expert on presentation swords, Bruce Brazelon, recognized at least one of the swords as being part of a group that had been offered for potential sale in 1994. This particular sword had been noted as missing during a previous inventory check. The museum had noted the misplacement of several items over the years, but was unable to prove if they had been stolen or simply misplaced. These items had not been included in the Notification of Theft form, but the list was provided to FBI as additional information. Including this list of missing objects proved to be invaluable in the recovery of the stolen materials. This sword had not been included in the list of thefts, and would not have been recognized by the sword expert if it had not been included in the list of objects with unknown locations. FBI agent Whittman brought information about all of the missing works to the weapon show, not merely the ones thought to be stolen.
Brazelon could not confirm if the items had been sold, but he did know who was trying to make the sale, a Poconos flea market dealer. With this new information in hand the FBI agents contacted the Poconos flea market dealer. The dealer was able to provide the FBI with the name of the person who tried to sell him the swords, George Csizmazia. Csizmazia was an electrical contractor from Rutledge, Pennsylvania, who had been briefly employed by HSP ten years earlier. At first Csizmazia denied any knowledge of the sword and other objects missing from HSP. The FBI had to break down his story, starting with his denial of knowledge of the swords. Eventually Csizmazia admitted the truth and brought the agents to his home where they found the stolen artifacts and approximately 200 of the “missing” artifacts. Csizmazia’s collection was strewn about his home. Objects, including a ring with a lock of George Washington’s hair, cigar holders, and the telescope used by Elisha Kent Kane to locate the Polar Sea were haphazardly placed on coffee tables, shelves, and on the walls. He even admitted to trimming his hedges with a sword from the 1600’s.
At this time Kristen Froehlich and Robert K. Whittman met with the objects and confirmed that the artifacts found in Csizmania’s home were the same pieces that belonged to HSP. They did this by reviewing each piece and comparing it to the photograph HSP had on file and the catalogue information. They had to make sure that each piece matched the museum’s records down to every inscription. This process did two things. First, it proved that the pieces had originated at HSP and the museum would be able to reclaim the objects after the case was closed. Second, it provided the FBI with an exact list of all the items stolen which affected the charges they would place against the suspect.
After further questioning, Csizmazia informed Agent Whittman of how he gained possession of the artifacts. About ten years earlier the subject had met a janitor, Earnest Medford, at HSP while Csizmania had been contracted to do some electrical work. The two men became friends. Medford eventually learned of the other man’s interest in history, particularly the civil war era and military antiques. At one of their meetings Medford presented Csizmania with a gift, a small artifact he had picked up at HSP. After this the security guard continued to “pick up” items for the collector, who paid him a small stipend. Over the years the security guard was paid around $8,000 for the items he stole. It turns out the thief was being severely under paid by his friend. The objects were worth between two and three million dollars. Csizmania and Medford were convicted of theft of culturally significant historical artifacts and were sentenced to spend four years in jail.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Yogi Berra Museum and Learning Center
The Yogi Berra Museum and Learning Center is a small institution connected to the Montclair State University. Yogi Berra Museum and Learning Center was founded to honor Yogi Berra and his legendary baseball career. There are few more recognizable names in baseball than Yogi Berra. Born in 1925 in St. Lois, Missouri Yogi always had an affinity for America’s pastime. He became a part of the Yankee franchise in 1942 when they signed him to play with their minor league team, the Newark Bears. It was not until after Yogi returned from serving in the Navy during World War II that the Yankees brought him to play in the majors. 
Yogi was a flamboyant player, continually talking behind the plate to distract opposing batters and freely swinging his bat were standard parts of his game. Yogi’s active career included fifteen All-Star Star appearances, three time American League Most Valuable Player, played in fourteen World Series including ten wins, and holds multiple World Series records. After a stunning career on the field Yogi moved to the dugout and became the Yankees manager in 1964. Shortly after this Yogi was fired by the Yankees and joined the Mets as a player-coach. This move caused a media frenzy in New York. The Yankees’ star had jumped the fence into the National League, and New Yorkers did not know how to respond. Yogi became the Mets manager in 1972. A year later he brought the last place Mets to National League pennant champions. In 1976, Yogi returned to his old team to be a coach. In 1985 Yogi was fired as manager by George Steinbrenner 16 games into the season. This created a rift between Yogi and the Yankees, which was finally reconciled during a private meeting in 1996 at the Yogi Berra Museum and Learning Center. In 1986 Yogi became manager of the Houston Astros, where he stayed until he retired in 1992. Yogi was inducted into the National Baseball Hall of Fame in 1972.
It should be no surprise that after such a distinguished career in New York with the Yankees and Mets Yogi Berra has become a beloved icon of the New York city area. It is with respect to this admiration that the Yogi Berra Museum and Learning Center was founded in 1998. Yogi and the Montclair State University have shared a long history. Yogi has had a residence in Montclair for the past fifty years. In 1996 Montclair State University provided Yogi with an honorary doctorate, a fine achievement for a man who had dropped out of high school to help support his family. In 1998 the University honored Yogi once again by naming their baseball stadium after him. Adjacent to the stadium they founded the Yogi Berra Museum and Learning Center. After a career in baseball that lasted over forty years, Yogi dedicated his life to the betterment of children through education, a dedication that the Yogi Berra Museum and Learning Center strives to continue. The Yogi Berra Museum and Learning Center focuses on providing visitors with an educational and enjoyable experience that provides a “nostalgic return to baseball when it was just a game.” The Yogi Berra Museum and Learning Center’s primary focus is on educational programming. This is made clear in the museum’s mission “to preserve and promote the values of respect, sportsmanship, social justice and excellence through inclusive, culturally diverse sports-based educational programs and exhibits.”
Yogi Berra’s career centered around the Yankee and Shea Stadiums, two monuments to America’s pastime. After standing over the Bronx for eighty five years Yankee Stadium was closed after the 2008 season. Shea Stadium also closed in 2008 after serving as the home of the Mets for forty four years. These two stadiums are monuments on their own, but because of their close association with Yogi the Yogi Berra Museum and Learning Center decided to showcase them in the current exhibit Going, Gone, Goodbye. The exhibit stands as a tribute to these two structures through the perspective of Yogi Berra. With a subject like this it would be easy for the exhibit to become stuck in the past, but the Yogi Berra Museum and Learning Center also conveys the idea that change is an essential part of society, and that New York baseball fans should look forward to the new stadiums.
Yogi was a flamboyant player, continually talking behind the plate to distract opposing batters and freely swinging his bat were standard parts of his game. Yogi’s active career included fifteen All-Star Star appearances, three time American League Most Valuable Player, played in fourteen World Series including ten wins, and holds multiple World Series records. After a stunning career on the field Yogi moved to the dugout and became the Yankees manager in 1964. Shortly after this Yogi was fired by the Yankees and joined the Mets as a player-coach. This move caused a media frenzy in New York. The Yankees’ star had jumped the fence into the National League, and New Yorkers did not know how to respond. Yogi became the Mets manager in 1972. A year later he brought the last place Mets to National League pennant champions. In 1976, Yogi returned to his old team to be a coach. In 1985 Yogi was fired as manager by George Steinbrenner 16 games into the season. This created a rift between Yogi and the Yankees, which was finally reconciled during a private meeting in 1996 at the Yogi Berra Museum and Learning Center. In 1986 Yogi became manager of the Houston Astros, where he stayed until he retired in 1992. Yogi was inducted into the National Baseball Hall of Fame in 1972. 
It should be no surprise that after such a distinguished career in New York with the Yankees and Mets Yogi Berra has become a beloved icon of the New York city area. It is with respect to this admiration that the Yogi Berra Museum and Learning Center was founded in 1998. Yogi and the Montclair State University have shared a long history. Yogi has had a residence in Montclair for the past fifty years. In 1996 Montclair State University provided Yogi with an honorary doctorate, a fine achievement for a man who had dropped out of high school to help support his family. In 1998 the University honored Yogi once again by naming their baseball stadium after him. Adjacent to the stadium they founded the Yogi Berra Museum and Learning Center. After a career in baseball that lasted over forty years, Yogi dedicated his life to the betterment of children through education, a dedication that the Yogi Berra Museum and Learning Center strives to continue. The Yogi Berra Museum and Learning Center focuses on providing visitors with an educational and enjoyable experience that provides a “nostalgic return to baseball when it was just a game.” The Yogi Berra Museum and Learning Center’s primary focus is on educational programming. This is made clear in the museum’s mission “to preserve and promote the values of respect, sportsmanship, social justice and excellence through inclusive, culturally diverse sports-based educational programs and exhibits.”
Yogi Berra’s career centered around the Yankee and Shea Stadiums, two monuments to America’s pastime. After standing over the Bronx for eighty five years Yankee Stadium was closed after the 2008 season. Shea Stadium also closed in 2008 after serving as the home of the Mets for forty four years. These two stadiums are monuments on their own, but because of their close association with Yogi the Yogi Berra Museum and Learning Center decided to showcase them in the current exhibit Going, Gone, Goodbye. The exhibit stands as a tribute to these two structures through the perspective of Yogi Berra. With a subject like this it would be easy for the exhibit to become stuck in the past, but the Yogi Berra Museum and Learning Center also conveys the idea that change is an essential part of society, and that New York baseball fans should look forward to the new stadiums.
The Museum Catalogue: An Essential Document
Inventory systems, or catalogues, are essential to the fundamental success of museums. Every museum strives to maintain a complete and accurate catalogue of its collection. This desire is not always achieved as the day to day responsibilities of the registrar detract from time spent on updating the catalogue.
The catalogue acts as an inventory system, providing the museum with a complete list of what it hold in the collection. The lack of a complete catalogue is unfortunate because “in addition to facilitating the improvement of research, documentation, and storage, an ongoing inventory system can be an essential security device.” (Malaro, Marie. A legal Primer on Managing Museum Collections) The catalogue provides a secure source of information on every object held within the museum. This information includes, but is not limited to, the object’s location within the museum and a detailed history and description of the object. This information helps the museum recognize when a theft has occurred and can be used by authorities to locate and recover the stolen objects. An ambiguous description can help authorities locate objects to an extent, but without a fully detailed description the museum may never be able to prove rightful ownership and recover these pieces.
As personnel change, knowledge of objects is lost unless it is recorded in a catalogue. Museums are constantly adding to their collections. Between new additions and changing personnel it becomes difficult to complete all categories within a catalogue for each object.
A typical catalogue will answer the following questions about an object: What type of object is it? What is the object made of? How was it made? How big is it? Does it have any identifying markings or distinguishing features? Does the object have a known title? What is represented? When was it made? Who made it? Who has owned it? The typical catalogue will also have a short description and photograph. When these questions are answered and recorded the security of a collection is improved exponentially.
The catalogue acts as an inventory system, providing the museum with a complete list of what it hold in the collection. The lack of a complete catalogue is unfortunate because “in addition to facilitating the improvement of research, documentation, and storage, an ongoing inventory system can be an essential security device.” (Malaro, Marie. A legal Primer on Managing Museum Collections) The catalogue provides a secure source of information on every object held within the museum. This information includes, but is not limited to, the object’s location within the museum and a detailed history and description of the object. This information helps the museum recognize when a theft has occurred and can be used by authorities to locate and recover the stolen objects. An ambiguous description can help authorities locate objects to an extent, but without a fully detailed description the museum may never be able to prove rightful ownership and recover these pieces.
As personnel change, knowledge of objects is lost unless it is recorded in a catalogue. Museums are constantly adding to their collections. Between new additions and changing personnel it becomes difficult to complete all categories within a catalogue for each object.
A typical catalogue will answer the following questions about an object: What type of object is it? What is the object made of? How was it made? How big is it? Does it have any identifying markings or distinguishing features? Does the object have a known title? What is represented? When was it made? Who made it? Who has owned it? The typical catalogue will also have a short description and photograph. When these questions are answered and recorded the security of a collection is improved exponentially.
Sassona Norton at the Morris Museum
The Morris Museum, located in Morristown, NJ, is currently exhibiting a variety of sculpture in their new gallery. The exhibit shows the development of sculpture from ancient Buddhist reliefs to contemporary sculpture. The exhibit opened on November 3, 2008 and will remain on display through May 2009. The exhibit is composed of eleven pieces and features three pieces by artist Sassona Norton.
Sassona Norton is a contemporary sculptor who prefers to work in the traditional process of lost-wax bronze casting, a technique that spawns from the ancient Egyptians who followed the same process, substituting wax for sand. Norton was selected out of thirty artists to construct a public memorial to 9/11 in Norristown, PA. The current exhibit at the Morris Museum is the second time the museum has featured Norton’s work. She was the primary artist in a 2006 exhibit. In the current exhibit she has three pieces, Memories of Sweetness, Unquenchable Thirst, and An Hour Before Dawn. Each piece was given to the museum directly from Norton for the purpose of exhibition.
Two of these works are used to frame the exhibit as the first and last things a visitor encounters. The first, Memories of Sweetness depicts a bald woman puckering her lips as if to kiss while holding out her hands as if she were holding a small animal with one hand and petting it with the other. The artist has chosen to show the woman’s hands and head, leaving the rest to the imagination. Her soft gesture conflicts with the coldness projected from the Cor-ten steel I-beam shaped column upon which it rests. This piece stands facing the entrance greeting each visitor.
The second donated piece faces the exit of the exhibit. This piece, Unquenchable Thirst shows the same female figure, only in this rendition her mouth is open and her hands are cupped as if she was holding water. Here too the artist has chosen to portray the woman’s hands and head on a Cor-ten steel beam. The sculptures share qualities of style, technique, and subject, but the end result is drastically different. Where the first piece is welcoming, reminding visitors of loving grandmothers, the second is harsh and unyielding. Norton accomplishes this with the severity of the gapping mouth.
Both of Norton’s pieces were created using the lost-wax bronze casting technique. Each sculpture is made of parts that give the illusion of the whole. Her use of parts to make a whole has been a major theme throughout her career.
The exhibit greatly benefits from the inclusion of these two pieces. The pieces show how one of the oldest techniques in sculpture is used in the contemporary world. Because of the connection between the old and new worlds of sculpture these works pull together the ancient Buddhist wood carvings with modern works of mix media and abstract thoughts.
Sassona Norton is a contemporary sculptor who prefers to work in the traditional process of lost-wax bronze casting, a technique that spawns from the ancient Egyptians who followed the same process, substituting wax for sand. Norton was selected out of thirty artists to construct a public memorial to 9/11 in Norristown, PA. The current exhibit at the Morris Museum is the second time the museum has featured Norton’s work. She was the primary artist in a 2006 exhibit. In the current exhibit she has three pieces, Memories of Sweetness, Unquenchable Thirst, and An Hour Before Dawn. Each piece was given to the museum directly from Norton for the purpose of exhibition.
Two of these works are used to frame the exhibit as the first and last things a visitor encounters. The first, Memories of Sweetness depicts a bald woman puckering her lips as if to kiss while holding out her hands as if she were holding a small animal with one hand and petting it with the other. The artist has chosen to show the woman’s hands and head, leaving the rest to the imagination. Her soft gesture conflicts with the coldness projected from the Cor-ten steel I-beam shaped column upon which it rests. This piece stands facing the entrance greeting each visitor.
The second donated piece faces the exit of the exhibit. This piece, Unquenchable Thirst shows the same female figure, only in this rendition her mouth is open and her hands are cupped as if she was holding water. Here too the artist has chosen to portray the woman’s hands and head on a Cor-ten steel beam. The sculptures share qualities of style, technique, and subject, but the end result is drastically different. Where the first piece is welcoming, reminding visitors of loving grandmothers, the second is harsh and unyielding. Norton accomplishes this with the severity of the gapping mouth.
Both of Norton’s pieces were created using the lost-wax bronze casting technique. Each sculpture is made of parts that give the illusion of the whole. Her use of parts to make a whole has been a major theme throughout her career.
The exhibit greatly benefits from the inclusion of these two pieces. The pieces show how one of the oldest techniques in sculpture is used in the contemporary world. Because of the connection between the old and new worlds of sculpture these works pull together the ancient Buddhist wood carvings with modern works of mix media and abstract thoughts.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
SI extended hours
The Smithsonian Institute has three of the most popular US museums; the Air and Space museum, the Natural History museum, and the American History museum. This summer these museums will be open later than ever before. The museums had previously closed at 5:30 pm. Now, three times a week they will be open one to two hours later.
FINALLY!!
What has the Smithsonian been waiting for? I recently lived in DC and can honestly say that, as a local, it was nearly impossible to visit these museums. They were open while people were at work and then mobbed by tourists and children throughout the weekend. With these extended evenings it is my belief that locals will frequent these museums more often. Let's face it, locals are always happier when they can avoid tourists.
FINALLY!!
What has the Smithsonian been waiting for? I recently lived in DC and can honestly say that, as a local, it was nearly impossible to visit these museums. They were open while people were at work and then mobbed by tourists and children throughout the weekend. With these extended evenings it is my belief that locals will frequent these museums more often. Let's face it, locals are always happier when they can avoid tourists.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Attic Pottery: How it was made.
The following is a description of how a Lekythos, such as the one pictured below would have been made in Ancient Greece, around 400 BC.
Attic clay is rich sedentary clay that is characteristically an orange-red color and has plastic properties, making it ideal for pottery. Once the attic clay is dug up it is purified by levigation with large amounts of water and left to settle. At this time stones and other heavy materials will settle at the bottom.
Once the clay is purified and aged the potter throws the pot. In this process the potter shapes the clay as an assistant turns the potter’s wheel. Once the shape is formed the piece is trimmed and uneven clay is removed. At this point the potter added the handle and left the vase to dry. When the vase became leather-hard it would be burnished. This process involved rubbing a hard, smooth piece of leather or wood vigorously across the surface. This would compact and smooth the surface, making it shiny and more durable.
After burnishing the Painter would have sketched the design onto the clay. Then a slip was added to create the black and white gloss that acts as the background on the vase. The clay was left bare where the images were intended to go, the white areas would have been the exception to this, as the whole area would need to be covered to create the white band. The slip was then burnished. The potter painted over his sketch to outline the red-figures with the same material used to create the gloss. In areas where the Painter would have wanted a brown or lighter shade the gloss applied would have been watered down. Once the design was complete the vase was placed in a kiln. The vase then underwent a three-part firing process. In phase one the kiln reaches approximately 800°C in a highly oxidized atmosphere. Phase two, or the reducing phase, involves closing the air vent and raising the temperature to approximately 950°C. In the final phase the kiln is cooled to 900°C and oxygen is allowed in for oxidizing. The vase is then removed from the kiln, ready for use.
Attic clay is rich sedentary clay that is characteristically an orange-red color and has plastic properties, making it ideal for pottery. Once the attic clay is dug up it is purified by levigation with large amounts of water and left to settle. At this time stones and other heavy materials will settle at the bottom.
Once the clay is purified and aged the potter throws the pot. In this process the potter shapes the clay as an assistant turns the potter’s wheel. Once the shape is formed the piece is trimmed and uneven clay is removed. At this point the potter added the handle and left the vase to dry. When the vase became leather-hard it would be burnished. This process involved rubbing a hard, smooth piece of leather or wood vigorously across the surface. This would compact and smooth the surface, making it shiny and more durable.
After burnishing the Painter would have sketched the design onto the clay. Then a slip was added to create the black and white gloss that acts as the background on the vase. The clay was left bare where the images were intended to go, the white areas would have been the exception to this, as the whole area would need to be covered to create the white band. The slip was then burnished. The potter painted over his sketch to outline the red-figures with the same material used to create the gloss. In areas where the Painter would have wanted a brown or lighter shade the gloss applied would have been watered down. Once the design was complete the vase was placed in a kiln. The vase then underwent a three-part firing process. In phase one the kiln reaches approximately 800°C in a highly oxidized atmosphere. Phase two, or the reducing phase, involves closing the air vent and raising the temperature to approximately 950°C. In the final phase the kiln is cooled to 900°C and oxygen is allowed in for oxidizing. The vase is then removed from the kiln, ready for use.
Monday, March 23, 2009
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)