Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-10T17:06:11.024Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Lawfulness and Ethics around Cultural Property Auctions: The Case of the Barbier-Mueller Pre-Columbian Collection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 November 2020

Zara Ruiz Romero
Zara Ruiz Romero*
Affiliation:
Pablo de Olavide University, Seville, Spain; Email: zmruirom@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In March 2013, the Barbier-Mueller collection of pre-Columbian art was auctioned at Sotheby’s Paris. This event ended with the sale of half of the works offered and generated a confrontation between six of the countries of origin of the artifacts, which were absolutely opposed to the sale, and the Sothebys’ Parisian branch. This article, taking the case described above as a reference, intends to analyze the ethical considerations and lawfulness implied in the buying and selling of cultural property at auction. With this purpose in mind, the arguments held by both parties in this disagreement are analyzed. At the same time, the efficacy of national laws, international conventions, and regulations is considered, mainly with reference to the use of principles and ethical codes that seem to be applied when the law has no jurisdiction.

Type
Article
Information
International Journal of Cultural Property , Volume 27 , Issue 3 , August 2020 , pp. 397 - 416
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: This article is part of the R&D+I Project: Ruins, Looting and Interventions for Cultural Heritage (No. UPO-1264180), funded by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and by the Andalusian Regional Department of Economy, Knowledge, Enterprises and University, of the Andalusian Regional Government, within the Andalusia ERDF 2014-20 Operational Programme (Specific Objective 1.2.3: promotion and generation of border knowledge and knowledge directed to the challenges of society, and the development of emerging technologies, funding percentage 80 percent). Thanks to Donna Yates for her support and useful advice and ideas during the elaboration of this article and to Luis Pérez-Prat for his relevant and required corrections.

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alva, Walter. 2001. “The Destruction, Looting and Traffic on the Archaeological Heritage of Peru.” In Trade in Illicit Antiquities: The Destruction of the World’s Archaeological Heritage, edited by Brodie, N., Doole, J., and Renfrew, C., 89–96. Cambridge, UK: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
de Matos, Avalos, Rosalía, and Rogger Ravines. 1974. “Las antigüedades peruanas y su protección legal.” Revista del Museo Nacional 40: 363–458.Google Scholar
Berger, Martin. 2019. “‘From a Cave near Tehuacán’: An Attempt to Reassemble Post-Classic Mesoamerican Ritual Deposits Separated by the Art Market.” In The Market for Mesoamerica: Reflections on the Sale of Pre-Columbian Antiquities, edited by Tremain, C. G. and Yates, D., 112–35. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.Google Scholar
Brodie, Neil. 2003. “Lessons from the Trade in Illicit Antiquities.” In The Trade in Wildlife: Regulation for Conservation, edited by Olfield, S., 184–95. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
Brodie, Neil. 2006. “An Archaeologist’s View on the Trade in Unprovenanced Antiquities.” In Art and Cultural Heritage Law for the Twenty-first Century: Policy and Practice, edited by Hoffman, B., 52–63. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brodie, Neil, and Renfrew, Colin. 2005. “Looting and the World’s Archaeological Heritage: The Inadequate Response.” Annual Review of Anthropology 34: 343–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruhns, Karen O., and Kelker, Nancy L.. 2010. Faking the Ancient Andes. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.Google Scholar
Gilberga, Casas, Anna, , and Ricart, María Pérez. 2009. “El Museo Barbier-Mueller de Arte Precolombino de Barcelona.” Artigrama 24: 165–86.Google Scholar
Cuno, James. 2008. Who Owns Antiquities? Museums and the Battle over Our Ancient Heritage. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Portes, Des, Elisabeth, . 1998. “Museum and Ethics: Long History, New Developments.” International Journal of Cultural Property 7, no. 1: 141–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donnan, Christopher B. 1982. “The Identification of a Moche Fake through Iconographic Analysis.” In Falsifications and Misreconstructions of Pre-Columbian Art, organized by Benson, E. and edited by Boone, E., 37–50. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks.Google Scholar
Giannini, Massimo Severo. 1976. “I beni culturali.” Rivista trimestrale di diritto publico 26: 3–38.Google Scholar
Sánchez, Hernández, Herlindo, Edgar. 2008. La Máscara de Río Azul: Un Caso de Tráfico Ilícito del Patrimonio Cultural de Guatemala. PhD dissertation, San Carlos de Guatemala University.Google Scholar
Janevicius, Shelly, Chechi, Alessandro, and Renold, Marc-André. 2014. “Case Pre-Columbian Archaeological Objects-United States v. McClain.” Platform ArThemis, Art Law Centre, University of Geneva. https://plone.unige.ch/art-adr/cases-affaires/pre-columbian-archaeological-objects-2013-united-states-v-mcclain (accessed 3 August 2020).Google Scholar
Joyce, Rosemary A. 2019. “Making Markets for Mesoamerican Antiquities.” In The Market for Mesoamerica: Reflections on the Sale of Pre-Columbian Antiquities, edited by Tremain, C. G. and Yates, D., 1–15. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.Google Scholar
Kelker, Nancy L. 2019. “Forgery and the Pre-Columbian Art Market.” In The Market for Mesoamerica: Reflections on the Sale of Pre-Columbian Antiquities, edited by Tremain, C. G. and Yates, D., 151–69. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.Google Scholar
Kelker, Nancy L., and Bruhns, Karen O.. 2010. Faking Ancient Mesoamerica. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.Google Scholar
Kersel, Morag M. 2011. “When Communities Collide: Competing Claims for Archaeological Objects in the Market Place.” Archaeologies: Journal of the World Archaeological Congress 3, no. 1: 518–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luke, Christina, and Henderson, John S.. 2006. “The Plunder of the Ulúa Valley, Honduras, and a Market Analysis for Its Antiquities.” In Archaeology, Cultural Heritage, and the Antiquities Trade, edited by Brodie, N. et al., 147–72. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.Google Scholar
Mackenzie, Simon, and Yates, Donna. 2016. “Collectors on Illicit Collecting: Higher Loyalties and Other Techniques of Neutralization in the Unlawful Collecting of Rare and Precious Orchids and Antiquities.” Theoretical Criminology 20, no. 3: 340–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salazar, Mejía, Álvaro, R. 2014. “El patrimonio cultural como derecho: el caso ecuatoriano.” FORO: Revista de Derecho 21: 5–26.Google Scholar
Merryman, John Henry. 1986. “Two Ways of Thinking about Cultural Property.” American Journal of International Law 80, no. 4: 831–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merryman, John Henry. 1992. “Limits on State Recovery of Stolen Artifacts: Peru v Johnson.” International Journal of Cultural Property 1, no. 1: 169–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merryman, John Henry. 2007. “The Good Faith Acquisition of Stolen Art.” Stanford Public Law and Legal Theory Working Paper no. 1025515.Google Scholar
O’ Keefe, Patrick J. 2000. Commentary on the Unesco 1970 Convention on Illicit Traffic. Leicester, UK: Institute of Art and Law.Google Scholar
Prott, Lyndel V. 1997. Commentary on the UNIDROIT Convention. London: Institute of Art and Law.Google Scholar
Tremain, Cara G. 2019. “The Many Lives of Maya Antiquities: Tracking Distribution and Redistribution through Auction Catalogues.” In The Market for Mesoamerica: Reflections on the Sale of Pre-Columbian Antiquities, edited by Tremain, C. G. and Yates, D., 170–88. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yates, Donna. 2019. “Failures and Consequences of Antiquities Antitrafficking Policy.” In The Market for Mesoamerica: Reflections on the Sale of Pre-Columbian Antiquities, edited by Tremain, C. G. and Yates, D., 189–203. Gainesville: University Press of Florida.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yates, Donna, and Lee, Greg. 2014. “‘Good’ Provenance, Repatriation Requests and Auction Failure: Can We Learn about the Antiquities Market from Sotheby’s Sale of Pre-Columbian Objects from the Barbier-Mueller Collection?” Unpublished paper.Google Scholar