March 28, 2001

- Aztec, Mayan artifacts reported missing from TCU library
- Judge Threatens to Reject Auction House Pact
- Issue Involving Foreign Dealings Threatens Auction Settlement
(Sotheby's and Christie's decline to comment)
- Re: Steve Keller's posting on lights for security cameras
- conservation and security (Tom Dixon)
- RE: Steve Keller's posting on lights for security cameras (Tom Dixon)
- RE: David Tremain (Jim Sanders)
- Press Release: TEMPORARY BAR PLACED ON EXPORT OF MIDDLE BRONZE AGE AXE-HEADS

Aztec, Mayan artifacts reported missing from TCU library

By Ram Luthra
Daily Skiff
Texas Christian U.
(U-WIRE) FORT WORTH, Texas -- More than 110 Peruvian, pre-Columbian pottery artifacts, valued at about $267,700, were reportedly stolen from a basement storage room in the Mary Couts Burnett Library at Texas Christian University. The pottery artifacts are from the Aztec and Mayan civilizations, dating back 2,700 years. They were reported as missing to the TCU Police Feb. 23. However, the TCU incident report cited that the items were last seen Feb. 1, 2000. Robert Seal, head university librarian, said the room where the artifacts were stored was locked. He said he does not know how someone got into the room, but noted that there was no forced break-in. There was no scheduled inventory check-up on the stored items, but rather, they are checked randomly, he said. TCU Police Chief Steve McGee said there have been no solid suspects linked to the case. According to the incident report, the pottery pieces were individually wrapped in bubble plastic and placed into cardboard boxes to be stored in the basement. While the artifacts were taken from the storage room, the plastic covers and boxes were left behind, said Kelly Ham, TCU detective of criminal investigations. Each artifact was numbered with a four-digit museum catalog number. The artifacts were donated to TCU by the Moorehead Collection in three different donations in 1996 and 1997. The approximate value of the items stolen are based on 1996 appraisal values. The current value of these artifacts may be significantly higher from the appraised value. McGee said not all the artifacts were taken from the storage room, but several that remained were damaged. McGee said the artifacts have since been moved from the storage room. "It cannot be determined if the artifact pieces were taken incrementally or if they were taken all at once," McGee said. Seal said the artifacts were reported missing after Thomas Guderjan, anthropology professor, noticed they were tampered with. Faculty and students can use the artifacts after obtaining permission from the library, Seal said. "The pottery artifacts have been in storage for a couple of years now, after being on display for a year," Seal said. "Even if they are in storage, they are still used on and off by students and faculty members." McGee said the investigation to find the missing artifacts has been difficult because of the large time period between when they were reported missing and when they were seen last. "We have an ongoing investigation in progress, and are looking for any and all leads in this case," McGee said.
(C) 2001 Daily Skiff via U-WIRE
http://news.excite.com/news/uw/010328/university-108

Judge Threatens to Reject Auction House Pact

A federal judge in New York threatened to reject a $537-million settlement of lawsuits brought by customers of Sotheby's and Christie's auction houses in a price-fixing case, just weeks after tentatively approving it. U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan said lawyers who reached the deal tried to satisfy his concerns by tinkering with the numbers rather than adequately modifying the settlement. He gave them until Monday to let customers of the auction houses who believe they were cheated in foreign auctions sue in the United States, something the tentative deal had disallowed. Otherwise, he said, the deal will be tossed out and a trial date set. He noted that the lawyers, led by David Boies, had earned fees of $26.75 million that could be paid once the settlement became effective. Boies is the lawyer who argued the government's antitrust case against Microsoft Corp. The lawyers "gained a powerful incentive to protect the settlement and thus their large fee," Kaplan said.
http://www.latimes.com/
--------------------------------------------

Issue Involving Foreign Dealings Threatens Auction Settlement

By CAROL VOGEL
A federal judge in Manhattan warned the Christie's and Sotheby's auction houses yesterday that he would reject a proposed $512 million settlement of a class-action lawsuit against them unless they better addressed the claims of customers who dealt with the companies both in the United States and overseas. Under the proposed settlement, which the judge, Lewis A. Kaplan of Federal District Court, conditionally approved last month, members of this so-called mixed class would be compensated only for auctions that took place in the United States and would give up their right to sue in the United States for transactions that took place overseas. But lawyers for many of these class members say they should not have to give up their right to sue in the United States over foreign transactions, even though the judge had earlier written that he thought foreign courts were the proper place for such suits. Those involved could not say how large that class is. Earlier this month, Sotheby's and Christie's agreed to set aside for such customers $7 million in discount certificates, which could be used against future sales. But in an opinion issued yesterday, Judge Kaplan said this did not address concerns over the loss of the right to sue over foreign claims in the United States. Although he threatened to reject the settlement if it were not modified by Monday, he indicated that he expected a quick resolution, writing that "this contretemps appears to be a tempest in a teapot." Sotheby's and Christie's declined to comment yesterday. The civil suit grew out of a four- year-old criminal antitrust investigation by the Justice Department that heated up last year when the former chief executive of Christie's provided documents detailing how officials of the two companies colluded to fix rates on commissions and other matters. The civil settlement calls for the auction houses to pay $412 million in cash and the rest in discount certificates, which can be used against future sales or redeemed for cash after four years.
http://www.nytimes.com/ http://www.nytimes.com/

From: IntlArtCop@aol.com
Date sent: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 00:38:04 EST
Subject:

Re: Steve Keller's posting on lights for security cameras

To: tom.dixon@ngv.vic.gov.au, securma@xs4all.nl
Tom:
Thanks for your reply. Of course, YOU do the training. I could have guessed that much. That's why you are on this list every day, participating, sharing and learning. But your colleagues? I don't think so. If they were like you we wouldn't have this problem.
I won't take on your comment that putting black felt cloth over pictures each night risks damage. I'm not an expert and I'm sure you can come up with some possible damage this might cause. But do a "cost risk evaluation". Is the risk of damaging the pictures greater than the risk of light on them? Is the risk of not being able to use the CCTV system in face of the very real threat of burglary or internal theft low enough to balance the risk of placing the light weight cloth over the pictures? Which risk is worse? We'll never know. But don't use the trump card I hear so often--it can' t be done because it isn't good for the collection. How long would it REALLY take to place cloth over a vitrine? I know museums that routinely do this with light fragile pieces. Maybe you need to press for more staff who do regular and frequent conservation patrols in galleries.
I'm kidding, of course, because guards can do this for you . . .if they are trained to do so.
By the way, I asked my wife, an educated woman, my neighbor who has a MBA, and and the accountant who is located in the office next to mine if they knew that light would harm works on paper and they didn't know. Good that they didn't apply for a guard job. If they do, I'll send them to you because I know they will get properly trained.
But let's not kid ourselves. Even some of the best museums provide little or no meaningful training to guards let alone training on conservation issues. If the Canadian museum did and if the chief failed to assure that the training was carried out, then shame on him. Otherwise, shame on the people who are responsible for protecting works on paper from light who did not share their knowledge like you do. I'm not defending security management on this issue, just betting, based on the information provided, that security management should not be blamed for this breakdown.
Steve Keller

From: Tom Dixon tom.dixon@ngv.vic.gov.au
To: "'securma@xs4all.nl'" securma@xs4all.nl,
"'David_Tremain@pch.gc.ca'" David_Tremain@pch.gc.ca
Copies to: "'IntlArtCop@aol.com'" IntlArtCop@aol.com
Subject:

conservation and security

Date sent: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 15:45:50 +1000
Thanks to David Tremain and to Steve Keller for their comments. I'm a conservator that follows the list, and puts my 2 cents worth in every once in a while. I've been head of conservation here since 1984 and in that time have tried to have a close relationship with our guards. There are many reason for this. One is that we have shared interests- the protection of the collection as well enhancing access by the public. Another practical reason is that the guards are my eyes in the public spaces- I worked in an office on the floor beneath the ground floor of the gallery and it was not uncommon for me to go a day or two without setting foot into any gallery, let alone all of them. I now work a 10 minute drive from the gallery. Attendants often called or wrote a note to me to draw my attention to a problem. In our old building, now being renovated, I always tried to spend an hour or so every Friday going through all the galleys and store rooms "looking for trouble". It was a good opportunity to ask guards as well as education and other front of house staff what was working and what wasn't and often I was able to interceed with Senior Management on their behalf in a way that didn't threaten their jobs.
Another reason I'm interested in the field is that the guards used to have "stop work days" when the then highly unionised attendants would strike for a day in order to attend a stop work meeting off premises to discuss issues. Other staff would step in as replacement floor attendants. Some day I will write a book about what I saw, and no one that hasn't been "back to the floor" would believe it. It opened my eyes to how difficult being a floor guard can be. My best description is incredible boredom interspersed with members of the public having mental breakdowns and expecting you to help. I am of the opinion that every middle and senior manager should spend a minimum of 1 day per year front of house, on the floor, at the front desk or on the switchboard- or all three- just opening their eyes to the reality out there.
Good security staff are, like all other good museum staff, hard to find and hard to keep and deserve the respect and support of their colleagues. The collection is what a museum or art gallery is about- without it, we no longer have a reason to exist. It really is a shared responsibility to preserve, protect and present the collection. We all have our part to play in that and none of us have all the answers. What each of us does has an effect on what the others do or don't do.
What's the point of protecting the collection from after hours light damage if it increases the risk of theft or vandalism, and conversely, what's the point of protecting it from theft or vandalism if the collection suffers accelerated light deterioration? We all need to keep talking so conservators don't impose decisions on security that compromise the protection of the collection and vice versa. This can also be said about curators, design, building managers, public relations people, etc.
Tom Dixon
Chief Conservator
National Gallery of Victoria
Melbourne Australia

From: Tom Dixon tom.dixon@ngv.vic.gov.au
To: "'IntlArtCop@aol.com'" IntlArtCop@aol.com
Copies to: "'securma@xs4all.nl'" securma@xs4all.nl,
"'David_Tremain@pch.gc.ca'" David_Tremain@pch.gc.ca
Subject:

RE: Steve Keller's posting on lights for security cameras

Date sent: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 17:28:16 +1000
Hi Steve
I think our messages literally crossed in the ether, and also I think you are working too late for your own good- its 1:30 in the morning your time. Thanks for the complement- I try to do a good job, but I'm not unique- there are a lot of people in my field who are really out there on your side. Regarding the black clothes on light sensitive items, my point is we have used these for exhibitions with maybe a hundred framed prints, but there is someone walking around putting them up and taking them down- there are a lot of them to carry, one size does not fit all and it introduces a physical risk- but not a huge one because we have things well secured to the wall. As my institution, which is smaller than the Met or National Gallery Washington, but bigger than most U.S. galleries, goes to over 30 display galleries in two big buildings, this is just unsustainable in my opinion. Also, we have a lot of light sensitive Aboriginal items that we can't put cloth on because the surfaces are so poorly bound and the balance of risk is greater for the potential for abrasion and the cloth catching on bark or hewn wood than the light damage. In a small museum with show case display, it may be a perfectly good strategy.
I take the point about the trump card- it has been played far too often and I'm as guilty as my colleagues. Its not about "you can't do it because its bad and wrong", rather, its about how can we find the best balance so we increase access and decrease risk. What's the answer? Not blame. Its also not "either or". I don't know the answer, but expect it can be found through conversation, mutual respect, education and common caring about the collection.
Regarding you educated wife, neighbors, et al not knowing light deteriorates paper- one of the things I think is so great in the Australian state of Victoria is that for the last 10 years or so, every high school age student has to do a Compulsary Assessment Task (CAT) on preservation of cultural materials. We put together a kit explaining the interaction of light, humidity, etc on cultural materials that goes to the schools and some of the teachers have shown me some wonderful research papers on the subject by these young people who all get a basic grounding. I just love it.
Cheers
Tom Dixon

From: Jim Sanders JimSanders@worcesterart.org
To: Museum Security Network securma@xs4all.nl
Subject:

RE: David Tremain

Date sent: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 09:33:12 -0500
David Tremain's message is well thought out and clearly expressed. As to David's opening comment: . I like Tom Dixon's comments questioning the need for CCTV after-hours if motion detectors are installed..." there is a very good reason why both should be operating....it's called redundancy. If your intrusion detection fails, for one reason or another, you are "blind" if you don't have your CCTV system operating. As I stated in an earlier message, we are able to keep low level night lights burning throughout the facility which allow our cameras to "see", but do not make the conservators nervous.
Jim Sanders
Director of Operations & Security
Worcester Art Museum
Worcester, MA

Press release

Department for Culture, Media and Sport 2-4 Cockspur Street London SW1Y 5DH www.culture.gov.uk

TEMPORARY BAR PLACED ON EXPORT OF MIDDLE BRONZE AGE AXE-HEADS

Arts Minister, Alan Howarth, has placed a temporary bar on the export of 13 bronze axe- heads found in Dorset. The axe-heads were discovered by a metal detectorist, and are part of a hoard of 90 bronze palstaves (axes), manufactured during the Middle Bronze Age, around 1400-1250 BC. The temporary export bar provides a last chance to raise the money to keep the axe-heads in the United Kingdom.
The Minister's decision follows the recommendation by the Reviewing Committee on the Export of Works of Art, that the export decision be deferred. This reflects the palstaves' importance for the study of Breton and Norman axe-head types, and their archaeological significance for demonstrating the cross- channel trade in manufacturing methods and metals during the Middle Bronze Age. The deferral will enable a purchase offer to be made for any one of the palstaves, at or above the following recommended price:

The deferral period could be extended until after 26 June 2001 if there is a serious intention to raise funds with a view to making an offer to purchase any one of the above axe-heads. Anyone interested in making an offer to purchase any of the above items should contact the owner's agent through:
The Secretary The Reviewing Committee on the Export of Works of Art Department for Culture, Media and Sport 2-4 Cockspur Street London SW1Y 5DH

NOTES TO EDITORS

Middle Bronze Age Palstaves, circa 1400-1250 BC
Dating from the Taunton phase of the Middle Bronze Age, circa 1400 - 1250 BC, the items under deferral are bronze palstaves of varied types. They are generally in fine condition, with only limited corrosion deposits, such that many traces of ancient working and wear are extant. All are complete, or have suffered only minor damage at the edges, and some show clearly that they are fresh from the mould, still to be sharpened up for use. The palstaves fall into three main types, each with variants: broad-bladed type, Norman type and Breton type.
The hoard was found in October 1989 by a metal-detectorist on his own farmland in Dorset. Although the whole hoard, comprising 90 bronze palstaves (axes), had already been removed, it was made possible for the Trust for Wessex Archaeology to conduct a small excavation around the findspot. They discovered that the hoard had lain in a small pit, 0.60 x 0.40 m in plan and 0.40 m deep, the sides of which still retained traces of green corrosion products.
The hoard is of exceptional archaeological significance, firstly because of its size. There are very few Middle Bronze Age hoards containing more than fifty objects anywhere in the country. Such hoards offer much evidence on the contemporaneity of different object types. More specifically, the hoard is noteworthy in containing a high proportion of demonstrable northern French types, both in the Breton and Norman styles. It is also possible that some of the broad-bladed examples are imports, but these are less easy to distinguish from indigenous styles. Breton and Norman palstaves are known from a number of sites scattered through the southernmost counties of England, south of the Thames. The distribution of these, and their occurrence sometimes in large hoards, is intimately tied to the flourishing cross-channel metals trade of the Middle Bronze Age. Concentrations of hoards occur in the north French coastlands at the same time, while the shipment of metal in bulk is demonstrated by the slightly later find from the seabed at Langdon Bay, Dover.
Although the dispersal through private sale of much of the hoard is a woeful loss to the nation's Bronze Age heritage, these items present an opportunity to preserve a portion of this important find in a public collection. The range of types available is reasonably representative of the hoard. Even having accessible a portion of the hoard would greatly facilitate evaluation of its significance in the course of future research.