William Scott wrote:
"We were recently approached by a group who asked us to have an
event
> similar to the antique roadshow. We quickly declined, stating that our
> policy does not allow us to provide appraisals, nor authentications. (We
> do provide identifications with no warranty). So the recent thread on
> this list has raised some questions for me.
>
> While I am always glad to hear that a museum has had a successful program,
> I would like to know how Mr. Needham and Ms. Henri's museums have dealt
> with the potential conflict of interest and liability that may come from
> providing appraisals or authentications. Please do not take this message
> as an attack. I am truly just interested.
>
> The ICOM Code of Ethics states:
>
> ". . . written certificates of authenticity or valuation (appraisals)
> should not be given, and opinions on the monetary value of objects should
> only be given on official request from other museums or competent legal,
> governmental or other responsible public authorities."
>
> In my opinion, providing programs that further connect artifacts with
> monetary values works against museums' attempts to preserve artifacts and
> teach the public. It may also encourage looting and illicit trade in
> cultural property. Is luring individuals to the museum with the
> promise of appraisals worth the extra attendance that it provides?
> Is the cultural understanding, or aesthic experience that is
> gained during the visit not cancelled by the big price tag that has been
> placed on everything?
>
> (All opinions are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of the
> Mathers Museum or Indiana University.)"
>
William, I fear you are reading too much into my post, but you raise an
excellent series of points.
I never called our project an "appraisal" day or said that we offered either
appraisals or certificates of authenticity.
What we DID do was to provide people who were interested in either with the
names of military antiquarians in the area who could provide both.
Where pressed for an idea of the value, our standard response (where we were
really familiar with recent market values) was to say, "If this can be
authenticated as an original artifact, I can tell you that such artifacts
have sold recently for amounts of between X and Y dollars. If you want to
have your object authenticated and get an estimate of its potential market
value, we suggest you take it to one of the antiquarians on this list."
That's as far as we would go and I think no one ought to go further. In the
case of many artifacts, the range between X and Y is so wide that makes it
vry obvious to the owner that he needs more advice. I have recently seen
Victoria Crosses, for example, to sell in Canada, in a period of months, for
amounts ranging from $CA25,000 to $CA115,000. We ALSO cautioned owners on
the large number of very good reproductions that are not so marked, for
example German militaria of the Second World War, which can be extremely
difficult to authenticate.
Where the project is being conducted by DEALERS or their representatives,
and not by the museum, that is perhaps a different matter. I am not so sure,
however, that such an alliance might not represent a potential conflict of
interest, unless the mueum involved had an arms-length relationship to the
dealer(s).
My colleagues and I were as concerned about the points that you raise as you
are and I am glad that you have raised the issues so well for the List, as I
think they represent the main dangers of engaging in such a project.
Harry
Harry Needham
Special Advisor - Programme Development
Canadian War Museum
330 Sussex Drive,
Ottawa, Canada
K1A 0M8
Voice: (819) 776-8612 Fax (819) 776-8623
Email: [log in to unmask]
|
