What to do with a Collector's Piece Nobody Wants?

.
Some antiquity collectors will add anything at all to their collections to increase the thrill. This includes desiccated human remains, I have discussed a number of cases of these, Egyptian mummies, Injun skulls, Peruvian corpses bought and sold on the antiquities market by collectors. This raises the question of the respectful manner in which to treat them when they are no longer "needed" in a personal artefact collection. One Idaho museum had to deal with this problem recently.

Police in eastern Idaho are investigating a mummified hand turned over by Museum of Idaho officials [...] [they] haven't been able to link the hand to any missing person cases. It's unclear how old the hand is, but [...] dating and DNA testing might offer clues. Museum Executive Director David Pennock said the museum likely received the hand within the last five years. "It's never been a part of our collection," he said. "Someone dropped it off." He said when the museum first received it workers called other museums for suggestions but got no help."It's just one big question mark," he said. "I think it was assumed that we could find the people who knew what to do with it. Obviously, nobody really wanted to deal with it." He said the hand was forgotten until several weeks ago when a worker found it in a small box. "Just poking through some shelves, there it was," Pennock said, noting it was then decided to turn it over to police. "We are absolutely uninterested in having it," Pennock said. "We just assumed they'd know what to do with it since we didn't know what to do with it".

Vignette: What motivates collectors to add mummified human remains to an "ancient art" collection? Anything deeper than cheap thrills?

Nightime Artefact Hunting in Shropshire Cemetery

.
According to the Shropshire Star (hat tip to Mo) Metal detectorists plunder Shropshire cemetery, 27th October 2010:

Late-night metal detectorists [...] are plundering a south Shropshire cemetery in the hope of unearthing valuable relics from a historic battle, it was claimed today. A meeting of Ludlow and Clee local joint committee last night called on police to take action against those who target the cemetery in the hope of selling the booty on to unscrupulous dealers for huge profit. It is believed [they...] are targeting the cemetery and the area around Park Road because there had been a battle at Ludford Bridge in the 1400s. Councillor Imogen Liddle, vice-chairman of Ludford Parish Council near Ludlow, said: “[...] They have spades, metal detectors and torches. People have been threatened with spades. Despite the fact that we’ve given car registration numbers, it still persists.” Councillor Liddle said residents had told her they had spotted holes that had been dug up in the cemetery.

This is wholly indicative of the way some of these people exercise their "right" to hunt for artefacts wherever they feel like it and in total disregard for the feelings of those who would rather they did not in certain places. The description of the aggressiveness which they exhibit when challenged is also typical of the milieu in general. The reaction of the local law enforcement officer is telling, though the information about the Treasure Act is not entirely accurate (and its not just so-called "rogue" metal detectorists who will continue to search a site from which a Nationally important Treasure has been found in the hope of finding more):

Local police constable Paul Sparrow urged people to continue monitoring the situation and send in registration numbers. He told the meeting it was not just a problem in the Ludlow area. He said that police would deal with people who were breaking the law. He added: “People who go metal detecting may be engaged in other activity that is unlawful. We will deal with them, but if they have gone on land with landowners’ permission there may not be anything we can do.” “Nighthawks” trespass on to land and any finds are sold on to unscrupulous dealers, rather than officially declared. The nighthawks are unintentionally aided by the Treasure Act of 1996 which stipulates that all finds must be published, thereby alerting rogue detectorists to sites. Nighthawks also gain information by joining legitimate metal detectors’ clubs.

I'd like to know more about the PC's source for his statement: “people who go metal detecting may be engaged in other activity that is unlawful". What is an "illegitimate metal detectors' club"?

Woman arrested while attempting to mail a mummy by parcel post

.
According to a report ('Woman arrested while attempting to mail a mummy by parcel post') Bolivian police arrested a woman who had tried to send a Peruvian mummy in a cardboard box to France using regular postal service. The child's corpse, probably from a burial of the Inca culture,

was discovered during a routine inspection at the time it was being shipped through the Post Office of Bolivia in La Paz bound for the French town of Compiegne addressed to a person identified as Annette Huc, said Tuesday police Col. Adolfo Cárdenas, according to El Comercio de Lima (in Spanish).
Cardenas said the detainee stated that she received the parcel containing the mummy from a Peruvian national in the Bolivian town of Desaguadero, near the border with Peru, about 70 kilometres west of La Paz. The instructions she received were to send the shipment to France by Parcel Post. She also stated being unaware of the content of the package, reports lostiempos.com of Cochabamba, Bolivia (in Spanish).

There are two points here, it is no problem at all to shove whatever illicit antiquity in a box with bubble wrap and send it through the post with some vague customs declaration hoping the package will not be opened. It probably happens all the time. Secondly what kind of perverted "ancient art" collector collects dessicated human corpses ? It seems some people have absolutely no scruples about what they will collect and put on display in their homes to "make an impression" (or whatever they use these artefacts for - I would like to see Annette Huc whoever justify this on the grounds that they are "studying the past" through gaping ghoulishly at this cadaver). The case is still being investigated. Let us hope those responsible for trafficking human remains at both ends of the chain are brought to justice.

Ancient Corporeal "Collectable" Handed Over

.

The collecting of human body parts as souvenirs is one of the less savory features of the private collection of objects removed from archaeological sites. In the case of an object, a human toe, that was returned to Egypt this week however we have a rare case when the collectable was valued not only for its "Eeeeeuuwww value" but also for its provenance, which was not therefore lost. The toe had been taken from the mummy found in 1907 in Valley of the Kings tomb 55, an Amarnan period royal grave now thought after the latest DNA testing to have been that of Akhenaton. The item was handed over by university of Zurich scientist Frank Ruehlit o the head of the Supreme Council of Antiquities on Wednesday during the signing in Switzerland of an agreement about return of stolen antiquities. The return was Ruehli's 'private initiative' and not sponsored by the Swiss government. The toe had apparently been taken from the royal body in 1907 and passed through private hands and kept as a souvenir until through 'personal contacts' it was obtained by Ruehli in 'another European country'. He then returned the object to Egypt so it could be reunited with the body.

A number of antiquity dealers and collectors hold this kind of material, there was the case of a Washington dealer discussed here who was selling a mummified foot, which she withdrew from sale when the matter was being openly discussed, Damien Huffer drew attention on SAFECorner last week to a gallery in Australia selling bronze bangles with the human armbones in them as an added 'bonus', again when he drew attention to this the items were withdrawn from sale. Ebay does not always react to being alerted to dodgy artefact sales, but tends pretty quickly to end the auctions of ancient human remains when notified. The collectors who held the KV55 toe are not named to shield them from public shame.

So it would appear that the people responsible for offering such items for sale and collecting them realise that what they are doing is likely to be regarded as offensive by many people. Obviously they do not care - unless people find out that is. Artefact collecting is, collectors feel, best done behind closed doors. Collectors and antiquity dealers do not want people peeking over their shoulders, seeing exactly what they are doing, because they know in their heart of hearts that while protesting loudly that it is all legitimate ("innit") and "no law (of my country) is broken", in fact a lot of people if they had the full facts about the damage done by the double standards and doubletalk inherent in the trade would strongly disapprove.

Sky News King Tut's dad's toe returned to Egypt April 15, 2010

Vignette: here's a book for the sort of people that might want to collect broken off bits of human corpses in their homes as "antiquities" (Legal disclaimer: I do not want to imply however that its author would approve of such things, most normal people would not, though for many antiquity collectors it is quite acceptable).

Cadaver Collecting in Colorado

Glenn Howard (Ancient Art, Ltd.; Ancient Art International,Inc.; Egyptian Antiquities, Westminster, CO 80036, USA) writes to the yahoo Ancient Artifact list that he was told (by whom I wonder) that the sale of his mummified human foot by Bob Dodge had "stirred a little attention and confrontation" on the list. He writes to tell the members his version of how it came to be on sale in the USA, the "real story behind this mummies (sic) foot....". The text he produces however is clearly crafted to offset the earlier criticism of fellow collectors, and is notable for what it does not say, as much as what it does. Neither is it explained why one dealer is selling another dealer's stock as his own. Let us see Mr Howard's retrospective justification for collecting human corpse parts.

Apparently a "few years ago" dealer Howard was asked by a collector's niece to look over some artefacts when the person's house was being cleared after their death:

"I sorted them in three sections. Fake, authentic, and pieces I was interested in. Among the pieces were two mummy hands, and one foot (in an old Tupperware container). She proceeded to tell me she was going to throw them out. I was shocked by this. I wrote a check out and handed it across the table. I thought she was going to fall off her chair."

Interesting that last comment, somebody invites a dealer to look over some artefacts and is surprised to get a cheque? This obviously is intended to convey that for the former owner, these artefacts really had no value. The fate of the recently acquired pieces of human tissue is then described. Note, no mention is made of whether the foot and two hands belonged to the same cadaver:

One person's trash, is another persons treasured mummies hands (and foot), right? Anyway.... Now.... since then these have been cared for and kept from an certain destruction. I sold one of the hands to a collector that absolutely treasures it.I sold the foot in the auction that honest and well respected dealers Bob and Teresa Dodge worked so hard to make a great success.The last hand? I have have under a hand crafted redwood and glass display case in my private gallery. An interesting note, This hand has an original bronze pin holding the bandage gently into place on its palm. It is fascinating, and in an incredible state of preservation (I guess Tupperware really does keep things fresh!) Seriously. It may have helped in keeping this hand intact. To me personally.... this hand gives me some a the greatest inspiration,and thoughts this Egyptian culture has ever given me in 15 years.I wonder what this hand held [... snipped lengthy romantic speculation ...]? I don't think I will ever part with this hand.... It will sit beside me through life. I will instruct my estate to transfer this hand to a museum or a family member after I pass, as so they can be the next caretaker of this fascinating piece of history. Probably a family member of dear friend. Besides many of us know if would probably end up in an old metal chest down in the basement of a museum, if that's where I sent it. Just as bad as the trash. Not cared for as it should be. [...] So many of you should really think before you go on your insane tirades...".

Mr Howard therefore has given the fragment of cadaver a "good home" (in a "a hand crafted redwood and glass display case" in his private gallery) and "saved" it [for now] from "an (sic) certain destruction". He uses it as his muse, an aid to entertaining speculation about the past. On his demise he intends to will a piece of somebody else's corpse to a family member or friend (as a memento?). He regards it as "insane" to question whether this is ethical collecting.

What of course he does not say is what kind of "good home" he has assured for the foot he also bought at the same time and now sold on, through another dealer. It is not going to any "good home", it is going to the guy that came up with the most cash for it. That could be anyone, the piece could be going anywhere, to a freak show owner or foot fetishist, or a loudmouth drunkard Neo-Nazi wife beater given to smashing furniture perhaps. What actually is the US definition of a "good home" in which to lay to rest human corpses? In fact, whatever that definition is, neither Mr Howard or Mr Dodge seem to have taken any measures to 'vet' the bidders in the foot auction to make the "ensuring it goes to a good home" argument stick. But we note that in the text Mr Howard published on the collector's forum, the destination and type of "care" offered to the foot itself (that is what was being discussed) is mentioned only in passing.

Let us look at his key argument that he saved it: "This would be buried in a landfill right now". The first point is that whether it is the uncaring heirs of one collector or another that dispose of items like this as trash, it still does not resolve the general issue of whether temporarily housing lopped off bits of human cadaver in ephemeral private collections (or with family members and friends of a deceased collector) is an activity which we should be applauding or decrying. Is it actually "insane" to ask such a question about the nineteenth century trophy-hunting attitudes of private collectors in the twenty-first century? I think not. Secondly I wonder whether in the US state where this woman lived it is legal and normal to dispose of human remains in the trash? Some guy's girlfriend's dead baby for example, grandma to save funeral costs, aborted human foetuses, human tissue from hospitals, the hobo that died of cold round the back of the garage. My guess is it is not. So is buying a bothersome artefact the only way to save it from somebody doing something illegal or unethical to it? Or is the motive for buying it the notion of a "handcrafted rosewood display case in my private gallery" and the potential for making 6000$ on the foot and an undisclosed sum on the hand, and the rest is retrospective excuse-making for this behaviour? The reader can examine the whole text and decide.

Renfrew ('Loot, Legitimacy and Ownership') has examined the collectors' "good home" argument (2000, 20-1, 77) and concludes that it "may apply for stray dogs" but not antiquities. I think it applies even less in the case of pieces of dismembered human body, however much one might like to justify their acquisition in order to then ghoulishly stare at it on display in a personal gallery of decontextualised antiquities and speculate whose dismembered and scattered body it is a part of.

.

Vignette: A collection of feet.

But is it Art? Collecting Human Body Parts, Legal? Ethical?

In today's Antiquities, Ancient and Ethnographic Art auction on Liveauctioneers.com, Artemis Gallery Ancient Art (Robert and Teresa Dodge, Elaine Jamieson: Erie, CO 80516) sold off Lot 263:

A Very Rare Egyptian Mummified Foot Estimate $7,000 - $9,000 New Kingdom, extremely rare mummy's foot. Traces of gilding on bandages. Toenails in perfect shape. Prints still intact on bottom of toes. L[ength].7-1/2 [inches] PROVENANCE: Old America collection from the 1920/30s Condition report: Fragmentary.

Well, let us start with that "provenance", "Old America (sic) collection" is not a provenance. It gives no cultural context to the object at all, in fact it does not even identify the object as from Egypt, let alone ancient Egypt (its a human foot wrapped up in linen and dessicated). Howactually is it "dated" to the New Kingdom (as opposed for example to Ptolemaic or early Coptic?)

Let us assume it is ancient Egyptian as the seller asserts. Is this "very rare"? Well, I have just spent three months living in the Theban necropolis, and in my wanderings in the bits the tourists do not usually go, I very frequently came across ancient human remains lying where they'd been thrown out of the tombs by people later using them for one thing or another. Not "rare" at all there. I must admit however the idea of picking bits up with the thought that in Colorado some uscrupulous idiot will pay thousands of dollars for it to sell over the internet never really crossed my mind. More generally I put them carefully in a nearby place where the'd be protected from the sun, tourists trampling and scavengers, I guess I should add to that list of threats US portable antiquity dealers and collectors. The idea of taking it home and displaying it (even as a form of "protection") far from theplace where it was laid to rest really is abhorrent as it would have been to the individuals involved in the funeral.
The "object" (its not really a "portable antiquity" is it? Neither is it really "ancient art") is not really "fragmentary", it's holding together quite well accordiong to the photographs. What it is however is a fragment broken off what was a complete body and the bits scattered to the four winds, in this case to the USA and sold off through the Internet. That seems extremely disrespectful of the bearers of the ancient culture portable antiquity collectors claim to be honouring by their collection.

Who would buy such a thing and what for? Which of the "justifications" usually trotted out to make portable artefact collecting sound beneficial (sic) could one apply here? I really cannot think of a single one that would excuse this kind of treatment of human remains.

A few days ago a member of a collecting forum with a conscience raised this point:

Does the fact that this poor individual died so long ago make this alright? I'm ready to accept the sale of grave-goods and associated funerary artifacts, but people collecting actual body parts? Come on, you'd need to be some kind of ghoulish dracula to put in a bid for that. Anyone that puts in a bid for this should be put on some kind of serial killer watch-list, just in case.

Leaving aside the idea that for some reason this person thinks it is "alright" to loot graves for "grave-goods and associated funerary artefacts" for commercial reasons, the question about the sale of human tissue is a perfectly cogent one. In fact it did not raise much of a reaction from collectors, but after the auction was over the dealer Bob Dodge triumphantly announced:

For those of you who were watching the earlier thread about our Egyptian Mummified Foot, it sold today for $6K and there were multiple bids - I guess there are a lot of potential serial killers out there, right? That was a really crazy post...

I personally do not think it was a "really crazy" post at all, whether or not the dealer wants to admit it or not, that was clearly a very valid question being asked. Just to put the answer in context, this is a picture from the Artemis Gallery website of the US dealer in dessicated human tissue, playing hide and seek with a tribal mask (if it is real, potentially an object of religious significance to some group too)




Bob Dodge

As far as I can see the legal situation in the US is rather confusing about the sale of human tissues. The law is clear about remains coming from Native American graves, but I am having difficulty finding what it says about digging up non-Native graves and selling the remains found in them, or the sale of human tissue cut from living bodies, though I assume there must be such legislation as there have been a number of police actions taken as a result of scandals about the running of cemeteries and the unauthorised selling of human body parts over there. There also does seem to be some legislation which governs the movement of such material across the borders of some states, which seems to add to the confusion. EBay does have a global policy which forbids the use of its facilities for the sale of such material (and when notified, has quickly taken down auctions which violate it) , but as far as I can see Liveauctioneers.com does not have such a policy (at least one displayed in an obvious place). This is rather odd, but then they use the same get-out as EBay: it is merely a "gateway linking bidders to traditional auction events broadcast in real time via the Internet".

Does the fact that somebody has taken it upon themselves to become a collector of portable antiquities somehow excuse them from the norms by which others live? Would you let your children go alone to do their homework to the home of a neighbour who you know has human bodyparts in the parlour? What kind of a person would that be? Archaeologists have codes of ethics and professional practice which would not allow them to keep such items in their parlour - why would collectors not feel restrained by a similar sense of ethics and what is and what is not respectful treatment of human remains?

"There were multiple bids and it sold for 6000 $", to whom? And what are they going to use it for? To take out of its box at coctail parties to entertain his guests?

Illustrations: the human tissue in question from the original Artemis Auction; Bob Dodge from his own website, vignette, still from The Mummy Returns

Another suicide in American Indian artifacts looting case

A second defendant in the federal crackdown on archaeological looting in southern Utah has killed himself (Patty Henetz and Brandon Loomis Another suicide in American Indian artifacts looting case, The Salt Lake Tribune 19/6/09). Steven L. Shrader, 56 a single man from Santa Fe, New Mexico, faced trial on two felonies in the antiquities case. He had reportedly had gone to visit his mother, in the village of Shabbona, Ill. While there, he shot himself twice in the chest late Thursday or early Friday behind the elementary school near his mother's house, authorities said. He died on Friday morning, the day he was supposed to appear in court in Salt Lake City on charges connected with trafficking of American Indian artifacts illicitly taken from public and tribal land in southeastern Utah. Shrader was not one of those arrested in the sweep on June 10th, but

turned himself in last Friday at the FBI offices in Santa Fe and
was released after an initial appearance Monday in federal court in Albuquerque. Federal agents took him back to Santa Fe that day. His residence was not the subject of any of the search warrants executed by the FBI and Bureau of Land Management.

Shrader was indicted for allegedly being party to the trafficking of stolen artifacts -- specifically ancient sandals and a basket -- along with Carl "Vern" Crites, 74, Marie Crites, 68, and Richard Bourret, 59, all of Durango, Colo. His role though is described as "peripheral" to the main case. (Salt Lake Tribune Latest court papers reveal grisly side of artifact digging).

Texas Collector uses this blog to seek "low end artefacts"

.
Joel Warren, astronomy buff and apparently also a Nazi memorabilia afficionado (member of the Wehrmacht Awards forum) admits:

Personally, I like reading what Barford says. Thanks to some of his stories, I've found some great new sources for antiquities

One can only presume he is referring to the eBay sellers of looted Balkan artefacts and the connection with organised crime discussed here. Mr Warren is also (as "Sloppy Joe") apparently interested in acquiring from (US?) treasure hunters "lower end items" such as nails, tools, musket shot and cannon balls from "any pre 1733 shipwrecks". Surely there is a law against that, even in the USA?

If Mr Warren is interested in buying the kind of artefacts I discuss on this blog, no-questions-asked, and interested in acquiring genuine Nazi memorabilia for his collection and equally not a bit interested where they come from, he'd perhaps be interested in a group of metal detectorists whose activities I have been following over here who can supply genuine Nazi badges and uniform fittings (not like the reproductions and 'doctored' items which infest eBay these days). Straight from the bodies of fallen soldiers in the forests of central Europe. I will not however be giving him their addresses, I am sure any collector of this sort of stuff can find them themselves and decide whether or not there are questions they should be answering (in court actually).

I wonder how many intact dog tags from Nazi war graves are in US collections in general? They are quite a popular "collectable" in the Nazi militaria market these days. Of course none of these collectors asks whether they should be on the market, or where they came from - still less what happened to the human remains (since the two halves are together) they would have accompanied and which can be identified by the items they so avidly collect - which was after all their function. I would say given the circumstances of their discovery, that these items rank pretty "low" on the "lower end' of the no-questions-asked relics market - just above the collection of bits lopped off mummified bodies.

There are six on ebay right now. Being sold from the UK ( 140312550069, 140312550310 [oculomotorius22] “It was dug out in Poland using metal detector”) and Poland. It is not just archaeological artefacts that should be encompassed by a strictly enforced eBay policy of only accepting objects of documented legitimate origin.

Another repatriation row brewing?

.
In the shadow of the fuss over Gandhi's glasses, the Summer Palace bronzes, and the St Louis/Sakkara mummy mask, another repatriation disute row seems to have been somewhat neglected by the press. Bernadette Merdalors ('Van Gogh's ear to be sold at auction' Artnose), reports that a mummified ear, believed to be the one severed by artist Vincent Van Gogh and recently discovered by the staff of a well-known auction house in a glass jar in the attic of a farmhouse in Provence was recently auctioned in New York, arousing dismay back in Europe:

French auctioneers are furious that the ear has been allowed to leave France . “It is a disgrace,” said Patrick Soigné, a leading French commissaire-priseur. “Vincent’s ear is part of the national patrimony, like the Mona Lisa, the Rosetta Stone, or the cave paintings at Lascaux . It belongs in the Louvre or the Musée d’Orsay.” “This is baloney,” commented Hertz van Rental of the Stedelijk Museum in Rotterdam . “Vincent was born in Holland. The ear is ours.”

The 1970 UNESCO convention does not seem to cover human body parts if they are not from archaeological contexts. Obviously if ownership is to be contested, this is a case that can only be resolved by civilised debate and discussion of the ethical issues rather than invoking international law. But in the absence of proper context, how sure are we that this piece of shrivelled tissue is indeed van Gogh's ear?

haggling over the price of corpses now

Hikers in the mountains found a dead body melting out of the ice. They reported it as one tends to do on discovering human remains where they are not normally to be expected... and now want a reward, because what they found was not the remains of a victim of a modern accident but an ancient one, the Oetztal ice body ("Oetzi"). They have now received a larger reward than originally awarded (Italian law offers them 25% of the market value of the find). So what price is a corpse on the antiquities market? What is the market value of an Oetzi or any aging human remains? It may be news to some readers of this blog, but antiquity traders do sell not only items taken FROM bodies, but bits of the bodied themselves when they can get theior hands on them. A Chicago dealer had a mummified foot on offer recently - gone now, it seems qiuckly to have found a buyer. The comments made on the forums at the time were revealing of the mindset of portable antiquity collectors.