82 Professtonal Notes

the Palace was transformed into a Museum? For most of the rooms it appears that the last option would result in the most sensible solution, one which would take as its point of departure Svinin’s reconstruction of the Palace into the Museum, together with the careful preservation, where possible, of the earlier historic inter- iors by Rossi. In this case some help from and cooperation with the afore- mentioned GIOP would be, indeed, very valuable.

2. The layout of permanently displayed collections in the Museum has its own history and traditions. Having been launched at the beginning of the Museum’s existence in the first years of the 20th century, the collection has been largely formed out of private collections or components of them. Their display layout was based on the principle of grouping together the objects originating from any one source. For example, the collection of Ancient Russian Art which originally

Law I:

Art Theft and Its Control

Presented by Lloyd’s of London Press, in association with The Art Loss Regis- ter and the newly-founded Institute of Art and Law, and supported by the Antique Trddes Gazette, the conference ‘Art Theft and its Control’ took place in London, 14-15 November 1995, and its international sponsors included The Getty Art History Information Pro- gram. Central to the sessions were the recent developments in the UNIDROIT Convention Laws on Stolen Art, but for the benefit of those not totally familiar with the ramifications of art theft most of the first day was devoted to an authoritative overview of the present situation, ‘The Scale of the Problem and the Nature of the Beast’. Professor

belonged to Princess Tenisheva has been displayed in the right wing of the Mikhailovsky Palace on the ground floor. Gradually the contexts of collections, as well as their display styles, have changed in accordance with the historic period, and this has consequently led to modifications in the appearance of the galleries them- selves. It is worth noting that even today the layout and displays of the museum collections has not yet been finalised. Longer-term plans envisage expansion of the displays of the Ancient Russian Art Collection, including the Applied Arts, and expansion of the 1920s and 1930s Avantgarde Collection, together with the introduction of some new exam- ples of the Soviet Period, including the 1980s and 1990s. It would be advantageous were these new displays to be placed in galleries of the appro- priate period.

STEPHEN WA. CANNON-BROOKES

Michael Levi (Criminology, University of Wales, Cardiff) provided valuable insights into the motivations, social organisation and criminal careers of those people involved in stealing, distrib- uting and laundering the proceeds of art crime, while Mona Vaswani, of the Lon- don-based lawyers Allen & Overy, in the first simultaneous session, contributed a most enlightening account of tracing money through art movement, both common law tracing and equitable trac- ing.

More specific experiences were pro- vided by Lawrence Kaye (Herrick, Fein- stein of New York), concerning the Turkish successes in recovering stolen antiquities in the United States of Amer- ica, not least the Lydian Hoard, and by Dr Branca Sulc (Director of the Museums Documentation Centre, Zagreb, since 1989) who opened the second simultaneous session and pro- vided a particularly well-documented

Professional Notes 83

account of art theft in periods of armed conflict, taking as her example the losses and damage to cultural property suffered in the Republic of Croatia. Professor Patrick Boylan (Vice-President of ICOM) has been deeply concerned with the implementation of the provisions of the 1954 Hague Convention on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Case of Armed Conflict and the Proto- col to the Convention on the Prohibition of Export of Cultural Property from Occupied Territories During Armed Conflict, both in respect of Croatia and elsewhere. He reviewed the policy of ICOM with regard to museum ethics and practice in relation to stolen and looted cultural property, not least with reference to the damage or destruction of the 42 museums and 9 archives in Croa- tia cited by Branka Sulc.

Peter-Wolfgang Marx, as an insurance company director, went on to discuss the influence of the insurance industry on improving risk management and secu- rity, while Richard Mangnall and Mark Sorby gave insiders’ accounts of the complex problems posed by the payment of ransoms and rewards, and Det. Chief Inspector Charles Hill (Head of Art and Antiques Squad, New Scotland Yard, London) described the occasionally bizarre story of the recovery of The Scream, by Edvard Munch, and related cases.

Half of the second day was devoted to ‘The UNIDROIT Debate’, with the past history of the project reviewed by Pro- fessor Norman Palmer (University Col- lege, London) and the final text intro- duced bY Marina Schneider (UNIDROIT Research Officer, Rome). The signal failure of the 1970 UNESCO Convention to curtail the growth of art theft has led UNIDROIT to adopt the Convention of 24 June 1995, and in the interest of both the licit trade and the preservation of the cultural objects themselves, together with the informa- tion concerning them, it attempts to reconcile, within a most complex inter- national legal context, the conflicting views of individuals, and of nations,

victims and beneficiaries of illegal export. The case for it was put with great cogency by Professor Pierre Lalive (Geneva), while the case against was put by James Fitzpatrick (Counsel, The National Association of Dealers in Ancient, Oriental and Primitive Art, Washington), with a summing up by Dr Lyndel V. Prott, Chief of the Inter- national Standards Section, Division of Cultural Heritage, UNESCO. The gen- eral consensus was that UNIDROIT, notwithstanding opposition from certain quarters, offered today the most effective way forward yet proposed.

However, one of the key components in the battle against art theft-and indeed the illegal handling of all cultural property-is the assembling and rapid dissemination of information. Dr Robin Thornes, opening the third simultaneous session, reported on the collaborative project ‘International Documentation Standards for the Protection of Cultural Objects’ he is coordinating for The Getty Art History Information Pro- gram, while the role of hard copy adver- tising/circulation was reviewed by Philip Saunders (Trace Magazine) and Anne Bowden (Antiques Trade Gazette), and on the Internet by James Corsellis. Recording and identifying systems, secure storage and “Black-Lite” were discussed in the fourth simultaneous session, which also provided the basis for the final joint session, that addressing the kev question of ‘Reducing Art Theft’, with contributions from the insurers (Robert Read, Hiscox Syndicates Lim- ited), the art trade (James Ede) and the Police (Richard Ellis, Art and Antiques Squad, New Scotland Yard).

In conclusion, the ‘Art Theft and its Control Conference’ brought together a number of the key individuals involved in formulating UNIDROIT and in putt- ing into effect both it and the wide range of innovations described. Lloyd’s of London Press advertised it as an inaugu- ral conference, and it is to be hoped that the next is not long delayed.

PETER CANNON-BROOKS