Blog Subscription via Follow.it

January 12, 2024

Three houses of Vittorio Sgarbi searched and the painting attributed to Rutilio Manetti seized.

Image Credit Vittorio Sgarbi
via Facebook

This week, the Public Prosecutor's Office at the Court of Macerata initiated an investigation to determine whether Vittorio Sgarbi, Undersecretary of Culture, should face formal charges for the offense of Self-Laundering of Cultural Assets (as specified in Article 1(1)(b) of Law No. 22 of the Criminal Code, C.C. art. 518-septies). As an outcome of this inquiry, today, Italy's Carabinieri del Nucleo Tutela Patrimonio Culturale carried out searches at three residences linked to the art critic in Rome and Le Marche.  Simultaneously to these searches, Sgarbi was informed of his status as a suspect, while according to the Carabinieri's press release officers executing the search warrants seized "telematic, IT, and documentary devices" relevant to their law enforcement investigation requiring further examination.

As part of the prosecutor's inquiry, and in order to conduct the necessary scientific examinations for authentication and attribution of an artwork owned by Sgarbi, officers conducted an evidentiary seizure of the art critic's painting titled The Capture of Saint Peter (Italian: Cattura di San Pietro).  This artwork, attributed by Sgarbi as a previously "unpublished" painting by the artist Rutilio di Lorenzo Manetti (c. 1571 – 22 July 1639), was confiscated from facilities associated with the Cavallini-Sgarbi Foundation in Ro Ferrarese in Emilia-Romagna, Italy.  The order for seizure also called for the seizure of one of the cloned copies of the painting produced by GraphicLAB s.n.c. di De Pietri Cristian & Co.

Since mid December, in addition to hurling insults at investigative journalists, Sgarbi has angrily and adamantly asserted, on video and in print, that he is the victim of politically-minded journalists and that his painting is not the painting from the Castello di Buriasco (Pinerolo) reported stolen by its owner Margherita Buzio on 14 February 2013.  Instead, he defends his ownership by claiming that the painting in his possession was discovered in the abandoned Villa Maidalchina in the Viterbo area and is a much earlier original, and that the stolen painting was merely a poor copy, completed at a later date. 

As discussed in our earlier blog post, to the naked eye, viewing only digital imagery of the two artworks, both paintings appearto be remarkably similar, with the painted characters depicted matching proportionately and in placement, something ARCA does not believe would have been possible for the original 17th century artist himself, let alone a later copiest recreating the image of his predecessor.

The primary difference, aside from the cut down size of Sgarbi's painting, which might be attributed to the fact that the stolen painting was cut from its frame, is the placement of an illuminated torch, which some allege was added to the top left quadrant of Sgarbi's painting at some later date.  Meanwhile, while ignoring these improbable similarities, or the fact that a painting cut from its frame, would be, by its resulting damage, now smaller, Sgarbi took to the airwaves as soon as the searches and seizure of his painting was announced, stating:

"I spontaneously handed over the work so that all the necessary checks could be carried out, starting from the measurements of the painting compared to the frame of the stolen one. I am absolutely at peace. The seizure is a necessary act. I have nothing to fear. I will defend myself by all means against those who speculate on the matter and those who become complicit in it."

ARCA would like to remind its readers that when questioned by reporters last December about the The Capture of Saint Peter and its added torch, Sgarbi deflected the reporters line of questioning stating that he had sold the artwork in question.  The Cavallini Sgarbi Foundation, where the artwork was recovered was founded in 2008 by Caterina “Rina” Sgarbi and Giuseppe “Nino” Sgarbi and their children, Elisabetta and Vittorio Sgarbi.  This foundation is located in Ro Ferrarese, in the family's home, which is now owned by the Elisabetta Sgarbi Foundation and houses hundreds of works of art – paintings and sculptures from the 13th to the 20th century – that have been acquired over many decades. 

It will be interesting to see what paperwork investigators uncover and whether or not said paperwork substantiates an actual sales transaction to the Cavallini-Sgarbi Foundation, and if this transfer of ownership is of evidentiary interest in the investigation of Self-Laundering of Cultural Assets.

For now, it is up to the investigators to determine if this artwork is one and the same as the stolen painting from Castello di Buriasco, and if it is, whether or not the torch modification was introduced by the art critic himself, or in collaboration with persons currently unknown, as a means of subterfuge, designed to hide the artwork's theft by adding a detail to make the painting appear different from the original.

January 7, 2024

The Judgement of St. Paul or The Capture of Saint Peter? A tail of theft and perhaps too many coincidences


February 2013 

Castello di Buriasco
A large format oil painting is stolen from the Castello di Buriasco (Pinerolo).  The painting was owned by Margherita Buzio and had been on display inside the castello,  which for many years was a restaurant and events venue previously open to the public. 

The theft was discovered by Margherita Buzio after it was noticed that a lock on the castello's external gate had been tampered with, allowing unknown individuals to gain entry to the estate.  

Following the theft, Buzio registered a complaint with the Carabinieri Comando Stazione Vigone noting that she believes the thieves gained entry at night. The stolen painting depicts its protagonist, with his hands clasped and his face turned upwards as a sign of supplication, as he is forcibly brought, by two guardsmen, before a judge who is depicted pointing with his right arm raised. Other individuals, perhaps the apostle's followers, are painted into the background as witnesses to the unfolding events depicted. 

According to her report to law enforcement officers, the painting's owner recounted that at some point, an unknown person or persons had apparently entered the castle she owned and had cut the painting in question from its frame, removing it at an undetermined date.  In its place, the resourceful thief or thieves are said to have replaced the removed canvas with a large photocopy of the work, re-stapling the reproduction back into the original frame.

At a much later date, it will later be determined that the thief or thieves, who cut the artwork from its frame, accidentally left behind a small triangular fragment from the painting's original canvas.  This painted scrap will later be found, stuck between the replacement image and the painting's frame which was rehung at the crime site. 

According to the victim of the theft, a person by the name of Paolo Bocedi, identified from open source media on the internet as an entrepreneur in Lombardia who founded S.O.S. Italia Libera together with Tano Grasso in 1991 had twice visited the Castello di Buriasco in an attempt to purchase the painting, however Signora Buzio declined to sell. 

Date Unknown

Following the report of theft filed with the Carabinieri in Vigone, a theft notice regarding the painting stolen from the Castello di Buriasco is sent by Italy's National Central Bureau to the Interpol Works of Art Unit.   The identikit details of which are uploaded to Interpol's ID-Art App, making the image of the stolen artwork searchable by the general public. 

The INTERPOL stolen works of art database refers to the stolen painting as a 17th century painting of The Judgement of St. Paul by the School of Francesco Solimena, (L'Abate Ciccio).

Spring 2013

According to later journalistic investigations made public in December 2023 by investigative reporters Thomas Mackinson it is claimed that Vittorio Sgarbi, Italy's Undersecretary of Culture in the Meloni Cabinet, contacted Gianfranco Mingardi in the Spring of 2013 telling the Brescia-based restorer: 

"I'll send you a painting to fix".  

Sgarbi has worked extensively with Mingardi periodically in the conservation of artworks from the 1980s until quite recently.

8 May 2013

According to one of Mackinson's article regarding this evolving story, the restorer Gianfranco Mingardi recounted that three months after the theft of the painting from the Castello di Buriasco, on May 8, 2013 he received a painting requiring restoration which was the purported to be property of Vittorio Sgarbi.  Like the artwork stolen from the Castello di Buriasco and uploaded to the Interpol database, the painting requiring restoration depicted its protagonist, with his hands clasped and his face turned upwards as a sign of supplication, as he is forcibly brought by two guardsmen, before a judge, who is depicted pointing with his right arm raised.  

Mingardi told newspaper reporters that he had picked up this painting at the exit of the A4 motorway, in central Brescia in the northern Italian region of Lombardy, adding that he met a delivery truck, along with Paolo Bocedi, who arrived by  motorcycle.  It should be noted that this is the same individual who was was mentioned by Margherita Buzio as the person who had previously contacted her about the purchase of her painting before the artwork was stolen.

At the handover, the restorer Mingardi stated that the painting was delivered to him "without a frame, cut, and rolled up like a carpet".  Once laid out and spread open, the restorer says he observed several parts of the artwork which showed breaks and canvas losses.  

Having taken photos of the artwork at the time it was delivered, Mingardi was able to demonstrate to the journalists that at the time he received the canvas, the painting was rolled up like a scroll and appeared to be in poor condition.  His documentation also showed that at the time the painting was under his care, it did not yet depict a torch in the top left quadrant of the painting's imagery.  

This purported augmentation is thought to have been added at some later date.  

 Photo of rolled atwork
taken by restorer Gianfranco Mingardi 

Also of note in the restorer's photographic documentation is a prominent horizontal line that runs along the entire length of the painting at the point where the two canvases are cojoined at the ground layer,.  This is a common system or merger which allowed artists of the period to create larger format paintings.  Lastly, Mingardi's records identify a series of losses, including a hole in the canvas at the height of the dog's collar, as well as a crack along one tunic and other similar losses. 

10 December 2018

Gianfranco Mingardi tells news journalist Thomas Mackinson that he returned Vittorio Sgarbi's painting to the art critic on 10 December 2018, a full five and a half years after it was received. 

“I realised that that canvas was hot, so I asked him [Vittorio Sgarbi] for a certificate of ownership...He said he would send it to me but he didn't, and when I protested he said not to worry, he could say that it was in Villa Maidalchina..." 

April 2019 

Vittorio Sgarbi's painting depicting its protagonist, with his hands clasped and his face turned upwards as a sign of supplication is now said to be at the studio of Valentina Piovan, an established restorer from Padua. 

Why the artwork was taken to a second restorer is unclear.  What should be noted is that by this time period, Sgarbi's painting now contains an added element, a lighted torch which serves to illuminate the top left quadrant of the painting's imagery. 

October 2020

Samuele and Cristian De Pietri, the owners of GraphicLAB s.n.c. di De Pietri Cristian & Co., collect Vittorio Sqarbi's painting from the studio of restorer Valentina Piovan at the beginning of October 2020 

13 October 2020

Samuele and Cristian De Pietri, the owners of GraphicLAB s.n.c. di De Pietri Cristian & Co create a digitised, contactless scan of Vittorio Sqarbi's painting using a high quality, large format scanner capable of scanning large format works of art and then cloning them. 

22 November 2020

Vittorio Sgarbi visits the laboratory of GraphicLAB s.n.c. di De Pietri Cristian & Co in person, who, according to the owners "was interested in understanding the potential of our machinery, how far it could go. From there we then do many other jobs, for various museums and around Italy." 

Photos and videos are taken where Sgarbi can be seen discussing the original painting left in G-Lab's care, alongside the cloned work created by the business associates.  Both images appear to closely resemble the stolen painting from the Castello di Buriasco. 

These images and video are later shared with the journalists working for Il Fatto Quotidiano and the Rai television program "Report" who release them to the public in 2024.  In the film, Sgarbi can be seen wandering between the original version of the Capture of Saint Peter and its digital clone, examining each of them closely, with a flashlight in his hand moving over key areas of the artwork.

On 12 January 2021 

Vittorio Sgarbi pays a €6100 invoice issued by GraphicLAB s.n.c. di De Pietri Cristian & Co. which labeled their service as a "consultancy."  According to the business owners, the original version of Vittorio Sgarbi's painting and its digital clone were subsequently transferred to the care of the Cavallini-Sgarbi Foundation (Ro Ferrarese, Ferrara). However, their original 3D scan file, which digitally captured the scan of the 17th century painting at 1600 DPI resolution (meaning that for every inch of mouse movement, the cursor moves 1600 pixels), and weighing 52 gigabytes, remained with the digitisation company's owners, Samuele and Cristian De Pietri.

8 December 2021 through 2 October 2022

The art exhibition I Pittori della Luce. Da Caravaggio a Paolini, curated by Vittorio Sgarbi and produced by Contemplazioni takes place at the Padiglione Panini - Ex Cavallerizza in the historic center of Lucca.  At this exhibition, Sqarbi exhibits the painting he had commissioned to be cloned earlier at GraphicLAB s.n.c. di De Pietri Cristian & Co. 

According to the accompanying exhibition catalogue, written by Sgarbi and Professor Ciampolini, the 235 x 204 cm, oil on canvas painting is now titled The Capture of Saint Peter (Italian: Cattura di San Pietro) and is written up as a previously "unpublished" artwork, believed to have been completed by the artist Rutilio di Lorenzo Manetti (c. 1571 – 22 July 1639), sometime between 1637 and 1639.  Manetti being an Italian painter of late-Mannerism or proto-Baroque, active mainly in Siena.  

Sgarbi's catalogue as well as accompanying exhibition documentation lists the artwork as being the property of the Cavallini Sgarbi Foundation.  Regarding its provenance, the exhibition's catalogue states that the painting was found at the Villa Maidalchina, which in the 1600s was owned by Olimpia Pamphilij, sister-in-law of Pope Innocent.  The previously abandoned villa is located near La Quiete, in the La Pila district, near Viterbo.  Built between 1615 and 1625 this once abandoned villa is now the property of the Cavallini Sgarbi Foundation. 

Sgarbi's catalogue goes on to state that his painting "is remembered, generically among others paintings, in the inventory of 11 October 16-49, drawn up by the notary Cosimo Pennacchi, of the assets of Andrea Maidalchini, Olimpia's brother. The works of art, including the famous Bust of Innocent X by Alessandro Algardi, then passed to Giulio Bussi and the Gentili counts."  

According to research conduced by journalists, there is no affirming documentation which concretises these attestations.  In fact quite the contrary, Angelo Allegrini, the Director of the State archives of Viterbo, failed to identify any record of any works of art by the artist Manetti in the bound 1649 records of Pennacchi.  And while there is a record of a painting depicting Saint Peter recorded, that work of art describes the presence of a handmaid, who is not depicted in the work of art in Sgarbi's hands.  

The catalogue further describes the paintings light source as follows: 

"a precise light source, coming from the top left, emphasising the dramatic tone of the agitated scene, enhancing the material values of the clothes and skin and creating suggestive light and backlight effects. A torch, remembered by Honthor Stano, illuminates a room to the left of Herod, creating a symmetry with the scenographic background of the road on the right. There is an evident Caravaggesque origin, which the painter combines with a pursued theatrical taste, in the general layout, as in the individual characters, unnaturally elongated to emphasize their 'dancing pace' way of acting."

Late 2021/Early 2022

By late 2021 Vittorio Sqarbi's painting depicting the Capture of Saint Peter has drawn the attention of investigative journalists Thomas Mackinson and Manuele Bonaccorsi working for Il Fatto Quotidiano and the Rai television program "Report" based upon its similarities to the painting stolen from the Castello di Buriasco (Pinerolo), owned by Margherita Buzio and publicly searchable via the Interpol Id-Art app for stolen artwork. 

Driven by demand from patrons and commissions it was not unusual for artists of the 16th and 17th century to have created multiple versions of a particular theme or to emulate aspects of one another's artist's style.  While each of those are highly plausible, it would have been quite impossible for artists of that period to have matched brush stroke for brush stroke, precisely the proportions as you see below, in this ARCA's overlay of both the stolen painting and the one exhibited at the early exhibition I Pittori della Luce. Da Caravaggio a Paolini, in Lucca.

Aside from the lighted torch element, which illuminates the architectural backdrop on the upper left side, the painting owned by the Cavallini Sgarbi Foundation is objectively identically proportioned character by character to the painting stolen from the Buriasco Castle.  

One could argue, as Vittorio Sgarbi later does, that the stolen painting was a much later replica of his painting,  however that still would not explain the absence/occurrence of the lit torch, and again, how the artisan who replicated the work would have precisely matched the brush strokes in such an extracting way. 

By December 2023

By December 2023 GraphicLAB s.n.c. di De Pietri Cristian & Co., owned by Samuele and Cristian De Pietri, have invoiced undersecretary for cultural heritage Vittorio Sgarbi for a reported 20 thousand euros for the high end cloning and printing of "material reproductions" of paintings.  

These include not only the Capture of Saint Peter, but five other cloned artworks. The latest invoice, paid by Vittorio Sgarbi is dated December 2023. 

After 08 Dicembre 2023 

Stopped outside the Lucca exhibition, Antonio Canova e il Neoclassicismo  journalists investigating the similarities between the stolen painting a the Sgarbi foundation artwork attempt to speak with Undersecretary Vitttorio Sgarbi abouthis foundation's painting and the similarities to the artwork stolen in 2013.  Caught on tape, reporters ask the politician to explain the torch depicted in the Manetti artwork, and the fact that experts state that this is a more recent addition not previously found in the painting when it was worked on by the restorer Gianfranco Mingardi. 

At first Sgarbi hurriedly brushes off the reporters questions, hurling various insults before seating himself in a waiting car with driver.  Very shortly after however, he steps out of the vehicle and reengages with the journalists and camera man somewhat aggressively.  

Speaking in a frustrated or angry tone, he provides further statements regarding the artwork in question while still continuing to hurl colourful vulgarities at the journalists.  He also tells the reporters dismissively that he has sold the painting in question.  At the conclusion of their exchange, Sgarbi takes his leave wishing the journalists a premature death, then denouncing them to the police for stalking.

NB: It should be noted that the PDF for the Lucca exhibition two years earlier already stated that the artwork, at the time of the exhibition, was owned by the Cavallini Sgarbi Foundation. 

15 December 2023

In the first of multiple news articles journalists with Il Fatto Quotidiano begin reporting on their questions regarding the seventeenth-century painting in the Cavallini Sgarbi Foundation collection which they suspect matches the one stolen in 2013 from the Castello di Buriasco.

17 December 2023

The seventeenth-century Cavallini Sgarbi Foundation painting, titled the Capture of Saint Peter is highlighted in the investigative TV program "Report" in Italy, appearing in the first of multiple episodes on the 17th of December ".  In this first reporting, TV journalist Manuele Bonaccorsi walks his viewers through the story of the theft of the artwork from the Castello di Buriasco (Pinerolo) owned by Margherita Buzio as well as its similarities to the artwork titled The Capture of Saint Peter by the artist Rutilio di Lorenzo Manetti owned by Vittorio Sgarbi's foundation.  

The episode covers the paintings passage from restorer to restorer and the digital scanning firm where it was cloned.  It also discusses the curatorial text listed for the artwork when it was presented at the Lucca exhibition which stated the presence of the work in Villa Maidalchina and that the painting would be certified by a notarial deed from 1649. 

The episode goes on to show that a cross check of the State archives of Viterbo, which contains an inventory of Andrea Maidalchini's assets, drawn up in 1649, and which details various paintings from the collection, makes no mention of any work of art by Manetti.  While this inventory does mention, a painting of Saint Peter, the description does not match the paintings under consideration. 

7 January 2023

By comparing an image obtained by a visitor to the Lucca exhibition of the seventeenth-century Cavallini Sgarbi Foundation painting, the investigative TV program "Report" demonstrates that the purported Manetti painting exhibited in Lucca in 2022 appears to be one of the digital clones created by GraphicLAB s.n.c. di De Pietri Cristian & Co. in 2020, after the original artwork was scanned on behalf of undersecretary Vittorio Sgarbi.

High resolution screenshon of G-Lab scan of Sgrabi's artwork

The news program and the newspaper Il Fatto Quotidiano publish high resolution images of the scanned artwork, which, by increasing the magnification shows their respective audiences Sgarbi's painting's craquelure, the fine pattern of dense cracking that develops over many decades or centuries, exhibiting irregular patterns. 

Conservators and appraisers of fine art will recognise that the pattern of craquelure on the surface of paintings are one of many factors which can be used to determine the age, the authenticity, and the restoration works conducted of a painting.  In this case, the fine irregular pattern of dense cracking from the drying oil paint can be seen across Sgarbi's entire painting, but is absent from several of the areas where the artwork has been retouched or overpainted during its restoration.  These changes can be visualised in both the area where the torch appears, indicating it may have been added, as well as in areas where losses were documented earlier while the painting was with the Brescia restorer. 

Loss and Restoration Comparison to Sgarbi painting

Comparing the very high resolution image preserved at GLab's studio, alongside the corresponding images of the artwork without the torch previously obtained from the Brecia restorer Gianfranco Mingardi, along with the other details uncovered or contradicted throughout this journalistic investigation, it seems to be quite possible that the Cavallini Sgarbi Foundation painting of the Capture of Saint Peter could very well be the same stolen painting, with subsequent enhancements, which had from Castello di Buriasco.


Key to this investigation may be a tiny triangular shred of canvas that the reporters found at the castello in Buriasco, stuck between the plastic replacement photo and the frame left at the "crime site".   Turned over to the Caravinieri TPC in Rome on December 20th, this small, seemingly inconsequential scrap, appears to have once been attached to the bottom right portion of the painting, around the area where the three tipped halberd is depicted placed on the ground.  If this proves to be true,  the reporters' journalistic  hypothesis that Sgarbi's painting is the one stolen in 2013 may proven to be true. 

Sgarbi, in his defense, has claimed that multiple copies of this theme were created by Manetti and that Mingardi, who also did work for his mother and had previously completed a job badly and perhaps, as a result, was harbouring revenge against the family.  He has given no explanation as to why, if their relationship was so acrimonious, that he still elected to entrust this rare 17th century artwork by Manetti to the restorer who held the artwork for more than five years given the claim that his restoration work was deemed so problematic in the past that the art critic had refused payment. 

Regardless, even if we play devil's advocate and assume, through some incredibly rare and almost unbelievable stroke of good luck, that the art critic Sgarbi truly was smiled upon by the luck of the Irish and found this valuable 17th century painting in his foundation's previously abandoned villa near Viterbo, one still has to ponder following questions, including: 

Why would an important art critic, and undersecretary to Italy's Ministry of Culture not provide any concretised evidence that substantiates his claim that the artwork was found at Villa Maidalchina.  As an art historian well-versed in the need for provenance, one has to ask why there are no witnesses named as being present at the time of the discovery, or are we to assume Sgarbi was working on his mother's villa renovations personally?

Why is it that Sgarbi considers the St. Peter mentioned in the inventory of 11 October 16-49, drawn up by the notary Cosimo Pennacchi, of the assets of Andrea Maidalchini to be the painting he now possesses, when that inventory description  describes an artwork which depicts the presence of a handmaid when there are no female figures in the Manetti owned by Sgarbi.  

Why has Sgarbi repeatedly stated that the artist Manetti made multiple copies of this work, yet failed, in his detailed telling of the artwork for the Lucca exhibition, failed to document any of these additional copies be they by Manetti himself or a 19th century copiest as he now claims the stolen artwork to be.  All this notwithstanding that fact that Sgarbi himself admitted to having firsthand knowledge of the one hanging at the Castello di Buriasco and having seen it when he lunched at the restaurant and commented on the painting. 

Update: First week of January 2024

The Italian New services now state that Undersecretary of Culture Vittorio Sgarbi is being investigated by Italian authorities as a suspect in the crime of Self-Laundering of Cultural Assets referred to in Article 1(1)(b) of Law No. 22 of the Criminal Code (C.C. art. 518-septies) .  This investigation seems to fall under the jurisdiction of the Public Prosecutor's Office of Macerata and was confirmed via public prosecutor Giovanni Fabrizio Narbone.  

This is unrelated to another investigation, originally opened in 2023 by Alberto Lari, the Imperia prosecutor's office in relation to an earlier investigation into the illegal expropriation of another artwork, the Concerto con Bevitore by Valentin de Boulogne to Monaco. 

December 31, 2023

Conflict Heritage: The Fate of Qasr al-Basha Palace (قصر الباشا)

Gaza, situated on a narrow stretch of land along the Mediterranean, was founded during the Canaanite age (3000 BCE), and is considered as one of the oldest cities in the world.   Its historical significance lies in serving as a vital trade route connecting which has connected Egypt and the Levant since ancient times and which traced its origins back to the third millennium BCE. 

Throughout its rich history, the area has been at a cultural crossroad, nurturing various civilisations, enduring through the Byzantine and Christian epochs, and progressing into the Islamic era, including subsequent periods like the Mamluk and Ottoman eras.  During the Ayyubid era, the core of the old city expanded beyond the limits of its surrounding wall forming four neighbourhoods: The Tuffah (Apple), The Zaitoun (Olives), Al-Shuja’iyya (Braves) and Al-Daraj ( Steps).  Unfortunately, the area has been frequently plagued by conflicts, many of which have impacted archaeological and historical sites with tragic regularity. 

Alongside the thousands of dead persons on both sides of the cataclysmic 2023 war, which also has displaced citizens of the region, dozens of heritage sites in Gaza have been damaged and destroyed, including the Qasr al-Basha Palace (قصر الباشا), which was a testament to the region’s past and its rich cultural heritage and the history of  civilisations and diverse political rulers, over the centuries.  

History of the Qasr al-Basha Palace

Built c. 1260 and 1277

Built in the Haraat al-Daraj district, the once densely populated northwestern quarter of Gaza's Old City, it is not recorded exactly when Qasr al-Basha Palace (قصر الباشا) was first constructed, but the style of the entrance, along with the construction of the interior, suggest it was sometime during the Mamluk period.

The first floor of the palace is believed to have been built under the orders of Mamluk Sultan al-Zahir Baybars, in the middle of the thirteenth century CE.  The building's prominent sculpture of two lions, facing each other, are one of the most important landmarks during Baybars’ rule and were represented in all important works, constructed during his reign.  The building also utilises geometric patterns, domes, and intersecting vaults, all typical features found within Mamluk-period  architecture. 

1530-1681 CE

According to records referencing the endowment of Musa Pasha Al Radwan, the Qasr al-Basha Palace became known as Al-Redwan Palace in the 17th century in reference to the “Al Radwan” family that ruled Gaza and most of Palestine specifically between 1530-1681 CE. 


1649 CE

A Turkish traveler, Evliya Celebi, wrote about Qasr al-Basha Palace saying: “The castle was built in ancient times. It is small and rectangular, and is located one hour east of the sea. Its walls are twenty yards high, and it has an iron door that opens in the direction of the Qiblah.."

17th century CE

A second floor is added to the Qasr al-Basha Palace under the orders of governor Jamal al-Din Aqosh, appointed by the Ottoman governor from the Damascus Governorate. 

During this era, the castle is fitted with protective openings and underground passages to be used as a fortress when enemies attacked and as a means of defending the city.  Inside the castle there were rooms and housing for soldiers, a mosque, a silo, and an arsenal of weapons, cannons, and arrows. 


1649 CE

A Turkish traveler, Evliya Celebi, wrote about Qasr al-Basha Palace saying: “The castle was built in ancient times. It is small and rectangular, and is located one hour east of the sea. Its walls are twenty yards high, and it has an iron door that opens in the direction of the Qiblah.."

Lithograph, 1819 
February 1799

Napoleon conquered Egypt in July and August of 1798, and by February of the following year had embarked on his campaigns laying siege to Palestine.  Some say that before the French general's forced retreat Bonaparte may have stayed in, or attacked the Qasr al-Basha Palace which is why it is sometimes called Napoleon’s Castle. 

Over time, it would become one of the few historical structures from that period which withstood time in the city, and is believed to be the oldest representative of Islamic architecture in Palestine. 


By on/around 1918

Following the First World War and during the period of the British Mandate, when the British controlled Palestine for almost three decades, overseeing a succession of protests, riots and revolts between the Jewish and Palestinian Arab communities, the Qasr al-Basha Palace was renamed Al-Saraya and converted into a police station, with two small rooms allocated under its floor for detention purposes.  


1956 and Later

The Qasr al-Basha Palace became the administration building for Princess Firyal (daughter of King Farouk) School in 1956, when Egypt ruled the Gaza Strip and is later renamed  the Fatimah Al-Zahra School for Girls during the era of President Gamal Abdel Nasser.


1967 through 2005 

By 1967, the Palestinian territory – encompassing the Gaza Strip and West Bank, including East Jerusalem was occupied by Israel with much of Gaza's Old City was affected by conflict, including the Qasr al-Basha Palace, which is eventually abandoned. 



1998

By 1998, and now falling under the control of the Palestinian National Authority, that exercised partial civil control over West Bank areas "A" and "B," it is decided to relocate the girl's school from The Qasr al-Basha Palace and to converted the historic structure into a museum which will be overseen by the Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities, to be renamed as the Pasha’s Palace. 


By 2005

The Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities conduct a restoration project for the Qasr al-Basha/ Pasha’s Palace. The United Nations Development Programme's Programme of Assistance to the Palestinian People (UNDP/PAPP) and KfW Development Bank of the German government built new facilities for the girls school, and the historic building's restoration begin under the supervision of the Palestinian Authority Department of Antiquities and Cultural Heritage to become the first museum in the Gaza Strip. 

During the first phase of the project, landscaping is added, as well as new doors, windows, and gates were installed.  The facade of the palace is also restored. In the second phase of the project, appropriate furniture was placed for the museum, in addition to installing glass halls designed to house historical antiquities. 

 Pasha’s palace (Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities, 2013).

A smaller building in front of the palace is also renovated to be used as an access gate to the museum.

The museum centres on five rooms dedicated to displaying the museum’s modest collection of antiquities which includes Neolithic, Ancient Egyptian, Phoenician, Persian, Hellenistic, Roman and Islamic artefacts.

The first room displayed antiquities predominantly from the Roman era, the second from the Byzantine era, and the third room displays women’s adornments during all eras. The fourth room displayed architectural elements including  stones, columns, and capitals for all eras and the last gallery room, was allocated to artefacts from the Islamic era.


11 December 2023

While the information we have regarding antiquities and cultural assets in Gaza is limited and fragmented, Al Jazeera provided video footage of bombardments on Omar Al-Mukhtar Street which also depicted damages to the historic Pasha Palace Museum although the building remained standing



By 28 December 2023

Video and still footage from media and social media sites show the almost complete destruction of the Pasha Palace Museum, leaving only partial walls of the primary structure still standing and the second building in front of the palace completely destroyed. 

ARCA would like to thank and cite the documentary work and photographs used in this article outlining the repurposing of this building found in the academic paper: The Role of Heritage Tourism in Preserving Historical Buildings in Palestine (Case Study of the Pasha’s Palace, Gaza) by author Hammouda Aldohdar.

ARCA's Statement on War Damage

This war has led to calls on heritage professionals and cultural institutions to release statements in support of either Israel or Palestine, something ARCA will not do.  Instead, our reporting will remain as it has always been, focused on cultural property protection, as the significance of the humanitarian consequences of war is outside of the scope of our research. 

Both Israel and Palestine are parties to the 1954 Hague Convention on the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict and the Convention’s First (1954) Protocol.  This protocol specifically applies to movable cultural property only, and prohibits the export of movable property from occupied territory and also requires its return to its original territory at the conclusion of hostilities (Article 1).

Palestine has also ratified the Convention’s Second (1999) Protocol which states that Parties to a conflict shall ensure the immunity of cultural property under enhanced protection by refraining from making such property the object of attack or from any use of the property or its immediate surroundings in support of military action.

Under customary international law, Rule 38., each party to the conflict must respect cultural property:

A. Special care must be taken in military operations to avoid damage to buildings dedicated to religion, art, science, education or charitable purposes and historic monuments unless they are military objectives.

B. Property of great importance to the cultural heritage of every people must not be the object of attack unless imperatively required by military necessity.


December 20, 2023

Wednesday, December 20, 2023 - ,,,, No comments

And the epigraphic fragment of the marble lararium lived happily ever after...

Our story begins at the house of Lucius Caecilius Iucundus, a banker from Pompeii, whose residence was found buried under a blanket of ash and lapilli during the Bourbon excavations in 1844.  Between 1875-1876 researchers exploring his residence discovered a stash of some 154 waxed boards, which gave us the occupant's historic profession.  These recorded the commissions paid (1-4%) for loans with the banker between 52 and 62 AD.  Most covered transactions for real estate rents, securities, trade goods, and in some cases the purchase of animals and slaves.  

Three of these recovered apochae, (receipts from a creditor acknowledging the payment of a debt) offered a captivating peek into the everyday life of the home's enigmatic "banker," who, before Vesuvius blew, in 79 CE, once lead a comfortable life in this domus.  They also serve as a window into the everyday transactions of Pompeii's middle class merchants and landowners as they documented items sold, alongside the identities of sellers and, in one case even the buyer. Issued to Iucundus, in front of named witnesses, these ancient documents cover sums ranging from a few hundred sesterces to as much as 38,000 sesterces, each meticulously recorded as transactions between the merchant banker and his private clients or at auctions for small transactions.  

Walking inside the vestibule of the house of Iucundus, with its floor mosaic depicting a guard dog, you arrive to his atrium, with its central impluvium surrounded by a mosaic of geometric figures.  One of the most important rooms in a Roman house, it is here, in the north-west corner that Iucundus placed his lararium, a shrine to the guardian spirits of his Roman household, where the banker, his family and his servants, likely performed daily rituals to guarantee their protection.  

We know from the details of the carved frieze on two sides of this home chapel that the lararium was positioned here after the famous earthquake which shook the city in 62 CE because it details, on two of its bas-reliefs, the damage from that event. The first bas-relief, found intact, details the collapse of the Capitolium in the Forum of Pompeii next to a ceremony propitiating the Goddess Tellus.  


The second relief depicts the damage suffered by the Porta Vesuvius which collapsed as a result of the earthquake and to its left the castellum aquae.  This marble slab was not found inside Iucundus' house, but in the areas adjacent to it.  Why the banker chose to memorialise this mournful event is unknown, but perhaps having born witness to the earlier destruction and having escaped catastrophe, he wanted to offer a ex voto to his tutelary deities for the grace they bestowed on his family. 


Originally stored in the Antiquarium of Pompeii, these two marble reliefs were eventually reinstalled in the house of Lucius Caecilius Iucundus when his lararium was restored.  They and depicted in numerous photos, in situ, from the 1930s onward.   The piece depicting the Porta Vesuvius was cemented into the north wall above the base of the lararium, perhaps because of its imprecise find spot.  There, both reliefs remained, that is until thieves began prying pieces loose in the 1970s. 

Subsequent to the theft, the remaining bas-relief was moved to the Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Napoli, for safekeeping, while all that remained of the second fragment which depicted the Porta Vesuvius was its cast impression, taken in the 1930s and part of the collection at the Museo della Civiltà Romana in Rome.  There were no further traces of the stolen bas-relief until it was identified some 50 years later, cemented into the staircase of another family home, this time in Flanders, Belgium.  

Raphaël De Temmerman, 80, and his son, Geert De Temmerman, told authorities that they visited Pompeii in 1975, (long after Italy's cultural property laws went into effect.  While touring the archaeological site, the pair were approached by an unidentified man who offered to sell them an ancient souvenir.  Without thinking if their actions were legal or not, the tourists purchased the ancient marble and returned home to Belgium with a 2000 year old momento of their trip.  

Back home in Tongeren, the relief was cemented into the family's stairwell, wherte remained in the De Temmerman's home until Geert contacted the Gallo-Roman museum in Flanders hoping to get the piece appraised.  From there it was identified as the well documented artefact stolen from the Pompeii banker's domus. 

Anyone who has visited Pompeii in the 1970s comparing it with today has seen the devastation the influx of tourists to archaeological wonders can cause, (with or without theft).   The sheer volume of visitors, coupled with a lack of awareness or disregard for preservation, has led to an erosion of delicate frescoes, as well as the deterioration of centuries-old structures, and wear-and-tear on the very remnants that attract these crowds. 

Trampling on restricted areas, unauthorised touching, and even instances of graffiti also contribute to the gradual degradation of this historical marvel, despite the best efforts of its site managers, who do their best to strike a balance between making this cultural treasure accessible to the public and still safeguarding the city for future generations. 

Legends speak of the spectral inhabitants of this archaeological site, the echoes of lives abruptly interrupted by the cataclysmic eruption.  Some say that the spirits of Pompeii's past residents wander amidst the remnants of their homes and streets, quietly observing the influx of modern-day visitors. Visiting this archaeologicalsite, ARCA recommends that tourists take only memories and leave only footprints, lest the restless souls of the city's past inhabitants subject you to their ethereal disapproval. 







December 17, 2023

Lost Time, Found Art: The Decade-Long Pursuit of Restitution for Antiquities Smuggled by Douglas Latchford at the Metropolitan Museum of Art

In 2013 the Metropolitan Museum of Art restituted two,10th-century, Koh Ker stone statues, known as the “Kneeling Attendants” to Cambodia.  These artefacts had been donated in separate stages to the Museum in the late 1980s and early 1990s and had been associated with antiquities collector-dealer-trafficker Douglas Latchford, a/k/a “Pakpong Kriangsak”, who for 50 years, was once considered one of the world’s leading authorities on Asian Art before his unmasking. 

As early as 2012, Bangkok-based Latchford had already been identified in a civil lawsuit, as a middleman in the trafficking of looted Khmer sculptures from “an organized looting network” and was said to have conspired with the London auction house Spink & Son Ltd., to launder looted temple antiquities. 

Douglas Latchford's
Facebook photo
on 28 October 2017,
two years
before he was indicted.
On 21 December 2016, following months of interviews with confidential informants, and the examination of thousands of emails and other seized documents, as well as years of investigations into international smuggling networks, the office of the New York District Attorney's Office in Manhattan filed criminal charges against New York antiquities dealer Nancy Weiner, stating that she used her gallery “to buy, smuggle, launder, and sell millions of dollars’ worth of antiquities stolen from Afghanistan, Cambodia, China, India, Pakistan and Thailand.” In their complaint, it was documented that Weiner “and her co-conspirators, [one of whom was Douglas Latchford], trafficked in illegal antiquities for decades.”  (New York/Manhattan Wiener complaint, p. 2) .

In 2019 charges were filed in the United States against the then 88 year old Latchford by Assistant U.S. Attorney Jessica Feinstein, in the Office’s Money Laundering and Transnational Criminal Enterprises Unit, for his purported role in "wire fraud, smuggling, conspiracy and related charges pertaining to his trafficking in stolen and looted Cambodian antiquities." Many of the suspect objects mentioned in his 25 page indictment passed through his hands en route to the Met and other important collections, during the course of his business operations.  Latchford died on 2 August 2020 before he could be extradited to the United States and his indictment was formally dismissed, due to his death, the following month. 

Last Friday, the United States authorities announced that the Met would be returning fourteen more pieces to Cambodia, dating from the ninth to the 14th centuries, plus an additional artefacts to Thailand.

The pieces going home to Cambodia are:

This 7th century CE pre-Angkor period sandstone Head of a Buddha, which was purportedly with implicated New York dealer Doris Wiener from 1984–2005 until she gifted it to the Metropolitan Museum of Art in 2005, upon which it was given Accession Number: 2005.512.  


This 10th - 11th century CE copper Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara Seated in Royal Ease. It was given Accession Number: 1992.336 when it was purchased directly from Douglas Latchford using funds from the Annenberg Foundation Gift. 


This 11th century sandstone Standing Female Deity, (probably Uma), Accession Number: 1983.14 was sold by Douglas Latchford to Spink & Son Ltd., London,  who in turn sold it onward to the Metropolitan Museum of Art. 

This 10th century sandstone Standing Female Deity, which was given Accession Number: 2003.605. This artefact was purportedly with Doris Wiener from 1998 through 2003.  Various saved accession record dates show it was either donated to the Metropolitan by Doris Wiener, in honour of Martin Lerner or was purchased through this New York dealer. 

This partially fragmented 930 - 960 CE  bronze Face from a Male Deitycame to the museum via a Latchford donation in honour of Martin Lerner.   It was given Accession Number: 1998.320a–f.


This ca. 920–50 CE stone Head of a Buddha, was also donated to the museum by Douglas Latchford in 1983 (with no provenance listed), where it was given Accession Number: 1983.551. 

This 10th century, Angkor period bronze Head of Avalokiteshvara, the Bodhisattva of Infinite Compassion was in circulation with Spink & Son Ltd., London until 1998, when it was then sold to an undisclosed private collector who donated the artefact to the Metropolitan the same year, and was given Accession Number: 1998.322.

This 11th century, Angkor period, bronze Four-Armed Avalokiteshvara (Bodhisattva of Infinite Compassion)  This bodhisattva is often depicted with multiple heads and arms symbolising his limitless capacity to help alleviate grievances and is venerated as the ideal of karuna, the willingness to bear the pain of others.  Given Accession Number: 1999.262, the statue was directly purchased by the museum from Douglas Latchford via funds from Friends of Asian Art Gifts, Cynthia Hazen Polsky Gift, and Josephine L. Berger-Nadler and Dr. M. Leon Canick Gift. 


This 11th century architectural Lintel with Shiva on NandiAccession Number: 1996.473. This doorway topping was previously purchased in 1993 by Steven M. Kossak, owner of the prominent "Kronos Collections", who then loaned the piece to the Met for three years before eventually donating it to the museum in 1996. 


This late 9th century, stone Angkor period, Khmer style of Bakong, Headless Female Figure, Accession Number: 2003.592.1, is said to have been in the possession of Latchford's friend, Alexander Götz.  Originally living in Bali, then for a time in Germany, Götz and his family moved to London in 1990 where he opened a gallery specialising in Southeast Asian art, with Indonesia as the main focus. He closed his London gallery in 2015 and has since moved back to Indonesia.


This late 12th century, stone Angkor period, Standing Eight-Armed Avalokiteshvara, the Bodhisattva of Infinite Compassion. Given Accession Number: 2002.477, this stature was sold by Douglas Latchford to Jeffrey B. Soref, heir to the Master Lock fortune, who sits on the Board of Directors at the Metropolitan.  Soref in turn loaned his purchase to the Met from 1999–2002 before gifting it to the museum in 2002.  Authorities in Cambodia had received information from a reformed looter named Toek Tik, who admitted to personally stealing this, as well as other artworks from Cambodia over a span of 20 years during his time as a smuggler.


This 7th–8th century, bronze pre-Angkor period, Ardhanarishvara (Composite of Shiva and Parvati), depicts the god as half male and half female representing the Shakta as worshipper and Shakti as devotee relationship which gives the Ardhanarishvara male and female characteristics.  Assigned Accession Number: 1993.387.4 the female side of this sculpture depicts Parvati’s elegant hairstyle and flowing skirt and exposed breast, while the male side gives us half of Shiva’s moustache, as well as his third eye.  Originally, the public accession record listed only the donation of this object as coming from Enid A. Haup (who had purchased and donated another problematic piece).  The more recent the Met's record was updated to state that the statue was sold by Spink & Son Ltd., London to Haupt who gifted it to the Met in 1993.


This 9th century, stone Angkor period depicting the Head of Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara. Given Accession Number: 1997.434.1, it was previously owned by American pipeline billionaire George Lyle Lindemann, a collector who frequently bought Khmer artefacts from individuals, some of whom were later implicated in the trade and trafficking of Cambodia's cultural heritage.  Lindemann gifted the object to the Met in 1997, who listed the object with no prior provenance, aside from the name of the wealthy donor.


This 11th century, sandstone Angkor period, Male Deity, probably Shiva.  Depicted with four-arms and a high chignon of jatamukuta, wearing a pleated sampot, this statue was given Accession Number: 1987.414.  The Met's website listed that the statue as previously owned by Margery and Harry Kahn who gifted the object to the Met in 1987 and that the statue "likely formed the centerpiece of a triad in a chapel of an unidentified temple in the vicinity of Angkor Thom.  Its style relates to sculptures recorded from the Baphuon temple, a monumental step-pyramid dedicated to Shiva, built as the state temple by King Udayadityavarman II."

The Artefacts Returning to Thailand are:



This 11th century Gilt-copper alloy, with silver inlay, possibly miss-named statue of a Standing Shivais believed to be the most complete extant gilded-bronze image from Angkor.  Given Accession Number: 1988.355, it belongs to a small group of metal sculptures of Hindu deities associated with royal cult practices that were discovered in Khmer territories including Cambodia and northeastern Thailand.  The statue was purchased by Walter H. and Leonore Annenberg via Spink & Son Ltd., London in 1988 and donated that same year to the Met. 


This 11th century bronze inlayed with silver and traces of gold statue of a Kneeling Female Figure, perhaps a Khmer queen, who kneels in a posture of adoration with arms raised above her head and palms pressed together.  Given Accession Number: 1972.147, she was sold to the museum by Doris Wiener. 


When the Metropolitan Museum of Art announced the return of 16 Khmer sculptures to Cambodia and Thailand known to be associated with Douglas Latchford with great fanfare on "X" the social media site formally known as twitter it stated that :

"Every one of the 1.5 million objects in our collection has a unique history, and part of the Museum’s mission is to tell these stories. When, how, and where was it created? Who made it and why? What was going on at that time and place in history? The Met also examines the ownership history or provenance: where has the object been and in whose care?" 

and that through research, transparency, and collaboration, the museum was committed to responsible collecting and goes to great lengths to ensure that all objects entering the collection meet its strict standards. 

ARCA would like to underscore that it took the Metropolitan Museum of Art from 2013, when the “Kneeling Attendants” were first relinquished to Cambodia, through the Nancy Weiner and Douglas Latchford's respective indictments of 2016 and 2019, alongside numerous gentle, and then more insistent requests by Cambodia, as well as the continued campaigning of heritage activist groups before the museum moved forward with their restitution on Friday, a decade later.

It is worth remembering that there is an imperative need for justice and ethical stewardship by institutions responsible for the world's cultural heritage and it should not take ten years for a museum, the size and scope of the Metropolitan to do-the-right-thing.  Prolonged processes only contribute to the perpetuation of injustice and swift restitution is essential for rectifying historical wrongs, fostering international cooperation, and preserving the cultural identity of affected communities. Lengthy delays such as this one serve to exacerbate diplomatic, as well as cultural, tensions and perpetuate a sense of cultural entitlement on the part of certain western museums. 

When illicitly acquired objects are identified in a museum's collection, expedient restitution processes are the litmus test which, in ARCA's eyes, truly serve to demonstrate a museum's genuine commitment to holding themselves accountable to their past acquisitions.  When doing so, they foster goodwill among the claimants,  and serve as a positive example which in turn amplifies and reinforces the importance of respecting rightful ownership when it comes to cultural treasures. 

To end on a positive note, ARCA is pleased to see that the Metropolitan Museum of Art has taken a step forward in its documentation protocols and has elected to leave the accession records for these relinquished objects online and visible to the public with notations of "Deaccessioned by The Metropolitan Museum of Art for return to the Kingdom of Cambodia, 2023 or Deaccessioned by The Metropolitan Museum of Art for return to the Kingdom of Thailand, 2023."  This action promotes transparency and accountability in the global effort to combat the illicit trade of cultural artefacts.

One small step for a single museum, one giant leap for museum archival documentation. 

By:  Lynda Albertson