Trackback URL
Download PDF The government was sending the artefacts to Paris for display at the Guimet National Museum under a nominal insurance cover.
The insurance value for 187 artefacts was only 5.50 million euros [around Tk 55.4 crore] whereas value of some of the items individually could be more than the insurance money, said experts.
‘Vajrasattva’, the Pala-era artwork moulded out of eight metals, and ‘Pragya Paromita’, ancient paintings on manuscript made of palm leaves–any of them could fetch more than the amount the entire collection was insured for.
Dr Joachim K Bautze, a German art historian who is an honorary fellow of the International Centre for Study of Bengal Art, in a letter to the French Ambassador in Dhaka said, “Would you consider an insurance value of just four million euros [initially it was four million euros] sufficient for all the treasures of France?
“For this amount of money you cannot buy a fragment of a painting by Vincent van Gogh, but your government considers this adequate ‘according to international standards’ for the cream of the art of Bangladesh.”
It all appears to be a financial fraud especially since an item like ‘Vajrasattva’ alone would be worth the total value of insurance, noted Bautze, a specialist in Asian art.
Coming from the museum of Mainamati, the bronze statue of a sitting Buddha seems to be one of the major attractions for the Guimet Museum authorities. Its picture has been used on both the front and back covers of the catalogue for the now cancelled exhibition.
Sufi Mustafizur Rahman, chairman of the archaeology department at Jahangirnagar University, said, “I don’t believe you can find another Vajrasttava even if you search the whole world through. It is simply an amazing work of art.”
He observed, “I’m not sure if in the ninth or tenth century when the statue was sculpted here in Bangladesh the other world would know the metal moulding technology.”
Pointing to a clause of the agreement that says the Guimet Museum is entitled to restore the artefacts prior to the opening of the exhibition, one of the experts seeking anonymity said, “It is indeed very fishy.
“I don’t think it is necessary to restore all the artefacts before the exhibit. It may be hard to distinguish between the original ones and the restored ones without a carbon test,” the expert added.
Sufi Mustafizur Rahman said Bangladesh has only two Pragya Paromita, a Pala era manuscript containing paintings.
“The government was sending both of them. Except us, only Cambridge University and India may have such manuscripts. If we loose them nobody is going to give those back to us,” he said.
It was known that only three leaves of a manuscript like Pragya Paromita were sold for $12,000 [around 8,000 euros] each at an auction in Europe. But according to the agreement, the insurance coverage for more than 700 such leaves had been set at only 30,000 euros.
According to the insurance coverage mentioned in the agreement, only the borrower, the Guimet Museum, could make a claim on the insurance.
Besides, there are other clauses that go against the interest of lenders, three Bangladesh museums.
For instance, article nine prevents recourse against the carriers, freight agents, storage operators, packers, holders or guardians thereof, including the borrower’s staff, and any person lending their support to the organisation of the exhibition.
An expert said the whole thing manifests poor negotiation skills of the Bangladesh side. They could have turned to UNESCO for expertise required to set out fair terms and conditions in the agreement as well as a comprehensive insurance cover for the artworks.
December 31st, 2007 at 3:31 am
[...] Here’s another interesting post I read today by Bangladesh News [...]