As I write this, questions of ethics and ownership are the order of the day in the auction and collecting world.
The reasons?
Religion. National property.
Big, difficult subjects.
The jewels, listed for auction and then the Indian Government stepped in. Image courtesy of Sotheby's.
And often very present in the auction room.
This week it's the "Buddha Jewels" that are the cause of the row.
But it's happened many times before and will happen again.
Who do the Buddha jewels belong to?
As I write, Sotheby's have just postponed what would have been one of the biggest auctions of the year.
The lots that caused the fuss were a collection of jewels and other relics possibly linked with the Buddha's physical remains.
The Hong Kong auction was sensationally called off at the 11th hour when the Indian Government said they would take legal action.
Talks are now taking place.
The Indian authorities say the gems “constitute inalienable religious and cultural heritage of India and the global Buddhist community”.
Peppé photographed the five reliquaries he excavated in 1898.
The gems were dug up from a holy burial ground in 1898 by William Claxton Peppé.
His great grandson is selling them, with a £9.7 million opening price tag.
The find has already been through a legal process once. The British (ruling India as a colony at the time) took most of the vast trove, gave a large segment of them to a Kolkata museum and physical remnants to the King of Siam (now Thailand) who was a Buddhist.
The gift had an element of respecting the religious nature of the finds. But they were also a nice way to promote British influence against Dutch, French and Russian advances to the king.
The Peppé family was allowed to keep a relatively small part of an enormous trove.
Auctions: doing the right thing
If you've ever watched a good art heist movie, you'll know the problem with selling illicitly obtained famous pieces for huge sums of money is...
That everyone knows what they are.
You need publicity to sell.
So we get the semi-legendary concept of great works of art "stolen to order" for connoisseurs who can never buy them legally.
The Phantom escapes with the Pink Panther diamond in the 1975 caper comedy. A diamond so well-known and famous it could never be sold and must be stolen as a private treasure.
Of course, they can also never show them off.
That's not to say that this doesn't happen.
Because it is absolutely the case that it is extremely damaging for auction houses to be seen dealing in stolen goods.
Doing the right thing, and being seen to be doing the right thing, is very important to auction houses, sellers, and the collecting world more broadly.
There's no suggestion that Sotheby's or the sellers have done anything improper in announcing this sale.
There's no heist here. Just history.
Sotheby's undoubtedly have good lawyers. They will have approved this sale.
And the sellers say the ownership of these gems - which, they say, do not include any direct physical link to the Buddha - has never been legally disputed.
They say they would like Buddhists to buy them.
The Indian government says they have no right to sell them.
A world of laws, a world of different laws
Many countries have laws that identify some things as unsellable.
They're so precious and important they are identified as belonging to the nation.
In the UK (England, Wales and Northern Ireland, Scotland has its own law) for example, it's the famous Treasure Trove act. That was recently updated to bring all discovered items over 200 years old and containing metal (previously it was precious metals only) under its remit.
The famous helmet from the Sutton Hoo discovery. When it was found in 1939 the fact that it was a burial, with no intent for the real owners to come back and get it, meant that it was not classified as treasure trove.
These items are then offered to a museum or public institution. The finders receive compensation.
And, it's a law something like this - the Indian Treasure Trove Act of 1878 -
that was initially used to bring much of the Peppé find into public (or crown at least) ownership.
Changing boundaries
In December 2024, a tablet was sold with what is believed to be the oldest known copy of the 10 Commandments inscribed on it.
Before its $5 million auction, an Israeli official told the Times of Israel: "This artifact was traded on the antiquities market more than 100 years ago and is not classified as a state treasure.
“It has been privately owned since the Ottoman period, meaning that Israel's Antiquities Law does not apply to it.”
You can't not know that who governs that part of the world is controversial. And that it has changed.
One of the most notorious imperial lines ever drawn is this one over the Sykes Pictot agreement. How should we judge these claims - A is a French sphere of influence, B is British - now? What about the laws passed between these lines?
The Ottoman Empire collapsed at the end of World War I and Britain moved in.
Now we have Israel.
In Syria, which is also rich in archaeology that has huge historical - and also monetary - value, France replaced the crumbling Ottoman authorities thanks to Britain and France's secret Sykes-Picot agreement.
How does one judge that in a modern court?
Which period of historical jurisdiction takes precedence?
And in which modern court should it be decided?
That's the question.
Times change
In 1897 when William Claxton Peppé excavated the Buddha jewels in Piprahwa (only a 20 minute walk from the Nepal border today) India was very firmly in the hands of the British Empire.
Neither India nor Britain nor indeed nation states as we currently understand them existed when the relics were buried in the 2nd century BC.
Back in Victorian India, colonial authorities took a decision on the finds.
The Indian government today is seeking to take action in both Indian and Hong Kong courts (another former colony) to stop the sale and say they will use international law and United Nations conventions to do so.
What those laws and conventions are and whether they apply, if they do apply how they should be adjudicated, and if they are adjudicated how they will be enforced is likely to be a long, complicated tale.
The High Court in Hong Kong - now a special administrative region of the People's Republic of China - where the final decision on the jewels may well be taken. Image by Chong Fat at Wikimedia.
The Peppé family are now in California to add another layer of US Federal and state legal systems to the mix that might come into play.
For now, the auction world will hold its breath and wait.
All on questions of legal ownership that have barely touched on the moral and political dimensions to these issues.
Ownership and provenance
For collectors not in the rarefied world of Buddhist burial goods, the lesson from these cases remains very simple.
Provenance. Provenance. Provenance.
No matter how humble your own artefact. And be it a stamp, or a coin, an autograph or an action figure, a watch or a car.
You need to do your research and keep all your evidence.
This is provenance.
This incredible block of Penny Black stamps will cost you a good deal - click the image to discover how much - and it's backed with the best authentication by professionals and a good history.
You should always ask about it when you buy. Good sellers always provide it, and detail it in sales descriptions.
And we love collectors who add to it with their own research and proper records of repair, cleaning, expert assessment and so on.
Buy from a trusted source
We're proud to be the world's largest dealer in rare collectibles.
And we certify everything we sell as authentic before we offer it to you.
And as experienced players in this field we know very well how important provenance is.
Take a look at our collections here.
