Letter: What we may learn from antiquities

Sir: With regard to the Royal Academy's exhibition of the George Ortiz antiquities, James Chesterman's attitude (letter, 12 February) that 'antiquities are often repetitive and even more often of crass workmanship' entirely ignores the most valuable aspect of such finds, namely the information about the contexts from which they have been removed.

In the case of Syrian glass perfume bottles, for example, it is almost certainly the grave in which they were originally deposited. The loss in such cases includes all information on grave type, associated skeletal remains, , composition of grave groups and the patterns of association and the distribution of wealth and social position, as well as the physical loss of any commercially less attractive objects from the tomb.

While the confused state of the laws relating to the discovery of portable antiquities in this country allows considerable ambiguity, this is not the case in many of the countries from which objects reach the 'art market'. They have been excavated illegally and smuggled out of their countries of origin. In view of the consequences of such trade in encouraging further looting, it is irresponsible to ignore the difference between archaeological materials and prints, drawings and paintings which have been in continuous circulation since their creation.

Yours faithfully,

ANDREW SHERRATT

Linacre College

Oxford

12 February