--- Begin Forwarded Message ---
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2005 23:17:45 +0100
From: tony campbell <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: [MapHist] Issues arising out of the Smiley affair
Sender: [log in to unmask]
To: *MapHist <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
Message-ID: <006401c59ec2$7ff0f8f0$abc4a850@ockendonuyx368>
Colleagues,
I wonder if this is the time to raise some of the broader issues that relate
to the allegations surrounding Forbes Smiley. Much of the argument below
takes forward the thoughts prompted by the Bellwood/Perry thefts in Europe a
few years back, as set out in 'How should we respond to early map thefts?' <
http://www.maphistory.info/response.html >. If you are seriously interested
in these issues, please look at that. I will not repeat its points here.
Bibliographical Aspects
------------------------
Where the earlier thefts mostly concerned maps removed from atlases, we now
seem to be dealing with single maps removed from early printed books. The
practical implications of this are significant. Whereas atlases are usually
curated by map specialists (or at least their value and vulnerability are
well understood), the map as text illustration will usually (and
understandably) be found in a rare book collection. While the map
specialists (curators, collectors, dealers) will tend to know of the
existence and value of such maps, is the same true of the rare books
curator? In how many of those public collections that are likely to hold
such works is their special vulnerability understood? Steal one page from a
first folio Shakespeare and you have nothing of value; slip into your jacket
pocket a single sheet from a book with an early map of North America on it
and you may have a readily saleable, broadly untraceable, artefact worth up
to six figures in dollars.
The obvious conclusion is that institutions need to identify what are, in
terms of theft, possibly the *most vulnerable* items in their entire
collections, and then ensure that they are consulted only under the
strictest possible invigilation. Ideally, that would include CCTV, which
has once again proved its worth.
But how are these maps, and the books that should still contain them, to be
identified? Again the answer is surely obvious: close cooperation between
the map specialists and the rare books curators. For political reasons,
this may not have happened in the past. It must surely be initiated now. We
can be sure that the potential thief will have done their homework, even if
the library hasn't.
The (continuing) flood of newspaper articles has identified a few of the
books/maps involved (see < http://www.maphistory.info/theftlinks.html#lit
>). But those are presumably just the tip of the iceberg. We are told
that other libraries are checking their holdings. But what list are they
using to do this? Does it just include the titles already mentioned? I
sincerely hope it is more rigorous than that.
It is of course very possible that there have been developments behind the
scenes. But has anybody compiled the kind of list a conscientious thief
might have prepared of early maps of North America, by working through
bibliographies, dealers' lists (particuarly, perhaps, Forbes Smiley's),
etc.? By his own admission, Smiley has been dealing for 25 years. If the
allegations against him are found to be true, for how long might he have
been pillaging libraries? And what might be the full range of material he
could have targetted?
Information-sharing (post-theft)
-------------------------------
The main problem identified during the discussions three years ago was the
lack of information-sharing between different groups (curators,
dealers/auctions, law enforcement agencies). This was because of separatge
(and often fragmented) networks that, in addition, were rarely as
international as the trade in early maps.
If a list has been compiled of all the books/maps known to have been
involved this time (or even, ideally, a list of all those titles that are
potentially relevant), how has this been circulated? Clearly, handing it to
a potential thief should be avoided but is there yet any secure mechanism
that can distribute such a list (assuming it exists) to all the libraries
*throughout the world* that might be expected to hold early North American
maps bound into books? And, for that purpose, would OCLC, RLIN, NUC, ESTC,
etc. provide an adequate inventory of the relevant libraries?
The British Library has discovered losses among the material Smiley
consulted. What about the other major collections around Europe?
Forbes Smiley is a map dealer and there are some curators who are suspicious
of dealers in general. This is unjustified and counter-productive. The
trade has its own organisations with codes of practice that allow it to
police its members. It is significant that Smiley is reported as not being
a member of such an organisation. Curators should also remember that,
sadly, some of their members have been guilty of a betrayal of trust in the
past. To avoid being the accidental conduit for stolen maps, dealers must
know what has been taken, and in as much 'copy-specific' detail as possible
if they are to help catch thieves. The need for libraries to disclose what
they have lost, in full and as speedily as possible, was urged in <
http://www.maphistory.info/response.html >. That policy, which is in line
with recommendations from rare books organisations, seems now to be
generally accepted, even if there has been no move to create the proposed
central, web-based register of stolen maps.
Forensic identification
----------------------
It has been rightly stated that it is very difficult to prove that a
particular map came originally from a particular volume, unless there was a
library stamp (which remains visible). In the case of an atlas map, it can
often be shown to fit back exactly into its parent volume. The maps
involved in this case, however, are likely to have been folded into the
volume and to have a different overall size.
However, the map may have left a 'footprint', particularly if it was folded
several times - an indentation like a platemark, showing its original size.
Even if the folds have subsequently been pressed out, they can usually be
seen and measured, allowing the original size in the volume to be calculated
precisely. There may perhaps be offsetting of the neighbouring text on the
verso of the map, or matching worm-holes. All of which makes it important
to attempt to match any suspect map with a vandalised volume.
Given that these issues have wide relevance I would be grateful if this
message might be copied to other interested lists. Thank you.
Tony Campbell
******************************************
[log in to unmask]
'Map History / History of Cartography: THE Gateway to the Subject'
http://www.maphistory.info/
[part of the WWW-Virtual Library]
******************************************
|