In February 1987, a landscape was stolen from the Museum of Decorative Art (MDAD). In 1989, a file was opened in the Ministry of Culture for new disappearances of artworks, in the same institution. In 1991, some old pieces on loan from the German Embassy were stolen. This year, more precisely, on Wednesday, February 16 at 11:45 a.m., a guard observed that in the corridor that connects the Empire and Sert rooms on the 1st floor, one of the doors of a showcase where numerous pieces of art are exhibited was open. 19th century European porcelain. Three 26cm Austrian porcelain amphora vases were missing. high, with an estimated value of US$ 1,500 each.
They did not go the only robberies recorded. It was also found that 6 pieces of Swedish glass and crystal from the 20th century and the paintings “Saint Joseph with the Child Y “Portrait of Infanta”both anonymous. So far, the stolen pieces are 20.
The news caused a stir. The museum was intervened. As comptroller was appointed the current National Director of Museums, María Isabel Baldasarre. The director until that moment, the architect Martin Mark, was suspended from his duties, without the benefit of salaries or pension contributions. The latest news is your resignationlast week, after rejoining after the suspension, without all the functions in his charge being restored.
In recent months, an inventory of all the pieces in the Museum (both those on display and those in storage) has begun. The MDAD has about 6,500, of which only about 20 percent is on display. That review was ordered by Marcos himself before his suspension.
past thefts
The history of Argentine museums records looting of all kinds. Some were famous, such as the one perpetrated against the National museum of fine arts on December 25, 1980 in which, among other things, a pencil drawing by Matisse disappeared, “The call” by Gauguin, two drawings by Edgard Degas, two watercolor nudes by Auguste Rodin, “Portrait of a woman” of Renoir andPeaches on a plate” of Cezanne. The entire booty was valued at $20 million. The fact that the site was undergoing renovations and the thieves were able to enter through scaffolding and metal structures favored the theft.
Decades before, also in Fine Arts (December 5, 1944); a thief entered through the roof and left with a painting by Claude Monet painted in 1879, almost three feet high, entitled “The berge of Lavacourt”. The institution learned its lesson and today it is the museum with the highest investment in security.
In the National historical museummore than 300 ancient coins from the collection belonging to Manuel Belgrano They were stolen in 2020 with the most typical modality in these cases: the “ant theft”. The same Museum was the object of two symbolic thefts: that of the corvo saber of San Martín in 1963 and 1965, as spoils of a Peronist Youth politician.
The Heritage Specialist’s Book Daniel Schavelzon, “The looting of art in Argentina. Theft and illegal trafficking of works of art”, collects several of these acts perpetrated against provincial and municipal museums. For example, in 1983, from Estevez de Rosario Municipal Museum paintings by El Greco, José de Ribera and Murillo were stolen. Another case occurred in the Natural History Museum of Mendoza, in April 1940; when they took from one of its showcases a human head reduced by the jíbaros. Three paintings by Bernaldo de Quirós and other national painters were also stolen from the Ricardo Güiraldes Museum in San Antonio de Areco. A robbery at the Sobremonte Museum in Córdoba dates from the same period.
In his book, Schávelzon recounts that between 1989 and 1991 there were significant lootings in different museums in the country: the Salesian Art Museum in Córdoba, the Fine Arts Museum in San Rafael, the historical museums in Corrientes and Tucumán, and the Estancia de San Martín in Cañuelas, from which several silver objects were taken, including an incense burner that was later recovered in an antiques house on Calle Posadas. All the objects were sold to collectors and thanks to the complaints they could be recovered and returned.
Safeguarding cultural heritage is a delicate task that must take into account aspects such as the flow of visitors, the number of works on display, their value, and the shape and size of the facilities. Alberto Bellucci, former Director of Fine Arts and MDAD, considers that there are generally no resources for these things “that are not considered very important”. “In culture, specifically in the case of museums, the efforts are usually bland,” says Belluci.
As he explains, a museum is constantly changing. New works are always being received and rearranged and that forces the security systems to pursue the same objective of renovation. Although, according to his opinion, it is more important to have suitable personnel than security systems. “Systems are just as or more imperfect than people, and I trust people more,” says Bellucci.
The occasion makes the thief
Marcelo El Haibe works at Interpol for twenty-five years, in the area dedicated to investigating theft of works of art. Among the achievements, he says that four years ago they were able to recover the Murillo paintings stolen from the Estevez Museum in Rosario. At this time, Interpol has a repository with 1,200 recovered pieces. “Most of the things that are stolen from museums today are not great works of art but small objects. Sometimes because they are made of gold and can be dismembered and sold separately, or melted down”. According to El Haibe, ten years ago it was still very possible to steal a valuable work and place it on the market or even ask for a ransom. Today this would be very difficult. All stolen works are reported to Interpol. This complaint makes the possibility of offering it unfeasible. “The psychology of the collector is, precisely, exhibitionism. It is contradictory to have a work and not be able to show it to anyone. The equation is cost-benefit. If the thief believes that the work is difficult to steal and difficult to place on the market and he is going to earn little money, then he does not risk it, ”says the specialist.
El Haibe also points out some important details. Security personnel in museums must have visual contact with all works. If a room is divided in half by any structure that impedes vision, there must be a security person on each side of that division. It is also important to take into account the flow of visitors to an institution, its location, its size and the type of works that are exhibited, their market value. “In a small museum, which does not have so many things to guard, a closed circuit with two people permanently monitoring the images through the cameras is a very expensive investment,” explains El Haibe.
From his point of view, the ideal security of a museum should be supported by three legs: technological (closed circuit television, surveillance cameras), mechanical (barriers that prevent or restrict access to the works) and personal (people who watch cameras, monitor, etc). All three must be linked to each other. For the researcher, security in museums “has improved a lot in recent years.”
Testimony
However, the questioned director of the Museum of Decorative Art Matthias Mark, maintains the opposite of El Haibe. As he explains, museums currently have “many weaknesses in security issues” and to substantiate his opinion he cites a case: two years ago there was a theft of a collection of Greco-Roman coins from the custody deposits of the National Historical Museum. “That made it clear that they don’t have security cameras or movement alarms there either. Unlike my case, neither the director was suspended nor was the museum intervened, ”he says. He also alleges that he and other directors are aware of the lack of security, a fact that the Minister of Culture, Tristan BauerI was also up to date. “There is a tender that only now, after two and a half years, has a winning company (ROCNET. SA). Museums don’t do those tenders, because we only handle small boxes of 65 thousand pesos a month. The MDAD is not an autarchic entity, it depends on the National Directorate of Museums and the Ministry”.
The General Directorate of Museums, in charge of the Ministry of Culture of the Nation, did not make statements to the media (not even to NOTICIAS) to explain the security conditions of the Museum of Decorative Art. When the authorities of the City of Buenos Aires were consulted on the same issue in the Buenos Aires institutions, they also refused to make any statements.
Alberto Bellucci, who supported Marcos after he was removed from office, explained: “During my management at MDAD, there was always some defect in the alarms or in the cameras. Security in these years neither improved nor worsened. Museums have the same security deficit that society has.”
Image gallery
