by Samuel D. Gruber (based on news reports)
The London Jewish Museum reports that it is close to raising funds needed to purchase the famous 18th century Lindo hanukkiah (click here for photo) which it has displayed for seventy years - since the museum was founded.
Unless the family is really hard up for money or to pay taxes, it seems disgraceful and extortionary that the family should ask for money for the work generations after it was put on display. Are they taking advantage of the Museum's reopening - knowing that this is a central object of the collection, one that the Museum can not afford to lose? One would think that the work is de facto the property of the museum after all these years.
The Museum has raised £250,000, including £145,000 from the National Heritage Memorial Fund (NHMF), £75,000 from the independent Art Fund, and £30,000 from the MLA/V&A Purchase Fund; £50,000 are still needed. This purchase is on top of the £14 million raised for the expansion of the museum’s
In addition to the importance of the Hanukkiah for its age (London's oldest standing synagogue, Bevis Marks, for example, was built only in 1701) and certain provenance, the work is unusual for its iconography of the Prophet Elijah begin fed by Ravens (I Kings 17:6) a allusion to the patron Elias (Elijah) Lindo. Though the subject is not very common in Jewish art, it was popular during the Baroque period in both Catholic and Protestant lands. For example, there is a late 16th century version by the Flemish painter Paolo Fiammingo (now in San Francisco), and a well known version from 1620 by the Italian artist Guercino (coincidentally, now in
Read the full story as reported from ArtDaily.org (presumably from a press release). The Jerusalem Post ran the story almost verbatim, read it here.
1 comment:
What mystifies me is who is claiming to be the owner of the lamp? I am a direct descendant of the Lindo family, and not a cousin twice removed, but a nice straight line, and so I am wondering why someone thinks they have the right to demand monies for the lamp as the one only owner? This is a family item, with many descendants, it cannot be owned or claimed by one, and most certainly not one person alone can claim monies surely?
Post a Comment