Dear all,
My HW to provide raw data and data dictionary for our provenance information
that includes financial transactions is very easy, as we have published these
in a github repository:
https://github.com/thegetty/provenance-index-csv
The current UI to the dataset is accessible via:
http://www.getty.edu/research/tools/provenance/search.html
(the below examples are in dealer stock books, specifically Knoedler. Search
for the PI Record Number in the bottom field of the form)
We are in the process of transforming the data into CIDOC-CRM, with a new UI.
To extract two specific examples, one very easy and one more complex.
PI Record K-24263 documents two Purchases of the same object, a painting called
“King Saul” by Rembrandt.
1. The acquisition from Andrew W. Mellon, during November 1922, for 8000
dollars.
2. The sale to Chester H. Johnson, on May 9th, 1923, for 14500 dollars.
This works well with a soc Payment class, mirroring Acquisition, modeling the
transfer of MonetaryAmounts from the payer to the payee. There’s no real need
for Obligations and Contracts for this case.
And more complex:
PI Record K-20484 also documents two Purchases of the same object, “C’est lui”
by Detaille.
1. The acquisition from an unknown party, on April 30th 1912, by three
parties BVC & Co, Tooth, and Knoedler, for a total of 10010 francs, split three
ways evenly.
2. The sale to Boussod, Valadon et Cie (the BVC of the previous
acquisition) during May 1919, for a total of 1995 francs, through which
Knoedler received 347 dollars.
Here Obligation and Contracts are useful. There was an agreement between BVC,
Tooth and Knoedler to fulfill the obligation to pay 10010 francs. Each made a
payment that reduced the obligation to zero. We do not know the order however,
as to /which/ payment reduced it to zero and thus terminated it, just that the
set of three payments did terminate it.
Similarly, that agreement for 1/3rd shares meant that the sale to BVC was
actually that BVC bought out the shares of Tooth and Knoedler. The result is
that BVC owns 100% of the painting, rather than 33% of the painting.
For this we would need to have the Rights discussion integrated, with the
ability to partition them such that someone can own a share of an object rather
than only the entire object, and that either those shares can be traded or can
come in and out of existence as the shared portions change. There are
thousands of records in our stock books that have this sort of form, sometimes
between the same parties, sometimes different. Sometimes the shares are evenly
split, sometimes not.
Rob
