Customer Reviews

Loot: The Battle over the Stolen Treasures of the Ancient World

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Whose art is it, anyway?

That is the question at the heart of this carefully-crafted and insightful analysis of the ongoing battle of the ownership of antiquities from Greek, Egyptian and other ancient societies. Sharon Waxman has done an admirable job of covering the key personalities and issues, never allowing herself to be distracted and accomplishing the impossible -- taking a passionate view of the importance of these objects to art and history without losing sight that their is no simple answer to that fundamental question of their ownership.

Waxman profiles both sides of the debate, the activists and government officials in countries such as Egypt, Turkey and Italy who are lobbying for the return of everything from the Elgin Marbles (hacked off the Acropolis some two centuries ago) to unique Etruscan artifacts likely looted and smuggled overseas within the last decade. There are no heroes in this saga. Museum directors continue to duck the question of how some of the objects on display ended up in their galleries and argue that their collections form part of the broader "human heritage" that only institutions in giant Western cities from New York to Berlin can adequately care for and display. On the other side are those pressing for the return of these objects so that they can be displayed as part of the heritage of the country where they were created and, millennia later, rediscovered.

But... What happens when objects are repatriated? Waxman takes the reader to the site of nearly-empty museums in Luxor, Egypt and Antalya, Turkey, filled with precious objects but devoid of local visitors. (Even the son of Zahi Hawass, Egypt's antiquities honcho and chief agitator for the return of the Rosetta Stone, among other items, is more interested in Islam and the country's more immediate and, to many, relevant history than he is in the idolatrous Pharoahs and the temples to Horus or Hathor that they left behind them.) She also tells of one Turkish archaeologist who is facing trial for the theft of priceless gold objects from the "Lydian Hoard", finally returned by New York's Met to Turkey amidst great fanfare about a decade ago. Is returning the objects to countries where they can't be protected, cared for or displayed the right strategy, especially if those objects really have no connection to the society inhabiting the country today? (Today's Turks, for instance, aren't descended from the Greek, Phrygian, Lydian, Lycian or other societies that once inhabited their nation; they arrived from further east centuries later.) But, just as the reader becomes sympathetic to the arguments of museum curators, Waxman switches gears to show the ruthlessness with which the latter built their collections and the intellectual arrogance of their arguments. Nor, as she shows in connection with the Elgin Marbles, have they alwasy cared for their objects in their care.

Ultimately, there are no easy answers and Waxman wisely avoids the trap of joining one camp or the other. In the final few pages, she advocates a new paradigm that may prove utopian but at least offers those of us who may be tempted to join the public debate a more reasonable middle way.

The only flaw in this ambitious but thorough and lively overview of the ongoing battle is Waxman's failure to address, except in passing, the role of private collectors in the antiquities trade. Public collections have gradually adopted a much more restrictive approach to purchasing antiquities that don't have a clear provenance or history, and are at least engaging in this debate with the countries of origin. But private collectors have tended to be less scrupulous and, by their nature, their activities are less visible. Waxman notes that the high prices these collectors are still willing to pay for black market objects are likely to encourage archaelogical looting; it would have been valuable and interesting to have explored this with some of these collectors or their art advisors.

Anyone interested in learning more about this looting should turn to the work co-written by Peter Watson & Cecilia TodeschiniThe Medici Conspiracy: The Illicit Journey of Looted Antiquities-- From Italy's Tomb Raiders to the World's Greatest Museums If you're more interested in the debate over how the past is represented and who owns it, The Future of the Past by Alexander Stille is excellent and beautifully written.

I wanted to love this book but ended up merely liking it. For those without a basic knowledge of the arguments in the museum acquisition and antiquities world this is a good basic book outlining many of the key issues. Waxman is at her best when drawing character sketches. At times she seemed to be fumbling for a point to the whole book and her end conclusions don't seem to be informed much by any of her experiences. It felt like a series of newspaper pieces, well-researched, accurate but devoid of the sort of passion and intensity that keeps a book like this entertaining for the reader.

I read this book when it first appeared, and find that over the months I am mellowing in my opinion of it. The author is a reporter who writes about Hollywood. It shows. The premise of the book is that museums in the US and Europe continue to purchase works of art that have been looted from other cultures and illegally purchased by those museums. This is not a simple subject since virtually all conquests and wars throughout the centuries have included pillaging by the winners, hauling the loot back to the conqueror's home land. We are supposedly above such things now, and the countries where the works originated should, the author argues, have a right to determine whether those works can leave the country.

The problem is in the endless nuances of how such laws should be implemented, and Waxman is of little help in trying to articulate and determine how those decisions should be made. Instead she bludgeons us with various chapters each focusing on a hero (trying to recover loot) or villain (museum personnel trying to keep the loot). Of course even the title provides a not-very-subtle clue as to Waxman's sympathies.

But my big problem with this book is that it reads like a collection of newspaper articles. Lots of interviews, virtually no historical research other than a tangent on Napoleon's grabing Egyptian artifacts for what would become the Louvre. And the chapter on the Getty and its travails is filled with who-slept-with-whom at the museum. Not terribly relevant to anything but the author's day job as far as I could tell.

But while this book provides little help in delineating possible global solutions to this issue, or even in framing the issues in a nuanced manner, she does ask the questions, and several months later, I find myself thinking of this subject each time I enter a museum. What should a museum purchase, and under what circumstances should it return a work to another country?

Art may be a symbol of a culture, but its perceived value has been a prize of conquest since before recorded history. The chief distinction between then and now has been the application of the industrial revolution's technology to loot with amazing abandon, a predominantly Western European endeavor. While the author's sympathies are with the exploited countries of origin, as we know them now, the case for the alternative is succinctly made and explored: If rich westerners saw works of amazing art, the locals saw cheap building supplies and raw materials. The builders of these amazing works of art were races and societies apart from those who inhabit those regions today, who more often then not are indifferent, if not actually hostile, to what we might consider to be cultural patrimony. The focus on four western art institutions that have benefited from the plunder, still ongoing, is contrasted with the political entities who are exploiting the western hand wringing with the raw exercise of power for its own sake. Well written if not a bit preachy, the book's 399 pages are organized into 15 chapters within four parts.

Think about the current placement of the Rosetta Stone. It was discovered in Egypt by Napoleon's army in 1799. Then the French army capitulated to the British, with the stipulation that all the specimens uncovered by the savants who accompanied Napoleon had to be turned over. The stone was eventually transferred to England, and has been prominent within the British Museum ever since. While the French and English scuffled and argued over its ownership, no one was asking the Egyptians what they thought. Perhaps the Egyptians didn't really care much; it took the scholarship of the French to start the still unending interest in Egyptology. But the Egyptians care now, or at least some of them do. Why should the Rosetta Stone be so far away from its home and from its context? Why should it not be returned, since the nation of its origin was never consulted about "donating" it? The Rosetta Stone is just one artifact mentioned in _Loot: The Battle Over the Stolen Treasures of the Ancient World_ (Times Books) by Sharon Waxman. The author is a journalist with expertise in Middle East studies, and places the acquisition of such treasures within the history of the nationalism and colonial reach of the expanding powers starting at the end of the eighteenth century and continuing to the present. The present, however, is especially complicated. Current nations presiding over their ancient troves would like to recover what they have lost, and some of them are making it happen, using "lawsuits and criminal prosecution, public embarrassment, and bare-knuckled threats." Since this is a story of world history and culture, it touches us all, and Waxman has provided an exciting account that pays close attention to all sides of the issues as the controversy enters a new phase.

Regarding finds of previous centuries, there are few disputes in which the feelings of both sides have such strong and comprehensible arguments to support them. Those who feel that treasures, like the Rosetta Stone, ought to stay just where they now maintain that these are not artifacts that belong to a region, but are part of the history of all humankind. The great museums have plenty of visitors, so that the objects get appreciated and the lands from which they were taken reap increased interest and tourist visits. The museums have staff and security to take care of the finds. The opposing view is that objects of ancient history are best appreciated in the region of their own culture; a concentration of such objects found in one region could easily be displayed in good museums not far from where the treasure was found. The context with the other objects could be unbroken. Other cultures ripping out the treasures and taking them away steal the soul and history of a nation, a link between present and past vital for national identity. A good deal of Waxman's book has to do with the Elgin Marbles, the pieces of the Acropolis Lord Elgin took two centuries ago and which have pride of place in the British Museum. This is the oldest and loudest of the repatriation battles. Waxman shows that in this supreme argument about repatriation, Greece may trump any argument from the British Museum, but the museum is going to fight for a reason that surpasses the Elgin controversy: if the museum gives the marbles back, then there will be an inevitable deluge of petitions to return all that other looted stuff, not only to Greece, and not only from the British Museum, but worldwide.

There is plenty of controversy here to go around, and few easy answers. There is, at least, some new hesitation from museums to take on acquisitions that might have wrongfully come to them, although that hesitation has been obtained by the threat of legal procedure and financial loss. The museum world may not be close to solving the problem of the acquisitions from the old colonial days, but at least the pros and cons are being considered, rather than a mechanical acceptance of the status quo. Waxman takes us on a tour of sleek museums and dank tombs, and introduces us to a cast of scholars, gadflies, and rogues. Writing about such a controversial topic, it is not surprising that she cannot offer pat answers to the repatriation question. She does, however, ask the right questions. Anyone who has an interest in museums or ancient art will benefit from the light she has brought to a complex controversy.

Sharon Waxman has written a remarkable book. With skill and insight, she takes the reader inside the world's great museums and through the sordid antiquities market. She poses difficult questions and uncovers uncomfortable truths, but without rancor and with a reporter's attention to nuance. "Loot" also never lags as it hopscotches from Europe to the Middle East to the United States. I couldn't put it down--and I certainly will never look at the Louvre or the Met the same way again.

When we look with amazement and wonder at the antiques in the Louvre, British Museum, Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles or the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, we seldom ponder on how they were collected and the stories behind the acquisitions of those pieces. Now in this detailed book `Loot' , Sharon Waxman tells us the fight (both legal and political) that is going on between the countries like Egypt, Italy, Greece and Turkey from where many of the antiquities came from, and the museums where they currently reside. We get a glimpse of the life behind the museum's staid facade, the trade in stolen antiquities and how many museums are now being forced to give back many prized pieces back to the countries they were stolen from.

However, the book is not a one sided version - it also explains the great value being provided to society by these museums, not only in educating the public, protecting the antiques from destruction and vandalism, but also in research, excavations and studies that have given so much insight into many old civilizations and cultures. But times are changing and old colonies are now independent democracies which feel the need to demand back what was `stolen' or removed from their temples, tombs and other archaeological sites over the last few hundred years. The challenges undergone by the four museums that I have mentioned above are covered in full detail.

Some of the important disputed antiques whose `stories' are covered in this book are `The Rosetta Stone', `The bust of Nefertiti', `Zodiac ceiling of Danderah', `Sculpture of Ankhaf' from Egypt, `The Lydian Hoard' from Turkey, `The Euphronios Krater', `the Elgin Marbles, from Greece, `The Victorious Youth', `Statue of Aphrodite', from Italy as well as many others.

The museums that seem to have been affected most seriously are the Getty museum and the Metropolitan Art, who have been forced to return many valuable antiques back to the country of origin. The Louvre and the British Museum seem to be holding out better, though it remains to be seen how long they can withstand the pressure.

With a good mix of the stories behind many of the prized antiques as well as the important players in this drama such as the museum curators, collectors, dealers and the politicians, the book provides a lively narration of a subject which typically does not get much coverage. However the drawback of the book is that the narrative is often too long, points keep getting repeated and the author seems to lose focus at many places.

I read this book a year ago, and I thought the book gave a pretty good overview of the issues dealing with ownership of antiquities. However, I would have liked to see more of a discussion on actual modern looting, rather than the focus on what was taken in the past with ambiguous legality. I would have also liked if there had been something about looting of artifacts from American countries. Still, I enjoyed the book and would (and have) recommended it to others.

What can I say.. I loved the style, the accompanying photo's, the interviews and the fact that she just did it. I loved the book.

Sharon Waxman's new book is a winner in more ways than one. As several reviewers have commented, she has brought us new insights on the key personalities involved in the antiquities trade, done her homework in regard to the history and paper trails and best of all she makes the case for why the museum world and responsible governments will have to pay attention. The problem of restitution and return of artifacts is here to stay and it's not going to disappear into the woodwork.

Is it possible to hold a grudge for 120 years? Apparently yes, according to Kwame Opoku and Zahi Hawass, two men who have taken every opportunity to call for the return of African antiquities, regardless of whether they were looted, stolen, bought or given away under permit. They look at all of these objects as part of any nation's patrimony, and like two terriers in a rat field they intend to stand their ground till the bitter end.

They purposely seek out confrontations with heads of major museums either in person or in print, of whom Opoku has singled out James Cuno as a target. Director of the Art Institute of Chicago and author of the controversial Who Owns Antiquity? Cuno argues that "antiquities are the cultural property of all humankind, evidence of the world's ancient past and not that of a particular modern nation. They comprise antiquity, and antiquity knows no borders." He argues that retention of new finds and reclamation of old ones will lead to a dangerous politicization, thus he believes that there is such a thing as too much protection. His attitude is that now is the time to broaden, not restrict, access to antiquities, a stand that seems typical of the other large museums.

Opoku, a retired legal adviser in Vienna, takes an unrelenting opposite view that challenges Cuno and calls for the return of all antiquities. This power struggle created by Hawass and Opoku has if anything exposed a fatal weakness in the monolithic institutions of the West. That is a central and timely point made by Waxman. As she says, there is in the larger museums, "an unwillingness to adapt to the changing mores of a shifting global culture. The politics of `us versus them' has to give way to a reaffirmation of the value of cultural exchange, and its real embrace by both sides."

She also shows how in defense of their position the large museums of the West have distanced themselves from the concept of the National museum, the institution that is often used to tell the story of a nation's past and confirm its present importance. They now prefer to be known as encyclopedic museums, products of Enlightenment idealism, and institutions whose collections represent the world's artistic legacy.
Irene Rowland a professor at the University of Notre Dame School of Architecture, based in Rome, in a recent review explained how the great encyclopedic museums of the West found themselves on their high horses, since they "were predicated, perhaps to a one, on the idea that their local public constituted the world's best people, and hence the most deserving to stand in the presence of high culture, with a smattering of primitives to drive that sense of superiority home."

Rowland has kindly provided a stepladder on the off chance that they now find it difficult to get down from their lofty positions. She says, "the only plausible arrangement for museums today is to work as a peer among peers in schemes of international cooperation, already increasingly the norm for archaeological expeditions. The day is long gone when English, German, and American scholars could move in to tell the locals what was what and take their findings back to their encyclopedic museums to enlighten those who are deemed most capable of enlightenment."

Rowland and Opoku provide a way of the future in the development of a system that we can all believe in, the International Museum to which all nations and cultures would make their own contributions.

Waxman also helps by calling for "changing attitudes and shifting paradigms," but above all she points the finger at one of the central obstacles, provenance, the history of every object in every museum, collection and art salon. A more open attitude toward provenance may be just the thing to start everyone on the right road toward a meaningful and peaceful solution before too much blood is spilled, as it surely will be.