Den of Antiquity

[SeattleUte]

Those interested in Classical civilization must pick up this week's New Yorker and read the articlle "Den of Antiquity" by Rebecca Meade. Here is an abstract of the article:

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2...09fa_fact_mead

I wish I could post the electronic version but it's not available. It's a facinataing study of the international trade in antiquities, both legal and underground. The upshot of some international legislation is that our great museums have had to return some priceless artifacts to Greece, Italy and Turkey, sometimes after possessing these items for decades (this is not stuff stolen by the Nazis but excavated secretly by so-called "grave robbers"). A rich irony is that once returned these items often sit in dark storage areas and waste away because these countries lack the means to exhibit them properly. Moreover, "grave robbers" often have a better nose for finding things than trained archeaologists, and grave robbers have been the means, particularly during the Enlightenment, of putting some priceless items out of reach of religious fundamentalists.

One of the moral and philosphical questions is thus, do Greece, Turkey, and Italy, etc. have a greater claim as patrimony on these relics than the rest of us? One of the best parts of the article is the Metropolitan Museum's Classical aniquities curator who argues persuasively that, among other things, they are the patrimony of no one nation over any other, but whoever takes time to study them. He also notes that most of this stuff is not takenby grave robbers but by construction workers, etc. He says that in America if a backhoe hits something hard it's a boulder, in Italy or Greece or Turkey it's probably something beautiful early Christians tried to destroy.

[il Padrino Ute]

So, the childhood axiom "finders keepers; losers weepers" applies here?

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

So, the childhood axiom "finders keepers; losers weepers" applies here?

The question is who can claim to have "lost."

[Solon]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

One of the moral and philosphical questions is thus, do Greece, Turkey, and Italy, etc. have a greater claim as patrimony on these relics than the rest of us? One of the best parts of the article is the Metropolitan Museum's Classical aniquities curator who argues persuasively that, among other things, they are the patrimony of no one nation over any other, but whoever takes time to study them.

Very interesting. I'll have to get to a copy of this article.

It's interesting to see the tussle over the past. When I was in Greece, most Greeks seemed rather indifferent to their Classical past, drawing much more of their identity from Byzantine Greece. It seems that the government really gets interested in ancient Greece only when there is money to be made.

For instance, in order for archaeologists to excavate, they must first purchase the land which they want to dig. Anything dug up belongs to the government, and when the site is finished, the government can charge admission to tourists - even if the archaeologists (or sponsoring institution) still owns the land. It's good to have safeguards in place to prevent theft and plunder, but the bureaucracy makes it tough for archaeologists to dig.

I'm sure this is in the article, but there is a lot of pressure for the British Museum to return the Elgin Marbles - the marble reliefs taken from the Acropolis by Lord Elgin in the 19th century. The British Museum won't even consider it until the Greeks can prove they have a museum capable of preserving them. The new Acropolis Museum was supposed to be finished in time for the 2004 Olympics. It's still far from complete. The Greeks love to bellyache about their looted past, but I sometimes feel it's all lip service.

I see both sides of the debate. It's disappointing to go to a site only to discover that the most important pieces are in Berlin or London. On the other hand, many of these institutions have preserved these pieces and made them readily available for public study and viewing. In many ways, the democratic west is more of an heir to Greece's ancient civilization than are today's Greeks.

[Solon]

I went to an AIA (Archaeological Institute of America) lecture this evening by Chris Roosevelt, an archaeologist who works in Lydia (western Turkey). It was part condescending, part interesting, part depressing. He spoke about the robust antiquities trade in Turkey and how many of the tombs in Lydia have suffered more damage from grave robbers in the past five or ten years than they suffered over the past 2400 or so.

He essentially blamed "the market" for being the engine that drives the looting, but it's naive to think that demand for valuable antiquities will ever go away. I also found his attitude towards the Turks to be somewhat condescending when he railed on a poor farmer and his two sons for looting their own cultural heritage. The farmer's reply: "It's not my cultural heritage. Do I look like an ancient Greek? I'm a Turk."

At any rate, it's a multi-faceted issue and I see many points of view. I don't believe in looting - archaeological context is 95% of an artifact's value to scholars. On the other hand, it's not in the farmers' interest to have something valuable on their land legitimately excavated, since the Turkish laws of Eminent Domain are somewhat authoritarian. Furthermore, the fact that many of the Turkish authorities are tied to looting makes it hard to trust the Ministry of Culture.

Anyways, I thought I would post it here since SU mentioned the New Yorker article.

Here's some info. on Roosevelt's lecture:

http://www.archaeological.org/webinf...e=10224&lid=56

[BarbaraGordon]

Solon, as a student, you should be able to get a digital copy of the New Yorker article from the Penn State library's webpage.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Solon

I went to an AIA (Archaeological Institute of America) lecture this evening by Chris Roosevelt, an archaeologist who works in Lydia (western Turkey). It was part condescending, part interesting, part depressing. He spoke about the robust antiquities trade in Turkey and how many of the tombs in Lydia have suffered more damage from grave robbers in the past five or ten years than they suffered over the past 2400 or so.

He essentially blamed "the market" for being the engine that drives the looting, but it's naive to think that demand for valuable antiquities will ever go away. I also found his attitude towards the Turks to be somewhat condescending when he railed on a poor farmer and his two sons for looting their own cultural heritage. The farmer's reply: "It's not my cultural heritage. Do I look like an ancient Greek? I'm a Turk."

At any rate, it's a multi-faceted issue and I see many points of view. I don't believe in looting - archaeological context is 95% of an artifact's value to scholars. On the other hand, it's not in the farmers' interest to have something valuable on their land legitimately excavated, since the Turkish laws of Eminent Domain are somewhat authoritarian. Furthermore, the fact that many of the Turkish authorities are tied to looting makes it hard to trust the Ministry of Culture.

Anyways, I thought I would post it here since SU mentioned the New Yorker article.

Here's some info. on Roosevelt's lecture:

http://www.archaeological.org/webinf...e=10224&lid=56

Thanks. Facinating issue. I had no idea the level of mutual contempt between museum curators and archeologists. They see the world with completely different eyes. The Met curator interviewed by the New Yorker said (I'm paraphrasing), "I don't care if some guy died without his teeth, or what his bones look like, I care what he dreamed, what inspired him, and what he created to express beauty." He also said archeologists are elitists who begrudge treasure hunters because they are more successful finding things. He said the treasure hunting urge is inborn in humans (I'm sure JS would agree) and some treasure hunters just have the knack whereas many archeaologists do not. Again, thanks to treasure hunters many of the treasures in the great museums were saved from destruction by religious fanatics and ignorant people.

The article ended with him saying (again, I'm paraphrasing), "The Met is six months older than the nation of Italy; now that puts things in perspective." Italy is trying to get the Met to give back the crown jewell of the Classical section: a complete chariot from the Etruscans (pre-cursors to the Romans), 500 B.C. Somebody bought it from a peasant for peanuts who found it in a field he was plowing and was using parts of it for boiling water.

[Solon]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

Solon, as a student, you should be able to get a digital copy of the New Yorker article from the Penn State library's webpage.

You're right. I accessed it earlier this week. The digital version wasn't available when Seattle first posted this but it is now. I love the library (as I'm sure you do too). This semester, I'm working for the Penn State Arts and Humanities Library in acquiring texts in ancient Greek.

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by Solon

This semester, I'm working for the Penn State Arts and Humanities Library in acquiring texts in ancient Greek.

I'm officially jealous. That's very cool.

[Solon]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

I'm officially jealous. That's very cool.

Yeah. It's a lot of fun spending someone else's money. Our Classics holdings are already first rate. A rich donor with an appreciation for Greek heritage wants it to be even better.