07.16.09
Who Owns Antiquity?
James Cuno
Do antiquities still belong in museums located far in time and space from the makers of the artifacts they house? Or do they belong to the government that happens to be in control of the land where the culture once flourished? At the ALCTS President’s Program on Monday, James Cuno, president and director of the Art Institute of Chicago, made a strong case for the argument that “we all own antiquity,” and that museums and libraries exist to “keep the past in the public domain for the sake of those who succeed us.”
Referring to the debate over the ownership of the Elgin Marbles — classical Greek sculptures and other artifacts that were acquired by Lord Elgin for the British Museum in the first decade of the 19th century and which Greece would like to have returned — Cuno pointed out that those antiquities have been housed in London longer than there has been a Greek state. (Elgin acquired the antiquities legally from the Ottoman Empire.) In addition, displaying Athenian art from the 5th century B.C. in a wider context where it can be compared to other cultures of the time — the Roman Republic, the Persian Empire, the Han and Mayan cultures — is at least as beneficial as limiting its exhibition to the locale where it originated.
“Many of the great 20th-century collections of antiquities, such as those at Chicago’s Oriental Institute or the University of Pennsylvania,” Cuno said, “were acquired under the system known as partage, which is French for distribution or sharing. Local governments negotiated with foreign excavators to bring their expertise to the region, in partnership with local specialists and scientific societies.” The first choice of anything excavated went to the locals, while the rest could go to the excavating nations for study. “This had the benefit of building both local museums and ancient collections in foreign institutions,” Cuno explained. “Housing artifacts in different countries has multiple benefits: It protects them from any disasters that might occur in one locale, and it encourages others in many countries to become curious about the world and its diverse cultures. If it was a good idea then and people benefit from it now, then it’s a good idea now.”
One audience member asked Cuno how the British might feel if some other country took Stonehenge away from England, but Cuno answered by saying he questioned the value of privileging one viewing context over another. “We know a lot about things that are no longer in their original locations,” he concluded.
Eva Semertzaki said,
July 19, 2009 at 9:46 am
Regarding the world wide known topic of Elgin Marbles the things are different that simply transferring an entire artefact from the owning country to a museum in another country. In the case of the missing parts of the Greek artefacts, it is terribly sad and unfair to see the remaining parts of each of the original masterpieces exhibited in the New Acropolis Museum. It is sad to see half of a horse, for example, in the New Acropolis Museum and the other half displayed in the British Museum.
Now in the new museum the absence of the missing parts is obvious. They cannot be replaced by copies of them, but rather the original ones should be returned to shape the whole of the original piece of art.
Jeff Guerrier said,
July 23, 2009 at 11:41 am
When one considers the likelihood of the further deterioration and dispersal of what are now called the Elign Marbles, in the early 19th Century, if they had been left in situ in Ottoman Greece, it is justification enough of Lord Elgin’s purchase and removal to safer confines.
Museum collections, all over the world, of ancient and antique works of art and of archaeological artifacts have preserved, conserved, contextualized and made accessible great art and our collective cultural legacy. The Museums and we of the western world have nothing to feel guilty about nor beholding in any way to communities that neglected or sold these treasures for whatever conditions or reasons.
Instead, the museums and cultural institutions of the world—excepting in the most oppressive countries—have long shared their collections globally through loans and traveling exhibitions. With the ever-improving sophistication of conservation and preservation technologies, as well as that of transportation methods, this global sharing of art and artifact—and, of course, digital information technology—will only improve access to these works to all who seek it out.