Help
Sign In
antiquities
September 2007 
Moral Dilemma of Working in the Antiquities Market
Posted on Aug 30th, 2007
by 
火狐 Li
火狐 Li
Have you ever heard of Cultural Patrimony claims?
These are attempts by polities to reclaim art and artifacts that are claimed to be the sovereign possession of that nation and the culture(s) and ethnicitiy or ethnicities it represents.
Many artifacts in museums and private collections were plundered from their point of origin in times of financial and political insecurity and eventually hoisted into the art market for the highest bidder. At times national institutions would intervene and patron such displays as grand manifestations of imperial or cultural might-- the right to catalogue, display, and interpret the Other.
The most famous examples are the Rosetta Stone from Egypt, and "Lord Elgin's marbles" from the Parthenon, which are both held in the British Museum. A less savoury example would be the sacred body of theTzeachten First Nation Medicine man that was displayed in the Burke Museum Seattle...
Ok, so I won't be helping in the upkeep and sale of such controversial art and artifacts (should the Medicine Man even be treated as one!?), and chances are the works I will be dealing with won't be the target of patrimony claims. It is more likely that no one knows they have been unearthed. But Han dynasty terracotta and wooden Buddhas makes me a little nervous. How were these objects obtained and who is really benefiting from them? Not to go all Indy-Jones and say "It belongs in a Museum!" but they do really belong in Museum in China if anything. and imagine the even greater discoveries that could have been made if excavated under archaeological processes?
--- no wonder archaeologists and art collectors don't get along.
Frankly, I don't care for much of the fetishistic purchase and displays of conspicuous consumption that characterizes the antiquities market.
What I do care about is how these works came into being and who produced them for what reasons. I feel uncomfortable about taking works out of context, plundering tombs and subjugating very personal objects to our scrutiny. and to top that off-- selling them.
... Seems like I will be doing a little bit of soul searching in the next few weeks.
These are attempts by polities to reclaim art and artifacts that are claimed to be the sovereign possession of that nation and the culture(s) and ethnicitiy or ethnicities it represents.
Many artifacts in museums and private collections were plundered from their point of origin in times of financial and political insecurity and eventually hoisted into the art market for the highest bidder. At times national institutions would intervene and patron such displays as grand manifestations of imperial or cultural might-- the right to catalogue, display, and interpret the Other.
The most famous examples are the Rosetta Stone from Egypt, and "Lord Elgin's marbles" from the Parthenon, which are both held in the British Museum. A less savoury example would be the sacred body of theTzeachten First Nation Medicine man that was displayed in the Burke Museum Seattle...
Ok, so I won't be helping in the upkeep and sale of such controversial art and artifacts (should the Medicine Man even be treated as one!?), and chances are the works I will be dealing with won't be the target of patrimony claims. It is more likely that no one knows they have been unearthed. But Han dynasty terracotta and wooden Buddhas makes me a little nervous. How were these objects obtained and who is really benefiting from them? Not to go all Indy-Jones and say "It belongs in a Museum!" but they do really belong in Museum in China if anything. and imagine the even greater discoveries that could have been made if excavated under archaeological processes?
--- no wonder archaeologists and art collectors don't get along.
Frankly, I don't care for much of the fetishistic purchase and displays of conspicuous consumption that characterizes the antiquities market.
What I do care about is how these works came into being and who produced them for what reasons. I feel uncomfortable about taking works out of context, plundering tombs and subjugating very personal objects to our scrutiny. and to top that off-- selling them.
... Seems like I will be doing a little bit of soul searching in the next few weeks.
Access: Public
Yeah that has to be a tough business for anyone with a conscience. I don't know how I feel either about someone wanting to “own” a piece of history. I too feel that something so important shouldn't belong to one person, but should be available to everybody. And as far a putting medicine men, mummy's and any other dead people on display… well that's just plain disrespectful.
Hi Ben,
Yeah. Its sad, if I had a choice I would do something else, but as an entry job to the larger world of museum/gallery management– an experience in a small commercial gallery is quite valuable. I can get experience the poetics of display, cataloging, packing, and selling. Some of the works are not too old, but others are really ancient. A few look like sculpted panels torn off from temple walls… (thats quite tragic).
Archaeology can be just as bad though. The very act of unearthing, retrieving, and cataloguing ritual and disinterred remains is a sacrilege in most cultures. But we can do such things because we presume these cultures are dead without due consideration for the contemporary ancestors of cultures under the archaeological gaze. That is archaeologists have to adhere to strict protocal when excavating sites, and must consult local stakeholders before digging.
As for whether anyone is entitled to own a piece of history… well, I am not too sure. If it is your history or your ancestors history– I think it is fine. On the other hand, I also think artifacts of history that belong to no-one or everyone should be open to the interpretive gaze of all–so long as its not too disrespectful.
: )