Grave Goods: The Politics of Removing Objects Intended for Burial

Euphronios, Krater

For centuries, grave goods have been illicitly or legally removed from their intended final resting places, so it is no surprise that the practice persists to this day.1 Many argue that looters and archaeologists are "strip mining our past,"2 disturbing a culture's intentions for burying certain objects with their deceased. Conversely, others contend that transferring grave goods from burial grounds into public or private collections allows visitors to engage with and learn from objects that otherwise would have been destroyed, either by political and economic instability or by development. Looting, unfortunately, will continue as long as collecting communities view grave goods as precious objects or academic evidence, ignoring their critical value as sacred objects tied to culturally specific rituals surrounding death, mourning, and the afterlife. It is essential to remember that such objects are deposited in graves for a reason; and while the rituals and processes of burying the deceased vary cross culturally, objects in graves are not placed in the expectation that they will be removed and displayed or studied. An exploration of several case studies, including the repatriation of the Euphronios krater, the Euphronios kylix, and the ancient Egyptian coffin of Shesepamuntayesher (Fig. 3) will make clear the contrasting arguments and solutions to uprooting grave goods from their intended burial grounds. Close examination of these objects and the outcome of their repatriation reveals the myriad challenges associated with the removal of burial objects from source communities and their display in foreign places and spaces.

Euphronios, Kylix

Two Etruscan burial objects - the kylix, a wine chalice; the krater, a wine mixing bowl - have been focal points in interlinked issues of repatriation, grave goods, and stolen property. Crafted by Euphronios, a Greek master potter and painter, both the kylix and the krater are rare examples of Greek antiquities that contain an artist's signature. Euphronios is believed to have signed a total of nine Greek vessels, thus making him among the earliest known artists to have signed his work.3 Both the kylix and the krater were utilized during lavish parties, as the Etruscans were known to be obsessed with luxury. According to Otto J. Brendel, the Etruscan people epitomized the Greek word trophe, a derogatory term the Greeks used to refer to the Etruscan's affection for all things ostentatious.4 In accordance with Etruscan tradition, both objects were placed in elaborate, domed tombs to serve the deceased person or family in the afterlife. Their presence alongside the deceased allowed Etruscan families to express the power of their social structure, claiming the kylix and krater as symbols of elitism while preparing the soul's comfortable and familiar journey from life in Etruria into the afterlife.5

In the early 1970s, the Metropolitan Museum of Art (Met) embarked on an ambitious pursuit to acquire Euphronios' famed krater and kylix, as rumors on their availability circulated the art market. In 1972, Oxford educated, German-born Met curator, Dietrich Von Bothmer, convinced the museum's director, Thomas Hoving to purchase the Euphronios krater for one million dollars. Since the Met sold its coin collection to fund the acquisition and, therefore, "improve" its Greco/Roman collection, technically Von Bothmer and Hoving complied with the standards for collection care set by the American Alliance (then Association) of Museums in its Code of Ethics.6 The purchase of the krater was, however, unethical, because it was a stolen or "illicit" object.7

The two men were unable to purchase the kylix to stand alongside its "lost" companion. Only a year later after the successful purchase of the krater, Von Bothmer was outbid by Giacomo Medici, a famed Italian art dealer. Medici, born just north of Rome into a lower-class family, learned about the antiquities trade from his father, who was hired by Prince Vittorio Massimo8, to dig and search for "treasures" on his land north of Rome. Enticed by Massimo's lavish lifestyle, Medici and his father soon began regularly "mining" the Italian countryside for ancient Etruscan burial goods to sell worldwide. As a "middle-man", Medici employed tombaroli, or grave diggers, to unearth objects, including the krater and the kylix. Medici then sold the looted objects to Robert Hecht, an American art dealer.9

By removing the kylix and the krater from their original burial grounds in Cerveteri both vessels were divorced from their intended resting places and any contextual information about their surroundings. The Etruscan people had a great preoccupation with their fate at and after death; like the Romans, they had a deep-seated belief in the survival of a soul after death.10 Removing these objects was both unethical and illegal, as it disturbed the Etruscan's deeply rooted beliefs in keeping objects with a deceased person's soul into the afterlife. However striking and important these grave goods are, they were never meant to be seen by another living soul.

Dr. Ian Morris, Professor of Classics at Stanford, argues that in death "rituals, people use symbols to make explicit social structures, an interpretation of the meaning of daily life".11 As symbols, grave goods allow archaeologists and other scholars to understand the greater social structure and daily life of a community when they are left within their grave site. This, however, begs the question, then: should archaeologists be allowed to unearth grave goods? Similarly, Paul Bahn, a British archaeologist, argues that the disturbance of graves ultimately violates a culture's "beliefs about the afterlife; it deprived them of the corporeal integrity and/or the goods they needed after death".12 En situ burial goods provide a window to the reality of civilizations "lost" through time and space. When grave goods are left undisturbed in their intended burial places, "we can develop models of ancient social history and social structures that make far greater allowance than previous interpretations for changes through time and space...and for conflicts over meaning". 13 Taken out of context, the meaning of objects like the krater and the kylix shifts dramatically. For example, both objects are no longer associated with Etruscan burial rituals; rather, they become valued for their formal and aesthetic qualities.

When burial objects are divorced from their graves and placed on display at museums - particularly art museums - such objects become closely associated with their aesthetic value, rather than their use and cultural value. For example, Von Bothmer purchased the krater to bolster the Met's collection of classical antiquities, hoping to educate others about the artistic and visual methodologies Euphronios used in creating the wine bowl. Instead, the krater's significance has become more closely associated with its Homeric, epic-like voyage from the Greppe Sant'Angelo, where it was buried, to the Met and back to Italian soil once again. A Greek pot that was sold to a wealthy Etruscan family, then buried in a tomb and seized from its resting place before arriving in New York has become an example of contemporary conflicts over cultural property and of the challenges museums face. Less associated with the Etruscan afterlife, the krater instead illuminates "cautionary tales for prospective collectors in the illegal antiquities trade via trophies like the krater". 14 In the illegal antiquities trade, objects like the krater, if they are successfully repatriated, undergo numerous identity changes. When grave objects travel from their original burial "home", to another country, and back to their country of origin - though placed in a museum, not back in their grave - the object "home" and context changes many times. For instance, the identity of the krater has changed dramatically, from its use in the Etruscan tomb it was buried to its position on a pedestal at the Met.

Conversely, scholars argue that keeping an object buried in the ground limits one's knowledge of the "greatest story ever told: human history".15 In a 1973 television interview, Wheeler, a British archaeologist, argues that "if you dig up a man with bowls and things around him – like those we dug up in Maiden Castle - they were dead. They had been a long time...and they were going to be dead a long time...they're still dead. But round them were all sorts of possessions, which were of interest to us".16 When looters or archaeologists bring objects into the light of day, these vessels become the means by which the human story lives on. The contribution to scholarship on objects that have been "resurfaced" from graves help shape and construct the history of human existence. Archaeological "knowledge of the past that has been made by burials and their contents is immense"17, helps anthropologists and historians extract information on a culture's diet, race, health, and way of life, adding to the universal human story.

Coffin of Shesepamuntayesher

However, not all grave goods end up in museums that are open to the public and are, therefore, arguably used for educational purposes. In 2011, the coffin of Shesepamuntayesher - westernized to "the lady in the striped wig" - was looted in Egypt by local grave robbers, cut into four pieces, sent to Dubai, shipped to America in between furniture containers as to appear "unnoticed", and landed in the hands of Joseph Lewis, a private art collector based in Virginia. Lewis purchased the coffin through a Brooklyn-based antiquities dealer.Although the coffin has since been returned to the Museum of Cairo in Egypt, many looters in places of conflict - such as Syria, Egypt, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Iran - eagerly and easily steal from past in order to survive in the present day. In Egypt's case, the Arab Spring in 2011 - when Shesepamuntayesher was looted - spurred looters and robbers to unearth thousands of grave goods. Egyptian tombs, for example, are seen as readily accessible sources of income by which to support their families. In poverty-stricken areas fueled by economic and political instability, these looters believe it is better to unearth the wealth literally beneath their feet then to connect with their ancient and historical past. This lack of interest in one's history does not always stem from an inherent disinterest, but rather from an underwhelming sense of pride in one's national heritage due to political and economic issues. However, as Bahn argues, not all grave goods are unearthed by human force. Many unidentified grave sites are "discovered through erosion, construction, roadwork, or ploughing; others turn up unexpectedly on archaeological sites and can sometimes cause intense annoyance by posing extra problems for the excavator".18 Nonetheless, Lewis, who purchased the coffin, plans to fight back against tightening U.S. foreign laws.19 As an advocate for collecting antiquities, often illegally, Lewis "recently helped form an association to educate and defend collections".20 A supporter of "universal museums", Lewis believes museums help to "safeguard the cultural property of mankind, which source countries often fail to protect".21 In return, many collectors, like Lewis, donate or loan their objects to museums, who then arguably contribute to public knowledge. Doing so is also a way to provide the work’s with a provenance that is falsely "created", making falsely legitimized "histories" for objects removed from burial.

In 2015, National Geographic in Washington D.C. held a repatriation ceremony for Shesepamuntayesher's return to Egypt. The coffin stood alongside Egyptian ambassador to the U.S., Mohamed Tawfik as well as Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security and ICE Director Sarah Saldaña, National Geographic President Gary Knell, and other officials and special agents responsible for the return of more than a hundred artifacts that are believed to have been illegally smuggled out of Egypt.

While the trading of antiquities on the art market has the ability to "save" objects from destruction, the unethical, "gray areas in which it operates leave it open to accusations that it drives looting". 22 It also seems to greatly enhance false provenances, as many art dealers cite that an object has come from a conveniently vague "Swiss collection", as Switzerland does not adhere and sign to the 1970s UNESCO Convention on the Protection of Cultural Heritage. The removal and selling of grave goods becomes further complicated when cultural property laws differ from country to country and, in the United States, from state to state. For example, because Switzerland does not comply with the 1970s UNESCO law, it is much easier for smugglers, like Medici, to transport art through Switzerland. However, Australia, for instance, does comply with the 1970s law.

Footnotes

1 Tom Mueller. "Plundering the Past: the illegal antiquities trade is booming, wreaking havoc on the world’s archaeological heritage." National Geographic. (National Geographic Press, Washington, D.C.), June, 2016. P. 66

2 Ibid, p. 64

3 Vernon Silver. The Lost Chalice: The Epic Hunt for a Priceless Masterpiece. Harper Collins Publishers: New York, New York. 2009, p. 8

4 Otto J. Brendel. Etruscan Art. Yale University Press: New Haven, CT. (1995), p. 75.

5 Jodi Magness. "A Near Eastern Ethnic Element among the Etruscan Elite?" Etruscan Studies, Vol. 8, No. 4 (2001). P. 34

6 "Collections." American Alliance of Museums: Code of Ethics for Museums."" http://www.aam-us.org/resources/ethics-standards-and-best-practices/code-of-ethics (accessed 22 March, 2017)

7 Id

8 Silver, p. 217

9 Id

10 Paul Bahn. "Do Not Disturb? Archaeology and the Rights of the Dead." Journal of Applied Philosophy, Vol. 1, No. 2, 1984. P. 214

11 Ian Morris. "The anthropology of a dead world." Death-Ritual and Social Structure in Classical Antiquity (1992) Cambridge University Press, P. 1

12 Bahn P. 213

13 Ibid, p.203

14 Michael Kimmelman. "Stolen Beauty: A Greek Urn’s Underworld." The New York Times. NYT Press: New York, New York. (July 7, 2011). http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/08/arts/design/08abroad.html (accessed 23 March, 2017)

15 Mueller. P. 70

16 Bahn. P. 213

17 Ibid, p. 222sale-of-sacred-object-stopped-by-museum-and-native-leaders/.

18 Ibid, p. 220

19 Mueller, p. 75

20 Id

21 Id

22 Ibid, p.80