An 1800 year old, life-sized Greek-Roman statue looted almost six decades ago from present-day Turkey is on its final view in the Cleveland Museum of Art (CMA). Following more than a year of legal fighting, the bottomless bronze sculpture was shown earlier this month in the rotunda of the museum, where it will remain until 8 July before it is repatriated.
It is estimated that it is worth more than six feet long statue of around $ 20 million Old city of Bubon who have been prominently displayed in museums in the United States for decades. The works were initially excavated from an old sanctuary in the mid -20th century and then smuggled from Turkey by illegal antiquisodes traders George Zakos and Robert attaches, according to one research By the public prosecutor in Manhattan.
Despite published research that connects them with Bubon and one Request from the Turkish government in 2012 Ask for their return, only in 2023 did researchers have finally seized dozens of these stolen works, many of which were were repatriate. But the statue of Marcus Aurelius remained with the CMA.
“This statue was quite unusual for how well documented his illegal origin was,” said Museum Studies Scholar Elizabeth Marlowe Hyperallergic In an e -mail pointed out that the looters had immediately received the attention of the Turkish authorities and archaeologists.
In an opinion for Hyperallergic In September 2022, Marlowe referred to the association of the statue with an vacant pedestal in Bubon that bears the etching of the name of Marcus Aurelius.
For more than a year, the artwork was central in a lawsuit by the CMA against the district processor Alvin Bragg of Manhattan who disputed the place of origin of the work and the identity of the subject, Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius thought. In February, after extensive forensic analysis, witnesses of soil comparisons, interviews and document research that confirmed that the statue was looted from Bubon, the CMA Finally surrendered The statue.
Before repatriation, the statue remains to be seen for almost three months at the CMA in a Display Contextualization of his controversial journey from Bubon to Ohio. The work is presented in addition to four panels that investigate the creation and iconography, the bubon archaeological site, recent scientific analysis and the legal conflict and ethical debates on the acquisition.
“We see the new display as a positive result for a long -term process and an opportunity to share new knowledge and to offer the favorite farewell to these old visitors,” said Seth Pevnick, the CMA’s curator of Greek and Roman art, told Hyperallergic.
The CMA continues to suggest uncertainties around the identity of the statue, referring to the work as “draped male figure, perhaps Marcus Aurelius” (ca. 150 BCE – 200 CE) based on the possibility that the statue was on a non -described platform in Bubon instead of the name of the emperor.
This last representation of the statue in particular acknowledges the crucial investigation by the Turkish archaeologist Jale endran, who published a scientific article in 1978 that corresponds to the plundered artifacts with the Bubon site.
“It was her publications, starting in 1979, who tied the thefts in Bubon to the images that circulated on the American market, including this philosopher statue,” Marlowe said Hyperallergic.
In the fourth panel of his display, the museum also claims that the “statue was publicly exhibited in various other institutions in the United States, the seller claimed to be his rightful owner, and the reported modern history of the image met the CMA standards for acquisition.” The text also notes that the CMA ‘had not received any legal challenges [the statue’s] Ownership until 2023, “Although Turkey has applied for its declaration since 2012.
“Yes, during the 19 years that the statue was on the market, it was ‘publicly exhibited in various other institutions’, but there is a reason why none of those other museums was willing to buy it,” Marlowe continued.
“When the” reported modern history of sculpture met the CMA’s standards for acquisition, “lets it only reveal how the CMA’s standards were compared with all the other museums that took the work of Inan seriously and no to documented looting,” said Marlowe.
