Loot: The Battle Over the Stolen Treasures of the Ancient World

Any arts or general-interest lending collection will find lively and fun LOOT: THE BATTLE OVER THE STOLEN TREASURES OF THE ANCIENT WORLD. For two centuries the West has plundered the treasures of the ancient world - LOOT brings to life the methods, logic, and history of this plundering of museums and offers many important insights into cultural and social interactions in the arts. Perfect for both arts and general lending library world history collections.

Sharon Waxman's new book is a winner in more ways than one. As several reviewers have commented, she has brought us new insights on the key personalities involved in the antiquities trade, done her homework in regard to the history and paper trails and best of all she makes the case for why the museum world and responsible governments will have to pay attention. The problem of restitution and return of artifacts is here to stay and it's not going to disappear into the woodwork. Is it possible to hold a grudge for 120 years? Apparently yes, according to Kwame Opoku and Zahi Hawass, two men who have taken every opportunity to call for the return of African antiquities, regardless of whether they were looted, stolen, bought or given away under permit. They look at all of these objects as part of any nation's patrimony, and like two terriers in a rat field they intend to stand their ground till the bitter end. They purposely seek out confrontations with heads of major museums either in person or in print, of whom Opoku has singled out James Cuno as a target. Director of the Art Institute of Chicago and author of the controversial Who Owns Antiquity? Cuno argues that "antiquities are the cultural property of all humankind, evidence of the world's ancient past and not that of a particular modern nation. They comprise antiquity, and antiquity knows no borders." He argues that retention of new finds and reclamation of old ones will lead to a dangerous politicization, thus he believes that there is such a thing as too much protection. His attitude is that now is the time to broaden, not restrict, access to antiquities, a stand that seems typical of the other large museums. Opoku, a retired legal adviser in Vienna, takes an unrelenting opposite view that challenges Cuno and calls for the return of all antiquities. This power struggle created by Hawass and Opoku has if anything exposed a fatal weakness in the monolithic institutions of the West. That is a central and timely point made by Waxman. As she says, there is in the larger museums, "an unwillingness to adapt to the changing mores of a shifting global culture. The politics of `us versus them' has to give way to a reaffirmation of the value of cultural exchange, and its real embrace by both sides." She also shows how in defense of their position the large museums of the West have distanced themselves from the concept of the National museum, the institution that is often used to tell the story of a nation's past and confirm its present importance. They now prefer to be known as encyclopedic museums, products of Enlightenment idealism, and institutions whose collections represent the world's artistic legacy. Irene Rowland a professor at the University of Notre Dame School of Architecture, based in Rome, in a recent review explained how the great encyclopedic museums of the West found themselves on their high horses, since they "were predicated, perhaps to a one, on the idea that

"Loot" is top-notch work written by a highly acclaimed writer for the New York Times and The Washington Post, a volume which delves into the longstanding and now increasing debate on the return of antiquities from museums to their countries of origin. Waxman, who earned a Masters degree from Oxford University in Middle Eastern Studies and who subsequently worked in the middle east for a decade, caught onto this cause and explicates it as only a person of her training can, making the concepts clear to the layman, describing arguments for and against in no-nonsense writing, and providing background information that is as interesting as it is useful. Waxman's work is somewhat of a polemic. (If the title doesn't make clear to you her position, then nothing else in the following 400 pages will.) And yet the work is much more nuanced than one might at first expect. Waxman maintains a clear position, but she won't hesitate to provide counter arguments for specific cases that she feels are difficult to answer. In fact, she at several places provides the arguments against her own inclinations and openly states that these counter arguments are difficult to answer. But make no mistake about it, Waxman feels that, on the whole, the world's greatest museum holdings should, as a rule, be returned to the countries of origin, particularly in cases where the acquisition is of dubious merit, where clear "theft" was the original act to move the antiquity out of its place of origin, and where the originating country can provide a safe and secure resting place for the object. Waxman's is a case difficult to refute. There are counter arguments, and many have merit. Specific cases (and these are, after all, ALL specific cases, aren't they?) can get tangled in detail, and often these cases work through the legal systems of two countries for many decades with little headway. And yet, when one reads how these pieces were moved from their original location to the famous museums of the world, the argument for return continues to stare us in the face. The writing in "Loot" is exceptionally well done. The story itself is fascinating. While we listen to the argument, we are also introduced to all kinds of related subjects: archaeological digs in Egypt, and who started the field of archaeology in Egypt; the history of the Louvre museum, the Met, and the British Museum; and more. It's a book worth reading whether you agree with Waxman, or not. The amount of research that went into the book is impressive, and much of it is research that the layman would never normally have the opportunity to explore and consider. I rate this text five stars for all these reasons, and even if you disagree with Waxman, you might find it difficult not to do so, either.

Think about the current placement of the Rosetta Stone. It was discovered in Egypt by Napoleon's army in 1799. Then the French army capitulated to the British, with the stipulation that all the specimens uncovered by the savants who accompanied Napoleon had to be turned over. The stone was eventually transferred to England, and has been prominent within the British Museum ever since. While the French and English scuffled and argued over its ownership, no one was asking the Egyptians what they thought. Perhaps the Egyptians didn't really care much; it took the scholarship of the French to start the still unending interest in Egyptology. But the Egyptians care now, or at least some of them do. Why should the Rosetta Stone be so far away from its home and from its context? Why should it not be returned, since the nation of its origin was never consulted about "donating" it? The Rosetta Stone is just one artifact mentioned in _Loot: The Battle Over the Stolen Treasures of the Ancient World_ (Times Books) by Sharon Waxman. The author is a journalist with expertise in Middle East studies, and places the acquisition of such treasures within the history of the nationalism and colonial reach of the expanding powers starting at the end of the eighteenth century and continuing to the present. The present, however, is especially complicated. Current nations presiding over their ancient troves would like to recover what they have lost, and some of them are making it happen, using "lawsuits and criminal prosecution, public embarrassment, and bare-knuckled threats." Since this is a story of world history and culture, it touches us all, and Waxman has provided an exciting account that pays close attention to all sides of the issues as the controversy enters a new phase. Regarding finds of previous centuries, there are few disputes in which the feelings of both sides have such strong and comprehensible arguments to support them. Those who feel that treasures, like the Rosetta Stone, ought to stay just where they now maintain that these are not artifacts that belong to a region, but are part of the history of all humankind. The great museums have plenty of visitors, so that the objects get appreciated and the lands from which they were taken reap increased interest and tourist visits. The museums have staff and security to take care of the finds. The opposing view is that objects of ancient history are best appreciated in the region of their own culture; a concentration of such objects found in one region could easily be displayed in good museums not far from where the treasure was found. The context with the other objects could be unbroken. Other cultures ripping out the treasures and taking them away steal the soul and history of a nation, a link between present and past vital for national identity. A good deal of Waxman's book has to do with the Elgin Marbles, the pieces of the Acropolis Lord Elgin took two centuries ago and which have prid

Sharon Waxman has written a remarkable book. With skill and insight, she takes the reader inside the world's great museums and through the sordid antiquities market. She poses difficult questions and uncovers uncomfortable truths, but without rancor and with a reporter's attention to nuance. "Loot" also never lags as it hopscotches from Europe to the Middle East to the United States. I couldn't put it down--and I certainly will never look at the Louvre or the Met the same way again.