Cleveland Museum of Art returns statue linked to Bubon

Source:
Cleveland Museum of Art

The Cleveland Museum of Art has agreed that the bronze figure acquired in 1986 will be returned to Türkiye. Scientific tests on soil samples appear to confirm that the figure was in fact found at Bubon and thus formed part of a series of imperial statues. For many years the headless statue was presented as a representation of the emperor Marcus Aurelius.

The Manhattan DA presented this account of the looting:

In the 1960s, individuals from a village near Bubon began plundering a Sebasteion, an ancient shrine with monumental bronze statues of Roman emperors and selling those looted antiquities to smugglers based in the coastal Turkish city of Izmir. Working with Switzerland-based trafficker George Zakos and New York-and-Paris-based trafficker Robert Hecht, they unlawfully removed the looted antiquities from Türkiye, transporting them to Switzerland or the United Kingdom, and then onward to the United States or other European destinations. Once the statues were in the United States, New York-based dealers such as Jerome Eisenberg’s Royal-Athena Galleries and the Merrin Gallery funneled the stolen Bubon bronzes into museum exhibitions and academic publications thereby laundering the pieces with newly crafted provenance. As the Bubon pieces graced the pages of exhibition catalogues and academic publications, the reputational value of the institutions who displayed the Bubon pieces increased and the financial value of the statues grew.

George Zakos was linked to the Lydian silver treasure that was returned to Türkiye by New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art. Zakos also handled the Sion Treasure that was acquired by Dumbarton Oaks, and three terracotta antefixes in the Metropolitan Museum of Art that appear to come from the Panionion on Mykale in Türkiye (1992.36.1; 1992.36.2; 1992.36.3).

The research of Dr Elizabeth Marlowe on the Bubon material is acknowledged by the Manhattan DA. 

Press release:

Cleveland Museum of Art: Cleveland Museum of Art and District Attorney of New York Reach Agreement on Draped Male Figure (the Philosopher) (February 14, 2025).

Manhattan DA: Manhattan DA’s Office Announces Repatriation of Marcus Aurelius Statue to the People of Türkiye (February 14, 2025)

| |

Another Bubon bronze head likely to be repatriated

It appears that a bronze head acquired by the J. Paul Getty Museum from Nicolas Koutoulakis has been removed from display and appears to be returning to Türkiye (Adam Schrader, "The Getty Museum Returns an Ancient Bronze Head to Turkey", Artnet April 24, 2024). The head had featured in the Fire of Hephaistos exhibition (1996) no. 44: the find-spot was stated as "Reported to be from Ibecik (ancient Bubon in Lycia) in Turkey". Arielle Kozloff had earlier listed the statue among the Bubon pieces in The Bulletin of the Cleveland Museum of Art (1987).

This will put further pressure on the Cleveland Museum of Art in their attempt to disassociate a headless bronze statue from its suggested link with Bubon and its identification with the emperor Marcus Aurelius. Incidentally, the Cleveland statue was illustrated in the Fire of Hephaistos catalogue (cat. 54, fig. 2): "... possibly Marcus Aurelius ... Reported to be from Ibecik (ancient Bubon in Lycia)."

| |

Bubon: More Returning Sculptures

Line drawing of part of the base in the Sebasteion at Bubon, Türkiye with portrait statues of Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus at the appropriate positions. Note: the figures are not to scale.

Christopher Chippindale and I drew attention to the imperial bronzes associated with the Sebasteion at Bubon in Turkey back in 2000: discussion of this group can be traced back to the 1970s. The looting of this space seems to have taken place in the early 1960s. It now seems that the (headless) portrait of Marcus Aurelius as a philosopher will be returned from the Cleveland Museum of Art and will be reunited with the portrait of Lucius Verus from the Shelby White and Leon Levy collection: the pair were originally displayed, appropriately, next to each other. They will join the Lipson statue of Septimius Severus that was seized from New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art. Other pieces include the head of Caracalla that had been displayed at Fordham University. 

Elizabeth Marlowe ("Bronze Roman statue, believed to have been looted from Turkey, seized from Cleveland Museum of Art", The Art Newspaper 31 August 2023) has pointed out that Cleveland has played down both the identification with Marcus Aurelius and the association with Bubon. The same phenomenon is being played out with the bronze statue in the Houston Museum of Fine Arts. The online entry now notes: 

It was associated throughout the 1970s and 1980s, by some scholars, with other bronzes that had been found near Bubon, Turkey. However, that opinion was ultimately disproved in 1993. The Houston sculpture was acquired in 1962; the excavations at Bubon commenced two years after, in 1964.

The start of the illicit activity at Bubon may well have preceded 1962 and the museum would be sensible to be cautious.

It appears that a portrait of a woman from the Worcester Art Museum (inv. 1966.67) has also been removed from display. It was reported to have been found 'in south-western Anatolia'. Andrew Oliver associated this find with Bubon. 

| |

Bubon and North American Collections

Two Roman imperial statues associated with Bubon in Türkiye appear to be in a state of flux. The statue of Marcus Aurelius that was acquired by the Cleveland Museum of Art in 1986 (inv. 1986.5) and had earlier been in the Lipson collection is no longer on public view in spite of being central to the classical galleries. The head of Caracalla, formerly in the collection of Norbert Schimmel, and acquired by New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art in 1989 (inv. 1989.281.80) has disappeared from the museum's website, a fate normally indicating that it has been deaccessioned. 

Are these two about to join the statues of Lucius Verus formerly in the Shelby White collection, and the Septimius Severus formerly in the Lipson collection? If so, will Bubon associated statues from other North American and European museums be reunited in Türkiye?

Such returns indicate that material that surfaced prior to 1970 is now subject to investigation.

| |

The Bubon statue in the Cleveland Museum of Art

Imperial bronze in Cleveland Museum of Art
Source: Open Access

In 1986 the Cleveland Museum of Art acquired a bronze statue (Inv. 1986.5). It had previously resided in the collection of Mr & Mrs Charles Lipson of Boston (Mass.). The Lipsons were also the owners of the bronze statue of Lucius Verus that has been returned to Turkey from the Shelby White collection. Both statues are reported to have the same findspot: 'reported to be from Ibecik (ancient Bubon in Lycia), Turkey' (Fire of Hephaistos no. 50; fig. 2 under no. 54). 

Will the Cleveland Museum of Art be contacting Turkish authorities to arrange the return of this statue? 

A discussion of the issues for this statue can be found on Chasing Aphrodite.

| |

Cleveland Museum of Art: material from Latium

Two of the three antiquities returned to Italy from the Cleveland Museum of Art appear to be impasto amphorae with 'spiked handles' of the type that have been found at Crustumerium in Latium. The two pieces were acquired in 1995 (inv. 1995.64–65). 

The third piece is a Near Eastern head pendant (inv. 1994.97). 

| |

Cleveland Museum of Art: further returns to Italy

Etruscan silver bracelets
Gift of Edoardo Almagià
Returned from Cleveland Museum of Art

The Cleveland Museum of Art has returned three further items associated with Edoardo Almagià to Italy. These have been described as ("Valuable artifacts considered stolen being returned to Italy, including items from Cleveland Museum of Art", December 15, 2021 cleveland.com): 

The Cleveland Museum of Art said in a statement that it acquired three items from Almagià in 1994 and 1995, two Roman amphora with spiked handles and a tiny ancient near eastern glass bead in the shape of a head.

Are the 'two Roman amphora with spiked handles' the same as the distinctive impasto ware amphorae with spiked handles from Crustumerium in Latium? Certainly material from Crustumerium is featuring in material returned from other sources.

Back in 2010 the museum was reluctant to reveal what else had been acquired from Almagià (in addition to the pair of silver Etruscan bracelets given by him and Courtney Keep in 1996). 

There does not yet seem to be a press release about the latest returns from Cleveland. Why is there reluctance to be transparent about the objects? 

| |

Fittings from a Roman Chariot

This presentation will explore how the description of objects by museums and in exhibition catalogues can alert researchers to the workings of the antiquities market. It will use a specific case study of four Roman bronzes that are said to have ‘traveled through the art market’ together: two were acquired by the J. Paul Getty Museum, one by the Cleveland Museum of Art, and the fourth by a North American private collection (and subsequently sold to the Getty). Was the movement of these figures fortuitous or does it indicate something more? The scientific study of the corrosion products suggests that they had shared a similar ‘burial environment’. Moreover, the bronzes are linked by the presence of ‘relatively homogenous’ fragments of red brick or tile embedded in their surfaces. What can we infer from the evidence?

Context Matters: Collating the Past

Context Matters is based on the twenty essays contributed to the Journal of Art Crime over its first ten years. They are supplemented by articles and review articles that were published alongside them. The chapters were written as museums in Europe and North America were facing a series of claims on recently acquired objects in their collections in the light of the photographic dossiers that had been seized from dealers in Switzerland and Greece. They engage with some of the recent debates over cultural property that include the Ka Ka Nefer mummy mask currently in the St Louis Art Museum, and the Leutwitz Apollo acquired by the Cleveland Museum of Art. Two of the essays reflect on the recent and controversial metal-detecting finds in England, the so-called Crosby Garrett helmet and the Lenborough Hoard. The volume contributes to the wider discussion about the appropriate due diligence process that should be conducted prior to the acquisition of archaeological material. 

Gill, D. W. J. 2020. Context matters: collating the past. ARCA. ISBN-13: 978-1734302615.

Cleveland Museum of Art: new curator of Greek and Roman Art

Seth Pevnick will be moving from Tampa to the Cleveland Museum of Art where he will be the curator of Greek and Roman Art (Steve Litt, "Cleveland Museum of Art hires Seth Pevnick as ‘profoundly ethical’ curator of ancient Greek and Roman art", cleveland.com 20 December 2018).

One of the acquisitions that will need to be addressed is the "Leutwitz Apollo". The modern history of the monumental bronze does not seem as secure as it has been presented by the museum (see here). It is time for some of the analyses to be made public and open to debate.

The case of the acquisition of the portrait of Drusus Minor is, perhaps, illustrative of the museum's policy towards acquisitions in recent years (see here).

| |

The Leutwitz Apollo: unanswered scientific questions

Michael Bennett's departure from the Cleveland Museum of Art reminds us that he appeared to fail to provide the scientific analysis of the bronze Leutwitz Apollo.

Paul Barford wrote some particularly reflective pieces on the issues here.

My own thoughts on the bronze can be found here.

Perhaps the new curator will release the undisclosed studies.

Getty returns Fleischman Zeus to Italy

Seated Zeus to return to Italy.
Source: MiBACT

The Italian Government has announcted that the Getty Museum has returned a seated Zeus to Italy ("FRANCESCHINI, IL GETTY MUSEUM SIGLA ACCORDO CON L’ITALIA PER LA RESTITUZIONE DELLO ZEUS IN TRONO RIENTRA A NAPOLI STATUA DEL I SECOLO A.C.", press release, 13 June 2017; "The J. Paul Getty Museum and Italian officials announce agreement to return first century B.C. sculpture to Italy", press release, 13 June 2017). The statue is a copy of the great chryselphantine statue of Zeus from Olympia.

The statue was acquired by Barbara and Lawrence Fleischman from Robin Symes in 1987. It was sold to the Getty in 1992 (inv. 92.AA.10), although the published statement only recorded that it had been in a New York private collection [JSTOR].

Jessica Gelt ("Getty agrees to return 1st century BC sculpture to Italy", LA Times, 13 June 2017) notes what the press releases omit:

Getty Museum Director Timothy Potts said the Italian government came into possession of a fragment that it believed joined the sculpture at the Getty. Italian officials tested their theory on a visit to the museum in 2014. 

“The fragment gave every indication that it was a part of the sculpture we had,” Potts said in an interview. “It came from the general region of Naples, so it meant this object had come from there.”

The Fleischman collection formed part of earlier research that I had conducted with Christopher Chippindale (Chippindale, Christopher, and David W. J. Gill. “Material Consequences of Contemporary Classical Collecting.” American Journal of Archaeology, vol. 104, no. 3, 2000, pp. 463–511. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/507226.). The Zeus joins a large number of former Fleischman pieces that have already been returned to Italy (including one piece from the Cleveland Museum of Art).

The Tiberius and the Drusus heads

Tiberius and Drusus. Source: PIASA

Documented collecting histories are important. The portrait heads of Drusus Minor and Tiberius excavated at Sessa Aurunca have parallel histories.

Both passed through the sale of PIASA in Paris on 17-18 March 2003, lot  569, and 29 September 2004, lot 340. Both came from the same source ("Cette tête de même provenance que la tête vendue le 18 Mars 2003 ").

The Drusus was reported to have been purchased by Phoenix Ancient Art, who then sold it to the Cleveland Museum of Art in 2012. It was displayed in the New York exhibition, "IMAGO: Four Centuries of Roman Portraiture", with the information that it had formed part of a 19th century Algerian collection ["Phoenix Ancient Art to Exhibit Collection of Roman Portraits, Unveil Its Newly Renovated New York Gallery", 29 November 2007].

The Drusus appeared in Randy Kennedy's article, "Museum Defends Antiquities Collecting" (originally from the New York Times, 12 August 2012). The article specifically states, "The Cleveland Museum’s new portrait of Drusus Minor has no ironclad record pre-1970". It is noted, "But the museum said it believed its history could be traced back to the late 19th century as the property of a prominent family in Algiers." The source for this collecting history is unstated though was in circulation in 2007. David Franklin, the then director of the Cleveland Museum of Art, was quoted, “We’ve done our due diligence and we feel that both these objects have a pre-1970 provenance” [the other piece was Mayan].

The Tiberius was purchased by the Royal-Athena Galleries and then sold to the US Private Collector. I am told that the private collector returned the head to Italy in January 2017.

It is unclear when the pieces were removed from the Antiquarium in Italy.

I am grateful to Dr Jerome Eisenberg for the additional information and clarification.

The Drusus and Tiberius portraits from Sessa Aurunca

Drusus Minor. Source: Cleveland Museum of Art

The return of the head of Drusus Minor to Italy from the Cleveland Museum of Art has been in part thanks to the diligent research of Giuseppe Scarpati. He has discovered the photographic records of sculptures discovered during the mid-1920s during the excavations of Sessa Aurunca.

The head of Drusus Minor is clearly recognisable from the archive photographs (Scarpati 2008-11: 357, fig. 7, 358 fig. 10). The head passed through PIASA in Paris in 2004, a source that is not without some interest. It was acquired from Phoenix Ancient Art in 2012. (See Gill 2013: 72 for oral histories and objects linked to this dealer, and with a specific mention to the portrait of Drusus.)

David Franklin, the then director of the Cleveland Museum of Art, defended the acquisition of the head at the time. (He resigned from the museum in 2013.) The museum is probably wishing that it had not claimed that the collecting history had been traced back to the 19th century.

The trail of the Drusus portrait had been identified by a companion piece. The head of Tiberius appears to be the one in a North American private collection ("The Magdalene Tiberius")  and published by John Pollini (Pollini 2005; Scarpati 2008-11: 361 figs. 11-14). It was reported to have formed an old French collection in Marseilles dating to the 1960s. It was said to have been found in North Africa (a good reminded of the intellectual consequences of collecting recently surfaced archaeological material). It was acquired by its present proprietors in 2004. The source appears to have been the Royal-Athena Galleries (Art of the Ancient World 15 [2004] no. 24; Scarpati 2014: 33 fig. 9). Will those owners be contacting the Italian authorities in the light of the return of the Drusus portrait?

It is interesting that the (recent) collecting histories of both portraits now do not seem to go back beyond 2004 (i.e. 34 years after the UNESCO Convention). What were their collecting histories immediately prior to 2004?

The Drusus Minor return is merely serving to open up the discussion. Was the Cleveland Museum of Art aware of Scarpati's research prior to the portrait's acquisition?

Now is probably also a good time for the museum staff to revisit the documented collecting history of the Leutwitz Apollo.

Bibliography

Gill, D. W. J. 2013. "Context matters: The Cleveland Apollo goes public." Journal of Art Crime 10: 69-75. [academia.edu]
Pollini, J. 2005. "A new marble head of Tiberius. Portrait typology and ideology." Antike Kunst 48: 55-72. [JSTOR]
Scarpati, G. 2008-11. "Un ritratto di Tiberio da Sessa Aurunca ritrovato note su un probabile ciclo Suessano di statue onorarie Giulio-Claudie." Rendiconti della Accademia di Archeologia Lettere e Belle Arti 75: 345-68. [Academia.edu]
Scarpati, G. 2014. "Il ritratto di Druso minore dal ciclo statuario Giulio-Claudio di Sessa Aurunca." Bollettino d’Arte 24: 29-38. [Academia.edu]

Press Release
"Cleveland Museum of Art to Transfer Roman Sculpture of Drusus Minor to the Republic of Italy", Cleveland Museum of Art April 18, 2017. [press release]
"Il Cleveland Museum of Art restituisce all’Italia una scultura romana di Druso Minore", MiBACT April 18, 2017. [press release]

Cleveland Museum of Art to return portrait of Drusus

Drusus. Source: Cleveland Museum of Art

In 2012 the Cleveland Museum of Art purchased a portrait head of Drusus that was reported to be from "an old Algerian collection" (see earlier report). The head had been purchased from Phoenix Ancient Art.

It has been announced that the head will be returned to Italy (Steven Litt, "Cleveland Museum of Art returns ancient Roman portrait of Drusus after learning it was stolen from Italy in WWII", cleveland.com April 18, 2017). It is now understood that the portrait was excavated at Sessa Aurunca, Campania in the mid-1920s. It appears that the head was stolen from the museum there around 1944.

This now raises questions about the due diligence process surrounding the acquisition as well as other material handled by the same dealer. The curatorial team will no doubt be releasing the basis of their pre-acquisition enquiries.

"There is a far greater awareness of the problem of trafficking in looted antiquities"

I was very struck by Timothy Rub's comments to reporters from The New York Times in the discussion over whether or not North American museums should "repatriate" --- a loaded word? --- antiquities to their countries of origin (Tom Mashberg and Graham Bowley, "Islamic State Destruction Renews Debate Over Repatriation of Antiquities", March 30, 2015). Rub is quoted:

Timothy Rub, director of the Philadelphia Museum of Art and former president of the art museum directors association, said acquisition scandals, including those involving the Getty before Mr. Cuno’s tenure, had put his peers on the defensive when it came to holding on to items. 

He added, however, that “there is a far greater awareness of the problem of trafficking in looted antiquities and the role that American museums can and should play in discouraging this.”

Then in response to a comment by Gary Vikan, former director of the Walters Art Museum in Baltimore, who suggested that antiquities that surface on the "black market" should be "ransomed back".

Mr. Rub said that approach was warranted only in rare cases when “an item was in fact taken out of harm’s way and would be at risk if returned to the country of origin.” 

“That’s when museums and philanthropies and governments should work together,” he said, “to ensure that the item is acquired and cared for and kept safe until it can be returned to its rightful owner.”

Mashberg and Bowley miss a key point here. It was not just the J. Paul Getty Museum that was involved in an "acquisition scandal". There was also the Cleveland Museum of Art where Rub had been director from 2006 to 2009. Indeed Rub was director when it was agreed to return objects (that had been acquired prior to his directorship). Yet he also declined to disclose the collecting histories of the return items (unlike Boston or the Getty). Rub has also had a confused position over the return of antiquities, placing "clear blue water" between himself and James Cuno (see here).

But have we seen major museums working with the governments of countries to see the rightful return of archaeological material? The case of the Ka-Nefer-Nefer mummy mask is a case in point especially now that the internal emails and memoranda have been released.

Have senior museum directors of North American museum appreciated the scale of the problems that have developed over the last 45 years? Perhaps they should read something on the "scandal" that would help them to focus their minds.

Newspaper reports such as this demonstrate that there continues to be a lack of genuine awareness of the problem of trafficking in looted antiquities by some in the North American museum, antiquities market and legal communities.

Cleveland and the Apollo

The latest number of the Journal of Art Crime has appeared. This contains my essay on the so-called Cleveland Apollo.

"The exhibition of the Cleveland Apollo and the thinking behind the publication of Bennett’s book reveal what Roger Bland of the British Museum once described (in a review of James Cuno’s work) as “an example of US cultural imperialism at its worst”. Bennett has reignited the debate and prepared the way for a full and balanced discussion of the so-called Cleveland Apollo at some future managed event at the Cleveland Museum of Art."

• Gill, D. W. J. 2013. "Context matters: The Cleveland Apollo goes public." Journal of Art Crime 10: 69-75.

From Geneva to Antalya: Roman sarcophagus

The Turkish press is reporting that a Roman marble sarcophagus decorated with scenes showing Hercules is likely to be returned to Turkey ("Stolen sarcophagus might return to Turkey", Hurriyet November 9, 2013). It appears that it was found at Perge. The sarcophagus had then passed into the hands of Phoenix Ancient Art in Geneva.

After the examination in Perge, the Swiss prosecutor met with A.Ç., who is imprisoned in Elmalı prison on a separate smuggling charge and is suspected of smuggling the artifact out of Perge. In discussions with the Swiss prosecutor, A.Ç allegedly confirmed that the artifact had been smuggled. 

International legal proceedings began with the aim of repatriating the sarcophagus to Antalya. The case is being closely followed by the Antalya Public Prosecution Office as well as the Turkish Culture and Tourism Ministry and Foreign Ministry. 

According to Turkish officials, legal action against the Phoenix Ancient Art Gallery will be completed by the end of the year, facilitating the return of the sarcophagus to Antalya.

I presume that this is the same sarcophagus noted here in March 2012.

If the sarcophagus is returned to Turkey it will increase the pressure on the Cleveland Museum of Art and the St Louis Art Museum to clarify the collecting histories for the Leutwitz Apollo (CMA) and the Egyptian mummy mask (SLAM).

Cleveland and Phoenix Ancient Art

Last month I raised a question about Michael Bennett's claim (in 2008) that he had a long-standing link with the Aboutaams.

The Cleveland Museum of Art does not appear to publish full collecting histories for its objects either on the web or via its print catalogues. Will CMA now issue a list of all the objects that have been acquired from Phoenix Ancient Art along with their complete collecting histories?

This will demonstrate two things: rigorous due diligence and transparency.

Creating Stories?

One of the points that was made at the ARCA symposium at the V&A yesterday related to the fabrication of collecting histories, sometimes by forging supporting documentation. Richard Ellis suggested that the due diligence process should leave no stone unturned.

As I sat in the audience I kept thinking about the reported collecting history for the Leutwitz Apollo acquired by the Cleveland Museum of Art. How much of it can be authenticated? How far has the museum explored discrepancies?

It is a good story as it is presented. Garden sculpture. Communist attack. Burial in the rubble of the house. Sale to a Dutch dealer.

Does the curatorial team at Cleveland believe it?