Estimated to be value some $20 million, the greater than six-foot-tall statue is a part of a trove of Roman artifacts originating from the traditional metropolis of Bubon which were prominently displayed at museums round the US for many years. The works have been initially unearthed from an historic shrine through the mid-Twentieth century and subsequently smuggled out of Turkey by illicit antiquities traffickers George Zakos and Robert Hecht, based on an investigation by the Manhattan District Legal professional.
Regardless of revealed analysis connecting them to Bubon and a request from the Turkish authorities in 2012 asking for his or her return, it wasn’t till 2023 that investigators lastly seized dozens of those stolen works, a lot of which have been repatriated. However the statue of Marcus Aurelius remained on the CMA.
In an opinion for Hyperallergic in September 2022, Marlowe referenced the statue’s affiliation with a vacant pedestal in Bubon that bears the etching of Marcus Aurelius’s title.
Its practically three-month run on the CMA follows years of investigation and a lawsuit filed by the CMA in opposition to Manhattan District Legal professional Alvin Bragg.
For greater than a yr, the art work was on the middle of a lawsuit filed by the CMA in opposition to Manhattan District Legal professional Alvin Bragg contesting the work’s place of birth and the identification of its topic, regarded as Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius. In February, after intensive forensic evaluation, soil comparisons, witness interviews, and doc analysis that confirmed the statue had been plundered from Bubon, the CMA lastly surrendered the statue.
Earlier than its repatriation, the statue will stay on view on the CMA for practically three months in a show contextualizing its controversial journey from Bubon to Ohio. The work is introduced alongside 4 panels exploring its creation and iconography, the Bubon archaeological web site, latest scientific evaluation, and the authorized battle and moral debates surrounding its acquisition.
“We see the new display as a positive outcome to a lengthy process and an opportunity to share new knowledge and bid this longtime visitors’ favorite farewell,” Seth Pevnick, the CMA’s curator of Greek and Roman Artwork, instructed Hyperallergic.
The CMA continues to counsel uncertainties across the statue’s identification, referring to the work as “Draped Male Figure, perhaps Marcus Aurelius” (c. 150 BCE–200 CE) based mostly on the likelihood that the statue stood on an uninscribed platform in Bubon relatively than the one bearing the emperor’s title.
A panel contextualizing the authorized and moral controversy now accompanies the statue’s show on the CMA. (photograph by and courtesy Sarah E. Bond)
This closing show of the statue notably acknowledges the essential analysis of Turkish archaeologist Jale İnan, who in 1978 revealed a scholarly article matching the looted artifacts to the Bubon web site.
“It was her publications, starting in 1979, that tied the thefts at Bubon to the statues that were circulating on the American market, including this Philosopher statue,” Marlowe instructed Hyperallergic.
Within the fourth panel of its show, the museum additionally maintains that the “statue had been publicly exhibited in several other institutions in the United States, the seller claimed to be its rightful owner, and the reported modern history of the sculpture met the CMA standards for acquisition.” The textual content additional notes that the CMA had “received no legal challenges to [the statue’s] ownership until 2023,” though Turkey has been requesting its return since 2012.
“Yes, for the 19 years that the statue was on the market, it had been ‘publicly exhibited in several other institutions,’ but there’s a reason none of those other museums had been willing to risk buying it,” Marlowe continued.
“If the ‘reported modern history of the sculpture met the CMA’s standards for acquisition,’ that only reveals how out of step the CMA’s standards were compared to all the other museums that took Inan’s work seriously and said no to documented plunder,” Marlowe stated.
