Early Bronze Age Research Papers (original) (raw)

Context is paramount. It is only when scientifically conducted excavations recover archaeological materials in their stratigraphic context that valid inferences can be made about the circumstances in which they were buried, about their chronology and about their function.
Unfortunately, however, most of the marble Early Cycladic figurines and vessels, and many other Early Cycladic atrefacts, now kept or exhibited in the world’s museums apart from the state museums of Greece (as well as nearly all those in private collections) are the product of clandestine excavations. Their findspots are unknown. The circumstances of their discovery are lost: in what circumstances they were found, with what materials they were associated at the time of their discovery are not recorded. Consequently they can add little to our knowledge and understanding of the distant Cycladic past. The looting of Cycladic antiquities represents a tragic loss of knowledge.
The looting of the Early Cycladic cemeteries and the subsequent sale of their grave goods, marble figurines in particular, is an aspect of illicit activity which has had a continuous presence in the Cyclades since at least the late 18th century. The need of the great museums in Western Europe to form their collections resulted in the quest for art treasures in Greece. Along with the remains of the classical Greek world other antiquities, including Cycladic marble figurines, although sometimes described as ‘barbarian’ or ‘ugly’, were most welcome.
Early Cycladic sculpture was not greatly esteemed until the early twentieth century. Then, however, the modernist movements, as represented by such sculptors as Picasso, Braque, Brancusi, and Giacometti, created a new aesthetic, in which the striking simplicity of Cycladic sculpture came to be greatly appreciated. From that time these sculptures were no longer regarded as mere curiosities, but as works of art, and began to be priced accordingly. It has, indeed, been argued by Colin Renfrew that all Early Cycladic sculptures of unknown origin, and therefore lacking secure context, which have emerged on the market after the early 20th century, more specifically after the year 1914, should be regarded as of doubtful authenticity. Since that time it is clear that numerous replicas have been produced with the intention to deceive.
Ιt was in Paris in the year 1970 that the UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property was adopted. Although it was not ratified at once by all the participating nations, it has now been very widely ratified and accepted and establishes a number of fundamental principles.
The world’s major museums, guided by the International Council of Museums (ICOM), have now gradually adopted ethical acquisition policies, but some still do not enforce them with rigour. One might have hoped that in the light of the apparent reform in museum ethics, this perspective would be communicated to private collectors, and that demand for unprovenanced Early Cycladic sculpture on the open market would recede. However such is not the case. Auction houses widely considered respectable continue to offer for sale Cycladic antiquities which certainly have no collecting history extending back as far as 1970. The implication must certainly be that these are illicit antiquities, illegally excavated.
When the public sale of illicit antiquities continues in auction houses in London and New York it is clear that the battle against looting is not yet won. Nevertheless, if museums and private collectors would refrain from acquiring any Early Cycladic material which has come to light since 1970, the year of the UNESCO Convention, ongoing looting might be diminished.