By Sharon Wu Read original article at NYULOCAL.com
March 27th, 2012
The latest art world custody battle is currently being waged between Sotheby’s in New York and the Cambodian government.
Last Saturday, Sotheby’s pulled a sculpture from an auction hours before the auction was set to take place, because Cambodia, as a country, claimed ownership.
The Cambodian government alleged that the statue was stolen from a historical site during the turbulent war years and, therefore, rightfully belongs to Cambodia. Valued at $2-3 million and estimated to be over a thousand years old, this is artifact is no light matter.
The sculpture was commissioned by Jayavarman IV, an 8th century Angkor emperor. It stands at five feet tall and weighs 250 pounds. The size and quality of the piece is directly correlated to the prestige of the person who commissioned it.
Titled the “Khmer Athlete,” the sculpture depicts an athlete poised in a battle stance. The sculpture itself is disconnected from its base, which is still located in Cambodia. It was originally found at Koh Ker, a former capital city located 60 miles away from the famous Angkor Wat complex. This statue is considered to be “one of the great achievements of Khmer art,” according to the auction pamphlet.
The sculpture, which currently still resides at Sotheby’s, is one of two identical pieces. The twin is on display at the Norton Simon Museum in Pasadena, California.
From 1975 to 1979, Cambodia experienced an unimaginable genocide of astronomical proportions. An estimated 1.67 million died from forced labor, famine, disease, torture, systematic murder, political purges, and ethnic cleansing. The years before and after this time period were also marked by war and bloodshed. The Cambodian government believes that the statue was stolen during this chaotic era.
Sotheby’s claimed that the piece was sold by a “noble European lady” who purchased the piece in 1975 from Spink & Son, a London-based antiques dealer. Spink & Son no longer possesses company records on the artifact. Sotheby’s has found no proof that the artifact was acquired illegally.
In 1993, the Cambodian government passed a law that nationalized all cultural heritage, but it’s believed that the statue was taken long before then. Therefore, Sotheby’s maintains that the exporters were not violating any limitations.
However, lawyers have also uncovered a 1925 French colonial law that stipulated that all Cambodian artifacts are a “part of the national domain” and are “the exclusive property of the state.” The law remained, even after Cambodia won its independence in 1953.
Sotheby’s has invited the Department of Homeland Security to open investigations in order to determine exactly when the piece was stolen. The Cambodian government hasn’t yet demanded the statue back and is hoping the settle the case quietly through negotiations.
The Cambodian government is asking Sotheby’s to negotiate a deal with a private collector, who has offered $1 million for the sculpture and intends to donate it to Cambodia as charity. The private collector is Hungarian diplomat Istvan Zelnik, who specializes in Southeast Asian art and houses his collection in a museum in Budapest. This type of exchange is becoming increasingly common amongst poorer countries seeking to reclaim artifacts that they cannot afford to buy themselves.
It’ll be difficult for the Cambodian government to legally claim ownership of the piece. First, international authorities and American civil courts would have to agree that Cambodia’s 1925 nationalization law is valid. Then, Cambodia would have to prove that the piece was indeed stolen after 1925, which would also be difficult although probably possible. If the law is proven valid, then the Norton Simon twin may be questioned as well.
This case is yet another instance of the age-old debate of art ownership. While Cambodia’s defense will be difficult to validate, it may benefit from the sympathies evoked from its recent war history. If the “Khmer Athlete” was indeed stolen during this time of turmoil, it may be emotionally difficult for anyone to keep the statue from Cambodia.
March 27th, 2012
The latest art world custody battle is currently being waged between Sotheby’s in New York and the Cambodian government.
Last Saturday, Sotheby’s pulled a sculpture from an auction hours before the auction was set to take place, because Cambodia, as a country, claimed ownership.
The Cambodian government alleged that the statue was stolen from a historical site during the turbulent war years and, therefore, rightfully belongs to Cambodia. Valued at $2-3 million and estimated to be over a thousand years old, this is artifact is no light matter.
The sculpture was commissioned by Jayavarman IV, an 8th century Angkor emperor. It stands at five feet tall and weighs 250 pounds. The size and quality of the piece is directly correlated to the prestige of the person who commissioned it.
Titled the “Khmer Athlete,” the sculpture depicts an athlete poised in a battle stance. The sculpture itself is disconnected from its base, which is still located in Cambodia. It was originally found at Koh Ker, a former capital city located 60 miles away from the famous Angkor Wat complex. This statue is considered to be “one of the great achievements of Khmer art,” according to the auction pamphlet.
The sculpture, which currently still resides at Sotheby’s, is one of two identical pieces. The twin is on display at the Norton Simon Museum in Pasadena, California.
From 1975 to 1979, Cambodia experienced an unimaginable genocide of astronomical proportions. An estimated 1.67 million died from forced labor, famine, disease, torture, systematic murder, political purges, and ethnic cleansing. The years before and after this time period were also marked by war and bloodshed. The Cambodian government believes that the statue was stolen during this chaotic era.
Sotheby’s claimed that the piece was sold by a “noble European lady” who purchased the piece in 1975 from Spink & Son, a London-based antiques dealer. Spink & Son no longer possesses company records on the artifact. Sotheby’s has found no proof that the artifact was acquired illegally.
In 1993, the Cambodian government passed a law that nationalized all cultural heritage, but it’s believed that the statue was taken long before then. Therefore, Sotheby’s maintains that the exporters were not violating any limitations.
However, lawyers have also uncovered a 1925 French colonial law that stipulated that all Cambodian artifacts are a “part of the national domain” and are “the exclusive property of the state.” The law remained, even after Cambodia won its independence in 1953.
Sotheby’s has invited the Department of Homeland Security to open investigations in order to determine exactly when the piece was stolen. The Cambodian government hasn’t yet demanded the statue back and is hoping the settle the case quietly through negotiations.
The Cambodian government is asking Sotheby’s to negotiate a deal with a private collector, who has offered $1 million for the sculpture and intends to donate it to Cambodia as charity. The private collector is Hungarian diplomat Istvan Zelnik, who specializes in Southeast Asian art and houses his collection in a museum in Budapest. This type of exchange is becoming increasingly common amongst poorer countries seeking to reclaim artifacts that they cannot afford to buy themselves.
It’ll be difficult for the Cambodian government to legally claim ownership of the piece. First, international authorities and American civil courts would have to agree that Cambodia’s 1925 nationalization law is valid. Then, Cambodia would have to prove that the piece was indeed stolen after 1925, which would also be difficult although probably possible. If the law is proven valid, then the Norton Simon twin may be questioned as well.
This case is yet another instance of the age-old debate of art ownership. While Cambodia’s defense will be difficult to validate, it may benefit from the sympathies evoked from its recent war history. If the “Khmer Athlete” was indeed stolen during this time of turmoil, it may be emotionally difficult for anyone to keep the statue from Cambodia.
1 comment:
These statues are King Jayarvarman...
Post a Comment