Chasing the Lydian Hoard
Author Sharon Waxman digs into the tangle over looted artifacts between the Metropolitan Museum of Art and Turkish government
- By Sharon Waxman
- Smithsonian.com, November 14, 2008, Subscribe
(Page 3 of 5)
We dug in turns for nine or 10 days....On the 10th day we reached the stones, each of which was almost 1.5 meters in height and 80 cms wide....It would be hard for five or six persons to lift one of them. ...We had tried to break the stones with sledgehammers and pokers, but were not successful. I exploded [the main entrance] using black powder.
The looters found a corpse that was, in the main, a pile of dust and a hunk of hair. But the gold and silver objects were undamaged. That one tomb held 125 pieces.
Meanwhile, the treasures purchased by the Met were presented to the museum’s acquisitions committee by Dietrich von Bothmer. It was the time of “don’t ask, don’t tell” when it came to buying unprovenanced treasures. The pieces were unique, and they were exquisite: acorn-shaped pendants along one heavy golden necklace; bracelets with intricately carved lion heads at each end; carefully ribbed and sculpted silver bowls; a silver ewer with the handle in the form of a graceful human figure arching backward. And of course the masterpiece, a tiny golden brooch in the shape of a hippocampus—a horse with wings and a fish’s tail, representing land, water, and air. The horse, barely an inch and a half in height, had three sets of tassels of three hanging, golden braids, each braid ending in an intricate golden ball in the shape of a pomegranate. There was not another like it in the world. The Met paid $1.5 million for the treasures over several years.
Under increasing pressure from the Turks, the Met dragged its feet, trying to head off a legal battle. The Turks tried asking politely, formally requesting the return of the Lydian hoard in July 1986 and sending their consul general to meet with museum officials. Meanwhile, inside the museum, documents later emerged that showed the Met knew full well that the “East Greek” pieces were what von Bothmer described as “the Lydian hoard,” the pieces Turkey had inquired about from the early 1970s forward. Hoving states bluntly in his memoir that everyone knew the stuff was contraband:
Dietrich von Bothmer asked what we should do if any damaging evidence were found that our East Greek treasure had been excavated illegally and smuggled out of Turkey....I was exasperated. “We all believe the stuff was illegally dug up,” I told him....“For Christ’s sake, if the Turks come up with the proof from their side, we’ll give the East Greek treasure back. And that’s policy. We took our chances when we bought the material.”
On May 29, 1987, the Republic of Turkey filed a lawsuit in Manhattan federal court against the Metropolitan Museum of Art, contending that several hundred artifacts had been illegally excavated and illegally exported from the country in the 1960s. This was a spectacularly bold move by a country with no track record in suing major institutions in foreign countries. Would it work? Turkey, represented by the American lawyers Harry Rand and Lawrence Kaye, was betting that the American justice system would judge the evidence fairly. Predictably, the Met filed a motion for dismissal, claiming it was far too late to sue for artifacts it had bought in good faith. But in 1990 Judge Vincent L. Broderick accepted the Turkish position. In pretrial discovery, the Met allowed a team of outside scholars to inspect the treasures for the first time. Among those who came was Kazim Akbiyikoglu of the Usak museum, who gave an affidavit providing the evidence that he had of the treasures’ origin. The Met’s defenses crumbled fairly quickly. Wall paintings were measured and found to fit the gaps in the walls of one tomb. Looters cooperating with the investigation described pieces they had stolen that matched the cache at the Met. The case was covered prominently in the press, and it was beginning to look like a black eye for the museum.
Seeking to salvage things, museum officials tried to negotiate a settlement. Under one plan, the Met would admit that the treasures were Turkish and would propose a kind of joint custody, in which the hoard—now known to be 363 pieces—would spend five years in New York and five years in Turkey. The Turks dispute this version, saying that the offer was to return merely a small portion of the hoard. Around Christmas 1992, the Met’s president, William Luers, and its director, Philippe de Montebello, traveled to Turkey to work out this deal with the minister of culture, Fikri Sa˘glar. But the minister refused to meet with them.
It was game over. Facing an imminent trial, the Met agreed in September 1993 to return the Lydian hoard, explaining in a press release: “Turkish authorities did provide evidence that most of the material in question may indeed have been removed clandestinely from the tombs in the Usak region, much of it only months before the museum acquired it. And second, we learned through the legal process of discovery that our own records suggested that some museum staff during the 1960s were likely aware, even as they acquired these objects, that their provenance was controversial.”
Single Page « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.









Comments (4)
I revisited this page because I am going to Turkey this summer and I would like to see the Lydian Hoard, or what remains of it. So far I have found that it is nearly impossible to get to Usak. If an organized tour goes there I have failed to find it. Google maps indicate that it would take at least six hours to get from Kusadasi to Usak via auto. The Lydian Hoard is located where it can only be seen by the most adventurous travelers. Culturally New Yorkers are as closely related to the Lydians as the Turks. The Turks have located this treasure at a location where no one can view it. Is this really in the interest of history or culture.
Posted by N. R. Lerner on November 24,2009 | 05:26 PM
I am shocked to read such racist and ignorant comments on a site such as this. The citizens of modern day Turkey are a blend of all the peoples who have been there throughout the many thousands of years the land has been there. They are citizens of Turkey, thus they are Turks.
Posted by C Lopez on January 1,2009 | 02:25 PM
The argument by N.R. is hollow and to some extent racist. Yes inded some of the Turks and the original Ottoman ruling class came from Central Asia but they mixed with all the Anotolian People and cultures, in the Anatolian melting pot, fueled by the Islamic Religion and the Ottoman Rule. Today's people living there are inheritors of all that is there. This argument sounds like excluding the Norman's from the English Culture becase they arrived there in 1066 (The first Turkish ruling dynasty Seljucks arrived Anatolia in 1071.
As for the Lydian Treasures, the burglary that occured there is aginst the International law and the UN convention. These people are thieves. It is as simple as that.
Posted by Demir Karsan on December 9,2008 | 12:24 PM
1. Present day Turks have no historical relationship with the ancient Lydians. Turks are descendants of people from Central Asia. Culturally they have no greater relationshp with the Lydian people than New Yorkers. It is not their history that was being stolen. 2. The treasure that was found in the ground at best belongs to the owners of that ground. If the people of Usak were allowed to hire archeologists to excavate the tumuli in the vicinity of Usak and then to sell the artifacts found, the world would know much more about the Lydian culture, the artifacts would be available to more people, and they would be better protected. 3. Artifacts that are over 2000 years old are part of every one's history, not the exclusive cultural property of those who reside where the artifacts are found.
Posted by N. R. Lerner on December 1,2008 | 05:42 PM
D.B. has obviously never visited Turkey, a country where Moslems are the overwhelming majority, and which is replete with beautifully protected spiritual sites from early Christianity as well as synogogues and very early religious sites from other trditions. There is a beautifully protected place that is believed to be the home Mary was brought to by St. John after the crucifiction and the place where she died. Christians have a long history of destroying the spiritual structures of other traditions. Greek temples that were converted into churches were spared in places like Agrigento in Italy. The magnificent mosque in Cordoba, Spain survived because it was converted into a cathedral. It did suffer major reconstruction to accomodate the church's needs. I do believe the United States has quite a history of destroying the "pagan" spiritual places of Native Americans. posted by BGS on 11/25 at 11:30
Posted by Bonney Schaub on November 25,2008 | 11:39 AM