Xl. ve XVIII. yüzyıllar Xl. to XVIII. centuries iSLAM-TÜRK MEDENiYETi VE AVRUPA ISLAMIC-TURKISH CIVILIZATION AND EUROPE Uluslararası Sempozyum International Symposium

iSAM Konferans Salonu !SAM Conference Hall Xl. ve XVIII. yüzyıllar islam-Türk Medaniyeti ve Avrupa ULUSLARARASISEMPOZYUM 24-26 Kas1m, 2006 ·

• Felsefe - Bilim

• Siyaset- Devlet

• Dil - Edebiyat - Sanat

• Askerlik

• Sosyal Hayat

•Imge fl,cm. No:

Tas. No:

Organizasyon: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı islam Araştırmaları Merkezi (iSAM) T.C. Diyanet işleri Başkanlığı Marmara Üniversitesi ilahiyat Fakültesi

© Kaynak göstermek için henüz hazır değildir. 1 Not for quotation.

,.1' Xl. ve XVIII. yüzyıllar

Uluslararası Sempozyum

DIFFERING ATTITUDES OF A FEW EUROPEAN SCHOLARS AND TRAVELLERS TOWARDS THE REMOVAL OF ARTEFACTS FROM THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE

Fredrik THOMASSON•

The legitimacy of removal of artefacts from the Ottoman Empire during the Iate 181h and early 191h century was already debated by contemporary observers. The paper presents a few Swedish scholars/travellers and their views on the dismemberment of the , exeavation of graves ete. in the Greek and Egyptian territories of the Empire. These scholars are often very critica! and their opinions resemble to a great extent many of the positions in today's debate. This is contrasted with views from representatives from more in:fluential countries who seem to have fewer qualms about the whotesale removal of objects. The possible reasons for the difference in opinions are discussed; e.g. how the fact of being from a sınaller nation with less negotiating and economic power might influence the opinions of the actors. The main characters are Johan David Akerblad (1763-1819) orientalist and classical scholar, the diplomat Erik Bergstedt (1760-1829) and the language scholar Jacob Berggren (1790-1868). Their views are contrasted with the testimony of Charles Robert Cockerell (1788 -1863) who exeavates two important temples and sells remains from them to Münich and London.

Introduction My aim in this paper is to illustrate a few individual attitudes towards the acquirement of artefacts by W estem European individuals/institutions in the Ottoman Empire. The period discussed is the Iate 18th and the beginning of the 19th century. 1 I will not enter the issue of the legality or morality of removal , or the issues canceming restitutian of artefacts now in W estem museums and collections to the countries of origin. Within art history, history, archaeology and law the debate is lively, also treating many other fields of cultural property issues, such as the restitutian of objects to aboriginal populations.2 What I will show and try to discuss is rather what a few individuals, contemporary to the act of removal, have to say. I will present a few such Swedish travellers/scholars ın contraposition to an English artist/architect without sustaining that they are

European Uh.iversity Institute, , Italy. I have chosen to use the word "removal" instead of "looting", "plunder" ete. as to not immediately give a moral tinge to the issue. 2 The debate can be followed in e.g. International Journal of Cultural Property. A bibliography is found at: http://wings.buffalo.edu/anthropology/Documents/lootbib.shtml 320 f~ltim-TurkMedeniyeti ve Avrupa

representative for their nations of origin. Whatever the legal and moral issues of today, what interests us here is the perception of participants and contemporary observers. Many of the positions of today's debate were already present in the contemporary discussions on the removal and selling of ancient artefacts from sites in the Ottoman Empire. Cases Johan David kerblad Johan David Hikerblad (Stockholm 1763-Rome 1819) spent several years in during the 1780s and 90s, first as a translator at the Swedish embassy, later as Legation Secretary. He travelled widely in the Eastern Mediterranean; in , Turkey, the Middle East and Northern AfiJca. According to many testimonies he spoke Arabic, Turkish and a number of other languages, his language proficiency was such that he could travel in disguise being taken for an Inhabitant of the Ottoman Empire. He published on the Demotic part of the Rosette inscription in 1802~and became known as one of the precursors of Champollion in the decipherment of the hieroglyphs. Hikerblad is often critical towards the "robbers" in both publications and unpublished correspondence. He is especially fierce when it comes to the dismemberment of the Parthenon. In 1811 he writes in a publication on Greek inscriptions:* "The grand staircase, which leads there, was discovered some years ago by Lord Aberdeen, a small gain that cannot cancel the memory of all the wrongs, that another English, Lord Elgin, did to the monuments of ." He elaborates in an 1816 letter to a Swedish acquaintance that has seen the sculptures in London: "The marbles you have seen in London and which were barbarously taken from Greece by Lord Elgin have beeh bought by the English government and shall without doubt be placed somewhat more decently than how you found them. Indeed, you are perfectly right in saying that it would have been better to leave them where they were taken. The damage that the villainous Lord has done is irreparable and even his compatriots that have visited Athens after him have sworn to relegate this man to public despise and loathing. You might have seen Childe Harold by Lord Byron where he is treated as deserved."

3 * kerblad, Johan David, Lettre szrr I 'inscription 6gyptienne de Rosette, Paris 1802. All translations are made by me; the quotations are given in the endnotes in their respective original languages. Italics and underliningg are those of the original texts. 4 "La grandiosa scalinata, che vi conduce, b stata scoverta, alcuni anni fa, dal Lord Aberdeen; picciol bene, che non pul, scancellar la memoria di tutto il male, che un'altro inglese, Lord Elgin, ha fatto ai monumenti d'Atene." kerblad, Johan David, Sopra due laminette di bronzo trovate ne' contomi di Atene. DissertmaZIonedim membro onorario dell 'AccademiaLibera d2Ircheologia di Roma, Rome 1811. "Les marbres que vous avez vue d Londres et dont le barbarie de Lord Elgin a spolit la grhce, ont 6tt achetb par le gouvernement anglais qui sans-doute les fera placer un peu plus decemment que vous ne les avez trouv6s. Au vkritC, vous avez parfaitement raison, Monsieur, de dire .qulon auroit mieux fait de les laisser: ou on les a pris. Le d6gilt qu'a fait ce vilain Lord est irrtmediable, et ses Freçlrik Thomasson 321

The almost commonplace critique of Lord Elgin is supported by a reference to Lord Byron, one of the most outspoken critics of the removal of antiquities. Akerblad has copied the relevant passages of Byron' s work in his notebooks. 6 Akerblad is als~ a collector on a small scale which creates interesting contradictions. W e know little about his own collections; he sametimes refers in lerters to small objects such as inscriptions and statuettes in his possession. He spent his last years in Rome in penury and we know that he was obliged to seli his books to survive. At the time of his death very little of value was in his possession. Objects were also left in Stockholm but w ere sold abroad after his death and no inventory of the calleetion has been found. On his trips in the Empire he buys manuscripts and tries to acquire other types of artefacts. In his visit of the Troad in 1792 he attempts to acquire a bas-relief: "I had a big slab of marble taken away, which had a bas-relief of a beautifully draped woman on one side. I think that it was a part of a metope from a Doric temple. I had the stone brought during the night to the garden of the Aga of Bounar-Baschi, where it was left lying as the Aga would not give me the permission to take it with me. When I in the year of 1797 came back to I found my stone in the same place where I left it, but it was knocked over and lying with the bas-relief towards the ground so it would not draw the attention oftravelers."7

Other travellers have noted a similar reliefin the Ağa's garden but it is not clear if it is the same.8 On his fırst trip to the Troad Akerblad alsomakes a copy of the Sigeion inscription9 which Lord Elgin later takes to Britain. There is little information on Akerblad's sojourn in in 1787. He did buy a small mummy he presented as a gift to the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences in Stockholm in 1790. 10 There are also examples of how Akerblad in a very modest way takes part in the dealing of antiquities while residing in Rome in 1809-1819. An obvious explanation to why he is not trading might be the lack of capital. He often complains

compatriotes meme que ont vis ite Athenes depuis, ont voue cet ho mm e a 1' execration et au mepris public. Vous avez peut-etre vue le Childe Harold de Lord Byron ou Lord Elgin est traite comme ille merite." Letter from Akerblad to L.J. von Röök. 2 August 1816. National Archives, Stockholm. Savstaholmssamlingen II. 94. Brev till hovintendenten L.J. von Röök 1796-1866. 6 V at. Lat. 9785, Vatican Library, Rome. 7 "Einen grossen Marmorblack liess ich wegnehmen, der auf der einen Seite mit einem Basrelief verziert war, welches eine schöne drapirte Frau vorstellte. Ich glaube, class es zu einer Metope eines dorischen Tempels gehörte. Ich liess den Stein in der Nacht in den Garten des Aga von Bounar­ Baschi bringen, wo er liegen gebliebten is, da der Aga nicht zugeben wollte, class ich ihn mit mir nahme. Als ich im J. 1797 wieder nach Troja kam, fand ich meinem Stein an derselben Stelle wieder, wo ich ihn gelassen hatte, aber auf die Basre1iefseite gestürzt, um nicht die Aufi:nerksamkeit der Reisenden auf sich zu ziehen." Akerblad in C.G. Lenz's translation and aclaptation of J.B. Lechevalier: Reise nach Troas ader Gemah/de derEben von Troja in ihrem gegenwiirtigen Zustande vom Bürger Lechevalier, Altenburg und Erfurt 1800, p. 230. 8 Cook, J.M.,'The Troad: an archaeological and topographical study, Oxford 1973, p. 146. 9 V at. Lat. 9784, Vatican Library, Rome. The inscription is now in the , inv. number: BM GR 1816.6-10.107. lO Minutes 4 August 1790, The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Stockholm. The mummy is presently exhibited at the M edi terranean Museum in Stockholm, inv. number: NME 1 lA. 322 İ s 1l ii m - Tü r k M e d e n i y e t i v e A v r up a about economical problems on his trips and during his permanencies abroad, both in the diplamatic service and as a private scholar. Stili, he does seem to treat the whole antique business with a certain irony describing the Roman scene in a letter to Sebastiano Ciampi in 1815: "[ ... ] the English milordi [ ... ] all walking around with their servants carrying vases under their arms, leaving the U ggeri, Visconti, Guattani and all that bunch of antiquarians with dry mouths."11

It is of course diffıcult to distil a clear position from Akerblad's enunciations. Almost two decades passed between trying to remove the metope and the critica! quotation from 1811 on the Parthenon dismemberment. These were also years of growth in the trade of antiquities from the Eastem Mediterranean. It seems that sınaller objects, especially those that already have lost their context are legitimate objects of acquisition in a wholly different way than actual cutting down and destruction of existing monuments. Some kind ofhierarchy could thus be constructed. The main problem for Akerblad seems to be the lack of documentation during the search for objects to sell. Akerblad, ina publication from the year 1800, is scathing in his critique against Louis-François-Sebastien Fauvel 1753 - 1838, artİst and art agent that spent several decades in Athens: "No one has destroyed more grave mounds then the French painter Fauvel. He has excavated almost all in the vicinity of Athens, Marathon and other areas, amongst others the one on the road to the harbour in , the one the old ascribed to the Amazon Antiope that Pausanias talks about. The worst thing about it is that Fauvel has not given us the slightest notice about the remarkable items found in these venerable moiıuments, and that you don't even know what has become of the objects, which partly have been sent to Choiseul, whose collecti~ns have been scattered since his emigration. Fauvel has told me that he will give such ihformation in a memoir on the excavations he has done for the National Institute, ofwhich he isa member."12 Akerblad recognises that the loss of context of the artefacts found severely impairs the quest for further knowledge. The digs are more resembling grave-robbing ll "[ ... ] i milordi Inglesi [ ... ] giranda ognuno di essi col servitore di piazza, e coi vasi sotto il braccio, lasciando colla bocca asciutta gli uggeri, i visconti, i guattani e tuttiı. quella schiera antiquaria." Letter from Akerblad to Sebastiano Ciampi, 2 February 1815. The RoyalAcademy ofLetters, History and Antiquities, Stockholm, Sebastiano Ciampis samling, Acc 1828. 12 ''Niemand hat mehr alte Grabhügel zerstört, als der franz. Malıler Fauvel. Er hat fast aile aufgraben lassen, welche in der Nachbarschaft von Athen, Marathan und anderwiirts liegen, unter andem den Grabhügel auf dem Weg zuın Piraischen Hafen, welchen diAlten der Amazone Antiope beylegten, und von welchem Pausanias spricht. Das Schlimmste bey der Sache İst, dass Fauvel uns nicht die mindeste Notiz von den in diesen ehrwürdigten Denkmalıler gefundenen Merkwürdigkeiten gegeben hat, und man weiss nicht einınal, was aus den selben geworden İst, di zuın Theil an Choİseul geschickt worden, dessen Sammlungen seİt seiner Auswanderung zerstreut worden sind. Fauvel hat mir gesagt, er sey entschlossen von seinen Nachgrabungen dem Nationalinstitut, dessen Mitglied er İst, in einem Memoire Rechenschaft zu geben." Akerblad in C.G. Lenz's translation ofLechevalier: Reise nach Troas ader Gemiihlde derEben von Troja in ihrem gegenwiirtigen Zustande vom Bürger Lechevalier, Altenburg und Erfurt 1800, p. 232. Fredrik Thomasson 323

than archaeology. The found artefacts are either kept by Fauvel, put on the market or directly acquired by Fauvel's patron count Choiseul-Gouffier, pre-revolutionary France's arnbassader at the Porte, who instructed Fauvel to: "Take everything you can, do not neglect to loot in Athens, or in its territory, everything which is lootable [ ... ]. Spare neither the dead nor the living."13 Charles Robert Cockerell

Charles Robert Cockerell (London ı 788- London ı863), an architect and artist that during his "" managed to excavate two important temples and remove sculptures and architectural elements. Together with his colleague-s he sells the spoils to the highest bidder at the isiand of Zante (Zakynthos ), the first auction w on by the prince of Bavaria and the second sale by the government of the United Kingdom. He has written about the ı 8 ı ı finding of the important sculptures in an almost picaresque fashion: "Full of these bright anticipations, a party of four, consisting of Baron Haller, Messrs. Foster and Lynckh, and the author, determined, in April, ı811, to pay a lengthened visit to the isiand of JEgina, for the purpose of exploring the Temple of Zeus Panhellenius-a monument which, as they knew, from its reputed antiquity and its extraordinary preservation, presented to the antiquarian and the artist an object not inferior in interest to any edifice existing in Greece. Accordingly, having spent the evening with Lord Byron in pouring out libations in propitiation of his horneward voyage to England, to reap the rich harvest of fame which awaited his return, they left Pirreus just after midnight, and arrived at break of day under the Panhelleman Mount."14 Both his posthumously published diaries 15 and the cited publication are fascinating in the description of the practice of archaeology and the life of the "international community" in Ottoman Greece. An example is his observation, slightly ironic as it may seem to us today: "April ı ı th.-Lord Byron embarked to-day on the transport (which is carrying Lord Elgin's Marbles) for ."16 What interests us is the discussion on ownership and the legitimacy of the removal of the sculptures. In his own account there seem to be little hesitation in stating that the spoils were smuggled out of the Empire with no formal permission: "It could scarcely perhaps be expected that the isianders would quietly resign their possession of these treasures, however little able they might be to appreciate their worth; and indeed their transport from JEgina was not accomplished without much

13 "Enlevez tout ce que vous pourrez, ne negligez aucune occasion de piller dans Athenes ou dans son territoire tout ce qu'il y a de pillable [... ]. N'epargnez ni les morts ni les vivants." Letter from Choiseul-Gouffier to Fauvel (no date given) cited in Legrand, P.E., 1897, "Biographie de Louis­ François-Sebastien Fauvel. Antiquaire et Consul (1753-1838)", Revue archeologique, 1897, p. 57. 14 Cockerell, eharles Robert, The Temples of Jupiter Panhellenius at .!Egina, and ofApollo Epicurius at Bass ce near Phigaleia in , London 1860, p. viü. 15 Cockerell, Charles Robert, Travels in southern Europe and the Levant 1810-1817, London 1903, reprinted London 1999. 16 Ibid. p. 48. 324 İ~liim-Türk Medeniyeti ve Avrupa address, and in spite of many diffıculties. What the Archons chiefly feared was the vengeance of the Capitan Pasha, to whom they were personally responsibi e, and whose appanage lEgina was at that time, in common with all the islands of the Archipelago. But their apprehensions were at length quieted with a present of money; and the precious treasures were transported to Athens in the fırst instance. The Turkish authorities at Athens, however, were no less to be feared than those of lEgina; and it was accordingly resolved, for their better security, to transport them to Zante."17 Cockerell published his finds at Aegina almost 50 years after the sculptures were removed. He does his outmost to prove that he was in no way responsible for the fact that the sculptures were sold to Bavaria and not to his native country. Nothing is said about the legitimacy of possible grievances of the local populations, the Ottoman authorities or the fledging Greek nation. The competition between the European powers was clear at the moment of the 1auction at Zante and maybe even more so later in the century when Cockerell publishes his account. At in the Peloponnesus things go better; the spoils reach the "right" country: "Scarcely had the sculptures been collected, and safely embarked on board a vessel provided at Navarino, when a change of government took place; the Vizier, Vili Pasha, was superseded by another, who sent his janissaries with a protest against their transportation; but he was too Iate. The precious fragments were already on their way to Zante, where they remained until their final sale. This took place in the following year in favour of the English Government, by whom they were purchased for the sum of 60,000 dollars, and they now form one of the most splendid omaments of our British 'Museum."18 This is mirrored in British secondary literature. In a history of the Society of Antiquarians of London ofwhich Cockerell was a member Joan Evans writesin 1956: "Cockerell had German collea&Ues at Aegina, and the spoils of the Temple went to Munich through the stupidity of British of:ficials. The Bassae sculptures duly reached the British Museum"19 and Cockerell's biographer in 1974: "Having discovered and even owned for a short time the fırst major examples of Late-Archaic sculpture [Aegina] known to the modem world, Cockerell was fortunate enough to mak e a discovery of similar magnitude [Bassae] in the following year."20 The Aegina sculptures are tak en to Rome where· the Danish sculptor Bertel Thorwaldsen restores them before they are exhibited irr ·the· Glyptothek in Munich. Akerblad who knows both Cockerell and Thorwaldsen mentions the fınd in a letter to Sebastiano Ciampi in but does not comment on the legitimacy of the removal:

17 Cockerell, Charles Robert, The Ternp/es ofJupiter Panhellenius at /Egina, and ofApo !lo Epicurius at Bassce near Phigaleia in Arcadia, London 1860, p. ix. 18 Ibid. p. 44. 19 Evans, Joan, A History ofthe Society ofAntiquaries, Oxford 1956, p. 200. 20 WatJillı, David, The life andworkofC.R. Cockerell, London 1974, p. 12. Freçlr k Thomasson 325

"[Cockerell] who was so lucky in his excavations on the isiand of Egina in the temple of Giove panelleno and in Arcadia in the temple of Apolle in Sigalia. All the statues that stood in the Aeto, that is the tympanum of the first temple, are now in Rome; really marvelou§ examples of ancient art."21 Jacob Berggren and Erik Bergstedt Jacob Berggren (Krokstad 1790 - Skallvik 1868) was chaplain at the Swedish embassy in Constantinople and ended up travelling extensively in the Empire during his posting 1819-1823. He covered much of the same territory as Akerblad and refers to him several times in his three-volume travelogue published 1826-28. When he visits the form er site of the Sigeion inscription he records the complaint of the local Greek priest: "I slept in the village of Cap Janischari, at the house of an old Greek priest. He much lamented the loss of the Sigeian bas-reliefthat was removed by Lord Elgin with the help of a firman and a bujurdi or additicnal orders from the govemer of the Dardanelles, Hadim Oglu, in the year 1799. This marble earned pastar laci considerable income, in that it was believed that it could cure a variety of ailments. Sick persons of all types let themselves be rolled on it, in the firm conviction that in the stone lay a higher power of healing. In this way it had been used for centuries, as a talisman of the church, and it was well that it was saved from a superstition, whereby the inscription, the oldest known, which stood under a Hermic statue, was close to being completely destroyed."22 He states the still commen argument that the removal of the artefacts was a way of preserving them. The reason given for the local resistance is Christian superstition. Anather Swedish traveller and diplomat, Erik Bergstedt (Strangnas 1760 - Stockholm 1829) visits the Troad in the mid 1790's and publishes a translation and by himself extensively commented edition of Jean-Baptiste Lechevalier's Vayage de la Traade in 1802-5. Bergstedt visits the area before the removal of the Sigeion inscription but still comments on the efforts of Choiseul-Gouffier and Elgin to take away the inscription, something he obviously received information about: "The well-known Sigeion inscription is at Y enisheyr [ ... ] Count Choiseul' s attempt to remove it, supported by Firmans from the Porte and with the help of Hassan Pasha, could not do anything against the prejudices of the village inhabitants. The

21 "[Cockerell] che feci cosi felici scavi all'isola d'Egina nel tempio di Giove panelleno, ed in Arcadia nel tempio di Apollo in Sigalia. Tutte le statue che stavano nell'Aeto, ossia timpano del primo tempio sono ora in Roma; cose veramente meravigliosa dall'arte antica." Letter from Akerblad to Sebastiano Ciampi, 30 September 1815. The Royal Academy of Letters, History and Antiquities, Stockholm, Sebastiano Ciampis samling, Acc ı 828. 22 "Jag viiade över natten i byn Cap Janischari, hos en gammal, grekisk prest. Han beklagade mycket forlusten af den Sigadska basreliefen, hvilken Lord Elgin, till foljd af en Storherrlig firman, och en bujurdi eller ytterligare order af Guvernören i Dardanellerna, Hadim Oglu, ar ı 799 bortfort. Denna marmor forskaffade pastar loci betydliga inkomster, i det den troddes bota hvaıjehanda iikommor. Sjuklingar a'f alla slag liito sig rullas der ofvanpa, under den fasta tillforsigt, att i stenen ıag en högre inneboende lak:edomsk:raft. Pa detta vis anviind under arhundraden, sasom en kyrkans talisman, var det viil, att den riiddades undan en vidskepelse, hvarigenom inskriften, den iildsta man kiinner, och som statt under en Hermeisk staty, var niira att alldeles ga forlorad." Berggren, Jacob, Resor i Europa och Österliinderna, Stockholm ı826-1828, vol. I, p. 66. 326 İslam-Türk Medeniyeti ve Avrupa

English Ambassador at Constantinople Lord Elgin has been more fortunate. He met Kapudan Pasha with the Turkish Fleet in the DardaneHes and obtained his permission and assistance to remove this remarkable monument. "23 Again the resistance of local inhabitants is mentioned - in this case without any religious connotation. In another passage he relates Fauvel's belief that the damaged done to certain sculptures in Athens is the work of Christian iconoclasts, the Turks are not motivated enough to bother with the destruction of sculptures and images which are hard to reach: "Mister Fauvel [ ... ] has in Athens told me that when he copied the bas-reliefs of the friezes of the Parthenon and the Theseion temple, he appears to have found that s ome of the figures were mutilated by a harnın er, damage that surely should be ascribed to the barbarous zeal of the Iconoclasts while the Turks certainly not have dedicated ı time to such a slow and difficult destruction of these monuments of Phidian art, which are located so high up that they cannot be reached and so destructed without effort. "24 Bergstedt also visits Egypt in the 1790's but does not comment upon the market of antiquities in any of his publications, something that Berggren does on several occasions in his book. Such a market does obviously not exist in the same way in the 1790's or earlier during Akerblad's visit, dnly after the French and British invasions of Egypt and the subsequent "egyptomania" was European interest fully sparked. Berggren, who a couple of decades later comments on the removal ofboth Greek and Egyptian antiquities does not seem to make any major distinction between the two .areas of origin of the artefacts: "The same indulgence has not been shown the noble Lord for his sacrilege in the temple of Minerva at the Acropolis in Athens, that he with the help of his agent Lusieri plundered thoroughly of its richness and splendor, that Xerxes, Ph/ipi, Sylla, Alari c and the ravaging Time itself, spared during the millenniums. [... ] A comparable vandalism was commitred by Lelorrain that 1821 cut up and removed the famous Zodiac ofDenderah, to, against 150,000 francs, show the Parisians the place of theAriesin the zodiac [... ]."25

23 "Vid Yenisheyr ar den sa mycket omtalte basrelief och Sigeiska inskription [ ... ] Grefve Choiseul försök att afflytta denna sten, ehuru understödt genom Firmaner af Porten och Hassan Pashas bitrade, kunde dock ingenting utratta em ot fôrdomarne h os invanarn e i ... byn. Engelske Ambassadören i Constantinopel Lord Elgin har varit lyckligare. Han traffade Kapudan Pasha med Turkiska flottan vid Dardanellerne, och erhöll hans tiliateise och histand att aflıamta detta markvardiga monument." Lechevalier, J.B./Bergstedt, Erik. Resa til! Propontiden och Svarta Hafvet, öfversatt med Anmiirkningar och Tilliiggningar afE. Bergstedt, Stockholm 1802-1805, vol. I, p. 103. 24 "Herr Fauvel, [ ... ]har i Athen berattat mig, att han der skulle afmodellera basrelieferna pa fiiserna af Partlienon och Thesei tempel, har han tydligen funnit att atskilliga figurer varit med harnınare afslagna; en averkan som sakert bör tillskrifvas Ikonoklasternas barbariska nit, ernedan Turkarne visst icke gifvit sig tid ti11 en sa Jangsam och besvarlig fôrstöring af dessa monumenter af Phidire konst, som aro sa högt uppsatta, att de ej utan möda kunna atkomma sa nara som det fordrats fOr att pa detta satt rorstöra dem." Ibid. vol Il, p. 261. 25 "Samma öfverseende har man icke haft med den adla Lordens helgedomsran i Minervas teropel pa Akropolis i Athen, det han, genom sitt ombud Lusieri, plundrade i grund pa all den rikedom och pragt, som Xerxes, Ph/ipi, Sylla, Alaric och den hiirjande Tiden sjelf, under artusenden skonat. [ ... ] Fredrik Thomasson 327

He als o put in doubt that the museums of London and Paris are better places than the originallocations for the preservation of the monuments and joins to the argument a crucial comment: maybe it is better at this point of saccilege of ancient holy sites to be from anation that does•not have museums: "It is uncertain whether these shrines, on the banks of the Seine and the Thames, under the prot.ection of George and Ludvik, will receive as many sacrif'ices of veneration and adıniration and endure so many of times ravaging storms, as they did in Hellas' laurel groves and the palm forest of Tentyra under the protection of Pallas and Isis. When you to these violations against what a distant antiquity bequeathed us of greatness and beauty above earth, add the battles, between mercenary agents on the ruins of Thebes and Philes of w hat the tombs contain it is better to as certain lands be without Museums, and being happy with living mummies- and antiquaries [... ]".26 One could maybe say that Berggren turns the poverty of his country of origin and its lack of collections and museums into a moral strength. It might be considered an argument of the "sour grapes said the fox" type. However, I have not seen such comments from individuals from at the time richer and more important countries. Berggren comments with despise several times on the free market of antiquities in Egypt and shows no sympathy with the European traders that make a good living seliing and transporting "who le boatloads of skeletons, idols, sarcophagi, cameos, scarabs, ro lls of papyri, ete. "27 to the adornment of foreign collections and museums. Discussion Size, quality and co ntext of artefacts There seems to be a clear distinction between large and important items and smail and insignificant. In between the two poles there is obviously a large span - the same might be witnessed in today's market for artefacts. Sınaller portable objects seem to be legitimate acquisitions while dismembering or dismantling monuments is more difficult to accept. The present debate is focused on a few emblematical works such as the Parthenon marbles and the Rosetta stone in London, the Nefertiti head in Berlin ete. These are issues that to a certain extent seem to repeat themselves when large temples and other archaeological areas are quarried in other parts of the world, something that stili is going on.

En motsvarande vandalism begick Lelorrain, som 1821 sönderbröt och bortförde den namnkunniga Zodiaken i Denderah, för att, mot 150,000 francs, visa Parisame viidurens plats i djurkretsen [ ... ]." Berggren, Jacob, Resor i Europa och Österliindema, Stockholm 1826-1828, vol. I, p. 66. 26 "Osak.ert ar, om dessa helgedomar, pa Themsen och Seinens striinder, under Georgs och Ludviks besk:ydd, skola :fa emottaga sa manga offer af vördnad och beundran och motsta sa manga av tidens haı:jande stormar, som de gjort i Hellas' lagerlundar och i Tentyras palmskogar, under Pallas' och Isis' hagn. 'N'ar man till dessa valdsamheter mot hvad en aflii.gsen forntid qvarlemnat af stort och skönt ofoan jord, Higger de strider, som pa Thebes och Philes ruiner uppsta mellan so1dade agenter, om det stoft griftema innesluta, sa ar det battre att, med vissa land vara utan Museer, och lata nöja sig med lefoande mumier- och antiquarier [... ]." Ibid. vol. I, p. 68. 27 Ibid. vol. III, p. 271. 328 İ ;s I a m - T ü r k M e d e n i y e t i v e A v r u p a

Thus the hierarchy between major examples of art and lesser objects that can be safely included in private collections does already seem to be firmly established. Such hierarchy seem to li ve on today; it is generally the "signifıcant" objects that much of the restitutian debate is concemed with. There might also be a value attached to artistic in contrast to histarical value, the Sigeion inscription seerus to be viewed as a "document" and not a as a work of art, its removal is maybe therefore less criticised. Akerblad's critique of Fauvel focuses on the loss of information when taking an object out of context, and when digs are not documented. Here the critique is not connected to the artisticlhistoric importance of the object. In another of Akerblad's publications he comments unfavourably on the scanty information accompanying Fauvel' s publication of artefacts, an inscription in this case.28 The lack of such information is one of the main grievances of archaeologists and art historians today. This is obviously a special conc'em in the case of sınaller and less charged objects, we tend to know more about the large and architecturally connected objects such as sculpture from temples, architectural elements ete. Ownership and origin of commentator/collector The issue of ownership seerus to a great extent connected to the above-discussed hierarchy. When small objects are discussed there seem to be no qualms about removing them. With the small sample it is impossible to draw conclusions but the attitudes of scholars from lesser nations do seem different. The Swedish travellers/scholars reason differently in comparison with exponents from the great European powers. Berggren when discussing the virtue of not having museums puts the ·question in the open, is this "advantage" the critica! factor w hi ch makes the Sw~des less prone to support the removal of major artworks from Greece and Egypt? The Swedes presented are not ambassadors, nor noblemen with private incomes and estates to adom which was the cas e of many of _the British and continental collectors. Sweden is at this time relatively poor and without major political signifıcance. It could be sustained that Sweden never entered the "fılling up the museums race" and thus Swedish commentators could retain a higher moral ground. One might sustain that the argumentation of for instance Berggren might be informed by both individual lack of means and little political leverage in negotiating with the local authorities. Another factor is obviously lack of interest - for instance has little antique sculpture of quality ever been acquired by Swedish nobles or travellers. Even the royal family, most famously the king Gustav ın buying antiquities on his trip to Italy in the 1780's, were not wealthy or knowledgeable enough to be able to buy really precious and/or high quality artefacts. Caution must obviously be exerted when associating individual acts to behaviour of a certain "national" kind. What is to be remembered is that the archaeological

28 Akerblad, Iserizione greca sopra una lamina di piombo trovata in un sepolcrq n_elle vicinanze di Atene, Rome 1813. F r e .d r i k Thomasson 329 exploits and dismemberment of monuments mostly were undertaken by individuals that then sold the spoils or presented tlıem to public collections. In the famous cases of Lord Elgin and count Choiseul-Gou:ffier, who at certain stages of tlıeir careers were ambassadors to the Pd'rte, it is di:fficult to distinguish between the individual and the State. Even if they acted as individuals, and in the cas e of Elgin sold his collections to the British government, it might be sustained that they had the backing of their countries of origin by using their political and diplamatic status in the quest for artefacts. Wlıat seems to be clear is that the issue of ownership and the legitimacy of the removal are in certain cases connected to the origin and cultural background of the actor. Cockerell's main line of defence in his publications is to explain why everytlıing he removed did not reach Britain, other issues of ownership or legitimacy are not considered. Locatio n of removed artefacts

The phillıellenism of many of the antiquaries certainly informs their attitudes. In the case of Akerblad tlıere are several examples in correspondence of his support of Greek liberation.Z9 Byron's stance is well known and most scholars, steeped in the revered what was defıned as Greek classical culture. Otlıers, like Fauvel,30 expresses disdain for the Greek quest for independence. Effectively, the removal of major artworks from Greek territories immediately stops after the foundation of the Greek State while it continues in other Ottoman territories. It would be hazardous to connect the few examples presented here to any more or less well-defined picture of either "Europe" or the "Orient". Greece is mostly represented as one of the sources of s ome kind of (to be more precise may easily lead to hyperbole) comman cultural European heritage. This does not mean that all scholars are positive towards the mores of the Greek population, sametimes they are equally disparaging of Greek Christian customs as of what they perceive as Muslim traditions as we have seen above.

Phillıellenism and its connection witlı the critique of the Ottoman Empire has been 3 1 explored by amongst atlıers Henry Laurens , to w hat extent this is linked to the attitudes of the antiquaries is tlıouglı an open question. That many travellers are derogatory towards the local culture goes witlıout saying - tlıese lamentations often seem to repeat the great number of commonplaces infarıning the view of the "Orient".

Tlıere appears to be a clear difference when comparing for instance Greece and Egypt. Tlıere seem to be little resistance to the removal of artefacts from Egypt in

29 Letter from Akerblad to Sebastiano Ciampi 18 May 1816: "You know how much I love that interesting nation [Greece] that recent1y seems to shake off its old stupor." "Ella sa quanto amo quella interessante nazione [Greece] che da qualche tempo sembra scuotere dall'antico torpore." The Royal Academy of Letters, History and Antiquities, Stockholm, Sebastiano Ciampis samling, Acc 1828 " 30 Legrand, P.E., 1897, "Biographie de Louis-François-Sebastien Fauvel. Antiquaire et Consul (1753- 1838)", Revue archeologique, 1897, pp. 205. 31 Laurens, Henry Les Origines intellectuelles de l'expedition d'Egypte: l'orientalisme islamisanı en France, 1698-1798, 1987. 330 Isliim-Türk Medeniye/i ve Avrupa

comparison to the voices defending Greece. Egypt is in many ways almost being conceived as out of the reach of a weak:ened Ottoman administration, 32 a perception that is us ed as a justi:fication of the colonial push in the end of the 18th century. I have seen few examples of early critique against the removal of Egyptian artefacts, a process on a quite different scale compared to the more discriminatory removal of classical Greek remains. Several factors, Berggren being from a peripheral nation, his personal experience of the "battles between mercenary agents" on the Egyptian burial grounds ete. might inform his explicit critique. There is also an issue of quantity, the early 19th century quest for Egyptian objects might be considered a new in the sense of the large amounts of objects taken out ofEgypt. Local resistance to removal

Local resistance to the reı;noval are mentioned by several of the travellers above. There are different reasons cited for such resistance and it is sometimes ridiculed. The commonplace is that a bribe is good enough to assuage the local inhabitants. In the case of Choiseul-Gouffier's try to remove the Sigeion inscription the inhabitants stop him. Elgin later manages to take it but only with the explicit permit and help of higher authorities. Akerblad doesn't manage to leave with "his" stone because of the Ağa' s d eni al. Local views are often absent or difficult to identi:ty in our sources. It might be interesting to explore if such resistance is present in other cases and which reasons, if any, are stated for the opposition. It would also be interesting to see if testimonies of . similar instances of local resistance can be fo und during the "campaigns" in Egypt. Conclusions My sample is of course too small to fumish any conclusions that are valid for other cases, some common tr~its might though be observed. To what extent these common traits can be used to distinguish between the views of the various presented scholars and connect them to for example their origin is stili an open question. An even closer reading of the texts would yi el d other results as well; the religious background of the respective writer has for instance not been elaborated upon. What I hope to have shown is different positions of the debate around year 1800 and that many positions are similar to those entertained by various parties today. The discussion on restitution and ownership will be with us for the foreseeable future, any attempt to investigate the histoncal background might nuance this debate.

32 Ibid. pp. 180.