The Meyer and Brysac reading discusses the Tang Emperor’s Horses (also known as the Chinese Tang Dynasty Ceramic Horses) which are considered extremely important works of Chinese art from the period of the Tang Dynasty (618-907 AD). The way that the Penn Museum obtained these sculptures is questionable because they are thought to have come from the tomb of Emperor Taizong in China and the dealer who sold them to Penn may have obtained them illegally. However, the University of Pennsylvania is unwilling to give up this prized treasure. The article assesses the role of wealthy American museums and collectors involved in the industry of asian antiques and art and the ethics of commandeering such art.

In the video “The Treasures of China”, the ancient Daoist philosopher Zhuangzi is quoted: “When the customs or culture of one place differ from those of another, practices that are familiar in the first will be regarded as unfamiliar in the second”. This is a metaphor for the market for antiquities in the Middle East before World War I and the role of Europeans who removed untold treasures abroad. This was true until upon arriving in China, they found people whose understanding and connection to antiques and the cultural past was great. The Chinese were unwilling to allow the Westerners to purchase and remove the historic Asian treasures as they had done during the Ottoman Empire. It wasn’t until the invasion by the British and French armies in the 1860s that some of China’s treasures found their way to the West. Ultimately though, if the Western collectors wanted Asian treasures they would have to dig for the treasures themselves or exploit the Chinese practice of tomb raiding – both of which they did. It wasn’t until the political instability of 1911 when the Qing dynasty was overthrown and the war and suffering forced the Chinese to sell much of their treasured art.

The Daoist philosopher Zhuangzi

The podcast “A Question of Artefacts” discusses that it should not be okay to just take another people’s art and display it in high profile museums – we are essentially saying the society it came from can’t maintain it on their own and we can take better care of it. The question “should we return the art?” came up. The podcast considered the ethics and morality of holding another culture’s historical treasures. Many countries now want their art back, in part because it belongs to them but also having these treasures will attract more people to their country and increase tourism. They make a valid point that heritage cannot exist in private collections because the treasure loses its connection to where it came from. They brought up the importance of museums having the original piece rather than a replica, because it holds greater artistic and emotional value. 

During class, we were asked the questions “who is asking art back?” and “what if it is an authoritarian, nationalist regime about to abuse history for its own purpose [China]”. Presented this way, we shouldn’t repatriate art and return it to China under these circumstances. Another question – “should it go back to mainland China or Taiwan?” – was raised. My group was unsure because either choice would create further conflict between the two countries if one side had what the other wanted.

The important theme this week was not only western collectors, but also ethics and the possibility of repatriation.

Bibliography

Meyer, Karl E, and Shareen Blair Brysac. The China Collectors : America’s 

Century-Long Hunt for Asian Art Treasures. New York: Palgrave 

Macmillan, 2015.

“The Treasures of China”, by Justin Jacobs. Indiana Jones in History: From 

Pompei to the Moon.

“A Question of Artefacts”, presented by David Baker. Analysis, BBC Radio 4, 

Oct. 20, 2019.