Decades of Dispute: The Latest Bubon Bronze to be Repatriated to Türkiye

July 11, 2025

By Andrew Dearman

The exquisite ancient bronze statue of a draped figure, housed at the Cleveland Museum of Art since its acquisition in 1986, has long been a centerpiece of the museum’s collection. Following an extensive legal and scientific investigation into its provenance and rightful ownership, the statue was scheduled to be repatriated to the Republic of Türkiye on July 8, 2025.^[1]

A Case Overview

The Turkish government has asserted that it first approached the Cleveland Museum of Art (CMA) in 2008 to inquire about the provenance of the bronze statue, but received a delayed response and no supporting documentation.^[2] In 2012, Türkiye escalated their campaign to reclaim their cultural heritage, publicly announcing their intention to reclaim dozens of artifacts from notable US institutions, including the J. Paul Getty Museum and the Metropolitan Museum of Art.^[3] This list included twenty-one contested objects from the CMA’s collection, most notably the bronze draped figure.^[4]

More than a decade later, in August 2023, the sculpture was seized in place, following joint investigatory efforts by the Turkish government and Manhattan’s District Attorney’s (DA) office, which cited new evidence that the object had been looted from Türkiye and trafficked through New York.^[5] Under New York Penal Law § 165.54 et seq., the Manhattan DA’s Office exercises jurisdiction over antiquities believed to be stolen property if they have passed through New York. . Utilizing this law has strongly positioned New York as a de facto global hub for antiquities resolution and litigation, with the Manhattan DA’s office acting favorably towards claimant nations.

In response, the CMA filed a lawsuit against the Manhattan District Attorney, maintaining that the bronze had been lawfully acquired and that no compelling evidence had been provided to substantiate Türkiye’s claims that the statue was stolen.^[6] Ultimately, scientific analysis, coupled with investigations conducted in Türkiye, concluded that the bronze had originated from the archaeological site of Bubon, which had been subject to extensive looting in the 1960s.^[7] The CMA withdrew its lawsuit and the Turkish government permitted the statue to remain in Cleveland temporarily for a farewell exhibition, before being reunited with other bronzes from Bubon in Türkiye.^[8]

The Bubon Bronzes: How Looted Statues Saturated the International Antiquities Market

Over the past decade, Türkiye has undertaken considerable efforts to recover a distinguished group of bronze sculptures looted from the ancient city of Bubon. Located in the region of ancient Lycia, Bubon was gradually assimilated into the Roman empire. A small imperial-cult shrine, known as a sebasteion, was erected in the city, possibly during the reign of Nero (54–68 A.D.). It featured large bronze statues of Roman emperors that symbolized the city’s political allegiance to Rome. This sebasteion remained in use for approximately two centuries, until it was ultimately buried during an earthquake.^[9]

Although the site of Bubon was first documented by explorers in 1842, the sebasteion remained unexcavated until the 1960s, when local farmers realized the financial potential held within the buried artefacts.^[10] The site was subsequently pillaged, and numerous artifacts were transported to the port city of Izmir, where they were sold to a dealer nicknamed ‘American Bob.’ Investigations identified this individual as Robert Hecht, a notorious antiquities dealer involved in the illicit antiquities trade, who introduced the bronzes to the international art market in New York.^[11]

By the late 1960s, looting at the site had waned, and a singular remaining bronze statue was recovered when the Turkish authorities arrived. A few years later, Turkish archaeologist Jale Inan visited the site, later returning in 1990 to lead formal excavations. Through her fieldwork, Inan was able to reconstruct the placement of the bronze statues within the sebasteion. This was aided by interviews with local farmers, who acknowledged their involvement in looting the artifacts. Her findings corresponded with Greek inscriptions that remained on the stone bases left at the site.^[12] Although an exact inventory of the Bubon bronzes remains a subject of debate, Inan’s research laid the foundation upon which Türkiye has pushed to reclaim the dispersed sculptures.

From Pedestal to Pedestal: Tracing the History of the Bronze Draped Figure

The bronze statue of a draped figure was first exhibited in the United States in 1967, on loan from Charles Lipson to the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.^[13] Lipson had acquired the work, along with several other high-quality bronzes, from Hecht.^[14] These included torsos of Septimius Severus and Lucius Verus, which were also linked to Bubon and repatriated to Türkiye in 2023.^[15] Cornelius Vermeule, then curator at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, observed the influx of impressive ancient bronzes entering both public and private collections in the U.S. He was the first to group these bronzes, including the draped figure, as having originated from an ‘eastern Roman temple’ in Türkiye.^[16]

In 1987, the statue entered the collection of the Cleveland Museum of Art when it was purchased from the Edward H. Merrin Gallery for $1.85 million.^[17] The acquisition was commemorated by an exhibition which placed the statue in dialogue with photographs of other bronzes associated with Bubon, as well as a bronze portrait bust of a woman which was correspondingly repatriated to Türkiye in 2023.^[18]

Despite the draped figure’s long-standing association with the group of bronzes identified by Vermeule and later associated with Bubon by Inan, the museum denied that the statue originated from the sebasteion. They stated that the evidence provided ‘fell short of persuasive proof’ that the statue had been stolen and belonged to the Republic of Türkiye, despite the object’s heavily documented association with Bubon.^[19] Similarly, a private collector recently sued the Manhattan DA to fight the seizure of another bronze figure linked to Bubon, similarly contesting the lack of definitive evidence. ^[20]

However, collaborative efforts between the museum, the Manhattan DA’s Office, and Turkish authorities yielded decisive evidence through scientific analysis.^[21] Firstly, physical and photogrammetric comparisons were made between casts of the statue’s feet and the stone bases at Bubon. Lead isotope analysis also linked samples from the statue and its pedestal. Finally, soil analysis compared sediment from inside the statue with several samples from the ancient site. These results conclusively established the statue’s presence at the sebasteion, and the CMA relinquished ownership of the bronze to the Republic of Türkiye.^[22] Within restitution cases, scientific analysis is emerging as a crucial and prominent tool for provenance research, providing the hard evidence that scholarly arguments and historical conjecture lack.

Strategic Uncertainty: Shifting Narratives through Cataloguing Practises

This case also sheds light on a troubling practice within the antiquities market involving increasingly ambiguous and evasive cataloguing. Unlike modern artworks, determining the origin of an antiquity is often a subjective practice, particularly when findspots and provenance are unrecorded or purposefully obscured. Furthermore, such objects were traded across the ancient world, so stylistic features alone cannot ensure that an artefact belongs to a specific region. Despite this inherent uncertainty, modern requirements for the trade and restitution of antiquities demand a specific location to be defined. For example, the new EU Regulation 2019/880, requires certain cultural goods to be accompanied by an importer statement which specifies the country of origin. This expectation is often at odds with the complex realities of ancient empires, which now geographically span multiple modern countries. A notable exception to this challenge is found in artefacts that were excavated in academic contexts, preserving strong and precise records of the archaeological context in which they were discovered.

Originally, the bronze draped figure was catalogued by the CMA as: “The Emperor as Philosopher, probably Marcus Aurelius (reigned AD 161-180), c. AD 180–200, Turkey, Bubon(?) (in Lycia), Roman, late 2nd Century.” However, in light of the controversy surrounding the statue, the museum updated their website to read: “Draped Male Figure, c. 150 BCE-200 CE, Roman or possibly Greek Hellenistic.”^[23]

The museum made three significant changes to lessen the bronze’s association with Bubon. First, and most strikingly, they eliminated any reference to Türkiye, despite the statue’s long-standing connection with Bubon. This link was even explicitly acknowledged and discussed in a 1987 issue of The Bulletin of the Cleveland Museum of Art dedicated to the sculpture.^[24] Secondly, they rescinded any attempts to identify the figure, removing references to Marcus Aurelius. This identification had further tied the sculpture to the series of imperial names inscribed on the plinths at the sebasteion.^[25] Finally, they broadened the proposed date of production from a narrow window of twenty years to an inflated period of over three centuries.

This rescission and deliberate vagueness undermined the CMA’s transparency and role as an educational institution. When museums readily alter cataloguing to circumvent legal complications or restitution claims, they risk compromising their institutional integrity. This practice is exacerbated in the art market, where dealers and experts can catalogue antiquities to deliberately assign or obscure countries of origin. For instance, an artefact that may originate from Greece or Türkiye, may be strategically catalogued as Greek to avoid possible restitution claims from Türkiye, who enforce stricter antiquities laws dating back to 1906.^[26] Such practices can be observed in the late twentieth century, when auction houses resorted to generic descriptions to prevent looted Pre-Columbian antiquities being detected by customs authorities.^[27] Overall, both the market and institutions are adapting in light of tighter regulations and scrutiny, sometimes at the expense of scholarly integrity and ethical standards.

Conclusion

The bronze draped figure is the latest of fifteen artifacts from Bubon seized by the Manhattan DA’s Office.^[28] By opposing the seizure of the bronze, the CMA asserted its ownership of the sculpture in the absence of clear evidence that it was illegally removed from Türkiye. However, this highlights the difficulty of resolving claims involving less well-documented cases of looting than Bubon.

Throughout the dispute, the museum carefully managed its public image, consistently stating their willingness to cooperate, citing their past restitution cases.^[29] However, they also sought to safeguard the sculpture as a cherished highlight of their collection. Once scientific analysis had established the statue’s origin, the museum swiftly announced it would be repatriated to Türkiye, framing the act as a successful case of international collaboration.^[30]

This case illustrates the complexity of contemporary restitution efforts, and highlights the critical role that scientific analysis now plays in provenance research. More broadly, it demonstrates that in an age of restitution and cultural re-evaluation, museum collections can no longer be regarded as static. Institutions are required to be responsive and dynamic, and to fulfill their roles as central for research and education.

About the Author:

Andrew Dearman is an undergraduate History of Art student at the Courtauld Institute in London. He previously worked in the antiquities department at Christie’s, and is currently a Summer 2025 Intern at the Center for Art Law. He is interested in cultural heritage policy, specifically the legal and ethical concerns surrounding the trade and restitution of antiquities.

Select Sources:

1. Seth Pevnick, The Bubon Statue Departs, The Cleveland Museum of Art (June 4, 2025), available at https://www.clevelandart.org/articles/bubon-statue-departs. ↑
2. Steven Litt, Turkey’s inquiry into 22 treasures at the Cleveland Museum of Art lacks hard proof of looting, Cleveland.com (May 27, 2012), available at https://www.cleveland.com/arts/2012/05/turkeys_inquiry_into_22_treasu.html. ↑
3. Jason Felch, Turkey asks U.S. museums for return of antiquities, The Los Angeles Times (March 30, 2012), available at https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-xpm-2012-mar-30-la-et-turkey-antiquities-20120331-story.html. ↑
4. Jason Felch and Ralph Frammolino, The Cleveland List: 21 objects Turkey wants Cleveland Museum of Art to Return, Chasing Aphrodite Blog (April 2, 2012), available at https://chasingaphrodite.com/2012/04/02/the-cleveland-list-21-objects-turkey-wants-cleveland-museum-of-art-to-return/. ↑
5. Steven Litt, New York authorities order seizure of ancient statue at Cleveland Museum of Art possibly connected to looting, trafficking of antiquities in Turkey, Cleveland.com (August 30, 2023), available at https://www.cleveland.com/news/2023/08/new-york-authorities-order-seizure-of-ancient-statue-at-cleveland-museum-of-art-possibly-connected-to-looting-trafficking-of-antiquities-in-turkey.html?outputType=amp. ↑
6. Adam Schrader, The Cleveland Museum of Art Is Suing the Manhattan D.A. Over the Seizure of a $20 Million Statue Allegedly Looted From Turkey, Artnet News (October 20, 2023), available at https://news.artnet.com/art-world/cleveland-museum-lawsuit-sculpture-2381754. ↑
7. Seth Pevnick, The Bubon Statue Departs, The Cleveland Museum of Art (June 4, 2025), available at https://www.clevelandart.org/articles/bubon-statue-departs. ↑
8. Peter Chakerian, Cleveland Museum of Art to display looted ancient statue before return to Turkey, Cleveland.com (April 7, 2025), available at https://www.cleveland.com/entertainment/2025/04/cleveland-museum-of-art-to-display-looted-ancient-statue-before-return-to-turkey.html. ↑
9. Graham Bowley and Tom Mashberg, Who Looted an Ancient Roman Shrine? A Village Finally Tells., The New York Times (October 30, 2023), available at https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/30/arts/ancient-rome-bronzes-bubon.html. ↑
10. Bora Bilgin, Bubon, Lycian Monuments (Updated 2024), available at https://www.lycianmonuments.com/bubon/. ↑
11. Graham Bowley and Tom Mashberg, Who Looted an Ancient Roman Shrine? A Village Finally Tells., The New York Times (October 30, 2023), available at https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/30/arts/ancient-rome-bronzes-bubon.html. ↑
12. Id. ↑
13. Draped Male Figure, The Cleveland Museum of Art Collection Online (accessed July 9, 2025), available at https://www.clevelandart.org/print/art/4.2025. ↑
14. Graham Bowley and Tom Mashberg, Who Looted an Ancient Roman Shrine? A Village Finally Tells., The New York Times (October 30, 2023), available at https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/30/arts/ancient-rome-bronzes-bubon.html. ↑
15. Septimus Severus, Museum of Looted Antiquities (accessed July 9, 2025), available at https://mola.omeka.net/items/show/2091. ; Lucius Verus, Museum of Looted Antiquities (accessed July 9, 2025), available at https://mola.omeka.net/items/show/2194. ↑
16. Cornelius C. Vermeule, Sixty-Ninth General Meeting of the Archaeological Institute of America, 72 American Journal of Archaeology 2, 174 (October 30, 2023), available at https://www.jstor.org/stable/502843. ↑
17. Graham Bowley and Tom Mashberg, Cleveland Museum Sues to Block Seizure of Its ‘Marcus Aurelius’ Bronze, The New York Times (October 19, 2023), available at https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/19/arts/cleveland-museum-seizure-marcus-aurelius-bronze.html. ↑
18. Elizabeth Marlowe, Bronze Roman statue, believed to have been looted from Turkey, seized from Cleveland Museum of Art, The Art Newspaper (August 31, 2023), available at https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2023/08/31/cleveland-museum-art-roman-bronze-turkey-loot-seized. ↑
19. Graham Bowley and Tom Mashberg, Cleveland Museum Sues to Block Seizure of Its ‘Marcus Aurelius’ Bronze, The New York Times (October 19, 2023), available at https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/19/arts/cleveland-museum-seizure-marcus-aurelius-bronze.html. ↑
20. Sarah Cascone, A Collector Sues to Fight Seizure of Roman Bronze Statue, Artnet News (September 5, 2024), available at https://news.artnet.com/art-world/mendelsohn-lawsuit-fights-seizure-bronze-statue-2531251. ↑
21. Daniel Grant, Cleveland Museum of Art will return looted Greco-Roman bronze to Turkey, The Art Newspaper (February 17, 2025), available at https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2025/02/17/cleveland-museum-art-returns-looted-greco-roman-bronze-turkey. ↑
22. Cleveland Museum of Art and District Attorney of New York Reach Agreement on Draped Male Figure (the Philosopher), The Cleveland Museum of Art (February 14, 2025), available at https://www.clevelandart.org/about/press/cleveland-museum-art-and-district-attorney-new-york-reach-agreement-draped-male-figure. ↑
23. Graham Bowley and Tom Mashberg, Cleveland Museum Sues to Block Seizure of Its ‘Marcus Aurelius’ Bronze, The New York Times (October 19, 2023), available at https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/19/arts/cleveland-museum-seizure-marcus-aurelius-bronze.html. ↑
24. 74 The Bulletin of the Cleveland Museum of Art 3 (March, 1987), available at https://www.jstor.org/stable/i25159975. ↑
25. Graham Bowley and Tom Mashberg, Cleveland Museum Sues to Block Seizure of Its ‘Marcus Aurelius’ Bronze, The New York Times (October 19, 2023), available at https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/19/arts/cleveland-museum-seizure-marcus-aurelius-bronze.html. ↑
26. Sibel Özel, Under the Turkish Blanket Legislation: The Recovery of Cultural Property Removed from Turkey, 38 International Journal of Legal Information 2 (Summer, 2010), available at https://doi.org/10.1017/S0731126500005710. ↑
27. Derek Fincham, Towards a Rigorous Standard for the Good Faith Acquisition of Antiquities, 37 Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce 1 (August 14, 2009), available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1350649 ↑
28. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/14/arts/design/marcus-aurelius-bronze-turkey-cleveland.html. ↑
29. Adam Ferrise, Cleveland Museum of Art sues New York district attorney over seizure of statue valued at $20 million, Cleveland.com (October 19, 2023), available at https://www.cleveland.com/arts/2023/10/cleveland-museum-of-art-sues-new-york-district-attorney-over-seizure-of-statue-valued-at-20-million.html. ↑
30. Seth Pevnick, The Bubon Statue Departs, The Cleveland Museum of Art (June 4, 2025), available at https://www.clevelandart.org/articles/bubon-statue-departs. ↑