August io, 1893] 



NATURE 



343 



THE THIEVING OF ASSYRIAN 

 ANTIQUITIES. 



SO much interest is now taken in the archaeological re- 

 searches made in Egypt and Assyria that it behoves 

 a journal of science to chronicle a case of considerable 

 importance that has recently been before the law-courts. 

 The case is noteworthy, because it is concerned with 

 the excavation and disposal of the wonderful tablets, the 

 decipherment of which has added so much to our know- 

 ledge of the early history of mankind. 



We have not referred to the case earlier, as we had 

 hoped that some action in the public interest would have 

 been taken by the Trustees of the British Museum, which 

 would have carried the matter a stage further. For this 

 action however we have waited in vain. 



Although the real question at issue is the spending 

 of many thousands of public money, the case in the 

 newspapers has taken the form of an action for libel. 

 The plaintiff in the case was Mr. H. Rassam, formerly 

 assistant-excavator to Sir Henry Layard in the works 

 carried on for the trustees of the British Museum on the 

 sites of the ancient cities of Nineveh and Calah in 

 Assyria. His action was against Dr. Wallis Budge, 

 acting Assistant-Keeper in the Department of Egyptian 

 and Assyrian Antiquities in the British Museum. It was 

 alleged that Dr. Budge had made certain reports con- 

 cerning the way in which Mr. Rassam had disposed of 

 some of the excavated antiquities, and that these state- 

 ments were made to Sir H. Layard both at the British 

 Museum and elsewhere. The statements were said to im- 

 ply that Mr. Rassam had connived at depredations on the 

 sites of the excavations made by him in Babylonia during 

 the years 1876-82 for the trustees of the British Museum. 

 Mr. Rassam estimated that his reputation had suffered by 

 these charges to the extent of £ 1 000, and after a hearing of 

 four and a half days the jury decided in his favour, though 

 there was a difference of opinion among them as to 

 whether Dr. Budge's statements were actuated by malice 

 prepense, and awarded him ^50 to make up for the loss 

 sustained by the defamations and to soothe his virtuous 

 indignation. Such was the case before the public ; the 

 public interests behind it may be gathered from the 

 following statement. 



It will be remembered that so far back as 1846 Mr. 

 Layard began to excavate at Kouyunjik for the trustees 

 of the British Museum. These excavations had, we un- 

 derstand, been commenced at the expense of Sir Stratford 

 Canning, on the spot where the eminent Frenchman, Botta, 

 had begun to work, but were afterwards taken over by 

 the trustees of the British Museum, who indemnified Sir 

 Stratford Canning and paid Mr. Layard's expenses. When 

 Mr. Layard came home, a year or two later, the excavations 

 practically stopped, but were renewed at the expense of 

 the trustees of the British Museum under the direction 

 of a native, Mr. H. Rassam, the plaintiff in the present 

 case. The funds spent by the trustees on these works 

 were provided by the Treasury, and therefore ail the 

 results, without exception, belonged to the British Museum 

 by right. In 1873 the late Mr. George Smith made an 

 expedition to Assyria at the expense of the proprietors 

 of the Daily Telegrapli, with a view of discovering other 

 fragments of the tablet containing the Assyrian account 

 of the Flood. He subsequently made a second and 

 a third expedition to the country (where, in 1876, he un- 

 fortunately died) at the expense of the trustees, with 

 funds granted by the Treasury. In 1878 Mr. Rassam 

 again appeared on the scene, and under the authority 

 of a permit from Constantinople renewed diggings in 

 Assyria, and began to open new sites near Babylon, at 

 the expense of the British Museum. It will be seen then 

 that, with very slight exceptions, the money has been 

 found by the British Treasury. We now turn to 

 the results of this expenditure. From the evidence 



NO. 1 241, VOL. 48I 



eUcited at the trial it appeared that soon after Mr. 

 Rassam began to dig in Babylonia, collections of tablets 

 found their way into the London market, and these were 

 bought by the British Museum for considerable sums of 

 money (Times, July 1). If we remember rightly Dr. 

 Budge stated that between the years 1879 and 1882, 

 while Mr. Rassam was excavating, a sum of at least 

 ^3000 of public money was spent in this manner. Now 

 as no other excavations were being carried on except by 

 the British Government, and as the internal evidence of 

 the tablets indicated that those which they received from 

 Mr. Rassam as the result of his works and those which 

 they purchased had the same origin, it was natural that 

 the public department should begin to grow uneasy. And 

 this feehng became stronger when it was found that 

 the tablets purchased were of much greater value arch- 

 asologically and historically than those which arrived at 

 the British Museum from Mr. Rassam. Speaking 

 broadly, it seems from the evidence that Mr. Rassam 

 sent home 1 34,000 pieces of inscribed clay from Babylonia, 

 and of these more than 125,000 are what Sir Henry 

 Rawlinson, Mr. Maunde Thompson, and Dr. Wallis Budge 

 style " rubbish " {Standard, June 30, Times, July 3). 

 This represented the direct return for the outlay. 

 What did go wrong we cannot say, but the outsider will 

 certainly think that something did go wrong in this matter. 

 In 1882 Mr. Rassam came home, and in this and the follow- 

 ing year collections of tablets and other antiquities of very 

 great value were offered to the Museum for purchase ; in 

 fact the supply appears to have been so great that it was 

 some three or four years before the British Museum had 

 fundstobuy whatitwasoffered. In 1887 the British Museum 

 despatched Dr. Budge to Mesopotamia withinstructionsto 

 makeinvestigationsintothesourcesof the supply of tablets 

 which were coming to London, and on many other points, 

 to touch upon which does not concern us (Times, July i ; 

 Standard, June 29). While in Bagdad Dr. Budge ob- 

 tained a great deal of information upon the subject of 

 the systematic trade in Babylonian antiquities which was 

 being carried on, and he found that the agent who had 

 been appointed at Mr. Rassam's instigation, and who 

 represented himself as Mr. Rassam's " relation " (Stan- 

 dard, June 29), and who was paid by the British Museum 

 to protect the sites, was himself actively engaged in the 

 sale of antiquities. On visiting the sites of the excavations 

 Dr. Budge found that clandestine diggings were going on, 

 and he was also able to purchase many valuable tablets 

 and other antiquities from the peasant diggers (Times, 

 July l). The information which he gathered on all these 

 points he sent home to the British Museum in the 

 form of reports, one of the results of which was the 

 dismissal of the native agent. On two subsequent 

 occasions Dr. Budge visited Assyria and Babylonia, 

 and carried on excavations for the trustees, and he ac- 

 quired some thousands of tablets. 



It will easily be guessed that from first to last a very 

 considerable sum of public money, amounting to tens 

 of thousands of pounds, has thus been spent upon ex- 

 cavations in Assyria and Babylonia, and the question 

 naturally arises, Has this money been spent judiciously, 

 and has the nation obtained what it had a right to expect 

 in return for its money ? It seems pretty evident that 

 people other than the trustees of the British Museum 

 have obtained collections of Assyrian antiquities, and it 

 appears to us that this subjeet should form the matter of 

 a careful and searching investigation. Sales at auctions 

 have revealed the fact that sundry gentlemen had been 

 able to acquire Assyrian slabs from the palaces of 

 Assyrian kings, and as the excavations were carried on 

 by the Government, it is difficult to account for this fact. 

 The public has a right to know how property of this 

 nature came into private hands, and the question must 

 be asked until it is satisfactorily answered. The matter 

 cannot be allowed to rest where it is. 



