In an audacious move that sparked both outrage and curiosity, Brazilian artist Ilê Sartuzi conducted a daring act of conceptual art by stealing a historic coin from the British Museum on June 18, 2024. This act has reignited discussions surrounding colonial looting, the ethics of museum collections, and the lengths artists will go to provoke thought on these pressing issues.
Sartuzi's actions unfolded against the backdrop of growing concern about missing artifacts at the museum, which had recently admitted that hundreds of items had disappeared, allegedly pilfered by a former employee. This theft not only tarnished the museum's reputation but also opened the floodgates for conversations about the ownership and provenance of artifacts housed in such institutions.
During a guided tour of the museum, Sartuzi seized a 1645 silver coin minted in Newark, England—a historical artifact that had been showcased as part of the institution’s handling collection, allowing visitors to physically engage with pieces of history. As the artist explained in various interviews, finding a tangible piece of British heritage amidst a collection predominantly filled with foreign artifacts inspired his project. He felt that the coin being one of the few items of British origin made it an ideal target for illustrating the ongoing issues of colonialism.
Planning this elaborate project for over a year, Sartuzi initially attempted to carry out the “theft” a day prior but was thwarted by museum security. Undeterred, he returned the next day, having shaved his beard to disguise himself. Assisted by friends who recorded the event, he created a diversion to successfully switch the original coin with a replica before placing it into a donation box on his way out.
The footage of this escapade is now a central feature of Sartuzi's Master of Fine Arts thesis exhibition titled "Sleight of Hand," held at Goldsmiths, University of London until mid-July. The exhibition invites viewers to grapple with the complexities of cultural institutions and the artifacts they curate.
The British Museum was quick to respond, labeling Sartuzi's act as “disappointing and derivative,” and indicating their intent to inform law enforcement concerning the incident. They highlighted that this type of action undermines the trust between visitors and institutions that allow them to engage with history and artifacts.
This incident did not happen in a vacuum; it reflects a broader distress about institutional integrity and accountability in large cultural establishments. Critics argue that institutions like the British Museum perpetuate a neocolonial narrative, treating artifacts as their property without acknowledging the cultural significance and rightful ownership by the communities from which they were taken. Sartuzi’s theft—and its subsequent framing as art—brings to light a pressing conversation about ownership and accountability, and the need for ethical repatriation.
Amidst such discussions, Sartuzi argues that his actions encourage a re-evaluation of collections in such museums. By targeting a single British coin, he symbolically points an accusing finger at the British Museum's colonial roots and repository of history, which many argue contains objects wrongfully acquired during the era of imperialism. "These institutions operate as the custodians of humanity's treasures while being fundamentally tied to imperialist practices that have devastated many cultures across the world," Sartuzi stated in an interview.
Since the theft, social media has seen a flurry of reactions, with supporters praising Sartuzi's boldness as a much-needed critique of how museums manage their collections, while others see it as a failure of ethics in art. Some argued that Sartuzi's act could catalyze more serious discussions about repatriation efforts for international artifacts that museums like the British hold today—pieces that represent history and heritage for cultures that have been oppressed through colonization.
In light of this event, the British Museum finds itself at a crossroads, especially as it deals with the fallout from recent thefts, including the loss of 1,500 artifacts. Under increased scrutiny, museum officials are now faced with an urgent need to reassess not only their security but also the ethical implications of their collections and how they interact with the public.
As the conversation expands about the ethics of possession, a turning point may be on the horizon for institutions that uphold imperial histories. Sartuzi’s project serves as a reminder that art continues to be a powerful vehicle for critique and reflection on society’s values and historical injustices. It raises critical questions about who should own the stories told through the artifacts of the past, and how can museums be reformed to meet the ethical expectations of today's world.
Ultimately, Sartuzi’s actions could prompt a wider dialogue beyond the initial shock, leading to reform in how cultural institutions operate and a reevaluation of how history is represented and owned. As he pointedly puts it, the British Museum—and the legacy of many such institutions—stands as a foundational block in the colonial edifice, and it may not be until more artists wield their pens and actions as Sartuzi did, that the conversation surrounding restitution, ethics, and the role of museums in the modern world will evolve into concrete actions.
