As we see more and more interest in archival fashion, the red carpet has become as much a showcase for designers’ new collections as it is for really old ones. But where is the line that some pieces are too historically significant to be a one-night-only outfit?
From Kim Kardashian wearing Marilyn Monroe’s iconic ‘Happy Birthday, Mr President’ dress at the 2022 Met Gala to Zendaya’s recent appearance wearing 2,700-year-old Iranian earrings during the press tour for Christopher Nolan’s The Odyssey, the use of culturally significant objects in fashion has sparked debate over preservation and respect for the past.
For some, transforming ancient artefacts into contemporary jewelry allows history to be appreciated in new ways, bringing forgotten objects into the public eye and preserving traditional craftsmanship. For others, removing these pieces from their original context risks reducing complex cultural histories to luxury adornment – not to mention the risk of damaging the objects themselves.
So should ancient artifacts be celebrated as wearable art, or protected as historical objects? Elite Traveler asked Marc Auclert, founder of Maison AUCLERT, and classical archaeologist Cosima Carnegie to present their case.
See also: Should Your Suit Trousers Be Straight or Slim?
For repurposing artifacts as jewelry
Marc Aucleart, founder of Maison AUCLERT
Repurposed jewelry has been a speciality since the Renaissance, when the first archaeological discoveries began inspiring jewelers [to incorporate ancient artifacts into designs].
At Maison AUCLERT, I am very happy and proud to be [among those] who re-launched its popularity 15 years ago [creating jewelry with authenticated ancient coins and artefacts].
That being said, one needs to respect the rules of provenance and rarity. Only artifacts that have not been looted, have not been illegally exported, and have a clear ownership history dating from before 2000 – or ideally 1970 – should be considered. That’s simply common ethics.
If an artifact is extremely rare, then it belongs in a museum where it can receive the care and protection it deserves, not set into a piece of jewelry that will inevitably be knocked around [when worn].
Against repurposing artifacts as jewelry
Cosima Carnegie, classical archaeological scholar, presenter, and content creator
Zendaya’s jewelry, and the reaction to it, is a great example of the tension that exists between mainstream and academic circles. On the one hand, we have one of the most famous actresses in the world choosing to wear genuine artifacts as a homage to the ancient world, and, on the other, we have Iranian earrings that were looted in the 1940s getting dragged out of a private collection for a viral moment.
Scholars and heritage experts have raised legitimate concerns. There is always the worry of damaging an artifact by wearing it – no one wants something that’s survived thousands of years snapping in half on the red carpet. There’s also a concern about lack of context: what do we lose by converting ancient artefacts into modern jewelry and placing them on a famous model or actress, with minimal emphasis on its country of origin or intended use?
