Albert Einstein’s eyes were stolen after his death and hidden in a New York safe-deposit box
Albert Einstein took deliberate steps to control what would happen to his body after death. He asked that it be cremated, and that his ashes be scattered in secret, to avoid shrines, relics or spectacle. He was explicit about not wanting to become an object of veneration. What he could not control was what happened in the hours immediately after he died.
Einstein was admitted to Princeton Hospital the previous evening with chest pain and died in the early hours from a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. He had declined surgery, reportedly saying he wanted to go “when I want to go,” without artificial prolongation.
05:58
The autopsy was carried out by Dr Thomas Stoltz Harvey, the chief pathologist on duty at Princeton Hospital itself. Harvey was not a neurologist or brain specialist. His professional expertise lay in general pathology, identifying disease, injury, and cause of death, not in the study of cognition or intelligence specifically. Yet during the autopsy, Harvey removed Einstein’s brain and kept it for decades afterwards. Less widely known, but equally significant, is that he also removed Einstein’s eyeballs.
Those eyes were not retained for research. Harvey gave them to Henry Abrams, Einstein’s longtime ophthalmologist. According to multiple historical accounts, they remain to this day in a safe deposit box in New York City.
Also read:Albert Einstein’s brain was stolen by a doctor and carried around for 40 years
The decision has never been fully explained.
As Brian Burrell writes in Postcards from the Brain Museum, “Why [Harvey] kept it will never be known for certain, but it can be inferred from comments made to various reporters that Harvey was inspired by Oskar Vogt's study of Lenin's brain, and he had the vague idea that cytoarchitectonics might shed some light on Einstein's case. A simpler and more appealing explanation is that [Harvey] got caught up in the moment and was transfixed in the presence of greatness. What he quickly discovered was that he had bitten off more than he could chew.”
Einstein’s eyes followed a quieter path than his brain. They passed directly from Harvey to Abrams and disappeared from public view. Unlike the brain, they were not sectioned, photographed, or circulated among researchers. Their continued existence is known largely through reporting and second-hand confirmation.
Abrams resisted suggestions that the eyes were a curiosity or a trophy. Speaking to the Sun Sentinel in 1994, he said: “Albert Einstein was a very important part of my life, a lasting influence. Having his eyes means the professor’s life has not ended. A part of him is still with me.”
Abrams died in 2009 at the age of 97. The eyes did not pass into a museum collection. They did not return to the family. They remain in private storage, frequently rumoured,though never confirmed, to be at risk of sale.
The removal of Einstein’s eyes took place alongside other actions that violated his stated wishes. In the days following the autopsy, Harvey sought retroactive approval from Einstein’s eldest son, Hans Albert Einstein, to retain the brain for scientific study. That approval was reluctant and explicitly conditional: any research was to be conducted solely in the interests of science, and any results were to be published in reputable scientific journals. The consent did not extend to the removal or retention of Einstein’s eyes.
In later interviews, Harvey offered shifting explanations for his actions. He said he had “assumed” permission existed. He said he believed the brain would be studied for science. He said he felt a professional obligation to preserve it. Contemporary reporting and later historical work make clear, however, that no explicit consent existed at the time the brain was removed, and none was ever given for the eyes.
Harvey’s professional standing collapsed soon after. He was dismissed from Princeton Hospital, in part for refusing to relinquish the brain. In the immediate aftermath of the autopsy, he photographed the brain, weighed it, and cut it into approximately 240 sections. He preserved the pieces in jars and created microscope slides, 12 sets, according to later accounts, carefully labelled and stored without any institutional oversight. Samples were sent to multiple research institutes for study, where scientists examined them for anatomical anomalies and other features of interest, while most of the material remained in Harvey’s possession.
Over the following decades, the brain travelled with him as he moved between jobs and cities, reportedly stored in containers ranging from laboratory jars to a beer cooler, while Einstein’s eyes remained fixed in one place, sealed away.
Preserving body parts of famous figures is not unusual, particularly long in medical history. New York and its regional surroundings hold several such relics. What distinguishes Einstein’s case, famously, is not rarity, but contradiction. He nevertheless explicitly rejected physical memorialisation. Yet parts of his body were separated, retained, and quietly institutionalised anyway eventually.
No scientific study has ever been conducted on Einstein’s eyes. No anatomical insight was pursued. Their value, such as it is, has remained symbolic rather than empirical. There is also no documentation that anyone beyond Harvey ever examined the eyes after they were removed. The location of the locker in which they were reportedly stored has never been publicly identified, and no confirmed sighting of the preserved eyes has been recorded.
That may be the most unsettling detail. The brain was at least framed as research. The eyes were not. They were removed, transferred, and locked away, with no clear purpose beyond possession.
In the end, Einstein’s instructions were followed only in part. His body was cremated. His ashes were scattered. But his gaze, literal, physical, intact, was kept behind glass, in a city vault, long after he had asked not to be turned into an object at all.
Anil Chaturvedi Decodes Time Travel Through Einstein And Foretells Astonishing Alien Encounters
The autopsy was carried out by Dr Thomas Stoltz Harvey, the chief pathologist on duty at Princeton Hospital itself. Harvey was not a neurologist or brain specialist. His professional expertise lay in general pathology, identifying disease, injury, and cause of death, not in the study of cognition or intelligence specifically. Yet during the autopsy, Harvey removed Einstein’s brain and kept it for decades afterwards. Less widely known, but equally significant, is that he also removed Einstein’s eyeballs.
Those eyes were not retained for research. Harvey gave them to Henry Abrams, Einstein’s longtime ophthalmologist. According to multiple historical accounts, they remain to this day in a safe deposit box in New York City.
Also read:Albert Einstein’s brain was stolen by a doctor and carried around for 40 years
As Brian Burrell writes in Postcards from the Brain Museum, “Why [Harvey] kept it will never be known for certain, but it can be inferred from comments made to various reporters that Harvey was inspired by Oskar Vogt's study of Lenin's brain, and he had the vague idea that cytoarchitectonics might shed some light on Einstein's case. A simpler and more appealing explanation is that [Harvey] got caught up in the moment and was transfixed in the presence of greatness. What he quickly discovered was that he had bitten off more than he could chew.”
Einstein’s eyes followed a quieter path than his brain. They passed directly from Harvey to Abrams and disappeared from public view. Unlike the brain, they were not sectioned, photographed, or circulated among researchers. Their continued existence is known largely through reporting and second-hand confirmation.
Abrams resisted suggestions that the eyes were a curiosity or a trophy. Speaking to the Sun Sentinel in 1994, he said: “Albert Einstein was a very important part of my life, a lasting influence. Having his eyes means the professor’s life has not ended. A part of him is still with me.”
Abrams died in 2009 at the age of 97. The eyes did not pass into a museum collection. They did not return to the family. They remain in private storage, frequently rumoured,though never confirmed, to be at risk of sale.
The removal of Einstein’s eyes took place alongside other actions that violated his stated wishes. In the days following the autopsy, Harvey sought retroactive approval from Einstein’s eldest son, Hans Albert Einstein, to retain the brain for scientific study. That approval was reluctant and explicitly conditional: any research was to be conducted solely in the interests of science, and any results were to be published in reputable scientific journals. The consent did not extend to the removal or retention of Einstein’s eyes.
In later interviews, Harvey offered shifting explanations for his actions. He said he had “assumed” permission existed. He said he believed the brain would be studied for science. He said he felt a professional obligation to preserve it. Contemporary reporting and later historical work make clear, however, that no explicit consent existed at the time the brain was removed, and none was ever given for the eyes.
Harvey’s professional standing collapsed soon after. He was dismissed from Princeton Hospital, in part for refusing to relinquish the brain. In the immediate aftermath of the autopsy, he photographed the brain, weighed it, and cut it into approximately 240 sections. He preserved the pieces in jars and created microscope slides, 12 sets, according to later accounts, carefully labelled and stored without any institutional oversight. Samples were sent to multiple research institutes for study, where scientists examined them for anatomical anomalies and other features of interest, while most of the material remained in Harvey’s possession.
Over the following decades, the brain travelled with him as he moved between jobs and cities, reportedly stored in containers ranging from laboratory jars to a beer cooler, while Einstein’s eyes remained fixed in one place, sealed away.
Preserving body parts of famous figures is not unusual, particularly long in medical history. New York and its regional surroundings hold several such relics. What distinguishes Einstein’s case, famously, is not rarity, but contradiction. He nevertheless explicitly rejected physical memorialisation. Yet parts of his body were separated, retained, and quietly institutionalised anyway eventually.
No scientific study has ever been conducted on Einstein’s eyes. No anatomical insight was pursued. Their value, such as it is, has remained symbolic rather than empirical. There is also no documentation that anyone beyond Harvey ever examined the eyes after they were removed. The location of the locker in which they were reportedly stored has never been publicly identified, and no confirmed sighting of the preserved eyes has been recorded.
That may be the most unsettling detail. The brain was at least framed as research. The eyes were not. They were removed, transferred, and locked away, with no clear purpose beyond possession.
In the end, Einstein’s instructions were followed only in part. His body was cremated. His ashes were scattered. But his gaze, literal, physical, intact, was kept behind glass, in a city vault, long after he had asked not to be turned into an object at all.
end of article
Featured in Etimes
- Katrina Vicky announce baby boy's name, here's what it means
- Kapil charges Rs 5 crore per episode? Here's what Sunil Grover gets
- Naveen backs gory violence shown in Ranveer's Dhurandhar
- 'Dhurandhar' box office collection day 34 (LIVE)
04:56 Orders on Jana Nayagan most likely be pronounced on January 9th- Aamir Khan’s humility surprised the crew; Das recalls fanboy moment
Trending Stories
- Mohanlal exits Bobby project: Rs 30 cr demand changes plans
- Deepika Padukone’s childhood discipline story opens a conversation on parenting styles and fear-based punishment
- As Dhurandhar crosses Rs 1200 crore, Sanjay Dutt joins Deepika with three Rs 1000 crore films
- Ranveer Singh's 'Dhurandhar' BEATS Allu Arjun's 'Pushpa 2 The Rule' to become No 1 film in Hindi cinema; YRF congratulates Aditya Dhar and team
- 'Dhurandhar' Day 34: Ranveer’s hit crosses Rs 780 Cr, outpaces 'Ikkis' and Kartik’s 'TMMT'
- Beautiful and unique baby girl names that are perfect for your firstborn
- 'The Raja Saab' censor review: Prabhas shines in new genre
- 'Dhurandhar' box office collection Day 33: Ranveer Singh and Akshaye Khanna starrer surpasses Rs 1,220 crore worldwide amid 'Ikkis' and 'Avatar: Fire and Ash' competition
04:56 Why Vijay’s final film Jana Nayagan is caught in a storm?- Raising kids the conscious way: Ajith Kumar and Shalini’s thoughtful parenting lessons
Photostories
- How to add smoky flavour to winter dishes without using a tandoor at home
- "I just read somewhere that 20% of American meals are consumed in a car!" Sadhguru shares tips on the right way to eat food
- Republic Day 2026 long weekend travel ideas from Delhi-NCR; places to go, things to do
- Mumbai’s busiest suburban corridor on Western Railway is set for major safety upgrade: What we know
- Bengaluru breathes easy: Hebbal flyover cuts traffic chaos to just 2 minutes (Photos)
- 7 habits of parents that raise kinder kids
- Shivlings in Kashi Associated With the Nine Planets
- Different types of foil papers and food wraps and which should be used when
- In pics | Rs 44 crore Nolambur Cooum bridge in Chennai set to open in February
- Exclusive: Shark Tank India 5’s newest Shark Kanika Tekriwal on being an entrepreneur; says ‘My own family didn’t take me seriously initially’
Up Next
Start a Conversation
Post comment