I laughed way too hard at this. But seriously most antiquities need to be returned to their places of origin. It’s 2023 how is this still a conversation to be had?
Some artifacts were acquired legitimately either as gifts or through purchase. So have no reason to be returned.
Some states are too unstable or corrupt to be able to return them, such as Syria or Egypt. And there was a case recently where France returned some artifical to an afircsn state just for the president (? King?) To keep them for himself.
Some artifacts don’t have an easy place to return them too. Like take the kohinoor diamond, do you give it back to the Indian government? The Pakistani government? The Afgan government? The decendents of of the Maharaja that signed over possession to the Queen, or the descendents of the people he stole it from? Or the people that person stole it from? And so on and so on.
And at this point it’s more historically important to the UK than it is to any other country.
Which brings me to the next point, some artifacts are important because of their history after being taken. The Rosetta stone is a perfect example of this. When it was discovered by the French it was rubble being used to construct a crude wall. If the French didn’t recognise it might br important it would have been lost to history. And if it wasn’t translated by a French archaeologist after the British took it, then it would still be insignificant, as the are other identical stele in Egypt and its actual cobtents are pretty mundane and unimportant. Literally the only thing that makes the rosetta stone significant is its history AFTER it was taken from Egypt.
And finally some cases the artifacts are only their because that country got invaded. Like a lot of roman artifacts in the British museum were brought by invading Romans. I don’t think anyone sensible thinks they should be returned to Italy right?
You make a very well reasoned point, and I don’t disagree with you. I can see why museum curators won’t release antiquities because in your examples establishing provenance and actual logistics would be a nightmare. Not to mention the precedent of giving away some country’s items but not others. But, at this point in time it’s also a point of contention, rightfully so, that items obtained are still viewed as the property of the British museum in what amounts to a trophy case of imperialism. Ultimately we are in a period of growing pains as society and this is just another awkward period we have to get through to move forward.
Absolutely, and all the people that now have the artifacts benefit in keeping the status quo, so there is effectively little push to solve a very complex problem.
The problem is that you have governments like the Taliban in Afghanistan, pre-9/11, destroying ancient statues, trying to erase the history they don’t agree with.
Instead of returning stolen antiquities, countries that are currently in possession of them should be required to send an equivalent value of their own country’s treasure to be displayed in the victim country’s museums.
Imagine having to go to Egypt to see the crown jewels of England.
I absolutely agree that there are some locations that are too volatile/corrupt to have items returned. I never would have thought to have equivalent items sent out of county for display, that would really drive the emotional point home.
I laughed way too hard at this. But seriously most antiquities need to be returned to their places of origin. It’s 2023 how is this still a conversation to be had?
Various reasons:
Some artifacts were acquired legitimately either as gifts or through purchase. So have no reason to be returned.
Some states are too unstable or corrupt to be able to return them, such as Syria or Egypt. And there was a case recently where France returned some artifical to an afircsn state just for the president (? King?) To keep them for himself.
Some artifacts don’t have an easy place to return them too. Like take the kohinoor diamond, do you give it back to the Indian government? The Pakistani government? The Afgan government? The decendents of of the Maharaja that signed over possession to the Queen, or the descendents of the people he stole it from? Or the people that person stole it from? And so on and so on. And at this point it’s more historically important to the UK than it is to any other country.
Which brings me to the next point, some artifacts are important because of their history after being taken. The Rosetta stone is a perfect example of this. When it was discovered by the French it was rubble being used to construct a crude wall. If the French didn’t recognise it might br important it would have been lost to history. And if it wasn’t translated by a French archaeologist after the British took it, then it would still be insignificant, as the are other identical stele in Egypt and its actual cobtents are pretty mundane and unimportant. Literally the only thing that makes the rosetta stone significant is its history AFTER it was taken from Egypt.
And finally some cases the artifacts are only their because that country got invaded. Like a lot of roman artifacts in the British museum were brought by invading Romans. I don’t think anyone sensible thinks they should be returned to Italy right?
You make a very well reasoned point, and I don’t disagree with you. I can see why museum curators won’t release antiquities because in your examples establishing provenance and actual logistics would be a nightmare. Not to mention the precedent of giving away some country’s items but not others. But, at this point in time it’s also a point of contention, rightfully so, that items obtained are still viewed as the property of the British museum in what amounts to a trophy case of imperialism. Ultimately we are in a period of growing pains as society and this is just another awkward period we have to get through to move forward.
Absolutely, and all the people that now have the artifacts benefit in keeping the status quo, so there is effectively little push to solve a very complex problem.
The problem is that you have governments like the Taliban in Afghanistan, pre-9/11, destroying ancient statues, trying to erase the history they don’t agree with.
Instead of returning stolen antiquities, countries that are currently in possession of them should be required to send an equivalent value of their own country’s treasure to be displayed in the victim country’s museums.
Imagine having to go to Egypt to see the crown jewels of England.
Look here captain nuance, when we want your opinion, well give it to you!
I absolutely agree that there are some locations that are too volatile/corrupt to have items returned. I never would have thought to have equivalent items sent out of county for display, that would really drive the emotional point home.
I think the Roman’s tried that.
We’re still looking at it.
For those who haven’t seen it:
https://youtu.be/x73PkUvArJY?si=DSku_hzu9L9s7qY3
Do you know why the pyramids are in Egypt? They were too big to put on the British ships
Do you know why the British were such good sailors? The taste of their food and the faces of their women
Do you know why we spell it color, honor, and such without the u? Cause fuck U that’s why
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=x73PkUvArJY
Thanks for sharing, I’ve never seen this guy before! Sooo funny!