Returning stuff to other countries from our museums?
Discussion
Us Brits once having an empire, and being rulers of a large part of the world, over time we have accumulated a huge amount of basically knicked stuff in our world famous museums and historic houses.
Should we be returning it when people from these now enlightened or free and independent places ask for it back?
The Moai from Easter island, Elgin marbles from Greece, and Rosetta stone from Egypt etc etc
I can see arguments on all sides.
1) Tough luck it's part of history, you lost your country, we had rifles and machine guns, you had spears and mangos, so we took everything from everywhere we and other european powers colonised?
2) Tough luck it's part of history you couldn't look after it. In fact it's good job we nicked it or it would have been destroyed by the nutters in your country. Taliban, Isis etc..
3) OK we did nick it, (we didn't know better at the time) but it's safe and stable now in your country, and we have studied your artefact, here you are have it back (Fanfare and much grandstanding and mutual admiration at how great we are at this reconciliation).
4) We bought if from some Dutch/French/British bloke who brought it back with a load of slaves.
Sorry we had no idea it was stolen and bought it in good faith so tough.
We generally made sure we had the best items for our museums, so these are seen as particularly significant in the countries they originated from.
Personally I get a genuine buzz from being in the presence of a truly historic item . i.e. The Rosetta stone et al.
Would I go and see the genuine item in Egypt? Maybe.. Would I go and see a replica in the British museum? probably not..
At the moment a delegation is coming to the British museum to ask for a Moai back..
Where do we draw the line, are we giving all the stuff back?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-462...
Should we be returning it when people from these now enlightened or free and independent places ask for it back?
The Moai from Easter island, Elgin marbles from Greece, and Rosetta stone from Egypt etc etc
I can see arguments on all sides.
1) Tough luck it's part of history, you lost your country, we had rifles and machine guns, you had spears and mangos, so we took everything from everywhere we and other european powers colonised?
2) Tough luck it's part of history you couldn't look after it. In fact it's good job we nicked it or it would have been destroyed by the nutters in your country. Taliban, Isis etc..
3) OK we did nick it, (we didn't know better at the time) but it's safe and stable now in your country, and we have studied your artefact, here you are have it back (Fanfare and much grandstanding and mutual admiration at how great we are at this reconciliation).
4) We bought if from some Dutch/French/British bloke who brought it back with a load of slaves.
Sorry we had no idea it was stolen and bought it in good faith so tough.
We generally made sure we had the best items for our museums, so these are seen as particularly significant in the countries they originated from.
Personally I get a genuine buzz from being in the presence of a truly historic item . i.e. The Rosetta stone et al.
Would I go and see the genuine item in Egypt? Maybe.. Would I go and see a replica in the British museum? probably not..
At the moment a delegation is coming to the British museum to ask for a Moai back..
Where do we draw the line, are we giving all the stuff back?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-462...
Edited by peterperkins on Sunday 18th November 07:32
Voldemort said:
Could there be another way? What if the very best, most significant treasures and artefacts of the World were gathered together and then spent the rest of time on a constant tour of the planet spending, say, six months in one country before going to another.
Interesting idea.But does England get 6 months and Easter island 6 seconds? Or all get the same?
Who decides which countries. Lucky dip, random draw? Visiting order? Alphabetical?
Security and logistics of moving it all about, massively increased risk of damage?
All eggs in one basket, ship sinks mid atlantic all lost forever.. hmm..
red_slr said:
So long as the country who its going back too can ensure its safe keeping then yes, but if not then no. ...snip...
I agree with this bit. Nowadays we can visit anywhere in the world, tomorrow, for the price of a packet of Woodbine and a half of stout. And we can see them in glorious 3D at anytime thanks to Google and YouTube.Send them back where they came from to the people they belong to.
As above, lots of these items were 'found' through reasearch and lengthy exploration digs.
Had they been found by the locals at the time, chances are they'd have been destroyed through lack of care or knowledge, conflict or simply plundered to make some quick cash.
There's a good chance the items they want returned wouldn't exist if it hadn't been for the likes of Howard Carter and the rich benefactors that funded them.
Had they been found by the locals at the time, chances are they'd have been destroyed through lack of care or knowledge, conflict or simply plundered to make some quick cash.
There's a good chance the items they want returned wouldn't exist if it hadn't been for the likes of Howard Carter and the rich benefactors that funded them.
Mothersruin said:
As above, lots of these items were 'found' through reasearch and lengthy exploration digs.
Had they been found by the locals at the time, chances are they'd have been destroyed through lack of care or knowledge, conflict or simply plundered to make some quick cash.
There's a good chance the items they want returned wouldn't exist if it hadn't been for the likes of Howard Carter and the rich benefactors that funded them.
Imagine if Egyptians came over here and “found” loads of priceless artefacts and said the same? Had they been found by the locals at the time, chances are they'd have been destroyed through lack of care or knowledge, conflict or simply plundered to make some quick cash.
There's a good chance the items they want returned wouldn't exist if it hadn't been for the likes of Howard Carter and the rich benefactors that funded them.
I think we should keep them all anyway.
Finders keepers.
Having the stuff distributed around the world in the big museums does avoid the country of origin going tits up scenario, and it all getting destroyed or knicked like the stuff in Iraq when it's museum was looted..
Like the internet and many other distributed services it avoids a single point of failure..
Like the internet and many other distributed services it avoids a single point of failure..
I sometimes wonder about the logic of keeping all of the worlds best stuff in one place when, like Alexandria or Brazil's national museum, it can simply make a disaster much worse.
I would broadly agree with returning stuff to other countries were it not for the politics which would doubtless get in the way. Just as Scotland would be unlikely to send the Declaration of Arbroath to America if things became politically unstable, so Egypt sending away the Rosetta Stone, or Greece sending us the Elgin Marbles for safe keeping seem unlikely.
There's a wierd irony in the way that our most important, powerful and immortal cities now keep the valuable possessions of what were the most powerful and timeless cities of before. I wonder how long it will be before the clock face of Big Ben/Westminster tower or the Statue of Nelson atop his column ends up in a foreign city as a relic from another forgotten empire.
I would broadly agree with returning stuff to other countries were it not for the politics which would doubtless get in the way. Just as Scotland would be unlikely to send the Declaration of Arbroath to America if things became politically unstable, so Egypt sending away the Rosetta Stone, or Greece sending us the Elgin Marbles for safe keeping seem unlikely.
There's a wierd irony in the way that our most important, powerful and immortal cities now keep the valuable possessions of what were the most powerful and timeless cities of before. I wonder how long it will be before the clock face of Big Ben/Westminster tower or the Statue of Nelson atop his column ends up in a foreign city as a relic from another forgotten empire.
How far do we go back this Country has faced its fare share of plundering do we get that all back too, what about the Germans the French the Dutch the Italians maybe look at Alexander the great I am sure he was of the opinion possession is the gift to the victor.
The Spanish would have a lot of stuff to return.
judging the actions from Centuries ago by todays standards and sensibilities is just not going to work.
The Spanish would have a lot of stuff to return.
judging the actions from Centuries ago by todays standards and sensibilities is just not going to work.
Interesting question... Apart from “where do you stop?” aspect to this stuff, I’m broadly in favour of us keeping the things anyway. However, how much are these things worth? If Greece, say, were to offer us £100M for the marbles, I’d be in favour of selling!
However, do these countries want the things back, or the things back for free?
If they had to pay whatever the market value for them is, would they still want them?
However, do these countries want the things back, or the things back for free?
If they had to pay whatever the market value for them is, would they still want them?Penelope Stopit said:
peterperkins said:
Parthenon Sculptures from Greece
Fixed that for youPrior to his intervention the site was a ruin and the sculptures were in a country under Ottoman rule, they didn't care a jot about them and many were damaged by wars. In fact the Parthenon itself was used as a munitions store, this led to the damage of many large parts of the building and sculptures.
At the time of Elgin these were in peril.
I do not support the repatriation of the marbles, I think the exhibition in London does them justice, I think Elgin is a part of their story now and to ignore or condemn him is ignorant.
If the Parthenon was fully restored to its former glory and all the marbles put back into place and perfect replicas made to replace those lost in the wars and mistreatment then I would support the return. Until then they are just fine where they are.
We need to have museums, we need to see humanity as a broad picture, many cannot go to Egypt to see a relic or mummy, nor to Greece to view the marbles there but a trip to London is a possibility.
We are all here for a blink of an eye, many of these items will be around in the care of museums long past me or my children.
DanL said:
Interesting question... Apart from “where do you stop?” aspect to this stuff, I’m broadly in favour of us keeping the things anyway. However, how much are these things worth? If Greece, say, were to offer us £100M for the marbles, I’d be in favour of selling!
However, do these countries want the things back, or the things back for free? If they had to pay whatever the market value for them is, would they still want them?
If I came into your house, helped myself to your car when it was cheap, then when prices went up offered it back to you for the current price would you think it is fair?However, do these countries want the things back, or the things back for free?
If they had to pay whatever the market value for them is, would they still want them?Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff