Returning "stolen" artifacts

[Orlion]

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1766804.stm

So that's the article where I got the idea from. The question here is whether or not 'stolen' (whatever context that seems to be) should be returned to the country of origin.

I think this can be particularly tough since some of the objects in question (like one of the crown jewels) is actually culturally significant in different countries. Whose culture deserves to have these items, then? Does it matter, since it seems any 'archeological' value these items may have had have been seriously reduced by their removal anyway, and the countries of origins are poor and might end up selling them private collectors anyway?

[Hashi Lebwohl]

My decision would be to return ownership of the items to the country or origin but allow the antiquities themselves to remain where they are. I have the same concerns the Italians do, that some object might be damaged in transit and thus ruined forever. Also, smaller items like the diamond in question are too high a risk to move to a new location where security might not be as strict. What would happen if, what did they call it, Koh-i-Noor, were returned to India only to have someone steal it? At best, a prize like that would wind up in some private vault somewhere, never to be seen again; at worst, it would be cut into smaller pieces and sold--but only someone insane or completely uncaring about the stone's significance would do this.

Perhaps the country who has possession of an antiquity could pay an annual fee to the country who owns the antiquity?

I agree that archaeologists in times past were glorified grave-robbers or thieves; however, their less-than-reputable actions did manage to save some items that might otherwise have been lost. How many Egyptian tombs were found completely empty, the treasures lost forever?

[Iolanthe]

This is a ticklish one. Many of the artefacts "rescued" by archaeologists in the 19th century were not prized by the countries from which they were removed, so they were in effect "saved for prosperity". The lifting of the Elgin Marbles and the Rosetta Stone is a different case perhaps, although the RS did enable cuniform to be finally translated. I really can't fathom why Lord Elgin brought the marbles here - self glorification perhaps.

Look what happened to the Dead Sea Scrolls when their value was realised - cut up into bits so that more money could be made from them. And many of the Egyptian tombs were robbed out millenia ago.

I agree with Hashi - much of what could be returned to whence it came would probably not survive long once it got there. We're talking about the history of "civilisation" here - it is important to everyone, so perhaps the museums that look after these precious objects should be looked upon as "protectors of history" rather than "hoarders of stolen goods".

[Avatar]

So, "it's yours, we'll just look after it for you" kind of thing?

Seems a little condescending to me. Of course, that's sorta a hallmark of colonial imperialism, isn't it?

Look, for the sake of the objects themselves, I would agree. But perhaps the right to dispose of them as they choose is more important than their eventual preservation?

In this day and age, certainly most, if not all, countries would wish that same preservation of their own history. If they cannot achieve it, it does not make them less deserving of the right to try on their own.

--A

[Hashi Lebwohl]

So, "it's yours, we'll just look after it for you" kind of thing?

Seems a little condescending to me. Of course, that's sorta a hallmark of colonial imperialism, isn't it?

Look, for the sake of the objects themselves, I would agree. But perhaps the right to dispose of them as they choose is more important than their eventual preservation?

In this day and age, certainly most, if not all, countries would wish that same preservation of their own history. If they cannot achieve it, it does not make them less deserving of the right to try on their own.

--A

Condescending, yes, which is why I added that the country that has possession of the artifact has to pay a "leasing fee" for the privilege of hosting the artifact to the country who owns it rightfully. I would also rule that artifacts from nations/cultures that no longer exist become the property of whatever nation occupies that territory now.

I would also support any nation stating "no, we want our antiquties returned to us" should have their antiquities returned to them without incident or delay. Yes, some of those things will wind up lost, stolen, or destoryed but then nothing is forever.

[Iolanthe]

So, "it's yours, we'll just look after it for you" kind of thing?

Seems a little condescending to me. Of course, that's sorta a hallmark of colonial imperialism, isn't it?

Look, for the sake of the objects themselves, I would agree. But perhaps the right to dispose of them as they choose is more important than their eventual preservation?

In this day and age, certainly most, if not all, countries would wish that same preservation of their own history. If they cannot achieve it, it does not make them less deserving of the right to try on their own.

Well, I've never thought of myself as an "Imperial Colonialist"!

There is now world recognition that certain sites are very important to world history. There has been much technological development in the preserving and recording of artefacts. Perhaps that is enough. Send everything back and allow those who need it access to digital images and other means of studying what has been found.

And hope that there will be something left to find in the future e.g. Ebla (Tell Mardikh in Syria) where there is still a library to be discovered.

[bruce3371]

There was a recent debate about the Elgin Marbles, whether they should be returned or not. The subsequent vote was overwhelmingly in favour of their return;

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18373312[/url]

[Iolanthe]

I would certainly agree with that Bruce.

[Avatar]

I would also rule that artifacts from nations/cultures that no longer exist become the property of whatever nation occupies that territory now.

I would also support any nation stating "no, we want our antiquties returned to us" should have their antiquities returned to them without incident or delay. Yes, some of those things will wind up lost, stolen, or destoryed but then nothing is forever.

I could go with that.

--A