19 ms·

I wonder if the British Museum will do the right thing and return previously stolen artefacts?

by gef 11mo ago

debian3 11mo ago
I’m conflicted. I understand the concept that stolen goods should be returned and it’s the right thing to do, but at the same time it was centuries ago and the preservation was done by them. I have seen well preserved exposition in that museum and then you visit the original country where it’s from and they themselves have nothing or very little left from that era.
- jeromegv 11mo ago
  We never fail to find someone to defend colonization! > then you visit the original country where it’s from and they themselves have nothing or very little left from that era. You seem to generalize quite a lot in order to validate your view point that everything stolen should stay stolen. Sometimes it's the entire opposite. It's not being shown anywhere, it's just hidden in a museum collection in the UK. In other cases it's exposed but with very little relevant information because it's not particularly relevant to the local culture or the colonizer is too ashamed of the real history of how this object got there that they fail to explain the true story of it. Here's a great podcast that I hope will make you change your mind, lots of examples: https://www.cbc.ca/listen/cbc-podcasts/1030-stuff-the-british-stole https://www.cbc.ca/listen/cbc-podcasts/1030-stuff-the-britis...
  - u_sama 11mo ago
    > Syria 2011 > Lebanon 1970s > Algeria 1990s > Afghanistan 1990s A few simple examples of nations who have went through rather devastating wars and civil wars including Islamists who's main ideology is that anything pre-Islamic is to be destroyed as it might lead to heresy, and who go out of their way to destroy historical places and artifacts. And if not war, then the fact that the cultures of those areas traditionally dont value historical artifacts the same way the developped European, or Chinese influenced countries did in their times. I am sorry but it is not defending colonization, it is a legitimate issue given that the middle east is stuck on an unresolved powder keg of issues, keeping the Pregammom in Britain instead of where it came from is a good thing. Even during WW2 the UK, Germany and France set out programs to saveguard historical cultural treasures in protected areas.
    - akudha 11mo ago
      Can't this be on a case by case basis? After all, the British stole from so many places in the world - what if they returned stolen items to countries (India for example) that are interested and capable of safeguarding artifacts and didn't return to those countries where they might get destroyed (Afghanistan etc)?
      - arethuza 11mo ago
        What about examples where there was nothing like theft involved and no colonisation - the Pergamon Altar in the amazing Pergamon Museum in Berlin is a good example... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pergamon_Altar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pergamon_Altar
        Podrod 11mo ago
        Although the Pergamon Museum also has the Ishtar Gate which was basically smuggled out of Iraq brick by brick.
      - u_sama 11mo ago
        I dont see an issue with such a thing, except on the case of legitimate purchase or corruption like the Egyprian bracelet that was smelted for gold.
    - lostlogin 11mo ago
      > Even during WW2 the UK, Germany and France set out programs to saveguard historical cultural treasures in protected areas. Did they though? That sounds revisionist. Eg The Badeker raids in one direction, a Bomber Harris and everything he did in the other. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baedeker_Blitz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baedeker_Blitz > A few simple examples of nations who have went through rather devastating wars and civil wars including Islamists who's main ideology is that anything pre-Islamic is to be destroyed as it might lead to heresy, and who go out of their way to destroy historical places and artifacts. The Reformation shows that this isn’t just an Islamic trait. Plenty of religious artifacts, and location were destroyed. > the middle east is stuck on an unresolved powder keg of issues It is. And several of the key players in this are missing from your comment. The US, the UK, Russia and China. This isn’t a problem with undeveloped Islamic countries, it’s considerably broader than that.
  - suddenlybananas 11mo ago
    >It's not being shown anywhere, it's just hidden in a museum collection in the UK. Are you under the impression that the British Museum does not show its Egyptian collections? >it's not particularly relevant to the local culture Ancient Egypt also has essentially nothing to do with the culture of most of Egypt, with the exception perhaps of the Copts.
    - lostlogin 11mo ago
      This argument would be stronger if the Egyptians were displaying Stonehenge and a few long barrows.
  - lm28469 11mo ago
    You can have negative views of colonization and also accept the fact that most artifacts were lost because they were looted before Europeans even arrived.
  - Jedd 11mo ago
    > We never fail to find someone to defend colonization! I think you are misrepresenting GP & parent's comments. Yes, absolutely, totally, Brits have a well-deserved reputation of colonisation. But as a hypothetical conundrum, who would you return the relics from a long expired society to -- the current (arguably quite distinct, religiously & culturally) administrations of those lands? What moral right is exercised (or exercisable) of relics of, say, Atenism, crafted 3 to 4 thousand years ago -- locals with an orthogonal religion & culture, or foreigners with an orthogonal religion and culture? (Personally I instinctively lean towards your take, albeit a little less abruptly - but I think it's all quite complicated - partly with the bizarre 'cultural birthright' thing, partly curator cred, less so the accessibility claims.)
    - lentil_soup 11mo ago
      you could, even though I disagree, use that argument for some artifacts, but surely not for the massive collection of things from Greece and Egypt. Those are pretty obvious you can return to the modern countries that sit on those lands. Event if culture and religion has changed those artifacts are part of those peoples heritage, if it weren't then why would the UK care about Stonehenge or Hadrian's Wall? Or Italians about the Coliseum? Just a single anecdotal point but I'm from Latin America and while there's little indigenous blood in me I would still consider indigenous culture and artifacts as part of my culture and that's at the extreme end of colonisation as natives were pretty much wiped out.
    - lostlogin 11mo ago
      > But as a hypothetical conundrum, who would you return the relics from a long expired society to -- the current (arguably quite distinct, religiously & culturally) administrations of those lands? Has this ever been in doubt? With Egyptian artifacts, they’d go to Egypt, with looted Greek artifacts they’d go to Greece. With the heads of Māori warriors, New Zealand Maori. Are there any real world situations where it’s confusing as to who they would be returned to?
      - suddenlybananas 11mo ago
        Greek artifacts from Anatolia, should they go to Greece or Turkey?
  - pdabbadabba 11mo ago
    You're using the word "stolen" here with a lot of conviction but, imho, not a lot of rigor. In what sense did people "own" the artifacts that the British removed from Egypt? Who owned them? If nobody owned them, how were they "stolen"? That's the weak version of the problem. The stronger version: how is it the case that Egypt, or Egyptians, today "own" something that has been in the British museum far longer than any of them have been alive? Even if the artifacts were wrongfully taken in the first instance, does that automatically mean that the only right thing to do is to return them, even after centuries? Are the myriad other interests that have accumulated in the interim simply not matter? How long domes something have to remain in Britain for it to meaningfully become part of British heritage as well as Egyptian? Should we also be working to return artifacts looted by the ancient Egyptians to their own ancestral homes, even though the looting occurred thousands of years ago when they were the dominant power? Perhaps they should give back everything south of the First Cataract to the Nubians. (Hopefully it's clear that this is a reductio not a policy proposal!) That's not to say I think it's categorically acceptable for powerful nations to take historical artifacts. But I don't think this has really anything to do with "stealing" in the usual sense. if anything, that rhetoric just obscures the issues here that might truly be worth thinking about.
    - wbl 11mo ago
      The Egyptian peasant lives today much the same as his ancestors did. It's a remarkable degree of continuity! And some works were removed contrary to law quite recently like the head of Nefertiti.
      - pdabbadabba 11mo ago
        Interesting points, but can you explain how they apply here? It's interesting and, afaik, true that modern Egyptians's lives today are more similar to their ancient ancestors' than you might expect (moreso than in many other nations). But how should we think about the relevance of this fact to debates about looted artifacts? Does the fact that they still work fields irrigated by the Nile suffice to give them a claim to repatriate artifacts taken generation ago? (Perhaps there are more similarities than this. I don't mean to be flippant on this point, I just am not an expert on all the similarities.) Or is it significant that they have generally abandoned the ancient Egyptian religion in favor of Islam, have a President rather than a Pharaoh, own televisions and smartphones, are now generally safe from crocodiles, have controlled the Nile's annual flooding (whose volatility was a dominant source of danger and drama in ancient life), etc.? Regarding the Bust of Nefertiti, I guess it's debatable whether 100 years ago qualifies as "quite recently," but I suppose it does seem like yesterday when one is thinking about ancient Egypt! In any case, the analysis certainly may differ depending on the artifact. If the the date of the looting makes a difference I think that only supports the general thrust of my argument.
soamv 11mo ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x73PkUvArJY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x73PkUvArJY
suddenlybananas 11mo ago
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/a-3000-year-old-bracelet-belonging-to-an-ancient-egyptian-pharaoh-has-been-stolen-sold-and-melted-down-for-gold-180987374/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/a-3000-year-old-br... >The ministry found that the artifact had passed from a museum restoration specialist to a silver trader to the owner of a jewelry workshop.
- sct202 11mo ago
  https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpegg27g74do https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpegg27g74do >British Museum gems for sale on eBay - how a theft was exposed The British Museum is also vulnerable to staff theft.
throw47474848 11mo ago
[flagged]
- zdragnar 11mo ago
  To be honest, this is what has always confused me about the land acknowledgements that are popular at the opening of events in various circles... it's not like any of the people doing this have an intention of giving the land back and going back to Europe. Instead of whatever they're trying to do, it sounds more like they're rubbing it in the faces of the descendants.
masfoobar 11mo ago
I'll admit that I might misunderstand the point but surely there is a gray area of what is considered "stolen" and what is "preserved" Humans or groups can be responsible for many foolish acts. Stealing is one of those traits. I am open to accepting this when referring to the British Museum. However, I am also open to groups of people DESTROYING historical items all because they do not share their culture or religious views! Again, I see no issue in Countries like UK returning items that's not theirs but only under grounds that they will be SAFE in their new (returned) home. However, the middle east is mixed with different cultures -- languages and religions. It's also a place of much conflict. As a British man myself and interested in Ancient Egyptian mythology, I would be just as much heartbroken of ancient items being destroyed. You don't have to be an Egyptian who's lineage traces back to this historical times. Its sad, really. One of these days those pyramids will likely be destroyed. Perhaps by War. Perhaps by religious uprising. Again - is "stolen" correct, here? If the British did not take any of these back with them, would many of these items still be around? It could have been destroyed of gone missing. Just a thought.
- jkmcf 11mo ago
  I would add that these finds would, and many did, find there way to the black market, ending up in private collections, which is almost as bad as their destruction.
  - masfoobar 11mo ago
    100% - I should have added this as part of my "gone missing" sentence at the end.
- krapp 11mo ago
  >As a British man myself and interested in Ancient Egyptian mythology, I would be just as much heartbroken of ancient items being destroyed. You don't have to be an Egyptian who's lineage traces back to this historical times. That's none of Britain's concern. How would you feel if Americans showed up and started breaking the angels off of Westminster Abbey or carting off Stonehenge because they didn't trust you to keep them SAFE? You'd probably riot. The belief that you're entitled to another culture's knowledge and artifacts is colonialist thinking. They have the right to destroy their own culture if they want, you only have the right to ask and negotiate with them as peers. What Britain did in many cases wrt these artifacts was clearly theft. And Europeans stripped the Colosseum for parts and the Church destroyed the artifacts of European pagan culture. You people really have no moral high ground to stand on.

I wonder if the British Museum will do the right thing and return previously stolen artefacts?

by gef 11mo ago

I wonder if the British Museum will do the right thing and return previously stolen artefacts?

I’m conflicted. I understand the concept that stolen goods should be returned and it’s the right thing to do, but at the same time it was centuries ago and the preservation was done by them. I have seen well preserved exposition in that museum and then you visit the original country where it’s from and they themselves have nothing or very little left from that era.

jeromegv 11mo ago
We never fail to find someone to defend colonization! > then you visit the original country where it’s from and they themselves have nothing or very little left from that era. You seem to generalize quite a lot in order to validate your view point that everything stolen should stay stolen. Sometimes it's the entire opposite. It's not being shown anywhere, it's just hidden in a museum collection in the UK. In other cases it's exposed but with very little relevant information because it's not particularly relevant to the local culture or the colonizer is too ashamed of the real history of how this object got there that they fail to explain the true story of it. Here's a great podcast that I hope will make you change your mind, lots of examples: https://www.cbc.ca/listen/cbc-podcasts/1030-stuff-the-british-stole https://www.cbc.ca/listen/cbc-podcasts/1030-stuff-the-britis...
- u_sama 11mo ago
  > Syria 2011 > Lebanon 1970s > Algeria 1990s > Afghanistan 1990s A few simple examples of nations who have went through rather devastating wars and civil wars including Islamists who's main ideology is that anything pre-Islamic is to be destroyed as it might lead to heresy, and who go out of their way to destroy historical places and artifacts. And if not war, then the fact that the cultures of those areas traditionally dont value historical artifacts the same way the developped European, or Chinese influenced countries did in their times. I am sorry but it is not defending colonization, it is a legitimate issue given that the middle east is stuck on an unresolved powder keg of issues, keeping the Pregammom in Britain instead of where it came from is a good thing. Even during WW2 the UK, Germany and France set out programs to saveguard historical cultural treasures in protected areas.
  - akudha 11mo ago
    Can't this be on a case by case basis? After all, the British stole from so many places in the world - what if they returned stolen items to countries (India for example) that are interested and capable of safeguarding artifacts and didn't return to those countries where they might get destroyed (Afghanistan etc)?
    - arethuza 11mo ago
      What about examples where there was nothing like theft involved and no colonisation - the Pergamon Altar in the amazing Pergamon Museum in Berlin is a good example... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pergamon_Altar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pergamon_Altar
      - Podrod 11mo ago
        Although the Pergamon Museum also has the Ishtar Gate which was basically smuggled out of Iraq brick by brick.
    - u_sama 11mo ago
      I dont see an issue with such a thing, except on the case of legitimate purchase or corruption like the Egyprian bracelet that was smelted for gold.
  - lostlogin 11mo ago
    > Even during WW2 the UK, Germany and France set out programs to saveguard historical cultural treasures in protected areas. Did they though? That sounds revisionist. Eg The Badeker raids in one direction, a Bomber Harris and everything he did in the other. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baedeker_Blitz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baedeker_Blitz > A few simple examples of nations who have went through rather devastating wars and civil wars including Islamists who's main ideology is that anything pre-Islamic is to be destroyed as it might lead to heresy, and who go out of their way to destroy historical places and artifacts. The Reformation shows that this isn’t just an Islamic trait. Plenty of religious artifacts, and location were destroyed. > the middle east is stuck on an unresolved powder keg of issues It is. And several of the key players in this are missing from your comment. The US, the UK, Russia and China. This isn’t a problem with undeveloped Islamic countries, it’s considerably broader than that.
- suddenlybananas 11mo ago
  >It's not being shown anywhere, it's just hidden in a museum collection in the UK. Are you under the impression that the British Museum does not show its Egyptian collections? >it's not particularly relevant to the local culture Ancient Egypt also has essentially nothing to do with the culture of most of Egypt, with the exception perhaps of the Copts.
  - lostlogin 11mo ago
    This argument would be stronger if the Egyptians were displaying Stonehenge and a few long barrows.
- lm28469 11mo ago
  You can have negative views of colonization and also accept the fact that most artifacts were lost because they were looted before Europeans even arrived.
- Jedd 11mo ago
  > We never fail to find someone to defend colonization! I think you are misrepresenting GP & parent's comments. Yes, absolutely, totally, Brits have a well-deserved reputation of colonisation. But as a hypothetical conundrum, who would you return the relics from a long expired society to -- the current (arguably quite distinct, religiously & culturally) administrations of those lands? What moral right is exercised (or exercisable) of relics of, say, Atenism, crafted 3 to 4 thousand years ago -- locals with an orthogonal religion & culture, or foreigners with an orthogonal religion and culture? (Personally I instinctively lean towards your take, albeit a little less abruptly - but I think it's all quite complicated - partly with the bizarre 'cultural birthright' thing, partly curator cred, less so the accessibility claims.)
  - lentil_soup 11mo ago
    you could, even though I disagree, use that argument for some artifacts, but surely not for the massive collection of things from Greece and Egypt. Those are pretty obvious you can return to the modern countries that sit on those lands. Event if culture and religion has changed those artifacts are part of those peoples heritage, if it weren't then why would the UK care about Stonehenge or Hadrian's Wall? Or Italians about the Coliseum? Just a single anecdotal point but I'm from Latin America and while there's little indigenous blood in me I would still consider indigenous culture and artifacts as part of my culture and that's at the extreme end of colonisation as natives were pretty much wiped out.
  - lostlogin 11mo ago
    > But as a hypothetical conundrum, who would you return the relics from a long expired society to -- the current (arguably quite distinct, religiously & culturally) administrations of those lands? Has this ever been in doubt? With Egyptian artifacts, they’d go to Egypt, with looted Greek artifacts they’d go to Greece. With the heads of Māori warriors, New Zealand Maori. Are there any real world situations where it’s confusing as to who they would be returned to?
    - suddenlybananas 11mo ago
      Greek artifacts from Anatolia, should they go to Greece or Turkey?
- pdabbadabba 11mo ago
  You're using the word "stolen" here with a lot of conviction but, imho, not a lot of rigor. In what sense did people "own" the artifacts that the British removed from Egypt? Who owned them? If nobody owned them, how were they "stolen"? That's the weak version of the problem. The stronger version: how is it the case that Egypt, or Egyptians, today "own" something that has been in the British museum far longer than any of them have been alive? Even if the artifacts were wrongfully taken in the first instance, does that automatically mean that the only right thing to do is to return them, even after centuries? Are the myriad other interests that have accumulated in the interim simply not matter? How long domes something have to remain in Britain for it to meaningfully become part of British heritage as well as Egyptian? Should we also be working to return artifacts looted by the ancient Egyptians to their own ancestral homes, even though the looting occurred thousands of years ago when they were the dominant power? Perhaps they should give back everything south of the First Cataract to the Nubians. (Hopefully it's clear that this is a reductio not a policy proposal!) That's not to say I think it's categorically acceptable for powerful nations to take historical artifacts. But I don't think this has really anything to do with "stealing" in the usual sense. if anything, that rhetoric just obscures the issues here that might truly be worth thinking about.
  - wbl 11mo ago
    The Egyptian peasant lives today much the same as his ancestors did. It's a remarkable degree of continuity! And some works were removed contrary to law quite recently like the head of Nefertiti.
    - pdabbadabba 11mo ago
      Interesting points, but can you explain how they apply here? It's interesting and, afaik, true that modern Egyptians's lives today are more similar to their ancient ancestors' than you might expect (moreso than in many other nations). But how should we think about the relevance of this fact to debates about looted artifacts? Does the fact that they still work fields irrigated by the Nile suffice to give them a claim to repatriate artifacts taken generation ago? (Perhaps there are more similarities than this. I don't mean to be flippant on this point, I just am not an expert on all the similarities.) Or is it significant that they have generally abandoned the ancient Egyptian religion in favor of Islam, have a President rather than a Pharaoh, own televisions and smartphones, are now generally safe from crocodiles, have controlled the Nile's annual flooding (whose volatility was a dominant source of danger and drama in ancient life), etc.? Regarding the Bust of Nefertiti, I guess it's debatable whether 100 years ago qualifies as "quite recently," but I suppose it does seem like yesterday when one is thinking about ancient Egypt! In any case, the analysis certainly may differ depending on the artifact. If the the date of the looting makes a difference I think that only supports the general thrust of my argument.

soamv 11mo ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x73PkUvArJY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x73PkUvArJY

suddenlybananas 11mo ago

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/a-3000-year-old-bracelet-belonging-to-an-ancient-egyptian-pharaoh-has-been-stolen-sold-and-melted-down-for-gold-180987374/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/a-3000-year-old-br... >The ministry found that the artifact had passed from a museum restoration specialist to a silver trader to the owner of a jewelry workshop.

sct202 11mo ago
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpegg27g74do https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cpegg27g74do >British Museum gems for sale on eBay - how a theft was exposed The British Museum is also vulnerable to staff theft.

throw47474848 11mo ago

[flagged]

zdragnar 11mo ago
To be honest, this is what has always confused me about the land acknowledgements that are popular at the opening of events in various circles... it's not like any of the people doing this have an intention of giving the land back and going back to Europe. Instead of whatever they're trying to do, it sounds more like they're rubbing it in the faces of the descendants.

masfoobar 11mo ago

I'll admit that I might misunderstand the point but surely there is a gray area of what is considered "stolen" and what is "preserved" Humans or groups can be responsible for many foolish acts. Stealing is one of those traits. I am open to accepting this when referring to the British Museum. However, I am also open to groups of people DESTROYING historical items all because they do not share their culture or religious views! Again, I see no issue in Countries like UK returning items that's not theirs but only under grounds that they will be SAFE in their new (returned) home. However, the middle east is mixed with different cultures -- languages and religions. It's also a place of much conflict. As a British man myself and interested in Ancient Egyptian mythology, I would be just as much heartbroken of ancient items being destroyed. You don't have to be an Egyptian who's lineage traces back to this historical times. Its sad, really. One of these days those pyramids will likely be destroyed. Perhaps by War. Perhaps by religious uprising. Again - is "stolen" correct, here? If the British did not take any of these back with them, would many of these items still be around? It could have been destroyed of gone missing. Just a thought.

jkmcf 11mo ago
I would add that these finds would, and many did, find there way to the black market, ending up in private collections, which is almost as bad as their destruction.
- masfoobar 11mo ago
  100% - I should have added this as part of my "gone missing" sentence at the end.
krapp 11mo ago
>As a British man myself and interested in Ancient Egyptian mythology, I would be just as much heartbroken of ancient items being destroyed. You don't have to be an Egyptian who's lineage traces back to this historical times. That's none of Britain's concern. How would you feel if Americans showed up and started breaking the angels off of Westminster Abbey or carting off Stonehenge because they didn't trust you to keep them SAFE? You'd probably riot. The belief that you're entitled to another culture's knowledge and artifacts is colonialist thinking. They have the right to destroy their own culture if they want, you only have the right to ask and negotiate with them as peers. What Britain did in many cases wrt these artifacts was clearly theft. And Europeans stripped the Colosseum for parts and the Church destroyed the artifacts of European pagan culture. You people really have no moral high ground to stand on.