4 ms·

Maybe at some point we should declare that this kind of thing belongs to wherever it is now (and where it has been for over a century), and stop having proxy fi

Maybe at some point we should declare that this kind of thing belongs to wherever it is now (and where it has been for over a century), and stop having proxy fights for people who died long before most of us were born? Where do you draw the line otherwise? Did the Benin Bronzes came to be using exclusively peaceful, slave-free, violence-free, eco-friendly, certified-organic, gluten-free methods? If not, should the bronze be melted back into ingots and returned to its rightful place?

blackrock 7y ago
> Maybe at some point we should declare that this kind of thing belongs to wherever it is now Therefore, by your logic, you are basically saying the following: That you can steal $1 billion worth of something (say iPhones), and just wait out 150 years, and then legally claim that it is yours. Do you agree with this? I would think that the person/organization/country that you stole it from, would disagree with you. Coincidentally, this appears to be the exact same argument that countries like Britain and France gives out, when it comes to their stolen war treasures. To which they call the spoils of war. And to add to their arrogance, they even stole a dog and called it “Looty”, and gave it to the Queen of England.
sct202 7y ago
A rule like that would disproportionately benefit a handful of countries, like Britain gets to go around the world plundering artifacts from Greece, Egypt, Benin, India, and China and now it's declared no take backs.
wl 7y ago
I think the Stele of Hammurabi is interesting to consider through this lens. It was originally created in the 18th century BCE to glorify a Babylonian king in what is now Iraq. In the 12th century BCE, an Elamite king conquered Babylon and took it back to the city of Susa (in modern day Iran). It's hypothesized that this king is responsible for erasure of a large portion of the cuneiform text, presumably to make room for a never-incised inscription attesting to the conquering king's glory. The stela was rediscovered in 1901 by French archeologists working with the permission of the local Qajar rulers, restored, and put on display in the Louvre. Should the stele go to the Iraqi government because they govern the area where it was originally created? Should it go to the Iranian government because archeologists discovered it at a site that's currently under the jurisdiction of Iran? Or should it remain with the French, who legitimately (at least, under the laws at the time) excavated it and took it to France? Arguments about the cultural heirs of the object are hard here. The stela depicts King Hammurabi being given the royal symbols of the rod and ring by the sun god Shamesh. The code is written in Akkadian, a language which was nearly dead by the time of Christ. It invokes Marduk, the god of Babylon who was part of a larger pantheon that was long ago forgotten. It's most potent, culturally, as a symbol of a glorious ancient past, albeit one that is utterly alien to the people who live in that region today. Assuming that the object belonged to the Iranian people, did the Qajar rulers have the authority to give it away to the French? At the time of the excavation, scholars in France were much better equipped to analyze and interpret the artifact than those in Iran and Iraq. Does that matter?

blackrock 7y ago

> Maybe at some point we should declare that this kind of thing belongs to wherever it is now Therefore, by your logic, you are basically saying the following: That you can steal $1 billion worth of something (say iPhones), and just wait out 150 years, and then legally claim that it is yours. Do you agree with this? I would think that the person/organization/country that you stole it from, would disagree with you. Coincidentally, this appears to be the exact same argument that countries like Britain and France gives out, when it comes to their stolen war treasures. To which they call the spoils of war. And to add to their arrogance, they even stole a dog and called it “Looty”, and gave it to the Queen of England.

sct202 7y ago

A rule like that would disproportionately benefit a handful of countries, like Britain gets to go around the world plundering artifacts from Greece, Egypt, Benin, India, and China and now it's declared no take backs.

wl 7y ago

I think the Stele of Hammurabi is interesting to consider through this lens. It was originally created in the 18th century BCE to glorify a Babylonian king in what is now Iraq. In the 12th century BCE, an Elamite king conquered Babylon and took it back to the city of Susa (in modern day Iran). It's hypothesized that this king is responsible for erasure of a large portion of the cuneiform text, presumably to make room for a never-incised inscription attesting to the conquering king's glory. The stela was rediscovered in 1901 by French archeologists working with the permission of the local Qajar rulers, restored, and put on display in the Louvre. Should the stele go to the Iraqi government because they govern the area where it was originally created? Should it go to the Iranian government because archeologists discovered it at a site that's currently under the jurisdiction of Iran? Or should it remain with the French, who legitimately (at least, under the laws at the time) excavated it and took it to France? Arguments about the cultural heirs of the object are hard here. The stela depicts King Hammurabi being given the royal symbols of the rod and ring by the sun god Shamesh. The code is written in Akkadian, a language which was nearly dead by the time of Christ. It invokes Marduk, the god of Babylon who was part of a larger pantheon that was long ago forgotten. It's most potent, culturally, as a symbol of a glorious ancient past, albeit one that is utterly alien to the people who live in that region today. Assuming that the object belonged to the Iranian people, did the Qajar rulers have the authority to give it away to the French? At the time of the excavation, scholars in France were much better equipped to analyze and interpret the artifact than those in Iran and Iraq. Does that matter?