5 ms·

I often feel uncomfortable walking around the British Museum, seeing important artefacts from other countries. That said, I’ll try playing devil’s advocate. 1

I often feel uncomfortable walking around the British Museum, seeing important artefacts from other countries. That said, I’ll try playing devil’s advocate. 1. Some items are from areas now controlled by very different people to those for whom the item was originally important. Do modern descendants of the Spanish have any moral claim to Aztec or Inca artefacts, for example? 2. Some items have complex histories, where multiple competing countries could all claim it as part of their history. Where the item was found is not the end of the story. Items from Greece, Turkey, Cyprus for example. 3. By storing them in the British Museum, they are better maintained for future generations. Globally, more people have access to them right now. Perhaps for those where the answer to all three of these is obvious, it’s indefensible that the British Museum still has the items. But there is quite a lot of stuff there where it’s not so obvious when you look into the details, though we should be putting a lot of effort into trying anyway.

AbrahamParangi 4y ago
1. Most Mexicans or Peruvians have indigenous ancestry, they are not exclusively (or even mostly) descendants of the Spanish. It would be better to return those artifacts to the descendants of those from whom it was stolen. 2. Who has an even weaker claim than all other claimants? The British Museum. 3. 2.5M people see the Crown Jewels in a year. The Smithsonian National Museum of American History in DC sees 4.1M visitors in a year. Should the Crown Jewels be moved to the Smithsonian? Surely we could take better care of them (they could go next to Dorothy's slippers) and more people would get to see them.
- blowski 4y ago
  > Who has an even weaker claim than all other claimants? The British Museum. Why?
- yelskcol 4y ago
  >2. Who has an even weaker claim than all other claimants? The British Museum. One of the laziest dismissals I've ever read on this forum. Yep, the world is this zero sum game where they should just dump it on whoever and then let all the competing entities argue amongst themselves
  - AbrahamParangi 4y ago
    Imagine that someone has died, and there are three inheritors squabbling for the various elements of the state. They can’t agree who gets the home, who gets the car, who gets the jewlry, etc. There is also a fourth individual, a thief, who has broken in and stolen various family heirlooms of both sentimental and monetary value. The thief claims then that, because the inheritors are squabbling, the only fair thing to do is that he should hold on to the heirlooms, at least until they sort it out (or so he says). The response is short because the situation is simple. The British Museum contains the stolen heritage of people all over the world. Confusion or disagreement over the most rightful heirs is no defense of this crime.
- x-complexity 4y ago
  >> 1. Some items are from areas now controlled by very different people to those for whom the item was originally important. Do modern descendants of the Spanish have any moral claim to Aztec or Inca artefacts, for example? > 1. Most Mexicans or Peruvians have indigenous ancestry, they are not exclusively (or even mostly) descendants of the Spanish. It would be better to return those artifacts to the descendants of those from whom it was stolen. This is an "easy to say, near-impossible to do" task that's been shoved with little effort from the proposer onto the museum staff. Short of comprehensive DNA analysis, finding the proper descendants for a particular artifact is not trivial. The response given does not take into account multiple competing claims towards the artifact, nor the possibility of all descendants that could properly claim it being dead, whether natural or not. >> 2. Some items have complex histories, where multiple competing countries could all claim it as part of their history. Where the item was found is not the end of the story. Items from Greece, Turkey, Cyprus for example. > 2. Who has an even weaker claim than all other claimants? The British Museum. Calling misdirection on this response: It does not properly address the original question posed. In an attempt to give a proper solution: Items with histories from multiple countries will have to put it into a round-robin-style sharing agreement, where the item/artifact will pass through the countries one by one before circling back.
  - thebooktocome 4y ago
    > This is an "easy to say, near-impossible to do" task that's been shoved with little effort from the proposer onto the museum staff. In principle, this is true, but in many cases the responsible party is very well-known and yet there is active resistance from the British Museum to repatriate the plundered items. For example, the Parthenon Marbles.
    - Chris2048 4y ago
      > the responsible party is very well-known > For example, the Parthenon Marbles. Can you clarify this?
      - PuppyTailWags 4y ago
- iamacyborg 4y ago
  One of my ancestors helped bring the Parthenon marbles to the UK. Another helped return works that were looted by Napoleon during his campaigns (my grandmother had one of Canova’s Ideal Heads which the ancestor received as a gift from Canova for returning those artworks). This stuff is pretty complicated, simply returning it is not possible, for example with ISIS purposefully destroying historical artefacts. Having artefacts in foreign countries is, in my opinion, a net good. It exposes folks to cultures that they would not otherwise get to see.
  - AbrahamParangi 4y ago
    Should the UK give the US the Crown Jewels of the United Kingdom in perpetuity so that more people get to see them? There are more people living in America and our cultural destinations have more visitors from all over the world. Or is it only a net good when the UK keeps the priceless cultural heritage of other nations?
    - iamacyborg 4y ago
      The US have more than enough artifacts from foreign cultures already, don’t you think?
      - AbrahamParangi 4y ago
        The point is: if you were from a culture that was looted, rather than the one which did the looting, would you feel the same as you do now? That it was a net good that the looting had happened so that others might enjoy your priceless heritage as a trophy of conquest?
        iamacyborg 4y ago
        I’m not sure there are many folks still around from cultures that are thousands of years old…

AbrahamParangi 4y ago

1. Most Mexicans or Peruvians have indigenous ancestry, they are not exclusively (or even mostly) descendants of the Spanish. It would be better to return those artifacts to the descendants of those from whom it was stolen. 2. Who has an even weaker claim than all other claimants? The British Museum. 3. 2.5M people see the Crown Jewels in a year. The Smithsonian National Museum of American History in DC sees 4.1M visitors in a year. Should the Crown Jewels be moved to the Smithsonian? Surely we could take better care of them (they could go next to Dorothy's slippers) and more people would get to see them.

blowski 4y ago
> Who has an even weaker claim than all other claimants? The British Museum. Why?
yelskcol 4y ago
>2. Who has an even weaker claim than all other claimants? The British Museum. One of the laziest dismissals I've ever read on this forum. Yep, the world is this zero sum game where they should just dump it on whoever and then let all the competing entities argue amongst themselves
- AbrahamParangi 4y ago
  Imagine that someone has died, and there are three inheritors squabbling for the various elements of the state. They can’t agree who gets the home, who gets the car, who gets the jewlry, etc. There is also a fourth individual, a thief, who has broken in and stolen various family heirlooms of both sentimental and monetary value. The thief claims then that, because the inheritors are squabbling, the only fair thing to do is that he should hold on to the heirlooms, at least until they sort it out (or so he says). The response is short because the situation is simple. The British Museum contains the stolen heritage of people all over the world. Confusion or disagreement over the most rightful heirs is no defense of this crime.
x-complexity 4y ago
>> 1. Some items are from areas now controlled by very different people to those for whom the item was originally important. Do modern descendants of the Spanish have any moral claim to Aztec or Inca artefacts, for example? > 1. Most Mexicans or Peruvians have indigenous ancestry, they are not exclusively (or even mostly) descendants of the Spanish. It would be better to return those artifacts to the descendants of those from whom it was stolen. This is an "easy to say, near-impossible to do" task that's been shoved with little effort from the proposer onto the museum staff. Short of comprehensive DNA analysis, finding the proper descendants for a particular artifact is not trivial. The response given does not take into account multiple competing claims towards the artifact, nor the possibility of all descendants that could properly claim it being dead, whether natural or not. >> 2. Some items have complex histories, where multiple competing countries could all claim it as part of their history. Where the item was found is not the end of the story. Items from Greece, Turkey, Cyprus for example. > 2. Who has an even weaker claim than all other claimants? The British Museum. Calling misdirection on this response: It does not properly address the original question posed. In an attempt to give a proper solution: Items with histories from multiple countries will have to put it into a round-robin-style sharing agreement, where the item/artifact will pass through the countries one by one before circling back.
- thebooktocome 4y ago
  > This is an "easy to say, near-impossible to do" task that's been shoved with little effort from the proposer onto the museum staff. In principle, this is true, but in many cases the responsible party is very well-known and yet there is active resistance from the British Museum to repatriate the plundered items. For example, the Parthenon Marbles.
  - Chris2048 4y ago
    > the responsible party is very well-known > For example, the Parthenon Marbles. Can you clarify this?
    - PuppyTailWags 4y ago
iamacyborg 4y ago
One of my ancestors helped bring the Parthenon marbles to the UK. Another helped return works that were looted by Napoleon during his campaigns (my grandmother had one of Canova’s Ideal Heads which the ancestor received as a gift from Canova for returning those artworks). This stuff is pretty complicated, simply returning it is not possible, for example with ISIS purposefully destroying historical artefacts. Having artefacts in foreign countries is, in my opinion, a net good. It exposes folks to cultures that they would not otherwise get to see.
- AbrahamParangi 4y ago
  Should the UK give the US the Crown Jewels of the United Kingdom in perpetuity so that more people get to see them? There are more people living in America and our cultural destinations have more visitors from all over the world. Or is it only a net good when the UK keeps the priceless cultural heritage of other nations?
  - iamacyborg 4y ago
    The US have more than enough artifacts from foreign cultures already, don’t you think?
    - AbrahamParangi 4y ago
      The point is: if you were from a culture that was looted, rather than the one which did the looting, would you feel the same as you do now? That it was a net good that the looting had happened so that others might enjoy your priceless heritage as a trophy of conquest?
      - iamacyborg 4y ago
        I’m not sure there are many folks still around from cultures that are thousands of years old…