3 ms·

> I'm suggesting that no such destruction of an archaelogical site and sale of historical artifacts to another country (even less so an individual buyer) is leg

> I'm suggesting that no such destruction of an archaelogical site and sale of historical artifacts to another country (even less so an individual buyer) is legitimate or ethical, regardless of whether it was approved by the occupying force at the time. But you are saying that they are legitimate just by your reference to "another country". The borders of today and their respective governments take precedence. You would be fine with artifacts from Sparta being sold to a museum in Athens, even though they were separate states at the time, and the Spartans would have not been happy about that. But if Roman artifacts were sold by Italy to a museum in London, this is illegitimate because it's "another country" even though at the time it was all part of the same empire.

coldtea 4y ago
>You would be fine with artifacts from Sparta being sold to a museum in Athens, even though they were separate states at the time, and the Spartans would have not been happy about that. We can ask the modern Spartans if you wish. Defending colonial-era archeological plundering gets close to racism fast, and what's said here, (to the tune of: what right do they have to their ancient culture, it's changed from the past anyway) is already heavy on racism and colonial entitlement. The next step would be to invoke the "white man's burden" to protect those artifacts and have them in a nicer museum than the natives ever could. All the while ascribing nationalism to the people's connection to their culture (because arbitrary removal of artifacts from their original land and keeping them for display on an colonial power's capital, full of other stolen artifacts from all over the world, is cosmopolitan).
- fallingknife 4y ago
  It's not their culture. The religion of the temple they came from hasn't existed for over a thousand years.
  - coldtea 4y ago
    That religion is not their present cultural practice. It's still their culture, as it was developed throughout history, you know, as cultures are known to do, adopting different things here and there, coming into contact with other ideas, and so. Not to mention that the temple has been a holy site for their next religion too, for close to 2 millenia. Anything to justify colonial plundering I guess...

coldtea 4y ago

>You would be fine with artifacts from Sparta being sold to a museum in Athens, even though they were separate states at the time, and the Spartans would have not been happy about that. We can ask the modern Spartans if you wish. Defending colonial-era archeological plundering gets close to racism fast, and what's said here, (to the tune of: what right do they have to their ancient culture, it's changed from the past anyway) is already heavy on racism and colonial entitlement. The next step would be to invoke the "white man's burden" to protect those artifacts and have them in a nicer museum than the natives ever could. All the while ascribing nationalism to the people's connection to their culture (because arbitrary removal of artifacts from their original land and keeping them for display on an colonial power's capital, full of other stolen artifacts from all over the world, is cosmopolitan).

fallingknife 4y ago
It's not their culture. The religion of the temple they came from hasn't existed for over a thousand years.
- coldtea 4y ago
  That religion is not their present cultural practice. It's still their culture, as it was developed throughout history, you know, as cultures are known to do, adopting different things here and there, coming into contact with other ideas, and so. Not to mention that the temple has been a holy site for their next religion too, for close to 2 millenia. Anything to justify colonial plundering I guess...