4 ms·
I was execting to disagree with the points made by the "remian" essay, but there... aren't any? It's just a recounting of how the marbles got where they are.
by sp332 3y ago
I was execting to disagree with the points made by the "remian" essay, but there... aren't any? It's just a recounting of how the marbles got where they are.
- carabiner 3y agoThat's called disagreeing. Their arguments are: * They were legally transferred by the govt in power in Greece at the time * Elgin rescued the marbles from destruction from an apathetic state * Greek government of today can't speak for the state of Greece then If you don't consider these valid, then yes, you stand on the "return" side.
- Ardms78 3y agoThis discusses the argument about legaly transfer [1]. Weak but there is an argument. I think this is the only argument worth disputing. (1)[https://theferret.scot/how-did-the-elgin-marbles-end-up-in-the-uk/ https://theferret.scot/how-did-the-elgin-marbles-end-up-in-t...]
- kmlx 3y ago> Elgin rescued the marbles from destruction from an apathetic state i would say it’s even worse than that: > According to a Turkish local, marble sculptures that fell were being burned to obtain lime for building.[5] from https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elgin_Marbles https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elgin_Marbles
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- sp332 3y agoSo the argument is more "because we can" than "because it would be good in any way".
- AndrewOMartin 3y agoTo me, the discussion about the means of acquisition is only relevant if the debate is "Should the UK be legally compelled to return the marbles", but if the debate is "Should the UK return the marbles" then I don't feel its relevant either way.