10 ms·

I know some of the museums aren’t the right place to keep some of the artifacts, but I also feel that in general they have been good stewards. My counterpoint

by matrix2003 2y ago

I know some of the museums aren’t the right place to keep some of the artifacts, but I also feel that in general they have been good stewards. My counterpoint is wondering how many would have been destroyed by ISIS or civil unrest in some of the less stable regions of the world.

mikrl 2y ago
>My counterpoint is wondering how many would have been destroyed by ISIS or civil unrest in some of the less stable regions of the world. This line of thought is fascinating to me. We should preserve them for all of humanity? Who chooses the custodian? We want a more nationalist case for repatriation to country of origin? If they get destroyed, it’s not the self-professed custodian nation’s problem or loss. Cynical, perhaps, but you need to balance self-determination with preservation. Maybe having their artifacts back will provide a drive to stability for the sake of heritage.
- matrix2003 2y ago
  I’m actually not sold on my argument, but was rather playing devil’s advocate. I can’t help but feel that all future generations should have the opportunity to learn from artifacts as well, but I’m saying that from a Western perspective. I have no idea how one should fairly choose a custodian or determine what “stability” really means. Maybe as humans touch all corners of the globe, we just accept that historical artifacts are ephemeral things and enjoy them while they last.
- TeaBrain 2y ago
  >Maybe having their artifacts back The idea that modern Egyptians have any claim over the artifacts when they don't share a culture or civilization with those who created the artifacts is tenuous. The artifacts don't belong to the land itself. They belonged to people of a no longer existing civilization that once inhabited the land.
  - mikrl 2y ago
    Consider this though. In the case of Britain, they got the artifacts because they established a protectorate over Egypt and thus were able to excavate and do civil engineering. However, the fact that the artifacts were there to be discovered in the first place was because the Arab and later Ottoman overlords left them there. So who should rightfully claim them? One of the historical suzerains of Egypt? Or the current nation of Egypt who inhabit the ancient Egyptian territory? I can’t think of the ‘right’ (ie just) answer to that question… only practical ones.
interactivecode 2y ago
[flagged]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- noworriesnate 2y ago
  Sounds good, we're using it just for show anyway. How would you like it delivered?
AlotOfReading 2y ago
There's 2 separate Hague conventions establishing an international framework for how to protect heritage in conflict regions. They're not perfect (like pretty much any convention), but they address all the basic issues like sheltering artifacts abroad and dedicating military units to prevent destruction. Also, western institutions have not been ideal stewards themselves, historically. The Pergamon kept the Ishtar gate through bombings in WW2 and the GDR. The British Museum has lost untold numbers of artifacts because they don't even have the resources to do a complete catalog of their collection, let alone properly conserve them.
- arethuza 2y ago
  Speaking of the Pergamon Museum I think the actual Pergamon Altar might be better off back in the actual site of Pergamon - now in Turkey. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pergamon_Altar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pergamon_Altar
- matrix2003 2y ago
  All good points! I did not realize military units were dedicated to this. I’m personally saddened by all the artifacts destroyed recently in the Middle East over ideological differences.
- gadders 2y ago
  >>There's 2 separate Hague conventions establishing an international framework for how to protect heritage in conflict regions. It's not working well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_of_Bamiyan#Destruction_by_the_Islamic_Emirate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_of_Bamiyan#Destruction...
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

mikrl 2y ago

>My counterpoint is wondering how many would have been destroyed by ISIS or civil unrest in some of the less stable regions of the world. This line of thought is fascinating to me. We should preserve them for all of humanity? Who chooses the custodian? We want a more nationalist case for repatriation to country of origin? If they get destroyed, it’s not the self-professed custodian nation’s problem or loss. Cynical, perhaps, but you need to balance self-determination with preservation. Maybe having their artifacts back will provide a drive to stability for the sake of heritage.

matrix2003 2y ago
I’m actually not sold on my argument, but was rather playing devil’s advocate. I can’t help but feel that all future generations should have the opportunity to learn from artifacts as well, but I’m saying that from a Western perspective. I have no idea how one should fairly choose a custodian or determine what “stability” really means. Maybe as humans touch all corners of the globe, we just accept that historical artifacts are ephemeral things and enjoy them while they last.
TeaBrain 2y ago
>Maybe having their artifacts back The idea that modern Egyptians have any claim over the artifacts when they don't share a culture or civilization with those who created the artifacts is tenuous. The artifacts don't belong to the land itself. They belonged to people of a no longer existing civilization that once inhabited the land.
- mikrl 2y ago
  Consider this though. In the case of Britain, they got the artifacts because they established a protectorate over Egypt and thus were able to excavate and do civil engineering. However, the fact that the artifacts were there to be discovered in the first place was because the Arab and later Ottoman overlords left them there. So who should rightfully claim them? One of the historical suzerains of Egypt? Or the current nation of Egypt who inhabit the ancient Egyptian territory? I can’t think of the ‘right’ (ie just) answer to that question… only practical ones.

interactivecode 2y ago

[flagged]

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
noworriesnate 2y ago
Sounds good, we're using it just for show anyway. How would you like it delivered?

AlotOfReading 2y ago

There's 2 separate Hague conventions establishing an international framework for how to protect heritage in conflict regions. They're not perfect (like pretty much any convention), but they address all the basic issues like sheltering artifacts abroad and dedicating military units to prevent destruction. Also, western institutions have not been ideal stewards themselves, historically. The Pergamon kept the Ishtar gate through bombings in WW2 and the GDR. The British Museum has lost untold numbers of artifacts because they don't even have the resources to do a complete catalog of their collection, let alone properly conserve them.

arethuza 2y ago
Speaking of the Pergamon Museum I think the actual Pergamon Altar might be better off back in the actual site of Pergamon - now in Turkey. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pergamon_Altar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pergamon_Altar
matrix2003 2y ago
All good points! I did not realize military units were dedicated to this. I’m personally saddened by all the artifacts destroyed recently in the Middle East over ideological differences.
gadders 2y ago
>>There's 2 separate Hague conventions establishing an international framework for how to protect heritage in conflict regions. It's not working well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_of_Bamiyan#Destruction_by_the_Islamic_Emirate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_of_Bamiyan#Destruction...

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]