Giving Egypt back its Artifacts?

IrishEyes19

Thought I'd throw out a question here as it's been on my mind for a while now. I absolutely love Ancient Egyptian history; its art, architecture, politics, everything about it. A marvelous civilization that I'd argue easily matches even the Ancient Roman and Greek civilizations.

But what really struck me when I went to London a while back and visited the museums was how there was an unbelievable amount of Egypt's ancient artifacts there and under the ownership of Great Britain or else were on tour from other countries other than Egypt itself. I already knew this was the case, but it was just a little sad and shocking to see all these beautiful items out of their natural setting.

Now one can argue, well you most likely wouldnt get to see these as freely if they were back in Egypt and there is absolute protection bestowed on these items to ensure their safety, but I think its really sad that these items which are priceless are effectively not in the hands of the people whose ansesstors created them. I mean if you really want to delve into the moral aspects of it, the mummified remains are effectively passed humans who are being showcased in foreign lands constantly rather than been given the respectful afterlife they wished for in creating the pyramids and tombs in the first place.

There is no also law in place that determines ownership on such items from the ancient eras, unlike the dicussions which have taken place on items from ww2 to decide this.

the argument also seems to be that protecting ancient cultures seems to have the support from many non western states but not from western states such as GB as they feel it will empty their national mueseums, they also argue due to the times, they acquired the artifacts legally, but I really feel its only right to give Egypt back its artifacts, and if neccessary help and assist them in protecting them and securing them if they have to.

I'd welcome any thoughts on the issue

Jolly Red Giant

No

Of course artifacts should be returned to their places of origin and if the 'West' is worried about the protection of such artifacts then it can provide the funds for such protection and care.

The 'legal at the time' argument is bogus and based on the use of economic, political and military might against a subjugated people. The starkest example of this was the trade in Toi Moko - decapitated heads of the Maori people with facial tattoos. In the early part of the nineteenth century there was a widespread trade in such decapitated heads many of whom ended up in western museums. Up to the present day many western museums refuse to return these Maori remains to their homes and over half of the heads that are known to exist - numbering 500 (and this is a fraction of the total heads that were traded) still remain in western museums.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10471941

These Maori remains were eventually repatriated in 2010 after a wave of controversy.

Manach

Don't care either way

Ancient Egyptian culture is world renowned. This is in no small part to these collections scattered around the world which attracts many visitors each year.
AFAIR from a book on Egyptian history (on Champollion and Hierographics), a constant problem was the theft and distruction of these artifacts from "tomb robbers" - who were driven to loot and disperse grave items. As well, artifacts such as mummies were so common that the bandages where used as fuel during the early 19thC. The initial Western collectors of these had the permission from the Ottoman authorities, and whilst the methods they used were crude by modern standards, it was the beginning of the re-discovery of the ancient Egyptians.
Thus the collections should remain as it.

Judgement Day

Don't care either way

The Egyptian artefacts are better off in places like the British Museum where they will be best looked after and seen by the maximum number of visitors. Where they came from originally is neither here nor there - literally ancient history which there's no point trying to rewrite just to satisfy the politically correct squad.

Nitochris

No

It is an interesting question - on the one hand it is now a common history it belongs to everyone and can educate distant cultures, some of these exhibits such as (to broaden it out) the Elgin marbles were protected by their move, though in peace time and with increased skills in museum care this may not be relevant any longer.

On the other hand these artefacts loose much in the removal from their original context - such as the Elgin marbles. Then we have what is probably the "politically correct" idea mentioned by Judgement Day that the acquisitions have often been the result of a colonial mindset, often (not always) taken without the subject or sub-altern peoples consent and so cannot ethically be held. Their is also the nationalist approach - these belong to our people.

The ideal resolution to the Elgin problem, which could also apply to others such as the Egyptian example in this thread, would be an official repatriation with an indefinate loan to the current host museums - however given the politics and passions involved it is an unlikely solution.

Jolly Red Giant

No

Manach wrote: »

The initial Western collectors of these had the permission from the Ottoman authorities,

One group exploiting the Egyptian people giving permission to another group exploiting the Egyptian people to plunder ancient artifacts - that's okay then - sorry for not understanding the issue :rolleyes:

Farcheal

Don't care either way

NO, have you seen what those crazy Iranians are doing to the Zoroaster relics? They would probably want to remove them as they are a reminder to a pre-Islamic past, which doesn't go well with the Arabic Powers that be.

Manach

Don't care either way

Jolly Red Giant wrote: »

One group exploiting the Egyptian people giving permission to another group exploiting the Egyptian people to plunder ancient artifacts - that's okay then - sorry for not understanding the issue :rolleyes:

Might I inquire the context of your own understanding of the historical issue.
Your sources say the interaction of the Ottoman empire with the Egyptian ruling elites (as to talk of the "people" seems to scribe a political polity that did not exist) or else on Pharonic Egyptian history, where these artifacts were created in the context of a state that went through its own phases of imperial expansion and conquest.

Jolly Red Giant

No

Farcheal wrote: »

NO, have you seen what those crazy Iranians are doing to the Zoroaster relics? They would probably want to remove them as they are a reminder to a pre-Islamic past, which doesn't go well with the Arabic Powers that be.

The 'crazy' West has destroyed more artifacts, relics, cultures and peoples than the 'crazy Iranians' could do in a million years. In all honest - the pomposity of such rubbish demonstrates an utter and complete lack of respect for people in the non-Western world.

Farcheal

Don't care either way

Jolly Red Giant wrote: »

The 'crazy' West has destroyed more artifacts, relics, cultures and peoples than the 'crazy Iranians' could do in a million years. In all honest - the pomposity of such rubbish demonstrates an utter and complete lack of respect for people in the non-Western world.

http://justicemusings.wordpress.com/2012/01/02/islam-and-destruction-go-hand-in-hand/

http://grendelreport.posterous.com/muslims-target-works-of-pre-islamic-egyptians

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/05/egypt-fatwa_2.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Zoroastrians

Hm, i really haven't researched this at all have I?

Also, you many want to look at this jolly

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Revolution

and this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Cultural_Revolution

Jolly Red Giant

No

Farcheal wrote: »

http://justicemusings.wordpress.com/2012/01/02/islam-and-destruction-go-hand-in-hand/

http://grendelreport.posterous.com/muslims-target-works-of-pre-islamic-egyptians

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/05/egypt-fatwa_2.html

Hm, i really haven't researched this at all have I?

Your point is irrelevent - The arrogance and pomposity of the 'West' in pointing a finger at anyone they deem beneath them.

Am I in favour of this destruction of artifacts? - no

Would I like to see artifacts repatriated in such circumstances? - no

Do I recognise that the refusal of the 'West' to return stolen artifacts (and that's what they are) is the height of arrogance given the history of destruction of artifacts by the West and the continued snobbish and arrogant attitude towards all things non-western (are exemplified by the attitude of Albanel over the Toi Moko in 2007) ? - yes

As I said previously - if the 'West' is worried about the security and care of returned artifacts then they should put their hand in their pocket and assist the native country in dealing appropriately with such artifacts but western museums have no right to keep stolen artifacts.

pinkypinky

Don't care either way

I studied ancient history in college so I've spent a lot of time in the British Museum. New Labour promised to return the Parthenon marbles in the late 90s and then once they got into power, they realised how much money they make so didn't make good on it. Haven't made it to Egypt yet but have numerous visits to Rome and Athens. This topic came up again and again in class.

If something is returned (and I doubt any country would be in a hurry to return artefacts), the problem becomes where do we stop?

If the Elgin marbles, for example, are given back to Greece and housed in the museum waiting for them on the Acropolis, what next? All the black and red figure vases? Every classical Greek statue, Cycladic figurine and amphora?

Does every artefact from every country then get returned too? Why stop there? Picasso is French so all of his paintings (that are not privately owned) should be in France? All Da Vinci's work goes back to Italy?

goose2005

Does every artefact from every country then get returned too? Why stop there? Picasso is French so all of his paintings (that are not privately owned) should be in France? All Da Vinci's work goes back to Italy?

Why only the country, though? Is it fair that if something was found in Kerry, it'd probably end up in a Dublin museum? Maybe everything should just be left in the ground.

IrishEyes19

No

I can see loads of interesting points here. And really good arguments for both sides. But many of the mummified bodies are the ancient kings and queens of Egypt. Would Britain be quite so adamant to keep them in Britain, if Ireland or any other nature had claimed Queen Victoria or Henry V111 bodies before the British did and buried them here for show?

Different era I know and not plausible. but just a thought.

And also to the poster who said they are kept better in Britain. Not true at all. Egypt houses tutankhamun among many other of their ancient artifacts, they are well advanced in the storage and up keep of their artifacts.

It is a very moral question I admit, I just feel they have a right to ownership.

Judgement Day

Don't care either way

The last example of this sort of political correct nonsense that took place was the return of the "Stone of Scone" aka the "Stone of Destiny" from Westminister Abbey to Scotland. It was taken to England by force (King Edward I) in 1296 and its return was instigated as a stunt by worthless bus conductor politician (John Major) to try and garner electoral support for the Tories in Scotland.

Should we empty out the Hunt Collection, Chester Beatty Collection and the National Museum of anything not produced in Ireland?

IrishEyes19

No

Judgement Day wrote: »

The last example of this sort of political correct nonsense that took place was the return of the "Stone of Scone" aka the "Stone of Destiny" from Westminister Abbey to Scotland. It was taken to England by force (King Edward I) in 1296 and its return was instigated as a stunt by worthless bus conductor politician (John Major) to try and garner electoral support for the Tories in Scotland.

Should we empty out the Hunt Collection, Chester Beatty Collection and the National Museum of anything not produced in Ireland?

I understand the logistics behind it, Judgement Day. I just don't think its right that is all. Obviously feasibility and other factors have to be taken into account. But I'm staunch on my opinion that Egypt should at least be allowed to get some of their artifacts, particularly the most important ones. Completely wrong for GB, Germany and other nations to be housing them.

RobbingBandit

Don't care either way

I would say no for now, at least until the country is stable again, many items were looted in the uprising last year,but it brings a question to mind should items be returned to Egypt then why not return the Mona Lisa to Italy or the Book of Kells to Kells.

IrishEyes19

No

RobbingBandit wrote: »

I would say no for now, at least until the country is stable again, many items were looted in the uprising last year,but it brings a question to mind should items be returned to Egypt then why not return the Mona Lisa to Italy or the Book of Kells to Kells.

definately agree with the stability point. As for the book of kells, its speculated anyway, Robbingbandit, that the book was created in many different monastries and areas, iona for example and then brought to kells and the illustrations were added elsewhere. it doesnt exactly have a full ownership.

As for the Mona Lisa, I definately wont be a hypocrite and say no to it returning to Italy, were it to happen. But the egyptians have actually requested their rights to their items back many of times, and there is a massive amount of artifacts taken from Egypt.

Bannasidhe

No

RobbingBandit wrote: »

I would say no for now, at least until the country is stable again, many items were looted in the uprising last year,but it brings a question to mind should items be returned to Egypt then why not return the Mona Lisa to Italy or the Book of Kells to Kells.

How would you feel if the Book of Kells or the Ardagh Chalice were in London?
They could very easily have ended up there - brought over for 'safe keeping' during the War of Independence for example and in 1922 the British Museum could have decided to hang on to them to ensure their continued safety during the Civil War - after all, the priceless National Archives were blown to bits in the Four Courts.


BTW the Mona Lisa was purchased by François I and da Vinci brought it to France himself - so it doesn't really fit the same category as artefacts which were looted or 'acquired' during colonial rule the OP was referring to.

IrishEyes19

No

It's utterly sickening to be honest. Egypt is in no way mediocre in protecting their artifacts or preserving them. That is obvious with what they already are protecting, ie their pyramids, tombs and artifacts, and schrolls. Its insulting and untrue to even suggest they are not capable of storing and protecting their own artifacts. Not the case at all. Cairo itself is home to muesums, and next to many of the most famous egyptian sites today.

a reason most people argue for Britain and Germany (another holder of Egyptian artifacts) is its easier for us Westerners to access them and see them. It's a selfish reason and coming from someone who loves History and to see them would be marvellous, its a sad thought that the people whose ancesstors created them, have no right to ownership.

clashburke

No

i voted yes but i believe that if thay are in a national public gallary/museum with high visitor rates (british museum) ,then thay are appraicated by enough people...
egyptians have not a very high regard for their history i believe!! if its viewed by the word its respected by the world and it need not be moved

Bannasidhe

No

clashburke wrote: »

i voted yes but i believe that if thay are in a national public gallary/museum with high visitor rates (british museum) ,then thay are appraicated by enough people...
egyptians have not a very high regard for their history i believe!! if its viewed by the word its respected by the world and it need not be moved

Egypt has a huge amount of respect for it's history and takes incredible care of it's artefacts - which is more then can be said for many of the tomb raiders posing as archaeologists who rampaged through places like Karnak in the 1920s.

RobbingBandit

Don't care either way

I wouldn't be too happy to see significant historical artifacts like the book or indeed the chalice housed in the British Museum and I agree the Mona Lisa was a silly choice.

Bannasidhe

No

RobbingBandit wrote: »

I wouldn't be too happy to see significant historical artifacts like the book or indeed the chalice housed in the British Museum and I agree the Mona Lisa was a silly choice.

But what makes the Book and the Chalice from Ireland different to the Marbles and Statues from Greece or the Sarcophagi and Papyrus from Egypt?

People have to travel to Dublin to see them - wouldn't more people get to enjoy them if they were in London?
Since they were created during a historical period when Ireland was 'exporting' Christianity across Europe are they still 'ours' or do they now belong to a European/Global history?

IrishEyes19

No

Regarding the book, you are talking about an item that's origins are still being researched and identified. The book was moved around to many monastic holdings during its creation.

But the artifacts from Egypt are distinctly Egyptian. And they have a massive support and admiration from the Egyptian people, the problem being so many of their items lie in the Western World. As I pointed out before, some of the mummified remains are their ancient royalty for gods sake. Seems only right they have claim to those at least.

I understand that for purposes of research what Howard Carter and similar people did, but such items should have been returned fully afterwards. The Pyramids were tombs, massive graveyards in fact. Would you walk into Glasn....in Dublin and dig up michael collins, de valeras and other Irish figures body to check if any documents were buried with him. certainly not without family consent thats for sure. and Im using a contemporary example as many graves are still being disbturbed in egypt, items removed and never put back. by all means have heavy security around the items and pyramids. But there is a certain sadness that these amazing people built these wonderful tombs so that their bodies and belongings could rest there for eternity, and we come along and take away their "afterlife" wishes and turn them into a showcase behind glass cases half way across the world. The tombs should stay as they are with the remains intact. Touring is fine as long as nothing is touched.

Historical research is wonderful and so important to record for future references, but it can go too far sometimes and the Pryamid item removals is one that really bothers me.

clashburke

No

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Egypt has a huge amount of respect for it's history and takes incredible care of it's artefacts - which is more then can be said for many of the tomb raiders posing as archaeologists who rampaged through places like Karnak in the 1920s.

i siad egyptians.. the state is very proud and takes great care of its history but many of its people(not all) have little intrest in it IMO

Bannasidhe

No

clashburke wrote: »

i siad egyptians.. the state is very proud and takes great care of its history but many of its people(not all) have little intrest in it IMO

That's a very sweeping statement.

Exactly the same could be said about the Irish. Just off the top of my head we have had:
There was a recent case of a farmer being prosecuted for the destruction of a ring fort and the judge stated this problem was so widespread a marker needed to be put down. Friends of the Earth estimate 44% are already gone.
We have had a helipad built at Clonmacnoise.
The M3 Controversy.
Carrickmines.
Not to forget the greatest bit of vandalism in Europe - the destruction of Wood Quay.

goose2005

IrishEyes19 wrote: »

I can see loads of interesting points here. And really good arguments for both sides. But many of the mummified bodies are the ancient kings and queens of Egypt. Would Britain be quite so adamant to keep them in Britain, if Ireland or any other nature had claimed Queen Victoria or Henry V111 bodies before the British did and buried them here for show?

Different era I know and not plausible. but just a thought.

And also to the poster who said they are kept better in Britain. Not true at all. Egypt houses tutankhamun among many other of their ancient artifacts, they are well advanced in the storage and up keep of their artifacts.

It is a very moral question I admit, I just feel they have a right to ownership.

Many of the early English kings are buried in France. And what connection does the modern Arab Republic of Egypt have to ancient Khemet?

Bannasidhe wrote: »

How would you feel if the Book of Kells or the Ardagh Chalice were in London?
They could very easily have ended up there - brought over for 'safe keeping' during the War of Independence for example and in 1922 the British Museum could have decided to hang on to them to ensure their continued safety during the Civil War - after all, the priceless National Archives were blown to bits in the Four Courts.

I wouldn't care. Why should it be in Dublin, anyway? Why not Ardagh, or Limerick? Dublin has no more claim on it than London or any other museum. The Book of Kells is more Scottish than Irish, given that it was probably written on Iona. So long as they were in a public museum and scholars had access to them, i don't really care, and I don't like politicians using centuries-old inheritance nonsense to make points against "the West".

BTW the Mona Lisa was purchased by François I and da Vinci brought it to France himself - so it doesn't really fit the same category as artefacts which were looted or 'acquired' during colonial rule the OP was referring to.

Most of them were legally acquired, according to the laws of the people governing Egypt at the time. And it's not clear how exactly the people who sold Mona Lisa to Francois got it. And couldn't the legitimate king of France claim the painting as his inheritance?

IrishEyes19 wrote: »

Regarding the book, you are talking about an item that's origins are still being researched and identified. The book was moved around to many monastic holdings during its creation.

But the artifacts from Egypt are distinctly Egyptian. And they have a massive support and admiration from the Egyptian people, the problem being so many of their items lie in the Western World. As I pointed out before, some of the mummified remains are their ancient royalty for gods sake. Seems only right they have claim to those at least.

But what connection do 21st century AD Egyptians have to the royalty of 21st century BC Egypt? Given the time that's passed, I'm as likely to be a descendant of Egyptian kings as they are.

Manach

Don't care either way

goose2005 wrote: »

Given the time that's passed, I'm as likely to be a descendant of Egyptian kings as they are.

Then have you mummy issues? (Sorry could not resist)

slowburner

Can we have a 'don't know' in the poll?
When I first looked at this thread, I was all in favour of returning Egypt's antiquities.
After a little research, I'm not at all sure.

Zahi Hawass, the driven man behind the call for the return of Egyptian antiquities has been removed from his position as Minister for Antiquities where had absolute control over the issuing of licenses for excavation and a staff of 30,000.
http://www.egyptindependent.com/node/351660

It seems there's something rotten in the state.
http://www.egyptindependent.com/node/468858

Would these antiquities be safer in Egypt than in Western Europe?

On the one hand, there is a symmetry in returning Egyptian antiquities to Egypt. I would feel pretty aggrieved if 'our' bog bodies were in an American collection, for example.
On the other, is the overriding concern about the survival of these antiquities.
My opinion is that this is what matters most, and Egypt just looks too risky at the moment.

Another valid reason for not returning the antiquities is to avoid capitulation to blackmail.
Hawass threatened to remove permission for excavation from archaeologists whose countries did not return Egyptian antiquities.
I don't know if this threat is still standing.

If these antiquities become the sole preserve of Egypt, future research would lose the objectivity of international Egyptologists.

The real issue for Dr Spencer is not whether specific objects are returned or not, but rather that a universal spirit of co-operation prevails in the world of Egyptology. He confirms that such a spirit does exist today and he hopes to nourish it in the future.

http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/spencer.htm

Fratton Fred

No

IMHO, these artifacts are so old they belong to humanity as much as the Egyptians, but they should be exhibited where they were discovered.

I think they should go back to Egypt, but under the protection if the UN so they can be properly protected.