Should the British Museum give back artefacts Britain took from other cultures?

steddyeddy

The Elgin marbles, the treasures of Egypt and the Easter island statues are housed in Britain away from their countries of origin. These cultural artefacts have significant spiritual meaning to the nations they belong to. I personally think they should take a plaster cast or any other sort of replication and give the originals back. Poll added for poster's opinions. Link from the Guardian.

The governor of Easter Island has tearfully begged the British Museum to return one of its famous statues, saying: “Give us a chance so he can come back.”

The museum has held the Hoa Hakananai’a – one of the most spiritually important of the Chilean island’s stone monoliths – for 150 years.

“My grandma, who passed away at almost 90 years, she never got the chance to see her ancestor,” said governor Tarita Alarcón Rapu after meeting officials from the British Museum, accompanied by Felipe Ward, Chile’s national assets minister.


'Moai are family': Easter Island people to head to London to request statue back

“I am almost half a century alive and this is my first time,” she added.

The four-tonne statue, or “moai”, is one of hundreds originally found on the island.

Each of the figures was considered to represent tribal leaders or deified ancestors.

It was an emotional moment for the indigenous Rapa Nui visitors when they saw the basalt statue, which for them, contains the spirit of their people.

“I believe that my children and their children also deserve the opportunity to touch, see and learn from him,” Rapu said, with tears in his eyes.

“We are just a body. You, the British people, have our soul,” she added.

Hoa Hakananai’a was taken without permission in 1868 by the British frigate HMS Topaze, captained by Richard Powell, and given to Queen Victoria

nullzero

Of course they should, but they won't.

Under His Eye

NO!

Yer Da sells Avon

Yes, and the occupied six, but sure what can you do?

Signore Fancy Pants

Finders keepers

Losers weepers.

Rhyme

If the countries that want their artefacts returned can keep them in as good a condition as Britain has been keeping them, then of course. If they would be returned only to go to shit, then no.

#controversial

Amirani

I think the town of Kells are still trying to get their book back from Trinity College.

Amirani

Rhyme wrote: »

If the countries that want their artefacts returned can keep them in as good a condition as Britain has been keeping them, then of course. If they would be returned only to go to shit, then no.

#controversial

Artifacts returned to Syria would've been blown up by ISIS most likely.

seamus

Rhyme wrote: »

If the countries that want their artefacts returned can keep them in as good a condition as Britain has been keeping them, then of course. If they would be returned only to go to shit, then no.

#controversial

This. If some national museum wants to keep them and display them and protect them, great.

If some theocracy wants to take them back and destroy them, piss off.

should they?

probably yes.

should they *have to*?

probably no.

Auguste Comte

They stole them fare and square boss, sure why wouldn't they keep them, boss.

super_furry

That would mean that they might have to face up to their history and legacy of going around the world, invading countries, slaughtering innocents and stealing anything of value.

They still won’t acknowledge that the ‘glorious’ empire they keep barking back to was built on the back of slavery, they’re not going to give back what they stole.

IR1SH RANG3R

Amirani wrote: »

I think the town of Kells are still trying to get their book back from Trinity College.

Library fine must be MASSIVE at this stage!

JohnnyFlash

Yes. And the French should send back the Mona Lisa to Italy. And we should send back Caravaggio’s The Taking of Christ. And Chester Beatty wasn’t always ethical when buying his ancient books.

See how this would work?

FTA69

It’s a great museum but it really is The Museum if Robbing C*nts. They also have the cheek to ask people to donate a fiver upon going in there, looool I would in my hole. Imperialist swine.

ELM327

Only if they give back everything else they stole too. Like the six counties!

Potatoeman

super_furry wrote: »

That would mean that they might have to face up to their history and legacy of going around the world, invading countries, slaughtering innocents and stealing anything of value.

They still won’t acknowledge that the ‘glorious’ empire they keep barking back to was built on the back of slavery, they’re not going to give back what they stole.

How far back do you go? Are the Italians going to apologize for the Romans? People these days seem to try and view history through a modern mindset.

Ok - I have the solutions:

We pool all the artefacts, money, etc. from all the countries in the world and split it all evenly per capita - then start from scratch, on an even playing field.

It could be interesting...

lalababa

The statue seems to be of a value to the Islanders that I would find hard to comprehend.
Something along the lines of siritual protectors to the Islanders, maybe as important to them as home rule is to us.Or the pope is to some catholics.BTW I know very little about it.
So it is a tough one.
Saw the statue on the news and I thought that those statues had away longer base going into the ground.

goose2005

from reddit:

There are 887 Moai on Easter Island or in Museum collections.

There are 79 Moai in museums around the world.

Only a quarter were installed. About half are still in the quarry where they were made.

Most of the statues were toppled in the period 1770-1830 by the islanders themselves.

The Easter Island governor may have a good case, but stuff like "My grandma, who passed away at almost 90 years, she never got the chance to see her ancestor" is a bit disingenuous to say the least.

the modern Easter Islanders have very little in common with the culture that built the moai.

similarly, the modern Arab Republic of Egypt has no real connection to ancient Egypt, the people, the language, the religion, everything has changed since then.

s7ryf3925pivug

I think in the case described in the article it should be returned as it was attained by pillaging. Returning items from museums would have to be considered on a case by case basis though

seamus

From the above, it does sound like the statues themselves were something of a cultural tradition or a pride piece during a specific era on the island, which came to an end a long time ago, most likely after some cultural shift like a war or a natural disaster.

As said above, the modern inhabitants of the island have no more a spiritual or cultural connection with these items than a modern Italian does with the Romans who built the Colosseum.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Amirani wrote: »

Artifacts returned to Syria would've been blown up by ISIS most likely.

Not any more, the good guys won.

Franz Von Peppercorn

seamus wrote: »

From the above, it does sound like the statues themselves were something of a cultural tradition or a pride piece during a specific era on the island, which came to an end a long time ago, most likely after some cultural shift like a war or a natural disaster.

As said above, the modern inhabitants of the island have no more a spiritual or cultural connection with these items than a modern Italian does with the Romans who built the Colosseum.

?

Why wouldn’t a modern roman have those connections?

One eyed Jack

The British Museum are quite arrogant about it -

It is the first time that the British Museum, which holds cultural treasures from around the globe, has agreed to hold talks about the statue. But on Tuesday the museum was talking only of a loan, not the return, on the artefact.

“The museum is one of the world’s leading lenders and the trustees will always consider loan requests subject to usual conditions,” a spokeswoman said.


They took someone else’s property, claimed it as their own, and now want to “lend” their property back to it’s owners? Of course they should give it back. If you take something from someone, that doesn’t make it yours, no matter how well you take care of it and whether or not you think they won’t. It’s not your property, it’s theirs. What’s the point in property which is of significance to its owners being stored in a museum where it is of no significance to the people who took it? That’s literally stealing and being a dog in a manger about it.

Harry Palmr

If every country that took something from somewhere else was compelled to return them you can be sure a lot of items would just disappear for good into dubious private collections or be quietly sold on to raise funds for the day the revolution comes and some despot or other has to leave for France (it's so often France) rather quickly.

What should Ireland give back?

maccored

if they stole the artifacts then - like anyone else would be expected to - they should return them. It matters not who 'looks after' them best. Person A might look after property they stole from person B, but they have no right to do so. Same should apply to the Biritish

Zorya

FTA69 wrote: »

It’s a great museum but it really is The Museum if Robbing C*nts. They also have the cheek to ask people to donate a fiver upon going in there, looool I would in my hole. Imperialist swine.

That museum is astonishing, but yes one feels the displayed items have been pillaged. Mind you without the pillage many artefacts would have been lost. What was brought back from caves etc along the Silk Road, though robbed, would likely have been destroyed otherwise, as one example.


I find this hard to answer. Of course it was gathered unfairly but as a result has been meticulously preserved for posterity. Unlike the artefacts in Iraq or the huge Buddha statues or even the Dead Sea and other desert scrolls that were used sometimes as kindling. Really difficult to say. A lot of places don't yet have the facilities for disaster proof storage, for example.

Potatoeman

Potatoeman wrote: »

How far back do you go? Are the Italians going to apologize for the Romans? People these days seem to try and view history through a modern mindset.

romans mainly originated from a migrant tribe of greeks, so yknow even then its dodgy

kneemos

ELM327 wrote: »

Only if they give back everything else they stole too. Like the six counties!

They broke it, they can keep it.

steddyeddy

maccored wrote: »

if they stole the artifacts then - like anyone else would be expected to - they should return them. It matters not who 'looks after' them best. Person A might look after property they stole from person B, but they have no right to do so. Same should apply to the Biritish

Agreed. The attitude of "we'll look after them better so we'll take them and keep them" seems quite colonial. In history the British empire have applied the same logic to whole nations.

If however you subscribe to the idea of "we know better" than perhaps we should run Britain to save them from the self inflicted wound that is Brexit.

Odhinn

steddyeddy wrote: »

Agreed. The attitude of "we'll look after them better so we'll take them and keep them" seems quite colonial. In history the British empire have applied the same logic to whole nations.

If however you subscribe to the idea of "we know better" than perhaps we should run Britain to save them from the self inflicted wound that is Brexit.

The notion of imperialism as 'caretaker' is an attempt to sugar coat the reality of conquest and exploitation, trying to show it as some humanitarian expedition.

BrokenArrows

While i do agree that it sucks for the original nation i dont agree that something taken so long ago should be returned.

If every museum had to return all things taken from other countries it would make museums pretty ****.

Especially in london since all the museums are free so they dont really earn any money to actually purchase these items.

steddyeddy

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The British Museum are quite arrogant about it -

It is the first time that the British Museum, which holds cultural treasures from around the globe, has agreed to hold talks about the statue. But on Tuesday the museum was talking only of a loan, not the return, on the artefact.

“The museum is one of the world’s leading lenders and the trustees will always consider loan requests subject to usual conditions,” a spokeswoman said.


They took someone else’s property, claimed it as their own, and now want to “lend” their property back to it’s owners? Of course they should give it back. If you take something from someone, that doesn’t make it yours, no matter how well you take care of it and whether or not you think they won’t. It’s not your property, it’s theirs. What’s the point in property which is of significance to its owners being stored in a museum where it is of no significance to the people who took it? That’s literally stealing and being a dog in a manger about it.

I think the nation should take the loan and not return the statue. It's not like Britain will be a world power post Brexit.

James Brown

Rhyme wrote: »

If the countries that want their artefacts returned can keep them in as good a condition as Britain has been keeping them, then of course. If they would be returned only to go to shit, then no.

#controversial

Who's to judge? Is Britain to play mammy with the stolen goods?

Rhyme

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Who's to judge? Is Britain to play mammy with the stolen goods?

Nothing to do with Britain, all to do with facilities and personnel.

Does the country that wishes their artefacts returned to them have adequate storage and display facilities to aid in the long-term survival of the artefacts, climate control, clean rooms, dry and safe storage. These typically are custom built. Also sufficient technological support to aid the above. Do they have appropriate staff such as curators, restoration technicians, historians, archaeologists etc.

If country A handed over artefacts to country B for them to put things in safe long-term storage while the facilities are created for their restoration and display then that's fine. Even if it takes years. If country B was just going to pop them into the town hall for any Joe Soap to paw them, I'd say hold on to them for the time being.

I'd include Ireland as a potential 'country B' here. Our National History Museum has had a leaky roof for the past 20 years, I'm surprised that some things haven't rotted away already in there. If the UK or the US (for example) had some historical documents or artefacts belonging to us and we intended to pop them in the Natural History Museum, I'd say they can keep those things until we sort ourselves out.

James Brown

Rhyme wrote: »

Nothing to do with Britain, all to do with facilities and personnel.

Does the country that wishes their artefacts returned to them have adequate storage and display facilities to aid in the long-term survival of the artefacts, climate control, clean rooms, dry and safe storage. These typically are custom built. Also sufficient technological support to aid the above. Do they have appropriate staff such as curators, restoration technicians, historians, archaeologists etc.

If country A handed over artefacts to country B for them to put things in safe long-term storage while the facilities are created for their restoration and display then that's fine. Even if it takes years. If country B was just going to pop them into the town hall for any Joe Soap to paw them, I'd say hold on to them for the time being.

I'd include Ireland as a potential 'country B' here. Our National History Museum has had a leaky roof for the past 20 years, I'm surprised that some things haven't rotted away already in there. If the UK or the US (for example) had some historical documents or artefacts belonging to us and we intended to pop them in the Natural History Museum, I'd say they can keep those things until we sort ourselves out.

What's your address? I'm coming over with a van to take some of your things. You can have them back at a time of my choosing, if ever and if I am satisfied you can look after and respect them in a manner of my choosing. Fair enough?

The J Stands for Jay

steddyeddy wrote: »

Agreed. The attitude of "we'll look after them better so we'll take them and keep them" seems quite colonial. In history the British empire have applied the same logic to whole nations.

If however you subscribe to the idea of "we know better" than perhaps we should run Britain to save them from the self inflicted wound that is Brexit.

Haven't they damaged loads of their artifacts. O vaguely recall reading that they 'cleaned' the Elgin marbles with a wire brush...

And why do we have to call it by such a disparaging name? I don't even know the real name.

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

Potatoeman wrote: »

How far back do you go? Are the Italians going to apologize for the Romans? People these days seem to try and view history through a modern mindset.

Maybe, if Italians were going around telling everyone how proud they were of their glorious empire and getting pissy when anyone mentioned the negative side.

Plenty of people criticised the British Empire at the time. It didn't fall because people improved morally, it fell because they couldn't hang on to it much longer.

RobertKK

The British Museum has been handling stolen goods for a very long time.

They need to do the right thing and return the items back to the rightful owners.

The Rape of Lucretia

No. Britain did so much to collect and preserve the world's heritage, often in countries who had done nothing to look after them before hand or had even destroyed them, the certainly deserve to keep them safely for posterity. It is a small thanks from the rest of the world, and suits so many to have them conveniently collected and so finely displayed and accessible to so many, in London.

RobertKK

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

No. Britain did so much to collect and preserve the world's heritage, often in countries who had done nothing to look after them before hand or had even destroyed them, the certainly deserve to keep them safely for posterity. It is a small thanks from the rest of the world, and suits so many to have them conveniently collected and so finely displayed and accessible to so many, in London.

They did not 'collect' them to preserve them, they stole from other countries.

London could easily get nuked in a nuclear war, I doubt Easter Island would be getting nuked.
The statue would be safer back where it belongs.

Míshásta

I suppose our own National Museum should return its large Egyptian collection as well.

"Among the most important objects exhibited are the gilt and painted cartonnage case of the mummy Tentdinebu dated to the 22nd Dynasty c. 945 - 716 BC; the mummy portraits of a woman and a young boy from Hawara dated to the first/second Century AD; and a model of a wooden boat dated to the early 12th Dynasty c. 1900 BC. There is also a number of important stelae, tomb furniture, offering tables, jewellery and household equipment.

The National Museum’s Egyptian collection comprises about three thousand objects, the majority acquired from excavations carried out in Egypt between the 1890s and the 1920s and ranging in date from the Stone Age to the Middle Ages."

There wouldn't be much left in western museums if this policy was adhered to.

prinzeugen

Is it just Britain OP or are you going after the Portuguese, Spanish, French, Dutch etc also.

Should they give up the stuff they collected or is this just another anti-British rant thread??

mammajamma

I was in cairo a few years ago, the museum is in bits, falling apart. The idea that they should be allowed house more priceless artifacts is just another empty-headed feel-good mission.

An ancient relative of mine was a pirate. So by this ill logic, I should give half my stuff to some random bloke in France because it might be ill-gained and therefore gave me advantages in life that the French blokes ancient ancestors didn't have.

Its spurious reasoning, with no thought of consequence.

As much as Ireland suffered at the hands of the empire, we have also received massive advantages due to proximity. Maybe Ireland should calculate a number in ill-gained wealth and give it to some other country. Makes sense.

Nope.

prinzeugen

super_furry wrote: »

That would mean that they might have to face up to their history and legacy of going around the world, invading countries, slaughtering innocents and stealing anything of value.

They still won’t acknowledge that the ‘glorious’ empire they keep barking back to was built on the back of slavery, they’re not going to give back what they stole.

The French were 100 times worse than Britain ever was.

mammajamma

RobertKK wrote: »

They did not 'collect' them to preserve them, they stole from other countries.

London could easily get nuked in a nuclear war, I doubt Easter Island would be getting nuked.
The statue would be safer back where it belongs.

They did what they did to take advantage. The idea that their modern relatives should hand it all back is crazy stuff.

Its not dissimilar to an extended logic, that because you were born in Ireland and had massive advantages (and took them) versus some guy in Somalia, maybe you should personally contact a guy in Somalia and arrange to share the fruits of your advantages.

That's not how life works, worked, or ever will work. Not to mention that a statue sent back to some island in the middle of nowhere practically guarantees destruction.

mammajamma

Míshásta wrote: »

I suppose our own National Museum should return its large Egyptian collection as well.

"Among the most important objects exhibited are the gilt and painted cartonnage case of the mummy Tentdinebu dated to the 22nd Dynasty c. 945 - 716 BC; the mummy portraits of a woman and a young boy from Hawara dated to the first/second Century AD; and a model of a wooden boat dated to the early 12th Dynasty c. 1900 BC. There is also a number of important stelae, tomb furniture, offering tables, jewellery and household equipment.

The National Museum’s Egyptian collection comprises about three thousand objects, the majority acquired from excavations carried out in Egypt between the 1890s and the 1920s and ranging in date from the Stone Age to the Middle Ages."

There wouldn't be much left in western museums if this policy was adhered to.

There are scores of thieves, in the employ of Chinese millionaires, actively stealing from European museums to return to china (read: hands of millionaires to be displayed in their private collections).

Its a dog eat dog world, to the winner go the spoils. Its amazing that crying about things seems to get so much traction.

Harry Palmr

Sure you've only got to look at Giza, it used to be in the desert now it's inside a ring road and subject to the air pollution of 20+ milion people driving shoddy old diesels.

mammajamma

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Sure you've only got to look at Giza, it used to be in the desert now it's inside a ring road and subject to the air pollution of 20+ milion people driving shoddy old diesels.

And the state of a lot of the pyramids too. Similar to the Taj Mahal, all pictures are taken at very particular angles.

One pyramid in particular looks stunning just outside Cairo. What you don't see in the pictures is the rubbish dump around it.

The museum burning down in Brazil taints my view on this. Typically, I'd say yes, but lack of care and theft or corruption could lead to a lot of artifacts disappearing.