Looted art and reparations

[TwoSheds]

that clearly isn't the case though in any of this

Correct. But it is nonetheless a nuance that would preclude any sane person from giving stuff back , a nuance which apparently doesn't exist in the minds of some people.

If you give it back it must go to "the people", it must be safe, and ideally it must be useful/ available for study, though I accept this is not a nuance that should get in the way of giving it back.

The reason why an item is where it is is also of massive bearing in deciding whether an item needs to go back and who it should go back to. Ideally there'd be an international body to decide such things and perhaps there is, I don't know. The decision shouldn't really rest in the hands of a dictator though.

 

[Jericholyte2]

I don’t see how, in the age of 3D printing, we don’t print replicas, pop them in the museums as a representation of artefacts, and return to originals.

 

[VanDeBank]

well, it kinda is

China destroyed a lot of artifacts in the past..

Isis more recently too, a terrible consequence of instability in the region

but in any case it's besides the point.. these things should be given back to their rightful owners

Stability isn't the same thing. Dictatorships can be perfectly stable. Democracies can burst up into flames too.

 

[Tarrou]

I don’t see how, in the age of 3D printing, we don’t print replicas, pop them in the museums as a representation of artefacts, and return to originals.

they've started creating replicas for all the shit ISIS destroyed

 

[Jippy]

How much stuff do people reckon will be given back over say the next 20 years?

The British Museum is massive and I went to the Met in NYC for the first time this year - that place is huge too. Add in the major museums across Europe and you're talking literally millions of artefacts.
There's no way that's all going to be returned realistically and assessing the provenance of a lot of it will be nigh on impossible.

 

[cyberman]

What gives a dodgy Egyptian dictator the right either? You have to find a suitable guardian for the artifact, you can't just put it in danger or in the hands of someone who will use the profits to do bad things. I agree with the principle of giving it back. I'd happily just have a lottery to give it back to a random Egyptian citizen if I thought it would be fair on them or the artifact. Clearly it wouldn't be though so I wouldn't support that.

The dodgy dictator and the people of that country have more right to the artefacts than the British whose right seems to be they simply stole it many years ago?
Do they need USA style puppet regimes to get back what’s rightfully theirs? It’s literally not the Brits possession to study

 

[africanspur]

I'd be all for helping Egyptians come and see it regardless of whether it's moved or not.

So even in this reality where the visa process becomes effortless for Egyptians, who's paying the hundreds of pounds for flights to London and accommodation here? In a country where a large number of the population live under the poverty line?

And why should they have to travel for a minimum of 6 hours to see it when they can just see it in their own capital city?

 

[SinNombre]

So even in this reality where the visa process becomes effortless for Egyptians, who's paying the hundreds of pounds for flights to London and accommodation here? In a country where a large number of the population live under the poverty line?

And why should they have to travel for a minimum of 6 hours to see it when they can just see it in their own capital city?

It is a silly argument.

It is even worse when you realize 0.1% of all artifacts are generally on exhibit with the biggest museums like the British, or NY or Chicago. There is a clip of a Native American in the original linked video going to the basement of the Art Institute to see his tribe’s own history kept permanently under lock and out of sight.

 

[harms]

The only reason not to return something like this immediately is if it’s not just a dictatorship but something like ISIS that actively seeks to destroy every historical artifact that doesn’t fit into their view of the world.

As for the Putin hypothetical — he will use it for his political gain, just as he uses history and museums now, but it’s hardly a legit reason not to return an item. I guess you can make an argument for pausing the transfer while the country is at war using logistics as an explanation…

As a museum worker myself, even if I work with contemporary art which rarely faces similar issues, I do wish for a transcontinental utopia where artifacts are kept safe, are available equally for anyone and aren’t used for ill purposes but it goes without saying that this is simply an impossible scenario.

 

[adexkola]

There clearly are. Loads of them. You wouldn't give it to someone who wants to throw it in the bin would you?

It's their property. So yes, I would.

There is no need to "White Man's Burden" this issue. Any concerns of misuse or damage to the artifacts are very likely to be (at the very least) indirectly linked to colonial/neo-colonial aftereffects. And at the very least, if concerns of safety are genuine, I'd rather they be relocated to the closest possible safe location. If not Timbuktu, then Abidjan. Not Paris, or London, who regularly deny visa access to citizens of the countries that own those artifacts.

 

[MoskvaRed]

How much stuff do people reckon will be given back over say the next 20 years?

The British Museum is massive and I went to the Met in NYC for the first time this year - that place is huge too. Add in the major museums across Europe and you're talking literally millions of artefacts.
There's no way that's all going to be returned realistically and assessing the provenance of a lot of it will be nigh on impossible.

The bulk will stay in Europe in my opinion unless the country in question is sufficiently important to be worth appeasing (e.g. China, India). For the rest, where it is blatant looting (like the Benin artefacts), it will probably be handed over. Where there is an argument that Europeans discovered the artefacts (so plenty of sites in Egypt, Iraq, Cambodia, Java), they will argue to keep them.

 

[Conor]

So even in this reality where the visa process becomes effortless for Egyptians, who's paying the hundreds of pounds for flights to London and accommodation here? In a country where a large number of the population live under the poverty line?

And why should they have to travel for a minimum of 6 hours to see it when they can just see it in their own capital city?

The British are the most civilised, altruistic gate keepers in the world, why trust the lowly Egyptians over them?

 

[Eyepopper]

Look, your ancestors didn't sail round the world enslaving and murdering people, destroying civilisations and stealing their shit just so you woke snowflakes can hand it all back!

 

[Withnail]

This discussion always reminds me of this bit by James Acaster

 

[Sky1981]

Can't believe some of the reasoning and justification in this thread...

 

[Adisa]

There clearly are. Loads of them. You wouldn't give it to someone who wants to throw it in the bin would you?

This is a bullshit argument. Why haven't the Benin Bronzes that were stolen been returned then? Nigeria has been a democracy for over 20 years.

 

[Adisa]

The mental gymnastics some engage in not to give the artifacts back are crazy.
The idea that people of these countries should travel to see their own cultural heritage is a bit of a joke tbh.

 

[Adisa]

The only reason not to return something like this immediately is if it’s not just a dictatorship but something like ISIS that actively seeks to destroy every historical artifact that doesn’t fit into their view of the world.

As for the Putin hypothetical — he will use it for his political gain, just as he uses history and museums now, but it’s hardly a legit reason not to return an item. I guess you can make an argument for pausing the transfer while the country is at war using logistics as an explanation…

As a museum worker myself, even if I work with contemporary art which rarely faces similar issues, I do wish for a transcontinental utopia where artifacts are kept safe, are available equally for anyone and aren’t used for ill purposes but it goes without saying that this is simply an impossible scenario.

ISIS is a completely different end of the spectrum. Most dictators have no interest in destroying their countries' artifacts.
I also find the argument about safety baffling. How many times do we hear artificats have been stolen in many African countries for example?

 

[Penna]

The Elgin Marbles should go back, the Greeks have built a spiffy new museum for those.

Personally I'm more engaged with the "incredibly wealthy individuals buying world-famous works of art and then hiding them away" debate. At least with other artefacts they'd go back to a museum where they'd still be accessible. Mind you, the purchase of Salvator Mundi (which seems to now be owned by bin Salman of Saudi Arabia) showed that even billionaires can slip up, as it's not been seen since the purchase and there are now doubts about the provenance.

 

[led_scholes]

What gives a dodgy Egyptian dictator the right either? You have to find a suitable guardian for the artifact, you can't just put it in danger or in the hands of someone who will use the profits to do bad things. I agree with the principle of giving it back. I'd happily just have a lottery to give it back to a random Egyptian citizen if I thought it would be fair on them or the artifact. Clearly it wouldn't be though so I wouldn't support that.

I don't get it. The artifacts belong to civilizations not dictators. If we follow that rationale, then why don't we all invade Egypt and take all the artifacts to "protect" them?

 

[harms]

ISIS is a completely different end of the spectrum. Most dictators have no interest in destroying their countries' artifacts.
I also find the argument about safety baffling. How many times do we hear artificats have been stolen in many African countries for example?

It is a poor argument that I don’t support but as an art historian I’ll tell you that safety of artifacts doesn’t simply mean not destroying it and making sure that it’s not stolen.

Most of historical artifacts are quite fragile so even the wrong temperature or humidity (even if it’s a little bit off) can trigger intense deterioration. But when we consider the bigger picture, stealing something and then refusing to give it back because the stolen thing is kept in better conditions than it would be kept in its original owner’s place is as absurd as it sounds.

 

[harms]

At least with other artefacts they'd go back to a museum where they'd still be accessible.

Which is yet another tough point since in more or less all museums 90% of their collection is hidden away and the access to them is only given to museum specialists & researchers (and more often than not a member of general public doesn’t even know that the thing is there in the first place which is an obvious prerequisite to initiate some sort of a process to see it).

While the art that is purchased by UHNWI is usually rented to some museum more or less indefinitely or, at least, appears in big retrospective exhibitions.

 

[2 man midfield]

I’d say give it all back, even if it goes to shit it’s their stuff. Let them do what they want with it.

 

[Penna]

Which is yet another tough point since in more or less all museums 90% of their collection is hidden away and the access to them is only given to museum specialists & researchers (and more often than not a member of general public doesn’t even know that the thing is there in the first place which is an obvious prerequisite to initiate some sort of a process to see it).

While the art that is purchased by UHNWI is usually rented to some museum more or less indefinitely or, at least, appears in big retrospective exhibitions.

Perhaps if we're talking about museum items that are currently on permanent display, they should be returned to the country of origin if they will also be on permanent display there. I take your point that there's no value in sending things back to go from one dusty storeroom to another.

 

[Heardy]

Excuse the source…

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...eum-returns-looted-Benin-bronzes-Nigeria.html

 

[The Corinthian]

Egyptians calls for return of the Rosetta Stone


Thousands of Egyptians are calling for the return of the Rosetta Stone, which has been on display in the British Museum since 1802.

The museum's most visited piece is now the subject of a petition that has received more than 110,000 signatures. Launched last month by Zahi Hawass, an Egyptologist and Egypt's former minister for antiquities affairs, the petition also demands the Louvre return the sculptured Dendera zodiac.

This year also marks the 200th anniversary of the decipherment of the hieroglyphics on the stone - a discovery that furthered scholars’ understanding of ancient Egyptian civilisation.

“It is the time Egyptian identity comes back home. We are not asking the British Museum to return the 100,000 Egyptian pieces they have, we just ask them to return one item,” Mr Hawass said.

Egyptians calls for return of the Rosetta Stone (msn.com)

 

[adexkola]

The mental gymnastics some engage in not to give the artifacts back are crazy.
The idea that people of these countries should travel to see their own cultural heritage is a bit of a joke tbh.

Most of them can't even get in! That's the galling part.

 

[Adisa]

Give it back you feckwits.

 

[The Corinthian]

Some innerestin' bits further in the article too actually -

In recent months, other museums and collectors have returned relics to their country of origin, including New York's Metropolitan Museum which returned 16 antiquities to Egypt in September. A US investigation concluded that they had been illegally trafficked.

On Monday, London's Horniman Museum signed over 72 objects, including 12 Benin Bronzes, to Nigeria following a request from its government.

Mr Hawass said he hoped the Rosetta Stone would be brought back to Egypt and displayed in the Grand Egyptian Museum. The museum is set to be the largest museum of Egyptian antiquities in the world when it opens in Giza next year.

It will also include all the pieces of the tomb of King Tutankhamun, which was discovered in 1922.

Mr Hawass, who was minister of antiquities in 2010, is planning another campaign to return the Nefertiti Bust from the Neues Museum in Berlin once his Rosetta Stone petition hits a million signatures.

“The Rosetta stone is the icon of Egyptian identity,” he said.

 

[The Corinthian]

Benin Bronzes: Germany returns looted artefacts to Nigeria


Germany's Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock has handed 22 artefacts looted in the 19th Century back to Nigeria at a ceremony in the capital, Abuja.
The return of this set of Benin Bronzes follows a deal made earlier this year to transfer ownership of more than 1,000 of these precious objects.
In July, Nigeria said it was the first time a European country had entered into this kind of agreement.
Ms Baerbock said it was part of efforts to deal with a "dark colonial history".
Speaking in Abuja on Tuesday, she added that it was an opportunity to right some of the wrongs of the past.
"Officials from my country once bought the bronzes, knowing they had been robbed and stolen.
"After that, we ignored Nigeria's plea to return them for a very long time. It was wrong to take them and it was wrong to keep them," Ms Baerbock is quoted as saying by German broadcaster DW.

Benin Bronzes: Germany returns looted artefacts to Nigeria - BBC News

Wonder if this will be the start of other European nations returning looted goods?

 

[The Corinthian]

Ancient Egyptian 'Green Coffin' returned to Cairo by US

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-64147545

 

[VeevaVee]

Probably worth noting that some artefacts in British and French museums were bought legitimately by collectors and historians before they were smashed to bits to be reused, destroyed for religious reasons, or stolen by their own people because they were unsecure, because many countries and civilisations didn’t value history until it became…valuable.

Not defending Britain because I kinda hate Britain but it paints a slightly different picture for those specific artefacts I think.

 

[Conor]

Probably worth noting that some artefacts in British and French museums were bought legitimately by collectors and historians before they were smashed to bits to be reused, destroyed for religious reasons, or stolen by their own people because they were unsecure, because many countries and civilisations didn’t value history until it became…valuable.

Not defending Britain because I kinda hate Britain but it paints a slightly different picture for those specific artefacts I think.

Many countries didn't value history because they were dealing with more important stuff. It's easy to have museums and a culture of appreciation of historical artefacts that involves a lot of investment when you're a fully functioning, developed country.

 

[VeevaVee]

Many countries didn't value history because they were dealing with more important stuff. It's easy to have museums and a culture of appreciation of historical artefacts that involves a lot of investment when you're a fully functioning, developed country.

And that changes very little considering they may not even exist anymore if they hadn’t been bought.

Also struggle to believe anyone has a divine right over an artefact just because they were born in the same place it was found thousands of years later. But obviously also don’t like how much of it was attained.

Personally, I’d be all for returning everything and supporting the safekeeping of them, unless they were in immediate danger of destruction or sale. At the end of the day it’s everyone’s responsibility to keep these things safe, and in the interest of everyone to do so, which holds more value than simply doing the right thing for the sake of it.

 

[Conor]

And that changes very little considering they may not even exist anymore if they hadn’t been bought.

Also struggle to believe anyone has a divine right over an artefact just because they were born in the same place it was found thousands of years later. But obviously also don’t like how much of it was attained.

Personally, I’d be all for returning everything and supporting the safekeeping of them, unless they were in immediate danger of destruction or sale. At the end of the day it’s everyone’s responsibility to keep these things safe, and in the interest of everyone to do so, which holds more value than simply doing the right thing for the sake of it.

Well your initial post came across quite cynical, as though countries only cared about their major historical artefacts when they became worth something, which doesn't even really make sense, given they want to display them, not sell them. I'm just pointing out that quite a lot of the time their apparent lack of interest had nothing to do with the value of the items, more so the order of priority something like that would have in a 3rd world/developing country with a shit load of basic societal problems.

 

[Jippy]

Ancient Egyptian 'Green Coffin' returned to Cairo by US

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-64147545

How the hell did these major museums end up displaying these trafficked artefacts? I went to the Met last summer and the Egypt section is massive, so god knows how much of that ropily acquired too.

Thinking about it, I've no idea how some things are considered fair game while others aren't, eg what constitutes a 'legitimately' acquired Egyptian sarcophagus for say the Met?

 

[The Corinthian]

Probably worth noting that some artefacts in British and French museums were bought legitimately by collectors and historians before they were smashed to bits to be reused, destroyed for religious reasons, or stolen by their own people because they were unsecure, because many countries and civilisations didn’t value history until it became…valuable.

Not defending Britain because I kinda hate Britain but it paints a slightly different picture for those specific artefacts I think.

I'm not sure your reasoning is correct.

Let's consider Egyptian antiquities - a significant amount of items were plundered and looted by two Italians in the 1820s- one working for the Brits, and the other for the French. Although there had been some looting before these Italians came (some looting in a timespan of a few thousand years), these two ended up bringing a significant number of pieces over to Europe. If I recall correctly - it was this type of smash and grab plunder which brought up the term 'Elginism' (from the same act with the Elgin marbles).

The other thing is - Egypt in those intervening few thousand of years was governed / occupied by a multitude of different forces - the Greeks, the Romans, Mamluks, Fatimids, Ottomans...yet none of these groups exported these antiquities en masse out of Egypt (although there is some evidence this happened with the ancient Greeks). Yes, wealth was relocated but the actual physical items weren't moved. It seems to be a hallmark of European colonialism to take such a significant amount of a country's history out to put it on display in the British Museum or the Louvre.

 

[The Corinthian]

How the hell did these major museums end up displaying these trafficked artefacts? I went to the Met last summer and the Egypt section is massive, so god knows how much of that ropily acquired too.

Thinking about it, I've no idea how some things are considered fair game while others aren't, eg what constitutes a 'legitimately' acquired Egyptian sarcophagus for say the Met?

There must be a massive black market for this type of stuff.

On your second point - legitimate goods must be bought with the consent of the Egyptian authorities / ministry of history and what not. I have no idea though...might be worth asking our resident archaeologist @SilentWitness.

 

[VeevaVee]

Well your initial post came across quite cynical, as though countries only cared about their major historical artefacts when they became worth something, which doesn't even really make sense, given they want to display them, not sell them. I'm just pointing out that quite a lot of the time their apparent lack of interest had nothing to do with the value of the items, more so the order of priority something like that would have in a 3rd world/developing country with a shit load of basic societal problems.

Remember that I was talking about those specifically legitimately acquired. I’d be very surprised if any of those were from a third world country. It could still be argued there is an element of Elginism despite that thought. At that point the grey area would probably be impossible to ever resolve through debate, whereas with those taken illegitimately I think it’s a lot easier for two rational parties without vested interested to come to a conclusion.

I'm not sure your reasoning is correct.

Let's consider Egyptian antiquities - a significant amount of items were plundered and looted by two Italians in the 1820s- one working for the Brits, and the other for the French. Although there had been some looting before these Italians came (some looting in a timespan of a few thousand years), these two ended up bringing a significant number of pieces over to Europe. If I recall correctly - it was this type of smash and grab plunder which brought up the term 'Elginism' (from the same act with the Elgin marbles).

The other thing is - Egypt in those intervening few thousand of years was governed / occupied by a multitude of different forces - the Greeks, the Romans, Mamluks, Fatimids, Ottomans...yet none of these groups exported these antiquities en masse out of Egypt (although there is some evidence this happened with the ancient Greeks). Yes, wealth was relocated but the actual physical items weren't moved. It seems to be a hallmark of European colonialism to take such a significant amount of a country's history out to put it on display in the British Museum or the Louvre.

Of course many artefacts were taken illegitimately and don’t think we should own them. I do think they should be kept safe though, personally, wherever that may be.

For me the whole “who decides that?” question that has been brought up is a bit a irrelevant, but could be resolved by one party (eg. British Museum) supporting the other (wherever it goes) with funding and assistance with safekeeping. That would no doubt be construed badly by some though, and they probably wouldn’t go for it anyway as it’d be a lose-lose.

 

[2cents]

Egypt in those intervening few thousand of years was governed / occupied by a multitude of different forces - the Greeks, the Romans, Mamluks, Fatimids, Ottomans...yet none of these groups exported these antiquities en masse out of Egypt

Not sure about en masse, but the massive obelisk in Istanbul’s hippodrome was taken from Luxor by the Emperor Theodosius in the 4th century. Was already almost 2,000 years old at that time.