The antiquities market is a system that has always been met with resistance, especially among those within the scholarly community of archaeologists. Many archaeologists and scholars have argued against this market, stating that it is a detriment to archaeology. On the other side, those in favor of this market have provided reasons to show why they believe it to be a solid system. Both sides have their merit in regards to this controversial issue. However, when looking at the antiquities market as a whole, it has shown to be an effective system that can actually work hand in hand with the scholarly community, rather than against it. The key takeaway from the antiquities market is that it helps to preserve the past, something which all archaeologists strive to achieve. The acquisition of …show more content…
Brodie argues that the antiquities market is flawed because there is no dialogue between the parties involved. Brodie writes, “Several studies of exhibition and auction catalogues have shown that most recently assembled collections are composed largely of antiquities with no verifiable provenance, and that most material appearing for sale on the market likewise has no provenance” (4). Because of this, there is an inherent lack of trust and transparency, as statements made by the trade community are made without any verifiable evidence. He is quick to clarify, however that an artifact having an unknown origin does not necessarily mean that it was stolen. Moreover, he argues that most people seem to not necessarily care about this issue; they simply go to the museums or buy the marble statues. Brodie argues that in order for the antiquities market to fully succeed, there must be open dialogue between all of the parties involved, so that there can be understanding across the
Merryman, John Henry. Thinking about the Elgin Marbles: Critical Essays on Cultural Property, Art, and Law. London: Kluwer Law International Ltd, 2000.
For years on end, countries have been fighting with big museums from other countries for ancient artifacts that belong to the original countries. The argument of whether or not the museums should be able to keep them still remains. It is the right of the country to have their own artifacts. It is imperative for countries to be able showcase their historical artifacts, therefor museums should return them to their rightful owners.
Duncan’s (1991) analysis of western museums is defined through the theme of “durable objects” as a criterion to judge the heritage of American and European art as a ritual of the modern state. In this manner western art museums are built like “temples” as a symbolic and figurative representation of greatness of western culture throughout the world: “[They] are more like the traditional ceremonial monuments that museum buildings often emulate—classical temples” (Duncan 90). This interpretation of American/European museums defines a dominant source of cultural heritage that ritualizes
The argument against the site can supported by saying that the site could have belonged to civilizations other than Troy. However, the lack of definitive answers on the historicity of Troy is reason the University should have purchased the collection. With such “a rare and valuable collection of Trojan, Greek, and Roman antiques,” the University would have been able to validate the historicity of the site as being or not being Troy (“Terrell to Walton” 4). Subsequently, this would have allowed scholars at the University to make progress in answering the age old question: did Homeric Troy exist? If the site was not Troy, the University would have still aided archaeologists by ruling this site out, narrowing the search window, and allowing the search for Troy to move
Processual archaeologists presume that the world is comprehensible, this assumption leads to complications. Post processual archaeologists on the other hand, are simply happy to interpret things, content that not everything has to be explained. They insist that the archaeologist is meant to be an interpreter. “Interpretation” is the practice that requires the interpreter to take “responsibility for their actions” and “interpretations” (Shanks and Hodder 1995, p. 5). The interpretive practice is an ongoing process, and there is no final and definitive account of the past as it was. “Interpretation is thereby a creative but nonetheless critical attention and response to the interests, needs and desires of different constituencies” (Shanks and Hodder 1995, p. 5). Any interpretation is critical of other interpretations. One of the ways to transcend the weaknesses of processual archaeology is to look beyond the “black boxes” (Shanks and Hodder 1995, p. 8) that it relies on. It is forgotten that in order to produce those “black boxes” there would have had to be a certain type of interpretation of the archaeological process that allowed them to exist in the first place. As mentioned before processual archaeologists assumed absolute objectivity, but the interpretation of their “black boxes” is in fact biased. Post processual archaeologists realize that these
SHA, and other archaeological societies, institutions, scholars and archaeologists find it hard to conduct or even to get involved in such shows that are produced for the entertaining of fans and also for gaining revenue. The Society for American Archaeology (SAA) is working on clearing-house project that will help in building public awareness about archaeology and the way it is practiced, therefore the project is seeking input from professionals and the interested public, in order to share and contribute information and
Artifacts are a work of art that need to be returned. In the passage, “Returning Antiquities to Their Countries of Origin,” by, Joyce Mortimer, she writes, “‘ Many artifacts and works of art have special value for a particular community or nation;’” after reading this passage readers
It is challenging to decide which is of greater importance when finding art pieces or artifacts for a museum: the historical import or the profit margin. For some, cost-effectiveness or revenue produced in future by marketing replicas will be a priority, but for others historical importance and representativeness of the real historical article will be more important. The discernment between buying the work of a young artist with great promise at the expense of a classic art piece being put away or sold, in reference to which decision would be more worthwhile for future generations, is extremely difficult. There are many different priorities, but they should be historical significance, historical representativeness, common sense and, finally, the marketability of the product.
Although this task will be difficult considering how easily a fake certificate of authenticity can be created, it is certainly worth the effort and funds that will go into it. More funding is needed to pay the salaries of those trained to hunt out illegally listed antiquities online. A legal antiquities market can work but it must not be a free-for-all like some online auction sites where the item for sale is only briefly described and photographed. Online item descriptions need to contain information about where an item comes from, the dates of the excavation it was pulled from, along with the contact information of the seller and the team which excavated a site. Also, any dealer that shows a hint of corruption or association with terror groups like ISIS needs to be restricted from selling antiquities. We need to take a strong stand on the sale of antiquities now in order to create a culture where past civilizations are looked at as something we can all learn from instead of something that can be profited
However the concept of perspective should be taken in account when critically analysing Lord Elgin. Other artefacts were also supposedly plundered includes the bust of Nefertiti. Berlin still has claim over the invaluable relic due to an apparent agreement with the Egyptian government that allowed for the sculpture to be possessed by Germany. So the examination of bias is essential to convey meaning effectively. Furthermore for evidence to be accepted the shortcomings must be acknowledged. Elgin’s case is no different as his official record demonstrating he was given access to the Parthenon Marbles is problematic as the original document was lost and only the Italian translation exists. As the conversion from one language to another causes small discrepancies, so under close scrutiny, the document is not infallible. Nevertheless as it is a form of evidence, the inconsistencies will have to be recognised when used as a based for an
Carlson, David L.."FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT A CAREER IN ARCHAEOLOGY IN THE U.S.."Texas A&M University. Texas A&M University,c16 June 2008.Web. 26Nov2013.
First of all, antiques play an extremely important role in the history of countries, and not many realize it. The passage “Returning Antiquities to Their Country of Origin “ states in paragraph two,” Now, some countries claim that muslims have an obligation to restore these artifacts to their original location.” These countries claim that the museums
He would argue that although some of these artifacts were stolen hundreds of years ago, they should be returned to their countries of origin. The mistake made by Hawass was this: back then there were no restrictions on buying stolen goods; therefore,since the trades were made on a legal basis, the deals are still valid today. The topic of thievery brings us to the next counterargument: protection. Some people may argue that it makes sense to keep artifacts together. These people often disregard the fact that keeping these priceless treasures in the same place with minimum protection from thieves is almost a guarantee of robbery; nevertheless, even with the top most protection, there is still the slightest possibility that an artifact might go missing every now and then. The third argument that comes with keeping the artifacts in their country of origin is the education of people around the world who have not learned about this culture. Professors such as Malcolm III, mentioned in passage one, say that taking these artifacts away from their home land takes away from the experience of learning about the culture. For instance, if someone in Colorado wanted to learn about ancient Egyptians, they may not be able to afford to travel all the way to Egypt. These artifacts are used to teach all different types of people about the past cultures of our world, not just the people who live in the general area of where it happened. These are the reasons why their counter arguments are
However, in my opinion, our book has not placed much emphasis on the developments that have shaken the museum-scape fundamentally since the 1980s and essentially have to do with processes of economization.3 The examples chosen by us have in common—despite their differences—that they were each fuelled to a great extent by contemporary art, as well as by strong idealistic alliances be...
The author found that most museum educators encounter the same misconceptions about archaeology from participants of their programs. The educators and museum professionals that responded to the online survey provided similar responses to those of the Penn Museum camp counselors. These were then reinforced by the responses of the campers themselves. The majority of responses to the online survey indicated that these museum professionals believe that fifty percent or fewer of program participants know what archaeology is. The top misconceptions that these professionals have encountered include the belief that archaeology equals excavation, and that archaeologists dig up dinosaurs and fossils. Responses from the Penn Museum camp counselors also