The phenomenon of looting has been in existence for centuries. Looting is the destructive and illegal appropriation and trade of artifacts. The act of looting falls into three distinct categories: war looting, archeological removal, and the looting of industry. Archeological removal, the theft of antiquities taken illegally from their environment or designated museum, is the form referred to within this essay (). The consequences of looting artifacts are numerous and affect more than just the culture the artifacts belong to. Museums have a history of promoting looting that, despite ethical codes, they continue to do covertly. However, museums have the ability to do more than they are currently.
Looting has a dire affect on culture and systematically
…show more content…
This is demonstrated by the development of several investigations by Homeland Security, the most prominent being Operation Hidden Idol, an investigation into plundered artwork sold through the notorious dealer Subhash Kapoor. Many United States museums are guilty of acquiring black market artifacts through Subhash Kapoor, a New York art dealer. Kapoor presided over an extensive network of black market art dealings that the authorities are still unable to fully comprehend. Influential American institutions connected to Kapoor include the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, the Asian Museum of Art in San Francisco, and the Art Institute in Chicago (). Investigations like this have put pressure on American museums to ensure collections do not contain illegally obtained artifacts. Still, museums fail to do due diligence when determining provenance and as an effect there is a new case of repatriation of antiquities monthly. Efforts to form a contemporary ethical code are ongoing, but even if museums stopped purchasing artifacts connected to the black market it is likely many collections would still contain looted objects obtained in the past.
Although there has been an effort by museums to create an ethical code, unprovenanced items plundered decades ago remain in the most prominent museums. For example, the New York Museum of Metropolitan of Art has only relatively recently returned two artifacts to Cambodia. The Cambodian government provided evidence that the artifacts had been looted from ancient temples within the country, after which the MET was forced to return the artifacts (). Occurrences like this one raise the question: how many artifacts in museum collections were acquired illegally, and how many should be
Imagine that one piece of history that is taken from a town. This piece of history tells l people how this town was built and all the important people that were apart of the community. “Returning Antiquities to Their Countries of Origin” by Joyce Mortimer can many people about how objects are getting taken from Museums. They should be returned immediately. There are so many artifacts out there that could be so important to people, and if someone can just imagine what it would feel to have one of the most important object taken from a museum and to be never returned again. Many people enjoy seeing these objects so why are they being taken?
Merryman, John Henry. Thinking about the Elgin Marbles: Critical Essays on Cultural Property, Art, and Law. London: Kluwer Law International Ltd, 2000.
Hunt insists that returning the marbles to Greece would create a precedent for other restitution claims. This in turn would rob all museums of their ability to provide a multicultural presentation of history. He declares that “we need the sharing of cultures.” I assert diversity can be achieved with castings, similar to the Romans copying Greek
However, I feel this act forces archeologists to halt further investigations and possibly damages lost records of history. Returning these artifacts and bones prevents them from being preserved a...
The idea that early hominids were powerful players in the ancient is slowly slipping away. Evidence is emerging that our ancestors were not great hunters, but scavengers that roamed the savanna looking for leftovers. Pat Shipman, discusses how it would be possible for early hominids to survive as strangers and how this method of cultivation affected human evolution. Shipman, uses the marks that stone tools, and teeth would make on the bones of prey animals as evidence for her hypothesis. She theorizes that early hominids weren't mighty hunter, but cunning scavengers.
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.
While digging in the far reaches of the African outback, now know as the western part of Kenya, archaeologist Bozo excavated a site that revolutionized the thoughts of the scientific world. At this site they found many interesting artifacts and paintings that included proof of an early civilization. At this time scientists are calling this civilization “Pontu” after one of the paintings suggested that a pontoon was used for transportation across Lake Victoria, one of the adjacent lakes.
“Duncan’s (1991) article provides an examination of western museums as a vehicle for the “modern state” to project imperialistic values over art objects of the Third World. The American/European art museum is a type of “temple” that is used to ritualize western art objects as a projection of modernity over the “primitive” art of Third World cultures.”
At first glance, Western society appears to have changed significantly since the nineteenth-century. Today, industrialized nations enjoy more efficient transportation, communication, medical care, and manufacturing than they did in the nineteenth-century. But have our core values changed? While the Western world has changed considerably, people's opinions of the core values and morality is well-preserved since the nineteenth-century. This assertion becomes apparent when one compares the standards by which Western society judges what is considered artwork. While today's definition and criteria of censorship in a Western art museum is unchanged since the nineteenth-century, the act of censorship has changed with museums and their role in society.
James Riding points out this issue in his article, "James Riding In Presents a Pawnee Perspective on Repatriation, 1996."When Riding reported, "consequently, orgies of grave looting occurred without remorse" (p. 491) it brought to mind having seen Indian artifacts for sell. This has been a common practice for many years. It is impossible for me to guess how much loot has been carried off from Indian burial sites over the years. The important point is to note that this has taken place, and Native Americans do want these artifacts
In “Whose Culture Is It, Anyway? ”, Kwame Anthony Appiah begins by pointing out that some of the museums of the world, particularly in the West, have large collections of artefacts and objects which were robbed from developing and poor countries. He then raises a question: who owns these cultural patrimony and properties? Our first answer may be that since they make up the cultural heritage of a people, they belong to the people and culture from whom they were taken. Appiah has doubt about this and argues that if some cultural artefacts are potentially valuable to all human beings, they should belong to all of humanity. He thinks that when they make contribution to world culture, they should be protected by being made available to those who would benefit from experiencing them and put into trusteeship of humanity.
In every museum, each exhibition represents a series of decisions that some individual or group undertook to compile a series of artifacts together in a display. Often times people fail to recognize the amount of time and several steps one took in order to assemble each arrangement. Source A, source B, and source C each mention different, crucial considerations one mast take into account when facing the responsibility of securing a new artifact for a museum.
The buying and selling of indulgences and the cult of relics made the Catholic Church scandalous. Relics are the material remains of a deceased saint or martyr and objects closely associated with those remains (anonymous). Indulgences were certificates, purchased either for one’s self or on behalf of another, that would guarantee forgiveness of sin (Eppehimer 18). The Post-Classic Latin meaning of indulgence came to mean the remission of a tax or debt. In Roman law indulgence was used to express release from captivity or punishment. An indulgence that may be gained in any part of the world is a universal indulgence, while an indulgence that can only be gained in a specified place is local. Perpetual indulgence may be gained at anytime, while temporary indulgences are available on certain days or within certain periods (Kent).
Whether its money, a phone, a car, or a masterpiece, which in turn the pilfered items are sold on the black-market, or out on the street. For an art buff, collector, or a curator, this is an absolute nightmare. Often when stored the crooks simply roll the masterpiece up in a suitcase, or simply cover the canvases with sheets. The damage this does to the works can be horrendous. A light must be shine on this dark branch of crime, awareness could return works of art that are missing, or are thought to be lost forever. Then perhaps one day the term “rescue artists” may not have to be used.
Unlike any other markets, the art market is extremely diverse and opaque. In most cases, buyers tend to hide themselves behind the curtains (especially during important auction events or art fairs), which make it hard to get access to the accurate information (art pieces ownerships, collection ownerships and price history). As a result, the more information you have from the inside market, the more chances you gain art bus...