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?
Other countries that are taking these artifacts that aren’t even theirs are way out of line. In the third
paragraph in the first passage it states “Perhaps the most famous on the controversy between Greece and the United Kingdom (UK) over the Elgin Marbles. In the early 19th century, the Earl of Elgin had numerous sculptures taken from Greece to the UK. These included half of the surviving sculptures from the Parthenon in Athens.” This quote shows that the UK was taking something from Greece and putting it in their country so that they can be recognized for it. What are the other people perspective? Should they be taken for a reason? Some people are thinking that because they were apart of that country years ago and that it is risky to keep that artifacts in just one place the whole time. “Particularly if the country is in turmoil or can’t afford to excavate or guard all of its treasure.” That is a reason why some people think they should move these artifacts to other places. This claim is invalid because many countries have these artifacts in safe places where some of them cannot even be touched due to being old and fragile. Therefor this shows that Many people are taking care of them and that they are in good hands. 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. The point that someone could try and get across is that many artifacts are very important to countries because they have very important facts in them that can lead to something great. Try and imagine what it would be like to lose one of the most important things in one’s country,to some people that could be devastating.
In the article “Bring Them Home,” the author talks of how countries “are seeking the return of objects important to their culture and history.” Examples of countries such as these would be: China, Iran, India, and Turkey. Why would these countries want their artifacts back if they have not seemed to miss them? Well, most of the time this happens because another country is in control of them and do not care for the objects themself. They do not care because they are not from that country and do not realize what value they hold to the people of that country. That is why countries should hold their own historical artifacts. It is their history, their culture, and it matters to the people to have the treasures from their land that could quite possibly be from when the land was first
In this manner, western cultures command great power by being able to represent their own heritage as a higher ranking than the “primitive” art of Third World nations that is often exhibited: “It also means the power to define and rank people, to declare some as having a greater share than others in the community’s common heritage—in its very identity” (Duncan 102). These are the important findings of Duncan’s (1991) analysis of cultural imperialism, which I agree with in terms of the greater influence of American and European museums to ritualize their status as a first world modern nation. More so, American/European museums get greater funding to superimpose their culture over museums in third world countries, which defines the overt power of the museum as a “temple” for first world art. These are important aspects of Duncan’s view that the disproportionate presence of western art throughout the world is based on a primarily imperialistic notion of cultural superiority in the presentation of American and European heritage on a global scale. In my opinion, I feel that western museums deliberately impose their cultural values in terms of “modernity” as a means of ranking themselves above lesser nations. Certainly, the increasing popularity of “primitive”
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.
One area that is legal nightmare is Native American artifacts because the artifacts that are
Her thesis includes why taking ancient, historical artifacts out of context is problematic and then included specific examples of different museums which have demonstrated this issue, such as the Rockefeller Museum, the Walters Art Gallery, and
When people think of the history or the timeline of human existence, they reference back to the theory of “mainstream science,” which indicates that the human civilization began approximately 6,000 years ago. Which brings into question, what about the time before that? Were there other homo sapiens like us living on Earth? Archeologists, geologists, and historians who attempt to comprehend human antiquity have conducted research on their ideology of human origin. Professionals refer to this as Forbidden Archeology. Forbidden Archeology is the belief that the origin of human civilization is far more ancient than what “mainstream science” claims. Based on the evidence, such as “out-of-place artifacts” (OOPARTS), Ancient Nuclear War, and mysteries
“The Kwakwaka’wakw formed a society called the U’mista Cultural Society in the 1970s” (Zasibley, 2015). This society that was created, produced a petition for the government to return their illegally stolen articles. The society work hard to obtain their items but the government was not on board with the decision. “The government decided that the only way the Native Americans and First Nations peoples could attain their items in their homeland was if the museums was maintaining the artifacts had significant conditions to store the artifacts in” (Zasibley, 2015).
Archaeologist should leave the historical artifacts from the RMS Titanic where they are and not take them from were they originally are. Removing artifacts is disrespectful because it is wrong thing for all those people who died because it’s a memorial to them.
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
Throughout modern times countries have sought to acquire more control over archaeological discoveries found, that hold cultural, religious and social meaning. This can be seen in countries such as Iraq and Greece who place strict sanctions on any excavation, as anything found is considered property of the country, therefore removing it would result in possible prison sentences. Such restrictions on excavations begs the question over the ownership of antiquities, and illustrates the political tensions that can arise due to archaeology. Additionally, the ethicise over the ownership of relics from the past can be seen in the collection and preservation of artefacts particularly in places such as museums. Starkly prominent examples over the care of items and their ownership can be seen in the cleaning of the Elgin Marbles, which through an acid wash by the British Museum’s workers, resulted in significant deterioration of the marble.
Of the many crimes that are present in this day and age, one that not only vandalizes the property, but as well as historical background is that of art theft. A crime that has taken away the sanctity of churches as well as many other religious and historical sites. Thefts have ranged from WWII (World War II) to the times of the Holocaust. Of the items that were taken from the churches, relics were items of great priority. These items not only had great value to the churches they were stolen from, but a great value to relic collectors. Most of the items taking during these times were either sold or placed in underground storage. Most of these items that were place in these secret places were never to be seen again. From the times of these so called “relic hunters” to now, art theft has become something that has taken some extreme changes. It has evolved from crime that started with minor relic thefts to something that has become a worldwide crime in need of better prevention.
Our cultural heritage is shared and preserved through artifacts and archeological sites. Studying these allows us to deepen our understanding of the past. Archaeological looting has been and continues to be a serious global issue. Once theses sacred artifacts and sites are destroyed, or sold illegally into the market, they are gone and can never be replaced. A part of our story as a human race is lost.
been in many wars and conquest previous to this encounter allowing their wealth, territory, and
The Merriam Webster definition of a museum is “an institution devoted to the procurement, care, study, and display of objects of lasting interest or value; also: a place where objects are exhibited." To find an artifact, the first thing I thought of was going to a museum because it seemed the most obvious place to find a piece of history. As I searched through four museums and hallowed in the artifacts set aside there, I found nothing that peaked my personal interest of the study of humanities. Alas, it hit me; a cemetery would be perfect for my interest in customs of my personal religious beliefs. I had passed this particular cemetery countless times as a child that I had never truly thought of at all. What better place to find an object of permanent value than a cemetery? At the corner of Cypresswood and I-45, I began to sift into a cemetery that I had no true interest in, or so I thought. The cemetery was home to about twenty burial plots, each one a little different in its own way, but one particularly interested me. The headstone read Friedrich August Wunsche, Geb July 20, 1837, Gest May 3, 1897. I decided on this tombstone because of its architecture and time period of the person it commemorated; it is the sole surviving memory of this man. Etched into the bottom of the tombstone were the last words of his family to the world, faded and eroded by the winds of time they were left in German and incomprehensible to most modern Americans. The words had a meaning seeming to say, In Thee O Lord have I put my trust, which was repeated on the other tombstones in modern English. This is a shrine of sorts to his life; this man lived in the union, probably fought for the confederacy and then died when the United States was once again u...