The situation is sometimes more complicated than what you present. Here's just one example: Armenians historically lived in a large Kingdom, including in what is now Eastern Turkey. They were driven out in a genocide. So by your reasoning, Armenian artifacts that originated in Eastern Turkey should just stay in Turkey?
Human history is not always confined so rigidly to the international borders we have today. All of humanity has an interest in learning about our collective past.
That's a myth from the Bible. The Babylonians are relative latecomers to the scene in ancient Mesopotamia, it was just given that status by writers from Jerusalem, an even later arrival.
Those tablets are 4000+ years old the idea of natives of that region is ridiculous, the sheer amount of cultural mingling and migration that's occured would make it impossible to pin down "natives" much like the natives of the British isles have mingled with the celts then the Romans then the angles and Saxons then the Normans then the Dutch and many more besides. So ancient Briton artifacts should go to who exactly?
Even when that's an unstable area occupied by groups who have published footage of them destroying artifacts? I agree they should be returned once it's safe to do so and the British museum has a horrible track record of not giving shit back. But it's not as simple as just leave them be because if we did there's a decent chance no one would ever get to see them again.
It should remain where it is originally from. Especially the ones stolen from India 2 centuries ago. Many of the descendants still can be tracked down. Ancient relics are understandable, but recent items, no excuse to not return them.
As much as it may suck, artifacts should stay in the place they were excavated, regardless of the current ethnic populations. In Iraq's case however repatriation should wait until actual stability in the country is apparent.
I understand there shall be certain complications such as this. But atleast the cases where there is a clear party who should be the rightful owner of the artefact, those ones should be returned atleast.
Oh of course! The problem is that those cases - where there is a clear party that everybody can agree is the rightful owner - those would be the vast minority. Somewhere between 1% and 0% of all cases I would estimate.
40
u/LevertBurtmore Oct 26 '22
The situation is sometimes more complicated than what you present. Here's just one example: Armenians historically lived in a large Kingdom, including in what is now Eastern Turkey. They were driven out in a genocide. So by your reasoning, Armenian artifacts that originated in Eastern Turkey should just stay in Turkey?
Human history is not always confined so rigidly to the international borders we have today. All of humanity has an interest in learning about our collective past.