Artifact Repatriation Debate

It's a difficult thing to do and there are so many hidden strings and interests at stake but the reality is quite clear. A lot of things were looted and are in our western countries somehow illegally. IMO they should be returned to their countries of origin if evidence of that says so. If things were bought/sold and there are documents to attest that, they could stay.

I’m conflicted. I understand the concept that stolen goods should be returned and it’s the right thing to do, but at the same time it was centuries ago and the preservation was done by them. I have seen well preserved exposition in that museum and then you visit the original country where it’s from and they themselves have nothing or very little left from that era.

When an artifact is not yours, it doens't matter if you "preserve it".The country they stole it from could preserve it too.

Very ironic considering one of their excuses on returning artifacts to countries of origin is “they wouldn’t be cared for and would be stolen”.

Aren't most museum pieces in the west pilfered? I say we send it all back.

Many of the big and well known museums have their most famous exhibits stolen or “bought”. These global heritage artifacts are kept under closed doors to generate revenue for the museums and not returned to the countries they originated from. The least they could do is to provide high resolution/detail digital scans freely available to everyone.

Before posting this have you checked the state of preservation [0] in the West? The real issue IMHO that if stolen good are returned to their rightful owners, Museums will be empty and libraries will be half empty.[0] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crgy4w221z5o

If the sale was legitimate sure. But there is a long, proven history of fraudulent sales and straight theft. In those (numerous) instances would it not behoove the recipient to return them?There are some people here saying “the people who made them are dead”. Which I imagine is an argument for “nobody actually owns them”. Which is a myopic view. The cultural heritage of a region should be able to be enjoyed by the people of that region. Imagine if major artifacts of American, or British (or w

A lot of these pieces, including the Elgin Marbles, weren't part of an ancient theft. Many of them weren't stolen until the 18th, 19th, or 20th centuries. For example, the UK has also refused to return certain pieces of artwork that the Nazis stole from Holocaust victims. That theft occurred at roughly the same time this letter was stolen.

Hopefully he's not just selling artifacts on the black marketI understand your point, but why not?Isn't the British Museum basically loot from all over the world? Wikipedia claims it has "8 million works". So maybe less than 1% is on display? And Britain isn't about to give any of that stuff back.So when an empire steals it's OK, but when "the little people" try to make a few bucks to cover costs, that's bad?Anyway, I'm just sa