• Shard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    I’m conflicted with this one.

    If we return it to a country of origin that has no protections for priceless artefacts, we lose an irreplaceable part of our heritage as humans if the piece is lost/sold/stolen or worse destroyed. Granted it may be that country’s right to decide what it does with its history, but its unfair to the rest of us when we lose our shared history because of incompetence.

    Like the Buddha statues that were destroyed by the Taliban,

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_of_Bamiyan

    As impractical as it would have been, I would much have preferred they were excavated and shipped to a safe museum or city somewhere, than being destroyed by ideological bigots. We lost an important piece of history, architecture and craftsmanship that day.

    • makyo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      I think there is the rare case where you could be right but it’s also important to note that the UK has been using that excuse to avoid returning artifacts to Greece (where they would obviously not be in danger).

      • Holyhandgrenade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        And who is more likely to value historical artefacts than the culture they originated from? Truth is, the British have frequently lost or damaged priceless artefacts, and thousands of them are locked away in vaults where no one can enjoy them. How is that better than simply giving them back?