|
|
|
|
|
by jterrys
1325 days ago
|
|
I think you're not really seeing my point. Nobody here is a kid. You acting as an adult comes off from a position of benevolence towards children, which is in its own way belittling to Egyptians as a former colony of England. Like England the parent should do the 'right thing' in your opinion to Egypt its child. Modern Egyptians don't have anything in common with ancient Egyptians. The artifacts found were in places long abandoned and forgotten, sometimes in places looted in antiquity. Sometimes in the middle of the desert. I don't understand what laws you think were broken. The British didn't raid any museums or enter people's homes (in so much as dig beneath them where the people had NO idea anything was there). They actually built the museums in Cairo where these artifacts are stored. Is there a proportion of artifacts that were taken from Egyptians, possibly stolen by the British? Absolutely. But the modern Egyptians owning those artifacts have so little in common with the ancient Egyptians that their own possession comes from theft anyway. The difference is the British used them for archeological purposes that gave the artifact a different value. There is so little claim to genealogical ancestry by modern Egyptians that its preposterous to even have this conversation from. Especially when they've been looting and smashing grave sites since antiquity. [0] The history of ancient Egypt is the history of the World at this point. But its within the interests of Egypt As The State to safeguard its treasures because they derive their (quite profitable) national identity from it. [0]https://nyupress.org/9781479820078/a-physician-on-the-nile/ FWIW, archeological expeditions happen in foreign countries all the time, and the ownership of found objects is pretty clearly negotiated before a dig site is even planned. It would be fucking stupid for a university to finance a trip where it actually can't possess or at least lease out the items it finds. Obviously, in countries embattled by instability and corruption it's much harder to fairly negotiate the status of artifacts, like in the article you linked. |
|
Fundementally we disagre about rights. I think all within a country is owned by that country. That could be gem stones or antiquities.
I don't think invading a country gives you ownership over their belongings but you seem to wrt the British Empire. No more than Russias claims to Ukrainian grain.
I think Egyptians are capable of making decisions about their national belongings themselves and they have decided that they are better guardians than Brits. Inexplicably you seem to think they can not make this decision.
Ultimately you're view that British stole from 19th century Egyptians antiquities and now they belong to Britain is simply might is right thinking.
The idea that Brits are better caretakers of these items is not dissimilar original justification. Africans are too barbarous to look after their own assets.
What do you think of the Benin Bronzes. For me they are essentially similar morally. I suppose you'd say it was wrong to take them, but they looked after them, and now they shouldn't be returned?