|
|
|
|
|
|
by lostlogin
229 days ago
|
|
|
I argue that they should go back to where they were found. I’m sure there are some examples where the location of the find is unknown, and yes, that would be a difficulty. A lot of the heat would leave the debate if the blindingly obvious examples looting were resolved - The Elgin Marbles. |
|
|
Yes, again you're conflating where with who, and that was the crux of my questions to you in the previous post.
Unknown source locations - are a bit of a (minor) edge case I think, but aren't a major problem.
I have no strong opinions on Elgin Marbles, and I haven't been following any debate around that one. In the abstract, I suspect resolving one claim of ownership wouldn't assist in resolving much of 'the debate', but as I say, a bit ignorance on that specific example you cite.