Repatriation of Cultural Artefacts
Essay: submission deadline 14 December 2011
d) What are the main arguments for and against the repatriation of cultural material? Discuss with reference either to human remains or archaeological artefacts.
The issue of the repatriation of cultural material is a very topical one, with this year seeing a statue of Aphrodite being returned to Sicily by the J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, the Boston Museum of Fine Arts re-uniting the statue of the “Weary Herakles” to Turkey (see fig 1 below), the Minneapolis Institute of Arts sending back a Greek krater showing a Dionysian procession to Puglia, Italy, and Berlin’s Pergamon Museum returning the Hattusa Sphinx of Hittite origin to Turkey almost 100 years after German archaeologists had excavated it in Central Turkey and shipped it to Berlin. All bar the Hattusa Sphinx were removed after the 1970 UNESCO convention banning the illicit export of artefacts, and it is hard to argue that- for example- the re-unification of the “weary Herakles” was anything but a positive development.
This essay will cover the arguments for and against repatriation, look to establish a structure of principles and then use as an example the Benin “bronzes (actually brass) held not only in the British Museum but in museums worldwide, including the Pitt Rivers in Oxford.
The key arguments for repatriation are that:- 1. Artefacts are enriched by being viewed in their place of origin 2. They are part of the area's heritage, history and in some cases spiritual beliefs 3. Illegal procurement of the articles, whether knowing or unknowing 4. Economic benefit through tourists visiting to view the artefacts 5. Resources are now in place to properly preserve and conserve the artefacts 6. Where human remains are involved , keeping them in a scientific display or examination area degrades our common humanity 7. Patriotic pride, where the return of culturally important artefacts can symbolise a nation
d) What are the main arguments for and against the repatriation of cultural material? Discuss with reference either to human remains or archaeological artefacts.
The issue of the repatriation of cultural material is a very topical one, with this year seeing a statue of Aphrodite being returned to Sicily by the J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles, the Boston Museum of Fine Arts re-uniting the statue of the “Weary Herakles” to Turkey (see fig 1 below), the Minneapolis Institute of Arts sending back a Greek krater showing a Dionysian procession to Puglia, Italy, and Berlin’s Pergamon Museum returning the Hattusa Sphinx of Hittite origin to Turkey almost 100 years after German archaeologists had excavated it in Central Turkey and shipped it to Berlin. All bar the Hattusa Sphinx were removed after the 1970 UNESCO convention banning the illicit export of artefacts, and it is hard to argue that- for example- the re-unification of the “weary Herakles” was anything but a positive development.
This essay will cover the arguments for and against repatriation, look to establish a structure of principles and then use as an example the Benin “bronzes (actually brass) held not only in the British Museum but in museums worldwide, including the Pitt Rivers in Oxford.
The key arguments for repatriation are that:- 1. Artefacts are enriched by being viewed in their place of origin 2. They are part of the area's heritage, history and in some cases spiritual beliefs 3. Illegal procurement of the articles, whether knowing or unknowing 4. Economic benefit through tourists visiting to view the artefacts 5. Resources are now in place to properly preserve and conserve the artefacts 6. Where human remains are involved , keeping them in a scientific display or examination area degrades our common humanity 7. Patriotic pride, where the return of culturally important artefacts can symbolise a nation