Originally posted by der schwarze RitterOk...cool dude. I guess I need to develop my sense of humour... ; (
I'm just teasing -- obviously, this is a complicated issue and if the British museum returns the statuary, then it sets the precedent for other museums to have to do the same.
I think you are right and it looks unlikey that they will be willing to do that......
Originally posted by RSMA1234The bottom line is Elgin Marbles were not looted at all. They were removed by a british ambassador to the Ottoman Empire with express permission of the Ottoman Sultan. Greece at the time was under Ottoman rule. So by no means was there any looting by the British.
Also, I think you are over simpltying things by stating that "Greek national pride" should be ignored for the sake off mankind, the bottom line is that they where looted and the Greece Goverment owns the artefacts, they are well within their rights as "the rightful owner" of them to have them back.
[/b]
Also, if you want to argue that line, the Greek Government is definately not the rigthful owner of the Marbles. If anything or anyone Greek is a rightful owner it would be the Greek people.
Originally posted by RSMA1234No, the Greek government is not able to look after its treasures properly. The Parthenon, for instance, has been damaged badly by pollution. Hopefully further damage can be prevented but it looks unlikely.
By "preserving these treasures for mankind", your implying that the goverment is "incapable" of looking after them.....which quite frankly is nonsense and may be the reason why you where called a "an apologist for thievery and racism for sure" as above.
Surely calling the government of another country incompetent at a task like this is not racist.
1 edit
Originally posted by shavixmirIn case of the Elgin Marbles maybe, as these would be stored indoors, but pollution in Athens is a major issue when it comes to ancient sites.
I really don't have a clue.
The whole pollution thing is obviously rubbish.
EDIT: I am not even sure if that's true as I remember reading somewhere that they would like to re-mount the marbles on the Parthenon, in which case they would certainly be exposed to pollution.
Originally posted by RSMA1234It's not just that the British Museum is unwilling to return the Marbles, it is legally unable to do so by it's constitution, which bans the museum from returning any part of its collection.
Ok...cool dude. I guess I need to develop my sense of humour... ; (
I think you are right and it looks unlikey that they will be willing to do that......
"...legal position that the museum is banned by charter from returning any part of its collection. The latter was tested in the British High Court in May 2005 in relation to Nazi-looted Old Master artworks held at the museum; it was ruled that these could not be returned. The judge, Sir Andrew Morritt, ruled that the British Museum Act – which protects the collections for posterity – cannot be overridden by a "moral obligation" to return works..."
(Source: Wikipedia)
Originally posted by knightwestSeriously, knightwest, why do you think that charter exists in the first place?
It's not just that the British Museum is unwilling to return the Marbles, it is legally unable to do so by it's constitution, which bans the museum from returning any part of its collection.
"...legal position that the museum is banned by charter from returning any part of its collection. The latter was tested in the British High Court in May 2005 in r ...[text shortened]... ty – cannot be overridden by a "moral obligation" to return works..."
(Source: Wikipedia)
Also, the fact that it was an occupying power at the time giving it to the British doesn't change a god-damned thing, if anything, it makes the Greek claim more legitimate. If the Greek people want it back, I see no reason why the British should keep it.
Originally posted by PalynkaYou're a bit angry about the whole thing aren't you? Do you care anything at all about the Elgin Marbles, or are you just angry with the Britain for some reason. If you cared in any way at all about keeping the Marbles safe and as intact as they are, then you would agree that their current location is the best place for them.
Seriously, knightwest, why do you think that charter exists in the first place?
Also, the fact that it was an occupying power at the time giving it to the British doesn't change a god-damned thing, if anything, it makes the Greek claim more legitimate. If the Greek people want it back, I see no reason why the British should keep it.
Also, it changes a lot if the British were given the artefacts or not, as there was mention of looting in earlier posts, something which clearly did not occur.
Additionally, if the Marbles had stayed in Athens they would almost certainly be very damaged by now, because it is only in recent years that the pollution problem has even started to be addressed. So the best thing that ever could have happened was for the marbles to be removed.
Originally posted by knightwestNo, I'm angry at the ethnocentrism that came with all colonialism, where I obviously include my own country.
You're a bit angry about the whole thing aren't you? Do you care anything at all about the Elgin Marbles, or are you just angry with the Britain for some reason. If you cared in any way at all about keeping the Marbles safe and as intact as they are, then you would agree that their current location is the best place for them.
Also, it changes a lot if ...[text shortened]... addressed. So the best thing that ever could have happened was for the marbles to be removed.
Your bullcrap about you being British and about my opinions being driven by some anti-British sentiment is typical of someone running out of arguments. If you want proof I'm not anti-British in this case is that I've already defended in this forums the same position regarding the obelisk in the Concorde square and the Egyptian artefacts in the Louvre.
No, they're current location isn't the best place for them. If you go by any sort of economic arguments, then the UK isn't the best place for it, is it?
The British were given the artefacts by the looters. You can wash your hands, Pilate, but that doesn't mean a thing. It was looted, period. If someone gives you a stolen stereo for free, you don't get to keep it. Why should anyone get to keep a national monument?
Finally, you have no basis to claim that if the Marbles had stayed in Athens they'd be damaged by now, except your ridiculous sense of superiority. And even if you did have any basis, they're not yours or mine, they belong to the Greek people who sculpted them for the benefit of their own country, not so you can charge a few extra pounds off your tourists.
If you put the Parthenon in any major city, equally polluted as Athens, it would be the same, wouldn't it? Athens is indeed polluted, but not more than New York or Paris or Berlin.
There is also an archaelogical point of view wherein it is stated that since antiquities are part of the history of said people (the Greeks, in this case), those antiquities should continue to be used and maybe even modified by the people.
For your information, if the Elgin marbles were to be returned to Greece they would be inside a museum. Also, the late professor Th. Skoulikides found a way to protect the Acropolis and all other outdoor monuments by means of applying a thin resin onto them, which has no other consequences apart from the fact that it stops all electrochemical phenomena.
Also, looting is an international crime, as far as I can remember.
Originally posted by knightwestNot sure I understand your point......so the occuping power gave "permission" to British ambassador......will that still does not make the occupying power the rightfull owner that can give permission to take / loot the national treasure to "the ambassador".
The bottom line is Elgin Marbles were not looted at all. They were removed by a british ambassador to the Ottoman Empire with express permission of the Ottoman Sultan. Greece at the time was under Ottoman rule. So by no means was there any looting by the British.
Also, if you want to argue that line, the Greek Government is definately not the rigthful ...[text shortened]... er of the Marbles. If anything or anyone Greek is a rightful owner it would be the Greek people.
Agian...not sure if you realise what your saying by "Also, if you want to argue that line, the Greek Government is definately not the rigthful owner of the Marbles. If anything or anyone Greek is a rightful owner it would be the Greek people"....do the Greek people not vote the Greek goverment in ?
If they vote the goverment in, then as representative of the people, they belong to the goverment.......they definatly donlt belong to the British people or goverment.
Originally posted by knightwestHow do you know that ?
No, the Greek government is not able to look after its treasures properly. The Parthenon, for instance, has been damaged badly by pollution. Hopefully further damage can be prevented but it looks unlikely.
Surely calling the government of another country incompetent at a task like this is not racist.
Pollution, effects all cities from London, NYC to Tokyo.