Everyone, "Hey Britain, those aren't yours!" Britain, "So."

As a card-carrying member of the Ashkenazim, I demand reparations! Send all of your high-grade Jewish War shekels to me immediately!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The Luxor Obelisk was a gift from Egypt to France in 1830.
It is exactly as if you were saying that the statue of Liberty needs to be returned to France.

 

Yeah, when Egypt was under the suzerainty of the Ottoman Empire - a modern Egyptian could argue that a foreigner gave it away.

 

The Luxor obelisk has not been looted or stolen, it was a diplomatic gift from the Egyptian government to France in 1830. And Egypt was not under Ottoman rule, the country under Mehemet Ali had its own independent defence and diplomacy. In fact, Egypt offered both Luxor obelisks. The French built a specially designed ship for the transportation, the "Louxor", who could sail from Toulon to Luxor and back to Paris on the Mediterranean, the river Nile, the Atlantic Ocean and the river Seine (under Paris bridges). She carried only one obelisk, which is on Place de la Concorde since 1836. The second obelisk waited for the French and remained French property until 1981, when president Mitterrand very officially gave it back to Egypt. And as far as I know the Egyptians never claimed this obelisk back, they know very well why it is now in France.

I am a little worried about the Bayeux Tapestry because it is going to be loaned to the United Kingdom. Macron should insist on this point : it's a loan, not a donation!

 

“Some of the countries”. Specifically talking about Middle East / African countries. As much as it pains me knowing I’ll never get to see the Tutankhamen collection I would never feel safe visiting Egypt as an openly gay man.

 

Can modern Egyptians even claim a connection with the Egyptians that made the obelisk though? To me the answer is pretty obviously “no”. Most Egyptians are descendant now from the Muslim conquests, a complete 180 from predecessor Egyptians.

 

I tend not to get my knickers in a knot over the Elgin Marbles, or most other similar high-profile antiquities. The fact is that all that stuff happened a long time ago--many generations ago. There are no Greeks today who had grandparents alive when the Elgin Marbles were removed to Britain. If anyone has a claim to the Marbles, it's probably the British Museum, and the conservationists, scholars, custodial staff, and and so on who actually care for these sculptures in the present time.

I feel the same way about landclaims. Argentina wants the Falkland Islands, despite the wishes of the islanders themselves. Spain wants Gibraltar back, despite the wishes of the majority of the citizens of Gibraltar. There are many aboriginal people who would actually be better off if every Caucasian person were permanently removed from the western hemisphere. It's just not possible to send all these people back to the Old World.

And even if it were, why stop there? What about the land stolen from Saxons by the Normans, or the treasures stolen by the Saxons from the Celts? Nathan's Guide to World Peace: if you can't get it back within two generations, just forget about it and move on.

I would make some exceptions. There are many priceless artefacts belonging to indigenous people that were essentially stolen from them (e.g. artefacts related to potlatches and so confiscated when those were made illegal by the Canadian government). I would like to see a quantity, from some to many to most to all, returned to these people, as long as suitable arrangements can be made for their security and preservation. Partly, I feel this way because the thefts were fairly recent: within the last 100 years or so. Partly it's because of the extreme traumas experienced by these people as a direct result of cultural genocide. And partly it's because of how much was taken: in some cases, virtually everything.

For me, the important thing is that great antiquities (that have significant cultural value to all of humanity) that are kept in world-class museums currently should remain in world-class museums. And one of the advantages of living in the age of the internet is that many artefacts and artworks that are in museums are actually already accessible to all people, regardless of where they are in the world, as long as they have a cellphone or a computer, and an internet connection.

Probably the most I would say is that there should be a legal mandate for these institutions to ensure that these artefacts are accessible online. Regulations, might include a requirement that images not only of the front, but also of the back, or a corner/side view be present.

 

Apprently colonialism is not dead. Who knew?

 

I'm pretty sure that the genetic evidence shows that the admixture of other populations (including sub-Saharan peoples) with ancient Egyptians came well before the Arab conquests. See https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms15694. I do not believe that the Arab conquests themselves, in Egypt or elsewhere, were accompanied or followed by massive immigration, or replaced the indigenous populations of the countries they conquered as opposed to converting that population.

 

Greece has built a beautiful modern museum complex (the Acropolis Museum, at the foot of the Acropolis) to display their cultural birthright when finally the British do the right thing and return the Parthenon marbles.

 

Show them don’t store them

 

If an alien race visited earth and we went to showcase pieces of our history, would we say things like “this obelisk was made by ancient Egyptians”? Doubtful. We’d likely say it was made by us, humans. Humanity. National labels are meaningless. We’re all human. And humanities treasuries should be displayed in safe and secure places that allow for the most people to see them. Returning historical items to regressive countries that do not even recognize the basic fundamental rights of all humans is not in the overall interest of humanity.

 

I think this is missing the forest for the trees, but an interesting read nonetheless!

 

Egypt is Egypt since Narmer in the 33rd c. BC. This is the first country (I mean a sovereign state with a capital where is the central power, several big cities and a large territory where people speak a common language) in history, all others were multiethnic empires or small city-states. This country had three main civilizations : Pharaonic, Christian, Islamic. In Egypt the Coptic community still prays in coptic, a language evolved from the pharaonic egyptian. There have been immigrants all throughout history: Jews, Greeks, Arabs, Syrians, Ethiopians. One could even say that the present struggle between the military power (Nasser, Sadat, Mubarak, Sissi) and the religious power (Muslim Brethren) is a tradition that dates back to the 18th and 19th dynasties, with military pharaohs such as Horemheb, Sethi, etc. against the power of the Amon clergy. Modern Egyptians can rightfully claim to be connected with their ancestors 3000, 4000 years ago. May I also remind that Christianity and Islam who believe we shall be judged by God and enjoy eternal life in Paradise (if we are not damned) are following the ancient Egyptian religion? There is no such belief in Judaism...

 

This is not really correct on several counts. There are eschatological beliefs and beliefs related to the afterlife within the traditions of Judaism. Furthermore, the origins of these beliefs come from Zoroastrian influence during the Achaemenid period. Prior to this Persian influence, these beliefs were not present within ancient Israelite religion.

Update: The influence of Zoroastrian belief on the Judaisms of the day varied somewhat. Zoroastrian influence in some ways had more of an effect on the Essenes than on the Pharisees. In terms of a focus on eschatological matters, early Christianity had much in common with the Essenes, and that is why in terms of emphasis it began to diverge from Pharisaic Judaism, which went on to develop into Judaism as we now recognize it. Islam, of course, borrowed from both Judaism and Christianity.

 

Which forest does it miss?

 

.

 

The question as I see it is whether the 20 greats grandchild of a citizen of somewhere (including Greece and Rome) whose family over the years moved (of their own volition or driven out by terror) to somewhere else loses their 'rights' to the interest in or possession of the property of their ancestor and whether an invader who sent previous occupants away gains those rights based on squatting on the turf previously occupied by someone else's ancestors. Each of us has exactly the same number of ancestors back the same degree (minus overlaps caused when cousins marry - one of my 4 great gf and 3 great are the same man due to distant cousins marrying). There is a term for the belief that people are better or worse, more or less entitled than others due to their family culture of place of origin: Racism. The entire concept of Cultural Property is based on the idea that some pigs are more equal than others.

 

Stephen Fry fighting the good fight.

 

Thanks for this great link. Watching now...
I just finished reading/listening to Stephen Fry's Mythos, Heroes and the recently released Troy. I keep putting off making a thread on them, but HIGHLY recommend for pleasurable and entertaining reading!