But they don't just take offers. Things that have … been made by humans. They dont have the resources to take care of these artifacts and are in many problems right now that can effect the artifacts in a negetive way. But I also think that whatever hasn't been found yet should stay there on display in there found location, so that people who travel there can see something like it was when found. I do wonder if they were returned to the countries of origin if they would be cared for as much as we care for them? If a country can properly house and care for an artifact, its fine to return it.
I say this because if they are in the museum they'll be kept in better conditions. This is because many objects may be special to Egypt. Anonymous says: the artifacts that were taken should go back to where they came from. In my opinion, artifacts should be put in museums but in this blog I will talk about whether artifacts should be put into museums and why they shouldn't be put in museums. Good museums already adhere to a code of ethics above and beyond the law that holds institutions accountable for the actions of their leaders and staff. Eventually, significant objects should be returned to their country of origin and a replica could be made for display instead.
The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act rights the wrong in a way, but not completely. I also think that postcolonial nations need to give countries of origin the right of refusal for objects taken illicitly or illegally. Unlike many illicit materials and stolen artefacts, by nature of being wrongfully obtained, are illiicit materials , ownership and a papertrail should exist and provide adequate evidence of whose rightful property such objects are. Do not pour dirty water on public roads or just anywhere in the compound. So many times this happened, many books lost , many traditional knowledge especially on medicine has lost forever.
But as tourists and visitors, not as thieves. Does the Louvre have a right to show these artifacts in their museum if they're taking good care of them? It's still a foolish claim to consider my 'race' different and think the phrase meaningful when the categories are arbitrary and meaningless by any real standards. According to the proposal, a number of artifacts would be lent to Ethiopia for a period of six months and then returned to France. If the object is very valuable ,it might not be something you would want to keep in your home. They give animals places to live and hide and they are beautiful.
If the Elgin Marbles had spent three months in England they would not be an integral part of two cultures as, I feel, they are now. That is why I think they should remain in museums for everyone to see. Hajar says: Everything that belongs to Egypt must be returned to Egypt. Also by spreading artifacts around the world by the connection of where they have came from, the next generation is not going to know that much about history. Once again the native Americans come up short and have their possessions taken away from them.
I have a lot more thoughts but i dont feel like explaining them. Its a ongoing debate that unfortunately has not correct answer. All buildings and artefacts were made with the idea they would disappear in time. We don't need a blanket law that would harm as many as it helps. The archeologists, that found the sacred artifacts, shouldn't have immediately taken the tribe's precious treasures. Since becoming head of the Supreme Council of Antiquities in 2002, Hawass says the latest recoveries bring to 31,000 the number of relics brought back to Egypt. It's a thin argument at best to say that displaying the precious belongings of the dead or even their own bodies is ok period, nevertheless for it to be done somewhere thousands of miles from the country where they were originally buried.
Many empires who went across the world conquering lands collected these artifacts. But when I make this decision I also consider where they came from. How are we to be educated when artifacts are returned to countries that are dangerous, have closed borders, or express extreme hatred toward certain people? I think some artifacts are better in museums and some belong to Egypt and should be in Egypt. It is vital that the country of origin to learn about their past. While it's ok to say that we all have the right to take care of the artifacts, it shouldn't be the excuse under which we refuse to return the treasure to the country of origin. Strong evidence indicates that the stone was the recut French Blue and the same stone known today as the HopeDiamond.
Then fine, no issue, since Britain doesn't have any instability like the Middle East has. Anonymous says: I think that the artifacts should be returned to their countries. They should belong to the world. Maybe a compromise, such as having a limited time exhibit in the Met until hype has died down would both satisfy the intrigued Americans and allow Egypt to soon receive their artifact for keeping. Even Iran is governed by Arabian people mostly, so the best solution is to let it be kept by the people who found it, returning it to whom they desire.
Nobody but Native Americans should have the right to dig up artifacts that are on Native land. The artifacts, in this case if returned to Britain will be taken care of, and will be enjoyed by many, especially school students. They were displaced south into modern Sudan, Ethiopia and Somalia and it is they who can claim cultural heritage over Egyptian artefacts. Ok, lets say we bring it back. I would have a hard time believing that a 5,000 year old piece of pottery would even be in fair condition. They can educate themselves learning about artifacts and scientists get to study them.