Who owns our ancient past?

[Aragorn]

What should be done with objects from antiquity, when their provenance is uncertain?

From the debate over the British Museum's Elgin Marbles, to the conviction of art dealer Giacomo Medici in 2004 for selling millions of pounds worth of stolen Italian antiquities on the international market, curators face a minefield when acquiring new objects.

Now, the director of the Art Institute in Chicago, James Cuno, has argued that we should not waste time debating what to do with objects whose origin is less than completely certain.

He says that museums should simply take all the necessary steps to ensure that purchases are legal and are not looted or stolen.

But he opposes the concept that a country has an automatic right to have the antiquities that originated from their region returned, criticising the idea that there is "an indelible link back to the ancient peoples who by chance happen to occupy that bit of earth that modern nation states do now occupy".

Lord Renfrew, a former director of the McDonald Institute for archaeological research at Cambridge University, says Mr Cuno's argument "isn't good enough".

"The great problem at present is the destruction of the record of the past through looting," he says.

"If great museums feel free to buy anything then you have a free-for-all which encourages the looting of the past."

While the controversy over the Elgin Marbles stretches back to the 1800s, there are many more recent claims on notable antiquities.

http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/t...00/7709332.stm

[Skandi]

Hmm. as a short answer, whoever dug them up! but with a bit more consideration I would say that the country of origin has the first and best claim to any object but equaly if the artifact was legaly extracted and sold at some point in the past then the pressent owner has the claim. It should not be possible to sell something for gain one year and then claim it back as a cultural treasure the next.

[Aragorn]

Country of Origin isn't always the best place to preserve the legacy. Especially not if we take Middle-East countries in thought; as we remember clearly what happend to the Bagdad National Museum after the US-invasion. And important notice aswell, I believe in Western Europe treasures are far more safer from looting, destroying then in many other countries. Just my own thoughts though.

[SwordoftheVistula]

Hmm. as a short answer, whoever dug them up! but with a bit more consideration I would say that the country of origin has the first and best claim to any object but equaly if the artifact was legaly extracted and sold at some point in the past then the pressent owner has the claim. It should not be possible to sell something for gain one year and then claim it back as a cultural treasure the next.

I'm with that. If a country of origin makes it a law that you can't dig up antiquities and that they belong to the government, then that law should be followed. I don't think they should be able to go after people 50 or 100 years later and try to get them back.

Under Anglo-Saxon common law there is the 'Bona Fide Purchaser' concept, which means that if you buy something for a fair price without knowing it was stolen, it is yours. The person who stole it or knowingly sold stolen property are on the hook. In most of these cases, they are long dead.