Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Netherlands has returned some stolen artifacts to Indonesia

smithsonianmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 220 posts

Re: The Netherlands has returned some stolen artifacts to Indonesia

#181

Post by perilunar »

aithrowawaycomm wrote: post #38
notpushkin wrote: post #3

> While some critics of repatriation have raised concerns over how poorer countries will care for their returned artifacts, Marieke van Bommel, director general of the National Museum of World Cultures, tells the New York Times’ Lynsey Chutel that “the thief cannot tell the rightful owners what to do with their property.” But the government of the country the artifacts are being returned into isn’t the rightful owner…

Many artifacts were stolen from legitimate kingdoms / village councils / etc that no longer exist, so for these artifacts returning it to the corresponding modern government is fairly appropriate. Otherwise, unless there is a clear claim of individual/familial ownership vis descendancy, then returning artifacts to a legal national government is still a least bad option. In this case the artifact belongs to the people…

> the government doesn't "own" it in the way King Charles owns the Crown Jewels

Would the Crown Jewels still be owned by Charles (or his heirs) if the UK ceased to be a monarchy? I hope not — when the monarchy falls all “royal” property should become public property.

Re: The Netherlands has returned some stolen artifacts to Indonesia

#182

Post by cuteboy19 »

nickff wrote: post #127
rightbyte wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mummies are maybe a bad example, as one could argue, that bodies should be by their grave.

Graves generally aren't permanent; most plots are leased for a fixed term. What is done with the caskets and contents thereafter varies widely.

Is that really how pyramids worked? King Tut in the pyramid for 60 years then to the Nile his bones?

Re: The Netherlands has returned some stolen artifacts to Indonesia

#183

Post by oska »

pie420 wrote: post #153
isodev wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t see the controversy of your example because since there was no UNESCO and other global agreements in the 1500s, the indigenous people of this area are still around and so it would be the local Native American tribes that can have a legitimate claim on their heritage.

Lots of native american tribes committed genocide and destroyed other tribes. If Tribe A made some artifacts, and then was genocided out of existence by Tribe B, which was then conquered by the Tribe C (USA). Would you want Tribe B to have ownership of the artifacts of tribe B?

Including your 'tribe C' (the USA) with two indigenous tribes (A & B) in your example is highly disingenuous. And self-serving to your contrived hypothetical.

Re: The Netherlands has returned some stolen artifacts to Indonesia

#184

Post by gwervc »

Covenant0028 wrote: post #163
noworriesnate wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because they are more secure there. These are irreplaceable items. Pick your favorite cultural artifact, would you help move it to a more secure location if there was a lot of instability that could lead to it being destroyed? Even if that more secure location was a different country? I personally would.

I would recommend reading "Africa is Not a Country" that delves into this exact question. It is the pinnacle of self-serving arguments for European countries to first spend centuries colonising Africa, stolen its wealth and cultural artifacts, enriching themselves in the bargain, and dividing the continent in a way that would guarantee political instability, to then use that same instability as an excuse for not retu…

Having been multiple times at the Chirac Quai Branly museums, it's pretty clear the argument is valid: most pieces seem totally forgettable and would likely have been discarded by their owners. Heck, even the "royal door of XXX king palace" is a 1-meter wooden door with carvings that aren't particularly fine. Those artifacts still exist and have value because they are exposed in a museum in Paris, otherwise nobody would care.

Re: The Netherlands has returned some stolen artifacts to Indonesia

#185

Post by trwhite »

makeitdouble wrote: post #172
ahmeneeroe-v2 wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes the UK a unique place with regard to slavery, as your original post implies?

It doesn't need to be unique, you can't just look at a dispute between the UK and another country and dismiss that other country on the base of an history of slavery. PS: my question would be how many other countries you think were ahead of the UK in terms of trade slave when it was all the rage for European countries ?

Spain was considerably more exploitative than Britain at first, in the South American gold & silver mining trade, to name one example.

Re: The Netherlands has returned some stolen artifacts to Indonesia

#186

Post by Neonlicht »

rayiner wrote: post #174
sangnoir wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In other cases, though, the items could easily have ended up lost to time (or political, economic, social turmoil) That's a hard sell when the country that winds up with the artifacts was also the primary agitator of political, social and economic turmoil (you know, the usual colonial stuff). An arsonist shouldn't get to keep victims' heirlooms to "save them from the conflagration".

[flagged]

It's entirely possible that Indonesia would not exist without Dutch colonisation. Indonesian nationalism was a response to colonialism.

Re: The Netherlands has returned some stolen artifacts to Indonesia

#187

Post by Neonlicht »

gwervc wrote: post #184
Covenant0028 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would recommend reading "Africa is Not a Country" that delves into this exact question. It is the pinnacle of self-serving arguments for European countries to first spend centuries colonising Africa, stolen its wealth and cultural artifacts, enriching themselves in the bargain, and dividing the continent in a way that would guarantee political instability, to then use that same instability as an excuse for not retu…

Having been multiple times at the Chirac Quai Branly museums, it's pretty clear the argument is valid: most pieces seem totally forgettable and would likely have been discarded by their owners. Heck, even the "royal door of XXX king palace" is a 1-meter wooden door with carvings that aren't particularly fine. Those artifacts still exist and have value because they are exposed in a museum in Paris, otherwise nobody wo…

The Netherlands has accumulated so much art and antiques in the last 200 years that most of it never sees the light of day. It sits in giant secured vaults.

Re: The Netherlands has returned some stolen artifacts to Indonesia

#188

Post by philwelch »

chgs wrote: post #69
bell-cot wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's Complicated(tm) - Scotland and England are, currently , both part of Britain. Historically, not so much. And they were often far-from-friendly, with wars fought and everything. In a referendum 10 years ago, ~45% of Scottish voters wanted to separate again.

Scotland and England has been the same country for far longer than say the USA has even existed.

1707 versus 1776 isn’t what I would describe as “far longer”.

Re: The Netherlands has returned some stolen artifacts to Indonesia

#189

Post by graemep »

yread wrote: post #103
graemep wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Benin Bronzes if returned will go to the descendants of the original owners - the kings of a kingdom built on slavery. I certainly know many people in countries from which these things were taken who think they are safer somewhere stable - I have heard exactly the comment that returning things will probably mean then end up stolen by politicians from Sri Lankans with regard to the things the Netherlands returned…

> end up stolen by politicians from Sri Lankans with regard to the things the Netherlands returned to Sri Lanka. I'm not sure if I understand what you're saying, but do you mean that Sri Lanka politicians stole the golden cannon or something else returned from Netherlands? Do you have a citation for that?

No, i am saying that a lot of Sri Lankans believe things are safer in the Netherlands because they risk being stolen if returned (also that they are less likely to be well looked after).

Re: The Netherlands has returned some stolen artifacts to Indonesia

#190

Post by chgs »

philwelch wrote: post #188
chgs wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scotland and England has been the same country for far longer than say the USA has even existed.

1707 versus 1776 isn’t what I would describe as “far longer”.

In the context of crowning kings, the union of the crowns was 1603, before the mayflower, before new Amsterdam, even before Jamestown.

But even with 1707 you’re talking 30% of the age of the USA again.

Post reply on HN