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

91–100 of 220 posts

Re: The Netherlands has returned some stolen artifacts to Indonesia

#91

Post by ahmeneeroe-v2 »

makeitdouble wrote: post #71
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…

> the kings of a kingdom built on slavery. You cannot put that as a reason to keep the artifacts in the UK, of all places.

You lost me. Why not the UK of all places?

Re: The Netherlands has returned some stolen artifacts to Indonesia

#92

Post by mihaic »

jntun wrote: post #76
mihaic wrote: post #41

While these discussions are always loaded with sentimental intepretation, and complex questions of what "rightful owner" after hundreds or thousands of years even means, I think more of an emphasis should be put on impact for the population. After all, the British Museum, the main example for restitutions, is located in a global city, given completely free access to its huge collection on display and pays for preserv…

Looting and pillaging is fine, as long as you build an entire economic / social system around it? Because that is the only semblance of logic I can take away from your statements. These museums didn't just pop into place for the artifacts to reside in; they were built to show off their spoils.

> These museums didn't just pop into place for the artifacts to reside in; they were built to show off their spoils.

You have a very cynical and skewed view of things. These museums were built specifically for the public good, to show off things that were of no interest in their original countries at that time. The British didn't say they wanted to build public museums to increase tourism, that came later as an unintended consequence.

Re: The Netherlands has returned some stolen artifacts to Indonesia

#93

Post by bee_rider »

mihaic wrote: post #41

While these discussions are always loaded with sentimental intepretation, and complex questions of what "rightful owner" after hundreds or thousands of years even means, I think more of an emphasis should be put on impact for the population. After all, the British Museum, the main example for restitutions, is located in a global city, given completely free access to its huge collection on display and pays for preserv…

It would be sort of interesting, maybe if there was some sort of right to visit these artifacts, the idea that the UK was preserving their cultures for these countries would be a little more defensible. What percentage of a country’s population should be given a museum-funded trip to the UK, before we can say the museum is actually living up to that promise, I wonder? Half or so?

Re: The Netherlands has returned some stolen artifacts to Indonesia

#94

Post by veggieWHITES »

mihaic wrote: post #41

While these discussions are always loaded with sentimental intepretation, and complex questions of what "rightful owner" after hundreds or thousands of years even means, I think more of an emphasis should be put on impact for the population. After all, the British Museum, the main example for restitutions, is located in a global city, given completely free access to its huge collection on display and pays for preserv…

> complex questions of what "rightful owner" after hundreds or thousands of years even means

I think that's besides the point.

To me this means a goodhearted effort to right past wrongs.

Re: The Netherlands has returned some stolen artifacts to Indonesia

#95

Post by BlackJack »

ipaddr wrote: post #90
makeitdouble wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the kings of a kingdom built on slavery. You cannot put that as a reason to keep the artifacts in the UK, of all places.

Didn't the movement to stop slavery come from the UK? After that happened the African region refused to stop because it made them rich so England had to invade and created the Ivory Coast? England has a lot of credibility. The idea of reparations has come up. Should the US be paying or the African countries who profited and kept it going for another 100 years.

The British were engaged in the slave trade, then worked to outlaw slavery but replaced it with indentured servitude that was basically like slavery with a trivial income. That and exploitative colonial government meant you don't need slavery to loot everything.

Reparations are a different topic and wouldn't necessarily solve the problems of slavery/colonization.

Re: The Netherlands has returned some stolen artifacts to Indonesia

#96

Post by mihaic »

TremendousJudge wrote: post #70
mihaic wrote: post #41

While these discussions are always loaded with sentimental intepretation, and complex questions of what "rightful owner" after hundreds or thousands of years even means, I think more of an emphasis should be put on impact for the population. After all, the British Museum, the main example for restitutions, is located in a global city, given completely free access to its huge collection on display and pays for preserv…

> After all, the British Museum, the main example for restitutions, is located in a global city, given completely free access to its huge collection on display and pays for preservation. The global cultural value it adds is much larger than individual museums all over the would could provide. Most of the collection of the British Museum is not on display at any given moment (if ever). They could lose 90% of their inv…

Most of these third world countries also have some artefacts on their soil as well. Do they need literally all of them, and you'd have to visit the globe to see international artefacts? The most famous ones, like the Rosetta Stone, only became famous from their usage by Western archeologists.

As for London being expensive, well visiting any foreign country is expensive by non-natives. At least in London you can get a large set of cultural exposure in a single visit.

> Most of the people whose cultures those items belong to cannot afford to go visit the museum.

There is no ancient Greek or Egyptian alive today, those cultures are long dead. What claim do modern inhabitants of those regions have over these artefacts?

Re: The Netherlands has returned some stolen artifacts to Indonesia

#97

Post by returningfory2 »

isodev wrote: post #81
ckuehne wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no "nation from which the items were taken".

I’m not sure I follow - The items were taken from somewhere at some point in time and now there is a country on that territory.

Take an extreme hypothetical. Suppose in the 1500s the government of Spain had taken some artifacts relating to the indigenous peoples of New Mexico. Would the government of the United States really be the rightful owner of these artifacts?

For other countries it's not quite as extreme, but in general the link between ancient culture in place X and modern country in place X is less strong than people try to make out.

Re: The Netherlands has returned some stolen artifacts to Indonesia

#99

Post by jntun »

mihaic wrote: post #92
jntun wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looting and pillaging is fine, as long as you build an entire economic / social system around it? Because that is the only semblance of logic I can take away from your statements. These museums didn't just pop into place for the artifacts to reside in; they were built to show off their spoils.

> These museums didn't just pop into place for the artifacts to reside in; they were built to show off their spoils. You have a very cynical and skewed view of things. These museums were built specifically for the public good, to show off things that were of no interest in their original countries at that time. The British didn't say they wanted to build public museums to increase tourism, that came later as an unint…

> to show off things that were of no interest in their original countries at that time

You have a very cynical and skewed view of things.

Re: The Netherlands has returned some stolen artifacts to Indonesia

#100

Post by skylurk »

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.

And Scotland has been crowning Scottish kings with it since before England even existed, if you believe the legends ;)
Post reply on HN