Pros And Cons Of Elgin Marbles

It seems logical the originating country is the rightful owner to its national treasures. To deny the request for the return of the treasures is cultural theft. The treasures reflect the heritage and foundation of the people in the originating nation. The request should be honored in most circumstances. From the article “Bring Them Home

As I mentioned, this is an extremely controversial topic that has raised a lot of difference in opinions. Furthermore, I must admit that those arguing for the sculptures to remain in Britain do make some interesting points that plenty of people have taken into consideration. One of their arguments is that the sculptures were already in a damaged and fragile condition, and leaving them in Greece would have destroyed them completely (‘The Parthenon Marbles: Refuting the Arguments”, par 6). In the YouTube video, “Parthenon Marbles Debate ", one of Tristam Hunt’s arguments is if the Greeks are able to acquire their historic artwork, this may cause other countries to demand their historic artifacts as well, not just from the British Museum, but from museums all over the world as well. I can see the counter arguments that this controversy issue involves. However, regardless of whether they were in a horrible condition, the Greeks were never consulted, nor did they have a say regarding the selling of this artwork to Elgin. Now, when it comes to everyone claiming and demanding they receive their ancient artwork, like historian Hunt said; this is true. It can happen, but I don't believe that any other artifacts have the amount of significance that these sculptures do. The Greeks worked their hearts

More evidence is shown in the passage, “A Case in Antiquities for ‘Finders Keepers’” paragraph 15, “Scientist and curators have generally supported the laws passed in recent decades giving countries ownership of ancient ‘cultural property’ discovered within their borders.” This evidence shows that some people like travelers are on a mission to discover something new and if they find an ancient objects from the past they should have the right to bring it back and spread this cultural religion and ancient artifact. Lastly, evidence is shown in the passage, “Vision of home: Repatriated Works Back in Their Countries of Origin” paragraph 2 and 3, “The Getty, which had bought the statue in 1988 for $18 million, returned it to Italy in 2011 after Italian prosecutors found that it had been

Ancient artifacts are the symbols of human civilization. All of them are priceless and cannot be measured by currency value. Repatriate is a controversial problem because of the various reasons. For instance, the aggressor took all of the captures back to their home countries and showed them to the public, during the war. Voyagers took other countries’ artifact to prove they had been in that place. Archeologists, anthropologists, and scientists took the antiquities back to their university for research. Politicians used the regulation to move away a relic as decrease the power of a competitor. Thieves had stolen someone’s important items or expensive objects in a tomb in order to sell to the private collectors. It can’t be right to steal the items that belong to other people. When the owner found out the items were stolen, and then they hoped they could get them back. That was how repatriated started. Some antiquities were transported to the country that they do not belong to. Thus, there are some people think those ancient artifacts should be returned to the original country because it involves moral issues. However, some people think they shouldn’t be returned because they are the spoils of the wars. Most antiquities were looted from other places, which are showed in the museum. So which countries do they belong to? However, In my opinion, museums don’t have to return the antiquities to the original

In “Bring Them Home,” the author explains why certain countries sell their artifacts to protect them from conflicts in their country. Many countries need a place to send their very important valuables to prevent them from getting damaged. A country will sale or send their valuables to a trustable country.As stated in the article,Greece sent “stunning marble sculptures” that were in the Parthenon Temple to keep them from being damaged by the Turkish Government. Now,Greece has took their independence back and wants their sculptures back.It’s only right to send them back considering that Britain’s job was to

The issue of artifacts that have been taken from their original homes has started some global debate. Some may say that the artifacts need to be returned to their place of origin or who found them. They may also say that there are laws saying that the artifacts should be returned. Others may say that no matter who the objects belong to the artifacts should remain in museums around the world. Artifacts should not be returned to their nations of origins.

For obvious reasons, preservation of the marbles takes priority to both the Greek and the British. Integrity and distribution rely on the preservation of the marbles, therefore everyone

The controversy began almost one hundred years ago. Between 1801 and 1812, Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin and British Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, removed several sculptures from the Parthenon in Athens and shipped them to England, where he sold them to the British Museum in 1816. 167 years later, Melina Mercouri, Greek Minister of Culture, requested that the “Elgin” Marbles be returned. This request sparked one of the greatest debates the art world has ever known. For the past two decades, people have argued over who has the rights to these Marbles. The Greek position is certainly understandable from a cultural and emotional point of view. However, from the standpoint of

As we are all aware, the Parthenon bears immeasurable cultural importance as a surviving example of Classical architecture in the modern world. The structure also bears many artefacts, including friezes depicting significant historical events such as the occurrences at the Battle of Marathon. The ‘Elgin Marbles’, which were removed from the Parthenon by Lord Elgin upon the agreement of the Ottoman Empire between 1801 and 1805, depict such a scene. The Greek Government have requested that the British Museum return the Marbles, on the basis

One of the main reasons people believe that Egyptian artifacts should stay in Britain or France is because they believe the weather, humidity, and location will make the important artifacts decay quicker. I strongly disagree with this statement because Egypt has very many museums dedicated to ancient Egypt which the artifacts can be displayed in. Many pieces like King Tutankhamen’s mask is now being displayed at the Egyptian Museum in Cairo, Egypt. That important artifact was once in a tomb. However, they did move it to museum, in Egypt. In addition, many tourists and travelers go to Egypt to see Egyptian artifacts. The same way someone would go to France to see the Eiffel Tower or the Louvre Museum. These tourists wouldn't want to go to Egyptian museums and see barely any antiquities from the ancient times of the

The Frieze was taken from the Parthenon between 1801 and 1812 by Thomas Bruce the Earl of Elgin after he was granted permission to take them by the Ottoman Empire. He later sold them to the British Government in 1816 where it was moved to the British Museum in 1832. The Frieze was shipped in two stages with the first set going in 1803 in 200 boxes with the second shipment in 1809. The transportation of the marbles took so long as Elgin was imprisoned on the Spanish border at Pau for three years. The entire removal process of the marbles taken from the Parthenon cost Elgin £74,000. (4)

noted by the Metropolitan Museum of Art, “The art of the ancient Near East exhibits a great

“Many Egyptians believe the Rosetta Stone is significant to their national heritage, and its presence in a European museum is a monument to the days of colonialist looting and exploitation. Anything that left illegally, it should go back to Egypt. ”

One of the most well-known components of the Parthenon are the enormously beautiful and important marble sculptures that were placed in the pediment of the monument. These marbles are shrouded in controversy as to whom they belong: Greece or Britain. These marble sculptures were removed between 1801 and 1812 in order to protect them from possible destruction caused by the war between the Grecians and the Venetians, taken to Britain for refuge by the Earl of Elgin, and sold to the British Museum to be displayed. John Henry Merryman discusses his view on the issue of the ownership of marbles by presenting two main points and the validity of both sides. One aspect of his examination revolves around the legality of the removal of these sculptures.

The Parthenon is located on the Athenian Acropolis, Greece; is a former temple which was dedicated to Greek goddess Athena, whom the Athens considered their leader. According to the British Museum (2015), The Parthenon was built nearly 2500 years ago and has a long and complex history. After thousands of years it became a church of the Virgin Mary of the Athenians, then a mosque and then finally resulted in a archaeological ruin. After the result of a ruin, the buildings were reformed in which various sculptures were damaged. During the 1800’s after the Parthenon being damaged, the Elgin marbles (Elgin) a part of the remaining sculpture, was removed and given to a British museum. For hundreds of years there has been a question if the British museum should return the Elgin marbles back to the Athenians or not. I believe that that the safest and most beneficial place for the Elgin marbles is the British museum, therefore the British should not return the marble to the Athenians.