Should Museums Artifacts And Their Country Of Origin?

Artifacts that are found in a country should stay in that country so it don’t get lost or broken. I think that if the artifact is in the museum then it needs to stay in one place so the object doesn't get tossed around and gets broken. If the artifact breaks then that is a part of history that is gone forever and it will not be here for us to learn about. I feel like if the artifact was found in a certain country then it needs to be stored in its own countries’ museums.

The repatriation of cultural artifacts and pieces of art refers to the return of these items to their country of origin. Although this seems to be an overwhelmingly positive action taken to reunite ancient artifacts with their culture, the process can also prevent intercultural blending and encourage cultural segregation. As James Cuno expressed in the supplemental article “To Repatriate or Not to Repatriate, That is the Question….James Cuno’s Case Against Repatriating Museum Artifacts”, returning cultural artifacts to their homeland first entails taking from the country in which they reside. While this seems rather harmless, preventing intercultural fusion could destroy the education of and respect for outside cultures. Because of this, in

From what I learned from the past assigned readings and class discussions, one of the difficult decisions that museums have to make is do they return their objects/artifacts back to their original countries or cultural group. This issue is an ethical dilemma because, would it be the museum to legally keep the objects because of their belief that they can protect and use these items (Warren 1999: 1-20). Or, would it be ethical for the museum to return the items that were previously removed from their country or place of origin. Based on my lecture notes and discussion for this week’s class, one of the ways which many countries and cultural groups are able to acquire back their objects/artifacts legally is through the process of restitution and

Museums are filled with unique,historical artifacts that are precious to our history throughout the world. These “traveling exhibits” give people around the world an opportunity to see how our ancestors lived in many different regions of the world. Many artifacts are far away from their country of origin 7.In the articles “Bring Them Home”and “Museums Preserve the Cultures of the World,” people argue that museums should return certain artifacts to its original country, while others believes it’s only right to keep them considering the originating country rightfully sold those artifacts.In my opinion, countries should bring some artifacts back to their originating country.

Many works of art can be considered artifacts that hold volumes of information regarding the culture of the people that created them and the historical context in which they lived.

Politics within nations and communities influences the finding of art artifacts and the eventual explanation of the art artifacts because they decide who has the right to claim it. If an archeologist finds an artifact that belongs to a nation or community and has significance, then the archaeologist can’t claim it. This can cause archaeologists and art historians to feel a certain pressure within their research projects because they can’t retaliate if a community claims the artifact they’ve been researching and studying. However, when the rightful community claims the artifact, they may be able to add insight into the meaning of the artifact because it belongs to them so they may know more about

In examining the article “Around the Mall and Beyond”, by Michael Kernan, the author seems to make an argument illustrating the existence of artifacts, practically everywhere. In this article, I concur with his position that there are likely artifacts and remains wherever one might go. This is because we are not the first inhabitants of this land, as such, remains of humans, animals, tools etc. could likely be found in any area if searched for in-depth enough. The author makes a specific reference to the National Historic Preservation Act, which I particularly agree with. The author goes on to use several instances in history where history were discovered on sites which were being considered for or in the process of being converted into

Historic treasures and artifacts are often donated to or purchased by other nations to place in their museums. Often museums are given the objects with full cooperation from the originating country, but sometimes they are stolen or given for protection such as in a time of war. When nations want the artifacts returned it can cause a disagreement with the other nations of who the rightful owner is.

Collecting objects from a specific culture is also unethical, not because objects are being stolen, but because people are being put on display as if they are not human. In Denver Museum of Nature and Science, Indian skulls and bones are “labeled like a library book with a tracking number, wrapped in coarse white muslin, and packed in a cardboard box” (1). People are viewing these exhibits and looking at the bones as if they are normal objects you see every day. These bones were once humans, and they are being shown off like animals. Labeling them like library books shows the dehumanization of these exhibits, which is ironic because institutions and collectors find their culture so interesting. In a way, this can be considered racist. While discussing this piece, a classmate said “Why are we [as in, Native Americans] so interesting to you [as in, mostly white historians]; why don’t we have exhibits

Antiques, they are hundreds, maybe thousands years old, but what if someone just took them from you. You would want them back, right? This valuable prized possession, someone just, stole. Well, imagine it a bit more extreme. That has been the major problem in Egypt for many years. Britain, France, and other surrounding countries have been stealing major antiquities from Egypt illegally for a long time. These countries should give back Egypt’s antiquities because, they deserve to be in their country of origin, these artifacts represent Egyptian culture, and Egyptian antiquities are not only limited to staying in the pyramids.

These issues with museums and other institutions has led many tribes to not only protest these collections and demand the most sacred items back, but to also develop their own institution that not only tell the real story of their people from a non scientific point of view, but also show the proper resect for the sacred and religious artifacts. Religious sights and objects are a piece of many different groups culture, many of which require a certain level of respect. Within the United States Native American groups are reclaiming these objects for their own

I think yes artifacts should be returned to their place of origin if the country can make sure that the artifacts are protected. Why i believe that the artifacts should be returned to their place orgen is because it will shown more background of the artifact to show where it was used but because once it was removed from its origin it lost some context and meaning for what it did.Also by returning some artifacts back to tribes or the groups of people that made to artifacts for special ceremonies, as they are said in paragraph 4 “Some museums have objects that were made for private Native American religious ceremonies and were never meant to be seen by the public.”

While reparation and restitution are similar, they vary in audience. Restitution is the act of giving art or cultural treasures back to their original owner. Repatriation, applying to a group of people rather than an individual, is the act returning of cultural treasures to their country of origin or culture (UNESCO). Sometimes restitution goes against repatriation. This occurs when the legal owners of cultural treasures desire to own, or have access to it, whereas the country of origin wants to keep the work. Repatriation is viewed on a case by case basis, whereas restitution is almost always a moral necessity. Often times the owners will win the art back, then display it in galleries. This allows for the public to continue to appreciate the art. Both of these aspects of the art world are important, as they affect international affairs.

Of the many crimes that are present in this day and age, one that not only vandalizes the property, but as well as historical background is that of art theft. A crime that has taken away the sanctity of churches as well as many other religious and historical sites. Thefts have ranged from WWII (World War II) to the times of the Holocaust. Of the items that were taken from the churches, relics were items of great priority. These items not only had great value to the churches they were stolen from, but a great value to relic collectors. Most of the items taking during these times were either sold or placed in underground storage. Most of these items that were place in these secret places were never to be seen again. From the

The museum will strive to acquire artefacts and specimens that generally are complete and in good condition, and for which provenance is well documented regarding its history. All potential acquisitions must be thoroughly researched in regards to their provenance, including proof of ownership prior to acquisition. Acquisitions must not violate any international laws or conventions and rights of the country.