I disagree that the artefacts should be returned home to conditions they wouldnt possibly be able to survive in. For example if we sent home wooden african figures to their original context they would soon decay in the humid conditions. The protection of these artefacts is also questionable in countries in financial difficulty. The temptation could be too much. Also nobody has absorbed the point that by spreading artefacts around the world,in relation to their origins,we are reducing the understanding of civilisations our future generatiosn will have.

Indeed.

I'm doing a paper on this subject and yes, I believe, if they were in any way moved to another country in the past, the country that houses the original dig site should have everything returned.

Now, there is the issue of past collection and maintenance that England (I'll use the Egyptian artifacts as an example) went through in the last 100 or so years. Should they be reimbursed? Or should the Egyptian Government pay a fee to appease the English so they can give up many precious artifacts?

Thank you.

haha you missed spelled Louvre!! but i do think artifacts should go back where they belong because they're part of their culture!

It is an interesting question and does not led itself to an easy answer. Just because an item is found in a certain location doesn't mean that it is an artifact of the current indigenous population. What if the artifact is from a culture that isn't represented by the current government of the area? Who should the artifact be returned to? What about the cases where a "legitimate" representative of a government donated or even sold an item to a foreign government, museum, or collector? The human remains question can be just as murky. It is far to simplistic to say "yes return them"!

It is a difficult problem- at what point does the history of the object stop? Many times How and Who found the artifact is just as important as where it was found. For example: British Archaology and Egyptian Archaeology DO have ties and connections- is it wrong to dismiss that history?\r\n\r\nThere is also the question of care- how heartbreaking it would be to turn over a collection to another museum knowing that the care of the object(s) would be in question.

Can someone help me or tell me the reason that why artifacts should NOT be return back to their orgin.

The problem, at its centre, is a debate of Internationlism and Nationalism.
While it's ok to say that we all have the right to take care of the artifacts, it shouldn't be the excuse under which we refuse to return the treasure to the country of origin.
The artifact has its unique value because of its cultural contents, thus it could only display its integrity in where it belongs. This is like sending a painter to the country where his inspiration lies, not in a city centre where the best drawing facilities can be bought.
We have reasons to doubt the real care taken in the country where the artifacts are kept. In fact some investigations showed that the earlier thefted artifacts are buried and ignored in some possessing countries.
There are many ways we can help the artifacts to be known to more in the world. Seizing them in the hands where they were seized may be the worst, but mentioned the most in the present world, probably because it's internally the more selfish one. If we are really considering for the human treasure, we could help the artifacts return to its country of origin, when the country is capable to take care of the artifacts; and we could help the country of origin to receive the artifacts by aiding with the facilities and the general education.
The artifacts should return to their countries of origin as their final destiny.
We are in the same family. We did contribution to take care of each others' children when their families are in trouble, but we will do crime if we refuse to return the child to their own parents.
It may take efforts for everyone to make an agreement on the issue, but we can see the light if we are really thinking for the artifacts' sake- for the treasure of all humanity.

This article from the Wall Street Journal summarizes many of these issues, and offeres a nice solution: ownership of objects may revert to the country of origin, but the objects themselves can stay in their current museums on long-term loan.

the should be returned. hurrah!

Well, I personally think we should retuen the artefacts. Our class is debating upon this issue, and I pretty sure it's the right thing to do.

I think that these artifacts should be returned to the countries they were found. In my opinion the western world stole these things to enrich thier own culture, which is almost non existent when compared to the past civillizations that existed. These artifacts are the heritage and lineage for those countries. How would we americans like it, if things that are important in our history be displayed in Japan for thier viewing pleasure? I strongly believe that it just thievery disguised in a fancier way, if they cared a lot about these artifacts as they argue, they would take them back home and preserve them there. So that if you want to see them you go there for yourself and experience everything that country has to offer both past and present. It is a pattern in history where the western world strips other "primitive" civillizations of what rights they have and what rightly belongs to them. I do not think that is ever going to change although i truly hope it does.
Even when it comes to civillizations like the early roman and greek and egyptian civillizations, most of thier artifacts are in france or britain and even here in the U.S. They should be taken back to Rome, greece and egypt...e.t.c, to the people who have every right to them.

Due to the fact that the Rosetta Stone is currently in The British Musuem, I personally think that since it is the Egyptian icon of their identity. It will be protected properly there and besides, how would you like it if someone just came along and looted a precious artifact of your original culture? Respect other countries identities.

Conditions:
If proper documentation and proof of ownership is established, then by all means a particular artefact should be returned. The onerous part is establishing ownership and the possession chain. Unlike many illicit materials (and stolen artefacts, by nature of being wrongfully obtained, are illiicit materials), ownership and a papertrail should exist and provide adequate evidence of whose rightful property such objects are.
On another note, Public Museums do not OWN their collections per se. Public Museums are merely the stewards of such objects. Therefore, if it is proven by due documentation that any given peice of a collection was wrongfully - or erroneously - accquisitioned, then the given object should be deaccquisitioned to the proper authorities who should then make the decision as to whether to return the artefact to a private owner.
As long as it is accomplished by due process, any such artefact should be returned to a steward organization local to the original owner. That entity should then decide the article's fate, as is its right. Say a state museum is holding an Iriquois treasure obtained from a village when sacked by US Cavalrymen. The rightful owner (assuming that in this enlightened age we can dispense with 'to the victors . . ') would be either the descendent or the tribe thus assaulted. The state museum cannot go to Joe Running Bear and hand over the object (most state museums can only hand over pieces of their collections to registered non-profit organizations). The Curator or Director of the museum would have to deaccquistion the object and transfer custodianship to a responsible organization such as a tribal council. It would then be the tribal council's responsibility to decide the fate of the object, a decision which would require proper identification and documentation.

Now, more essoterically, who should have proprietorship over treasures of [no longer extant] civilizations? The muddle-blooded offspring only locationally related to the original artisans? The current political institution claiming dominion over the original dig sites?
I believe such objects are treasures of humanity. Those found destroying such, in my opinion, should be subject to indictment for crimes against humanity (such as certain idols and millennia-old icons destroyed out of religeous fanaticism by numerous extremists over the last few hundred years, including damage to the sphinx and the parthenon).

Wasn't there an act past in the 70's to make it illegal to own artfacts and such items or to take them out of its country of origin? I am doing some reading on cambodian art an have read how they took statues out of the country back in 80's and 90's. Is that illegal? a

I am doing an essay on this subject and I have just read through the comments. I think that we don't need to return them, because the people took them because they didn't a camera to make a picture of them. As well when they got home they wanted to show the people of there country how other people lived

The items should not be returned. Look what happened to the Bagdad museum! As soon as the country destabilized, the townsfolk looted the museums and took everything. now all those wonderful artifacts from Mesopotamia are gone. They will never be returned or researched further. If you send artifacts back to Egypt, then next war or civil unrest, say goodbye to those pieces as well. Nothing will happen to those pieces in America, Canada, Britain, France, Germany etc... They're safe and in the hands of non-radical fundamentalist religious fanatics who wish to make Allah supreme God. They will all be destroyed eventually otherwise. Let scholars and researchers take care of them!

I think that the stollen monuments should return to their home country only if the government of their home country could preserve them properly in siutable musueums and make them accessible to their visitiors like the Greek government and the Egyptian one who are able to preserve their monuments.

i have mixed views on this subject as on the one hand its good knoledge and very intresting and informational but on the other you have to understand that the ancient egyptions belived in the after life and this i think will hinder them in some way from have a full after life also we should think about it this way would you like your ancestors put on show with all there worldly goods in all different countries we have to think that back in ancient time they were very strong belivers that they would go onto better things like bacomming gods and do we really have the right to step into that path .

I think that this is completely wrong that they would not give artifacts to there original countries. But they won't because the other countries want them as an eyecatcher in a museum so they can make money

artifacts should not be returned to their countries of origen. if someone else had to come into their country and find them, it means that the native people of that country were unable to do it themselves. i say finders keepers.

They should go back home where they belong! What kind of morals are you setting for the future? Is that right to find something and just keep it? NO! You should always return it to the owner. For example... What if you found a really cute loving dog and you knew that it belonged to someone? Would you try to find the owner and return the dog or just say "OH FINDERS KEEPERS!"?

MANY of the objects which are under debate such as King Tut's tomb, his burial headdress and his belongings which reside in England ... and many other artifacts... where taken out of countries a LONG time ago. At that time in history these artifacts were NOT stolen ... there were NO laws or restrictions governing what should happen to these artifacts. Archaeologists were allowed to come in and keep whatever they found... it was up to them to find the resources necessary to remove them and ship them back to their countries ( a lot harder back then). It was not stealing then ... it is only considered stealing now due to modern restrictions and laws saying people cannot take things out of countries... Is it fair to give them back when, when they were taken it was perfectly LEGAL? Not really! I agree that objects found now should reside in their country of origin or where they are found BUT artifacts taken from countries lets say before WWII don't have to be returned. People and countries all evolve, maybe restrictions were set in place because countries have learned from their "mistakes" of the past...

U R wrong. People should keep the artifact to sell to museum.THey have no right to take an artifact from someone who found it.

hi i think we should return the artifacts but i am bored now so bye

I believe that the country of origin should have the artifacts. simply because it is part of their heritage and culture. It is vital that the country of origin to learn about their past. In order to learn about their past they need things from their past to provide knowledge.
But, if the country of origin cant afford to keep it in good condition they should just probably just leave it in the other countries museum.
Thats what i believe.

so...going along with all that...then all artifacts and remains found must go back to africa and asia...because according to evolution, we all came from there originally...(unless u don't believe in evo)

that's what i don't like about claiming artifacts and such. i know it's disrespectful from the human perspective (especially if artifacts are human remains) but personally, in the perspective of science, it's just all science...human remains(just living creatures like everything else)...artifacts(just made out of elements/material like everything else)...no attachment of human morality to it.

I like the artical about the ancient artifacts that have to come home.

artifacts should be allowed to stay in the museums that currently house them. Without these artifacts the entire idea of a museum is lost. They will no longer hold educational or historical value.

RETURN THE ARTIFACTS!

The new Acropolis museum has opened, reigniting the debate over the Elgin marbles.

All stolen, pillaged or illegally obtained artifacts currently in museums around the world should be returned to their original source countries. If we really want to heal the wounds of past transgressions, then we need to start by repatriating these artifacts.

I'm doing a debate on this subject in school. Does anyone have good reasons for their thoughts????

The problem with Hawass' demands is that he is not Egyptian, he is an Arab and most of modern Egypt's population are Arabs and are not descended from the ancient Egyptians. They were displaced south into modern Sudan, Ethiopia and Somalia and it is they who can claim cultural heritage over Egyptian artefacts. The argument that the Rosetta Stone, for example, is an essential part of Egyptian culture is nonsense - modern Egyptians are Arabs, their culture is in Mecca not in Egypt. Egypt has no cultural claim to these aretfacts whatsoever.