Peru wants its Machu Picchu relics back from Yale:
Peru has formally warned Yale University that it will be sued if relics taken from Machu Picchu by famed U.S. explorer Hiram Bingham nearly a century ago are not returned
It’s about damn time the “west” returned all the plunder they stole from these “lesser civilizations.”
Lumbreras said former President Augusto B. Leguia gave Bingham “permission to temporarily export the objects for scientific ends,” for a period of one year. That later was extended by 18 months, Lumbreras said, adding that the items should have been returned in 1916.
The academic and cultural arrogance should be over and the least that could be done is to give back (with apology) all relics, jewelry, mummies, …everything… to their rightful places and owners; namely, the peoples of the originating culture. My prediction is that Yale is going to bitch and moan and the said relics will never see Peru again.
Just to play Devil’s Advocate… There’s something to be said for letting countries that have stolen treasures keep their booty. For instance, many of the world’s greatest relics are housed in the British Museum in London, which gets millions of visitors each year. If all of the treasure was returned to its rightful owners, then far fewer people would bother to come appreciate them in their native location. Why? Because returning the relics would squander the positive network externalities created by placing all of these items in a common, easily-accessible location. People may be willing to travel to London and devote an afternoon browsing the collections at the British museum, but far fewer are willing to travel to Peru (or wherever) to appreciate a single piece of ancient jewelry.
Tyler,
Good point. However, the world have found a system for doing just that… a traveling exhibition. These exhibitions go around the world and display at museums months at a time. They are usually comprehensive, grand and attract crowds; much better than a few items from a “far land”, IMO. This way, they are owned by the “right” people but still available for the world to see.
If the British Museum likes to have such items, they can just as well create replicas. It’s not the same thing, but still, more just. Stolen property should be returned…
I do not agree with the previous comment. Ease of browsing is no reason for keeping/stealing other people’s treasures.
However, I like to remind that after the fall of Baghdad, its museums were looted and many many invaluable artifacts destroyed by the good and friendly people of Iraq. I do not even have to mention Taliban destroying Buddha statues and destroying “ALL” sculptures in the Kabul museum. In Iran, a new dam will soon destroy one of the most archeologically important areas in the world.
In conclusion, I prefer to see these artifacts be stolen and kept in Britain (or any other safe place in that case) than see them destroyed forever.
Freeman,
The point you raise is precisely the argument the British made in obtaining all of its loot. When Elgin ‘found’ the Parthenon in ruins and not well-maintained, he dismantled it and hauled it back to England, where it has been watched over for the past two centuries. The dilemma arises whenever a country stabilizes and wants the stuff back, as Greece has done for the Elgin marbles. Doesn’t England have a reasonable claim to housing the treasures, since it protected them when no one else would?
Tyler Moore,
I do agree that Elgin saved the Marbles as they were about to be destroyed by Turks (that he himself made some harms is another story). On the other hand, I acknowledge the fact that Greece is now a safe country by all standards.
To tell you the truth, I do not care about national pride and prestige (either English, Greek, or Peruvian). I just want the best conservation of the artifacts. I have to say it would have been an excellent mission for UNESCO if it was not so P.C. and dysfunctional.
So we all agree that artifacts should be:
1. saved for posterity;
2. owned by their rightful owners, i.e. originating cultures;
3. returned to their place of origin when #1 can be reasonably satisfied;
4. be shown to the widest audience.
I can live with that.
Thanks for the discussion… keep at it!
Excellent summary, I totally agree, thanks.