Selling History
Yale University once housed crates of items from Machu Picchu that date back to the
15th century. Yale purchased the items from Peru, the University displayed many of the items including ceramics, jewelry, and human remains at the Peabody Museum for over 100 years.
However, the government of Peru sued to have the artifacts returned and in 2010 Peru won and
Yale returned the artifacts. Peru won the court case on the basis that the artifacts were the cultural heritage of the people of Peru (Buying, Selling, Owning the past, 1).The case of Peru vs.
Yale brings up the question of should people be able to buy and sell antiquities?
The general consensus is that all artifacts should be excavated by professional archaeologists who will
…show more content…
The cultural heritage laws created by UNESCO are meant to prevent countries from losing objects that are important to it. In the case of Peru vs. Yale it was argued that objects created hundreds of years before the nation of Peru was ever devised were still important to the people of
Peru (Buying, Selling, Owning the past, 2-3).
One area that is legal nightmare is Native American artifacts because the artifacts that are created by tribes that often still exist. One example was a nine thousand year old skeleton that was found by scientists who were legally excavating a dig site. The scientist wanted to study the skeleton, but Native Americans, sued claiming that they owned the skeleton because it was one of their ancestors. The court case ended up lasting nine years because the laws regarding Native
Burial grounds were not clear (Buying, Selling, Owning the past, 6-7).
Buying and selling Native American artifacts is not always covered by the laws written by UNESCO but the United States has its own laws regarding Native artifacts. Due to the strict laws and high collectibility of native artifacts Antiques Roadshow has created a guide for
113. 424 http://www.aztec-indians.com/aztec-art.html http://www.about-peru-history.com/inca-artifacts.html Voyages in World History, pg. 113.
The skeleton had a hideous impact to the community and was predicted by local investigators to be reasonably modern. To get better understanding and avoid confusion, a bone sample was sent to a laboratory in the USA for investigation and analysation using series of scientific
Through the study of the Peruvian society using articles like “The “Problem of the Indian...” and the Problem of the Land” by Jose Carlos Mariátegui and the Peruvian film La Boca del Lobo directed by Francisco Lombardi, it is learned that the identity of Peru is expressed through the Spanish descendants that live in cities or urban areas of Peru. In his essay, Mariátegui expresses that the creation of modern Peru was due to the tenure system in Peru and its Indigenous population. With the analyzation of La Boca del Lobo we will describe the native identity in Peru due to the Spanish treatment of Indians, power in the tenure system of Peru, the Indian Problem expressed by Mariátegui, and the implementation of Benedict Andersons “Imagined Communities”.
Merryman, John Henry. Thinking about the Elgin Marbles: Critical Essays on Cultural Property, Art, and Law. London: Kluwer Law International Ltd, 2000.
The Kennewick man was a monumental find to further our understanding of the history of the migration patterns of the people that culture sees today. The Kennewick man being a 9200 to 9600 year old skeleton made him one of the oldest nearly whole skeletons found in North or South America. The Kennewick man was found on July 28th 1996 by two college students whose names were Will Thomas and Dave Deacy while they were walking along the Columbia River near Kennewick Washington trying to get a better view into the local hydroplane races (Chatters, 23). These college students stumbled upon something that has caused a series of serious debates that have lasted for over ten years. After the students fell upon “the rock with teeth” (Powell 2005:6) they took it to the local police forces that were in the area.
Debate started to arise when an archaeologist by the name of Thomas D. Dillehay found artifacts of people existing 14,600 years ago, before Clovis, in Monte Verde, a site in southern Chile. These people slept in hide tents, had access to seafood and potatoes, and shared similar characteristics to other artifacts found in North Ame...
In the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 is a policy that was created by the United States Congress because the country was expanding westward and the constitution didn’t provide guidance on claiming and settling on new Northwest Territories. The United Constitution advocated for the newly found promise land to white settlers but nonconizance of the Northwest Territory (north and west of the Ohio River) expansion, which also had little consideration towards the Indians homelands. It was the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 that references “a clear policy with activities in dealing with Indians and Indian matters that is to reflect high moral standards in accordance in this Indian policy”. (Pg. 31)
However, I feel this act forces archeologists to halt further investigations and possibly damages lost records of history. Returning these artifacts and bones prevents them from being preserved a...
This can include valuable elements or artifacts belonging to a different culture, and can easily be a violation of their rights. In the 1981 movie, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Dr. Indian Jones seems to be a master of appropriating cultural artifacts coveted by other cultures. A scene that portrays this idea is the scene at the beginning of the film where Indy is determined to steal a golden idol from a South American Tribe. It is obvious by the many booby-traps that protect this idol, that the tribe members do not want this item out of their possession. Though its importance to the tribe is quite clear, Indy dodges the traps in order to retrieve the idol for his own motives. While he does not successfully get away with this mission, his little disregard for the tribe’s important artifact is definitely noted through his reckless attempt to retrieve
The argument against the site can supported by saying that the site could have belonged to civilizations other than Troy. However, the lack of definitive answers on the historicity of Troy is reason the University should have purchased the collection. With such “a rare and valuable collection of Trojan, Greek, and Roman antiques,” the University would have been able to validate the historicity of the site as being or not being Troy (“Terrell to Walton” 4). Subsequently, this would have allowed scholars at the University to make progress in answering the age old question: did Homeric Troy exist? If the site was not Troy, the University would have still aided archaeologists by ruling this site out, narrowing the search window, and allowing the search for Troy to move
For years on end, countries have been fighting with big museums from other countries for ancient artifacts that belong to the original countries. The argument of whether or not the museums should be able to keep them still remains. It is the right of the country to have their own artifacts. It is imperative for countries to be able showcase their historical artifacts, therefor museums should return them to their rightful owners.
A kouros purchased by the J. Paul Getty museum brings about skepticism of its legitimacy. According to Dr. Richard Serros the legitimacy of ancient works of art is often overlooked, as explained in the chapter titled, “Art and the Truth: The Getty Kouros and Provenance”. This is a notion worth noting as many priceless pieces of art may be seen as legitimate by several museums when in fact they are forgeries. These forgeries lack a true origin and may prove that many museums are indifferent as to where or from whom they receive ancient works of art.
In “Whose Culture Is It, Anyway? ”, Kwame Anthony Appiah begins by pointing out that some of the museums of the world, particularly in the West, have large collections of artefacts and objects which were robbed from developing and poor countries. He then raises a question: who owns these cultural patrimony and properties? Our first answer may be that since they make up the cultural heritage of a people, they belong to the people and culture from whom they were taken. Appiah has doubt about this and argues that if some cultural artefacts are potentially valuable to all human beings, they should belong to all of humanity. He thinks that when they make contribution to world culture, they should be protected by being made available to those who would benefit from experiencing them and put into trusteeship of humanity.
But the Egyptians have made an equally strong case. Egyptians remind us that the stone was found on Egyptian land therefore they should have the first claim. Just because they did not know it was there it was still on Egyptian property they are the ones who should have a first claim to the Rosetta Stone not the French who discovered it or the British who got it in a treaty. It is first and foremost Egyptian that is why they have a strong property claim. Another point to considered is that the stone is a part of Egyptian culture. Dr. Zahi Hawass, a famed Egyptologist, elaborates about the Rosetta Stone: “it is the icon of our Egyptian identity” (Milner and Edwardes). The Rosetta Stone is important to the Egyptians because the stele allowed for the deciphering of ancient hieroglyphics that allowed us to understand the language and learn about their mythology, their burial customs, and other aspects of the ancient culture. Egyptians dispute the legality of the Capitulation of Alexandria saying it was coerced. Napoleon was on his campaign seeking to defend French interests and weaken Britain’s access to India with soldiers who clashed against an army of Mamelukes who are members of a regime that ruled Syria and Egypt. The presence of these soldiers would have made any agreement questionable. If you are coerced to sign anything then it is not binding. As for the safety of the Rosetta Stone, the Egyptians can find donors to give
These skeletons are known as Romito 1 and 2. Romito 1 was a female approxiametly thirty years old and Romito 2 was a male teenager. Romito 2 had a special feature and the earliest of the world, known as dwarfism. Dwarfism results from abnormalities of cartilage growth leading to reduced size of long bones. In this case, it was assumed that the buried skeletons were mother and son due to similarities of the skulls and teeth. The Upper Paleolithic society exhibited attention and affection for people with disabilities. According to the short story of The Romito Dwarf, “Romito 2 had formidable physical handicaps for the life of a nomadic hunter-gatherer of the Ice Age, and the fact that despite them he survived to late adolescence mist mean that his social group protected and supported him” (Bahn, 77). This displays that despite no experience of dealing with dwarfism, the Upper Paleolithic society had empathy for Romito 2. Under those circumstances, the society understood that people who had disabilities should not be treated any different than anyone else. Furthermore, the burial cite was unique. Correspondingly, Romito 2’s, “burial in this special place in front of some rock art