To What Extent Should Cultural Artifacts Be Returned To Their Original Home

797 Words2 Pages

Should cultural artifacts be returned to their original home?

Some believe that cultural artifacts should be returned to their origin and others believe that artifacts could help people learn about the world without traveling and could be safe from harmful thief's in museums. Even though people have different opinions on the topic of artifacts going to their original home, they should all know the other side of their believe. This is why I will give my opinion on cultural artifacts then I will give different counter arguments on my opinion.

I believe that cultural artifacts should not be returned because of all the different harms it could do to the actual artifacts. One example of this would be in the first passage "Returning Antiquities to Their Countries of Origin" in paragraph 7 were James Cano talks about how he "doesn't support the return of legally acquired works" and he says why in the next paragraph. He says why …show more content…

One of the most important reasons in the second passage for returning an artifact would be in paragraph 15 were it says laws passed in recent years helped give the country who owns an artifact ownership if that artifact was found in their borders. These laws also helped protect artifacts by making sure they don’t get traded internationally.

The third and final reason for not returning artifacts to their homelands would be found in passage three "Vision of Home: Repatriated Works Back in Their Countries of Origin" in paragraph 25 were it says that since so many artifact are being sent back, the museum named Aidone museum is getting less and less resources for their publicity, maintenance and guards. This is a reason for not returning artifacts because if a museum doesn't have any artifacts for the public then they would have to shut down their museum and would cause many younger generations to be unknown to older

Open Document