My view is, Italy should therefore return all the antiquities looted by the Roman Empire, such as the many Egyptian obelisks, any statues made in Greece, etc etc etc. Oh, and if not, Italy needs to shut up.
 |
...from the remains of a Roman shipwreck dating to sometime between 100 B.C. and A.D. 100. The vessel sank while carrying the statue from its original location in Greece. Caught in the nets of a fishing trawler in the Adriatic off the coast of Italy in 1964, it is one of the few life-size Greek bronzes to have survived. The Getty maintains that because the sculpture was discovered in international waters it is not subject to Italian claims, while Italy insists that the bronze came under its jurisdiction when it was brought ashore. |
1 posted on
09/02/2007 1:37:59 AM PDT by
SunkenCiv
To: blam; StayAt HomeMother; Ernest_at_the_Beach; 1ofmanyfree; 24Karet; 3AngelaD; 49th; ...
2 posted on
09/02/2007 1:38:52 AM PDT by
SunkenCiv
(Profile updated Wednesday, August 29, 2007. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
To: SunkenCiv
WAR:
TO THE VICTOR BELONG THE SPOILS. (America needs to get with the program!)
Whiners need to get a grip.
3 posted on
09/02/2007 8:04:59 AM PDT by
bannie
To: SunkenCiv
I was pleased to see that the obelisk of Axum was returned to Ethiopia by the Italian govt. a couple years back.
Now we eagerly await the return of the Parthenon Marbles to their rightful location in Athens at the Acropolis. And hopefully before even more damage is done to them by the London Museum.
4 posted on
09/02/2007 9:20:58 AM PDT by
eleni121
(+ En Touto Nika! By this sign conquer! + Constantine the Great)
"Sir John Boardman (in Eleanor Robson et al. [eds.], Who Owns Objects [2006]) recently suggested that current legislation over the protection of cultural property has created:'The denial of the right of persons or museums to acquire antiquities which are not demonstrably stolen or the result of plunder, since most are only so deemed, not proved.'
What does he mean? Does somebody have to be present at the time the archaeological site is raided?"
Gill is attacking a straw man here -- Boardman is pointing out, quite correctly, that the claims are mostly unsubstantiated, and the legal standard being set in nationalist courtrooms is that any claim at all -- even ex post facto -- is enough to justify confiscation of antiquities.
Nations which don't make an effort to locate, then protect or recover historical artifacts (and anything being dug up is likely to have been previously unknown) don't have any complaint coming.
5 posted on
09/02/2007 5:23:25 PM PDT by
SunkenCiv
(Profile updated Wednesday, August 29, 2007. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
6 posted on
09/03/2007 6:04:10 PM PDT by
SunkenCiv
(Profile updated Wednesday, August 29, 2007. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson