Posted on 07/20/2003 10:18:03 AM PDT by UnklGene
Egypt demands return of the Rosetta Stone By Charlotte Edwardes and Catherine Milner (Filed: 20/07/2003)
Egypt is demanding that the Rosetta Stone, a 2,000-year-old relic and one of the British Museum's most important exhibits, should be returned to Cairo.
The stone, which became the key to deciphering ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics, was found by Napoleon's army in 1799 in the Nile delta, but has been in Britain for the past 200 years. It forms the centrepiece of the British Museum's Egyptology collection and is seen by millions of visitors each year.
Now, in an echo of the campaign by Athens for the return of the Elgin Marbles, the Egyptian government is calling for the stone to be returned and threatening to pursue its claim "aggressively" if the British Museum does not agree to give it back voluntarily.
Zahi Hawass, the director of the Supreme Council of Antiquities in Cairo, confirmed to The Telegraph that he had begun negotiations with academics and curators at the museum. He said he hoped that they would agree to "voluntarily return the stone", but gave a warning that, if the request was rejected, he would intensify his campaign to bring it back to Egypt.
"If the British want to be remembered, if they want to restore their reputation, they should volunteer to return the Rosetta Stone because it is the icon of our Egyptian identity," said Dr Hawass.
"Otherwise I will have to approach them using a different strategy. There are various stages to our negotiations. I don't want to fight anyone now, but if the British Museum doesn't act, we will have to employ a more aggressive approach with the Government. I don't care if people know my strategy, the artefacts stolen from Egypt must come back."
Dr Hawass said that he had been discussing a possible three-month loan of the stone with the museum. "More immediately, we are prepared to accept it peacefully on a temporary loan and we are in discussions about that right now. That is a short-term solution, however. Ideally, we would like the stone to come back for good."
Dr Hawass said that the Cairo Museum, where the Rosetta Stone would be kept, had a replica of the relic which it would be willing to give to the British Museum in return for the original.
The Rosetta Stone, which dates from 196 BC, was discovered by French troops in 1799 in the village of Rosette (Raschid) in the western delta of the Nile. The stone's importance was that it provided a key to understanding hieroglyphic text because it was accompanied by a Greek translation.
Although the stone was Napoleon's most coveted war acquisition, the French ceded it to Britain under the Treaty of Alexandria in 1801 and it has been exhibited in the British Museum since 1802.
Vivian Davies, the keeper of the Department of Ancient Egypt and Sudan at the museum, expressed sympathy with Dr Hawass's claim, but suggested that legislation on the repatriation of artefacts would prevent the relic's permanent return.
"Will the Rosetta Stone be returned? I would say that our priorities are elsewhere at the moment. We are working with our Egyptian colleagues to preserve the heritage of today rather than concentrate on problems - or issues, perhaps I should say - that are very old," he said.
"We would like to co-operate with the Egyptians insofar as we can under the law. It is the same law that guides us on the issue of the Elgin Marbles - the British Museum Act of 1963." This rules that no artefact can be repatriated without the permission of the museum's trustees.
Mr Davies added: "Perhaps, if I were in Dr Hawass's position, I would feel the same way. We are having constructive negotiations over the loan for three months. It's a new idea he has produced and we appreciate very much that Dr Hawass is being constructive on these matters. We enjoy working with him and his staff."
Dr Hawass, one of the world's leading Egyptologists, has pioneered a major new museum development programme and encouraged the Egyptian government to pour considerable funds into archaeological research.
The Egyptian government has asked for the stone as part of a wide-reaching programme to return "stolen" antiquities from all over the world. Among the items it wants to retrieve are the bust of Queen Nefertiti from the Berlin Museum, the statues of Hatshepsut in the Metropolitan Museum of New York and, perhaps most controversially, the obelisk in the Place de la Concorde, one of the most famous landmarks in Paris.
Dr Hawass added: "The obelisk in France is needed because the Luxor temple from which it came is left with only one. The second one should be there with it."
Last night Neil MacGregor, the director of the British Museum, was unavailable for comment, but in the past he has described the personal significance of the stone. "I remember the first visit I made to the museum was with my father at the age of eight," he said. "I was fascinated by the Rosetta Stone. I was thrilled to be able to touch it - it was uncovered at the time - and physically connect with history."
If the stone were to be moved, it would be seen by far fewer people than is the case today: the Cairo Museum has about 2.5 million visitors a year, compared to the 5.5 million who visit the British Museum annually.
Sorry I don't buy into the Perservation Myth . And you wrote nothing that disproves the facts that I wrote: the marbles were hacked into pieces to fit into the crates, 23 crates sunk (later recovered after 2 years), for 16 years they sat in a damp climate, then there's the acid bath ...
You can't argue with facts, so you insult. Typical liberal technique. You call me Anglophobe, but do not debate.
You seem to rely on the concept of Superiority of Culture that the British have a right to the marbles, just because they are British. I find the British claim to the marbles extremely weak (considering their own report in 1816 admitted they were stolen), and I no more support theft of any culture, as I would support the Greeks claiming the Mary Rose for themselves.
How the Greeks would have cared for the marbles is irrelevant and simply not supported by the facts of how the marbles have been treated. The marbles do not belong to the Brits.
In the US, ownership of propery is respected. We don't have people going off looting other cultures and display that booty in museums -- in fact our Department of Defense goes after anyone- anyone who has been caught stealing Iraqi artifacts. Theft of another's culture is simply not in our nature. Recently, our own Supreme Court in 2001 ruled that even shipwrecked vessels-- shipwrecked in US waters belong to the country of origin -- in this case it was Spain. That was a surprise judgement to me, but it simply underscores the nature of our legal system and the respect that we hold for another's property.
The modern Italy is quite different from the Ancient Roman civilization. Modern China is quiet different from ancient China. Ancient Babylonia is quiet different from modern Iraq. What's your point? Are you suggesting that we all go off on looting parties and take what we want because the underlying civilization is no more?
Those that have inherited the land, inherit the artifacts from that land. Ancient Roman artifacts, on Italian soil belong to the Italian people. Ancient Roman artifacts on Spanish soil belong to the Spanish, etc.
The Rosetta Stone was found in the Nile Delta by the French. And the Nile is in what country today?... No hurry .. take your time ... Begins with "E" ...
And the descendants of the inhabitants of the city of Bath, in England HAD NOTHING TO DO with building the enormous Ancient Roman Bath house there. What's your point?
How long to plan to occuy it? The Roman baths, homes, fortress, walls in Britain belong to Britain, not to Italy, now. America has made it very clear that the artifacts of Iraq belong to Iraq, that we are there to set up a stable government. Lord Elgin on his own looted Greek treasures. He didn't need an army. For his actions, he was censured by the British, the marbles were recognized as stolen yet at the same time, the British were totally uninterested in restitution.
I simply cannot see any American going off to Iraq, looting its treasures, and then get a mixed message from the American government ("that was bad, but we'll keep them anyway").
Are you claiming that Britain is still doing it?
Since the British aren't able to apply restitution to property they recognized as stolen in 1816, there is a very real possibility that the cultural climate in Britain would condone (or at least turn a blind eye) to the looting of artifacts from other cultures. Who knows what Babylonian artifacts have been lifted? And if the British would condemn stealing Iraqi artifacts today, why do they prevent the restitution of another's property they have already acknowledged as stolen?
My point is that the Rosetta Stone is not part of the cultural heritage of modern day Egypt.
Nor do I accept your premise, on which your conclusion is based, that everything that has ever been found, no matter when, within the geographical boundaries of modern Egypt, is the property of the "civilization" that exists there today.
"so, any ancient artifacts found within the boundaries of the US but more than 250 old years do not belong to the US?"
I happen to kind of agree with you regarding stuff that is still here.
However, IMO, artifacts taken in the past from the geographical boundaries of the United States before there was a United States (by say, England, to whom the territory belonged), are not necessarily property of the modern United States.
Nor do I accept your premise, on which your conclusion is based, that everything that has ever been found, no matter when, within the geographical boundaries of modern Egypt, is the property of the "civilization" that exists there today.
Then by the same argument, you must therefore not accept the fact that Stonehenge belongs to the British people of today. You see, I would argue that it does.
According to your black and white logic, the American government should return America to its original occupiers
We were talking about artifacts, and their ownership. I'm not up on American/Indian Law. I know we've had treaties with the Indians, I know they have been broken, but I also know today, that if an object is found and proved to have once belonged to the Cherokee Nation, then I believe that the object reverts to the Cherokee Nation, no matter where it was found.
That's a good question. I'll do my best to respond.
Those things created by man - whether handaxes, Rosetta Stones, Parthenon marbles, gold coin can be termed artifacts. Whether its an item of art is usually determined by professionals in that discipine. "I just found a stupid looking stone" says one person, "Oh, my God", says another -- "you just found a hand axe and proof that the bronze age culture was in this location."
Land, slaves and animals are not man-made, but that doesn't mean that they weren't sought after commodities. This element can open up the debate to regions where I'd prefer not to tred.
Right now, I'd prefer to continue to discuss ownership of (man-made) property. I've firmly believe and I've stated so many times that the Parthenon marbles belong to Greece -- I sincerely believe that the British claim on the marbles is (legally) very, very weak. Their claim on the Rosetta stone doesn't seem to me to be that strong, either. And I'm judging the British not by today's values, but by their own values at the time. You see, if the report of 1816 claimed that Lord Elgin did no wrong doing, and in fact praised him for his efforts, then I would have to say: "Oh, well, then was then, now is now." But that wasn't the case. The British in 1816 knew what Elgin did was thievery and stated so. By those standards, by the standards of 1816, the fact that the British knew the items to be stolen and have not done anything about it, is very puzzling.
But here's another hypothetical case that I would have no idea how to judge. Suppose a viking ship is discovered in international waters, off the coast of Greenland by an American team. Which Governments would have the legal claim to the ship: Greenland, Iceland, Denmark, Norway or USA? I wouldn't have the foggiest idea.
I thought the obelisk was a gift from the Ottoman Sultan's viceroy Mohammad Ali to Louis Philippe.
But if the Romans had carted it away during their occupation of Britain, before there was an England, then I would not think that modern day England would necessarily have much claim for assuming ownership of it.
I agree with you. It all depends, I suppose as to where the Romans carted it. If it was carted to the Falkland Islands, the Brits might still be in luck. If it was carted to Gaul/France - forget it!
BTW: what's your thought regarding the 2001 Supreme Court decision that upheld the right of Spain to reclaim their shipwrecked vessels - even though they were shipwrecked on US territory? I must admit, that one surprised me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.