A history of the world in 100 Stolen objects

The Standard of Ur.

I'm nearly halfway through a podcast series from the BBC called "A History of the World in 100 Objects" it looks at the world through the stories of 100 items in the British Museum and its hosted by the Director of the Museum Neil MacGregor and it is amazing.  Seriously I am really enjoying it and I'd like you to keep that in mind while you read the rest of this post.  I don't want to turn you off it, I really think everyone on earth should listen to this. Go download it now, I'll wait.

Now to completely contradict what I just said.

As much as I'm enjoying the series it does make me uncomfortable.  See most of the objects were stolen from the cultures they were made by.  Some were bought from collectors who may have discovered them themselves, or stole them or bought them from people who had no concept of their value.  This is not a new issue, its an issue as old as the ancient objects we are discussing and it is an issue with a lot of grey areas.

The Rosetta Stone.

There really is no argument that in many cases the acquisition of these objects by British (and lets focus on the British Museum specifically since that's where the series is from although all museums are guilty of this) explorers and archaeologists in nearly all cases saved them from destruction.  The important objects, the objects that tell us the most about our history as a species aren't necessarily obvious.  And their possession by Britain, a remarkably stable society has allowed them to survive intact and preserved for hundreds of years.  The Elgin Marbles almost certainly would have been destroyed or stolen by people seeking to sell of bits and pieces to private collectors had they remained in Greece.  Having these objects kept safe and in an environment where they are protected and preserved is of vital importance.  Imagine what the damage would have been to our understanding of the past if something like the Rosetta Stone had been lost? We may never have been able to understand Egyptian hieroglyphs and one of the great cultures would have been a mystery to us.

Having the objects in one place also allows millions more people to view them than if they were scattered around the world.   They have been open to scholars and the general public for hundreds of years and many more people have seen them than if they were in their original locations, locations which were and remain in politically volatile areas (how many of us would go to Iran just to see the Standard of Ur?).  The collection, one of, if not the, largest in the world also allows people to experience the history of the entire world for at one time.  And for free since the British Museum charges no admission fee (just like all museums should in my opinion).

So the weight of the amazing work done by the Museum over the centuries, against the fact that they never should have had them in the first place.  Not only were the cultures that were taken from damaged merely by the removal of their priceless artifacts and the fact that the discovery of their history was placed in the hands of a foreign culture, but the spirit and attitude they were taken, the 18th and 19th Century British attitude of racial and cultural superiority sounded the death knell to cultures around the world. 

The Destruction of the Buddhas of Bamyan.

However the argument of "We know how to take care of these things better than you", makes me exceptionally uncomfortable.  People should have the right to the control of their own histories it seems strange that the people of Greece should have to travel to London to see their history written through the eyes of others (or The Other if you are reading this with some knowledge of Post-Colonial theory).  On the other hand the argument that these items are safer in the British Museum is hard to argue with when we look at them in the context of the destruction of the Buddhas of Bamyan,  the looting of the Baghdad Museum and riots in Egypt of the last week or so, although it seems the original reports of damage to relics may have been an exaggeration.  However the argument is weaker when it comes to the objects that come from places like Greece, China and Australia. 




Perhaps the discomfort is a good thing.  Maybe it is best for the World as a whole that these items remain where they are but I think they should make us feel uncomfortable.  I think the feeling that we get when we are faced with the bad aspects of something that we benefited from (and I assume most of you reading this were beneficiaries of the colonial system) is the correct response.  Yes we should be filled with awe at these remarkable objects, and learn all we can about them and what they say about us as a culture, but we should also come face to face with the fact that our education and wonderment comes at a cost, a cost to the cultures the items were taken from and the cost to their descendants of not being in control of their own History.