Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 21st April 2006, 02:23 PM   #31
Andrew
Member
 
Andrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 1,725
Default

I, myself, contributed to the off-topic frolic and detour. Let's all take a deep breath and return to the topic now.

Artifacts, not bodies.
Andrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st April 2006, 03:10 PM   #32
yuanzhumin
Member
 
yuanzhumin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ex-Taipei, Taiwan, now in Shanghai, China
Posts: 180
Smile

What about body art like scarifications, traditional tattoes, reduced heads or trophy heads ?
To go back to our initial subject, about stolen artpieces and their return, all this reminds me of an interesting anecdote about the Nok terracotta from Nigeria.Few were bought completely illegally few years ago by the Louvre Museum before its ethnologic collections were transfered to the Quai Branly Museum, in Paris.The whole story is told in a very interesting article of the serious french newspaper Le Monde, translated in english and published on the website of an american university. Here is the link:
https://listhost.uchicago.edu/piperm...ry/001122.html
yuanzhumin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st April 2006, 06:03 PM   #33
nechesh
Member
 
nechesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 940
Default

I think that for me that most important issue here is how was the artifact originally obtained. Artifacts stolen outright from various cultures around the world should be returned if they want them, plain and simple.
Andrew, i am sorry to go off topic for a moment and i don't mean to prolong this discussion. I just hate rumor and inuendo. I don't really know how i feel about this body art guy, but i see no evidence that he is using the bodies of Chinese prisoners for his purposes. They are donated by their owners prior to death as far as i can tell and the "artists" best friend is apparently among them. But there does seem to be some scientific merit at work here.
http://www.koerperwelten.de/en/pages...von_hagens.asp
nechesh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st April 2006, 06:52 PM   #34
Rick
Vikingsword Staff
 
Rick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,293
Arrow

I'm not even going to that link ; nosiree bob .

So back to the subject ; which category do battlefield pickups fall into ?

If Venice was forced to return all of its booty ( no, not that kind ) it would lose some of its gloss .
Rick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st April 2006, 08:54 PM   #35
Tim Simmons
Member
 
Tim Simmons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: What is still UK
Posts: 5,807
Default

Hi Rick,

I do not think battle field pick ups really come into the "questionable area" The sacking of the royal palaces of Ghana and Benin amongst others on the most shaky basis must fall into the grey area, where the events were forced by an overwhelming superieur power. The looted palace artifacts were sold on the open art market to offset the expenditure. If I was in charge of the British Musuem I could still not sign the paper.
Tim Simmons is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st April 2006, 09:45 PM   #36
VANDOO
(deceased)
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: OKLAHOMA, USA
Posts: 3,138
Default

THERE IS NO ABSOLUTE ANSWER TO ALL THIS AND POLITICAL CORRECTNESS EFFORTS TO GIVE A ANSWER ARE IN VAIN AND OFTEN ABSURD. THINGS ARE DEMANDED THAT THE PERSON OR GROUP DOSEN'T REALLY WANT THEY JUST WANT TO FORCE SOMEONE TO GIVE UP SOMETHING AND MAKE THAT GROUP OR ORGAINIZATION LOOK BAD WHILE APPEARING TO BE THE GOOD GUYS AND GETTING MEDIA ATTENTION. THAT IS NOT ALWAYS THE CASE BUT THESE DAYS TOO OFTEN IS. MANY TIMES THE ONES DEMANDING THE RETURN OF THE TRIBAL TREASURES ARE NOT EVEN MEMBERS OF THE TRIBE AND ARE OFTEN ONLY INTERESTED IN THE ATTENTION AND MEDIA COVERAGE AND PERHAPS THEY CAN GET SOME DONATIONS TO THEIR CAUSE THRU THE COVERAGE. IN THE LAST FEW YEARS THERE WAS A EX PRESEDINT WHO SOLD A PRECOLUMBIAN GOLD RELIC FOR OVER A MILLION TO TWO GUYS WHO BROUGHT IT TO THE USA TO SELL AT A FAMOUS AUCTION HOUSE. SOMEONE TURNED THEM IN AND THE OBJECT WAS CONFISCATED THEY WERE FINED LOTS OF MONEY AND LOCKED UP. THE OBJECT WAS SENT BACK TO THE PEOPLE WHO SOLD IT IN THE FIRST PLACE, ANYONE WANT TO BUY IT AGAIN? LATELY THERE SEEMS TO BE A LOT OF GROUPS WANTING TO RE-WRITE HISTORY TO THEIR ADVANTAGE AND THE DISADVANTAGE OF OTHERS REGARDLESS OF ITS ACCURACY.

THE OTHER SIDE TO THIS IS THAT THERE MAY BE SOME OBJECTS IN MUSEUMS THAT ARE DOING NO GOOD THERE AND WOULD BE TREASURED BY THE DECENDENTS OF A GROUP OR RELIGION. THERE MAY ALSO BE SOME ITEMS THAT ARE ONE OF A KIND AND VERY IMPORTANT TO A TRIBE, NATION OR RELIGION, IF POSSIBLE I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD TO RETURN THEM. IT WOULD BE UNFAIR HOWEVER TO FORCE A MUSEUM OR PERSON TO GIVE IT BACK FOR FREE IF HE HAD A LOT OF MONEY IN IT, THEY SHOULD BE REIMBURSED AT LEAST WHAT THEY PAYED OR A FAIR PRICE. KIND OF LIKE MARKS FAMILY SWORD IT WAS WORTH MORE TO HIM THAN TO A MUSEUM OR OTHER COLLECTOR BUT INSTEAD OF DEMANDING THEY GIVE IT UP FOR FREE HE PAID A FAIR PRICE FOR IT SO EVERYONE IS HAPPY.

WAR TROPHYS ARE OFTEN GOTTEN BY RISKING ONES LIFE AND TRADITIONALY LOOTING HAS BEEN PART OF IT (WAR IS NOT A PRETTY THING). I WISH WE COULD EVOLVE BEYOND IT AS A SPECIES BUT LOOKING AT THE LEADERS OF MANY COUNTRYS AND KNOWING WHAT THEY WOULD DO IF THEY HAD THE POWER IT LOOKS TO BE A VERY LONG WAY IN THE FUTURE IF THE SPECIES SURVIVES. THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN TAKEN BY THEFT SHOULD BE RETURNED IF YOU CATCH THE THEIF OR IF THE ONE WHO BUYS IT KNOWS IT IS A HOT ITEM. IF THE BUYER TRULY DIDN'T KNOW PERHAPS SOMETHING FAIR CAN BE WORKED OUT? POOR PEOPLE WHO LOOT THEIR COUNTRYS PAST HISTORY TO MAKE A LIVING IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN AROUND FOR A LONG TIME AND WILL ALWAYS BE IF THERE ARE POOR AND SOME WITH ENOUGH MONEY TO BUY. IT IS GOOD WHEN A STORY HAS A HAPPY ENDING LIKE IN THE POST THAT STARTED THIS DISCUSSION.

THE LAWS THAT NO OBJECT OVER 100 YEARS OLD CAN LEAVE A COUNTRY EVEN IF MOST OF THE OBJECTS ARE COMMON AS DIRT AND WORTHLESS TO THE LOCAL PEOPLE IS AN ESPECIALLY SILLY ONE. LAWS THAT SET ASIDE THE BEST AREAS FOR COLLECTING FOSSILS AND ALLOW THEM TO WEATHER OUT AND BE DESTROYED BECAUSE THE MUSEUMS DON'T NEED ANY MORE SPECIMINS CAUSE A LOT OF SPECIMINS THAT WOULD BE TREASURED BY COLLECTORS TO BE DESTROYED FOREVER. TO TAKE A VERY IMPORTANT PIECE OF NATIVE ART FROM A MUSEUM AND GIVE IT TO A GROUP WHO WILL TAKE IT OUT AND DESTROY IT BY BURYING IT OR BURNING IT IS ALSO A FOOLISH THING TO DO, AS SOME OF THE DECENDANTS WOULD RATHER TREASURE IT AND KEEP IT. UNFORTUNATELY OFTEN MORE THINGS ARE LOST FOREVER DUE TO SUCH LAWS THAN ARE PROTECTED BY THEM. FOR INSTANCE MOST OF THE REAL OLD WEAPONS IN CHINA WOULD BE AGAINST THE LAW FOR THE COMMON PEOPLE TO HAVE OR SELL SO WOULD NOT BE TAKEN CARE OF OR HIDDEN LEADING TO THEIR DESTRUCTION. THE OTHER SIDE IS THAT THEY MAKE LOTS OF NICE FAKES TO SELL WHILE MOST OF THE AUTHENTIC STUFF IS POORLY STORED OR DESTROYED BY THE GOVERNMENT.
THIS IS JUST MY WAY OF LOOKING AT THESE TOPICS AND I AM NOT ATTACKING ANY GROUP OR ITS IDEAS ,BUT I FIND THAT THE HUMAN RACE FOR ALL ITS SUPPOSED INTELLEGENCE OFTEN MISSES THE MARK ON WHAT WAS INTENDED AND ADDS TO OR CREATES NEW PROBLEMS. BEING ONLY HUMAN I AT LEAST KNOW I AM NOT SMART ENOUGH TO SOLVE THE WORLDS PROBLEMS.
VANDOO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st April 2006, 10:17 PM   #37
Tim Simmons
Member
 
Tim Simmons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: What is still UK
Posts: 5,807
Default

It is very easy to sure of yourself when you hold all of the cards, and have the cultural and civil service background to manage a collection of your ill gotten gains. The people the artifacts were taken from often struggle to provide clean water. Okay that could be a political problem but does not get away from the fact their heritage was plundered, a bit like stealing the bill of rights. What if the British had stolen the aforementioned. Tim
Tim Simmons is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st April 2006, 11:43 PM   #38
Andrew
Member
 
Andrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 1,725
Default

Should we separate objects of extraordinary cultural significance (i.e. Tim's Bill of Rights example) from more common things?

One man (culture's) treasure may be only a collectible to another. However, the Bill of Rights is, arguably, the most important document in US history.
Andrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd April 2006, 11:27 AM   #39
Tim Simmons
Member
 
Tim Simmons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: What is still UK
Posts: 5,807
Default

Exactly. I mean no disrespect in using that as an example. The royal palace treasures of some of the before mentioned west African countries could be seen in the same light. Some of these artifacts are in fairly ordinary peoples collections. Something to chew on. I am not giving any of my humble collection away untill I am gone .
Tim Simmons is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd April 2007, 09:10 PM   #40
Tim Simmons
Member
 
Tim Simmons's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: What is still UK
Posts: 5,807
Default

I found this stuff about the sticks and the man who took them. The whole thing is not nice. How these stick were singled out is a mystery to me. Perhaps the alleged dastardly nature of there taking is true. makes me wonder about some of my sticks. Ineresting that there is meaning to the shapes.
http://msn-list.te.verweg.com/2006-April/004927.html
Tim Simmons is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.