The artworks and monuments looted from their original countries are still the subject of great controversy, as some believe that the looting of heritage is wrong, and the stolen items should return to their countries, while some believe that their presence in other countries is one of the types of promotion of civilization, in addition to some believing that the works The artifacts and looted antiquities receive more attention in their host countries than their legitimate owners.
The repatriation demands are based on the law, which was enacted in the 1950s, when colonial crimes and war crimes against humanity appeared, and countries' desire to restore their heritage to correct old mistakes has increased, which represents a kind of justice that requires admission of guilt, and makes repatriation difficult. Because states and institutions rarely admit that they were wrong.
There are many points that the looted countries claim as an excuse to restore their antiquities, the most important of which are:
Basic property laws legislate the return of stolen or stolen property to its rightful owner.
Cultural heritage belongs to the cultures that produced it, and it is considered a part of contemporary cultural and political identity.
Failure to return stolen heritage under colonial regimes is a continuation of colonial ideologies, which consider colonized peoples inferior.
The museums that have the most important international collections, which are called encyclopedic or world museums, are located in the north of the world: France, England, Germany, the United States, and they are places of high costs to visit, and it cannot be visited by anyone who wants to see looted art or heritage, which is precisely what It is considered a continuation of colonial policies.
Even if colonial countries acquired works of art and heritage legally in an ancient time, the attitudes of the international cultural community about cultural and heritage property have changed, and reality must reflect contemporary attitudes.
Marble engraving from the Parthenon Sculptures from Athens (438-432 BC) (Source: British Museum official website)
The groups and people who refuse to return the heritage to its original place have arguments against the previous arguments, through which they try to preserve the valuable groups that they fear losing, namely:
If all of the world's museums returned pieces that did not belong to them to their rightful owners, the museums would be nearly empty.
Because of poverty or armed conflict, the countries of origin do not have adequate facilities or specialists for heritage preservation, so antiquities and artifacts will be safer in their present countries.
The ancient or historical kingdoms, from which many of the pieces came, no longer exist in their ancient form, but contemporary national borders have changed, such as those of the Roman Empire, so it is not clear to which country exactly the looted heritage should be returned.
Most of the looted items were obtained at the time of their legal acquisition, so there is no reason for them to return to their original home.
In addition to the controversy raised by the continued existence of artistic and heritage pieces in other than their countries of origin, it also raises strong feelings related to patriotism, identity and morals, but the issue remains in the end legal, and the frameworks and laws that were developed in the twentieth century, work to restore the heritage to its original homeland.
The Hague Convention of 1907 was the first to recognize the damages of war and colonialism to cultural heritage, and to prohibit the theft and plunder of antiquities and artifacts, during armed conflicts and wars.
Homeland property and identity
Despite modern laws obliging to return cultural and artistic heritage to its original owners, states are procrastinating in the matter, and dealing with each piece separately, such as the Rosetta Stone that British forces seized from the French army in Egypt in 1801, and today it is considered one of the most popular and important exhibits. In the British Museum in London, in addition to the Parthenon sculptures that trace their origins to the ancient Parthenon in Athens, which are also on display in the British Museum in London.
Some art history experts assert that the arguments put forward regarding the unknown location of the assets of the looted heritage are flimsy arguments indicating that galleries, museums, and private collectors have not tried to make any significant effort to know the history of the artifacts in their possession, or they know and do not want to recognize the circumstance other than Legal for their access to artifacts, especially with regard to the heritage of the continent of Africa and the persistent assumption that the continent has no true history that can be traced.
With all the complications involved, the return cannot be of general interest in the absence of real investment in museums, sustainable awareness, educational programs, in addition to the safety factors and their preservation facilities, because in the end it is not just where the artifacts belong. It must be culturally and socially useful, and it must be easily accessible, because it not only represents the cultural achievements of humanity, but also the reciprocal travel movement that has shaped the global order in which we all live now.
It is noteworthy that the last historical groups that returned to their original homeland were the remains and skulls of 24 people from the leaders of the popular resistance, who were killed in the early years of the French colonization of Algeria, and the remains were preserved in the Human Museum in Paris, and returned to their original homeland on the eve of the 58th anniversary of Algerian independence.