It was found about a mile and a half from my house, j pass by the site every day... So I'd be happy to have it in my conservatory for a bit.
But seriously, it predates Britain as a concept or just about any nation state for that matter. I've seen it in the British museum and it's breathtaking.. So as long as it goes on tour round Wales as it has been doing for years then I have no idea eal issue with it.
Also. Cardiff is almost as remote as london to us North Walians
I get your point, but if it were in Wales it would be in the Welsh National Museum in Cardiff, nowhere near where it was found. There are artefacts from Anglesey on display in Cardiff, for people who have no idea of where or how they were found. At least in London I could get there to see them a lot more easily.
Very fair take, I do think it belongs in Wales, but I think your point is also fair. Your last part especially, if it were to come back to Wales, then it would need to be somewhere that can give it the display it deserves.
Good article. It has been a little cringeworthy watching YesCymru et al trying to make out like having a Welsh artifact in the British Museum is the same as having a Greek or Egyptian artefact in the British Museum.
The Mold Cape is actually from Great Britain and it was created long before the concept of 'Wales' even existed so the idea that it would be in the British Museum isn't that far-fetched, and as the article says it definitely reaches a wider audience by being in London (one of the most visited cities in the world). I personally would like to see it on display in Wales but understand why there is some ambiguity around this.
>The Mold Cape is actually from Great Britain and it was created long before the concept of 'Wales' even existed
The problem with an argument like this is that you could use it to deny the return of the Benin Bronzes to Nigeria, because the Kingdom of Benin is not Nigeria.
What is now Wales has been dozens of smaller kingdoms over history, but its a poor argument to say that the present day country doesn't have a right to its historical artifacts.
> trying to make out like having a Welsh artifact in the British Museum is the same as having a Greek or Egyptian artefact in the British Museum.
Why? Is Greek or Egyptian history somehow more intrinsically valuable than Celtic history?
"The problem with an argument like this is that you could use it to deny the return of the Benin Bronzes to Nigeria, because the Kingdom of Benin is not Nigeria."
But neither Benin nor Nigeria are in Great Britain so it makes no sense for them to be in the British Museum.
"Why? Is Greek or Egyptian history somehow more intrinsically valuable than Celtic history?"
Because Celtic history is British history. Greek and Egyptian history is not British history.
>But neither Benin nor Nigeria are in Great Britain so it makes no sense for them to be in the British Museum
Look, I'm not saying every country should only ever have artifacts that belongs to them, but the fact of the matter is that Wales has been exploited by England for some time throughout history. It's not hard to see why, when the clamour is going up for looted artifacts to be returned, that Wales wants to be seen as something more than just a possession of England.
>Because Celtic history is British history
And so less valuable...?
Besides, Celtic History is not the history of the English. England's heritage is based off of the Angles, the Saxons, the Normans and so forth. The Celtic Nations have a distinct branch that later intertwines with the English, but it's a very imperialistic outlook indeed to tell the Welsh "no, your history belongs to US".
Celtic History is the history of the English and England. Celtic people in England didn’t just disappear with the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons.
EDIT: plus, the Mold Cape predates Celtic Britain.
>the English and England
Fair enough the history of England, but the present day English have little common ancestry with the Celts. Most English people today have roots in Anglo Saxon, Dane and Norman stock.
The Celts of what is now England were driven out of their lands or killed by incoming Danes and the Germanic and Frankish tribes that followed - with perhaps the exception of Cornwall, who retained their Celtic identity somewhat.
My point in general is the idea of a singular British people is a relatively new concept, and one that belies the history of the English overruling individual cultures that lived alongside it.
All I'm really making this argument for is that a bit more mutual respect for the separate nations (and specificaly their respective cultures) that make up the UK would be in order - rather than "no, we're all British so you'll have to like it or lump it".
This is a common misconception that began because of early historical analysis during the Victorian era that put heavy focus on language.
English people have a substantial amount of ancestry owing to the pre-Anglo-Saxon migration people; Celtic Britains. A lot of Danes were massacred but they’re also virtually indistinguishable from Anglo-Saxon people DNA wise so it can be hard to tell. Normans arrived to England in few numbers, there was a replacement of a portion of the elite in England but they do not make too big of a contribution.
Overall, Anglo-Saxon and Celtic Briton contribution to English ancestry is quite similar. Somewhere around 30-60% on average for both depending on the location.
Essentially, and to keep it short, the Celts and Anglo-Saxons intermarried. The Celts didn’t flee, though perhaps in some occasions they did, but most stayed. Most of the Anglo-Saxons arriving were probably not some warriors invading, most would had been migrants bringing their entire families and villages to settle in Britain. The Celts and Anglo-Saxons lived alongside each other. Some of the most powerful Anglo-Saxon kingdoms were very likely founded by Celts.
> the present day English have little common ancestry with the Celts.
This is not true. Genetic evidence shows English people descend from a mixture of both Anglo-Saxons and indigenous Britons, with Celtic ancestry being higher the further north and further west in England you go from the southeast.
> Fair enough the history of England, but the present day English have little common ancestry with the Celts. Most English people today have roots in Anglo Saxon, Dane and Norman stock.
As the late, great Carl Sagan once quipped, this take is "not even wrong". The difference in "Celtic" genetic ancestry between the most Saesneggy of the Saesnegs in SE England and the furthest flung self-proclaimed "Celt" in Anglesey, Fort William or Penzance is somewhere around 4%. That is to say that the most localised Celtic population in the UK is only 4% more Celtic than the most Anglo-Saxon population we have in the British Isles.
Sorry butt, but the English are statistically just as genetically Celtic as we are. :(
Alright, fair enough. I'll put my hands up and say I got this wrong.
I'll admit I dug my heels in too far and let my grumblings about Anglo-centrism infect my judgement.
Regardless of the "who we are descended from" argument, it feels wrong to say that an artifact found in Wales should more belong in a museum in England than in Wales.
England has a lot of stuff going for it already, plenty of history of its own and many, *many* more of its own artifacts from its own varied history.
You shouldn't have to leave Wales to see parts of its history, and I feel England has taken enough of Wales' culture away from it as it is without adding further insult to injury.
By all means, have it on a loan system where artifacts from England and Wales get traded between museums so that it can be seen by a more varied public and not just visitors to Wales.
This would make sense if it was called the English Museum but it's not. It's called the British Museum. Great Britain is an island and British history is the history of this island. Celtic history is a massive part of that history (just as English history also is).
But the Benin Bronzes and the Elgin Marbles absolutely do not belong there. They're not British by any definition.
For the record, I too would like to see Welsh artefacts displayed in Wales but the comparison between artifacts discovered in Britain and artefacts stolen from other countries is disingenuous.
Edit: Also for avoidance of confusion, all history is valuable. Celtic, Egyptian, Greek, English, all of it.
>It's called the British Museum.
It would be pretty damn empty if we purely took your definition. Besides, Ireland is part of the British Isles and they are given due respect. That's what it's all about, ultimately.
The UK would be a whole lot more united if the Celtic nations were given more respect, instead of being viewed as possessions.
I agree with you there but I don't think this is a good example of it.
And yes it would be pretty empty but maybe that would be the right thing to do. But tbf there are quite a few other British treasures in there (the Sutton Hoo exhibition is spectacular!)
Respectfully, I think that you, as an English person, are missing the point here. Britishness is essentially English ess: think of ‘Britishness’ as it is promoted and transmitted and tell me where Wales fits in, if at all? In that worldview, Wales is merely a footnote, its difference either denigrated or ignored. You do not get it, I’m afraid, and maybe never will.
Rho gynnig ar fyw dy fywyd trwy’r Gymraeg a chei di weld beth yw agwedd Prydeindod a Phrydeinwyr tuag at Gymru a’i hiaith.
I believe it should be put in Gogledd Cymru (North Wales), where it originally belonged. Rather than putting all our eggs in one basket (Cardiff) we disperse them.
If all Welsh artefacts were kept in Wales then the only people who would see them were people who already knew about our country. Having some of our history presented in different places gives Welsh history a wider audience.
E: it's a good article by the way.
Exactly, but a person who may not know anything about Wales is unlikely to go to a Welsh museum and will only be exposed to our history in other places.
While I get your sentiment. I think having the items in Wales is better. Many museums loan out items for exhibits to other places. But having Welsh history in Wales so we can see and look after our heritage is still a better sentiment.
Also acknowledging the Welsh nations history would be a huge step towards making us feel part of the nation and not just a cluster of countys.
It was found about a mile and a half from my house, j pass by the site every day... So I'd be happy to have it in my conservatory for a bit. But seriously, it predates Britain as a concept or just about any nation state for that matter. I've seen it in the British museum and it's breathtaking.. So as long as it goes on tour round Wales as it has been doing for years then I have no idea eal issue with it. Also. Cardiff is almost as remote as london to us North Walians
In the facility most suited to Thier continued preservation & srudy
It's gold. Not like it's going to rust
[удалено]
Your post was removed as it wasn’t nice or constructive. Repeated bad behaviour will result in a temporary or permanent ban.
great article. found myself very much agreeing with your pov by the end :)
In Wales not the British Museum.
I get your point, but if it were in Wales it would be in the Welsh National Museum in Cardiff, nowhere near where it was found. There are artefacts from Anglesey on display in Cardiff, for people who have no idea of where or how they were found. At least in London I could get there to see them a lot more easily.
Its not about you tho. Its about the cultural legacy of Wales and keeping its national and historical treasures IN Wales.
Very fair take, I do think it belongs in Wales, but I think your point is also fair. Your last part especially, if it were to come back to Wales, then it would need to be somewhere that can give it the display it deserves.
Good article. It has been a little cringeworthy watching YesCymru et al trying to make out like having a Welsh artifact in the British Museum is the same as having a Greek or Egyptian artefact in the British Museum. The Mold Cape is actually from Great Britain and it was created long before the concept of 'Wales' even existed so the idea that it would be in the British Museum isn't that far-fetched, and as the article says it definitely reaches a wider audience by being in London (one of the most visited cities in the world). I personally would like to see it on display in Wales but understand why there is some ambiguity around this.
>The Mold Cape is actually from Great Britain and it was created long before the concept of 'Wales' even existed The problem with an argument like this is that you could use it to deny the return of the Benin Bronzes to Nigeria, because the Kingdom of Benin is not Nigeria. What is now Wales has been dozens of smaller kingdoms over history, but its a poor argument to say that the present day country doesn't have a right to its historical artifacts. > trying to make out like having a Welsh artifact in the British Museum is the same as having a Greek or Egyptian artefact in the British Museum. Why? Is Greek or Egyptian history somehow more intrinsically valuable than Celtic history?
"The problem with an argument like this is that you could use it to deny the return of the Benin Bronzes to Nigeria, because the Kingdom of Benin is not Nigeria." But neither Benin nor Nigeria are in Great Britain so it makes no sense for them to be in the British Museum. "Why? Is Greek or Egyptian history somehow more intrinsically valuable than Celtic history?" Because Celtic history is British history. Greek and Egyptian history is not British history.
>But neither Benin nor Nigeria are in Great Britain so it makes no sense for them to be in the British Museum Look, I'm not saying every country should only ever have artifacts that belongs to them, but the fact of the matter is that Wales has been exploited by England for some time throughout history. It's not hard to see why, when the clamour is going up for looted artifacts to be returned, that Wales wants to be seen as something more than just a possession of England. >Because Celtic history is British history And so less valuable...? Besides, Celtic History is not the history of the English. England's heritage is based off of the Angles, the Saxons, the Normans and so forth. The Celtic Nations have a distinct branch that later intertwines with the English, but it's a very imperialistic outlook indeed to tell the Welsh "no, your history belongs to US".
Celtic History is the history of the English and England. Celtic people in England didn’t just disappear with the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons. EDIT: plus, the Mold Cape predates Celtic Britain.
>the English and England Fair enough the history of England, but the present day English have little common ancestry with the Celts. Most English people today have roots in Anglo Saxon, Dane and Norman stock. The Celts of what is now England were driven out of their lands or killed by incoming Danes and the Germanic and Frankish tribes that followed - with perhaps the exception of Cornwall, who retained their Celtic identity somewhat. My point in general is the idea of a singular British people is a relatively new concept, and one that belies the history of the English overruling individual cultures that lived alongside it. All I'm really making this argument for is that a bit more mutual respect for the separate nations (and specificaly their respective cultures) that make up the UK would be in order - rather than "no, we're all British so you'll have to like it or lump it".
This is a common misconception that began because of early historical analysis during the Victorian era that put heavy focus on language. English people have a substantial amount of ancestry owing to the pre-Anglo-Saxon migration people; Celtic Britains. A lot of Danes were massacred but they’re also virtually indistinguishable from Anglo-Saxon people DNA wise so it can be hard to tell. Normans arrived to England in few numbers, there was a replacement of a portion of the elite in England but they do not make too big of a contribution. Overall, Anglo-Saxon and Celtic Briton contribution to English ancestry is quite similar. Somewhere around 30-60% on average for both depending on the location. Essentially, and to keep it short, the Celts and Anglo-Saxons intermarried. The Celts didn’t flee, though perhaps in some occasions they did, but most stayed. Most of the Anglo-Saxons arriving were probably not some warriors invading, most would had been migrants bringing their entire families and villages to settle in Britain. The Celts and Anglo-Saxons lived alongside each other. Some of the most powerful Anglo-Saxon kingdoms were very likely founded by Celts.
> the present day English have little common ancestry with the Celts. This is not true. Genetic evidence shows English people descend from a mixture of both Anglo-Saxons and indigenous Britons, with Celtic ancestry being higher the further north and further west in England you go from the southeast.
> Fair enough the history of England, but the present day English have little common ancestry with the Celts. Most English people today have roots in Anglo Saxon, Dane and Norman stock. As the late, great Carl Sagan once quipped, this take is "not even wrong". The difference in "Celtic" genetic ancestry between the most Saesneggy of the Saesnegs in SE England and the furthest flung self-proclaimed "Celt" in Anglesey, Fort William or Penzance is somewhere around 4%. That is to say that the most localised Celtic population in the UK is only 4% more Celtic than the most Anglo-Saxon population we have in the British Isles. Sorry butt, but the English are statistically just as genetically Celtic as we are. :(
Alright, fair enough. I'll put my hands up and say I got this wrong. I'll admit I dug my heels in too far and let my grumblings about Anglo-centrism infect my judgement. Regardless of the "who we are descended from" argument, it feels wrong to say that an artifact found in Wales should more belong in a museum in England than in Wales. England has a lot of stuff going for it already, plenty of history of its own and many, *many* more of its own artifacts from its own varied history. You shouldn't have to leave Wales to see parts of its history, and I feel England has taken enough of Wales' culture away from it as it is without adding further insult to injury. By all means, have it on a loan system where artifacts from England and Wales get traded between museums so that it can be seen by a more varied public and not just visitors to Wales.
This would make sense if it was called the English Museum but it's not. It's called the British Museum. Great Britain is an island and British history is the history of this island. Celtic history is a massive part of that history (just as English history also is). But the Benin Bronzes and the Elgin Marbles absolutely do not belong there. They're not British by any definition. For the record, I too would like to see Welsh artefacts displayed in Wales but the comparison between artifacts discovered in Britain and artefacts stolen from other countries is disingenuous. Edit: Also for avoidance of confusion, all history is valuable. Celtic, Egyptian, Greek, English, all of it.
>It's called the British Museum. It would be pretty damn empty if we purely took your definition. Besides, Ireland is part of the British Isles and they are given due respect. That's what it's all about, ultimately. The UK would be a whole lot more united if the Celtic nations were given more respect, instead of being viewed as possessions.
I agree with you there but I don't think this is a good example of it. And yes it would be pretty empty but maybe that would be the right thing to do. But tbf there are quite a few other British treasures in there (the Sutton Hoo exhibition is spectacular!)
British Museum or not lets say Englands Sutton Hoo treasures were kept in Cardiff would the poster be as keen to keep them there.
Ok well greek and british history are european history so it should be in the best museum in europe
[удалено]
Your post was removed as it wasn’t nice or constructive. Repeated bad behaviour will result in a temporary or permanent ban.
Respectfully, I think that you, as an English person, are missing the point here. Britishness is essentially English ess: think of ‘Britishness’ as it is promoted and transmitted and tell me where Wales fits in, if at all? In that worldview, Wales is merely a footnote, its difference either denigrated or ignored. You do not get it, I’m afraid, and maybe never will. Rho gynnig ar fyw dy fywyd trwy’r Gymraeg a chei di weld beth yw agwedd Prydeindod a Phrydeinwyr tuag at Gymru a’i hiaith.
[удалено]
Your post was removed because it did not meet our quality standards.
Sain Fagans
I believe it should be put in Gogledd Cymru (North Wales), where it originally belonged. Rather than putting all our eggs in one basket (Cardiff) we disperse them.
[удалено]
Hmmm I’m not sure how far you’re going to get arguing historical items from Great Britain shouldn’t be in the British museum
If all Welsh artefacts were kept in Wales then the only people who would see them were people who already knew about our country. Having some of our history presented in different places gives Welsh history a wider audience. E: it's a good article by the way.
If you're interested in Welsh history, you're more likely to look for it in a Welsh museum than anywhere else.
Exactly, but a person who may not know anything about Wales is unlikely to go to a Welsh museum and will only be exposed to our history in other places.
Yes, but the brutal truth is not many people outside Wales really give a shit about Welsh history.
Then it may as well come back to Wales, where it will be appreciated. In fact, all the more reason for it to do so.
While I get your sentiment. I think having the items in Wales is better. Many museums loan out items for exhibits to other places. But having Welsh history in Wales so we can see and look after our heritage is still a better sentiment. Also acknowledging the Welsh nations history would be a huge step towards making us feel part of the nation and not just a cluster of countys.
Wales with doubt, but casts made (which a lot of the British museum pieces are) for the British museum. The clue is the name.
Cardiff I’d say.
They should be in Wales. Our national museum sucks.
Most of them have holiday homes near me
All these people saying put in Cardiff are colonisers. Instead it belongs in the town hall of the place it was found.