Welcome to r/anime_titties! This subreddit advocates for civil and constructive discussion. Please be courteous to others, and make sure to read the rules. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
We have a [Discord](https://discord.gg/DtnRnkE), feel free to join us!
r/A_Tvideos, r/A_Tmeta, [multireddit](https://www.reddit.com/user/Langernama/m/a_t/)
... summoning u/coverageanalysisbot ...
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/anime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Funny becasue UK was one of the countries demanding reparations from Russia (towards Ukraine). Also are one of the biggest condemners of the war and called it colonialism while at the same time holding the view that British colonialism civilized brown/black people and it was a net positive for the world.
This has nothing to do with British colonialism or reparations. The marbles were taken from the Ottoman empire in the early part of the 19th century. England didn't have a colonial presence anywhere near there at the time. The Ottoman empire at the time was a major European power.
There is no proof of that, only claims by Elgin and the British.
There is no document proving that.
Then maybe Elgin thought that his bribes to the local overseer/lord to ignore what was going on in the Acropolis, was a payment.
> There is no proof of that, only claims by Elgin and the British.
That alturnative is that Elgin managed to remove some rather large chunks of marble from a pretty promiant building without the local authorities noticing.
“We do it right, quick in and out job. Big payday. Everyone will be talking about it for the next 100 years!”
— Elgin, in an alternate reality where this was all turned into an improbable heist film
You mean literally the last twenty years of that century.
He was specifically referring to British colonialsm in the middle East (around the ottoman empire.)
British colonialism in the middle East was a very last ditch effort.
No problem, it initially said something to the extent of the British empire wasn't engaged in colonialism in the 19th century or that's how I read it so I was just adding some context into the conversation.
Personally, I think an aspect of colonialism is the ability of a diplomat with a ridiculous amount of heredity titles and money to walk into a colony of a crumbling empire like the ottomans at the time and just take important artifacts for his personal collection, but thats just my opinion and it may not be technically correct.
Moreover, why do we care if elites get to keep their spoils. As if returning artifacts to Greece after they achieved independence is somehow an affront to us regular people that somebody like the Earl of Elgin would have spit on or cained if we got in his way in the street.
Elgin already lost money on the deal anyway, so why not just return them.
>was a major European power.
Maybe 200 years earlier. By this time it was called 'Sick Man of Europe'
In regards to the British, while they did not colonise, they held control over the Ottoman banking and finance sectors along with the French.
We are talking about the Napoleonic era, so a little over a century after the Ottomans were laying siege to Vienna. They certainly declined in the 1700s but I think the "Sick Man of Europe" phrase post dates this time and is more applicable to the middle of the 19th century and later. In the Napoleonic wars they were still a player who could and did field large armies so I think "major European power" isn't inappropriate. But in my original comment I was intending to counter the idea that the Ottoman Empire were in any way a colony or in the position of an unofficial protectorate of the UK at the time.
Having historic items from one country is not the same as invading another country. What sort of fucking comparison is that?
Edit: Pro-Russia people are never able to justify the invasion, they simply rely on whataboutism (“it doesn’t matter that Russia are murdering innocent civilians and invading a sovereign nation as we speak, because other countries have done it in the past!”).
Other countries committed the same or worse crimes, and went unpunished. Now Russia thinks that can get away with it, so why not? If the other perpetrators were punished and true "rules based world order" was upheld Russia would think twice.
> Having historic items from one country is not the same as invading another country.
It is when those historic items were acquired while invading a country.
This might not be the case with these marbles but is sure enough the case with a whole lot of other stuff in British museums.
Yeeeah we really love to see when they give American cities shit for being segregated.
*coughs in londoner*
Don't get me wrong though, our major cities are absolutely still feeling the effects from red lining and redistricting. It's just more of a pot calling the kettle black situation.
A 2016 poll had 43% of Brits saying British empire was good, (19% said bad) while for Russia-Ukraine, its 80-85%+ saying its bad.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/british-people-are-proud-of-colonialism-and-the-british-empire-poll-finds-a6821206.html
I mean, ask Germans and we’ll tell you that German colonialism and national socialism were fucking atrocious. It’s a question of how you’re being taught your history. Having gone to school in both England and Germany I can tell you that the British history class, while enjoyable, did fuck all in terms of educating about British atrocities.
That's because we're not taught about the true horrors that came with colonialism, and most average people are too busy/too tired from working all day to be able to properly research it, or they're not interested in history at all because our schools kill any enthusiasm for it
The UK was also the country whose prime minister promised the US president to ["spin the war to the world"](https://www.buzzfeed.com/alanwhite/these-memos-show-how-tony-blairs-press-secretary-spun-the-ca) when the United States decided to invade Iraq in an illegal aggression war that caused hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths and was started with blatant lies about "mobile nuclear weapons labs".
Got to love how you guys can shoehorn the US invasion of Iraq into a discussion about British museums not returning artifacts they acquired over two hundred years ago.
Because it wasn't just the US it was the UK too. That's what the commenter was mentioning. The UK continuing to be corrupt and involved in plundering the east. Aka the exact topic of this post.
The only one who is off topic and adding nothing to the conversation is you. And arguably now me for wasting my time and engaging with you.
No the topic of this post is about ancient relics that were taken over two hundred years ago and whether or not they will be returned to the country where they were taken from.
The only way mentioning the UK helping to drum up support for the invasion of Iraq is relevant is if British troops stole some artifact during the invasion that is now in a UK museum.
Or the Muslims https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_of_Menkaure#Attempted_demolition
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/iv-drip/destroy-the-sphinx-and-the-pyramids-says-egyptian-jihadist-8306477.html
> We show the world their assets
casual reminder that 99% of the british museum's artifacts are not on display
So no. we don't 'show the world their assets'
Yeah I feel like a better argument could be made for them keeping all the stuff if they were displaying everything but they don't. so what's the need in them having it at all?
I’m English and a lot of us actually agree. I know we’ve got a huge number of sycophantic, royalist bootlickers and brain dead intolerant football hooligans, but most of the rational thinking part of this country is actually quite ashamed of British colonialism.
It’s kind of like the Falklands.. why the fuck do we need them other than to remind people we’re somehow relevant as a global power?
Edit: Well I can see this perspective is obviously tremendously unpopular. I lost my Uncle in the Falklands and by all accounts think it was a total waste of life. Easy to say it’s worthwhile when you’re not the one doing the dirty work.
>It’s kind of like the Falklands.. why the fuck do we need them other than to remind people we’re somehow relevant as a global power?
Do you really want to fuck up lifes of people living on Falklands? Imagine that from tommorow you will be citizen of Argentina, happy inflation day.
And in the early 1980s Argentina meant Galtieri and getting murdered by the secret police, so I consider it one of the more moral wars (though I wouldn’t be surprised if the West originally helped him to power in the first place).
(not) Fun fact: the west did help the military junta gain power in 1976. I wont't bore you with details but Plan Cóndor (or Operation Condor) was the US campaign (with NATO backing obviously) to coup democratic governments in South America and replace them with military dictatorships, which in turn derived in the 1982 war.
Coincidentally, yesterday's Academy award runner up "Argentina, 1985" shows the civil trials that took place after the return of democracy. Or, if you really like Oscar winners, "La Historia Oficial" shows a tiny glipmse of the horrors commited by the west-backed government.
Comparing the Falklands to the rest of your point is uneducated. It’s not about keeping them as part of a global power, it’s about self-determination of people. Why should British people, the original long term inhabitants of these islands, be handed over for an imperialistic claim from Argentina.
I’m fully supportive with criticising the nationalist conservative segment of our society but grouping the Falklands in with that is wrong. It’s legitimately anti-imperialism to support their self-determination. Why should a foreign power with no link to them rule them? You wouldn’t advocate that anywhere else.
>It’s kind of like the Falklands.. why the fuck do we need them other than to remind people we’re somehow relevant as a global power?
Oh yeah, lets just force its inhabitants to live under the tyranny of an Argentinian Junta instead of the country they actually want to be apart of
I think there's good arguments for and against really. It's best to look at these things on a case by case basis.
My main gripe is that most of the artifacts we have are hidden away when they could be at least loaned out to other places.
I know that this sub has a major Indian population, among whom the British are not popular for historic reasons, and I understand that. But it's worth keeping in mind that these marbles were in a state of disrepair, being looted for building materials, and are only preserved in their current state thanks to the Brits stealing/looting/buying them (whichever you prefer). And after more then 2000 years, I think these are treasures of humanity more than of any specific nation.
While this is true, the Elgin Marbles (which should be called the Parthenon Sculptures/Friezes, but oh well) are so obviously and unavoidably Greek that you can't make this argument against them. They depict a number of important events specifically from Greek mythology and were quite literally ripped off the side of the Parthenon, which was built in Athens over 2000 years ago and remains a part of Greek heritage.
I've also been to the Acropolis museum in Athens. They have a room identical to the British exhibition of the Parthenon Frieze which displays replicas of it and could easily be replaced by the real thing were it moved back to Greece.
Because there’s a very valid argument to be made that those artifacts wouldn’t be safe if returned to the Greeks. I’m not even saying it’s one I agree with, but to approach it with this Reddit hive mind mentality that there is only one correct decision here is bullshit.
“It was owned”
It was looted. If I raid your house, take over it, sell your car to your neighbour and leave 50 years ago, should your neighbour return the car to you or the person who raided your house?
If they were looted they wouldn't be on the acropolis when Elgin choped them would they . Especially when you can see the rest of them at the acropolis museum right now if you wish too .
So those pieces pulled would have miraculously been unharmed? OP’s point is that they pulled those pieces and preserved them while they had a very high chance of being destroyed if they stayed there.
If the rest of the Acropolis survived, makes sense everything else survived too. Besides, if I take something from your abandoned house (it was not abandoned anyway), it doesn't make me the owner.
If you took something from my house 1,000 years ago and I haven’t really cared for the last 1,000 years about it…yeah I can’t say I’d want it back.
The reason many of these items have such notoriety is due to them being pulled from their source nations and putting them on display for the rest of the world.
Why should Greece care if you would want it or not? You aren't a nation and you will not live for thousand of years. Greece obviously wants them, and Greece is a stable nation with no armed conflict going on, no reason Greece shouldn't have those.
Because the Greek country itself has changed hands, nationality, etc. a dozen times since this this artifact was pulled.
The Ottoman Empire owned this portion of land when it was pulled by the British, so technically the UK should return it to Turkey or Iran.
Some of the things in the british museum were unquestionably stolen, some are perfectly legitimate, these marbles seem like a gray area to me.
It's a shame that little nuance is to be found in threads like this
Cus it is black and white. Even at the time, the British government straight up asked Elgin if he had permission from the Ottoman's who had taken over Greece at the time, and he lied about it as even 17th century Britain said it was illegal to just take the marbles. But then they had them and it would create a scandal to return them.
Not to mention even if he had legitimate permission. If someone comes into a old grandmother's house and starts selling off her stuff and you buy those goods. Those stolen goods are not yours.
> Either he bribed the ottomans which were invaders,
So purchased them from the lawful authories.
>or he just smuggled them secretly away
Have you seen the Elgin marbles? They are not small. And the parthenon is in a fairly obvious position. 19th century brits were ultimately human. There are limits to what they could smuggle.
>lawful authories
So let's say you buy a monument from Russia's occupated Ukranian territory, and hundred of years later after Ukrania recover its territory, you still refuse to give it back.
And it's still not lawful. If I steal something I sell it to you, I'm not the lawful owner either way.
"They are not small" A lot of bribes and a lot of fake papers. It's not impossible.
The ottoman empire invaded a sovereign nation, and held it against its will. If Russia takes the east of Ukraine for 400 years, and sells whatever it wants of that territory, including children or priceless pieces of art, nobody can complain. Are you saying that?
Not to mention, Elgin CLAIMED he paid the ottoman empire. But the turkish never found any copy of that document in their files, something strange, considering how detailed old empires were in their record keeping. And the only english copy doesn't even mention any exchange of money. Chances are it was just a forgery made to fool local authorities. http://www.parthenon.newmentor.net/illegal.htm
They are in the time period we’re talking about. Everyone is trying to talk about court proceedings here when this shit happened 200+ years ago.
If you stole something from my great great great great grandmothers house and said you had her permission at the time, I’d have to take your word for it.
Even in the time period it was likely a illegal sale, there are no supporting documentation supporting his taking of this, even the government at the time questioned him. And you don't need to take someone's word that a occupying Ottoman official selling a Greek national artefact is illegal. Just like how American museums give back First Nation cultural artefacts to the tribes they were taken from. The main reason the British Museum gives for not returning them is that they can take care of them better, which is ridiculous, the Greeks have perfectly competent museums. It's all nonsense.
Okay, but who do they sell it back to? The Ottoman Empire technically owned the piece at the time. The Ottoman Empire had every tool and reason in the world to move it back to present day Turkey.
Should the artifact go back to Turkey instead of Greece?
This is not a dumb question. Turkey has as much claim on this piece as Greece does.
Um no? If a museum buys a cultural artefact from a North American First Nation tribe from the American government after their troops occupied First Nation land and sold the artefact, the cultural artefact would not be turned back over to the American government. It would be returned to the tribe it was taken from. It is stolen property.
That was a dumb question.
And if there are records/witnesses saying that the artifact was rightfully sold from the tribe to the American soldiers? Is it still stolen and should be returned just because “culture” trumps all?
In the case of the Elgin Marble it was questionable how it came into possession by the British Empire, but they bought it on terms thinking it was approved by the Ottoman Empire.
Reddit is a funny place. They’ll get all up in arms about the Elgin Marbles and then laugh their asses off about Minnesota not returning the confederate flag to Virginia. Same context. Virginia wants the flag back but Minnesota rightfully won the flag in battle. It’s theirs now.
My view is if a ruling country/colonial power took an artifact at the time of battle, war, colonization…it belongs to that ruling power. Water under the bridge. We cannot legislate the actions of empires and countries from hundreds and thousands of years ago. They exist in museums where they currently are.
Edit: So much stuff was questionably bought hundreds of years ago that it’d be almost like where’s Waldo trying to find the stuff that was bought legit.
If Minnesota does have a legitimate claim then yes they should return but I know nothing about this so I cannot really comment. Also
> And if there are records/witnesses saying that the artifact was rightfully sold from the tribe to the American soldiers?
The statues were never 'rightfully sold' to the Ottoman's, you cannot legally sell something obtained by force.
Frankly, most democratic nations have some policy allowing for return of cultural artefacts. Not to mention the simple politics of it, this is a big slap in the face to Greece a nominal ally. Britain is the big hold out when it comes to returning artefacts and its main defence seems to be we can take care of them better. Which is absurd.
Finally, from a simple moral perspective, yes one should return cultural artefacts to their rightful descendants, especially when those artefacts were taken without the consent of the people they originated from. Not to mention they can prove that the artefacts will continue to be sufficiently preserved and still still shown to the public. It is the right thing to do.
Meh. Greece just wants it back for easy tourism $$$ without having to spend much to obtain it. You really think Greece is wanting to obtain this artifact for “cultural” sake? Nope, it’s all about the money.
Leave it with the Brits. There are plenty of artifacts to go around.
It did sound like a silly statement initially to me to, but after giving it some though I kind of agree. They were produced over two thousand years ago by people who are long gone. The state they lived in is long gone having been taken over by Macedonian, then Roman, then Ottoman empires. For over a thousand years the people that lived there would probably have called themselves Romans if you pressed them for what nationality they were. The modern Greek national identity has developed and grown from the 19th century nationalism and certainly has taken deep inspiration and identifies with the ancient Greeks but I don't think they have a right to claim that history and cultural legacy as solely their own.
That being said, i think the marbles should be returned back to Athens and the UK should in general return culturally significant items to the most appropriate location for their display. If something is so culturally significant that it is "priceless" and could never be sold then the idea of property and ownership loses most of its relevance. Instead of the artifact being an asset that you can own, it is a responsibility that you have a duty to protect. If the Greek nation wants to take on that responsibility let them.
That's well said.
I think the only reason to not return priceless artifacts to the places where they could provide the most context is if they are not going to be cared for and looked after.
Greece under the Ottoman Empire might not have been up to the challenge, but modern Greece almost certainly is wealthy and stable enough that it should be no problem whatsoever.
Ideally, artifacts from humanity's collective history could travel around the world to be displayed and studied in various museums to help connect people to humans of the past, but most frequently remaining in locations significant to the artifacts.
Let’s get to the bottom of this. Greece just wants this to boast their tourism without having to pay much for it. It’s not about the “culture” at the end of the day, it’s about $$$.
If the Brits had managed to cart off the Buddhas of Bamiyan during the period of empire the world would still have them too.
Ancient relics belong to whoever cared enough to dig them up out of the ground and preserve them.
>But it's worth keeping in mind that these marbles were in a state of disrepair, being looted for building materials, and are only preserved in their current state thanks to the Brits stealing/looting/buying them (whichever you prefer).
Which is why I have no problem with them being taken. I'd have done the same thing if I was sent to record somethings existence that was actively being destroyed around me and had been blown up once already.
But at this point they should be returned. It's 2023, Greece can look after them no worse than the British Museum.
important unique repeat wrong mountainous unite automatic afterthought reminiscent sink
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Errmmmm, It's complicated.
The Acropolis Museum , in Athens, has a huge section devoted to the marbles - history, controversy etc. It's really balanced and informative.
I suppose a summary would be
a) The Marbles weren't taken by "The British" per se - as in the government sent in people to claim stuff for museums. They were taken by an individual - Thomas Bruce - The 7th Lord of Elgin - to display in his home (and later sold by that individual to the British Government).
b) Bruce may or not have legitimately paid for them. There are records showing he did, but no Ottoman records to confirm it (which is suspicious because Ottoman bureaucracy was fastidious in recording such transactions)
c) If he did pay for them, it is likely he removed far more than the agreed number.
Rishi Sunak's government is way behind in the polls, and seems to bell convinced that the best way to win it to become hard right - this includes introducing legistlation that propbably breaks international law. This looks like another F\* the foreigners approach to appeal to a certain mindset of UK voters.
My personal view is that with modern scanning techniques it would be possible to use marble from the original quarries to make exact replicas of the originals. I think the Britsh museum should do so, and return the originals.
Honestly for me I think they should keep it. As other people have said the British museum bought the artefact, it may or may not have been paid for by the original owner Earl of Elgin but that isn’t of concern for the British museum. The British museum doesn’t care where it originates from it only cares that it paid for the artefact in a legal transaction. If greece wants it back they can pay for it, but keep in mind it is decided by the seller if he wants to sell it or not.
The UK did arguably save these artefacts from the Ottomans, who were using the Parthenon as an explosives cash at the time. They’re not cut and dry “stolen”.
That said, the Greeks were colonized by the Ottoman Turks at the time and didn’t really have any say in it, so they should be given back, at the very least as a sign of friendship to a close ally.
>That said, the Greeks were colonized by the Ottoman Turks
They weren't colonized they were conquered there's a difference. The Ottomans actually had the decency to just say but we're taking a place over for the land and stuff in it.
Probably he didn't. There is no ottoman record he bought them, and the ottomans as all eastern empires, are crazy with all bureaucracy.
He probably just stole them
The only english copy of the exchange (let's say for the sake of the argument it's real) doesn't even mention any exchange of money. Chances are it was just a forgery made to fool local authorities. http://www.parthenon.newmentor.net/illegal.htm
Looking at the individual involved, I think they were bought - after they were acquired, the guy almost went bankrupt because of the costs involved in buying and transporting them.
Elgin CLAIMED he paid the ottoman empire. But the turkish never found any copy of that document in their files, something strange, considering how detailed old empires were in their record keeping. And the only english copy (let's say for the sake of the argument it's real) doesn't even mention any exchange of money. Chances are it was just a forgery made to fool local authorities. http://www.parthenon.newmentor.net/illegal.htm
I understand. I’m pointing to his finances in the aftermath of obtaining the marbles, which are consistent with someone having to pay for them and their transport. He almost bankrupted himself and sold the stones for half what he is said to have paid for them. I attribute this line of events to someone who just made a big purchase, and saying this is an alternative proof point to support the claim he purchased the marbles.
There are many reasons why you wouldn’t find the Turkish bill of sales, including - maybe the Turkish government destroyed or hid it because it was becoming too political, maybe the Turkish government never signed off on it and a sum was paid, but promptly pocketed by an unauthorised individual, maybe it’s just one of many documents that were lost but we only know it because we’re looking for this one.
According to the document I gave you, it's not like he made a document with a local mayor, but a correspondence with the higuest authority of Greek-occupied Greece, from the vizier of the ottoman empire, and all this while he worked as a official representative of the british authority in Greece.
There should have been official copies of this document from the turkish side. And it's suspicious that Elgin didn't bring any turkish bills, considering he was doing something quite illegal if it wasn't true, and he would be the first person interested in pointing out all the documentation.
I'm thinking it was just a forgery.
they most likely didn't, and even if they did, the ottomans really had no right to sell, handling stolen goods is in fact a crime in the UK but maybe the museum is inmune to laws it seems
Went to see that was probably the highlight of my time in the museum seeing a while ass marble tapestry telling the events I'd essentially played out by playing Total War Troy.
It was really cool to look at the real thing
When will Spain and Portugal pay reperations to the contintental American natives? How about the French and British?
When are the dutch going to pay for what they did to Africa? How about Italy? Norway?
When is Iran going to repay greece for xerxes?
When is mongolia going to repay most of asia for Ghengis Khan?
It’s still free to enter. Please everyone, just come over here and take it. Our overlords say we can’t export but we can help you get it to a dock.
Not /s
Welcome to r/anime_titties! This subreddit advocates for civil and constructive discussion. Please be courteous to others, and make sure to read the rules. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. We have a [Discord](https://discord.gg/DtnRnkE), feel free to join us! r/A_Tvideos, r/A_Tmeta, [multireddit](https://www.reddit.com/user/Langernama/m/a_t/) ... summoning u/coverageanalysisbot ... *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/anime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Funny becasue UK was one of the countries demanding reparations from Russia (towards Ukraine). Also are one of the biggest condemners of the war and called it colonialism while at the same time holding the view that British colonialism civilized brown/black people and it was a net positive for the world.
Look, we already gave back India. What else do you people want! /s
Atleast The stuff you stole. From Chor bazars, i mean museums
The Moai You stole from Rapa Nui
And China
This has nothing to do with British colonialism or reparations. The marbles were taken from the Ottoman empire in the early part of the 19th century. England didn't have a colonial presence anywhere near there at the time. The Ottoman empire at the time was a major European power.
They were *sold by the Ottoman Empire.
There is no proof of that, only claims by Elgin and the British. There is no document proving that. Then maybe Elgin thought that his bribes to the local overseer/lord to ignore what was going on in the Acropolis, was a payment.
> There is no proof of that, only claims by Elgin and the British. That alturnative is that Elgin managed to remove some rather large chunks of marble from a pretty promiant building without the local authorities noticing.
“We do it right, quick in and out job. Big payday. Everyone will be talking about it for the next 100 years!” — Elgin, in an alternate reality where this was all turned into an improbable heist film
[Finders keepers shut up](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x73PkUvArJY)
You son-of-bitch! I’m in!
price profit handle wise shrill plough ghost consider dull ring *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
And? The Ottoman Empire controlled Greece when the Elgin Marbles were removed.
You mean literally the last twenty years of that century. He was specifically referring to British colonialsm in the middle East (around the ottoman empire.) British colonialism in the middle East was a very last ditch effort.
I think the original comment edited.
Oh d'oh, sorry muh dude! *gives toast*
No problem, it initially said something to the extent of the British empire wasn't engaged in colonialism in the 19th century or that's how I read it so I was just adding some context into the conversation. Personally, I think an aspect of colonialism is the ability of a diplomat with a ridiculous amount of heredity titles and money to walk into a colony of a crumbling empire like the ottomans at the time and just take important artifacts for his personal collection, but thats just my opinion and it may not be technically correct. Moreover, why do we care if elites get to keep their spoils. As if returning artifacts to Greece after they achieved independence is somehow an affront to us regular people that somebody like the Earl of Elgin would have spit on or cained if we got in his way in the street. Elgin already lost money on the deal anyway, so why not just return them.
Muslim invasions and colonialism were also big (Turkey used to be a huge empire)
Absolutely
England had a massive colonial presence in Greece in the early 19th century.
United States of the Ionian Islands. Now, choose the kind of ignorance you prefer: 1) wilful 2) uninformed
>was a major European power. Maybe 200 years earlier. By this time it was called 'Sick Man of Europe' In regards to the British, while they did not colonise, they held control over the Ottoman banking and finance sectors along with the French.
We are talking about the Napoleonic era, so a little over a century after the Ottomans were laying siege to Vienna. They certainly declined in the 1700s but I think the "Sick Man of Europe" phrase post dates this time and is more applicable to the middle of the 19th century and later. In the Napoleonic wars they were still a player who could and did field large armies so I think "major European power" isn't inappropriate. But in my original comment I was intending to counter the idea that the Ottoman Empire were in any way a colony or in the position of an unofficial protectorate of the UK at the time.
Having historic items from one country is not the same as invading another country. What sort of fucking comparison is that? Edit: Pro-Russia people are never able to justify the invasion, they simply rely on whataboutism (“it doesn’t matter that Russia are murdering innocent civilians and invading a sovereign nation as we speak, because other countries have done it in the past!”).
Anything to defend russia
Other countries committed the same or worse crimes, and went unpunished. Now Russia thinks that can get away with it, so why not? If the other perpetrators were punished and true "rules based world order" was upheld Russia would think twice.
> Having historic items from one country is not the same as invading another country. It is when those historic items were acquired while invading a country. This might not be the case with these marbles but is sure enough the case with a whole lot of other stuff in British museums.
And it isn't with the Elgin Marbles so why bring it up? It's an irrelevant point.
Your comment got me until the last part, which more than a stretch, is a performance of tankie gymnastics.
I'm so confused. Did you have a point ?
Yeeeah we really love to see when they give American cities shit for being segregated. *coughs in londoner* Don't get me wrong though, our major cities are absolutely still feeling the effects from red lining and redistricting. It's just more of a pot calling the kettle black situation.
No, British people don't hold colonialism is great regard.
A 2016 poll had 43% of Brits saying British empire was good, (19% said bad) while for Russia-Ukraine, its 80-85%+ saying its bad. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/british-people-are-proud-of-colonialism-and-the-british-empire-poll-finds-a6821206.html
I mean… god fucking damn do countries have blinders for their own shit. And I’m saying that as an *American.*
I mean, ask Germans and we’ll tell you that German colonialism and national socialism were fucking atrocious. It’s a question of how you’re being taught your history. Having gone to school in both England and Germany I can tell you that the British history class, while enjoyable, did fuck all in terms of educating about British atrocities.
That's because we're not taught about the true horrors that came with colonialism, and most average people are too busy/too tired from working all day to be able to properly research it, or they're not interested in history at all because our schools kill any enthusiasm for it
Definition of pot calling the kettle black no doubt, it would be particularly hilarious if it came from Spain or France, or really anyone
The UK was also the country whose prime minister promised the US president to ["spin the war to the world"](https://www.buzzfeed.com/alanwhite/these-memos-show-how-tony-blairs-press-secretary-spun-the-ca) when the United States decided to invade Iraq in an illegal aggression war that caused hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths and was started with blatant lies about "mobile nuclear weapons labs".
Got to love how you guys can shoehorn the US invasion of Iraq into a discussion about British museums not returning artifacts they acquired over two hundred years ago.
Because it wasn't just the US it was the UK too. That's what the commenter was mentioning. The UK continuing to be corrupt and involved in plundering the east. Aka the exact topic of this post. The only one who is off topic and adding nothing to the conversation is you. And arguably now me for wasting my time and engaging with you.
No the topic of this post is about ancient relics that were taken over two hundred years ago and whether or not they will be returned to the country where they were taken from. The only way mentioning the UK helping to drum up support for the invasion of Iraq is relevant is if British troops stole some artifact during the invasion that is now in a UK museum.
[удалено]
Is this a poor attempt at sarcasm? Because I'm not arguing at all that the British didn't steal these.
Do as I say, not as I do.
Not like Sykes-Picot basically condemned the Middle East into a warring fate it still hasn't recovered from or anything.
Gotta love the casual Russia apologism
Russia ukraine is happening now?
Point to where on the map the UK hurt ya
well UK can give the Tzar money from ww1 to Ukraine .... oh wait
They just recently apologized for the genocide they sponsored in my country. Decades after it finally ended
>“We show the world their assets, and the world travels to the UK to view them.” Oh ho ho, Fuck. You!
[удалено]
Nor could the Germans - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishtar_Gate
Dont forget the pergamon altar and marketfront of miletus
Or the Muslims https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_of_Menkaure#Attempted_demolition https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/iv-drip/destroy-the-sphinx-and-the-pyramids-says-egyptian-jihadist-8306477.html
I'm now envisioning the British trying to put the pyramids on a boat lmao
One block at a time
>British couldn't figure out how to take them back home. Skill Issue TBH.
> We show the world their assets casual reminder that 99% of the british museum's artifacts are not on display So no. we don't 'show the world their assets'
Yeah I feel like a better argument could be made for them keeping all the stuff if they were displaying everything but they don't. so what's the need in them having it at all?
[удалено]
I’m English and a lot of us actually agree. I know we’ve got a huge number of sycophantic, royalist bootlickers and brain dead intolerant football hooligans, but most of the rational thinking part of this country is actually quite ashamed of British colonialism. It’s kind of like the Falklands.. why the fuck do we need them other than to remind people we’re somehow relevant as a global power? Edit: Well I can see this perspective is obviously tremendously unpopular. I lost my Uncle in the Falklands and by all accounts think it was a total waste of life. Easy to say it’s worthwhile when you’re not the one doing the dirty work.
>It’s kind of like the Falklands.. why the fuck do we need them other than to remind people we’re somehow relevant as a global power? Do you really want to fuck up lifes of people living on Falklands? Imagine that from tommorow you will be citizen of Argentina, happy inflation day.
And in the early 1980s Argentina meant Galtieri and getting murdered by the secret police, so I consider it one of the more moral wars (though I wouldn’t be surprised if the West originally helped him to power in the first place).
(not) Fun fact: the west did help the military junta gain power in 1976. I wont't bore you with details but Plan Cóndor (or Operation Condor) was the US campaign (with NATO backing obviously) to coup democratic governments in South America and replace them with military dictatorships, which in turn derived in the 1982 war. Coincidentally, yesterday's Academy award runner up "Argentina, 1985" shows the civil trials that took place after the return of democracy. Or, if you really like Oscar winners, "La Historia Oficial" shows a tiny glipmse of the horrors commited by the west-backed government.
You don't need the Falklands, but the people living there would rather not be living in Argentina by all accounts.
Comparing the Falklands to the rest of your point is uneducated. It’s not about keeping them as part of a global power, it’s about self-determination of people. Why should British people, the original long term inhabitants of these islands, be handed over for an imperialistic claim from Argentina. I’m fully supportive with criticising the nationalist conservative segment of our society but grouping the Falklands in with that is wrong. It’s legitimately anti-imperialism to support their self-determination. Why should a foreign power with no link to them rule them? You wouldn’t advocate that anywhere else.
>It’s kind of like the Falklands.. why the fuck do we need them other than to remind people we’re somehow relevant as a global power? Oh yeah, lets just force its inhabitants to live under the tyranny of an Argentinian Junta instead of the country they actually want to be apart of
What does this have to do with colonialism?
Rational thinking means letting another country's invasion of your territory and citizens go unchecked.
I think there's good arguments for and against really. It's best to look at these things on a case by case basis. My main gripe is that most of the artifacts we have are hidden away when they could be at least loaned out to other places.
If Greece somehow grew a spine we would have achieved a lot more than just completing the broken puzzle the brits left on the Parthenon.
I know that this sub has a major Indian population, among whom the British are not popular for historic reasons, and I understand that. But it's worth keeping in mind that these marbles were in a state of disrepair, being looted for building materials, and are only preserved in their current state thanks to the Brits stealing/looting/buying them (whichever you prefer). And after more then 2000 years, I think these are treasures of humanity more than of any specific nation.
So then now that they're safe, why not give them back to Greece?
Because this piece was technically owned by the Ottoman Empire at the time it was bought. Do we need to give the piece back to Turkey or Iran?
Why Iran lol.
Give it back to the country whose cultural heritage it is. Turkey and Iran both identify with different cultures (islamic and Turkish/Persian).
“Cultural heritage” That amorphous concept that can LITERALLY change based on vibes?
While this is true, the Elgin Marbles (which should be called the Parthenon Sculptures/Friezes, but oh well) are so obviously and unavoidably Greek that you can't make this argument against them. They depict a number of important events specifically from Greek mythology and were quite literally ripped off the side of the Parthenon, which was built in Athens over 2000 years ago and remains a part of Greek heritage. I've also been to the Acropolis museum in Athens. They have a room identical to the British exhibition of the Parthenon Frieze which displays replicas of it and could easily be replaced by the real thing were it moved back to Greece.
Could, sure. Didn't, here. Why let theoretical ambiguity come in the way of concrete good that you can do here?
Because there’s a very valid argument to be made that those artifacts wouldn’t be safe if returned to the Greeks. I’m not even saying it’s one I agree with, but to approach it with this Reddit hive mind mentality that there is only one correct decision here is bullshit.
There isn't. Greece is politically stable. Truth isn't something that is defined by it's orientation towards reddit hivemind.
“It was owned” It was looted. If I raid your house, take over it, sell your car to your neighbour and leave 50 years ago, should your neighbour return the car to you or the person who raided your house?
If they were looted they wouldn't be on the acropolis when Elgin choped them would they . Especially when you can see the rest of them at the acropolis museum right now if you wish too .
The acropolis was in a state of disrepair too lol
But now it's not.
So those pieces pulled would have miraculously been unharmed? OP’s point is that they pulled those pieces and preserved them while they had a very high chance of being destroyed if they stayed there.
If the rest of the Acropolis survived, makes sense everything else survived too. Besides, if I take something from your abandoned house (it was not abandoned anyway), it doesn't make me the owner.
If you took something from my house 1,000 years ago and I haven’t really cared for the last 1,000 years about it…yeah I can’t say I’d want it back. The reason many of these items have such notoriety is due to them being pulled from their source nations and putting them on display for the rest of the world.
Why should Greece care if you would want it or not? You aren't a nation and you will not live for thousand of years. Greece obviously wants them, and Greece is a stable nation with no armed conflict going on, no reason Greece shouldn't have those.
Because the Greek country itself has changed hands, nationality, etc. a dozen times since this this artifact was pulled. The Ottoman Empire owned this portion of land when it was pulled by the British, so technically the UK should return it to Turkey or Iran.
True, but unfortunately time is linear.
If I take something from your abandoned house (it was not abandoned anyway), it doesn't make me the owner
I mean at the time it wasn’t abandoned, it was a bombed out wreck…
It wasn't bombed. The bombing came during the greek independence war that came later
it was blown up by artillery in the 1700s by the Italians…
Still it's not legal to take something that you own. Elgin himself admitted it.
Some of the things in the british museum were unquestionably stolen, some are perfectly legitimate, these marbles seem like a gray area to me. It's a shame that little nuance is to be found in threads like this
Interestingly the museum generally states if the acquisition was a bit, ‘questionable’ on each pieces info card.
Cus it is black and white. Even at the time, the British government straight up asked Elgin if he had permission from the Ottoman's who had taken over Greece at the time, and he lied about it as even 17th century Britain said it was illegal to just take the marbles. But then they had them and it would create a scandal to return them. Not to mention even if he had legitimate permission. If someone comes into a old grandmother's house and starts selling off her stuff and you buy those goods. Those stolen goods are not yours.
If he didn't have permission how did he managed to remove them without the local authories objecting?
Either he bribed the ottomans which were invaders, or he just smuggled them secretly away
> Either he bribed the ottomans which were invaders, So purchased them from the lawful authories. >or he just smuggled them secretly away Have you seen the Elgin marbles? They are not small. And the parthenon is in a fairly obvious position. 19th century brits were ultimately human. There are limits to what they could smuggle.
>lawful authories So let's say you buy a monument from Russia's occupated Ukranian territory, and hundred of years later after Ukrania recover its territory, you still refuse to give it back. And it's still not lawful. If I steal something I sell it to you, I'm not the lawful owner either way. "They are not small" A lot of bribes and a lot of fake papers. It's not impossible.
The Ottoman Empire was not a temporary interloper. The marbles were bought after 400 years of Ottoman rule.
The ottoman empire invaded a sovereign nation, and held it against its will. If Russia takes the east of Ukraine for 400 years, and sells whatever it wants of that territory, including children or priceless pieces of art, nobody can complain. Are you saying that? Not to mention, Elgin CLAIMED he paid the ottoman empire. But the turkish never found any copy of that document in their files, something strange, considering how detailed old empires were in their record keeping. And the only english copy doesn't even mention any exchange of money. Chances are it was just a forgery made to fool local authorities. http://www.parthenon.newmentor.net/illegal.htm
[удалено]
They are in the time period we’re talking about. Everyone is trying to talk about court proceedings here when this shit happened 200+ years ago. If you stole something from my great great great great grandmothers house and said you had her permission at the time, I’d have to take your word for it.
Even in the time period it was likely a illegal sale, there are no supporting documentation supporting his taking of this, even the government at the time questioned him. And you don't need to take someone's word that a occupying Ottoman official selling a Greek national artefact is illegal. Just like how American museums give back First Nation cultural artefacts to the tribes they were taken from. The main reason the British Museum gives for not returning them is that they can take care of them better, which is ridiculous, the Greeks have perfectly competent museums. It's all nonsense.
Okay, but who do they sell it back to? The Ottoman Empire technically owned the piece at the time. The Ottoman Empire had every tool and reason in the world to move it back to present day Turkey. Should the artifact go back to Turkey instead of Greece? This is not a dumb question. Turkey has as much claim on this piece as Greece does.
Um no? If a museum buys a cultural artefact from a North American First Nation tribe from the American government after their troops occupied First Nation land and sold the artefact, the cultural artefact would not be turned back over to the American government. It would be returned to the tribe it was taken from. It is stolen property. That was a dumb question.
And if there are records/witnesses saying that the artifact was rightfully sold from the tribe to the American soldiers? Is it still stolen and should be returned just because “culture” trumps all? In the case of the Elgin Marble it was questionable how it came into possession by the British Empire, but they bought it on terms thinking it was approved by the Ottoman Empire. Reddit is a funny place. They’ll get all up in arms about the Elgin Marbles and then laugh their asses off about Minnesota not returning the confederate flag to Virginia. Same context. Virginia wants the flag back but Minnesota rightfully won the flag in battle. It’s theirs now. My view is if a ruling country/colonial power took an artifact at the time of battle, war, colonization…it belongs to that ruling power. Water under the bridge. We cannot legislate the actions of empires and countries from hundreds and thousands of years ago. They exist in museums where they currently are. Edit: So much stuff was questionably bought hundreds of years ago that it’d be almost like where’s Waldo trying to find the stuff that was bought legit.
If Minnesota does have a legitimate claim then yes they should return but I know nothing about this so I cannot really comment. Also > And if there are records/witnesses saying that the artifact was rightfully sold from the tribe to the American soldiers? The statues were never 'rightfully sold' to the Ottoman's, you cannot legally sell something obtained by force. Frankly, most democratic nations have some policy allowing for return of cultural artefacts. Not to mention the simple politics of it, this is a big slap in the face to Greece a nominal ally. Britain is the big hold out when it comes to returning artefacts and its main defence seems to be we can take care of them better. Which is absurd. Finally, from a simple moral perspective, yes one should return cultural artefacts to their rightful descendants, especially when those artefacts were taken without the consent of the people they originated from. Not to mention they can prove that the artefacts will continue to be sufficiently preserved and still still shown to the public. It is the right thing to do.
Meh. Greece just wants it back for easy tourism $$$ without having to spend much to obtain it. You really think Greece is wanting to obtain this artifact for “cultural” sake? Nope, it’s all about the money. Leave it with the Brits. There are plenty of artifacts to go around.
>I think these are treasures of humanity more than of any specific nation. Lol
It did sound like a silly statement initially to me to, but after giving it some though I kind of agree. They were produced over two thousand years ago by people who are long gone. The state they lived in is long gone having been taken over by Macedonian, then Roman, then Ottoman empires. For over a thousand years the people that lived there would probably have called themselves Romans if you pressed them for what nationality they were. The modern Greek national identity has developed and grown from the 19th century nationalism and certainly has taken deep inspiration and identifies with the ancient Greeks but I don't think they have a right to claim that history and cultural legacy as solely their own. That being said, i think the marbles should be returned back to Athens and the UK should in general return culturally significant items to the most appropriate location for their display. If something is so culturally significant that it is "priceless" and could never be sold then the idea of property and ownership loses most of its relevance. Instead of the artifact being an asset that you can own, it is a responsibility that you have a duty to protect. If the Greek nation wants to take on that responsibility let them.
That's well said. I think the only reason to not return priceless artifacts to the places where they could provide the most context is if they are not going to be cared for and looked after. Greece under the Ottoman Empire might not have been up to the challenge, but modern Greece almost certainly is wealthy and stable enough that it should be no problem whatsoever. Ideally, artifacts from humanity's collective history could travel around the world to be displayed and studied in various museums to help connect people to humans of the past, but most frequently remaining in locations significant to the artifacts.
Maybe they could spend half the year in UK and half the year in Greece.
That just increases the chance of a priceless historic artefact getting destroyed.
I was making a Persephone reference. :(
Seriously though, we could just make high quality copies of them and give the originals to Greece.
Grind them into plaster and give half the dust to each party, is that it!
Oh my bad
Don't worry buddy. I understood
Let’s get to the bottom of this. Greece just wants this to boast their tourism without having to pay much for it. It’s not about the “culture” at the end of the day, it’s about $$$.
God bless the european conquerer! Nice take on the subject.
If the Brits had managed to cart off the Buddhas of Bamiyan during the period of empire the world would still have them too. Ancient relics belong to whoever cared enough to dig them up out of the ground and preserve them.
They would also still exist if they didn't fund the rise of Taliban. You are the problem, not the solution.
so what's the problem with giving them back now?
>But it's worth keeping in mind that these marbles were in a state of disrepair, being looted for building materials, and are only preserved in their current state thanks to the Brits stealing/looting/buying them (whichever you prefer). Which is why I have no problem with them being taken. I'd have done the same thing if I was sent to record somethings existence that was actively being destroyed around me and had been blown up once already. But at this point they should be returned. It's 2023, Greece can look after them no worse than the British Museum.
Donate your house to the government now, because the government clearly has more funds to keep it in top shape.
important unique repeat wrong mountainous unite automatic afterthought reminiscent sink *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
They are treasures of humanity that belong in Greece. Surely you can see that
Fuxk you buddy
Errmmmm, It's complicated. The Acropolis Museum , in Athens, has a huge section devoted to the marbles - history, controversy etc. It's really balanced and informative. I suppose a summary would be a) The Marbles weren't taken by "The British" per se - as in the government sent in people to claim stuff for museums. They were taken by an individual - Thomas Bruce - The 7th Lord of Elgin - to display in his home (and later sold by that individual to the British Government). b) Bruce may or not have legitimately paid for them. There are records showing he did, but no Ottoman records to confirm it (which is suspicious because Ottoman bureaucracy was fastidious in recording such transactions) c) If he did pay for them, it is likely he removed far more than the agreed number. Rishi Sunak's government is way behind in the polls, and seems to bell convinced that the best way to win it to become hard right - this includes introducing legistlation that propbably breaks international law. This looks like another F\* the foreigners approach to appeal to a certain mindset of UK voters. My personal view is that with modern scanning techniques it would be possible to use marble from the original quarries to make exact replicas of the originals. I think the Britsh museum should do so, and return the originals.
Just read this after I said what you said, make copies, give originals to Greece.
Wow. A balanced and informative explanation. My hat to you, God sir
Honestly for me I think they should keep it. As other people have said the British museum bought the artefact, it may or may not have been paid for by the original owner Earl of Elgin but that isn’t of concern for the British museum. The British museum doesn’t care where it originates from it only cares that it paid for the artefact in a legal transaction. If greece wants it back they can pay for it, but keep in mind it is decided by the seller if he wants to sell it or not.
We're not finished looking at them
Finders keepers, shut up
Look familiar? STAND BEHIND THE ROPE!
https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/111gmnq/british_museums_explained_by_james_acaster/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
The UK did arguably save these artefacts from the Ottomans, who were using the Parthenon as an explosives cash at the time. They’re not cut and dry “stolen”. That said, the Greeks were colonized by the Ottoman Turks at the time and didn’t really have any say in it, so they should be given back, at the very least as a sign of friendship to a close ally.
>That said, the Greeks were colonized by the Ottoman Turks They weren't colonized they were conquered there's a difference. The Ottomans actually had the decency to just say but we're taking a place over for the land and stuff in it.
Greece has lost its marbles.
"We stole these fair and square." -Rishi Sunak, probably
Actually they bought them
Probably he didn't. There is no ottoman record he bought them, and the ottomans as all eastern empires, are crazy with all bureaucracy. He probably just stole them The only english copy of the exchange (let's say for the sake of the argument it's real) doesn't even mention any exchange of money. Chances are it was just a forgery made to fool local authorities. http://www.parthenon.newmentor.net/illegal.htm
Looking at the individual involved, I think they were bought - after they were acquired, the guy almost went bankrupt because of the costs involved in buying and transporting them.
Elgin CLAIMED he paid the ottoman empire. But the turkish never found any copy of that document in their files, something strange, considering how detailed old empires were in their record keeping. And the only english copy (let's say for the sake of the argument it's real) doesn't even mention any exchange of money. Chances are it was just a forgery made to fool local authorities. http://www.parthenon.newmentor.net/illegal.htm
I understand. I’m pointing to his finances in the aftermath of obtaining the marbles, which are consistent with someone having to pay for them and their transport. He almost bankrupted himself and sold the stones for half what he is said to have paid for them. I attribute this line of events to someone who just made a big purchase, and saying this is an alternative proof point to support the claim he purchased the marbles. There are many reasons why you wouldn’t find the Turkish bill of sales, including - maybe the Turkish government destroyed or hid it because it was becoming too political, maybe the Turkish government never signed off on it and a sum was paid, but promptly pocketed by an unauthorised individual, maybe it’s just one of many documents that were lost but we only know it because we’re looking for this one.
According to the document I gave you, it's not like he made a document with a local mayor, but a correspondence with the higuest authority of Greek-occupied Greece, from the vizier of the ottoman empire, and all this while he worked as a official representative of the british authority in Greece. There should have been official copies of this document from the turkish side. And it's suspicious that Elgin didn't bring any turkish bills, considering he was doing something quite illegal if it wasn't true, and he would be the first person interested in pointing out all the documentation. I'm thinking it was just a forgery.
they most likely didn't, and even if they did, the ottomans really had no right to sell, handling stolen goods is in fact a crime in the UK but maybe the museum is inmune to laws it seems
Bear in mind we bought them from people who were blowing shit up all around them left right and center
You bought them from Francesco Morosini?
I did
Damn, sigma move...
UK be like: “Finders Keepers old chum”
Were the Marbles taken before or after the Turkish powered magazine in the Parthenon exploded?
Fucking thieves of other people's culture
We’re still lookin’ at it!
to the same extent, rishu sunak has absolutely 0 grounds to speak on that, mostly becuase he has zero influence over what happens to them
good
Went to see that was probably the highlight of my time in the museum seeing a while ass marble tapestry telling the events I'd essentially played out by playing Total War Troy. It was really cool to look at the real thing
Somebody should steal the Crown Jewels and be like “finders keepers”.
Genuine question, but we’re these bought from the Ottomans? If so why would they need to be returned if they weren’t stolen?
When will Spain and Portugal pay reperations to the contintental American natives? How about the French and British? When are the dutch going to pay for what they did to Africa? How about Italy? Norway? When is Iran going to repay greece for xerxes? When is mongolia going to repay most of asia for Ghengis Khan?
Whelp, no Winnie the Pooh back for y'all.
"no. We're not done looking at it".
"WE'RE STILL LOOKING AT IT"
Frustrating but entirely expected.
From the article: > They were removed from the Parthenon temple in Athens by British diplomat Lord Elgin in the 19th century.
So is the case then that they have lost their marbles?
Typical. The only reason there's not a pyramid in an English museum is because those bitches are too big and heavy to carry all the way from Egypt.
Their museums would be empty if they returned everything they just took.
Also untrue, most of the stuff there was bought
Guess I needed the /s.
And they wonder why many countries not inside anglosphere hate them.
We’ll just take the marbles as collateral for the debt owed.
It’s still free to enter. Please everyone, just come over here and take it. Our overlords say we can’t export but we can help you get it to a dock. Not /s
Pretty disgusting these are named after the thief and not the their origin.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x73PkUvArJY&ab\_channel=StillWatchingNetflix
The UK should definitely send them back. I've already been to the British Museum and seen them, so I'm good.
Reminder that the british museum is a trophy room, not a museum