Repatriation Controversy

The Rosetta Stone (Williams, 2009)

       This week in our class we've discussed repatriation of remains and burial artifacts from museums and universities to descendant and culturally affiliated communities, as well as the controversy surrounding it. Should the remains stay in the hands of scientists in the hopes of future study and in museums where they can be used to educate and awe the public? The biggest concern for artifacts and remains, for me, is how they will be treated once returned. If the remains are reburied, will they be venerated and respected or merely forgotten? If put on display will there be protection and preservation of the remains and burial goods? This brings to mind the past attempt of the repatriation of the Rosetta stone by the Egyptian government in 2009 from the British Museum. The Rosetta Stone found its way into the British Museum through pillaging and warfare first of Egypt, by Napoleon, and later France, by the British. The ill gotten good is a well prized object in the British Museum's collection and they were unwilling to return it to Egypt, at the request of Zahi Hawass, Secretary General of Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities and Deputy Minister of Culture, who wanted the stone returned to Egypt, as it represented Egyptian identity (Parchin, 2009). When I first heard about it in 2010, I was uneasy. While I understood why the Egyptians would want the stone back, with its illustrious history and national symbolism, I felt that the Egyptian government wasn't stable enough and their museums may not be able to adequately take care of and protect it, as my art history professor, at the time, had mentioned terrible conditions at the Museums of Cairo. The following year came round and thus the Arab spring began, toppling the Egyptian government and the raiding of museums commenced. I admit, I am glad that the Rosetta Stone, which could have been perceived as object of Egyptian unity under Mubarak, was not in Egypt to be symbolically destroyed by the revolutionaries. Therefore, when repatriation to other countries are considered, their political status should be taken into account, for the safety and protection of the remains. Repatriation should be considered if there is a strong sense of cultural and social unity among the requesting groups, but if there is not, the artifacts may not hold the same meaning and conflict could possibly arise. Though the importance of particular remains to collective global heritage, such as the iconic Rosetta Stone, further complicates repatriation.

Parchin, S. 2009. Egypt to ask British Museum to return Rossetta Stone. [online] Available from: <http://artmuseumjournal.com/egypt_to_ask_for_rosetta_stone.aspx> [Accessed 30 March, 2012].

Williams, S. 2009. Is repatriation good for archaeology? Zahi Hawass' quest for Egypt's antiquities. [online] Available from: <http://heritage-key.com/blogs/sean-williams/repatriation-good-archaeology-zahi-hawass-quest-egypts-antiquities> [Accessed 30 March, 2012].