British Museum in battle with Iran over ancient 'charter of rights'

January 24, 2010

The discovery of fragments of ancient cuneiform tablets – hidden in a British Museum storeroom since 1881 – has sparked a diplomatic row between the UK and Iran. In dispute is a proposed loan of the Cyrus cylinder, one of the most important objects in the museum's collection, and regarded by some historians as the world's first human rights charter.

The Iranian government has threatened to "sever all cultural relations" with Britain unless the artefact is sent to Tehran immediately. Museum director Neil MacGregor has been accused by an Iranian vice-president of "wasting time" and "making excuses" not to make the loan of the 2,500-year-old clay object, as was agreed last year.

The museum says that two newly discovered clay fragments hold the key to an important new understanding of the cylinder and need to be studied in London for at least six months.

www.guardian.co.uk...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/b625dc480a56.jpg[/atsimg]

Here we go again, first it's France that doesn't want to return artifacts to their rightful owners and now it's Britian...

Lend it to Iran and it will never be seen again!

Without institutions like The British Museum or even The Smithsonian a lot of these artifacts would either be in private collections or destroyed because they do not fit with the ideology of the time.

reply to post by BritofTexas


You are absolutely right, curious how many archeology finds have been destroyed or at the very least hidden from us.

Originally posted by Aquarius1
reply to post by BritofTexas

 

You are absolutely right, curious how many archeology finds have been destroyed or at the very least hidden from us.

Is it curious that museums, galleries and collectors don't put every item of every collection on show? Not to anyone with a passing knowledge of history and the purpose of museums. Archaeologists don't make the effort to discover evidence from history and then destroy it. The idea's as absurd as it is ingrained on ATS.

The Cyrus cylinder is sought as part of the political abuses that Iran is heir too under Ahmadinejad. It's useful propaganda, rather than adding to Iran's rich cultural heritage. It's regional one-upmanship and international 'stirring the pot.'

reply to post by Kandinsky


Destroyed was the wrong word to use, I agree that they don't find artifacts to destroy them, nevertheless I do think much is hidden from the public.

Originally posted by Aquarius1
reply to post by Kandinsky

 

Destroyed was the wrong word to use, I agree that they don't find artifacts to destroy them, nevertheless I do think much is hidden from the public.

True. There's more in storage and basements than is ever on display. The curators have to consider themes, what's popular/ current and what will generate bodies through turnstiles.

Popularity and publicity within existing budgets whilst keeping an eye on the next financial year. Pretty dull, I've been in the 'basements' of Liverpool Museum and the Transatlantic Slavery/Maritime Museums. Pretty cool, but very dull too.

On the other hand I am sure there are many artifacts on shelves that never get to museums, I would love to rummage through the basements of these places, of course in many cases you don't know what you are looking at or where it came from.

Originally posted by Kandinsky

Archaeologists don't make the effort to discover evidence from history and then destroy it.

The vast majority don't of course. However there are always so called archaeologists with an agenda. Who knows what the Nazis destroyed because it did not fit with their Aryan race fairytale.

As the Cyrus cylinder is a pre-islam "bill of rights",I can't help but feel that if it were loaned to Iran it would accidentally be dropped down the stairs.

Originally posted by Aquarius1
On the other hand I am sure there are many artifacts on shelves that never get to museums, I would love to rummage through the basements of these places, of course in many cases you don't know what you are looking at or where it came from.

Plus the amount of artifacts that are in private collections. The origins of Archaeology lie in Gentlemen digging sites for interior decorating purposes and keeping up with the Jones'. Most of that stuff has never seen a museum.

reply to post by BritofTexas

As the Cyrus cylinder is a pre-islam "bill of rights",I can't help but feel that if it were loaned to Iran it would accidentally be dropped down the stairs.

Given the Iranian record of human rights...that seems a fair conclusion.

It's pre-Islam...true. Then again, it's evidence that one of the earliest great rulers of the Middle East was a son of Iran. Iran gives lip-service to the rights of its citizens and the Cyrus cylinder is a good propaganda tool to provide provenance.

Check out some of the history of previous Shahs of Iran citing Cyrus to affirm the higher pedigree of the Iranian Nation-State. The historical importance is traded in for political point-scoring in the region.

[edit on 9-3-2010 by Kandinsky]

I would suggest that there are some descendants or immigrants of Persian origin that could make a case that the current government of Iran is not a proper representative of such artififacts and that they belong to people of Persian descent.

Originally posted by BritofTexas
Lend it to Iran and it will never be seen again!

Without institutions like The British Museum or even The Smithsonian a lot of these artifacts would either be in private collections or destroyed because they do not fit with the ideology of the time.

Somewhat off topic but I have to ask this. What is the reason for the British Museum to refuse the return of the Parthenon Marbles to their rightful place? Better preservation? In a museum that's so old, compared to the Acropolis Museum that is not yet one year old? In a museum that admittedly ravaged the Marbles in an effort to "clean" them during the 30's (I think) using material one would use to clean a dirty oven? In a museum that has absolutely no right in holding them? (who did they ASK before they took them in? Lord Elgin? Who did he ask? The Turks that had absolutely no hand in creating them?).

If there are museums capable of exhibiting and preserving antiquities in their place of origin, such antiquities should be returned to their birthplaces. It is a cultural "crime" to keep monuments like the Parthenon devoid of its Marbles.

And if you still insist they should be kept there, then a tablet should state in what part of BRITAIN they were created, by which son (or daughter) of BRITAIN they were created. If this is not possible, then it should be stated that these were STOLEN to be exhibited where they are today.

[/end rant]

reply to post by Maegnas


Fair question Maegnas, I wondered the same myself, I personally thiink artifacts belong to the country of origin.

reply to post by Maegnas


I thought the Elgin Marbles might come up.

Lord Elgin bought them from the Ottoman Empire (who controlled the area) between 1801 and 1812. The British Government then bought them in 1816.

The legal issues of this are pretty irrelevant now as in those days there were not the controls that are thankfully in place today. This is why the likes of the British Museum and the Smithsonian are full of foreign artifacts.

The British Museum has done an very good job of protecting them in a sealed environmentally controlled hall. Until recently the Greeks had nowhere to keep them safe and who knows what condition they would be in now if they had been sent back?

But perhaps now they could go back, BUT they have take Prince Phillip back too.