UM-Bot
Jul 30 2003, 08:22 AM
The British Museum has refused to loan the 2,200-year-old Rosetta Stone to Cairo. It was originally found in Egypt and unlocked the mystery of hieroglyphics. But British curators say they can't let a piece central to their collection go. British Museum officials said: "The trustees do not consent to the loan of what might be called "iconic" objects. "To loan such pieces would result in our disappointing the five million or so visitors who come to the museum every year. "The Rosetta Stone, which has been in the collection of the British Museum since 1802, is central to the museum's collection." Zahi Hawass, director of Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities, says he only wants the stone for three to six months for the opening of a new wing at Cairo's Egyptian Museum.
In contrast to the British Museum's policy, Hawass said items that might be considered central to the Egyptian Museum collection are part of a 50-piece show of Tutankhamen relics being lent to the British Museum.
View:
Full Article | Source:
Ananova
Starlyte
Jul 30 2003, 02:16 PM
I must say I'm glad it will be staying safe and sound in the British museum. I imagine more people get to see it there than they would in Egypt.
Sukato-San
Jul 30 2003, 02:30 PM
Starlyte: I agree with you 100%. The Stone needs to stay put, it is far too important to risk moving it.
snuffypuffer
Jul 30 2003, 11:46 PM
I don't like the idea of lending these things back and forth, I mean, can you imagine the insurance rates? And what if something happens? Would you like to be the guy who broke the Rosetta Stone? I agree with both of you, it should stay put.
bjmf
Aug 4 2003, 02:06 PM
The B. Museum is saying: "the roseta stone is one of our pet cash cow, so we keep it"
Some people assume british people are more capable than egytians to take care of such artifacts. Are they english speaking ? are they egyptians ? what do they know.
Most egyptians don't know english anyway, unlikely they'll read this news.
It's not giving, it's lending the stone. Didn't the british museum had countless items "lended" from other countries ? ... Which one needs more tourist attraction to help their economy, Egypt or britain ? Egypt has put so much effort in this, and people still think it's unsafe. That's how the trust in each civilisations grows I guess.
From what I remember visiting the B. Museum (takes a few days), most non-europeans items were stolen during Wars and colonial dictatorships in Asia during the Victorian era. Take that out, and the museum is downsized 1/3rd its current size.
Basically The B.M. is a leftover War loot.
So a one-time lending "no" anwser, says something about what people actually think of other civilizations. The mafia also says its "customers" they are "protecting" them better. Sounds like a story at least as old as the rosetta stone itself.
Thanks for supporting B.Museum decision.
Aslan
Aug 4 2003, 07:34 PM
| QUOTE |
| Basically The B.M. is a leftover War loot. |
Sadly, this is broadly true. But then again, there are very few major museums in the western world without some murky aquisitions in their galleries.
| QUOTE |
| Which one needs more tourist attraction to help their economy, Egypt or britain ? |
Again, while broadly true, I doubt the aquisition of the Rosetta stone will make any significant impact on any of the money-spinning sectors of the Egyptian tourist industry. There are plenty of amazing things to see in Egypt, but how many people are going to plan a holiday there purely on the basis of the Rosetta Stone. To be brutal, it's just a stone with writing on it. Look at Abu Simbel, or the pyramids, or the Valley of the Kings.
| QUOTE |
| So a one-time lending "no" anwser, says something about what people actually think of other civilizations. |
This I completely disagree with. The issue of 'ownership' of the Rosetta stone and imagined slights on a whole civilisation just bear no relationship to each other. Any other inference is both bitter and silly.
While the British Museum certainly does not deserve to have the Rosetta Stone, the best arguments for it's return seem largely to be based on issues of nationalism, while the best arguments for it's remaining seem largely to be based on what's best for the stone. It would certainly be naive to suppose that the British Museum's reasons were purely altruistic - the British museum plainly states as such - but there are so few places where you can go and experience such a diverse, and yet coherent selection of the beauties of antiquity. If the stone had been stolen twenty years ago, I could sympathise much more with the Egyptian point of view, but two hundred and one years ago?