为什么大英博物馆不归还殖民时期被盗的文物?（二）

Why doesn’t the British Museum return the artifacts stolen during colonisation?

2024-02-04 ARRRRRIES 4234 10 5 收藏纠错&举报

译文简介

与大多数国家的大多数博物馆不这样做的原因相同:这绝对是一场产权纠缠不清的后勤噩梦。

正文翻译

Colin Riegels
Same reason that most museums in most countries don’t: it is an absolute logistical nightmare of tangled property rights.

与大多数国家的大多数博物馆不这样做的原因相同:这绝对是一场产权纠缠不清的后勤噩梦。

In some cases museums hold classic “looted artefacts”, but those black and white case are relatively rare. In many more cases they have artefacts which they purchased or otherwise acquired in good faith which might have doubtful provenance. In other cases the provenance is actually fine, but changes of governments in foreign countries have meant changes in the demands that those countries make about things done by previous governments (Iran’s theocracy is famous for demanding the return of artefacts which the Shah previously licensed for export prior to the revolution).

在某些情况下，博物馆持有的是被掠夺的经典艺术品，但这类明显的案例相对较少。在更多的情况下，博物馆购买或以善意方式获得的文物可能具有可疑的来源。此外，有些文物的来源其实是合法的，但是外国政府的更迭导致了对前任政府行为的不同要求（伊朗的神权政体因要求归还在伊朗伊斯兰革命之前由国王许可出口的文物而闻名）。

The other great complication is that museums often do not even own the artefacts that they exhibit - they belong to third parties who have let the museum have them on long term loan for public exhibition. And the dividing line between ‘cultural artefacts’ and ‘valuable things we’d like’ gets blurry quickly. In other cases more than one country may claim an artefact - or two competing groups within the same country may claim it. There are also issues with some countries not having a credible recognised authority who can receive and store returned artefacts. In short: it’s all a bit of a nightmare.

另一个巨大的复杂因素是，博物馆通常甚至并不拥有其展览的文物，它们属于第三方，博物馆以长期借款的方式向公众展示。而且，"文化艺术品"和"我们希望拥有的有价值的东西"之间的界限很容易变得模糊。在其他情况下，可能有多个国家声称拥有某个文物，或者同一个国家内的两个竞争群体可能声称拥有它。还存在一些问题，例如某些国家没有一个可靠的、得到公认的机构可以接收和储存归还的文物。简而言之，这一切都非常复杂，是一个困扰人的问题。

In 1970 an international convention was signed relating to the restoration of historical and cultural artefacts from other countries. But since then, despite lots of people signing it, virtually nothing has happened. Because it is extremely complex and the boundaries are pretty grey. So people prefer to simply pretend the issue does not exist rather than face the enormous challenges associated with trying to do the right thing.

在1970年签署了一项有关归还其他国家的历史和文化艺术品的国际公约。但自那时以来，尽管很多人签署了这个公约，几乎没有任何实际行动。因为这个问题非常复杂，边界非常模糊。因此，人们更倾向于假装这个问题不存在，而不是面对与尝试正确做事相关的巨大挑战。

It isn’t just the British Museum - or Britain - that struggles with this. Everybody does. Personally I’d like to see more effort made to restore foreign artefacts to their countries of origin - it is not like most museums don’t have warehouses of other stuff they could exhibit - the public doesn’t really care that much. But museums tend to be very short on cash, and very short on qualified staff, and so - perhaps understandably - this is never treated as a top priority. Especially given the complexity and expense of shipping cultural pieces back to someone who is authorised to receive them in the country of origin.

这并不仅仅是大英博物馆或英国本土的问题，所有人都面临相同的困境。就我个人而言，我希望看到更多努力将外国文物归还给其来源国家，毕竟大多数博物馆都有可以展示的其他藏品，公众对此并不太关心。但博物馆往往资金短缺，专业人员也很少，因此可以理解为什么这从未被视为当务之急。特别是考虑到将文化艺术品运回原产国并交给有权接收的机构的复杂性和费用。

It is another one of those things that everyone says shrilly: “something should be done!” But actually getting off your arse and doing it is an awful lot harder than moaning about it on social media.

这是一个人人都在高声呼喊“应该采取行动”的问题。但实际上，真正起身行动比在社交媒体上抱怨要困难得多。

评论翻译

Julia Underwood
In the case of the Elgin Marbles housed in the British Museum, I have recently learned that Lord Elgin did not steal the marbles of the Parthenon from the Greeks, he bought them. The Greeks had no interest in their heritage at the time and were smashing them up to construct other buildings. If you go to see the marbles you will see how badly damaged many of the pieces are - this was done by the Greeks.

关于收藏在大英博物馆的埃尔金大理石雕像案，我最近了解到埃尔金勋爵并没有从希腊人那里偷走帕特农神庙的大理石雕像，而是购买了它们。当时的希腊人对自己的遗产并不感兴趣，他们正在将这些雕塑破坏以建造其他建筑。如果你去看这些大理石雕像，你会看到许多零碎的部分是多么严重地受到了损坏——这是希腊人干的。

Kevin Oliver
Should be British Museum return all its stolen artifacts?
Of course. But two criteria would have to be met first.

大英博物馆是否应该归还其所有被盗艺术品？当然。但首先必须满足两个标准。

· Identify those artifacts which were actually stolen according to the laws and customs followed during the era the artificats were acquired.
· Identify the rightful modern owners of the artifacts. For instance the Greeks claim, frequently and vociferously, the Elgin Marbles. However at the time Lord Elgin's agents purchased and removed the marbles they belonged to the Ottoman Empire, through right of conquest. So if it is true, as has been claimed, that the sale was made by a corrupt official then the modern owners would be the Turkish Government, as successors to the Ottomans.

确定那些艺术品是否根据当时的法律和习俗实际上是被盗的。 · 确定这些艺术品的合法现代所有者。例如，希腊经常而激烈地声称埃尔金大理石雕像属于他们。然而，在埃尔金勋爵的代理购买并移走大理石雕像时，依据征服权它们属于奥斯曼帝国。因此，如果事实如所声称的那样，即销售是由一个腐败官员进行的，那么现代所有者将是土耳其政府，作为奥斯曼帝国的继承者。

Jim Brown
The example most often cited is the Elgin Marbles, which used to adorn the frieze of the Parthenon. These treasures from antiquity, and the Parthenon itself, were held in such reverence that it was being used as an ammunition dump by the Ottomans until it was blown up on 26 September 1687 by a Venetian bombardment. Had Lord Elgin not rescued the sculptures and removed them to the British Museum where they are displayed indoors to this day, they might still lie among the rubble that surrounds the partially restored Parthenon.

最常被引用的例子是埃尔金大理石，用来装饰帕特农神庙的楣板。这些来自古代的宝藏，以及帕特农神庙本身，受到了如此的崇敬，以至于它被奥斯曼人用作弹药库，直到1687年9月26日被威尼斯人的轰炸炸毁。如果不是埃尔金勋爵拯救了这些雕塑，并将它们转移到大英博物馆，并在那里展出到今天，它们可能仍然躺在部分修复的帕特农神庙周围的瓦砾中。

The exquisite reliefs from Nineveh on display in the British Museum were rescued from the desert, where they had lain since the 13th century. Were it not for the preservation conducted by the British, they might still be subject to being ground into dust by the endless succession of wars in the Middle East.

大英博物馆展示的来自尼尼微的精美浮雕是从沙漠中拯救出来的，它们自13世纪以来一直沉睡其中。如果不是英国人进行的保护工作，它们可能仍然面临被中东无休止的战争彻底摧毁的命运。

The Rosetta Stone from the 2nd century BC was the key to decipherment of Egyptian hieroglyphics. The stone was removed from its original location in Memphis (probably by the Mameluks) and was eventually used as construction material (“Hey Achmed, what’s the funny writing all over this rock?” “For the XxiIIrd time, you moron, we don’t get paid enough to critique the building material, so just get a move on with that cart.”)

公元前2世纪的罗塞塔石碑是解读埃及象形文字的关键。这块石头从其原始位置孟菲斯被移走（可能是由马穆鲁克人），最终被用作建筑材料（“嘿，阿赫迈德，这块石头上有怪异的文字是什么？”“你这个白痴，我们拿不到足够的薪水来评论建筑材料，所以尽快把车开走。”）。

Had the French, and then the British not realized the significance of the stone, it would still be buried under the foundations of some desert building. (I must confess some personal prejudice in this last example. Before it became fashionable to make political statements by vandalizing cultural treasures, Rosetta Stone was set in a gallery of the British Museum on a simple stone plinth. When my wife and I first visited the Museum in 1971 or so, we could just walk up and run our hands over it. The thrill of touching a stone which was perhaps touch by Ptolemy V during its construction, or by Champollion during his decipherment, is one which will not be available to the public again, and I am grateful to the British people for preserving it.

如果法国人和英国人没有意识到这块石头的重要性，它现在可能还埋在沙漠建筑的地基下面。(在最后一个例子中，我必须承认有些个人偏见。在通过破坏文化宝藏来发表政治声明成为一种时尚之前，罗塞塔石碑被放置在大英博物馆的一个画廊里的一个简单的石基上。当我和妻子大约在1971年第一次参观博物馆时，我们可以走过去用手抚摸它。触摸一块可能是托勒密五世在建造时触碰过的石头，或者是商博良在破译时触碰过的石头，这种兴奋感将不会再向公众开放，我很感激英国人民保护了它。

If you can propose a better custodian of artifacts like these, Mr. Ramzy, why not give examples of how your people have protected cultural treasures like these as justification why they should be returned.

如果您能提出一个更好的文物保管者，拉姆齐先生，为什么不举例说明您的人民如何保护像这样的文化宝藏，以证明它们应该被归还呢？）

Michael Addley
Which artefacts and to where?
The elgin marbles for example have no connection with the current Greek state beyond geography. Geography does not give someone the right to claim title. If I move into a house, I do not necessarily own everything in it or what may have been stolen from it.

哪些文物以及归属权问题？例如，埃尔金大理石雕塑与现今的希腊国家除了地理位置之外没有任何联系。地理位置并不能使人拥有所有权。如果我搬进一间房子，我不一定拥有其中的一切或者可能被盗的物品。

The Elgins were bought from the Ottomans in full respect of the laws of the Ottoman state. The Ottomans had governed Greece for 400 years previous. More than the current age of the polity of Britain. Who owns these marbles? Us who bought them in full compliance of the law or the Greek state who just happen to now control the mainland they came from? Will the price paid be refunded in full accounting for inflation plus the monies spent on its preservation?

埃尔金家族全面遵守奥斯曼帝国法律，从奥斯曼帝国购买了这些大理石雕塑。奥斯曼帝国曾统治希腊长达400年之久，远超过英国现今政权的历史。谁拥有这些雕塑？是我们依法购买并持有它们，还是刚好控制现在这片土地的希腊国家？购买时支付的价格是否会按通货膨胀调整全额退还，还包括对其保存所花费的资金？

Alot of goods from the African continent have no connections to the current polities controlling the land. The borders have been ripped up and redrawn for years and only have resembled what we see now from the 70s.

许多来自非洲大陆的商品与当前控制这片土地的政权没有任何关联。边界多年来一直被撕毁和重新划定，直到70年代才开始变得像我们现在看到的样子。

The Mamluks do not exist anymore in North Africa so the goods we have from them cannot be returned (rosetta stone) as the current state of Egypt has nothing to do with them. The rosetta stone was nicked from them by the Ottomans then by us. The Ottomans (turks) have no claim to it. The Ancient Egyptians who made the thing don't exist anymore either.

马穆鲁克在北非已经不复存在，因此我们从他们那里得到的物品无法归还（罗塞塔石碑），因为埃及现今的政权与他们没有任何关系。罗塞塔石碑是被奥斯曼帝国（土耳其）从他们那里偷走的，然后又被我们拿走了。奥斯曼帝国（土耳其人）对此没有任何所有权主张。制作这件东西的古埃及人也已经不存在了。

We have no one to return the artefacts to. Geography cannot impart titles just because something existed there hundreds of years ago. They are lawfully as much ours as they are anyones. We have also spent money on the preservation of the goods and held them for centuries. That would satisfy any common law standard of ownership easily.

我们没有人可以将这些文物归还。仅仅因为数百年前某物存在于某地，并不意味着地理位置就能赋予所有权。按照普通法标准，它们在法律上就像任何人一样是我们的。我们还花费了大量资金用于保存这些物品，而且保存了几个世纪。这足以满足任何普通法上的所有权标准。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

James Kirk
And to add, there are many items, which were treated as not important/relevant, or curiosities when they first acquired by the British Museum or their donors. It was only with countries like the UK and France taking an interest in these items did their true value become apparent.
We also have to ask, how likely would these items have survived if it wasn’t for countries like France or the UK preserving them in museums?

此外，许多物品在被英国博物馆或他们的捐赠者第一次获得时被视为不重要/无关紧要或奇闻异事。只有像英国和法国这样的国家对这些物品产生了兴趣，它们的真正价值才变得显而易见。我们还必须问一下，如果不是像法国或英国这样的国家在博物馆中保存它们，这些物品能否幸存下来？

Now, I want to know when the UK can get a Magna Carta back from the Americans… How dare the Yanks steal such an important constitutional document - they have their own constitution to worry about… (/sarcasm)

现在，我想知道英国何时能从美国那里拿回《大宪章》...混蛋美国人竟然偷走了这么重要的宪法文件-他们自己都有自己的宪法要操心...(/sarcasm)

Burt Turderson
ms a bit weak of an argument to me, because it makes some major assumptions about the nature of things like colonialism. The Ottomans, for instance, didn’t ask for legal permission to take control of Greece, it did it through military conquest with no respect for the local opinion or laws on the matter. So therefore, it is very dubious to say that the Ottomans are in the right when they agree to sell off the artefacts that belonged to the people of Greece.

对我来说，这个论点有些薄弱，因为它对殖民主义等事物的本质做出了一些重要假设。例如，奥斯曼帝国并没有征得希腊人的法律许可就通过军事征服控制了希腊，对当地的意见或法律毫不尊重。因此，说奥斯曼帝国在同意出售属于希腊人的文物时是正确的是非常可疑的。

As a counter to your analogy, this would be like if a squatter forced their way into your living room and started selling all your possessions to me. He didn’t become the legal owner of them to make the sale, and I don’t become the legal owner just because I paid for them. I can insist it is a fair and legal transaction, but I’d be wrong; I would be in receipt of stolen goods that the squatter stole. Thus is the nature of imperialist rule; the Ottomans took control of Greece and started selling their stuff to us.

作为对你的类比的反驳，这就像一个扰民者强行闯入你的客厅并开始将你的所有物品卖给我。他没有成为这些物品的合法所有者来进行销售，而我也不会因为付款而成为合法所有者。我可以坚称这是一笔公平合法的交易，但我会错；我是拿到了扰民者偷来的赃物。这就是帝国主义统治的本质；奥斯曼帝国控制了希腊，并开始将他们的东西卖给我们。

Returning the Elgin Marbles to Greece, despite it not being the same continuous political entity that existed when the Marbles were first made, is not the problem you are making it out to be. If we don’t have any ancient Hellenist nations to give the Elgin marbles to, it’s an obvious solution to give it to the nation that sits in its place.

将埃尔金大理石雕塑归还给希腊，并不是你所认为的问题那样严重。即使希腊不再是最初制作大理石雕塑时存在的连续政治实体，将其归还给现在占据该地区的国家是一个显而易见的解决方案。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

Gaurav Upasani
But the Greeks haven't moved into Greece, it's a continuous inhabitation so the people of Greece are descendants of ancient Greeks even if there has been migration and settlement of other cultures. Also the culture of a region is heavily influenced by geography hence saying that geography has no claims to titles is wrong. Further your analogy of the house is incorrect. The person living in the house has no idea about the existence of stolen items so him claiming is wrong but here there is record of the people of Greece owning the artefacts.

但希腊人并没有搬进希腊，它是一个持续的居住地，所以即使有其他文化的移民和定居，希腊人民仍然是古希腊人的后代。此外，一个地区的文化受地理环境的影响很大，因此说地理不具备所有权是错误的。此外，你引用的房子的比喻也是不正确的。住在房子里的人对被盗物品的存在毫不知情，所以他的索赔是错误的，但在这里有记录证明希腊人拥有这些文物。

Dave Hoyles
I have read this argument and understand exactly what you are saying but what I would like you to expand upon is the issue with Australian indigenous remains that are in possession of the British Museum? The indigenous culture in Australia is one which places great significance on their ancestors and their remains what right do you think the British Museum has to keep their ancestors skulls and bones? Is it because the country of Australia didn't exist or is it because the British that colonised our country didn't recognise them as human beings the entire time they ruled the colonies there? Seriously I really would like someone to explain to me why the British Museum has such artifacts?

我已经阅读了这个争论，并完全理解你的意思，但我想让你进一步解释一下英国博物馆拥有的澳大利亚土著遗骸的问题。澳大利亚土著文化非常重视他们的祖先和遗骸，你认为英国博物馆保留他们祖先的头骨和骨骼有什么权利？是因为澳大利亚这个国家不存在，还是因为殖民澳大利亚的英国人在他们统治殖民地的整个时期内都没有承认他们为人类？说真的，我真的希望有人能解释一下为什么英国博物馆拥有这样的文物？

ROD OF IRON
This is the type of knowledge you gain when you attend European education system. A system whereby you’re thought to steal, cheat and kill while at the same time arming you with deceitful techniques to justify your actions.
what you said makes no sense at all… might do in Europe and other Caucasian Europeans might agree with you but out here in the real world it’s absolutely nonsense.

这就是当你参加欧洲教育体系时会学到的知识。一个让你学会偷盗、欺骗和杀戮的体系，同时还向你提供欺骗性的技巧来为你的行为辩护。你所说的完全没有意义……在欧洲也许可能有人同意你的观点，但在现实世界中，这是绝对的胡说八道。

firstly, before purchasing any goods it’s the buyers responsibility to properly vet the goods to ensure the seller acquired the goods legitimately. So, your rhetoric on why stolen goods can’t be return is nonsensical.

首先，在购买任何商品之前，买方有责任对商品进行适当的审查，以确保卖方合法获得商品。因此，你关于为什么不能归还被盗物品的论调是荒谬的。

secondly, every single artefacts from Asia, Africa, Europe and West Indies (Americas) were all stolen and by law that you claim to have studied should be returned because it’s illegal to handle stolen goods regardless of whether you paid for it or not.

其次，所有来自亚洲、非洲、欧洲和西印度群岛（美洲）的文物都是被盗的，根据你所声称学习过的法律，应该归还，因为处理赃物是违法的，无论你是否付款购买。

lastly, the descendants of the victims are actually well and alive but because of migrations, intermixing and other factors it’ll take quite a bit of work to identify these people but at the same time the geographical location that these artefacts were stolen from which you’re trying to dismiss is actually the starting point.

最后，受害者的后代实际上还活着，但因为移民、混血和其他因素，需要花费相当的精力来确定这些人，但同时这些文物被盗的地理位置，你试图否定的事实，实际上是起点。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

it’s ridiculous that in the 21st century you still think it’s okay to hold on to stolen property and give lame justification as to why it can’t be returned. Clearly shows there’s a huge problem in the Eurocentric social fabric and educational system. It now makes sense why African leaders that studied in Europe come back to Africa and behave exactly like colonists.

在21世纪，仍然认为持有被盗财产并给出无法归还的弱智辩解是可以接受的，这表明欧洲中心主义社会结构和教育体系存在巨大问题。现在明白了，为什么在欧洲学习的非洲领导人回到非洲后会像殖民者一样行事。

Pls, don’t take this as an attack but rather for you to question your views and ideologies which are product of your environment.

请不要把这看作是攻击，而是让你质疑你的观点和意识形态，这些都是你所处环境的产物。

原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处

大英博物馆 殖民时期 文物

很赞 ( 5 )