The United States Government has completed repatriating artifacts to war ravaged Iraq. Some of these artifacts had been in US Government custody for years so it's fair to ask, "why now?"
Is "repatriation" more important as a diplomatic measure than "protecting" an artifact for future generations? And, is there a concerted effort to conflate one concept with the other even where the facts suggest that repatriation will instead most likely endanger the object?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Henceforth, comments will only be posted from those who provide a full name, country of residence and basis for interest, i.e., collector, archaeologist, academic, etc. or their Blogger profile provides such information.