The idea of "repatriation" of antiquities is as foolish is the idea of their "liberation" by conquering armies in wartime.
By following the same line of thought, one might argue the Catholic
Church asking for pardon of atrocities perpetrated by the Inquisition is just as much nonsense. In fact, judges in the Inquisition tribunals
had a perfectly sound and coherent ethical system and they usually
applied it with honesty and integrity (e.g.
cf. work by Gustav Henningsen on Inquisitor Alonso de Salazar Frias). However, ethics change over time (luckily I would say, or we here in
Rome would
still be watching gladiator fights
) This can bring to a reassessment of facts that happened in the past, that were acceptable at the time they happened, but are no more if current standards are
applied. Ancient
Roman warfare was rather normal for the time, it would be an endless strip of crimes by modern standards (by the way, many ancient
Greeks would agree). Slavery was perfectly acceptable well into the XIX century, should we stop thinking of it as a crime? One can
still judge facts of the past with modern standards, once it is clear that different ethics
applied at the time those facts took place, and can sometimes
act on the consequences of those facts. Some claims to repatriation fall within this line of reasoning in my opinion, although, I repeat, individual case must be taken into account (I accept some cases are sheer propaganda).
Regards, P.
