Was there really a "Treaty for the Protection of Rare Antiquities?"

[ Reply ] [ The Indyfan Forum ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by ROB T. from 162.10.138.28 on July 20, 1999 at 03:23:14:

We've touched on this subject a little in the past but I wanted to ask if there was really a treaty in the thirties and if there was has anyone from this forum ever read it. Does Indy really adhere to the treaty?
Indy's methods seem questionable and his theory for what constitutes ownership seems dicey. He appears to believe that a piece of antiquity belongs to whomever is smart enough to take it and strong enough to hold it.
For example, the fertility idol at the beginning of "Raiders." It clearly belongs to the Hovitos and yet Brody claims that stealing it is not against the rules.
Even with the Ark it could be argued that the Nazis have more right to it than Indy. They have, it seems, implied permission from the Egyptian government to dig for it. I base that assumption only on the fact that a dig of that size could not have escaped notice.
So Indy, in effect, comes onto private property and steals it and even kills some people in the process. In a court of law I don't think he could use the excuse that he's the good guy and they're the bad guys.
Of course, for that one he has the permission of the American Army.
But what about the Cross of Coronado? The men at the beginning who dug up the cross are no different than Indy really. Someone has paid them to retrieve it just like someone later pays Indy to get the ashes of that guy at the beginning of "Temple of Doom." So does Indy really have a right to go back and steal the Cross later?
I seriously doubt that Indy's actions would be sanctioned by the Treaty for the Protection of Rare Antiquities and I think he would be unwelcome in the circle of serious archeologists.

Comments???


Follow Ups:



Post a Followup:

Name:    
E-Mail:  
Subject: 
Comments:

Optional:

Link URL:   
Link Title: 
Image URL:  


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Indyfan Forum ] [ FAQ ]