大英博物館のインスタグラム(britishmuseum) - 6月10日 18時56分

This statue represents King Thutmose III with his hands in a pose of devotion. Ramesses II put his name on the belt and shoulders, and his son Merenpath added his name on the chest. Ancient Egyptian kings would often alter older statues, replacing a previous pharaoh’s name with their own.

The column in the foreground was made around 1390 BC for a temple dedicated to Horus, the falcon god of kingship.

Explore the art of ancient Egypt in the Egyptian Sculpture Gallery before it opens to the public in our special morning tours – find out more at britishmuseum.org

#BritishMuseum #AncientEgypt #Ramesses #Thutmose #Horus #sculpture #London #UK

[BIHAKUEN]UVシールド(UVShield)

mina7asteria @sdzocan26 Oh, I'm sure they can not! Some reminders: Tut Ankh Amun's beard. Yes, it CAN happen that a king's beard can come off (though it shouldn't happen the way it did). BUT instead of calling some experts to get it fixed properly, they used epoxy resin to glue it back on. Epoxy resin can cause even more damage to the piece of art. Secondly, though this happened in different Muslim countries, not focusing on Egypt right now: do you remember (I think it was in ) 2013, when some crazy Muslims destroyed so many wonderful pieces of art, of history, because they were "against Allah's law"? Some brave people tried to stop this, but for many people, it was fine. Third point I'd like to mention is that Egyptian museums have wonderful artefacts in their cellars; they simply don't have the space to put these interesting artefacts on display. Yet they want everything else return to Egypt, even though they have no space for it. And lastly: what a boring place would earth be if every county has only and exclusively their own treasures. No one would learn bout other cultures, everyone would only see treasures /paintings of their own history. Stupid and boring.

ahlmandreas @sven524 yes, the majority of artefacts leaving Egypt did so legally. From what I have seen in the comment sections in the last few posts a lot of people have no clue about the laws and systems of the time. Some even seem to think the UN conventions of 1970 and 1995 existed in 1823. We can of course be critical of how antiquities were handled many times in the past, but just because something is illegal today doesn’t mean it was in the past. One reason Egyptian artefacts are spread throughout the world is because the financing system set up for archeological excavations. Museums and private financiers paid for the excavations in Egypt. When it was done everything was taken to Cairo where they got to decide first what would stay in Egypt (50%) and the rest was shared among the funders. This was a win/win situation for everyone. Egypt did not have to pay anything for excavations and got to choose what they wanted to keep. Why do you think most of the greatest artefacts, mummies and so on still are in Cairo if it was just for Europeans to steal what they wanted? This system was used from 1882 and on.

sven524 @csmccloskey Have I at any point said they weren’t? My involvement in this started because a specific criticism of the BM (which is fine) grew to a general criticism of the UK verging on the xenophobic (which is not fine). I pointed out that the items themselves were the product of Egyptian Imperialism, which they were. I also pointed out that people were hypercritcal over sllegations of exploitation when their own countries are currently doing that to their own prople. Dullards have taken this to be a defence of the BM which it isn’t. So get your facts right before uou criticise me.

noiamsparticus @csmccloskey no justification, just an aversion to a so called history buff that dismissed facts because it doesn’t suit , the OP much like yourself makes a claim that is wrong, this isn’t a defence of colonial power, but an observation that you cannot pick one world power and dismiss others, because it doesn’t suit your soapbox. Are you going to insist the Romans & the Greeks give back all the artefacts stolen during their reign? How about Mongolia? Or is your history only limited?

sven524 @ahlmandreas I raised issue of how these works of art were created because it widens the debate and makes people think about issues they may not have considered. From what you say the items were acquired legitimately at the time? Some people will clearly dispute that, and you may get some flack. I do not know enough about it to have an opinion. But you raise an interesting point.

ahlmandreas @sven524 It doesn’t matter what Egypt did 4000 years ago. British Museum BOUGHT this statue from Henry Salt in 1823. Henry Salt was mandated by Pasha Muhammad Ali of Egypt and had acquired it LEGALLY. Egypt was at this time not part of a British empire whatsoever but was a province of the Ottoman empire.

>> 飲む日焼け止め！「UVシールド」を購入する