Share the artefacts

A lot of debates about objects of cultural heritage hinge on the perception of permanent and eternal nation-states with defined territories and identities, such as the debate raging about Britain returning the Rosetta Stone to Egypt (“Hard as stone”, September 3rd). But what we think of today as “Greek” or “Egyptian” or even “British” are the contingent outcomes of centuries of interactions. Is the Hagia Sophia in Istanbul representative of the legacy of the Greek people, the eastern Romans or Byzantines, Greece, Christianity, Constantinople, the Turkish people, the Ottoman Empire, Turkey, Istanbul, or Islam? How fair would it be to strip any one of those layers entirely away?

I think it would be better to ask what gives value to a work of art. There are probably several answers; aesthetic appeal, historical reflections and national or cultural identity among them. How can those valuations be best appreciated and conveyed? The large point of museums is to do exactly that instead of narrowing the assessment of a piece into one dimension.

Perhaps museums in London, Athens, Cairo and elsewhere could work together and display originals and copies of contentious pieces on a timetable throughout the year. That way, works could be seen and understood through their various layers by the many communities who cherish them. Moreover, such an arrangement would underscore the shared heritage of a given object and the importance of global collaboration in celebrating human civilisation.

NAREG SEFERIAN

ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA