Historical documents

This story caught my eye

Copy of Magna Carta to be sold

Text:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Tue Sep 25, 8:31 PM ET

LONDON - A 13th-century copy of the Magna Carta, a milestone of English freedom, will be offered for sale in New York in December, Sotheby's auction house said Tuesday.



The vellum manuscript owned by the Perot Foundation is estimated to sell for $20 million to $30 million, Sotheby's said.

The document was on display at the National Archives in Washington for more than 20 years until last Thursday.

King John was forced by barons to agree to the charter in 1215. It guaranteed that freemen would not be imprisoned or deprived of property without due process, including a right to a speedy trial before a jury.

Versions of the Magna Carta were issued in 1216, 1217, 1225 and 1264 by John's son, King Henry III.

The copy offered by Sotheby's for sale on Dec. 10 is dated 1297, the year it was incorporated into the statute rolls of King Edward I.

Discovered among the Brudenell family records in England in 1974, the copy is one of only four remaining of the 1297 charter.

H. Ross Perot bought the copy in 1984 and loaned it to the National Archives. It was first exhibited in 1985.

I am all for free market trade and the concepts of supply demand and the freedom to buy what you want. However when it comes to antiquities and historical documents should these be open for sale?

It seems to me that this would be better served in a museum in England as it is historically signifigant to that country. I am oppossed to selling culturally signifigant artifacts as it takes away from thier cultural signifigance.

Any thoughts?

Quote:

---

Any thoughts?

---

The last thing our government wants is any document that might remind us we used to be free. 'No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions ... except by the lawful judgement of his peers" Ah, those were the days.

Seriously, we do have provisions over here to hold up sale of any culturally significant object and give museums etc first refusal. But once its out of the country and in other hands its fair game I guess.

Anyway, there are other copies. Salisbury cathedral has one on display, the British library has two, so its OK to share the love a bit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by English assassin

The last thing our government wants is any document that might remind us we used to be free. 'No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions ... except by the lawful judgement of his peers" Ah, those were the days.

Seriously, we do have provisions over here to hold up sale of any culturally significant object and give museums etc first refusal. But once its out of the country and in other hands its fair game I guess.

Anyway, there are other copies. Salisbury cathedral has one on display, the British library has two, so its OK to share the love a bit.

---

For me perhaps I am being to nationalist in my thinking but this is a document of historical importance to England. In my mind its a cultural item that should be embraced by the population as historically signifigant and cherished.

The fact that it is up for private sale bothers me, I dont dispute the validity of the process. I dont know the coffee this morning was pretty good, maybe i gotten bitten by the idealist I have worked years to suppress. :inquisitive:

I suppose I could come over all philosophical and say that rights and freedoms are intangible things, that we have to live, and the vellum they are written on isn't worth much.

But yeah, I take your point. If we didn't have a few of the originals still kicking about down the back of the national sofa I guess we'd be hoping to get this one back.

Quote:

---

I dont dispute the validity of the process. I dont know the coffee this morning was pretty good, maybe i gotten bitten by the idealist I have worked years to suppress.

---

That can be very nasty, idealism....:beam:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

For me perhaps I am being to nationalist in my thinking but this is a document of historical importance to England. In my mind its a cultural item that should be embraced by the population as historically signifigant and cherished.

The fact that it is up for private sale bothers me, I dont dispute the validity of the process. I dont know the coffee this morning was pretty good, maybe i gotten bitten by the idealist I have worked years to suppress. :inquisitive:

---

I don't know, as the Lawyer says, we have several copies already in Blighty and a lot of the English still don't know what the Magna Carta is. I don't think it's all that important really, beyond curtailing the power of the monarch a tiny bit. It shows a clawing back of a certain amount of what we lost in 1066.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

I don't know, as the Lawyer says, we have several copies already in Blighty and a lot of the English still don't know what the Magna Carta is. I don't think it's all that important really, beyond curtailing the power of the monarch a tiny bit. It shows a clawing back of a certain amount of what we lost in 1066.

---

Well I guess my line of thinking is somewhat flawed given where we are in 2007, I have found an appaling lack of connection to the past in my own country.

that said i'd hate to see a document of state (at one point thats what this was) of historical signifigance end up in a private collection, even if there are 2-3 laying around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

that said i'd hate to see a document of state (at one point thats what this was) of historical signifigance end up in a private collection, even if there are 2-3 laying around.

---

Agreed. If only for safekeeping and future historical studies. Old copies have much more -historical- value than the texts on them. Who knows what new methods would come up to study said documents and what new knowledge we might glean from it?

How are we supposed to preserve knowledge for mankind if the sources of said knowledge are sold to the highest bidder into a private museum of some rich dude who probably considered them just prestige pieces?

So she didn't die in vain after all. :beam:

Wow... next we'll be auctioning out the actual freedom spoken of in that document...

Wait, we already have: "No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions ... except by the lawful judgement of his peers" :dizzy: *cough* Terror laws and Patriot act *cough*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

For me perhaps I am being to nationalist in my thinking but this is a document of historical importance to England. In my mind its a cultural item that should be embraced by the population as historically signifigant and cherished.

---

One might argue that it is a document of historical importance to the entire world, enshrining as it does one of the most significant steps towards human rights. The concepts within the Magna Carta were exported across the globe.

It would therefore be a great shame for it to be bought by a private collector and hidden away in a vault somewhere, but I would be happy to see it on public display (even if privately owned) in any country, particularly the United States alongside the Declaration of Independence, for example.

With the caveat of course, that the United Kingdom still holds on to at least one ancient copy for her own people to reflect upon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

One might argue that it is a document of historical importance to the entire world, enshrining as it does one of the most significant steps towards human rights. The concepts within the Magna Carta were exported across the globe.

It would therefore be a great shame for it to be bought by a private collector and hidden away in a vault somewhere, but I would be happy to see it on public display (even if privately owned) in any country, particularly the United States alongside the Declaration of Independence, for example.

With the caveat of course, that the United Kingdom still holds on to at least one ancient copy for her own people to reflect upon.

---

I dont disagree with you that it might be of importance to the whole world. I guess my line of thinking is more along a nationalist line, to me (again just my take) the magna carta is an english document, and a signifigant item in british history 1st, the world second.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

I dont disagree with you that it might be of importance to the whole world. I guess my line of thinking is more along a nationalist line, to me (again just my take) the magna carta is an english document, and a signifigant item in british history 1st, the world second.

---

I don't disagree with you. If it was the only extant copy, I would urge every effort to be made to secure it for the country wherein it originated.

Since there are several copies, and this appears to be one of the later ones, it would seem to be unrealistic to spend vast sums of taxpayers money trying to get it back from abroad.

(And just to be a teensy bit churlish, if the UK made serious claims to ownership by national origin, the poor old British Museum would lose its Marbles...) :wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

Since there are several copies, and this appears to be one of the later ones, it would seem to be unrealistic to spend vast sums of taxpayers money trying to get it back from abroad.

---

thats the sad part really, that it would be at taxpayer expense to get back what I deem a national document property of the people of the UK. Technically thats not the law its owned by Perot, but induldge my idealism for a moment longer.

Expanding on this a bit, we all know there have been national treasures looted for years via war, I am somewhat surprised there isnt an international court/UN agency that would allow for some process by which governments might have a chance at getting these items back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

thats the sad part really, that it would be at taxpayer expense to get back what I deem a national document property of the people of the UK. Technically thats not the law its owned by Perot, but induldge my idealism for a moment longer.

Expanding on this a bit, we all know there have been national treasures looted for years via war, I am somewhat surprised there isnt an international court/UN agency that would allow for some process by which governments might have a chance at getting these items back.

---

There is, actually: UNESCO. Sadly, that outfit got so politicised during the Cold War(tm), that it pretty much got de-fanged, and now serves more as an advisory board, without much enforcement power.

The return of documents and artifacts and antiquities is a sore point with many in the 'ancient' world (Italy, Greece, Egypt ...) whose stuff sits in UK, US and private museums. Native Americans have bones to pick with museums and institutions also, their artifacts, and ancestor's bones sitting in museum storerooms, instead of being properly interred/handled, according to their culture. Those folks, wanting their millenia-old stuff back, would I guess, snicker at Anglo's desire to preserve a copy of a copy of a copy of a merely 900 year old document.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KukriKhan

There is, actually: UNESCO. Sadly, that outfit got so politicised during the Cold War(tm), that it pretty much got de-fanged, and now serves more as an advisory board, without much enforcement power.

The return of documents and artifacts and antiquities is a sore point with many in the 'ancient' world (Italy, Greece, Egypt ...) whose stuff sits in UK, US and private museums. Native Americans have bones to pick with museums and institutions also, their artifacts, and ancestor's bones sitting in museum storerooms, instead of being properly interred/handled, according to their culture. Those folks, wanting their millenia-old stuff back, would I guess, snicker at Anglo's desire to preserve a copy of a copy of a copy of a merely 900 year old document.

---

I guess hoping for an evolution on these matters is a pipe dream, none the less I would hope that at some point we can get to a modicum of mutual respect and understanding of others cultural past. Items that represent the identity and history of specific peoples, should in my opinion be hosted by said countries.

And here I thought I had successfully crushed the idealist I once was. :surrender2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

I guess hoping for an evolution on these matters is a pipe dream, none the less I would hope that at some point we can get to a modicum of mutual respect and understanding of others cultural past. Items that represent the identity and history of specific peoples, should in my opinion be hosted by said countries.

---

Amen. :yes:

Just to add to the point...

Marie Antoinette's pearls up for auction

Text:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

LONDON (Reuters) - A set of pearls once belonging to Marie Antoinette and taken to Britain by a friend for safekeeping will go on sale in December, and are expected to fetch up to $800,000.

Now part of a diamond, ruby and pearl necklace, France's last queen gave a bag of pearls and diamonds to Lady Sutherland, the British ambassador's wife, before she fled revolutionary France in 1792, a year before Marie Antoinette's death.

"Lady Sutherland was wife of the ambassador and friends with the queen, and they had children of the same age," said Raymond Sancroft-Baker, senior director of Christie's jewelry in London.

"When you are in a dire situation, there are not many people you can trust and the key was to give the jewels to someone with diplomatic immunity," he told Reuters.

Marie Antoinette, legendary for her extravagance, did not know her fate at the time, he said, and would have hoped to be reunited with her treasures one day.

"Hope springs eternal," added Sancroft-Baker.

According to Christie's, Sutherland arranged for clothes and linen to be sent to the queen while she was in prison.

"This was reportedly the last gesture of kindness shown to the doomed queen," the auctioneer said in a statement.

Marie Antoinette was executed by guillotine in October 1793.

The diamonds were made into a necklace, while the pearls were mounted later for the occasion of the marriage of Sutherland's grandson in 1849.

Christie's did not specify which of Sutherland's descendants was selling the necklace.

"The owner said it just sits in the bank the whole time, and there comes a time for everything," Sancroft-Baker said.

He hoped the pearls, which have never been offered at auction before and remained in the same family for over 200 years, would be made available for the public to see.

"The Louvre might be interested, for example," he said, adding that the story behind the necklace made it one of the most important sales he had overseen at Christie's.

"It's right up there in the top 10 we've ever sold, because its provenance is rock solid, as far as we can be aware. There are documents to go with it and contemporary supporting evidence."

The necklace will go under the hammer at the Magnificent Jewellery sale in London on December 12, and is expected to make between 350,000 and 400,000 pounds ($700-800,000).

Nothing much more to say other then yet another item of cultural signifigance goes up for sale. This definately belongs in the louvre, to bad there isnt some way of compensation or trade or some remuneration to get these items back to the state for public display and ownership.

The selling of a sacred national document.....it seems so tawdry. How did this Perot Foundation aquire it in the first place? Isn't this the same Perot that ran for President of the United States? What dire straits led the Brudenell family to part with it?

What's next, auctioning off Winchester Cathedral or Minster Abbey? When people put value on that which is priceless, what does it mean? It reminds me of how the Romans held an Auction for the position of Emperor near the fall of the Empire. If I had the capital, I would buy it and donate it to the British People to be placed in the Archives next to the other copies.