Good question! Human nature has this tendency toward something called public domain. Thus, most people have a right to privacy, until they do something that interests a certain percentage of society, like, make a movie, become the victim or perpetrator of a heinous crime, act really good and holy etc. Then, suddenly, they have no right to privacy anymore. Then it becomes OK to snoop, snap photos, steal “souveniers”, harass, and pry.
People who died long ago become interesting to us because of their strangeness, and also become public domain. All the normal filters we would usually use seem to evaporate and we feel free to help ourselves.
What makes it OK to take the riches from TUT, but not from granny, is public opinion. If you are not someone who believes that “if everybody does it, it must be OK” then you ask an astute question like the one presented here…
In the end, when we are talking about someone who has been dead for 3000 yrs, and who’s family and culture are no longer in tact to claim the goodies, then perhaps the public really does “own” the belongings of the deceased. I would be willing to argue that Egypt has a right to Tut.
As to whether it it OK? Hmm. I don’t know it is OK, especially when we come to understand the religion and beliefs of a people, and what the sanctitiy of the grave and the purpose of those belonging are to that person.
I think if family is still around, they have dibs, if not…I guess it depends on your personal belief system. If you believe they can’t take it with them…then what is the harm. If you believe they will need their body for the resurrection, then probably shouldn’t cut them up in pieces and distribute them to churches around the world. If you believe that everything will ultimately be recycled anyway, then what does it really matter?
cheddar
