Who owns the past? Join The Independent Debate as Bayeux Tapestry loan reignites Elgin Marbles debate

ACruss-Cross boundaries in the name of cultural treasures diplomacy, a deeper discussion stalls: Who really has the right to have great ruins of history? And are temporary loans a diplomatic correction or a way to overcome the bigger question?

President Macron’s decision to lend to the Bayeux goblelen, which was probably erected in the City but held in Normandy for centuries, has also begun a more controversial debate: Britain’s other historical artifacts, especially Elgin marbles.

Some see striking parallels between the two: cultural symbols created in one place are protected elsewhere. But others argue that it is not that simple. “This comparison is a big stretch,” a reader said in response to an article by Harry Mount last week. “It may have been done in the UK, but it was assigned by Normans… Normandy feels like the right house of this work.”

However, on the other side of the discussion, another suggested: “As a born and raised Hastings Chap, I can say that he did not return home until he was exhibited in a Hastings Museum.”

When it comes to Parthenon statues, risks – and emotions – are even higher. They are exhibited at the British Museum in London, which was created in ancient Athens and removed in the 19th century.

Lord Elgin claimed that he had issued sculptures with the permission of the Ottoman officials who controlled Athens at that time. However, the legality of his actions – deeply intertwined with the history of the British Empire – was widely discussed and never stopped calling Greece’s return.

So what is the answer? Are cultural loans a useful compromise or just stop tactics? Should the UK start to return historical artifacts to origin countries – and if so, where should the line be drawn?

We want to get news from you. Share Your Thoughts Comments And vote in the questionnaire below – we will present the most compelling answers and discuss the results in the coming days.