Take, for example, his response to this question:
The [UNESCO] treaty seeks to keep wealthy nations from raiding the cultural history of poorer ones in the name of science. What’s wrong with that argument?
It perpetuates this false view or sentiment that things are appreciated better if they are encountered where they were made. But sometimes things are better appreciated if they can be compared and contrasted with similar artifacts from other cultures and geographic regions. Which argues for some sharing.Would he argue that it was better to display the Sarpedon (Euphronios) krater in New York than in an archaeological museum in Tuscany surrounded by finds from the same Etruscan tomb? The krater could be better appreciated now if it had not been ripped from its ancient setting.
Or how about the series of Apulian pots attributed to the Darius painter that have been returned to Italy from North American collections? What other objects came from the rifled tombs?
The acquisition of recently-surfaced antiquities by museums has encouraged the continued looting of archaeological sites.