art and artifact repatriation · 2015-10-27 · art and artifact repatriation rachel heiss...
TRANSCRIPT
Art and Artifact RepatriationRachel HeissCalifornia State University, StanislausUniversity Honors Program
INTRODUCTION
I am looking at art and artifact repatriation
because I want to find out the current status of
the ownership/repatriation debate to better
understand the relationship between museums
and source countries so that we can find a
diplomatic solution. I have found that the debate
of ownership and repatriation has turned more in
favor of the source countries in the last three
decades. A major turning point was the 1970
UNESCO convention “on the means of prohibiting
and preventing the illicit import, export, and
transfer or ownership of cultural property.”
BACKGROUND/LITERATURE REVIEW
Illegal/Illicit excavations of ancient sites have
created a large collection of unrecorded artifacts of
historical and cultural value. These items are
looted in order to be sold, first through black
market dealers and then through legitimate
auction houses, ending up in the hands of
museums and private collections all over the
world. There are ethical statements and
expectations, but few actual laws governing the
sale of artifacts, even for those objects lacking a
documented ownership history that are highly
suspect of being looted. Many highly regarded
museums and private collectors were (and are!)
buying objects regardless of their legitimacy. This
lead to countries with rich cultural history and a
high amount of looting to demand repatriation
and restitution of items that are suspected of
being stolen.
QUESTION/RATIONALE
Can a world or encyclopedic museum, where
countries and cultures share their artifacts with
other countries and cultures in a scholarly
exchange, solve the dispute? In this way, more
people will be able to experience the rich culture
and heritage that belongs to the entire human
race in a way that we can ensure its preservation
and availability for future generations. It is
important that we find a diplomatic solution, so
that the flow of objects, ideas, history and culture
between museums and countries can continue.
METHODS/RESEARCH DESIGN
I am working on finding a diplomatic solution
between museums and source countries. I plan to
compare and contrast the acquisition and
repatriation policies of both major and minor
museums, along with private collections. At this
point in my research, I have seen that many
museums have changed their policies very much in
the last 20 years. One thing that seemed to set off
the changes was an exposure of the connection
between curators at prominent museums and black
market dealers in illicit antiquities. The scandals,
which revealed detailed activities from prominent
museums’ histories, such as the Getty, the MET and
the Boston MFA, were tinder that helped to start a
fire of new resolutions and policies in museums,
other institutions, and countries all over the world.
SIGNIFICANCE
This topic is significant because the material
remains of the past are important in the present. It
will gauge the current standing of the debate, the
main arguments from each side, the intended
solutions that have already been put in place, and
what more can be done to find common ground.
My main inquiries will be into the guidelines set by
the UNESCO conventions, the acquisition and
repatriation policies of museums, the cultural
property ownership laws of countries, often referred
to as source countries, from which artifacts have
been taken and what more can be done in all areas
that has not yet been done or what can be further
expanded upon that has already been shown to be a
successful tactic.
BIBLIOGRAPHYCuno, James (2009). Whose culture? The promise of museums and the debate over antiquities.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Felch, J., & Frammolino, R. (2011). Chasing Aphrodite: The hunt for looted antiquities in the world's richest museum. New York, New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Goldsleger, E. W. (2005). Contemplating contradiction: A comparison of art restitution policies. Journal Of Arts Management, Law & Society, 35(2), 109-120.
MacDougall, B. (2009). The market overt method to obtain ownership of lost or stolen goods: Comment on Manning v. Algard Estate, [2008] BCSC 1129. International Journal Of
Cultural Property, 16(1), 85-93.
Mcguigan, C. (2007). Whose Art Is It?. Newsweek, 149(11), 54-57.
Museum Heads Say: Hands Off Our Stuff. (2003). Art in America, 91(2), 37.
Renfrew, Colin (2000) Loot, legitimacy, and ownership: The ethical crisis in archaeology. London: Duckworth.
Roehrenbeck, C. A. (2010). Repatriation of cultural property: Who owns the past? An introduction to approaches and to selected statutory instruments. International
Journal of Legal Information: The Official Journal of the International Association of Law Libraries, 38(2). Retrieved March 5, 2015, from http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu.ezproxy.lib.csustan.edu:2048/cgi/
viewcontent.cgi?article=1216&context=ijli
http://www.digital-images.net/Gallery/Art/GettyVilla/gettyvilla.html
http
://w
ww
.getty
.edu
/glo
bal/
r/im
ages/
getty
_lo
go_og.p
ng
http
://lo
gok.o
rg/w
p-
con
ten
t/u
plo
ads/2015/01/M
et-lo
go.p
ng
http
://w
ww
.mfa
.org
/site
s/all/
them
es
/gu
ide/im
ages/lo
go.m
fa_fa
cebook-th
um
b.p
ng
Contact Info:
Rachel Heiss
I am Italian
and I want to go home
I am Greek
and I want to go home
TERMS
UNESCOUnited Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Art/Artifact RepatriationThe return of art or objects of cultural significance to their country of origin or original owners.
RestitutionThe restoration of property or rights previously taken away.
StolenDocumented as once in a known collection from which they were abstracted by theft (Renfrew, 2000)
IllicitClandestinely excavated and illegally exported antiquities (Renfrew, 2000)
Art and Artifact RepatriationRachel HeissCalifornia State University, StanislausUniversity Honors Program
INTRODUCTION
I am looking at art and artifact repatriation
because I want to find out the current status of
the ownership/repatriation debate to better
understand the relationship between museums
and source countries so that we can find a
diplomatic solution. I have found that the debate
of ownership and repatriation has turned more in
favor of the source countries in the last three
decades. A major turning point was the 1970
UNESCO convention “on the means of prohibiting
and preventing the illicit import, export, and
transfer or ownership of cultural property”.
BACKGROUND/LITERATURE REVIEW
Illegal/Illicit excavations of ancient sites has
created a large collection of unrecorded artifacts of
historical and cultural value. These items are
looted in order to be sold, first through black
market dealers and then through legitimate
auction houses, ending up in the hands of
museums and private collections all over the
world. There are ethical statements and
expectations, but few actual laws governing the
sale of artifacts, even for those objects lacking a
documented ownership history that are highly
suspect of being looted. Many highly regarded
museums and private collectors were (and are!)
buying objects regardless of their legitimacy. This
lead to countries with rich cultural history and a
high amount of looting to demand repatriation
and restitution of items that are suspected of
being stolen.
QUESTION/RATIONALE
Can a world or encyclopedic museum, where
countries and cultures share their artifacts with
other countries and cultures in a scholarly
exchange, solve the dispute? In this way, more
people will be able to experience the rich culture
and heritage that belongs to the entire human
race in a way that we can ensure its preservation
and availability for future generations. It is
important that we find a diplomatic solution, so
that the flow of objects, ideas, history and culture
between museums and countries can continue.
BIBLIOGRAPHYCuno, James (2009). Whose culture? The promise of museums and the debate over antiquities.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Felch, J., & Frammolino, R. (2011). Chasing Aphrodite: The hunt for looted antiquities in the world's richest museum. New York, New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Goldsleger, E. W. (2005). Contemplating contradiction: A comparison of art restitution policies. Journal Of Arts Management, Law & Society, 35(2), 109-120.
MacDougall, B. (2009). The market overt method to obtain ownership of lost or stolen goods: Comment on Manning v. Algard Estate, [2008] BCSC 1129. International Journal Of
Cultural Property, 16(1), 85-93.
Mcguigan, C. (2007). Whose Art Is It?. Newsweek, 149(11), 54-57.
Museum Heads Say: Hands Off Our Stuff. (2003). Art in America, 91(2), 37.
Renfrew, Colin (2000) Loot, legitimacy, and ownership: The ethical crisis in archaeology. London: Duckworth.
Roehrenbeck, C. A. (2010). Repatriation of cultural property: Who owns the past? An introduction to approaches and to selected statutory instruments. International
Journal of Legal Information: The Official Journal of the International Association of Law Libraries, 38(2). Retrieved March 5, 2015, from http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu.ezproxy.lib.csustan.edu:2048/cgi/
viewcontent.cgi?article=1216&context=ijli
http://www.digital-images.net/Gallery/Art/GettyVilla/gettyvilla.html
http
://w
ww
.getty
.edu
/glo
bal/
r/im
ages/
getty
_lo
go_og.p
ng
http
://lo
gok.o
rg/w
p-
con
ten
t/u
plo
ads/2015/01/M
et-lo
go.p
ng
http
://w
ww
.mfa
.org
/site
s/all/
them
es
/gu
ide/im
ages/lo
go.m
fa_fa
cebook-th
um
b.p
ng
Contact Info:
Rachel Heiss
I am Italian
And I want to go home
I am Greek
And I want to go home
TERMS
UNESCOUnited Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Art/Artifact RepatriationThe return of art or objects of cultural significance to their country of origin or original owners.
RestitutionThe restoration of property or rights previously taken away.
StolenDocumented as once in a known collection from which they were abstracted by theft (Renfrew, 2000)
IllicitClandestinely excavated and illegally exported antiquities (Renfrew, 2000)
METHODS/RESEARCH DESIGN
I am working on finding a diplomatic solution
between museums and source countries. I plan to
compare and contrast the acquisition and
repatriation policies of both major and minor
museums, along with private collections. At this
point in my research, I have seen that many
museums have changed their policies very much in
the last 20 years. One thing that seemed to set off
the changes was an exposure of the connection
between curators at prominent museums and black
market dealers in illicit antiquities. The scandals,
which revealed detailed activities from prominent
museums’ histories, such as the Getty, the MET and
the Boston MFA, were tinder that helped to start a
fire of new resolutions and policies in museums,
other institutions, and countries all over the world.
SIGNIFICANCE
This topic is significant because the material
remains of the past are important in the present. It
will gauge the current standing of the debate, the
main arguments from each side, the intended
solutions that have already been put in place, and
what more can be done to find common ground.
My main inquiries will be into the guidelines set by
the UNESCO conventions, the acquisition and
repatriation policies of museums, the cultural
property ownership laws of countries, often referred
to as source countries, from which artifacts have
been taken and what more can be done in all areas
that has not yet been done or what can be further
expanded upon that has already been shown to be a
successful tactic.