The emergence of the concept of Cultural Heritage it is the result of a long historical development in which different values have been attributed to monuments, buildings, works of art, artefacts, landscapes, etc. The systematic destruction or loss of these objects has led to phrases such as "outstanding universal value" and the declaration that these objects belong "to humanity."
These ideas were developed through the awareness that cultural heritage and the natural environment with which it is intimately linked are unique and irreplaceable. The emergence of the concept is directly related to the idea of protection or conservation.
The tradition of collecting smaller objects such as works of art and other cultural masterpieces belonged to the “antiquarian interest” but were also the first stages of a subsequent and long process of institutionalization. Their selection was based on notions of value inherent in the time and place of acquisition or the rarity and aesthetic quality of the object. They were also an exposition of contemporary knowledge that expanded with the discovery of new and new segments of the known world. Since the 19th century, the concept of national heritage has been one of the key factors in this process. This led to the creation of national museums and commissions or monument protection institutes.
World Heritage: World Memory
In the second half of the 20th century, movements, organizations that evolved spontaneously – such as the international body UNESCO – have managed to gain the necessary support to preserve some particular aspects of many nations' heritage, including concepts such as: World Heritage, World Memory.
Despite the inherent biases in approaching World Heritage, the door has been opened to a more holistic approach in contemporary heritage studies or heritage business. At the same time, more recent developments in cultural heritage practices and more generally in the uses and abuses of the concept of cultural heritage have led to a strong critical approach in the context of the “heritage business”.
Now, in the 21st century, there is a better understanding that heritage has meaning on multiple levels, best served by multidisciplinary approaches and methodologies that can be developed and used across the world. Cultural heritage falls within the scope of investigation of a series of humanistic, social and environmental studies. Solutions to cultural heritage and resource management problems are best achieved by recognizing differences and legitimizing conflicting interests, so as to seek common ground.
The theme of the restitution of works
Museums are home to millions of works of art and cultural artifacts. The Metropolitan Museum of Art alone holds two million objects. The Hermitage he has three million. The British Museum, eight million. Some of these objects arrived at these institutions by means that are not always clear. Some may have been stolen or looted, others acquired through forced transactions as in the case of Nazi plundering (here is an interesting in-depth article “Looted Art: The restitution of history” by Giuseppe Calabi). Should injustices be corrected and, if so, how? Some argue that there are objects in museum collections that should be repatriated, returned to their country, culture, or owner of origin. For example, consider the claims for the return of the Benin Bronzes, looted from the Benin Kingdom during the British Punitive Expedition of 1897. According to claims such as these, museums would have a moral obligation to repatriate questionable objects acquired from their collections.
Museums and cultural institutions tend to embrace the idea, enshrined in the Hague Convention of 1954, that cultural products constitute a contribution to the culture of all humanity. As we read in the preamble of that text: “Damage to the cultural assets belonging to any people means damage to the cultural heritage of all humanity, since each people makes its contribution to the culture of the world”. This sentiment is echoed in a 1982 UNESCO convention dedicated to artefacts and sites considered part of world heritage: “Their value cannot be limited to one nation or people, but must be shared by every man, woman and child of the world". Such commitments regarding the universal value of cultural products are often pitted against calls for repatriation. It is often given a questionable meaning: “The argument advanced by those who think museums have the right to resist restitution requests is that some artifacts are of such great value to humanity that it is justified to limit or ignore the rights of cultural property in order to promote or protect this value".
If we think that art has value for individual development and for humanity as a whole, then distributional issues cannot be avoided and the same point can serve as a springboard towards a broader reflection on the distribution of cultural goods. Furthermore, there are museums that consider the public good of their collections in a cosmopolitan, rather than nationalist, light. For example, in the “Declaration of the Importance and Value of Universal Museums,” a group of museum leaders including the directors of the Met, the Getty, the Hermitage and the British Museum write: “Museums do not only serve the citizens of one nation, but the people of every nation." If the goods that museums hold are public goods with universal value, goods that everyone has the human right to access and experience, then we must ask ourselves whether the current distribution of these is fair?
Il repatriation of cultural assets is not inconsistent with museum values regarding the management of public goods for the benefit of an international public; on the contrary, combined with considerations of justice, institutional commitments regarding the universal value of cultural property entail a much more radical redistribution than even requests for repatriation alone would justify. Museums and cultural institutions, however, have a duty to take substantial steps in the pursuit of justice in cultural heritage.
Now the question is better left to the lawyers competent in art-related law: this topic is a real web that involves history, family tragedies, art, passions where not everything is simplified. It takes knowledge, common sense and to be clear on the lines to follow. And in many other cases it is better to follow the laws to which you dutifully refer.
