Enjoy this article?
Most Museums Journal content is only available to members. Join the MA to get full access to the latest thinking and trends from across the sector, case studies and best practice advice.
From where I’m standing
Restitution dialogue is good but who gets to express an opinion?
Restitution is a subject that exercises museum professionals from all disciplines. Two conferences on this subject took place weeks apart from each other. The first was convened by Zahi Hawass, the secretary general of Egypt’s Supreme Council of Antiquities, and was held in Cairo.
The second took place in London and was organised by the legal firm Farrer & Co. Both discussed the same subject, but the two couldn’t have been more different.
The Egyptian meeting involved around 20 countries that wanted cultural items back from western countries. The agenda was to list which items were contested and to develop an action plan. Of the western countries, I understand that only the US attended. Britain, France and Germany – where many contested items are held – were absent.
In contrast, the London conference reviewed the UK’s position on restitution and heard the experience of international experts including Unesco, on its approach to illicit trafficking; Rick West, the former director of the National Museum of the American Indian, who gave the US experience; a Polish historian; and UK and French lawyers, who set out the legal and moral arguments. The day was very non-adversarial; no country was there to ask for its property back.
There has been a suggestion that western museum representatives should have been at the Egyptian conference but perhaps having these conversations behind closed doors first before presenting a plan publicly makes strategic sense. I understand that a catalogue of each country’s repatriation lists in order of priority is forthcoming.
One of the conclusions of the London symposium was that the UK was ahead of the European game - with more dialogue between museums with opposing views, the sharing of expertise, and partnerships.
Both debates have their merits. But wouldn’t it be refreshing if this dialogue didn’t always take place at institutional level. I wonder what a Nigerian or Peruvian citizen might think about artefacts that belong to them? They might not care but are they even consulted?
The second took place in London and was organised by the legal firm Farrer & Co. Both discussed the same subject, but the two couldn’t have been more different.
The Egyptian meeting involved around 20 countries that wanted cultural items back from western countries. The agenda was to list which items were contested and to develop an action plan. Of the western countries, I understand that only the US attended. Britain, France and Germany – where many contested items are held – were absent.
In contrast, the London conference reviewed the UK’s position on restitution and heard the experience of international experts including Unesco, on its approach to illicit trafficking; Rick West, the former director of the National Museum of the American Indian, who gave the US experience; a Polish historian; and UK and French lawyers, who set out the legal and moral arguments. The day was very non-adversarial; no country was there to ask for its property back.
There has been a suggestion that western museum representatives should have been at the Egyptian conference but perhaps having these conversations behind closed doors first before presenting a plan publicly makes strategic sense. I understand that a catalogue of each country’s repatriation lists in order of priority is forthcoming.
One of the conclusions of the London symposium was that the UK was ahead of the European game - with more dialogue between museums with opposing views, the sharing of expertise, and partnerships.
Both debates have their merits. But wouldn’t it be refreshing if this dialogue didn’t always take place at institutional level. I wonder what a Nigerian or Peruvian citizen might think about artefacts that belong to them? They might not care but are they even consulted?