Pub Date : 2021-11-01DOI: 10.1017/S0940739121000291
Elizabeth Marlowe
Dan Hicks’s new book, The Brutish Museums: The Benin Bronzes, Colonial Violence and Cultural Restitution, has made a splash. Designated by the New York Times as one of the best art books of 2020, featured on blogs, podcasts, webinars, and in mainstream newspapers, the book and its author, the professor of contemporary archaeology at the University of Oxford and curator at Oxford’s Pitt Rivers Museum, are suddenly everywhere. This Zoom-enabled ubiquity can be understood in the context of the larger historical reckonings of 2020 and 2021 – a global pandemic fueled by global capitalism, climate change, and incompetent governance; a breaking point in the long saga of police brutality against racial minorities andwhite indifference to it; a toppling of statues to colonialist and Confederate leaders around the world; and, as I was finishing the book, a final attempt to impeach a hate-mongering US president for fomenting rebellion against the very democratic institutions he swore to serve. In its passionately argued call for the restitution of cultural artifacts looted in one of themost notoriously brutal episodes of colonial violence, The Brutish Museums encapsulates the zeitgeist.1 The objects commonly referred to as the Benin Bronzes (although the metal pieces are actually made of brass, and the corpus includes works in many other materials) once adorned thepillars and shrines of thepalace in the capital of thepowerful EdoEmpire,which controlled a large regionof theNigerRiver andDelta andWestAfrican coast from the fifteenth tonineteenth centuries. The story of how the objects leftWest Africa is the story of this empire’s end, but that is not quite how the European and American museums that now own them tell it. Beside a vitrine at the Pitt Rivers Museum, Hicks’s ownmuseum, a panel states: “In January 1897 a small party of British officials and traders on its way to Benin was ambushed. In retaliation a British military force attacked the city and the Oba was exiled. Members of the expedition brought thousands of objects back to Britain, includingmany of those shownhere.” The emphasis in this account is not on the colonial reordering of African geopolitics but, rather, on the final event that ostensibly triggered it: the killing of a “small party of British officials,” which was led by Acting Consul James Phillips and which is often referred to by the British as the “Phillips massacre.” The Field Museum in Chicago tells the same story but with more background:
{"title":"Review of Dan Hicks, The Brutish Museums: The Benin Bronzes, Colonial Violence and Cultural Restitution. 345 pp. Pluto Press, 2020.","authors":"Elizabeth Marlowe","doi":"10.1017/S0940739121000291","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0940739121000291","url":null,"abstract":"Dan Hicks’s new book, The Brutish Museums: The Benin Bronzes, Colonial Violence and Cultural Restitution, has made a splash. Designated by the New York Times as one of the best art books of 2020, featured on blogs, podcasts, webinars, and in mainstream newspapers, the book and its author, the professor of contemporary archaeology at the University of Oxford and curator at Oxford’s Pitt Rivers Museum, are suddenly everywhere. This Zoom-enabled ubiquity can be understood in the context of the larger historical reckonings of 2020 and 2021 – a global pandemic fueled by global capitalism, climate change, and incompetent governance; a breaking point in the long saga of police brutality against racial minorities andwhite indifference to it; a toppling of statues to colonialist and Confederate leaders around the world; and, as I was finishing the book, a final attempt to impeach a hate-mongering US president for fomenting rebellion against the very democratic institutions he swore to serve. In its passionately argued call for the restitution of cultural artifacts looted in one of themost notoriously brutal episodes of colonial violence, The Brutish Museums encapsulates the zeitgeist.1 The objects commonly referred to as the Benin Bronzes (although the metal pieces are actually made of brass, and the corpus includes works in many other materials) once adorned thepillars and shrines of thepalace in the capital of thepowerful EdoEmpire,which controlled a large regionof theNigerRiver andDelta andWestAfrican coast from the fifteenth tonineteenth centuries. The story of how the objects leftWest Africa is the story of this empire’s end, but that is not quite how the European and American museums that now own them tell it. Beside a vitrine at the Pitt Rivers Museum, Hicks’s ownmuseum, a panel states: “In January 1897 a small party of British officials and traders on its way to Benin was ambushed. In retaliation a British military force attacked the city and the Oba was exiled. Members of the expedition brought thousands of objects back to Britain, includingmany of those shownhere.” The emphasis in this account is not on the colonial reordering of African geopolitics but, rather, on the final event that ostensibly triggered it: the killing of a “small party of British officials,” which was led by Acting Consul James Phillips and which is often referred to by the British as the “Phillips massacre.” The Field Museum in Chicago tells the same story but with more background:","PeriodicalId":54155,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cultural Property","volume":"28 1","pages":"575 - 586"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42609516","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-01DOI: 10.1017/S0940739121000345
A. Visconti
Abstract This article offers a critical appraisal of the evolution of Italian cultural heritage law with respect to issues of colonial and war restitution and of control over the import of potentially trafficked cultural property. As Italy is usually considered a “source country” and a victim of historical depredations, a form of “selective blindness” to its colonial past and to its role at the receiving end of both past and current misappropriations of cultural objects is discussed. Some recent restitutions of cultural property taken in times of colonial occupation are also analyzed as signs of a possible change in policy and practice, but the article also highlights the features of political expediency that have influenced them as well as the many legal and practical obstacles still to be faced by restitution and repatriation claims. Finally, the potential effects of recent (mostly international) inputs on Italy’s cultural heritage policy are presented.
{"title":"Between “colonial amnesia” and “victimization biases”: Double standards in Italian cultural heritage law","authors":"A. Visconti","doi":"10.1017/S0940739121000345","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0940739121000345","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article offers a critical appraisal of the evolution of Italian cultural heritage law with respect to issues of colonial and war restitution and of control over the import of potentially trafficked cultural property. As Italy is usually considered a “source country” and a victim of historical depredations, a form of “selective blindness” to its colonial past and to its role at the receiving end of both past and current misappropriations of cultural objects is discussed. Some recent restitutions of cultural property taken in times of colonial occupation are also analyzed as signs of a possible change in policy and practice, but the article also highlights the features of political expediency that have influenced them as well as the many legal and practical obstacles still to be faced by restitution and repatriation claims. Finally, the potential effects of recent (mostly international) inputs on Italy’s cultural heritage policy are presented.","PeriodicalId":54155,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cultural Property","volume":"28 1","pages":"551 - 573"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44768344","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-01DOI: 10.1017/S0940739121000400
J. Jacobs, Benjamin W. Porter
Abstract University-based anthropology museums are uniquely positioned to pursue nuanced decisions concerning the disposition of collections in their care, setting best practice for the field. The authors describe a three-staged approach to repatriations that they led during their concurrent service as head of cultural policy and repatriation (Jordan Jacobs) and director (Benjamin Porter) of the University of California, Berkeley’s Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology between 2015 and 2019. Examples involving human remains and cultural objects from Australia, Canada, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Iraq, Japan, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Saipan, Senegal, Vanuatu, Venezuela, and South Carolina in the United States demonstrate the benefits of transparency, open communication, and rigorous investigation of provenance and provenience, which may or may not lead to transfer based on the criteria and priorities of potential recipients. This article also provides a history of the Hearst Museum’s Cultural Policy and Repatriation division, which was disbanded in 2021.
{"title":"Repatriation in university museum collections: Case studies from the Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology","authors":"J. Jacobs, Benjamin W. Porter","doi":"10.1017/S0940739121000400","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0940739121000400","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract University-based anthropology museums are uniquely positioned to pursue nuanced decisions concerning the disposition of collections in their care, setting best practice for the field. The authors describe a three-staged approach to repatriations that they led during their concurrent service as head of cultural policy and repatriation (Jordan Jacobs) and director (Benjamin Porter) of the University of California, Berkeley’s Phoebe A. Hearst Museum of Anthropology between 2015 and 2019. Examples involving human remains and cultural objects from Australia, Canada, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Iraq, Japan, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Saipan, Senegal, Vanuatu, Venezuela, and South Carolina in the United States demonstrate the benefits of transparency, open communication, and rigorous investigation of provenance and provenience, which may or may not lead to transfer based on the criteria and priorities of potential recipients. This article also provides a history of the Hearst Museum’s Cultural Policy and Repatriation division, which was disbanded in 2021.","PeriodicalId":54155,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cultural Property","volume":"28 1","pages":"531 - 550"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47265809","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-01DOI: 10.1017/s0940739122000133
{"title":"JCP volume 28 issue 4 Cover and Back matter","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/s0940739122000133","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0940739122000133","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":54155,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cultural Property","volume":"28 1","pages":"b1 - b1"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44353230","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-01DOI: 10.1017/s0940739121000424
Letícia Machado Haertel
Abstract This article analyzes the role played by the Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property to Its Countries of Origin or Its Restitution in Case of Illicit Appropriation (ICPRCP) in promoting the settlement of disputes barred by the non-retroactivity of the 1970 UNESCO Convention through an assessment of its impact on the dispute between Greece and the United Kingdom over the Parthenon Sculptures. The analysis first focuses on the ICPRCP’s regular mandate, followed by an evaluation of some “collateral effects” that it might have had on the dispute. Through the examination of all reports, recommendations, and decisions issued by the ICPRCP and the performance of a wider interdisciplinary case study, it is argued that the ICPRCP has had an impact on the dispute, both directly and indirectly. The value of these conclusions is to shed light on the complex factors in interplay in voluntary and non-binding dispute settlement mechanisms such as the ones performed by the ICPRCP and to represent a framework for further studies on the ICPRCP’s work and alternative dispute resolution methods in general.
{"title":"The past, present: The Parthenon Sculptures dispute as an example of the ICPRCP’s role on claims barred by the non-retroactivity of the 1970 UNESCO Convention","authors":"Letícia Machado Haertel","doi":"10.1017/s0940739121000424","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0940739121000424","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article analyzes the role played by the Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property to Its Countries of Origin or Its Restitution in Case of Illicit Appropriation (ICPRCP) in promoting the settlement of disputes barred by the non-retroactivity of the 1970 UNESCO Convention through an assessment of its impact on the dispute between Greece and the United Kingdom over the Parthenon Sculptures. The analysis first focuses on the ICPRCP’s regular mandate, followed by an evaluation of some “collateral effects” that it might have had on the dispute. Through the examination of all reports, recommendations, and decisions issued by the ICPRCP and the performance of a wider interdisciplinary case study, it is argued that the ICPRCP has had an impact on the dispute, both directly and indirectly. The value of these conclusions is to shed light on the complex factors in interplay in voluntary and non-binding dispute settlement mechanisms such as the ones performed by the ICPRCP and to represent a framework for further studies on the ICPRCP’s work and alternative dispute resolution methods in general.","PeriodicalId":54155,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cultural Property","volume":"28 1","pages":"479 - 504"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41803185","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-01DOI: 10.1017/S0940739121000412
Jiewon Song
Abstract The key issue addressed in this article is authenticity, which is a criterion that is no longer limited to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s world heritage domain. This article draws from one of the most interesting public projects in the United States – the John F. Kennedy (JFK) Terminal 5/6 Redevelopment Plan, which was part of the larger JFK master plan. The project’s Trans World Airlines (TWA) terminal, which is the only landmarked terminal and remnant of the original JFK airport plan, raised concerns. In 2001, the debate started off with keeping the terminal building active for aviation use and experiences. Nonetheless, the terminal was reimagined into a luxury hotel in 2019. This article unveils the micro-politics in the redevelopment plan and examines the authenticity of the TWA terminal and how it was (re)constructed. In doing so, the article sheds light on urban law and the decision-making process. Moreover, it discusses the tangible and intangible consequences of the prevailing speculative logic in the law.
{"title":"Urban law and the expulsion of authenticity: Preservation of the TWA terminal in the JFK Airport Redevelopment Plan","authors":"Jiewon Song","doi":"10.1017/S0940739121000412","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0940739121000412","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The key issue addressed in this article is authenticity, which is a criterion that is no longer limited to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s world heritage domain. This article draws from one of the most interesting public projects in the United States – the John F. Kennedy (JFK) Terminal 5/6 Redevelopment Plan, which was part of the larger JFK master plan. The project’s Trans World Airlines (TWA) terminal, which is the only landmarked terminal and remnant of the original JFK airport plan, raised concerns. In 2001, the debate started off with keeping the terminal building active for aviation use and experiences. Nonetheless, the terminal was reimagined into a luxury hotel in 2019. This article unveils the micro-politics in the redevelopment plan and examines the authenticity of the TWA terminal and how it was (re)constructed. In doing so, the article sheds light on urban law and the decision-making process. Moreover, it discusses the tangible and intangible consequences of the prevailing speculative logic in the law.","PeriodicalId":54155,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cultural Property","volume":"28 1","pages":"505 - 529"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48550056","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-01DOI: 10.1017/S0940739121000308
E. Campbell
Abstract In recent years, the work of the American Monuments Men has been celebrated in popular histories and culture, such as bestselling books by Robert Edsel and a feature film directed by George Clooney (The Monuments Men, 2014). While public awareness of Nazi art looting and the courageous work of American cultural officers is long overdue, these popular narratives elide the role played by women and other Western Allies and fail to address the corps’ greatest failure: the incomplete restitution of Jewish assets. This article explores these factors through a case study of British Major Anne Olivier Popham (1916–2018), who served the Monuments, Fine Arts, and Archives (MFA&A) division in Bünde from November 1945 to October 1947. Drawing on Popham’s diaries held at the Imperial War Museum in London, the author’s interview with her, and British and American archives, the case study yields important insight into personnel recruited by the MFA&A, gender relations among the officers, methodological dilemmas presented by the use of first-hand accounts, and the ongoing need for transnational restitution efforts.
{"title":"Monuments Women and Men: Rethinking popular narratives via British Major Anne Olivier Popham","authors":"E. Campbell","doi":"10.1017/S0940739121000308","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0940739121000308","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In recent years, the work of the American Monuments Men has been celebrated in popular histories and culture, such as bestselling books by Robert Edsel and a feature film directed by George Clooney (The Monuments Men, 2014). While public awareness of Nazi art looting and the courageous work of American cultural officers is long overdue, these popular narratives elide the role played by women and other Western Allies and fail to address the corps’ greatest failure: the incomplete restitution of Jewish assets. This article explores these factors through a case study of British Major Anne Olivier Popham (1916–2018), who served the Monuments, Fine Arts, and Archives (MFA&A) division in Bünde from November 1945 to October 1947. Drawing on Popham’s diaries held at the Imperial War Museum in London, the author’s interview with her, and British and American archives, the case study yields important insight into personnel recruited by the MFA&A, gender relations among the officers, methodological dilemmas presented by the use of first-hand accounts, and the ongoing need for transnational restitution efforts.","PeriodicalId":54155,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cultural Property","volume":"28 1","pages":"409 - 424"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46517328","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-01DOI: 10.1017/S0940739121000321
Emily Löffler
Abstract The Landesmuseum Mainz holds a bundle of objects (paintings, works on paper, furniture) that entered its collections in September 1943 as a transferral ordered by the Oberfinanzpräsident of the State of Hesse. The objects had been confiscated by the fiscal authorities of Mainz and Darmstadt immediately after their owners had been deported. In terms of artistic quality, these pieces could be described as “living room art,” a term that well reflects the social function of Jewish upper-middle-class material culture. By combining the methodologies of provenance research and material culture studies, this article analyzes how the “living room art” that once belonged to the German Jewish middle-class closely related to social belonging, self-representation, and the identity of their owners and how the anti-Semitic persecution impacted their material life. This approach aims at reframing object-based provenance research – which is traditionally formulated in the context of the “art world,” for example, the study of art dealership, collecting, and museum history – in the context of the study of Jewish middle-class cultural consumption, small-scale private art collecting, and micro-history.
{"title":"“Living room art” and the material culture of provenance: Retracing bourgeois everyday life and art collecting practices through restitution files","authors":"Emily Löffler","doi":"10.1017/S0940739121000321","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0940739121000321","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The Landesmuseum Mainz holds a bundle of objects (paintings, works on paper, furniture) that entered its collections in September 1943 as a transferral ordered by the Oberfinanzpräsident of the State of Hesse. The objects had been confiscated by the fiscal authorities of Mainz and Darmstadt immediately after their owners had been deported. In terms of artistic quality, these pieces could be described as “living room art,” a term that well reflects the social function of Jewish upper-middle-class material culture. By combining the methodologies of provenance research and material culture studies, this article analyzes how the “living room art” that once belonged to the German Jewish middle-class closely related to social belonging, self-representation, and the identity of their owners and how the anti-Semitic persecution impacted their material life. This approach aims at reframing object-based provenance research – which is traditionally formulated in the context of the “art world,” for example, the study of art dealership, collecting, and museum history – in the context of the study of Jewish middle-class cultural consumption, small-scale private art collecting, and micro-history.","PeriodicalId":54155,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cultural Property","volume":"28 1","pages":"369 - 388"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45172904","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-01DOI: 10.1017/s0940739122000078
{"title":"JCP volume 28 issue 3 Cover and Back matter","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/s0940739122000078","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0940739122000078","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":54155,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cultural Property","volume":" ","pages":"b1 - b1"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48898264","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-01DOI: 10.1017/S0940739121000357
J. Graham
Abstract Few Old Master paintings possess as turbulent an object history as the Ghent altarpiece, now restored, since World War II, to the city’s cathedral for which it was made. While most accounts focus on the longue durée perspective, especially the work’s looting by Napoleon and Hitler, this article examines the altarpiece’s history following its return to Belgium in 1945. The altarpiece was subject to increased sensitivity at home after its wartime wanderings, and a major controversy ensued when the government backed a radical conservation project, which took place under the direction of Paul Coremans at the Royal Museum in Brussels between 1950 and 1951. The project served to emphasize the rift between north and south in Belgium in the newspaper press and became a focus for the international community as it battled to establish new standards in art restoration in the aftermath of the war.
{"title":"The Ghent altarpiece after World War II: Restitution, restoration, and redemption","authors":"J. Graham","doi":"10.1017/S0940739121000357","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0940739121000357","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Few Old Master paintings possess as turbulent an object history as the Ghent altarpiece, now restored, since World War II, to the city’s cathedral for which it was made. While most accounts focus on the longue durée perspective, especially the work’s looting by Napoleon and Hitler, this article examines the altarpiece’s history following its return to Belgium in 1945. The altarpiece was subject to increased sensitivity at home after its wartime wanderings, and a major controversy ensued when the government backed a radical conservation project, which took place under the direction of Paul Coremans at the Royal Museum in Brussels between 1950 and 1951. The project served to emphasize the rift between north and south in Belgium in the newspaper press and became a focus for the international community as it battled to establish new standards in art restoration in the aftermath of the war.","PeriodicalId":54155,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cultural Property","volume":"28 1","pages":"343 - 367"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44241314","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：