A consideration of the U.S. initiatives in response to the loss of cultural property in Latin America and Canada, as seen by a participant in their formulation and implementation from 1969 to 1994; cultural and aesthetic viewpoints are seen to divide the cultural property constituencies, although the former is prevailing. The significance of the U.S. UNESCO cultural property implementing legislation for five requesting countries and for Mexico is discussed, with a final recommendation for its emendation so as to allow the United States to respond immediately to the requests of all parties to the convention.

This article argues that the question of whether the nation-state or the international community is the legitimate guardian of cultural property can only be answered with reference to what we expect measures of protection of our cultural heritage to accomplish. The very concept of 'protection' is at stake, and two different schools (object-centrism versus functionalism) are to be distinguished. Whereas object centrism focuses on the cultural object and its protection as a value in its own right, functionalism argues that the cultural heritage cannot even be identified as such without reference to society and its meaning for societal processes of acculturation and socialization. This article endorses functionalism and develops a perspective that includes identity and cross-cultural communication as the most important functions of all cultural heritage. These two criteria should guide our thinking about the legitimate guardian of cultural heritage in general.

According to the Austrian art historian Alois Riegl (1857–1905), cultural heritage possesses age value (Alterswert) based on the perception of an object’s visible traces of age. His 1903 essay “The Modern Cult of Monuments” became a classic, and age value has ever since been constitutive for cultural heritage. Closer scrutiny, however, reveals that clever copies, reconstructions, and imaginative inventions can possess age value too. I therefore suggest “pastness” as a useful term for denoting the perception that a given object is “of the past.” Pastness is not immanent in an object but, rather, results from its appearance (for example, patina), its context (for example, in a museum), or its correspondence with preconceived expectations among the audience. In this article, I review the concept of pastness and discuss its implications for the global heritage sector. Age value emerges as being less universal than Riegl thought and was linked to a very particular intellectual and cultural context.

This article examines the main lines of Greek legislation on antiquities and on cultural heritage in general, in the course of its history, with an emphasis on the innovations and continuity of the current Law 3028 of 2002. It attempts to place the Greek case in the context of the relevant international experience and the broader debate about ownership of the past. It throws light on the relationship between the legal framework of antiquities and the formation and fostering of national identity in Greece, and on their close connection with the state, while at the same time criticizing the view that opposes a “cultural internationalist” approach to heritage to the “cultural nationalism” of Greece and other source countries.

China’s broad geopolitical strategy and positioning for global influence includes its averred legal position in relation to its sovereignty and jurisdiction in the South China Sea. A response to this legal position was the Philippines’ initiation of arbitral proceedings constituted under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Despite the non-participation of China in these proceedings, the arbitral decision of 2016 clarified a number of legal provisions pertinent to the ongoing territorial and maritime disputes in the South China Sea. This decision impacted directly on China’s assertion of sovereign and jurisdictional historical title or rights, which, in part, relies on evidence obtained from underwater cultural heritage and the associated maritime archaeology. This article critically evaluates China’s maritime archaeology program and its policy with respect to underwater cultural heritage in light of the 2016 arbitral decision and the underlying international law of the sea. While recognizing that China’s policy is not inconsistent with its broader heritage policy, and its national approach to the protection of underwater cultural heritage, this article argues that this cannot be used to support China’s South China Sea claims and is not only misplaced, such as to pose a risk to the archaeological record, but also inconstant with international developments in the form of the 2001 United Nations Convention of the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage.

Objects were and still are pivotal in configuring intertribal relationships; and equally, they played a crucial role in negotiating the borders between early colonial situations and Māori, the indigenous people of Aotearoa New Zealand. This article explores the notion of object efficacy through discussing further relational values such as place, oral and written histories, visionary leadership, and political and culturally defined imperatives, particularly as they contribute to reviving an object's embedded knowledge, in this case the entangled agencies of taonga.

The article examines the problematic politics of expertise in the formation of international legal rules in the field of heritage, looking specifically at international conventions made under the auspices of UNESCO. The article shows that, even within this seemingly small and cohesive universe, there is a lot of room for disagreement, and much of it can be traced back to what Laurajane Smith has called “the Authorized Heritage Discourse” (AHD). The AHD is responsible for the dichotomization of heritage between intangible and tangible, as heritage professionals strive to hold on to and expand their self-created professional legitimacy and importance. Heritage professionals, in striving to maintain their relevance, tend to create self-referential regimes that exclude heritage holders and communities. I argue that lawyers, because of their own professional tendencies, might be in a position to offer a counterpoint to rule by experts in international cultural heritage management.

In the debate about indigenous cultural property, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) of the United States has developed and implemented an unorthodox concept of “cultural affiliation.” The act entitles Indian tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations to claim repatriation of their cultural property—comprising human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural patrimony—upon the establishment of a specific shared group identity and a cultural affiliation to an object. The concept of cultural affiliation in the act replaces proof of ownership, or proof that an object was stolen or illicitly removed. It thereby amends traditional standards saturated in notions of property and ownership that have perpetuated since Roman law and allows the evolution of a control regime over cultural property that takes into account the cultural aspects of the objects. On an international level, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) of 2007 stipulates a similar emancipation of indigenous peoples' cultural property claims from notions of property and ownership. This article explores NAGPRA's cultural affiliation concept as it stands between private property and human rights law and brings into focus the concept's elements that go beyond traditional property law. It ultimately looks at the potential and limits of the concept from an international perspective as a standard for other countries that consider implementation of UNDRIP's provisions on indigenous, tangible, movable cultural property.

In 2005 foxhunting was prohibited by an act of parliament in England. The Hunting Act 2004 forbade the highly formal and ritualized hunting of foxes with packs of hounds and thus brought to an end a practice that had been present in the countryside for some 200 years. In this article I explore the complexities of foxhunting as a social and cultural practice prior to the ban as well as the nature of the ban as it relates to killing foxes. I then explore the effects of the ban in terms of how, from the perspectives of the supporters of foxhunting, it is experienced as an attack on cherished notions of community, rural life, belonging, and connectivity with the countryside.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: I would like to thank Captain Brian Fanshawe and Captain Rupert Inglesant for their invaluable suggestions. I would also like to thank Stephanie Schwandner-Sievers, who still has the patience to read drafts and unpick muddled thinking and writing.

The 2003 UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage specifies that communities are to be full partners in efforts to safeguard their intangible cultural heritage. Yet the notion of safeguarding has been complicated by the politics and mechanisms of digital circulation. Based on fieldwork in British Columbia and Thailand, I show that community-based productions of multimedia aimed at documenting, transmitting, and revitalizing intangible heritage are productive spaces in which local cultural property rights discourses are initiated and articulated. I argue that digital heritage initiatives can support decision making about the circulation—or restriction—of digital cultural heritage while drawing attention to the complexities of safeguarding heritage in the digital age.

In an influential article published in 2000, David Gill and Christopher Chippindale devised a scale to assess the quality of the provenance information provided for the antiquities displayed in seven recent high-profile exhibitions or collections. This article critically reviews Chippindale and Gill’s provenance scale, arguing that the values it encodes legitimize some of the more intellectually harmful practices of dealers and curators. The scale also fails to differentiate between more intellectually responsible methods of hypothesizing provenance and those that merely generate houses of cards. An alternative model for assessing how antiquities are discussed in museum scholarship, focusing on epistemological precision and reflexivity, is offered.

This article introduces the concept of the dark side of cultural heritage protection. It points out how the many and mostly honorable efforts to protect cultural heritage against the harms of war and conflict sometimes contribute to make cultural heritage vulnerable or even to cause its destruction. The more we talk about cultural heritage and its value and the importance of protecting it, the more interesting it becomes for some groups to target it. This article argues that states, international organizations, and the heritage community need to recognize these negative side effects and make sure to consider them in future action.

Ownership is often understood merely as a function of social relations, that is, it emerges merely because of the relations between people with respect to the things that they own. Concomitantly ownership is also seen as being dependent upon creativity to bring its force into motion. Far from dismissing such a view of ownership, it is acknowledged that such a view possibly comes from a world that is preoccupied with creativity. This discussion aims to show a particular kind of dialectic between creativity and ownership that underlies discourses about intellectual property especially in countries like Papua New Guinea. Through an ethnographic concern with personal names and their attendant claims to ownership and creativity, this paper aims to show how two trajectories of ownership co-exist in a Papua New Guinea society.

The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) occupied the city of Manbij and its countryside from 23 January 2014 until 12 August 2016. During this period, the region suffered greatly as ISIS monopolized control and brutally imposed its ideology. Fierce battles were fought for the control of oil wells, bakeries, mills, dams, and power stations, all of which were sources of revenue. Antiquities were soon recognized as another potential income source. This article demonstrates the ways in which ISIS began to administer and facilitate the looting of antiquities through the Diwan Al-Rikaz. Within this diwan, ISIS established the Qasmu Al-Athar, which was specifically responsible for looting antiquities. Based on interviews conducted in 2015 and primary documents, this article studies the specific ways in which ISIS facilitated the quarrying and looting of antiquities in Manbij and the rich archaeological sites of its countryside. Further, by examining the damage at a previously undocumented archaeological site, Meshrefet Anz, the looting of antiquities under the direct supervision of the Diwan Al-Rikaz is studied. Using documentary evidence including ISIS’s internal documentation as well as photographs collected by the author between 2014 and 2016, the article demonstrates the methods used by ISIS, reveals its financial motivations, and bears witness to the damage done at specific Syrian heritage sites.

New Zealand concerns regarding cultural heritage focus almost exclusively on the indigenous Maori of that country. This article includes discussion of the way in which New Zealand regulates the local sale and export of Maori material cultural objects. It examines recent proposals to reform this system, including allowing Maori custom to determine ownership of newly found objects.

A major development in New Zealand law concerns the role of a quasi-judicial body, the Waitangi Tribunal. Many tribunal decisions have contained lengthy discussions of Maori taonga (cultural treasures) and of alleged past misconduct by former governments and their agents in relation to such objects and Maori cultural heritage in general.

As is the case with legal systems elsewhere, New Zealand seeks to reconcile the claims of its indigenous peoples with other priorities, such as economic development and environmental protection. Maori concerns have led to major changes in New Zealand heritage conservation law. A Maori Heritage Council now acts to ensure that places and sites of Maori interest will be protected. The council also plays a role in mediating conflicting interests of Maori and others, such as scientists, in relation to the scientific investigation of various sites.

Despite these developments, New Zealand has yet to sign the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export, and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property. The changes proposed to New Zealand cultural property law have yet to be implemented, and there is evidence of uncertainty about the extent to which protecting indigenous Maori rights can be reconciled with the development of a national cultural identity and the pursuit of universal concerns, such as sustainable development.

Retentive nationalism has until recently dominated thinking about the international movement of cultural property, while the international interest in an active licit trade has been ignored and the interests of museums, collectors and the art and antiquities trade have been denigrated. An active licit market in cultural property advances the international interest, provides income to source nations and reduces the harm done by the black market. Trade in “culturally moveable” objects in private hands serves the international interest and is internationally licit, even when it offends national export controls. Source nations can reduce the damage from clandestine excavations by employing more sophisticated domestic controls and feeding surplus archaeological objects to the licit market. The “commodification” objection to an active trade in cultural objects lacks substance. Market nations can provide the most effective political force for development of an active market. They, and the art and antiquities trade, can help source nations finance organization of their cultural property resources for effective participation in a licit international trade.

The British parliamentary report on Cultural Property: Return and Illicit Trade was published in 2000. Three key areas were addressed: the illicit excavation and looting of antiquities, the identification of works of art looted by Nazis, and the return of cultural property now residing in British collections. The evidence presented by interested parties—including law enforcement agencies and dealers in antiquities—to the Culture, Media and Sport Committee is assessed against the analysis of collecting patterns for antiquities. The lack of self regulation by those involved in the antiquities market supports the view that the British Government needs to adopt more stringent legislation to combat the destruction of archaeological sites by looting.

Natural and human disasters continue to destroy historic urban fabrics worldwide. While residents would often like to see their cities rebuilt “as they were,” most scholars of heritage fiercely reject identical reconstructions by arguing either that they are “fake” simulations, or that they epitomize undemocratic urbanization processes. Challenging these arguments, I first draw from literature on theming to argue that it is precisely “fakeness” that allows people to construct a sense of authenticity in rebuilt urban spaces. Next, I show how preoccupations with participation and justice can paradoxically lead professionals to advance the same universalistic, undemocratic heritage approach that they claim to contest. By enabling diverse people to negotiate a sense of the past, confront each other, and share new aspirations for the future, identical reconstructions are heritage as much as, if not more than, other “historic” urban fabrics.