殖民文化财产的法律、来源研究与归还:关于荷兰的平等与斯里兰卡文物的思考

Q2 Arts and Humanities
Naazima Kamardeen, Jos van Beurden
{"title":"殖民文化财产的法律、来源研究与归还:关于荷兰的平等与斯里兰卡文物的思考","authors":"Naazima Kamardeen, Jos van Beurden","doi":"10.4467/2450050xsnr.22.028.17041","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The status of colonial objects in European museums touches upon a matrix of legal and historical issues. This article engages with some of them, while referring to the case of a Sri Lankan object in the possession of the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam (RMA) in the Netherlands: a ceremonial cannon looted by the Dutch from the King of Kandy in 1765. The article offers a historical overview of the European colonial domination of Ceylon, distinguishing between the Portuguese, Dutch, and British periods, and for each period distinguishes the nature and the size of the confiscated heritage. It also analyses Sri Lanka’s legal title to the cannon, and the discrepancy between the international and mostly Euro-centric legal regime and Sri Lanka’s own legal framework. The article moves on to analyses of and reflections about the type of provenance research practiced by the RMA, as well as the broader efforts in the Netherlands for better provenance research. The importance of the cannon for both Sri Lanka and the Netherlands, as well as earlier efforts to retrieve it, are also described and evaluated. In its conclusions, the article proffers suggestions for more balance and equality in the provenance research efforts. The contribution covers legal studies, history, and museum studies and is based on the literature, historical catalogues, and other documents, as well as the practice of UNESCO’s Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property to its Countries titution in case of Illicit Appropriation (ICPRCP).","PeriodicalId":36554,"journal":{"name":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Law, Provenance Research, and Restitution of Colonial Cultural Property: Reflections on (In)Equality and a Sri Lankan Object in the Netherlands\",\"authors\":\"Naazima Kamardeen, Jos van Beurden\",\"doi\":\"10.4467/2450050xsnr.22.028.17041\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The status of colonial objects in European museums touches upon a matrix of legal and historical issues. This article engages with some of them, while referring to the case of a Sri Lankan object in the possession of the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam (RMA) in the Netherlands: a ceremonial cannon looted by the Dutch from the King of Kandy in 1765. The article offers a historical overview of the European colonial domination of Ceylon, distinguishing between the Portuguese, Dutch, and British periods, and for each period distinguishes the nature and the size of the confiscated heritage. It also analyses Sri Lanka’s legal title to the cannon, and the discrepancy between the international and mostly Euro-centric legal regime and Sri Lanka’s own legal framework. The article moves on to analyses of and reflections about the type of provenance research practiced by the RMA, as well as the broader efforts in the Netherlands for better provenance research. The importance of the cannon for both Sri Lanka and the Netherlands, as well as earlier efforts to retrieve it, are also described and evaluated. In its conclusions, the article proffers suggestions for more balance and equality in the provenance research efforts. The contribution covers legal studies, history, and museum studies and is based on the literature, historical catalogues, and other documents, as well as the practice of UNESCO’s Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property to its Countries titution in case of Illicit Appropriation (ICPRCP).\",\"PeriodicalId\":36554,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Santander Art and Culture Law Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Santander Art and Culture Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050xsnr.22.028.17041\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Santander Art and Culture Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4467/2450050xsnr.22.028.17041","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

殖民地文物在欧洲博物馆中的地位涉及一系列法律和历史问题。本文涉及其中一些,同时提到荷兰阿姆斯特丹国立博物馆(RMA)拥有的斯里兰卡物品:1765年荷兰从康提国王手中掠夺的仪式大炮。本文对欧洲殖民统治锡兰的历史进行了概述,区分了葡萄牙、荷兰和英国时期,并对每个时期没收的遗产的性质和规模进行了区分。它还分析了斯里兰卡对大炮的法律所有权,以及主要以欧洲为中心的国际法律制度与斯里兰卡自己的法律框架之间的差异。文章接着分析和思考了RMA实施的种源研究类型,以及荷兰为更好地进行种源研究所做的更广泛的努力。还描述和评估了这门大炮对斯里兰卡和荷兰的重要性,以及早些时候为取回它所做的努力。在结论中,文章提出了在原产地研究工作中更加平衡和平等的建议。该贡献涵盖法律研究、历史和博物馆研究,基于文献、历史目录和其他文件,以及教科文组织促进文化财产归还本国政府间委员会(ICPRCP)在非法占有情况下的做法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Law, Provenance Research, and Restitution of Colonial Cultural Property: Reflections on (In)Equality and a Sri Lankan Object in the Netherlands
The status of colonial objects in European museums touches upon a matrix of legal and historical issues. This article engages with some of them, while referring to the case of a Sri Lankan object in the possession of the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam (RMA) in the Netherlands: a ceremonial cannon looted by the Dutch from the King of Kandy in 1765. The article offers a historical overview of the European colonial domination of Ceylon, distinguishing between the Portuguese, Dutch, and British periods, and for each period distinguishes the nature and the size of the confiscated heritage. It also analyses Sri Lanka’s legal title to the cannon, and the discrepancy between the international and mostly Euro-centric legal regime and Sri Lanka’s own legal framework. The article moves on to analyses of and reflections about the type of provenance research practiced by the RMA, as well as the broader efforts in the Netherlands for better provenance research. The importance of the cannon for both Sri Lanka and the Netherlands, as well as earlier efforts to retrieve it, are also described and evaluated. In its conclusions, the article proffers suggestions for more balance and equality in the provenance research efforts. The contribution covers legal studies, history, and museum studies and is based on the literature, historical catalogues, and other documents, as well as the practice of UNESCO’s Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property to its Countries titution in case of Illicit Appropriation (ICPRCP).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Santander Art and Culture Law Review
Santander Art and Culture Law Review Arts and Humanities-Visual Arts and Performing Arts
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信