December 8, 2010
French Bibliothèque Nationale staff speak out agains return of Korean manuscripts
Following the recent announcement by France’s president that the Bibliothèque Nationale would return numerous looted manuscripts to Korea has led to a backlash by librarians from the BNF. This issue (where the president makes decision without first discussing it with all stakeholders, followed by a subsequent backlash) is very similar to what happened with the Palermo fragment of the Parthenon Frieze in 2006, whereby the Italian president stated that the fragment would be returned, but had not discussed this with the museum in Sicily which held it, leading to a very lengthy delay before the fragment finally arrived in Athens.
The BNF staff have responded by creating a petition against the return of the manuscripts.
From:
Jesigne
Statut de la pétition
Declaration of On the fringes of G20 summit in Seoul, the President of the Republic has announced the return to South Korea of a vast collection of Korean manuscripts held by the Bibliothèque nationale de France since 1867. It should not be forgotten that copies of most of these manuscripts exist in Korea.
– the decision was taken against the advice of the Bibliothèque and of the Ministry of Culture, which for years have pleaded in favour in agreements involving reciprocity or corresponding benefits (exchange, mutual loans etc.). Any such possibility has now been abandoned.
– the decision deprives the Bibliothèque nationale de France of an important set of documents which it has long sought to preserve, restore, inventory to make them available for the researchers, as it is the fact for the numerous foreign collections it has gathered since the 17th century, demonstrating its high regard for the heritage of all civilisations across the world and its desire to make this heritage available to everyone.– under the cover of a loan renewable every five years, the decision is equivalent to a de facto restitution, contradicting the law. It will allow manuscripts to return to France in a manner that is at best episodic, and is sure to strenghten the increasingly sustained claims for the return of cultural property that various countries are making to the archives, museums and libraries in France, Europe, and beyond.
– the decision demonstrates the growing and worrying subordination of the law and heritage policy to politic economic and geostrategic considerations, at the risk of threatening the principle of inalienability in respect of public collections.
For these reasons, the following staff at the BnF wish to publicly express their disapproval of such a decision.
Amongst the first signatures :
Denis Bruckmann, conservateur général, directeur des collections, Thierry Delcourt, conservateur général, directeur du département des Manuscrits, Monique Cohen, conservateur général honoraire, ancienne directrice du département des Manuscrits, Sylvie Aubenas, conservateur général, directrice du département des Estampes, Antoine Coron, conservateur général, directeur de la Réserve des livres rares, Michel Amandry, conservateur général, directeur du département des Monnaies Médailles et Antiques, Laure Beaumont-Maillet, conservateur général honoraire, ancienne directrice du département des Estampes, Gérald Grunberg, conservateur général, chargé des relations internationales, Catherine Gaziello, conservateur général, directrice du département Philosophie Histoire Sciences de l’homme, Jean Yves Sarazin, conservateur en chef, directeur du département des Cartes et plans, Catherine Massip, conservateur général honoraire, ancien directeur du département de la Musique, Thierry Grillet, délégué à la diffusion culturelle, Noëlle Guibert, conservateur général honoraire, ancienne directrice du département des Arts du spectacle, Josué Seckel, conservateur général, directeur du département de la recherche bibliographique, Anne Sophie Delhaye, conservateur en chef, adjointe au directeur du département des Manuscrits, Laurent Héricher, conservateur en chef au département des Manuscrits, Elizabeth Giuliani, conservateur général, adjointe au directeur du département de l’audiovisuel, Hélène Jacobsen, conservatrice générale, directrice du département du Dépôt légal, …This declaration is available in french and in English on the website jesigne.fr. In case of problem, you can also write to motioncoree@yahoo.fr to add your name.
- Should France return the manuscripts from the Korean Royal to Korea? : January 7, 2011
- Opposition to Korean manuscript return from French Librarians : December 9, 2010
- French court rules on disputed Korean manuscripts : January 19, 2010
- Seoul’s requests for Royal Archive return : February 12, 2006
- French president pledges to return disputed royal manuscripts to South Korea : December 3, 2010
- Negotiations between Korea & France over manuscript return : January 11, 2011
- Korea asks France for copies of looted books : July 6, 2005
- France agrees to return Korean royal Uigwe books : December 6, 2010
Dr.Kwame Opoku said,
12.11.10 at 6:51 pm
PROTEST BY OFFICIALS AT THE FRENCH BIBLIOTHÈQUE NATIONAL AT REPATRIATION OF LOOTED DOCUMENTS BACK TO KOREA.
I assume the official at the French Bibliothèque National are conscious of what they are doing and are aware of the implications of their stand of the return of the looted manuscripts back to Korea.
One is surprised at the very feeble arguments presented for their opposition to the decision by Sarkozy to return the manuscript to Korea:
“It should not be forgotten that copies of most of these manuscripts exist in Korea”
That copies of the manuscript exist in Korea is no argument against the return of the original to the country of origin. The French could also make copies before the originals are returned to Korea. Or are copies only good for Korea, the land that produced the originals but not for France,the land that took them away by military force?
That “the decision was taken against the advice of the Bibliothèque and of the Ministry of Culture” raises issues of competence and authority that can be settled by French lawyers and the courts. This contention does not affect at all the juridical situation regarding the ownership of the manuscripts as far as Korea is concerned.
The argument that the decision
“is sure to strenghten the increasingly sustained claims for the return of cultural property that various countries are making to the archives, museums and libraries in France, Europe, and beyond.”
This may be so but Korea and other States that are claiming the return of artefacts looted from their countries do not need such decision to bolster up their claims. These demands have been made over decades are no novel issues. This is an old argument that if you give in here others will also come and claim their stolen objects. Does the Bibliothèque consists only of looted objects or objects of dubious acquisition?
“- the decision demonstrates the growing and worrying subordination of the law and heritage policy to politic economic and geostrategic considerations, at the risk of threatening the principle of inalienability in respect of public collections.
With all due respect to the protesters, the French should be the last to make such an argument for nowhere else are politics, economics, and geostrategic so intertwined with such considerations as in France. Think of the establishment of the Musee du quai Branly, the Bibliothèque National François Mitterrand and all the various cultural institutions that have been built on political considerations. The very names of these institutions show the political motivations at work.
“The risk of threatening the principle of inalienability in respect of public collections.”
This is no doubt a useful and necessary principle in preserving national cultural property but where it is clearly established that the objects have been stolen or looted, surely that principle should not apply. In any case,, there is a procedure under French law for seeking a modification by application to the Minister of culture as has been done recently in the case of certain Egyptian artefacts and also in the case of human remains that were returned to South Africa and also the Maori heads that wre returned to the Maoris, in New Zealand..
The protesters should be reminded that in several United Nations and UNESCO resolutions and Conferences, holding countries have been urged to return cultural objects to their country of origin.
ICOM Code of Ethics for Museums – 2001 Edition
Provides that:
6.2 Return of Cultural Property
Museums should be prepared to initiate dialogues for the return of cultural property to a country or people of origin. This should be undertaken in an impartial manner, based on scientific, professional and humanitarian principles as well as applicable local, national and international legislation, in preference to action at a governmental or political level.
6.3 Restitution of Cultural Property
When a country or people of origin seeks the restitution of an object or specimen that can be demonstrated to have been exported or otherwise transferred in violation of the principles of international and national conventions, and shown to be part of that country’s or people’s cultural or natural heritage, the museum concerned should, if legally free to do so, take prompt and responsible steps to co-operate in its return.
The Bibliotheque should have followed these principles in handling the Korean manuscripts.
We have always maintained the view that if museums and libraries would not seek to arrive at acceptable compromises with countries of origin of artefacts, the politicians will eventually step in and act in a way that may not please the specialists but will solve the issue. This is what has happened. Are the French museums and libraries going to learn from the case of the Korean manuscripts and act before politicians intervene in the other pending claims from the African, Asian and American States?
One has the impression that the protesters have forgotten the natural and logical interest of the Koreans in their manuscripts. It may also be questioned on what moral basis the French officials are protesting in a matter in which return is the honourable solution. The protest does not show any concern for the Koreans even though the protesters write about the Bibliothèque “demonstrating its high regard for the heritage of all civilizations across the world and its desire to make this heritage available to everyone. A high regard for all civilizations should move all to support the claims of the Koreans to recover their manuscripts taken away by brutal military force.