In an era of intensifying global interconnection and mounting pressure for historical reckoning, repatriation 1 has emerged as a critical arena where museums navigate the fraught intersections of cultural diplomacy and sovereignty. 2 Once framed primarily as a legal or ethical imperative, the restitution of cultural property now functions as a strategic site of negotiation 3 that compels museums to redefine their roles within transnational networks of cultural governance. As institutions historically tasked with the stewardship of contested objects, museums today operate as diplomatic actors engaged in processes that transcend national boundaries 4 and implicate broader structures of international cooperation and historical accountability, an evolution that mirrors ongoing efforts to redefine the very role of museums within global institutions such as the International Council of Museums (ICOM). 5 This paper situates repatriation as a distinctly political practice, one shaped by transnational pressures, contested sovereignties, and shifting institutional roles. 6 As Neil MacGregor has noted in A History of the World in 100 Objects , museums use objects to tell stories about human civilization, power, and identity; the possession and narration of those objects, then, becomes central to how institutions assert authority and interpret the nation. 7
Christina Iannelli (Thu,) studied this question.