Alix Mazuet (Stanford University)
amaz@****.com (Log-in to reveal)
From the Roman destruction of Druidic sacred groves at Mona (60 CE) to the burning of Beijing’s Old Summer Palace (1860), from the looting of archaeological sites in contemporary conflict zones to the clandestine burial of manuscripts by librarians under siege—war has always been a mortal threat to cultural patrimony. Yet wars have also, paradoxically, galvanized acts of preservation, from grassroots rescue operations to elite-led restoration projects.
This session takes a long view, welcoming research from any period, region, or type of armed conflict (ancient to contemporary, interstate to civil war, colonial to anti-colonial). The organizing question is not a moral verdict on any group but rather a practical and legal one: How adequate are existing political, legal, and institutional frameworks—from international law to local governance—for protecting cultural patrimony in wartime, and why do failures persist?
Three complementary themes:
The Vulnerability of Patrimony in War
- Intentional destruction as military strategy? Looting as economic warfare? Collateral damage as neglect?Ruling Classes—Between Destruction and Protection
- When and why do ruling classes (state actors, military commanders, occupying powers, insurgent leaders) order or permit destruction? When do they invest in protection?Preservation as Hope, Governance as Prevention
- What do successful acts of wartime preservation look like (e.g., hidden archives, evacuated museum collections, community-led protection networks)?The session prioritizes awareness and shared learning. It aims to present scholars and, through them, policymakers and the public with comparative knowledge of how cultural patrimony is lost and saved in wartime. A library that reopens after a siege, a monument restored after bombardment, an archive that survives underground—these are not just symbols. They are tangible evidence that preservation is possible, and that ruling classes, whether through enlightened self-interest or genuine conviction, can choose protection over destruction. The session could end with an open conversation on how to translate historical lessons into present-day advocacy.