The issue of restitution is one that is witnessed throughout the world, at various levels. This thesis explores the type of restitution seen within Romania, and examines the procedures utilised by...Show moreThe issue of restitution is one that is witnessed throughout the world, at various levels. This thesis explores the type of restitution seen within Romania, and examines the procedures utilised by two museums in the return of cultural objects. The focus is placed in the procedures of the Brukenthal National Museum and the Medias Municipal Museum, in Sibiu County. The interesting aspect of these restitutions is that, unlike in many Western museums, restitution cases in Romania are often internal, and carried out between state museums and private individuals. The impact of the Communist regime, and their forceful nationalisation of privately owned cultural objects create a deeper understanding of why current restitution cases occur within the nation. This included their direct and indirect effect on current restitution claims at the two museums. The research was carried out using semi-structured interviews with curators at the museums, along with one former curator at the Medias Municipal Museum, and an interview with the claimant of the Gheorghe Cernea case. These were further supported by written surveys completed by four additional museums: Bran Castle, the National Museum of Transylvanian History, the National Museum of Romanian History, and the Moldovan National Museum Complex. Questions asked included their procedures related to unprovenanced objects, their procedures related to restitution cases, and their personal opinions on the ethics of the return of objects. The findings demonstrate three main points: acquisition procedures from the communist period, and unknown provenance of objects complicate current restitution claims; the Romanian government involved itself in museum exhibitions in an attempt to control the cultural identity made public, and thus by extension influenced the types of objects entered in the collection; and the restitution procedures of the participating museums are judicial in nature. Thus the Communist regime influenced current restitution claims in two ways: indirectly, and directly. The creation of law no. 182/2000 in response to these crimes committed by the government, to aid in the restitution of cultural objects further demonstrates the indirect influence of the former regime. An imbalance remains, favouring the return of immovable cultural heritage, in both laws and organisations helping individuals file claims. Whilst the research is limited in this thesis, it is hoped that it stimulates future studies on the subject, to bring the issue to a greater audience and reduce the taboo around cultural object restitution that remains in Romanian heritage institutions.Show less
