Le Monde reports on the International Red Cross returning an archive of 80 000 items pertaining to the Spanish Civil War to the Republic of Spain, to help them research and preserve the memory of this significant event. In addition to being a significant endeavor on it's own right, this news items reminds me of an important detail in cultural heritage studies that is often overlooked to the detriment of the heritage: Museums and universities aren't the only ones making cultural heritage.

It is quite easy to get stuck in the familiar grounds of museums, public humanities and cultural studies, when talking about cultural heritage. Even discussions about the illegal relocation of objects is often talked about in a way that involves only private individuals, museums and the state as a mediator between them (through the process of legislation). The truth of the matter is that many organizations, some of which have no direct relation to issues of cultural heritage, can become involved in the debate, some willing, some unwilling.

The Red Cross is one example of such an organization, whose prime objective is not to deal with the preservation of cultural heritage issues, but who has been placed in a situation where it needs to deal with it. Another organization is the US Military. Larry Rothfield, of the Punching Bag, reports on the repercussions of military inaction in Iraq leading to the looting of the Iraq National Museums and destruction of a significant amount of the world's cultural heritage. The truth of the matter seems to be, that a lot of the destruction was caused not by malicious intent, but simply by wild ignorance of cultural heritage issues by the people planning the war. Hence the addition to the military field manual on Stability of Operations regarding the protection of cultural heritage.

These examples should serve as warning as to how dangerous it is to close certain subjects in an ivory tower and pretend that they are not related to "real world" issues. Cultural heritage, perhaps by it's reference to the past and the world "culture" in it, is often designated as a secondary concern by people dealing with "more important stuff", such as the economy or governance. However, such neglect can easily come around and bite you in the butt, as the world-wide debate regarding the protection of the Iraq museum has shown. However, such understanding has to begin with recognizing cultural heritage as a primary concern, not a tangentially related subset of a more important concern. For instance, the military need not protect cultural heritage, because it is vital to the stability of the region (though true), it needs to protect heritage, because it heritage is a important part of humanity. Similarly, while New York City's assessment of the economic profitability of Eliasson's "Waterfalls" may provide insight into the cost-benefit analysis of public humanities, it needs to be recognized at the same time, that an economic analysis can never be the sole assessment to the success of a piece of public cultural heritage.