Preserving the World’s Most Important Artifacts
The Memory of World Register lists over 800 historic manuscripts, maps, films and more to help raise funds for preservation
- By Judith H. Dobrzynski
- Smithsonian.com, March 30, 2009, Subscribe
The 13th century Tripitaka Koreana features 81,258 wooden blocks thought to be the world's most complete collection of Buddhist texts. John Van Hasselt / Corbis
Photo Gallery
|
Preserving the World’s Most Important ArtifactsExplore more photos from the story |
Video Gallery
Restaging the Greensboro Counter Sit-in
Learn how to stage a sit-in right next to the Greensboro lunch counter
The John Marshall Ju/'hoan Bushman Film and Video Collection, 1950-2000
Watch a selection from the Smithsonian Institution’s submission for the UNESCO Memory of the World Register of historic artifacts
What would you call a list that includes the 11th-century Bayeaux tapestries and the proceedings of the trial of Nelson Mandela? Plus Story of the Kelly Gang, the world's first feature-length film, made in 1906, and Iran’s 10th-century Book of Kings, considered Persia’s Iliad? And even Grimm’s fairy tales, Alfred Nobel’s family archives and the 13th-century Tripitaka Koreana, 81,258 wooden blocks thought to be the world’s most complete collection of Buddhist texts?
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), which keeps such a list, calls it the Memory of the World Register. And the list will get longer this August.
U.N. agency had little money for preservation, it decided to safeguard as much as it could by naming manuscripts, maps, films, textiles, sound files and other historical documents and artifacts to the register.
“We raise awareness of the importance of these collections,” says Joie Springer, the senior program officer for the Memory of the World Register. “It’s a seal of approval, enabling them to raise funds for preservation and raise the profile of the institution that owns the collection.”
In many ways, the Memory of the World Register mimics UNESCO’s World Heritage Sites roster, which currently lists 878 cultural or natural places around the globe. Designation as a heritage site bestows cachet and often turns historically significant places into tourist attractions; a listing on the Register could have a parallel impact.
But the Memory of the World Register, which totals 158 items, is 20 years younger than the sites program and less well known. Documentary treasures usually can’t be visited by tourists, and they tend to appeal to a narrower, better educated public. Even some high-ranking professionals—such as Geoffrey Harpham, director of the National Humanities Center, and Bruce Cole, who until recently was chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities—have never heard of the register, though both say they think it’s a great idea. “The historical imagination of any culture has to be founded on facts,” says Harpham. “Anything that helps bring those facts to the attention of the public is a valuable thing.”
UNESCO would like the program to be better known, too, Springer says; it is now taking a survey to determine who knows about the register and how a listing has helped objects on it. But she also notes that it may lack prominence here because the United States withdrew from UNESCO in 1984, re-joining only in 2002. The U.S. has just two listings on the register: The Wizard of Oz, submitted by the George Eastman House, and the 1507 World map by Martin Waldseemüller, the first to name the New World “America.” It was submitted by the Library of Congress, which owns the only surviving copy, and the mapmaker’s native Germany.
The Register is expanded in odd-numbered years. In each round, each UNESCO member (193 at the moment) may make up to two nominations. (And if they submit joint-proposals with another country, there is no limit.)
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.
Related topics: UN Archives
| Tweet | Digg |
Comments (2)
I have heard about UNESCO but not about the register. I think the Wizard of Oz books should be listed as they are, in the original form, very hard to find. The one following the movie won't be lost but it is not the same since Hollywood doesn't ever film anything exactly as the books go.
Posted by D.I.G, on April 25,2009 | 12:46 AM
I didn't know about UNESCO or the register before. I think it's a really good idea,but putting such modern things in like The Wizard Of Oz seems kind of pointless to me. It's not like we're about to lose every last copy anytime soon, right?
Posted by J.A.W. on April 12,2009 | 08:29 PM