“This remarkable work is made up of five hundred dazzling green, red, blue, and white quetzal feathers, with three-foot-long iridescent green tail feathers radiating from a multicolored semicircular band.” So wrote the inimitable Tom Hoving in his book Greatest Works of Art of Western Civilization.
He was describing Montezuma’s headdress, the only surviving pre-Columbian headdress of its type. It was given to Hernan Cortes, the conquistador, in 1519. Cortes later gave it to the Hapsburg emperor Charles V, ruler of the Holy Roman Empire. It has been in Europe ever since, but now — perhaps — it may go home to Mexico on a three-year loan.
Martin Bailey has the story in the March Art Newspaper, just published online this morning. Like Bailey, I agree this could be a model for other disputes pieces of cultural property. In return for the loan, Mexico would send an artifact to Vienna: “This could be the golden coach of Mexico’s Emperor Maximilian in the Museo Nacional de Historia,” The Art Newspaper says.
Bailey reports:
Last year the two countries agreed to co-operate over this part of their shared cultural heritage with Mexico’s National Institute for Anthropology and History and Austria’s Museum of Ethnology forming a bi-national commission.
…Two issues need to be resolved before a loan can be arranged. The first hurdle is legal, since there is a long-standing Mexican law that forbids the re-export of any archaeological material from the country. Initially it was hoped that the headdress would not be regarded as archaeological, but the Vienna museum needs assurance that its return would not be blocked. A special presidential decree on the headdress was discussed, but this might not be legally binding on future presidents….
Austrian and Mexican conservators also need to agree to the loan. The headdress was remounted on a display board in 1992 and cannot be easily detached. Conservators are reluctant to do so until a decision has been made on a new backing. This will depend on whether it has to be fit to travel.
Resolution of both issues are likely this year.
I hope it happens. It would help move forward the debate on cultural property and establish a model that other countries might follow to resolve disputes.