The Absent Framework
A Legal Semiotics Inquiry into the Destruction of Collective Memory through Cultural Heritage Loss
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21593522 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Isabella Salsano (0009-0009-3871-8441, University of Salento, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Publication date | 2025-11-06 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0952-8059 • E-ISSN: 1572-8722 |
| Publisher | Springer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1007/s11196-025-10382-w |
| OpenAlex | W4415956369 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 40 |
This article addresses a critical gap in international cultural heritage law: the lack of explicit legal recognition of cultural heritage’s role in preserving collective memory. Although normative instruments often refer to factors such as identity and cultural diversity, especially within human rights discourses, they consistently fail to conceive legacy as a vector of mnemonic continuity and collective historical knowledge. Through a computational semiotic analysis of significant legal documents, this paper reveals a recurring terminological omission: direct allusions to “memory” are downplayed, pointing to a broader conceptual blind spot in the legal regulation of cultural legacy. The loss of cultural heritage is not adequately addressed by international law, which still fails to recognise the mnemonic function of heritage and the deeper cultural disruption caused by its loss. This is particularly visible in conflict and post-conflict contexts, where heritage often has a stabilising and identity-affirming function. Grounded in legal theory, international law, and a rights-based approach to cultural governance, this paper presents a doctrinal and normative argument: cultural heritage protection must expand to encompass the preservation of memory as a legally significant interest. It argues that international law must go beyond seeing heritage as a passive item of cultural diversity or economic value and instead embrace a paradigm that acknowledges its active role in preserving memory, identity, and intergenerational continuity. The article concludes by advocating for the adoption of memory-sensitive principles in international cultural heritage law and urging the identification of memory loss as a distinct form of cultural damage
Collective memory · Cultural heritage · Cultural heritage management · Cultural identity · Cultural memory · International law · Mnemonic · Normative · Archaeological Research and Protection · Cultural Heritage Management and Preservation · Memory, Trauma, and Commemoration
Cultural Heritage and Human Rights
Collective memory
Does the Law Determine What Heritage to Remember
Cultural Trauma and Collective Identity
On Collective Memory
Cultural Heritage Rights and Rights Related to Cultural Heritage
Destruction, heritage and memory
Memory, Cultural Heritage and Community Rights
Law and Collective Memory
Intangible Cultural Heritage
Diaspora weavers
Culture as Collective Memories
Cultural heritage and memory
Between Memory and History
Negative Heritage and Past Mastering in Archaeology
Stored in the Bones
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |