The recent vandalism of the Nguyen Dynasty’s golden throne, a national treasure, has once again sounded the alarm over heritage conservation and protection, particularly as numerous heritage sites and national treasures have been damaged and deteriorated due to both subjective and objective causes. It is time to change the way heritage is protected.
National treasures harmed for silly reasons
Over many years, heritage experts and enthusiasts have had to witness numerous national treasures and cultural heritage sites suffer severe damage from human actions as well as from unforeseen incidents.
In April 2014, the Sung Thien Dien Linh stone stele, a national treasure at Long Doi Son Temple in Ha Nam Province, was scratched and roughened just before a ceremony to announce its national treasure status.
To clean the stele in time for the event, the local cultural agency hired a team of masons who used grinding stones, sandpaper, wire brushes, and steel shavings to scrub and polish it.
As a result, two lines of text personally inscribed by Emperor Ly Nhan Tong on the stele’s head were scratched, damaging and wearing down the characters, while the text on the stele’s body and its decorative patterns were also severely marred.
|
The Sung Thien Dien Linh stone stele with scratch damage. (Photo: Trong Duong) |
Also in the name of cleaning, the painting "Vuon xuan Trung Nam Bac" (Spring Garden of Central, Southern and Northern Regions) by renowned artist Nguyen Gia Tri, kept at the Ho Chi Minh City Fine Arts Museum, was damaged by an ignorant lacquer craftsman who used washing-up liquid, chalk powder, and sandpaper to rub away the surface paint layer. This destroyed the delicate bond between lacquer layers, eggshell inlays, and gold leaf—hallmarks of Nguyen Gia Tri’s lacquer art.
This incident caused a public uproar in 2019, leaving severe consequences for the nation’s fine arts, especially as the painting could not be fully restored to its original state.
|
The painting "Vuon xuan Bac Trung Nam" by renowned artist Nguyen Gia Tri before and after being damaged. |
Most recently, in 2024, Xuan Lung Temple in Phu Tho Province, an ancient Buddhist temple dating back 800 years, was ravaged by fire. The blaze destroyed the main hall, which housed many ancient statues dating back hundreds of years.
According to the Cultural Heritage Department, 27 ancient Buddha statues were burnt. Most heartbreaking of all, the lotus stone pedestal used in Buddha worship was shattered. The fire is estimated to have caused about 25 billion VND (960,000 USD) in damages, but the loss to heritage is beyond measure.
And just a few days ago, the incident of a man sneaking in from behind Thai Hoa Palace, climbing onto the golden throne to sit and breaking off one of its armrests, once again sounded the alarm for heritage protection. Perhaps, traditionally, many places have only taken a passive approach to conservation, following the old mindset of "fixing the barn only after losing the cow."
|
The stone altar of Pho Quang Temple after the fire. (Photo: Cultural Heritage Department) |
Lack of initiative in heritage protection
The heritage losses from the above incidents reveal a common and critical issue: the lack of initiative in the heritage conservation process. In the two cases involving the "cleaning" of national treasures, there was an absence of proactive involvement by experts. Entirely entrusting national treasures to ordinary workers allowed them to carry out conservation work using conventional methods, as if handling ordinary objects or goods.
In the Buddhist temple fire, it was clear that there was a lack of initiative in fire prevention and firefighting—something essential for any establishment, especially a place of worship housing numerous artefacts and flammable materials.
After the fire, the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism had to request the local authorities to promptly investigate its cause to clarify responsibilities, strengthen the protection and preservation of other relics in the province, and propose solutions for protecting, preserving, repairing, and restoring relics and artefacts at the temple.
In the case of the Nguyen Dynasty’s golden throne vandalism, two security guards were present at Thai Hoa Palace at the time. The perpetrator had already shown signs of abnormal behaviour upon entering the palace, prompting a security guard to direct him to the back of the building. However, the man later returned, snuck into the display area of the imperial throne, shouted loudly, and broke the front part of the throne’s left armrest.
To prevent further destruction or violent acts, the security guard approached from a distance, requested the man to leave, and called for reinforcement. Around noon, the perpetrator was restrained and taken into police custody.
The perpetrator had already displayed clear signs of abnormal behaviour, yet the lack of initiative led to complacency, allowing him to return and cause serious damage.
|
At Thai Hoa Palace, artefacts are separated from visitors by a low barrier. |
These are specific examples of the consequences of passivity. But more broadly, heritage conservation and protection still face numerous loopholes.
At many heritage sites, a shortage of human resources has resulted in insufficient security staff. The awareness and knowledge of those involved in heritage conservation and protection or working in areas that house valuable heritage remain inconsistent. In many places, even security personnel are elderly and untrained, lacking the necessary skills to respond to incidents effectively.
A lack of surveillance cameras is also common at many sites containing heritage or national treasures. Many have proposed that particularly valuable artefacts, such as national treasures, should be protected by modern surveillance systems, perhaps with the same level of security as in a bank. However, investing in such advanced security infrastructure is no simple matter.
Heritage, above all, belongs to the people, and the state’s policy has always been to maximise public access to heritage values. Moreover, some heritage sites and national treasures are closely tied to local communities and rituals, and cannot be easily separated for safekeeping elsewhere.
Therefore, in many cases, heritage is preserved within the community. Even when placed in a protected space, artefacts remain accessible to visitors, not sealed off behind excessive barriers, glass panels, or protective cabinets. Yet this accessibility comes with high risks of fire, vandalism, theft, and other forms of damage.
It is now time to treat national treasures as artefacts of particularly exceptional value, deserving of special conservation procedures. Placing heritage and national treasures at the centre of protection efforts, raising awareness among those involved in conservation and applying advanced technologies are essential to ensuring more effective and sustainable protection.
Once lost, the value of an artefact cannot be recovered. Artefacts that have been vandalised or damaged can never be fully restored to their original state.
