The first article of the Treaty contains a provision whose relevance remains to this day:
Historical monuments, museums, scientific, artistic, educational, and cultural institutions are considered neutral and as such shall be respected and protected by the parties to the conflict.
Thus, the Russian artist and thinker Nikolai Konstantinovich Roerich (1879-1947) laid the foundation for the legal recognition of the need to protect cultural monuments during military conflicts. It is no coincidence that the treaty came to be known as the "Roerich Pact".
Behind this nearly ninety-year-old event, which is now rarely remembered, lies one of the cardinal ideas of the 20th century—that under no circumstances should culture be touched.
Now, when cultural studies is an official academic discipline and culture is discussed on every corner, this call seems banal. However, it is worth remembering that even at the beginning of the 20th century, the attitude toward cultural monuments worldwide was quite utilitarian. They held a certain interest both in the realm of ideology—in the process of forming national identity—and in commerce: any monument was viewed as a financial asset (profitable or unprofitable).
Meanwhile, the question of preserving cultural monuments was only just being raised, and the problem was at the stage of being understood. Nikolai Konstantinovich Roerich was not the first artist whose work reflected an important trend in Russian culture and art of the late 19th and early 20th centuries: the formation of Russian self-awareness. It is worth noting that his historical paintings represented a new step in the visual art of this broad process, as he moved away from describing historical details and turned to recreating the historical atmosphere.
Nikolai Roerich, an enthusiast of ancient Russian archaeology and a fine connoisseur of the history of world art, participated in a major charitable project at the beginning of the 20th century. Its essence was that Russian artists provided their works for use in printing postcards, with the proceeds from sales going to charity. This led the artist on a business trip-cum-journey through ancient Russian cities.
Between 1903 and 1904, he visited nearly 30 locations and produced about 90 studies, primarily depicting architectural landscapes. In addition to some of these studies being printed as charity postcards, the work of drawing ancient Russian monuments gave impetus to the development of an entire new direction in his oeuvre. The direct experience of visiting these ancient Russian sites and what Nikolai Roerich witnessed there instilled in him the idea of the necessity to preserve historical monuments.
It is no secret that at that time, no one set such a task regarding cultural monuments. For example, ancient church frescoes, which over time fell into unsatisfactory condition, were routinely painted over by contemporary artists without a second thought. Like many cultural figures in Russia at the time, Roerich understood that only a change in attitude toward ancient monuments—both at the level of the ordinary citizen and in state policy—would allow future generations to see the genuine ancient works that form the foundation of the nation's culture.
From this moment, the artist began to form his stance as a defender of culture. A pivotal step in shaping Roerich's worldview on this issue was the First World War. The first major war of the 20th century revealed the utter fragility of cultural monuments in the face of the latest destructive weaponry. Artillery bombardments and aerial bombings demonstrated that humanity is capable of destroying cultural monuments and that this destruction irrevocably erases entire chapters from the history of world culture.
Despite all life's vicissitudes—forced emigration, global wanderings, and an active creative career—by the late 1920s, Nikolai Konstantinovich had come to understand the necessity of an international document that would obligate the leadership of countries to prioritize the protection of cultural monuments during military conflicts.
As a lawyer by training (he graduated from the law faculty of St. Petersburg University) and by enlisting other professional lawyers, particularly Georgy Shklyaver, to assist in drafting the document, Roerich prepared a draft of the Treaty on the Protection of Artistic and Scientific Institutions and Historic Monuments in the early 1930s. On behalf of his museum in New York, he proposed that the world's governments sign it. After several years of an active advocacy campaign, which included special conferences discussing cultural preservation, the Treaty was signed in Washington on April 15, 1935.
Unfortunately, this triumphant event coincided with a crisis in the relationship between Nicholas Roerich and his American financier, Louis Horch, leading to litigation, the artist's entry into the United States being barred, and his namesake museum effectively ceasing to exist.
By the mid-1930s, Europe was already on the brink of World War II, and politicians were focused on solving immediate problems, often neglecting the broader goal of preserving culture.
After the end of World War II, as the post-war world architecture led by the United Nations was being built, the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict was adopted in 1954. It contains a recognition of the broader application of the Roerich Pact. However, the actual text of the Hague Convention supplanted the main doctrinal thesis of the Roerich Pact regarding the priority of protecting cultural property over military necessity.
Over the decades since the signing of the Hague Convention, we must regrettably note that cultural treasures in many corners of the world remain under continuous threat of being obliterated without a trace during armed conflicts. The number of monuments lost in recent years is countless, and the delicate layer of global culture continues to suffer violence.
It is worth remembering this during International Day of Culture and moving from grand, sweeping statements to simple, small actions that should ultimately lead to an understanding of the correctness of the efforts of the Russian artist and thinker Nikolai Konstantinovich Roerich.