Decolonising Museums
Many objects in ethnographic museums are burdened by colonial legacies. Thus, they still symbolize the unequal relationships and discrimination faced by Indigenous peoples worldwide. Over the past four decades, museums have increasingly addressed these issues.
Decolonization generally refers to the process of gaining political independence from colonial powers, but it also entails a long-term process of confronting the consequences of colonial history, racism, and how these have hindered the development of colonized peoples, and continue to do so today. Decolonization requires individuals, organizations, institutions, and governments to create space and provide support for the return of what was taken, such as land, family, culture, language, history, and tradition.
Decolonization of museums is aimed at mitigating or undoing the unethical ways in which many objects were acquired. As a result, some museums have chosen to return such materials to their original owners (restitution) or to their places of origin (repatriation). Attention is focused on determining the provenance of objects, reinterpreting permanent exhibitions, ensuring transparency in museum archives and documentation, and collaborating with source communities.
As objects are studied more closely, their uniqueness and complexity become more apparent, as is the case with the exhibited moai kavakava ancestral figure. Collaboration with representatives of Indigenous communities has also led to new ideas about managing culturally sensitive and sacred items in museum collections. Many of these items are no longer exhibited in museums.
Uncovering the Meaning
Moai kavakava figure
Rapa Nui, 19th c.
The figure was gifted in 1868 by Tahitian Queen Pōmare IV to Émile de la Roncière, the governor of what was then French Oceania. Initially, island rulers would gift their most valuable items to colonial governors and officials in an effort to establish social and political relations based on mutual obligations and reciprocity, similar to the relationships they had maintained among themselves for centuries.
Pōmare IV.
Pōmare IV ruled Tahiti from 1827 to 1877. She became queen at the young age of thirteen. In 1843, the French declared Tahiti a protectorate, which led to four years of bloody war with the French, involving all the kingdoms of the South Pacific. Eventually, Pōmare was forced to accept French rule and their terms. She ruled Tahiti until her death.
Meaning and usage
Moai kavakava are wooden figures, almost exclusively male, with prominent bones, particularly the ribcage. Their appearance is akin to a corpse and, more broadly, represents an ancestor, to whom the living had to show respect and honor. Their supernatural power is emphasized by the figure’s intimidating facial expression. In private rituals, the figure was believed to have magical power, enhancing the full strength (mana) of the ancestor, while in public ceremonies, they were worn around the neck or on the back of the owner.
From ancestor to items of trade
In 1862, slave traders abducted half of the island’s population and took them to Peru, where nearly all of them died. The conversion of the remaining population to Christianity was completed in 1868. Missionaries sought to undermine and eradicate the local faith, symbolized, among other things, by the kavakava. After losing their religious function, the figures became items of trade. Today, moai kavakava fetch high prices at auction houses as rare examples of a bygone culture.
Myth of self-destruction
It is a widespread myth that the inhabitants of Rapa Nui were responsible for the deforestation of most of the island due to overuse. However, research has shown that the loss of the forests was caused by a natural disaster that struck the island in the 17th century. Rapa Nui is the most isolated inhabited place on Earth, with very limited biodiversity, so any crisis poses a significant obstacle to the island’s recovery.
Objects Not on Display
Tsantsa
Tsantsa are shrunken heads made from the heads of slain enemies. They were crafted with the intention of capturing the vengeful soul (muisak) of the killed warrior. The Shuar and Achuar peoples believed that members of their communities possessed multiple souls. The power of the vengeful soul was harnessed in rituals to promote harvests and the fertility of domestic animals. This makes tsantsa distinct from other types of war trophies made from enemy body parts around the world.
During the 19th and 20th centuries, the demand from collectors for such objects led to changes in their production, with animal and synthetic materials being used. This resulted in a confusing mixture of authentic tsantsa and those made for commercial markets. Analysis of the tsantsa in the Ethnographic Museum’s collection revealed it to be a copy made for the commercial market. It was displayed in the permanent exhibition for 52 years, leading visitors to view the Shuar culture through stereotypical and racist lenses, perceiving it as primitive and “barbaric.” Recognizing the responsibility museums have in representing other cultures, it was decided that the tsantsa would no longer be exhibited.
Churinga
For the indigenous peoples of Australia, churinga are sacred objects. The term can also refer to songs, dances, or stories, depending on the context. Churinga serves as a connection between people and the mythological time known as the Dreamtime, which is simultaneously the past, present, and future. Due to their sacred nature and the fact that these objects may only be seen by individuals initiated into secret knowledge through specific rituals, many museums no longer display churinga. Some institutions have decided to return such objects to their original communities. The Ethnographic Museum also no longer exhibits this item.
Repatriation and Restitution
Replica of Benin Bronzes
Niamey, Niger, 1960s
The Benin Bronzes are among the most valuable elements of the cultural heritage of the Edo people from Nigeria. In 1897, the British attacked, destroyed, and looted the royal city of Benin City. During the attack, they stole human remains as well as around 10,000 objects made from copper alloy, ivory, wood, and coral. Today, these objects are collectively known as the “Benin Bronzes.” These artworks had represented the history of the Benin people for centuries, so the looting not only took away the physical artifacts but also a part of their history. Original pieces, which had adorned royal altars since the time of the Benin Kingdom (11th century), are now housed in numerous museums and private collections around the world. Negotiations for their repatriation or restitution have been ongoing for decades.
Benin City
Three British officers seated in the courtyard of the royal palace, with looted bronzes displayed in the foreground.
Author: Reginald Kerr Granville.
1897.
European experts praised the beauty and refinement of the craftsmanship of these bronze reliefs and figures, viewing them as works of art. While some compared the Benin craftsmanship to Italian Renaissance sculpture and goldsmithing, others claimed that the contemporary Edo people, whom they described as “barbarians,” could not have produced such works, asserting that Benin City was in a state of “decay.” Based on the depictions of Europeans in some of the reliefs, it was believed that these objects dated to the mid-16th century and were influenced by the Portuguese, as many found it difficult to accept that Edo artists could have independently created such masterpieces. Later research, however, confirmed that bronze casting technology was an original art form of the Kingdom of Benin. The earliest guild of casters can be traced back to the reign of Oba Oguola in the 13th century, thus refuting earlier racist assumptions.
Manillas
Niger. 1960s
The Kingdom of Benin existed from the 11th to the 19th century in what is now southern Nigeria. Its golden age is considered the reign of Oba Ewuare in the late 14th century. “Oba” is the title for the king, who was believed to be a descendant of the god Osanobua. Since the first contacts with the Portuguese in the 15th century, some of the bronze sculptures, reliefs, and plaques were made using manillas — brass bracelets used by the Portuguese, and later the Dutch and British, to buy enslaved people from Benin’s kings. The raw materials for the alloy, as revealed by recent research, came from the Rhineland region of Germany, which sold them to Portugal from the 15th to 17th centuries. Later, manillas from Birmingham and Bristol became a means of exchange. The victims of African and European slave traders were transported by ships to the Americas and the Caribbean, where they worked on plantations.
General arguments for and against the return of non-European cultural artifacts to their countries of origin
A large number of museum professionals believe that these artifacts should remain in the museums where they currently reside for several reasons: unstable economic and political circumstances in the countries of origin, the lack of adequate conditions for their preservation, the sensitivity of the objects to transport, and the fact that displaying them in large European and North American cities allows a greater number of people, including the diaspora, to see them. These objects, they claim, represent world heritage and thus belong to everyone (though they can be found exclusively in European and North American museums). Additionally, they note that not only Europeans were involved in the slave trade but also African kingdoms.
Others argue that these points are hypocritical. They advocate for the return of all cultural objects to formerly colonized countries, enabling those nations to study and question their own history and cultural heritage. Moreover, they believe that the return of the artifacts should not be conditional, and that countries of origin should not have solutions imposed upon them against their decisions. They assert that former colonial powers must take responsibility for their colonial past, as long as artifacts acquired through looting or unequal power relations remain outside their rightful homes, that past is not truly past but present.
In 2022, several museums in Germany and the UK, in agreement with governments and Nigeria’s National Commission for Museums and Monuments, signed agreements to return Benin Bronzes they had in their possession. A small number of these artifacts were ceremonially handed over to Nigerian government representatives in 2022. However, in March 2023, then-Nigerian President M. Buhari issued a decree stating that all looted and returned Benin artifacts, including those yet to be returned, would become the private property of the Oba, the traditional ruler and cultural guardian of the Edo people. The decision to allow the Oba to unilaterally decide the fate of the Benin Bronzes has been criticized by many, as it enables the descendants of slave traders to profit once again from them. Meanwhile, the descendants of those enslaved have formed the Restitution Study Group, based in New York, and they also demand to have an equal voice in the decisions surrounding the Benin Bronzes.
Words Matter
Language continuously evolves, adapting to cultural and social changes. When choosing appropriate terms, consensus is often lacking among scholars, activists, and the public regarding their usage. However, certain words, whether used intentionally or unintentionally, can exclude individuals or make them feel uncomfortable.
Throughout history, words have been used to create divisions, allowing one group to feel superior to another. In ethnology and cultural anthropology, terminology has often been based on comparing European cultures with non-European ones.
In line with its mission, the Ethnographic Museum studies cultures from around the world and has the responsibility of presenting them respectfully. This involves careful consideration of words or phrases that may be sensitive for certain groups, as well as discerning when it is important to retain certain terms due to their historical context.
Discovery
Example from the permanent exhibition of the Ethnographic Museum, 1972:
“Exploring the Kwilu River, a tributary of the Congo River, Lerman discovered magnificent waterfalls and named them `Zrinsky Falls.’”
When we use the term “discovery” in a way that implies an area was uninhabited before the arrival of Europeans or ignore the fact that its inhabitants already had names for certain places, the word is not neutral and can carry negative connotations.
Exotic
Example from the Etnographic Museum:
Exotic Exhibition
In Croatian, the word refers to something foreign, unusual, or alien. When used to describe people, it often refers to those of different skin color, carrying a connotation of difference from the norm. Thus, the term is associated with ideas of the racial Other.
Primitive Peoples
Example from the permanent exhibition of the Ethnographic Museum, 1972:
“… there are connections and parallels between prehistoric forms of human life and today’s primitive peoples.”
In European thought, “primitive” became a synonym for the Indigenous peoples of Africa, the Americas, and Oceania. They were believed to live unchanged in ways that “civilized” people had lived in the distant past, and were often viewed as lacking qualities associated with Europeans, such as rationality and progressiveness. Using “primitive” to describe their cultures, for example, carries a pejorative meaning.
Dwarfism
Example from the permanent exhibition of the Ethnographic Museum, 1972:
Image of Bushmen, “dwarf inhabitants of the Kalahari Desert.”
Dwarfism is a medical or genetic condition characterized by short stature. When used outside the medical context, the term is considered offensive.