Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


No place like home

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 31 January 2007
THEY are not really the kind of thing you'd want on your mantelpiece, but in their native land the toi moko are sacred, and now they're going home. Earlier this week, nine preserved and tattooed heads of Maori warriors, acquired by Aberdeen University in the early 19th century, were ceremonially handed over to representatives from Te Papa Tongarewa, New Zealand's national museum.
Back home, they will be placed within a consecrated area of Te Papa (it means, roughly, "our place"), pending further research to confirm their iwi or tribe of origin. They are just the latest preserved Maori heads to be returned to New Zealand from
Scotland over the past few years, museums in Perth and Glasgow having similarly agreed to the repatriation of toi moko from their collections, following agreement that it was appropriate that these venerated relics be returned to their native soil and culture.

Te Taru White, a co-director of Te Papa, has described as heartening the fact that so many museums and other institutions are agreeing to return home these ancestral remains, adding: "This is both a time for sad reflection on the turbulent journeys these ancestors experienced and, at the same time, a cause or joy as they are returned to their homeland."

But is it a cause for joy for museum curators who see their collections dwindling, or in a more enlightened age, do we simply share in the Maoris' satisfaction that their ancestors are, at long last, returning to their rightful resting place? How do museums decide whether or not requests for such restitution are justified - and will such a decision ever be made on that old chestnut of disputed acquisition and ownership, the Elgin Marbles?

For Neil Curtis, senior curator of Aberdeen University's Marischal Museum, the departure of the nine smoked and tattooed heads, dating from the 1820s, may leave him with a gap in his collections but, he stresses, no regrets. "It's a loss to some of our earliest collections, but you set that against the feeling that these are so obviously important to this other group of people, that the right place for them to go is back to New Zealand." As part of the "memorandum of association" signed as part of the repatriation agreement, a scholar from New Zealand will come to Aberdeen to help document its remaining Maori collections. "So," Curtis says, "we'll actually end up knowing a lot more about the rest of the material that they're not asking for. This has actually been quite exciting, and I now know so much more about our Maori collections than I ever did before."

Referring to other recent restitutions of toi moko by museums in Perth and Glasgow, Curtis says that, while Glasgow may have followed that line because it involved human remains, "that's not necessarily what we are saying. We believe there can be justification for human remains in a museum, but for the Maoris these ancestors are particularly important".

In 2003, the Marischal Museum returned a sacred headdress to the Kainai Nation in Canada, so Curtis feels that they now have a clear idea of what to do in future instances of requests for restitution, "although that doesn't necessarily mean that we'll say yes". But curators across the land, he reckons, needn't lock up their artefacts at the first whisper of a visiting cultural delegation: "It's still a very small proportion of items, and it shows just how important some things are to people, which from a museum point of view is a good thing. It shows that what we have matters to people."

Through their return over the past ten years of items as diverse as Australian aboriginal remains, further toi moko, and the much-publicised Lakota Ghost Dance Shirt, Glasgow's museums can claim to be pioneers in the field, with each request, according to John Lynch, convener of the city council's culture and leisure services committee, being considered strictly according to its merits. "One of the big issues at the beginning was that we were accused by some other museums and authorities of setting a precedent," says Lynch, "but our response to that was that the only precedent we've set is a precedent of process. That process can be duplicated in any event, but the criteria have to be applied separately for each individual request."

In their most widely publicised repatriation, Glasgow agreed to return the Ghost Dance Shirt to the Lakota Sioux, after being approached by their representatives. "The evidence we had," explains Lynch, "indicated that the shirt was a religious object specific to that tribe, and that it was taken from the body of a warrior."

The Ghost Dance Shirt, thought to have been stripped from the body of a victim of the Wounded Knee Massacre in 1890, was originally obtained by Glasgow museums in the early 1890s, when William F Cody - "Buffalo Bill" - brought his renowned Wild West Show to Glasgow. However, Glasgow decided not to accede to a similar request for the return of a waistcoat also acquired during the Wild West Show's sojourn in the city, currently on display in Kelvingrove Museum. The waistcoat is thought to have belonged to Rain in the Face, a Hunkpapa Sioux warrior among those credited with killing General Custer at Little Bighorn. "There is no indication the waistcoat left Rain in the Face's possession by anything other than legal means," says Lynch. "In fact Rain in the Face was still alive 15 years after Glasgow museums got it." Lynch was among those who gave evidence to the House of Commons committee on culture, which resulted in a recommendation that museums give due consideration to the claims of "originating communities", but that a "strong presumption against disposal" should be the basis on which any claims are considered.

It's not just the Marischal or Kelvingrove that have been granting the restitution of sacred objects to the peoples from which they were taken: last year the British Museum returned two Tasmanian cremation bundles to their culture of origin, which brings us to that old chestnut, the Elgin Marbles, the subject of long-standing demands for their return to Greece. However, a spokesman for the British Museum points out that, as confirmed by a High Court ruling on a claim for the return of four old master drawings which had been looted by the Nazis, the British Museum Act of 1963 prohibits the museum from returning any such material: "Although to be honest, that isn't an argument that we tend to rely on, because we feel strongly that here in the museum you see the sculptures in a world context with other civilisations, and we feel that is something that's very important."

The same argument makes it unlikely the Lewis Chessmen, the beautifully wrought Viking artefacts found near Uig in the 19th century, will ever be permanently returned to the Hebridean island, though they have been loaned on occasion and 11 of the 93 pieces are now displayed in the National Museum of Scotland in Edinburgh.

Mind you, if one were to take the restitution process to its logical conclusion, that berserker impatiently biting his shield amid the ranks of the 12th-century chessmen might much rather be back in his real homeland - Norway.

BENIN BRONZES AND IVORIES

Glasgow, which has a relatively small collection of these ritual items acquired by Britain during a punitive raid on the king of Benin in 1896, was approached by the late Bernie Grant MP about repatriating this colonial booty to neighbouring Nigeria. Glasgow declined, citing the collection's educational importance but also expressing concern over security in Nigerian museums.

LEWIS CHESSMEN

These Viking chess pieces, elaborately wrought in walrus ivory and whales' teeth, were discovered near Uig on the Isle of Lewis in the early 19th century. Now in the British Museum collections, bar 11 in the National Museums of Scotland, they have been returned to Scotland for temporary exhibitions but will remain based in London.

WARRIOR'S WAISTCOAT

This beaded buckskin waistcoat is thought to have belonged to the renowned Hunkpapa Lakota warrior Rain In The Face, often credited with killing General Custer at the Battle of Little Bighorn in 1876. After consideration of a request for repatriation - originally made by Rain In The Face's granddaughter - Glasgow museums declined, as they regarded the waistcoat as having been acquired legitimately.

TOI MOKO

These preserved and tattooed heads of Maori warriors were acquired by museums during the 19th century, often brought back as curios by seamen or travellers. The New Zealand government is now supporting Maori bids to reclaim as many of these relics as possible.

ELGIN MARBLES

The famous sculptures from the Parthenon in Athens were acquired by Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin, then bought by the British Museum in 1816. Despite continuing claims by Greece that they should be returned, the museum is prevented by law from doing so, and argues that they are best displayed in the London museum within a world context.

LAKOTA GHOST DANCE SHIRT

This Lakota Sioux religious artefact is thought to have been looted from the body of a victim of the infamous Wounded Knee massacre in 1890, and found its way to Glasgow through Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show. After being approached by representatives of the Wounded Knee Survivors Association, Glasgow museums handed over the shirt in 1999.



Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 01 February 2007 11:11 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Scottish museums
 
1

Scaramouche,

31/01/2007 08:54:25

I believe that all original items belong in their countries of origin. I see no problem with COPIES being made for museums around the world. For example, in the RSM there is a copy of Nefertiti's bust. The real one is in Berlin, but should be returned to Egypt.

REPATRIATE ALL THE STOLEN ITEMS!

2

conservative,

31/01/2007 08:56:56

Why would you do that Scaramouche? Many of the 'countries' of origin no longer exist or have changed boundaries and populations so radically that the artifacts would be no more at home there.

(Australia is perhaps not a good example since its boundaries are somewhat more fixed).

3

Scaramouche,

31/01/2007 10:39:27

#4. No I don't assume it's all been stolen. But much of the loot was taken out of their countries of origin without permission of the governing bodies.

Unsolicited gifts are exactly that, Receiving them however should be stopped because of possible later charges!

#3. Maybe you could draw up a list of these no-longer-extant countries? It doesn't mean that we don't recognise the right of the inheritors of those within the borders of the previously named country.

Actually there's very few countries where the populations have altered as radically as you suggest.

I believe that all artifacts should be in a museum in their own countries or in situ where they were uncovered, in a protected environment.

Shipwrecks are of course exempt. I'm not that daft!

4

ian k,

Edinburgh 31/01/2007 10:55:45

If all the museums gave their loot back they would have to close

5

Shona,

Canada 31/01/2007 14:33:51

Rulesbutnotrulers, (#7) You're being simplistic and you know it. :-) There's a difference between smuggling a baguette and some bordeaux onto a ferry and holding items sacred to peoples in existence.
The situations involving things like the Elgin Marbles are clearly a bit stickier because there may be complicated political and legal issues that make ownership something of a grey area, but surely there's nothing wrong with, as Scaramouche said, making fakes and putting them on display. We can do quite convincing copies these days, and they simply aren't any less educational to the general public, and the practise is sensible and conducive to peaceful International relations.

In Canada we have remains belonging to various First Nations peoples held in universities, by the army (in a couple of situations) and in storage at major museums. This is an issue everywhere, and if the people to whom these artifacts belong are able to finance their return (because repatriation can be very expensive) why should it not be allowed?
Said items rightfully belong to them anyhow, and we have an ethical responsibility to ensure that they are restored.
Imagine how you'd feel if your grandmother and her belongings were on display behind glass and you couldn't bring her home - it sounds odd, but it is in fact very similar.

6

Tom01,

UK 31/01/2007 15:35:05

There is too much of this bleeding heart brigade about returning items to country of origin. As somebody says they just sell them. Typical examples are so-called confiscated Nazi art which is claimed by someone else when tried to sell it. If they succeed they just sell it for themselves.

7

Scaramouche,

31/01/2007 19:29:35

#11. " ( ...... To help him he engaged a foreign tribe. This tribe he finally allowed to leave. It became called the Jews and took over the One True God idea. This the Christians then used and finally the Muslims. Talk about full circle.

And which book did you glean THIS little gem from? Of course, it's wrong, but through Akhenaton's beliefs, the idea of the One God was transmitted to the Hebrews, who turned their warring, violent snake God Nehushtim, into Yaweh, a virtual clone of The Aton ..... who then turned into Jehovah/Allah much later.

(Tell el-)Amarna is of course an Arabic name. The proper name of Ahenaton's glorious new capital, was Akhetaton, "Horizon of the Aton".

And actually, Tutankhamun's paternity hasn't yet been proven either. Akhenaton may have been an elder brother.

As for "the Exodus", this is of course a political lie dreamt up by Hebrew leaders. Fabbie film .... but about as true as Lord Of The Rings!

8

C. Taylor,

U.S. 31/01/2007 20:39:51

Dead people, whatever condition they are in, be it smoked or skeletal et al, should be taken back to their homeland and laid to rest - especially if their culture still exists.
On the other hand, in my opinion, mummies are historical examples of a bygone civilization and serve a more educational purpose displayed in museums.
Besides, consider that Egyptians were digging up mummies and selling them by the boatload in the decades following the discovery of King Tut's tomb! The Egyptians practically invented graverobbing.
Yes, there should be a balance between religious- and burial-related artifacts (American spelling) which ought not to be objects of curiousity; and items from all over the world which, when seen in museums, are a source of education and marvel. The majority of us have little chance of travelling the globe and viewing historical objects in their native settings; museums are our only opportunity.

9

Renfrew Rant,

an undisclosed location 31/01/2007 23:20:47

The next thing you know the Americans will be returning the American Canal in Panama back to Panama!

All this is social feel good mumbo jumbo, but of course a great many items were bought or given as gifts and then taken out of their country of origin. Three or four years ago some historical items were given by the Bishop Museum in Honolulu to local native Hawaiian leaders on the Big Island. Within months the items came up missing and then were on the collectors market for big money. Many of these native groups are purely political in nature rather than cultural or religous. For the most part historical items are safer in museums, controlled and preserved (in the West anyway).

10

lisa,

perth 31/01/2007 23:56:08

When someone shouts "Its my heritage" he really means he has the right to sell it to the highest bidder.

11

AJ,

Fife 31/01/2007 23:59:38

Hi Lisa,

Is it Perth Scotland or Perth Australia?

12

lisa,

perth 01/02/2007 00:53:05

Hi there AJ, nice to hear from you.

Its Perth Scotland I'm afraid, but we are thinking of moving to Fife - your council is 100 times better than ours - but then so is the Albanian post office. Got any room for me?

13

The Wizard,

OZ 01/02/2007 01:01:46

King Tuts mask is a reproduction. The real yins in my cellar and I'm no tellin ye where I am. I bought it years ago for ten and six and a packet of woodbine.
Of course stuff is safer in western museums, your average 'Indigenous Leader" would sell his granny for a few quid and the locals have no idea of what is culturally important. Try visiting some of the old Middle East sites and make an offer. You could probably buy Troy or Persepolis if the offer was right.

14

Ileach,

01/02/2007 01:07:22

Scaramouche - thanks for defending Amenhotep IV or Akhetaten, as he later wished to be known. He was the first monotheist, and he built Akhetaten to serve his "father", the sun. He has been variously thought to be the pharaoh in Moses' time, or even Moses himself - however, this is not true. Yes, the bust of Nefertiti, his wife, is in Berlin, and yes, it should be returned to Cairo ASAP. I'd be just as happy looking at reproductions, knowing that the real thing is back where it came from.

15

lisa,

perth 01/02/2007 01:13:22

Hi there Wizard. When I told my brother about Troy he asked me to ask you if you had Helen's email address?

Seriuosly though, I wouldn't really trust our museums. They had a ago at the Elgin marbles a few years ago with a Black and Decker and left them virtually unrecognisable.

16

Renfrew Rant,

an undisclosed location 01/02/2007 01:30:13

Under no circumstances should the bust of Nefertiti be given to Cairo. According to the UNESCO convention, all antiquities taken legally out of Egypt before 1972, do not have to be returned to their country of origin.

The bust of Nefertiti was found in 1912 by a German. The Egyptian authorities split what was found at the site with Germany. The Egyptians took the limestone statues of Akhenaten and Nefertiti, and gave the head of Queen Nefertiti to the German expedition. Sounds like sour grapes now. They were the ones who made the decision.

The Egyptians should be just as happy looking at reproductions.

17

The Wizard,

OZ 01/02/2007 05:58:48

23Lisa

I am 250 miles from Perth and it's a lot warmer here than home.
I went to Troy 30+ years ago but Helen was out, in Paris I think-or have I got that back to front.
Only an old hag there who offered me a wooden horse at a good price. Refused the offer

18

The Wizard,

OZ 01/02/2007 06:01:49

23Lisa

Forgot to ask, is there snow on The Ochills?

19

Scottie,

01/02/2007 08:53:14

7 - most of the countries that items were 'taken from' are realising the emotional and monetary value of them now and are starting to take better care of what they have.
Did Scotland want the Stone of Scone back? That's exactly the same principle ...

8 - good post Shona!

LOL 21 - I'm glad I've seen Persepolis then.

20

The Wizard,

OZ 01/02/2007 13:13:38

#27 Scottie

Did you notice the Name of STANLEY(of Dr Livingstone I presume) etched in the gate at Persepolis. Seems grafitti is nothing new.

21

AJ,

Fife 01/02/2007 16:00:25

Lisa, moving from Perth to Fife is like jumping from the frying pan into the fire!!

If the council is the issue, I think Fife can out do most when it comes to inefficiency!!!

Perth and its surroundings always looks a better option to me, when compared to Fife!


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.