Any views expressed within media held on this service are those of the contributors, should not be taken as approved or endorsed by the University, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the University in respect of any particular issue.
1.5 Final Reflections and Future Considerations (Pt. 6)
The impact of our event Face to Face was more than I could have ever anticipated. As a group, we successfully responded to our project brief:
How might we tell the complex stories of the Skull Collection from a museological perspective while engaging seriously with decolonial thought and struggle?
What strategies can be employed to address knowledge and metadata gaps in small museums?
Initially, I felt that as a student on this course, the project needed to be a traditional curated exhibition, similar to that of the other GRP group. It was only as I began further research into the Skull Collection that I realised the following: a traditional exhibition is not the most appropriate avenue of representation for this collection, and that as curators we have the ability to curate things beyond exhibition spaces. This second discovery was very eye-opening for me and allowed me to better understand the work that would be expected of me when I graduate from the programme, and also instilled within myself the confidence that I could assemble an event of this magnitude. The highlights of working on this project, of which there were many, included:
Working closely with the curators of the Anatomical Museum, Malcolm MacCallum and Ruth Baxter.
Networking with our speakers and moderators, whose insight and advice was extremely helpful in developing career skills.
Delegating work and communicating effectively with my group!
Providing a sense of dignity and justice to the descendants currently resting within the Skull Collection.
However, the work is only just beginning in regards to the Skull Collection. For myself, Face to Face was a catalyst from which further justice work can be undertaken. For example, conversations have begun with the University’s rector about providing greater support to the museum in order to facilitate meaningful repatriation projects and care for the collection. Our group is currently working on a text for a memorial plaque which will go inside the Skull Room as a means of telling the stories of the individuals within, and ensuring that their pasts are not forgotten. Our alternative labels from Face to Face: The Hidden Histories will remain on display in the museum, and we hope to create more official labels for the displays as well as a self-guided tour map for visitors to use when visiting for the first time.
Interior drawing of the Skull Room by group member Jude Joseph.
The artwork at the top of this blog post is by ECA student, Lucy Keegan. Lucy’s illustration perfectly encapsulates the atmosphere and context of the day. This artwork, as well as photographs and presentation recordings are currently in the process of being uploaded onto the Anatomy Museum’s webpage for everyone to view. Working with the Skull Collection has been incredibly challenging yet ultimately one of the greatest experiences of my academic career. Facing these complicated histories could be emotionally-tolling at times, yet was necessary in order to address the deeply systemic and racist motives for collection by the University from the 18th-20th centuries. Decolonising our museums is an ongoing issue worldwide, and requires the dedicated work of individuals, such as our speakers and curators from Face to Face, in order to ignite real change.
I often reminded myself of a quote from my favourite author, Maya Angelou, while collaborating on this project, which perfectly embodies the work we have done:
“History, despite its wrenching pain, cannot be unlived, but if faced with courage, need not be lived again.” -Maya Angelou
During the first semester of the course, our group began to brainstorm what our project would look like and how we can create something that pays respect and dignifies the descendants held within the collection. It was clear from the beginning that a traditional exhibition would not be a suitable format for the project. Given the sensitivities surrounding the display of human remains, we were torn between creating a digital exhibition which focused more on the provenance of the collection, or to host a symposium-style event. After presenting our ideas to our peers and the curators of the Anatomical Museum in November, we landed on the idea of hosting an event which would focus on passing over the microphone to specialist speakers from a variety of backgrounds in order to foster constructive and meaningful discussion.
Creating a title was relatively easy for our group. I sent in a proposed title of Face to Face: A Dialogue on the University of Edinburgh’s Skull Collection, and we all agreed this best embodied the purpose of our event. We immediately began work to establish which speakers and moderators would be attending the event, as well as creating marketing material which would be shared both within the university and at nearby partner institutions. Originally our event was scheduled for the 15th March 2023 inside the Anatomy Lecture Theatre. Unfortunately, the UCU strike action persisted longer than we anticipated, and our event had to be cancelled due to this. Having already advertised the event across campus, and secured a great list of speakers, we were very disheartened as a group when we heard the news of the strike impacting our event. Very quickly we reached out to our speakers to figure out which alternative dates they could make. Luckily, three out of four speakers were free the 29th March 2023. Our fourth speaker, Dr. Marenka Thompson-Odlum from the Pitt Rivers Museum in Oxford, was sadly unable to attend in person following the event date change. Luckily, Marenka provided the group with a pre-recorded talk, therefore ensuring her participation on the day virtually.
Updated event poster following the date change.
Back on track for our event on the 29th of March, we began to plan what the actual day would look like. As a group we determined that our speakers would be paired off based on research interests, and would take part in a discussion panel following their presentations. In the middle of the day we planned for a tour of the Anatomical Museum and a creative workshop entitled ‘Museum of Me.’ We re-sent invites to everyone on our guest list, and also ensured that those who had purchased tickets on EventBrite were aware of the date change. What could have been a major roadblock for the project turned into a valuable learning experience for everyone. We were forced to work under pressure with the change in date, and had to ensure everyone was kept up to date on all communications. The marketing material was re-drafted numerous times, but luckily was promoted widely by the Edinburgh College of Art, Anatomical Museum, School of History, Classics and Archaeology, the National Museum of Scotland and Surgeon’s Hall to name a few. This work brought the GRP group closer together, and our event really began to take shape at this stage of the project.
From the onset of the project I was very passionate about creating a survey for our audience which we could then use to evaluate both the event itself as well as the knowledge gained from our project. It was clear that many members of the public, including university students and staff, were unaware of the existence of the Skull Collection, or even the Anatomical Museum. As a previous undergraduate of the university, I had only learned about both the collection and the museum through my MScR programme, and wanted to bridge this gap in knowledge for others.
After drafting and editing a survey, I created eleven questions for our audience members to respond to on the day of the event. Half of these would ask about their knowledge on a topic before attending, and then to review their knowledge afterwards. Additionally, there was a free response section which asked for suggestions on what should be done with the Skull Collection moving forward, as well as ways in which we could have improved the event.
The primary areas I was looking for increases in knowledge were surrounding the Skull Collection itself, decolonial museum practice and the illegal acquisition of human remains by the University. The data showed that for all three areas, audience understanding was relatively low prior to the event. Following the event, we see massive increases in knowledge on each topic area. In total we received 48 responses on our survey with the following result:
Sample survey graph which charts audience knowledge on the Skull Collection prior to the event.
Following the event, audience members on average showed great improvement in knowledge regarding the collection.
As a group, our targeted audience members were university staff and students. We wanted to ensure that the Anatomical Museum and the Skull Collection was made as widely accessible as possible across the university. Through online and in person promotion on campus, we successfully had 50 people attend our event, with students making up the largest demographic.
Sample graph which details the type of audience members in attendance.
Of those in attendance, the following disciplines made up the majority: History, Art History and Community Members. This was expected, and we were pleased to see a high turnout from local community groups who had a personal connection to the collection. The free response questions were as follows:
How could this event have been improved?
What should happen to the Skull Collection in the future?
For the first question the following answers were most commonly seen: changing or removing the creative workshop component (audience struggled to see the connection to the event), better audio in the lecture theatre and an extended period of time for the museum tour. Regarding the collection itself, a majority of the answers called for greater funding to the museum so that repatriation efforts could move forward. Overall, the survey data was extremely helpful in helping us understand the impact of the event and will be passed along to the curators of the Anatomical Museum moving forward.
After an entire semester of planning and a difficult date change, it was finally time for our event Face to Face: A Dialogue on the University of Edinburgh’s Skull Collection on March 29th from 1-4pm. As a group, we arrived at the Anatomy Lecture Theatre at 12pm on the day to begin set up, including testing out the microphones and recording devices, ensuring we had tables for teas and coffees, and presenting each speaker’s slides onto the big screen. We had a minor panic when we realised that the Arabic translation of our event handout had not been sent through in time for the event. Luckily, after some phone calls, we managed to get the final translation and proceeded to print copies of this on the day for any Arabic-speakers in the audience.
Getting set up before the event.
The Arabic translation of our event handout.
As our audience began to filter in, I helped our volunteers set up at various spots throughout the venue. Everything on the day went without a hitch! All of the microphones worked, our recordings were clear and the presentations were displayed properly. Our first two speakers were Zaki El-Salahi and Dr. Marenka Thompson-Odlum. Zaki’s presentation: From 1898 to Now: Sudan, Scotland & Omdurman Shaheed Skulls paired excellently with Marenka’s talk on the Labelling Matters project occurring at The Pitt Rivers Museum. Although Marenka was unable to take part in the live discussion, Zaki received thought-provoking questions which concerned themselves with the acquisition of these skulls and future plans for repatriation. Following these talks was a break for the creative workshop and tour of the Anatomical Museum.
I was involved with the tour of the museum and taking part in the discussion titled Face to Face: The Hidden Histories. As a group, we wanted to actively connect the museum tour to the rest of the event, and were aware for many that not seeing the skulls could possibly be difficult to understand. To overcome this, I created an alternate label for the infant and fetal remains which are currently on display in the museum. This label covered issues surrounding consent and identity, and was followed by a brief presentation by myself on the ethics of displaying these remains. The talk went incredibly well, and was followed up by fruitful discussion with the audience members. Following the tour, our groups swapped before heading back into the lecture theatre for the final presentations.
Label created for Face to Face: The Hidden Histories.
The museum tour group beginning with an introduction to the museum in the Elephant Foyer.
Our final presentations were by Nicole Anderson and Dr. Tobias Houlton. Nicole presented on her current PhD work surrounding provenance research within the Skull Collection, and Tobias discussed how craniofacial reconstruction can be an active mode of justice work when dealing with difficult collections. We had a great live discussion following these two talks, and were relieved the hard part was now over! Following the presentations the rector of the University of Edinburgh, Deborah Kayembe, gave some closing remarks. Her speech was incredibly powerful and emotional and has ignited a genuine desire for change from an institutional level (listen here)
After the event we hosted a small reception within the Elephant Foyer next door. It was a wonderful opportunity to chat with our speakers on how the day went, and also to receive feedback from our audience. I was interviewed alongside one of the museum curators, Malcolm MacCallum for a scientific journal which was a new experience for me! I spoke about my enjoyment of working with the collection and the museum curators, and discussed how these skills will help me later in my career. Overall it was a wonderful day and the feedback we received afterwards was very positive!
1.5 Working with the South American Skull Collection (Pt. 3)
As a part of our project brief, we were asked the following question: what strategies can beemployed to address knowledge and metadata gaps in small museums? To address this problem we began work in Semester 1 with Ruth Pollitt, one of the curators of the Anatomical Museum. Over the course of the semester, we met with Ruth biweekly to catalogue and further research the skulls in the South American collection of the Skull Room. This work included basic cleaning, photography and measuring of the skulls, followed by research into the phrenological catalogues and museum catalogues to try and find further information on each individual. This information was then compiled onto an online spreadsheet which allows for researchers on the collection to easily access the most up to date and accurate information regarding the South American collection.
Page from a phrenological catalogue which details information on the acquisition/origin of the South American skulls.
This experience was incredibly insightful to the development of our final project delivery. Seeing how the museum works, and what type of research is currently being undertaken by curators helped me to better understand the importance of meaningful and careful curation. Each skull was handled incredibly carefully, and Ruth was always nearby to provide us with support or to answer any questions which we may have had. The final two sessions with Ruth I chose to focus my time on further researching the origins of a young adult from Peru, whose skull had ended up in the museum’s collection but had little to no information to corroborate its provenance. The only information available for this particular skull was a catalogue entry which described the individual as being Peruvian in origin, from the Chincha Islands, and the word guano followed after this. After some initial research, I quickly discovered that guano was fertiliser created from seabird excrement. After chatting with Ruth about this, I began digging deeper into why this individual would have this associated with their skull and how this relates to the Anatomical Museum in Edinburgh.
The only available information I could find online was a newspaper article from the later 19th century which discussed the import of guano into the Port of Leith here in Edinburgh. The article stated that often times human and animal remains could be found within large shipments of the fertiliser. While it is difficult to say with certainty, it is possible that the young adult from Peru was discovered within the contents of a guano shipment to Edinburgh and was donated to the museum. The Chincha Islands, where the skull was described as originating from, were the largest exporter of guano to the United Kingdom in the 19th century.
Photograph of seabirds on the southernmost Chincha Island in Peru, 1907. (National Museum of American History [Online]).
Unfortunately, I hit a wall with my research and was unable to find any additional information which could tell me more about the life of this individual and why they ended up in the Skull Collection. Ruth explained that this is typical when handling material of this age, and which was collected with derogatory and racial motives. From this, I was able to better understand the realities of working in a small museum, and the frustrations which arise when trying to provide dignity to the individuals within the collection. My time working with the South American Skull Collection was incredibly meaningful and impactful for me. I had a desire to provide a glimmer of justice to this young adult from Peru, but was met with challenges in finding accurate information regarding the acquisition of the skull itself. Nonetheless, the information I could compile was successfully added to the working spreadsheet which Ruth had begun, and will hopefully be of use to researchers moving forward.
1.5 Creating a List of Speakers and Moderators (Pt. 2)
Once it was determined that our response to the project brief would take shape as a symposium-style event, it was crucial that we began researching individuals who would be suitable speakers and moderators for the event. Having consulted with Malcolm MacCallum, one of the curators of the Anatomical Museum, he shared with us the work currently being done between the museum and The Sudanese Community in Edinburgh, which was led by researcher Zaki El-Salahi. As a group, we were eager for Zaki to take part in our event, and organised a meeting with him at the start of Semester 2. At the meeting we learned about the work Zaki was currently undertaking, which centred primarily on active justice work regarding the two Sudanese skulls currently residing within the collection. Following on from this meeting and having secured Zaki’s presence at the event, we reached out to Nicole Anderson. Nicole is a current PhD student researching the provenance of the indigenous first nation’s people represented in the collection.
In order to create a well-rounded event, we needed to secure two additional speakers who could approach the collection from a scientific viewpoint and from a museological one. We reached out to Dr. Tobias Houlton from The University of Dundee, who is a lecturer in forensic art and craniofacial identification. After meeting online in January, Tobias expressed great interest in participating in our event, and even had experience in using the Skull Collection for his own teachings in anthropological facial reconstruction. As a group, we struggled to identify a suitable fourth speaker who could approach the collection from a museological perspective. This was a crucial aspect of the event, as we needed to address the part of our project brief which required us to engage seriously with decolonial thought and struggle within the museum setting. Dr. Lizzie Swarbrick, a career fellow at the University who graciously dedicated her time to assisting the group throughout the year, suggested Dr. Marenka Thompson-Odlum as our fourth and final speaker.
Marenka currently works at the Pitt Rivers Museum in Oxford, and is involved with the Labelling Matters Project, which seeks to address the outdated and derogatory texts accompanying many of the museum’s displays. Understandably, she had a very busy schedule and we only had the chance to meet once before the event. Originally planning to deliver her presentation in person, the change in our event date meant that Marenka had to share a pre-recorded talk and could no longer attend on the day. Nonetheless, her presentation was incredibly thought-provoking and assessed some of the labels currently on display within the Anatomical Museum.
Speaker and moderator biographies as seen on the event-day hand out for Face to Face.
The final piece of the puzzle was ensuring we had two moderators on the day who could help facilitate conversation, keep time of the presentations and to read out live-questions from our audience. Gaia Duberti, a current PhD student working with the collection and also an alumni of our MScR programme was extremly helpful the entire year in providing us with accurate information regarding the Skull Collection, and was for us a perfect fit as moderator. Our second choice was our programme director, Dr. Maryam Ohadi-Hamadani. Maryam’s research focusses on the postcolonial histories of Black-British art in Britain and beyond. Together, our 6 speakers and moderators perfectly embodied the work that is currently being undertaken within institutional museums in order to promote greater respect, justice and dignity for those within its collections.
Provenance research is a crucial framework used by museums, galleries and libraries to establish the full history of an object. At the most basic level, provenance relates to the origin of an object, its ownership and exchanges over time as well as the authenticity it may or may not have (Keessen, 2022, p. 118). One of the most well-researched and current examples of modern provenance research relates to Nazi-era looted art and artefacts. Under the National Socialist regime, artwork which was considered degenerate, Jewish or unaligned with the ideals of the Third Reich was confiscated and often times destroyed. Where artworks were not immediately destroyed, they were transported across Europe into various holding points. It is estimated that 650,000 works of art were looted during the Nazi era, with only 100,000 currently accounted for (Karrels, 2014, p. 297). Stolen from institutions and individual families and communities, the rampage of looting which was undertaken by the Nazis remains an ongoing effort within heritage institutions today, many of whom possess stolen art unbeknownst to them. In order to rectify this, museums and galleries are undertaking detailed provenance research in order to return stolen art to descendants of its previous owners, as well as to provide a more detailed narrative to its visiting audiences.
The Monuments Men retrieving Edward Manet’s ‘In The Conservatory’ from a salt mine in Central Germany. (Harvard Magazine , 2010, [Online]).
The guidelines established for the restitution of Nazi-era looted art are internationally known, and can be applied in the same way to the collection of human remains as seen within the University of Edinburgh’s Skull Collection. In 1998, The Washington Conference on Holocaust Era Assets was held as the first conference which approached the prospect of restitution of Nazi looted art and artefacts within institutions worldwide. The core principles adopted at the conference state that heritage institutions should be actively reviewing their possession of artworks and artefacts with unknown origins or histories of Nazi ownership. Should an institution be in possession of stolen art, it is legally responsible to return the items to their rightful owners or heirs. If restitution is not possible, then a suitable solution is to be found, such as returning an item to its country of origin or purchasing it for its current valued price (Heuberger, 2022, p. 159).
Two years after the conference, the Lost Art Database was established as a digital platform which allowed for institutions across the globe to upload information on objects they believed to have been stolen during the Nazi regime. A second, public database was released just last year titled the Nazi-Era Provenance Internet Portal. Over 100 museums have uploaded material to the portal, allowing for the public to not only understand the extent of material which was stolen by the Nazis, but also to potentially reunited works of art to living descendants (Wechsler & Ledbetter, 2004, p. 61).
Provenance research is not unique to works of art alone. Both human and artefact remains can benefit greatly from enhanced research into their origins, use and history. Considering the use of provenance research within the Skull Collection, it is clear to see how this work has the potential to bring justice to modern descendant communities. In collaboration with the University of Edinburgh, Vedda elders and Max Plank Institute for the Science of Human History in Germany, genetic testing was undertaken on the remains of a Vedda skull within the collection. The testing confirmed previous provenance research on the skull which suggested the Vedda community thrived off of a nutritional diet provided by the game in the local forests. Today, the modern Vedda are facing legal repercussions for their ancestral hunting practices, and the provenance research undertaken on the skull helps to corroborate their need for a continuation of traditional hunting technologies (The University of Edinburgh, 2021, [Online]).
Another current example of the importance of provenance research within the Skull Collection is the unification of two Sudanese descendants to members of their modern community. These skulls from Omdurman, Sudan, were only extensively researched in 2021 by Daisy Chamberlain. Chamberlain’s research discovered that the skulls belonged to individuals who resisted the British invasion of Sudan, and were eventually murdered and brought to Edinburgh by Henry Wellcome. These individuals are connected to modern descendant communities within Edinburgh today, including The Sudanese Community in Edinburgh, which is led by one of our event’s speakers, Zaki El-Salahi. When we undertake meaningful and careful research into the origins of an individual, we have the potential to reunite them with not only their communities, but also their families. While the repatriation of these skulls is still in consideration, the starting point for unification has been achieved through the successes of its provenance research. Thinking back to the use of this framework in Nazi-looted art and artefacts, it is clear to see the significance of this kind of work in regards to enacting justice and providing closure to affected individuals and groups.
Installation image from the exhibition ‘Afterlives’ at The Jewish Museum in New York City. The exhibition traces the histories of Nazi-looted art and brings forward untold Jewish narratives from the Second World War. (The Jewish Museum [Online]).
Unfortunately, it was not until the late 20th century that provenance research into Nazi-era looted art was taken seriously. It is crucial that we learn from the work that has been undertaken before us, and enact change through purposeful research as soon as possible. Two major roadblocks affected the research and return of Nazi-era artwork to its rightful owners: language barriers and a decline in the population of Holocaust survivors (Fuhrmeister & Hopp, 2019, pp. 224-226). Although many of the individuals within the Skull Collection date to the height of the British Empire in the 19th century, they are still deeply connected to many communities living in the area and abroad today.
The catalogues held within the Anatomical Museum which detail the acquisition of these skulls are written entirely in English, making it difficult for descendant communities to be involved with the research being undertaken. Moving forward, greater involvement with the affected communities needs to take place in order to secure a more well-rounded history of an individual. At our event, Face to Face, we translated our event handout into Arabic so as to assimilate information to the relevant groups in attendance, yet we recognise this is just one small step that needs to be taken in this field of work.
The involvement of the general public in the Lost Art Database project helped to bridge gaps in knowledge regarding Nazi-era looted art, and therefore held the potential to reunite stolen objects to their owners, or at least to signify an understanding of the objects origin when displaying it within a gallery space. We can pull from the provenance research done in this field of Nazi-era looted art and apply it to our focus on the Skull Collection by actively involving descendant communities to assist in the research and also by opening up information on the collection to the general public. The impact of theft and looting, whether from colonial Britain or Nazi-era Europe, continues to deeply impact descendants living today, therefore making the need for meaningful provenance research a cornerstone in our work as curators.
Bibliography
Fuhrmeister, C. & Hopp, M. 2019. Rethinking Provenance Research. Getty Research Journal. 11 (1), 213–231.
Harvard Magazine. 2010. The Art Army: Harvard’s Monuments Men at War. [Online]. [Accessed 2 April 2023]. Available from: https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2010/01/monuments-men-rescuing-art-stolen-by-nazis
Heuberger, R. 2022. Provenance Research, Memory Culture, and the Futurity of Archives: Three Essential Resources for Researching the Nazi Past. Judaica Librarianship. 22 (22), 159–172.
The Jewish Museum. 2021. Afterlives: Recovering the Lost Stories of Looted Art. [Online
Karrels, N. 2014. Renewing Nazi-Era Provenance Research Efforts: Case Studies and Recommendations. Museum Management and Curatorship. 29 (4), 297–310.
Keesen, S. 2022. The Role of Museums and Public Collections Institutions in Conducting Provenance Research of Nazi Looted Art of Jewish Ownership. Online Journal Modelling the New Europe. (40), 117–130.
The University of Edinburgh. 2021. A Skull Collection Revisited: From Colonial Resistance to Repatriation. [Online]. [Accessed 2 April 2023]. Available from: https://exhibitions.ed.ac.uk/exhibitions/mind-shift/colonial-resistance-to-repatriation
Our project, Face to Face: Approaching the University’s Skull Collection, is deeply rooted in practices of decolonial theory and curatorial work. When handling objects in a collection that have been illegally or wrongfully acquired, one must ask the question: Whose stories are we truly telling? In the case of the skull collection, it has traditionally been the narratives of the colonisers being told over those of the individuals themselves. Outdated and racist texts accompany this collection, and our project now redirects the focus to the stories of the individuals who are resting within: who they are, where they came from and how we can display them in the most respectful way possible moving forward.
Museums have never been and will never be neutral spaces. The concept of the museum is rooted in colonial and imperial notions of humanity, with the display of often-times stolen artefacts at the forefront of comparisons between us and them. As modern curators, we are tasked with resolving outdated modes of display from the past, while also engaging seriously with the communities and individuals our museums are representing in the future.
In order to fully understand the breadth of colonial practice within many museums today, I began researching the work being undertaken by the Museum of Ethnology in Hamburg (MARKK), Germany. This museum exemplifies the work being done by institutions abroad to rectify and address their pasts as places of colonial practice, theft and stereotyping. The museum’s webpage not only charts the history of the institution in great detail, but also has a dedicated platform for addressing its colonial heritage. MARKK works closely alongside modern descendants of the community groups targeted during the height of empire across Europe, and opens up dialogues surrounding restitution, display and public engagement with their stolen cultural heritage. The project ‘Digital Benin’ was launched by the museum in 2020 as a means of connecting artefacts from the Kingdom of Benin onto a single digital platform. Working alongside institutions in America, Nigeria and Western Europe, the project proactively tells the narrative of the Kingdom of Benin through its material remains. The aim of Digital Benin is to broaden the scope of knowledge available to the public, while also allowing for descendants of the Benin community to engage more closely with their own ancestral material.
This goal shares a similar vision to our own project, Face to Face. The Skull Collection within the Anatomical Museum at Edinburgh University is not open for public display, with many individuals unaware of the presence of this collection all together. Making the collection public knowledge was an important step for our project, as it allows for diverse audiences to input their ideas and thoughts on the future of the collection moving forward. Especially important is the use of this knowledge by local community groups such as The Sudanese Community in Edinburgh, which is led by one of our event speakers, Zaki El-Salahi. It is crucial that museums entrenched in colonial practice, such as the Anatomical Museum and MARKK, actively seek out local communities who are directly affected by the museum’s past to learn more about and speak directly to their thoughts and feelings on the collections we hold. The collaborators on the Digital Benin project shift the focus of the objects from that of ethnographic spectacle to objects of ancestral importance. The webpage includes a section on the oral histories of objects, as well as a label library which teaches audiences the correct Edo classifications of objects.
An example of the Edo classification system from the Digital Benin webpage. (Amadusan, 2022).
Museums are deeply rooted in practices of theft, racial stereotyping and outmoded hierarchal classifications dating back to the age of empire. Following on from our event, we asked our audience what they felt should be done with the Skull Collection in the future. A majority of these responses suggested repatriation efforts as the best step forward in humanising the collection. However, the intricacies of repatriation mean that this is not always a suitable avenue of resolution for a museum or community group. Barriers such as lack of funding and the current legislation which requires government officials to begin this process means that many collections remain untouched despite a desire by the curators to resolve their colonial past. Digital Benin is an excellent example of a decolonial museum which not only addresses its role both past and present in instigating harmful colonial thought, but also realises the importance of collections care and management as an avenue of restitution. Unfortunately, many objects from the Kingdom of Benin were looted in the 19th century, creating a diaspora of artefacts which expand across the globe. It is unlikely that these objects will ever be physically unified in person, therefore work such as the Digital Benin project allows for audiences to fully understand the extent of a collection without the need to visit in person or to return objects.
The university’s Anatomical Museum has had success in a previous repatriation project to the descendants of the Vedda community in Sri Lanka. However these process take time and careful negotiation and considerations. Hence, events like Face to Face bridge the gap in action between an objects collection and eventual return. By spreading knowledge and handing the microphone over to specialist speakers, we have been able to generate greater understanding and awareness of the Skull Collection without moving the individuals from their current resting place within the museum. More work continues to be done within the collection, however our event is a starting point from which real change can occur. Similar to Digital Benin, our Hidden Histories museum tour expands upon the nature of the museum’s displays and sought to express a more humanistic approach to the display of human remains. Despite their differences in subject matter, Digital Benin and Face to Face both share a desire to address a common colonial past, retell the narratives of the collections, and to connect individuals with varying sets of skills and expertise in order to move forward from a harmful past towards a future of greater care, respect and inclusion within museology.
Image of the Ceremonial Return of the Vedda skull to Wanniya Uruwarige, Chief of Vedda. (Cheskin, 2019).
Bibliography:
Amadusan, O. 2022. Ẹyo Otọ Language Cards and Colouring Book. [Online]. [Accessed 6 April 2023]. Available from: https://digitalbenin.org/eyo-oto
Cheskin, D. 2019. Wanniya Uruwarige, Chief of Vedda. [Online]. [Accessed 6 April 2023]. Available from: https://exhibitions.ed.ac.uk/exhibitions/mind-shift/colonial-resistance-to-repatriation
Colonial Heritage. [Online]. [Accessed 6 April 2023]. Available from: https://markk-hamburg.de/en/digital-benin-2/
Divya P Tolia-Kelly 2016. Feeling and Being at the (Postcolonial) Museum: Presencing the Affective Politics of ‘Race’ and Culture. Sociology (Oxford). 50 (5), 896–912.
Gaupp, L. et al. 2020. Curatorial Practices of the ‘Global’: Toward a Decolonial Turn in Museums in Berlin and Hamburg? Journal of Cultural Management and Cultural Policy / Zeitschrift für Kulturmanagement und Kulturpolitik. 6 (2), 107–138.
Henderson, J. 2020. Beyond Lifetimes: Who do we Exclude when we Keep Things for the Future?, Journal of the Institute of Conservation. 43(3), 195-212
Jeffery, T. 2022. Towards an eco-decolonial museum practice through critical realism and Cultural Historical Activity Theory. Journal of critical realism. 21 (2), 170–195.
Lyngwa, A. 2022. Self Representation, Community Engagement and Decolonisation in the Museums of Indigenous Communities: Perspectives from Meghalaya, India. History. 107 (375), 302–321.
Prianti, D. D. & Suyadnya, I. W. 2022. Decolonising Museum Practice in a Postcolonial Nation: Museum’s Visual Order as the Work of Representation in Constructing Colonial Memory. Open Cultural Studies. 6 (1), 228–242.
Identify your key responsibilities and list the main areas of work you have been involved in. Briefly highlight the skills and competencies that are relevant to this project/work area.
1. Project Management:
In the lead up to our event, it was crucial that we met twice a week as a group to review what needed to be done for the week. I assisted in creating meeting agendas and minutes, as well as organising virtual and in person sessions for our group. In addition to this, I created a Google Drive for the project which included folders which housed the material we needed for the event, including email invites, a budget spreadsheet, marketing packs and more. As a group, we created weekly action points which needed to be attended to in order to ensure we were progressing at an appropriate rate before the event. Within group settings, I tend to take a very proactive role, and therefore had to challenge myself to delegate the work equally to create a working environment which catered to the goals and ideas of the collective group.
2. Communicating with Speakers and Partner Institutions:
As a part of our event, we had four speakers and two moderators provide presentations and discussion panels. From the onset of the second semester, I was communicating frequently with our speakers and arranging one-to-one meetings to discuss their goals for the event and what topic they would be presenting on. This allowed me to develop my communication and time management skills, as it was crucial to ensure that our speaker’s were being responded to on time and kept up to date on any and all changes to the event. The sensitive nature of the event context meant working closely with experts such as Zaki El-Salahi, a leading member of the Edinburgh Sudanese Community Partnership. We frequently kept in contact and held meetings with Zaki to ensure that we were approaching this event in the most respectful way possible, and allowing for others to open up the dialogue for conversation on the topic which still resonates closely to many ancestral communities today. Additionally, I worked closely alongside the curator of the Anatomical Museum, Malcolm MacCallum, in order to discuss the ways in which the displays in the museum connect to our event and the Skull Collection more broadly. We established the exhibition title Face to Face: the Hidden Histories as a means of informing audiences of the hidden narratives that are within the museum display cases.
3. Distributing Marketing Packs and Creating an Event Brite Page:
I was responsible for creating the first draft of the marketing pack which we would use to send to institutions and individuals we felt could best promote our event. This included an event blurb, a link to our Event Brite page, as well as pre-written texts for social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. The marketing material was successfully promoted by a range of institutions, including: Surgeon’s Hall Museum, National Museum of Scotland, the School of History, Classics and Archaeology, and Edinburgh College of Art. It was important for our group that the event attracted a diverse audience, including students, heritage professionals, community activists and scientists. In order to achieve this, the marketing material needed to be diligently organised, dispersed to the appropriate groups and proofed multiple times before final submission. After creating the Event Brite webpage for the event, I was able to monitor the number of ticket sales and share the link directly to our guests for ease of booking. Both marketing and webpage management were new skills for me, and required an extensive amount of time management, creativity and background research.
4. Speaking at the ‘Hidden Histories’ Tour:
The final component of our event centred around a tour of the Anatomical Museum which was titled Face to Face: the Hidden Histories. The goal of this was to expand upon some of the display narratives within the museum, and to relate these displays to the story of the Skull Collection. For my talk, I focussed on issues surrounding consent and identity within the museum, particularly the display of infant and fetal remains. This involved the creation of a new, alternative label for the display as well as speaking to the audience about the relation of the display to the event. I was required to write concisely while also ensuring that all the relevant information was on display for the label. Additionally, I spoke to members of the audience about the issues surrounding the display, and answered questions surrounding the history of the collection of infant and fetal remains in museums.
Label created for Face to Face: the Hidden Histories museum tour.
Looking ahead, list your key objectives for the GRP. 3-7 SMART(Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Timed) objectives should be noted with realistic timescales and focused outcomes. The objectives should cover the project itself and your own role.
The main objectives for this project were as follows:
Tell the complex stories of the Skull Collection from a perspective of decolonial thought and struggle: First and foremost, this event was centered around decolonial museum practice, and seeked to address the complex history of the collection while also providing dignity and restoring humanity to those within it. We achieved this through our selection of speakers, discussion with audience members and tour of the museum.
Acknowledge metadata gaps in the Skull Collection:During Semester 1, our group. met biweekly with Ruth Baxter, curator of the Anatomical Museum, to bridge our understanding of the collection with hands-on work. We catalogued and researched the South American collection in order to better understand Ruth’s role as a curator, and also to disperse this information onto a spreadsheet for future use.
Design event structure and host event: Given the complex nature of this collection, it was clear that a traditional exhibition would not be the best route forward for our project. We decided to host an event centred around dialogue as a means of opening up discussions on colonialism within the museum. My title, ‘Face to Face: A Dialogue on the University of Edinburgh’s Skull Collection’ was chosen as the event title, as well as ‘Hidden Histories’ for the museum tour. The planning of the event required constant communication between group members, speakers, and the museum curators. Together, we put together an event which had 50 people in attendance and ignited meaningful discussion surrounding the history and the future of the collection.
Event evaluation: Following the event, we compiled the data from our surveys and also had a professional illustrator and photographer capture aspects of the day. This information was not only beneficial for our own assessments, but also to help the museum in putting on similar events in the future. The videos and recordings of the event were also compiled and plan to be uploaded to the Anatomical Museum webpage.
My own personal objectives were as follows:
1 . Create a network of communication with our speakers: After months of communication, I was able to establish well-working professional relationships with our speakers. The ability to network with professionals within the field and beyond was deeply beneficial in my understanding of the type of work that goes into hosting an event like Face to Face.
2. Enact real change for the future of the collection: The event sparked discussion amongst many members of our audience, including higher-ups from the university itself. At the reception, I was interviewed by a journalist for Live Science, and was able to explain the importance of conducting decolonial museum practice within university institutions as a means of addressing a wrongful past and making room for improvement and greater inclusion in the future.
Discursive self-reflection
Use this section to, 1) reflect upon the progress of the project to date (both as a whole and with regards to your own specific area/role). 2) Critically reflect upon your experience working with the group.Here you may consider your contribution so far, the value of your specific strengths and expertise, the effectiveness of group communications and your performance in group meetings.How might the group [have] enhance[d] its performance?
Overall, the project was an invaluable experience which proved to be a unique and rewarding challenge for the entire group. Coming from a range of backgrounds, we were all able to utilise our own specialist skills in knowledge in order to create a well rounded event. The group struggled with communication and delegation of the workload at the start of the year, but quickly turned this around by the second semester. My own contributions included proactive leadership, communication with our speakers and partner institutions and engagement with the curators of the Anatomical Museums. My background in conflict archaeology allowed me to view the collection as one born out of colonial thought and theory, something which I personally hoped to express to our audience. I was able to attend every session held by Ruth Baxter of the Anatomical Museum, and gained valuable insight on the inner-workings of the space and the role of the curator in dealing with such complex subject matter. Despite differences in our working styles and opinions on the future of the collection, as a group we all shared a collective goal of humanising the individuals held within the space. I believe our event was a great success in achieving this.
The Natural History Museum of Vienna and Maori Repatriations
One of the most well-researched and recent cases of colonial repatriation requests come from the Maori populations of New Zealand in regard to their stolen ancestral remains by Austrian taxidermist, Andreas Reischek. During the late 19th century, Reischek extensively travelled across New Zealand, recording and collecting a variety of natural and ethnographic artefacts- which he hoped to later sell for profit to the Natural History Museum of Vienna (O’Hara, 2020, p. 438). The greatest point of contention from the Maori is in relation to the unlawful theft and transportation of the Kawhia mummies. These remains, belonging to a Maori man and child, were traditionally buried and protected within the Kawhia Caves. The rumoured presence of the mummies ignited Reischek’s interest in their acquisition, which he carried out in 1881 (Kolig, 1986, p. 59). Since this time, a century-long repatriation process began in an attempt to return the mummies to their rightful home. In 1985 the first of these repatriation requests was successful, and the body of Chief Tupāhau was safely returned and reburied in New Zealand. Despite this progression, the Kawhia mummies, alongside numerous other stolen remains, were still in possession of the Natural History Museum of Vienna.
Reischek’s published work of his New Zealand expeditions, Yesterdays in Maoriland, details his encounters with the Maori population, and the processes by which he obtained stolen remains. (Childs, 2017)
Mana and Tapu: Respecting Maori Funerary Tradition
Understanding not only the provenance, but also the religious and cultural significance of the Maori remains was essential in their repatriation. In the Maori tradition, mana represents the prestige and importance of an individual, while tapu is regarded as a sacred and ethereal place, which extended to graveyards and burial sites (Hole, 2007, p. 6). Despite a clear understanding of Maori tradition and belief, Reischek desecrated tapu during his removal of human remains from sacred areas, including the Kawhia mummies. In regard to anatomical significance, the head is believed to be the most sacred of body parts, and is in itself both an embodiment of mana and tapu. In Maori culture, the heads of relatives were kept and displayed during important events, and conversely, removed and displayed by enemy tribes as a sign of victory. However, in both instances, the theft or purposeful removal of a head from its resting place is a violation of tapu and could potentially result in death (Hole, 2007, pp. 6-7). When modern repatriation requests were first made in the aftermath of the Second World War, the pertinence of Maori religious values was not considered. Instead, the Austrian government defended the actions of Reischek by citing the outdated and controversial methods used by many 19th century anthropologists. It is not until the 1980s, during which the first set of repatriations began, that the cultural significance of these remains to living ancestors was examined in greater detail.
Te Papa and the Natural History Museum of Vienna: Modern Reconciliation
Following the return of Tupāhau’s body to New Zealand in 1985, repatriation programmes in New Zealand began to accelerate, particularly that of the Museum of New Zealand, also known as Te Papa. The museum sought to repatriate both Maori and Moriori remains to their living ancestors, and restore a level of dignity and respect to the remains which were stolen. Within Te Papa works the Repatriation Advisory Panel, composed of local tribal members, who research in-depth the provenance of stolen remains, the areas they may have once belonged to, and the burial customs which are most suitable for each individual (O’Hara, 2020, p. 448). Since the onset of the programme in 2003, over 400 Maori individuals have been returned home from institutions across the globe. In September 2022, the Natural History Museum of Vienna formally recognised the role they played in the illegal and controversial obtainment of Maori remains, and conducted a repatriation ceremony before the return of 64 individuals to New Zealand, including the Kawhia mummies (nhm-wien.ac.at).
Repatriation Ceremony at the Natural History Museum of Vienna. (Roßbroth F., 2022).
Informing Future Projects and Research
Unfortunately, the narrative of 19th century anthropological research in foreign countries is not unique to Reischek and Austria. Institutions across Europe are left to confront unpleasant histories which were written by their predecessors. Within the University of Edinburgh, the Skull Collection of the Anatomical Museum awaits further investigation into the provenance of the remains, the issue of display, and ongoing repatriation requests. Thinking of the ways in which the Natural History Museum of Vienna approached the issue of their Maori collections, we can inform future decisions on the projects happening within our own community. Members of the NHM Vienna staff have taken part in lectures discussing the looted remains within the museum (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zo8MMl_Hjtk) as well as establishing a committee dedicated to provenance research. With these ideas in mind, it may be beneficial to the Skull Collection to establish a similar committee- whether amongst students or faculty, which is dedicated to the research of origin and cultural value within the collections.
In 2011, Te Papa opened an exhibition called Tai Timu, Tai Pari, Tainui: Journey of a People. This exhibition explored the dynamic between ancestral remains and colonial acquisitions, sparking a renewed interest in the repatriation of Maori individuals within local tribal groups. In regard to the University’s Skull Collection, the inclusion of art in place of human remains is a possible route forward when navigating these difficult narratives. It is important as scholars that we do not erase the history of how these skulls were obtained, but rather challenge this history by honing in on our own human instinct to restore and honour the dignity of these people in the most appropriate way possible- including repatriation with modern ancestors. Pulling from the ideas of the Te Papa projects, repatriated remains should always return to their country of origin when possible, and should be thoroughly researched and examined by the indigenous communities to which they belong. The intersection of art and repatriation could be analysed further within the Skull Collection as a means of acknowledging our own modern thoughts and feelings, as well as openly discussing and investigating the racial and colonial standards which were in place within our own University system at the time. A potential starting point for such research can occur within our own local galleries and museums, researching artwork and artists whose provenance correlates to that of the skulls held in the anatomical museum. As is the case for both the NHM Vienna and the University Skull Collection, human remains should not be seen as traditional static objects. These remains are continuously evolving and unearthing histories which assist in revealing many of the outdated and systemic issues within museums and galleries today.
Fitting the Character by Tayo Adekunle, a British Nigerian artist, is a 2021 work commissioned by the University of Edinburgh. This piece highlights the inherently racist practice of phrenology used within the Skull Collection. This artwork is a catalyst from which other artists can respond to the collection through artistic expression. (Adekunle, 2021).
Bibliography
Adekunle, T. 2021. Fitting the Character. [Online]. [Accessed 11 October 2022]. Available from: https://exhibitions.ed.ac.uk/exhibitions/mind-shift/fitting-the-character
Childs, R. 2017. The Amazing Andreas Reischek. [Online]. [Accessed 10 October 2022]. Available from: https://kapitiindependentnews.net.nz/the-amazing-andreas-reischek/
Hole, B. 2007. Playthings for the Foe: The Repatriation of Human Remains in New Zealand. Public Archaeology, 6(1), 5-27.
Kolig, E. 1986. Andreas Reischek and the Maori: Villainy or the Nineteenth-Century Scientific Ethos? Pacific Studies, 10 (1), 55–61.
Naturhistorisches Museum Wien. 2022. Repatriation Ceremony for Ancestors Returning to Aotearoa New Zealand. [Online]. [Accessed 10 October 2022]. Available from: https://www.nhm-wien.ac.at/en/presse/pressemitteilungen2022/repatriation_aotearoa
O’Hara, C. 2020. The Andreas Reischek Collection in Vienna and New Zealand’s Attempts at Repatriation. In: Cressida, F., McKeown, T. and Keeler, H. ed(s). The Routledge Companion to Indigenous Repatriation. 1st edition. Routledge: 438–451.
Roßbroth F., K. 2022. Repatriation Ceremony for Ancestors Returning to Aotearoa New Zealand. [Online]. [Accessed 11 October 2022]. Available from: https://www.apa-fotoservice.at/galerie/30676
