Memorandum submitted by Glasgow City Council
1. INTRODUCTION
Glasgow City Council has in the past 10 years
received five repatriation requests:
1. Australian Aboriginal Human Remains;
2. Five objects said to be from the Massacre
of Wounded Knee;
3. A beaded waistcoat said to belong to Rain-in-the-Face,
a Lakota Warrior;
4. Human remains dating from the 18th century,
found in 1932 in Greenhead Moss, Cambusnethan, Lanarkshire; and
5. Benin Bronzes and Ivories.
The first two of these have been fully processed,
leading in both cases to objects being returned. The return of
the Aboriginal human remains was not unusual, and followed precedents
set by other museums. The process devised to review the repatriation
request from the Wounded Knee Survivors Association has been described
as a model of good practice. This report briefly sets out the
background to the five requests that have been received, traces
the evolution and operation of that procedure, and gives an update
on the current position on the remaining requests.
2. REPATRIATION
REQUESTS
2.1 Australian Aboriginal Human Remains
2.1.1 Historical Background
In 1886 Glasgow Museums purchased from a James
Kerr two almost complete skulls from North Queensland. In 1889
A James Smith presented three fragments of human skulls, from
a cave from near Mount Morgan in Queensland, Australia.
2.1.2 Request for Return
In June 1990 the museum was contacted by Australian
Aborigine Rights activist Mr Michael Mansell, who asked if there
were any Australian Aboriginal human remains in the collection
and if there were, whether we would return them. This was followed
by a visit from June Lesley Fogarty, Director of the Aboriginal
Arts Unit, and by Mr Mansell. The case for return was based on
the Aborigine belief that where human remains are disturbed and
removed, the perpetual chain of reincarnation from the spirit
wells of specific groups is disrupted. "The dead must be
returned to Mother Earth where the spirit becomes one with the
land and the people themselves" (Letter from June Lesley,
18 July 1990). The formal request came from Douglas McClelland,
Australian High Commissioner.
2.1.3 Response of the Museum and the Council
Museum staff recommended to Committee that the
remains be returned on the grounds that:
— the museum had to respect different
cultures' attitudes to the use and preservation of human remains,
and burial was essential to Australian aboriginal beliefs;
— the remains had never been and probably
never would be, useful for scientific analysis (no institution
had ever asked to examine them);
— the remains had almost certainly
been removed without permission and taken more out of acquisitive
curiosity than for scientific investigation; and
— precedents for return existed, eg
the Royal College of Surgeons, Dublin, Bradford Museum, Peterborough
Museum and the Pitt Rivers Museum, Oxford.
The Arts and Culture Committee agreed to the
return in August 1990. This was carried out at a ceremony in Kelvingrove
Art Gallery and Museum. At the time, this was considered an isolated
exception which did not require an innovation in policy or procedure.
2.2 Five objects said to be from the Massacre
of Wounded Knee
2.2.1 Historical Background
On 31 December 1890 over 250 Lakota men, women
and children were massacred at Wounded Knee by the United States
7th Cavalry. This was the culmination of a period of rising tension
between the Lakota and the white community. As the Lakota had
more and more land taken from them and their traditional way of
life made impossible by the white settlement and the near extermination
of the buffalo, many turned in despair to a new messianic religion
which was led by Wovoka, a Pauite medicine man from Montana. He
preached that if Indians performed the Ghost Dance, the white
man would disappear, all the Indians who had died of disease or
had been shot would come back to life and Jesus would come to
save the Red Man from the White Man, who had killed Him when He
came to them. To this the Lakota added a belief that wearing the
ceremonial Ghost Dance Shirt would make the wearer impervious
to bullets.
In the harsh winter of 1890 the Ghost Dance
movement alarmed white people, and a large army was sent in to
contain the situation. Matters were made worse when Sitting Bull
was shot dead while being arrested. The 7th Cavalry detained a
band of Lakota led by Big Foot and took them to a camp at Wounded
Knee Creek. The next morning the Cavalry began to disarm the Indians.
During the search a shot was fired, and the soldiers opened fire
indiscriminately. The bodies were buried in a mass grave near
the site. The event was reported world wide, and was portrayed
as a battle in which the Indians attacked the Cavalry. One of
the reporters who travelled to the massacre site was George Crager,
who had lived and worked among the Lakota since he left home at
the age of 13, and served twice in the US army.
In January 1892, just a little over a year after
the Massacre, Crager was working as an Indian interpreter with
Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show, which was wintering in Glasgow.
He wrote to the Director of Glasgow Museums offering to sell his
collection. The upshot of this was that he sold 14 Indian objects
to the museum, among them a warrior's necklace said to be taken
from Wounded Knee. He also donated another 14 objects to the museum
including a Ghost Dance Shirt, a pair of boy's moccasins and a
baby's cradle, also said to be taken from Wounded Knee. The Ghost
Shirt was on display in the main Art Gallery and Museum in Kelvingrove
from at least 1960 up to 1999.
2.2.2 The Request for Return
In 1992 the Ghost Shirt was included in a major
temporary exhibition in Glasgow on the fate of American Indians,
where it was seen by an American lawyer, John Earl. He reported
his discovery and a letter requesting repatriation was sent. In
April 1995 a delegation from the Wounded Knee Survivors Association
(WKSA) led by their lawyer Mario Gonzalez, accompanied by Marcella
LeBeau, a Lakota elder, arrived in Glasgow. They requested the
return of the Ghost Dance Shirt and four other objects said to
be from Wounded Knee. The case put forward by Mario Gonzalez was
based on legal and ethical principles. He traced the history of
treaties between the Lakota and the United States, and the increasing
destitution experienced by the people as their land was reduced.
He described the harsh winter of 1890-91 and the near starvation
which the Lakota were experiencing. He recounted the events leading
up to the Massacre and stated that "the crucial consideration"
was that "this Massacre was not a battle during a war, but
a Massacre of innocent people, mainly civilians, women and children,
so that the material is not war booty. The items were stolen off
dead bodies of people whose persons and property were protected
under US law. Article 1 of the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty provided
that all war between the US and Lakota should forever cease. Article
8 of the 1877 Act (19 Stat.254) further provided that the Lakota
people and their property would be protected by US law; this legal
protection should have stopped the looting of the dead that occurred,
and means that the looted items are stolen property."
(Returns under the US legislation—the Native American
Graves and Repatriation Act (1990) grants unconditional return
of religious objects. The Smithsonian Institution has returned
several Ghost Shirts, some with weaker Wounded Knee provenances
than Glasgow's but not under the provisions of NAGPRA. They did
so on the grounds that there was no way they could have been legally
acquired.)
He also argued that because the Lakota tradition
was to bury a dead person in his/her garments, the objects should
be treated as having the same significance as human remains.
In September that year the Director of Glasgow
Museums responded on behalf of the Council saying that "Glasgow
Museums have decided on professional grounds not to agree to the
request for the return" of the five objects. The letter acknowledged
the wrong done to the Lakota at Wounded Knee, and justified retaining
the objects on the grounds that:
— the museum acquired the objects in
good faith;
— the objects should remain in the
public domain;
— the museum's duty to the modern Lakota
was to tell the story of the Massacre, in ways which reflected
their point of view;
— the story should be told at Wounded
Knee, for which purpose the WKSA should claim Ghost Dance Shirts
in American museums; and
— the story should also be told elsewhere,
and this Ghost Shirt is the only one in Britain, and probably
in Europe.
The letter also made it clear that the Lakota
could appeal to the City Council, which they did, in November
1996, through Iain Sinclair, a school teacher from the Isle of
Lewis, who had been appointed WKSA representative in Scotland.
2.3 Beaded Waistcoat
This request was originally made by Marcella
Le Beau when she visited Glasgow on behalf of the Wounded Knee
Survivors Association in 1994. The head of the delegation however
made it clear that this was a personal request and was not part
of the formal submission by the WKSA. No action by either Marcella
or the City Council took place until 1999, when the claim was
revived by a Mr Lewis Ballantyne on Marcella Le Beau's behalf.
A study of the provenance of the Waistcoat has been commissioned
and Mr Ballantyne has been asked to make the case in terms of
the City Council's Criteria.
2.4 Human remains dating from the 18th century,
found in 1932 in Greenhead Moss, Cambusnethan
In 1932 a man digging peat at Greenhead Moss
(half a mile south east of Old Cambusnethan Church, one mile east
of Wishaw, Lanarkshire) uncovered the remains of a human body.
The remains consisted of decayed, fragmentary human bones, clothed
in a wool jacket, shoes, stockings and a cap. A report on the
find in the Transactions of the Glasgow Archaeological Society
(New Series Vol IX, Part 1 1937) concluded:
"Laid upon the improvised stretcher the
body was apparently carried over a considerable stretch of desolate
bog and disposed of furtively—the burial in unconsecrated
ground suggests a case of suicide; yet the slashed bonnet and
shoe, indicating sword thrusts, seem to weaken this conjecture.
It cannot be stated definitely whether this killing
episode was connected with the fighting induced by the religious
disturbances prevalent in the district in the later part of the
17th century.
Nor can it be affirmed whether the victim was
a military or civilian person. He did not belong to the very lowest
grade of society. If a Royalist he was more likely to have been
a foot soldier than a horseman. A dragoon in uniform would wear
boots, not shoes, and his equipment, as described in the ancient
records, was apparently of better quality and of greater elaboration
than that now discovered ...
If the victim were a Covenanter he may have been
cut off unbeknown to his companions and his body, bearing wounds
on the neck and foot, carried away secretly and probably in darkness
by the aggressors and given a hurried burial ... Further discoveries
of 17th century clothing may throw light upon the mystery of the
Cambusnethan murder, now published after a silence of 250 years."
The dating was reassessed in 1975 by a costume
expert, (Mrs Helen Bennet of the National Museum of Antiquities)
who located the man's clothing as being from between 1790 and
1810.
2.4.1 The Request for Return
The Secretary of Central Wishaw Community Council,
Mr Sam Love, wrote on 15 August 1997, asking for "a small
part of the bones of the body", so that they could be "placed
in a sealed container and placed within a Cairn" which was
dedicated to the local Convenanting tradition, and due to be unveiled
on
15 September. It was explained to Mr Love that a
decision could not be made in this timescale. He resubmitted the
request in October, in the belief that "as Christians that
it is our duty and responsibility to have the remains of this
young man returned to the place where his friends laid him to
rest so long ago".
2.5 Benin Bronzes and Ivories
2.5.1 Historical Background
In 1896 the British had nearly consolidated
their control over trade in the Niger delta, but the Oba (king)
of Benin refused to sign a protectorate agreement. The acting
Consul-general, James Phillips failed to convince the Foreign
Office to send an expeditionary force to "destool the fetish
priest", so he decided to negotiate with the Oba himself.
On 3 January 1897 he led an unarmed delegation to Benin city of
eight other Europeans and their African porters, despite warnings
that the Oba was performing the Ague ritual, during which time
guests could not be received. The party was ambushed by Benin
warriors and only two escaped alive. Within five weeks the British
had sent a "punitive expedition" which conquered Benin,
burned Benin city, deposed and exiled the Oba and summarily shot
or hanged an unknown number of lesser chiefs and warriors. Over
3,000 objects mainly the carved ivory and brass castings which
are amongst the greatest artistic achievements in the world—"the
African equivalent of the Renaissance". Many of these were
sold in London to pay for the expeditionary force, with a great
many being purchased by the British Museum, and other museums
in Liverpool and Berlin.
Glasgow Museums has 21 Benin objects, including
two bronze memorial heads, one of a King (Oba) and a Queen Mother,
and an Ivory tusk, purchased in 1901, and a ceremonial sword,
which are likely to have come from the punitive expedition.
2.5.2 The Request for Return
The request for return came in November 1996
from Mr Bernie Grant MP for Tottenham, Chairman of the African
Reparations Movement and supported by the West African Museums
Programme, on behalf of the Oba of Benin, who wrote a letter of
authorization for the request. The case set out by Mr Grant for
the return of "Benin bronzes, ivories and other cultural
and religious objects" was on behalf of the current Oba,
and was for these objects to be returned, not to a museum but
to the Oba's palace. He argued that they are part of a living
culture and religion—for some rarely performed rituals which
are not written down, the bronzes are the only source of correct
dress. This culture was attacked by British imperial forces and
plundered, creating an historic injustice which should be rectified.
The technical case for repatriation is based on whether the British
expedition was legal even at the time. The British justification—that
the expedition was to punish the Oba and his people for massacring
unarmed British officials—is countered by the current Oba,
who argues that:
— the British were looking for a pretext
for taking over Benin, so that their motive was not justice but
conquest;
— there was no evidence presented that
the Oba had ordered the attack on the Phillips' expedition, and
that the war party could have been acting on its own initiative;
and
— the British went against natural
justice by organizing a trial in which they had a vested interest.
In his address at the Centenary commemoration
of the 1897 events, the current Oba compared their case for the
return of objects removed in 1897 to the return of the Stone of
Scone to Scotland and the moves to have Jewish gold plundered
by the Nazis returned by Swiss banks.
2.5.3 Refusal and Appeal
The Director of Glasgow Museums wrote to Mr
Grant on 10 January 1997 rejecting the request for return. He
stated that, though restitution was possible, and that Glasgow
had recently returned Aboriginal human remains, he could not recommend
return in this case on "entirely professional" grounds.
He argued that
"Museums have a collective responsibility,
both nationally and internationally to preserve the past so that
people can enjoy it and learn from it. In the case of the Benin
collection in Glasgow though it is small and not of the highest
quality, it does play an important role in introducing our visitors
to the culture, and religious beliefs of Benin, whose artistic
achievements rank with the finest not just in Africa but in the
whole world. Virtually all our 22 Benin items are on permanent
view to the public in Kelvingrove and in St Mungo's Museum of
Religious Life and their withdrawal from these displays would
limit, in our opinion, our visitors' understanding of the world.
We have taken into account, too the fact that
the museums in Nigeria, including the one in Benin itself, do
now have one of the world's finest representations of this great
culture and our collections would not add significantly to this,
even if the request for restitution had come from them. However,
in this case, we are not considering a transfer from one public
museum to another, but a request on behalf of the Oba of Benin,
himself, for future religious use. We believe, however, that these
artefacts have an important role in the public sector by informing
over three million visitors here about the culture of Benin, and
it has to be said, the history of British Imperialism".
Mr Grant immediately wrote back, formally appealing
against the Director's decision.
3. ESTABLISHING
A PROCEDURE
By early 1998 Glasgow City Council had three
outstanding repatriation requests, which had been rejected by
museums officials and for which there were appeals to the City
Council. The Council decided a strategic approach to the issue
was required. Initial investigation made it clear that, other
than blanket refusal of all requests, no general policy was possible.
On 8 April 1998 the Arts and Culture Committee therefore established
a cross-party Working Group on Repatriation, chaired by Councillor
John Lynch, to devise a procedure that dealt with the ethical
issues involved, reflected the democratic ambitions of the Council,
and to make recommendations to the Committee. The Committee agreed
that each request should be dealt with on its merits, in the light
of five main criteria:
1. The Status of those making the request
ie their right to represent the community to which the object/s
originally belonged.
2. The continuity between the community which
created the object/s and the current community on whose behalf
the request is being made.
3. The cultural and religious importance
of the object/s to the community.
4. How the object/s have been acquired by
the museum and their subsequent and future use.
5. The fate of the object/s if returned.
4.1 The Ghost Dance Shirt
The procedure agreed to process this request
included:
— briefing by an academic expert in
the provenance and historical background of the objects in question
(Ms Sam Maddra, who was researching the Glasgow Lakota material
for a postgraduate degree at Glasgow University);
— consultation with the Council's legal
department, who advised that there was no obligation in law to
return the objects, and that the Council had the legal power to
transfer ownership of the objects if it wished;
— consultation with members of the
museum community. The Group was very concerned that, in its role
as museum governors, it took the views of the museums profession
into account and had a meeting with representatives from the National
Museum of Scotland and the Scottish Museums Council. Both were
very supportive, recognizing the dilemmas involved, acknowledging
that a decision either way was justifiable and supporting the
open process we had devised. Neither expected a massive increase
in repatriation requests if we did decide to repatriate—the
"floodgates" predicted by the media; and
— a call for public comments through
newspaper advertisements. Over 400 letters were received, the
vast majority in favour of return, as was the voluminous correspondence
in the letters pages of the press. After the return was agreed
visitor comments books in the Museum next to the display received
over 1,500 signatures, the vast majority in favour for return.
4.1.1 Provenance and Authenticity
After considering the evidence presented by
Ms Maddra the Working Group agreed with her conclusion that the
Ghost Dance Shirt was almost certainly a genuine Lakota object,
but its link with Wounded Knee was unproven and probably unprovable.
George Crager was a showman and a liar, but he was at Wounded
Knee within two weeks of the Massacre.
4.1.2 The Hearing
The Repatriation Working Group held a hearing
at which delegates from Wounded Knee Survivors Association and
Glasgow Museums made presentations on their views. The public
were invited to be present, but were not allowed to speak—anyone
who wished to contribute to the debate was asked to do so in writing.
This took place on 13 November 1998 and was chaired by Councillor
Lynch. It was attended by representatives of the National Museum
of Scotland, the Museum Ethnographers' Group, the British Museum,
the Museums and Galleries Commission, the Museums Association
and Leicester University Museums Studies Department and the Scottish
Museums Council, along with nearly 200 members of the public.
The meeting was taken somewhat by surprise when
the Lakota delegation changed their request from all five objects
to the Ghost Dance Shirt alone. The hearing proceeded on this
basis.
4.1.3 Speech by Marcella LeBeau
The Wounded Knee Survivors Association was represented
by Marcella LeBeau. She introduced herself by her Lakota Name
(Pretty Rainbow Woman) and her lineage; she was a member of the
Hunkapapa Band of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. She said that
she was a retired nurse, who had served in the Army Nursing Corps
in England, Wales, France and Belgium during World War II. She
said that descendants of survivors and victims of the Massacre
of Wounded Knee lived on the Pine Ridge and Cheyenne River Reservations.
"The younger generation are identifying
their Bands, taking their place in history and picking their roads.
The Lakota people have lived under oppression, broken Treaties
when the Lakota people were ruthlessly massacred at Wounded Knee—250
Lakota people died and something else happened—the sacred
hoop was broken—the spirit was broken. It is up to us to
solve our destiny—it is our choice—the choice of my
son Richard and myself, on behalf of the Lakota Nation. We want
our youth to know first hand their own history, to bring meaning
to their lives, build self esteem, honour and respect into their
lives, which is our culture, to eliminate the devastation of alcoholism,
suicide and other negative influences. The Sacred Ghost Dance
Shirt of Wanagni Wacipi Agee Wakan was taken off a dead body at
Wounded Knee and the body was buried naked in a mass grave. No
culture in the world would do this as it simply is not the proper
thing to do. Native Americans have the greatest respect for their
dead. Today on the reservation, we, as veterans of World War II,
Vietnam and the Korean conflict pay our respect and tribute to
each cemetery on the Reservation on Memorial Day, yearly. Memorial
feeds and Give Aways are common to honor their dead. It follows
the natural law of society that a Ghost Dance Shirt taken off
the body of a massacred Lakota should be returned to the Lakota.
Long standing grief and sadness prevails with
the descendants and it would help in some small measure to bring
closure and healing to a sad and horrible event in the history
of the Lakota Nation.
The Cheyenne River and Pine Ridge Wounded Knee
Survivors' Association have an agreement with the Heritage Cultural
Centre in Pierre, South Dakota, to hold the Sacred Ghost Dance
Shirt until such time as the Pine Ridge and Cheyenne River Sioux
Tribe have a suitable museum for the Ghost Dance Shirt."
4.1.4 Presentation by Mark O'Neill, Head of Curatorial
Services
Mr O'Neill provided professional advice to the
City Council in coming to its decision. He argued that,
"If museums represent our better selves,
our humane values, then we have to admit to the possibility that
there may be other values, which are more important than that
of possession and preservation. Possession in itself cannot be
an absolute value, taking precedence over all others. And if our
values lead us to preserve an object because of what it tells
us about the history of a particular human group, then it is inconsistent
not to give that group the respect of at least taking their views
seriously. The objects we preserve and the stories they tell reflect
our values, what we stand for, how we wish to see ourselves, what
we wish to bring with us into the future.
A related argument here is that to give one object
back creates a precedent and a floodgate will be opened up. The
City Council has rejected this argument. It cannot be right to
say, the case for returning this group of objects is just, but
it cannot be done because future unjust cases may be encouraged.
Values are above all a matter of choice, and for values to be
real we must continually make the necessary choices. In Glasgow
our vision of museums is not as dusty storerooms but a places
where urgent issues of personal and communal meaning and identity
can be explored and renegotiated."
He acknowledged the strength of the case for
repatriation, and also presented the arguments against, and on
which the Council could base a decision if required. He presented
an analysis of the significance of what was happening reflecting
on the motives of those supporting return. These seemed to be
based on Scottish people's self perception as a just people, and
their awareness that they had been beneficiaries as well as victims
of imperial conquest. He also questioned the benefits the Lakota
hoped repatriation would bring them. He then evaluated the case
for repatriation against the Council's five criteria.
4.1.5 Applying the Criteria
It was clear that the Ghost Dance Repatriation
request scored strongly against the first four criteria. The Wounded
Knee Survivors Association had established their bona fides and
their right to represent the community to which the objects originally
belonged. The individuals involved in the WKSA were direct descendants
of the victims of the Massacre. Though the Ghost Dance Religion
was no longer practiced, Wounded Knee was overwhelmingly important
to the Lakota, marking the end of resistance to white conquest,
and the removal of garments from the dead was anathema to their
spiritual beliefs.
On the fourth criterion, relating to the museum
history of the object, Glasgow had long displayed the object,
and had plans to develop the displays, in the belief that museums
had the right, indeed the duty, to show objects relating to the
worst aspects of human behaviour, as well as to great cultural
achievements.
The most difficult issue was the fifth criterion,
the fate of the object if returned. Mr O'Neill argued that the
preservation of and provision of public access to historical objects
for educational purposes were legitimate values of the City and
its museums which needed to be acknowledged, so that for example,
reburial would not be acceptable, nor would storage in private
hands.
4.1.6 The Negotiations
The fate of the Ghost Shirt was the key issue
of negotiations which followed the hearing. While the WKSA had
undertaken to store the Ghost Dance Shirt in a museum in South
Dakota, accepting public display as a condition of return was
not straightforward. Many members of the Lakota community in the
US felt they had a right to unconditional rights over the Shirt
(as they would have under US Legislation). However agreement was
reached in the following terms:
"The Council agreed to transfer ownership
of the Ghost Dance Shirt. In return the Wounded Knee Survivors
Association undertook to
1. Preserve in perpetuity the Ghost Dance
Shirt
2. Ensure that the Ghost Dance Shirt is displayed
at all reasonable times in an appropriate place where the Shirt
and details of its historical and cultural significance is accessible
to members of the public
3. Acknowledge in any public display of the
Ghost Dance Shirt, the role of the people of Glasgow in its history
and preservation: and
4. Agree to loan the Ghost Dance Shirt, which
would be accompanied by a representative(s) of the Association,
for public display in Glasgow for such periods as may be agreed
between Glasgow City Council and the Association.
Glasgow City Council shall examine with the Association
ways in which Glasgow City Council might establish educational,
cultural and other similar links with the area represented by
the Association.
In reaching its decision on this matter, Glasgow
City Council has treated the claim of the Association on the basis
of its own particular merits and does not bind itself to act in
a similar manner in any future claim by other persons in relation
to any artefact within its ownership."
It was acknowledged that these conditions were
based on trust, as it is very unlikely that the City Council would
take any legal action if they were not carried out.
4.1.7 The Decision
The Cultural and Leisure Services Committee
of 19 November 1998 agreed to the Working Group's recommendation
that the Ghost Dance Shirt be returned. This was ratified by the
full Council that day.
4.1.8 The Return
The return took place eight months later, involving
a delegation from Glasgow which included Councillor Elizabeth
Cameron, Councillor John Lynch, and Mr Mark O'Neill. After two
days of ceremonies at Eagle Butte on the Pine Ridge reservation,
the Ghost Dance Shirt was formally handed over by Councillor Cameron
on Saturday 1 August at the site of the Massacre. Twenty-nine
descendants of those who were at the Massacre attended, along
with about 200 other people. After speeches and the presentation
of gifts, the Ghost Dance Shirt was handed over to the Director
of the South Dakota Historical Society, who took it to the museum
for safekeeping and display. The following day there was a further
ceremony at the Museum, attended by Marcella LeBeau and senior
officials from the SDHS. A bagpiper and Indian hoop dancer gave
the event a sense of cultural exchange.
4.1.9 Developments
Links with the Lakota will be developed as funding
and other resources permit. The possibility of bringing over a
group of teenage drummers to perform in Glasgow's World Music
festival, in both formal and community venues and schools is being
investigated.
4.2 Human Remains from Cambusnethan
After a meeting between Councillor Lynch, Mr
O'Neill and Mr Love to explore the reasons behind the request,
Mr Love agreed to resubmit his request in terms of the Council
criteria. This has not yet been received.
4.3 Benin Bronzes & Ivories
The Working Group requested a presentation from
Professor Frank Willet, former Director of Glasgow University's
Hunterian Museum and Art Gallery, and a noted authority on West
African culture, having conducted archaeological excavations in
Nigeria, and being the author of a number of important works,
including African Art (Thames and Hudson). Professor Willet made
a specific case against returning artefacts to Nigeria. He presented
evidence:
— of his concerns for the safety of
the artefacts if they were returned to Nigeria and commenting
on the inadequate security arrangements within Nigerian Museums;
— that Benin artwork had been stolen
from Nigerian Museums and sold on the open market;
— that although the Oba of Benin was
interested in keeping old traditions alive, he could not guarantee
the safety of the artefacts given that other art works had previously
been stolen from his palace; and
— the artefacts in Glasgow were not
unique in themselves, or uniquely important for the Benin culture.
4.3.1 Current Position
The Working Group has deferred making recommendations
until the outcome of the Parliamentary inquiry on Cultural Property:
Return and Illicit Trade. Given
— that the relatively minor importance
of Glasgow's Benin holdings, and the world class holdings of other
UK museums and in Benin itself, it would be very difficult for
a return by Glasgow not to be seen as a precedent; and
that Glasgow City Council as a responsible museum
governing body is reluctant to make unconditional returns, which
would be the result of repatriating to Nigeria, given the unstable
conditions prevailing there.
The Repatriation Working Groups feel that the
Benin issue is a national and intergovernmental problem in which
it would be unhelpful, at this stage, for individual museums to
act unilaterally.
4.4 The Lakota Waistcoat
A study of the provenance of the Waistcoat has
been commissioned and Mr Ballantyne has been asked to make the
case in terms of the City Council's Criteria. The Council expects
to make a decision on this by the end of June 2000.
5. CONCLUSION
Glasgow has not received any new requests for
repatriation since the return of the Ghost Dance Shirt, though
an earlier claim from the same community has been renewed. The
Ghost Dance Shirt was an exception to the general presumption
against return because of its unique position in the history of
the Lakota, because of the way the object found its way into Glasgow's
collection, and because the delegation were able to meet the Council's
concerns for the long term preservation of the object.
Glasgow City Council was able to contain the
precedent effect by generating a well informed public debate about
the issue, and devising a thorough and transparent decision making
process.
April 2000
|
