Examination of Witness (Questions 440
- 451)
THURSDAY 18 MAY 2000
COUNCILLOR ELIZABETH
CAMERON, COUNCILLOR
JOHN LYNCH
AND MR
MARK O'NEILL
440. It is a related issue. We have heard that
the Shirt should have been buried with the person who died when
wearing it. The Aborigines believe that their people should have
been cremated at the time, and so any human remains which they
request are returned should therefore be cremated; it is a similar
issue?
(Cllr Cameron) I speak personally here. I believe
that the issue of human remains essentially is different. I can
only answer you by saying that, yes, I respect the native Americans'
belief that the Shirt of Wounded Knee is part of a funerary ritual,
but I think that still is different. I think we believe, we share
the belief about bodies, we may not share the belief totally about
what surrounds the body but we certainly share the belief about
bodies. We have already returned Aboriginal remains, and, in actual
fact, that was ten years ago; that was not taking, I think, anything
out of the normal. This one here, I think, was much more complex,
and less simple.
441. You mentioned earlier the criteria which
you have drawn up, quite rightly, for return; what aspects of
those criteria does the claim for the Benin Bronzes not fulfil?
(Cllr Lynch) I think, prejudging the deliberations
of the Working Group, in which we have not considered the Benin
Bronzes in a depth sufficient to come to a decision, off the top
of my head, again, one of the main criteria that would have to
be strongly investigated would be the fate of the objects if returned
to Benin; and I think there we have to take into account the stability
of the state.
442. So we are now back to concerns about how
the objects will be displayed, or used, upon their return?
(Cllr Lynch) I think, if I could maybe pick up on
the point about the return of the Shirt, and, yes, initially,
the Indians would have probably elected to have buried the Shirt,
but I think there are ongoing tensions within the native American
community, and I think, after a fairly long debate, it was decided
that the return of the Shirt could have a significance in itself
within their community, as Marcella, one of the elders said, the
return would bring a healing to the nation. And I think one of
the things that we were struck by was how imminent, how close
the events of Wounded Knee were to that particular tribe, they
spoke of it as if it had been a recent event, although they were
maybe, what, three, four generations down the road. And I think
that is something which is in their culture, and I think they
felt that the return of the Shirt would have a greater significance,
primarily to the young people, I think there are many problems
on the reservations of drugs, suicides, disorders, among the children.
443. I am sorry to be devil's advocate, but
the invasion of Benin, I think, was in exactly the same year as
the battle of Wounded Knee.
(Cllr Lynch) Yes, I think it was.
(Mr O'Neill) It was several years later.
(Cllr Cameron) It was later; it was 1897, I think,
and the massacre was 1890.
444. But we are talking about both those dates,
in the same period?
(Cllr Cameron) Yes, the same time.
(Mr O'Neill) I think the issue for museums is one
about values, and it is very easy to switch from obsessive possessiveness,
the "It is loot, but it is our loot" approach, to sort
of a huge guilt and say we should give it all back and make recompense.
And what we tried to do, in Glasgow, was establish that western
values, which include everything from education to the Holocaust,
in some sort of continuum, one of our values was preservation
of historically valuable artifacts, and we felt that was something
that we could argue for and discuss with anybody who asked for
something back. The Council could still, within its criteria,
give something back and have it destroyed, it has that freedom
of decision-making. But we felt that the value of preservation
was not a negative one, it was a positive one, and in a discussion
between two peoples it was a reasonable thing to discuss. So when
the Benin decision comes up, the Council could decide to give
it back with no conditions, whatsoever. So I think it is about
a negotiation on the basis of values, and reinforcing the issue
that there is no statute of legal limitations, it is about two
peoples agreeing a shared position about ownership.
445. So let me get this right, that there is
the issue of preservation upon return, there is the issue for
you of the proximity of the event, time-wise, and there is the
issue of values, all of which I understand. Why then do you say
that the Benin issue is a national one and an intergovernmental
problem, and you cannot say in which it would be unhelpful at
this stage for individual museums to act unilaterally; surely,
you are saying, on the one hand, you are able to act unilaterally,
that you have the power to act unilaterally, but on this one,
because it is a bit too much of a hot potato, you are saying that
it is an intergovernmental problem, and one that the Government
should take on?
(Mr O'Neill) I remember writing that, I knew it would
come back to me! The Council has got to make a decision until
you have reported, because one of the things we were very concerned
to do, in terms of museum governance, was to respect the position
of other museums, and if the Council decided now to return the
Benin Bronzes the real reason would be to make a deliberate precedent
and challenge especially national museums, which the Council may
do; but it would be much more useful, again, in terms of the ethics
of the kind of way we are trying to go forward, which is a negotiated
consensus position between the requesters and museum governors,
which include a lot of museums in Britain. So I think it is continuous
with the same thinking that led to a public hearing and a consensus
position; if a consensus position does not emerge, the Council
may decide to set a precedent then.
Mr Faber: I was going to mention your
remark that you are deferring your recommendations until we have
reported. I think we would be flattered if one or two other bodies
sometimes did the same thing.
Chairman
446. We would not just be flattered; astounded.
(Cllr Cameron) Mr Faber, I wish to underline that,
in fact, I think we want as much information as possible, as we
progress and as we negotiate, we wish to do it on the back of
as much of a body of knowledge as we possibly can have.
Mr Faber
447. So who would you like to see, I think that
is absolutely fair, what you have said, but who would you like
to see taking the lead at a national level on that issue; is that
a Government Department, or a body, or who would you like to see?
(Mr O'Neill) I think it has to be the national museums,
as the custodians, with the ethical as well as the physical responsibilities,
I think they need to come to a more coherent position than "Oh,
the Act says we can't do anything." It needs to be ethically
based, and it needs to be culturally based, and they would need
to provide leadership for all holders of Benin Bronzes in Britain,
because it might be that if a decision is made to return it should
be based on all of the holdings in the UK rather than any one
individual museum's holdings.
Mr Keen
448. This is, initially, nothing to do with
this inquiry, but I was reminded the other day that somebody said
the English/Scotland football game is going to be reinstated.
Having been to two or three in the sixties and seventies with
a Scotsman, so I sat amongst the Scots, I do not think the visit
of Sioux warriors will increase the ferociousness of the Scots
in any way. But that just shows my position.
(Cllr Lynch) Since Mr Maxton and I both have in our
constituencies Hampden Park—
Mr Maxton
449. And we visit it, as well.
(Cllr Cameron) And the other link with sport, Mr Keen,
is that we do take this forward, you know, in friendship.
Mr Keen
450. You did mention that the Shirt, originally,
when it was in the museum, was just in an old cabinet, so if I
had visited ten years ago I would have said, "It's a shirt,
it's got feathers on, that's it," and just go on to the next
thing. What has replaced it? I have heard about the exchange that
is going to go on, which is excellent, but in the museum what
would I see now, if I came?
(Cllr Lynch) What you would see now is a 20-minute
audio-visual display, telling the story of the Ghost Dance; and,
essentially, the story of the Ghost Dance is a story of the end
of the Plains Indians, or, at least, the fights with the American
Cavalry. The audio-visual takes through the story of the Ghost
Dance to the killing of Sitting Bull, there are pictures of the
death scene at Wounded Knee and of the grave site at Wounded Knee,
two weeks after the actual event. You would continue with the
audio-visual to the story of Ghost Dancers travelling with the
Buffalo Bill Wild West Show, and coming to Glasgow. There are
pictures of the public hearing, a video tape of the public hearing,
and of the return of the Shirt to Wounded Knee. As well as that,
on static display, the replica of the Ghost Dance Shirt and other
artifacts relating to the Lakota, as a tribe, and to several individuals
of the Lakota. We also have on display three quilts which were
gifted to the three of us, although Liz has not given hers to
the museum yet, three quilts which were given to us at the site
of Wounded Knee, which had been used to cover the graveside during
the ceremonies, and they are quite special.
451. So, from what was just a shirt, with no
connection really with Glasgow, apart from that somebody came
with a circus, the display really is a thousand times more interesting
and has a real connection with Glasgow, so maybe other museums
can learn something from it. I do not mean that everything that
is returned to another rightful owner can really be developed
into a display, as you have been able to do.
(Cllr Cameron) It can be developed, and I think that
education is the most important thing that maybe we have been
able to bring forward to the people about the acquisition of the
Shirt, about the lives of the Plains Indians, about what happened
to them, and I think that is very good indeed. Also, to go back
to what John said earlier, the American Indians themselves, I
think, will gain something from this, something very important;
okay, the publicity they have caused, the education about their
way of life and the loss of their way of life is important, but
I think the idea that there is closure here, that there is possibility,
I think the words that Marcella LeBeau used were, on that day,
110 years ago, something was lost to the world, the sacred hoop
was broken, were the words that she used, that this can, in some
way, help to achieve something better in educational terms. And
I think what we have discovered, as far as the museum goes, is
that people are much more interested, from children right through
to older people coming in, to people coming to visit our museums
from afar, in what this story is about. One very important thing,
which I must highlight, is that, both in Glasgow and in America,
it has been said, and I believe this to be true, that if it had
not been for the years which the Shirt spent with us it might
well have been lost, and the Indians recognise that that Shirt,
the preservation of it, is due in part to us and that we have
become part of the history of the Shirt and the Lakota people,
which I think is extremely interesting.
Chairman: I will not say it is all I
can say, there is lots more I could say, but I think this is one
of the nicest sessions of this Committee that we have had, it
is comparable to our session with the Cavalier exponents, and
it rounds off a highly satisfactory and useful morning. Thank
you very much indeed.
|
