Pitt Rivers Museum Stories with Josie Long: Hidden Objects and Colonial Legacies

Early ethnographic classification (late 18th century) was relatively naive, with two main principles: geographic (people in specific areas belong to specific groups) and linguistic (language determines ethnic classification). These principles competed and evolved as scientific understanding improved. The geographic principle was intuitive but later supplemented by linguistic criteria as comparative linguistics emerged as a scientific discipline. Early linguistic classifications were imprecise due to limited knowledge of the languages being studied, leading to unexpected groupings and classifications.

This comprehensive section establishes the theoretical framework for understanding ethnological museums and presents major critiques of their colonial foundations. Key distinctions include: (1) Ethnography involves field observation while ethnology develops scientific theories; (2) The etymology reveals 'anthropos' (human) + 'logos' (discourse) for anthropology, and 'ethnos' (being one) + 'graphos' (sign) for ethnography; (3) The ecological museum concept represents a step beyond traditional ethnographical museums; (4) Claude Lévi-Strauss argued these museums witness cultural destruction and mumification of thinking; (5) Edward Said expressed hatred for ethnographic museums due to their inability to look back; (6) James Clifford proposed plural archives combining diverse disciplines; (7) The concept of 'post-colony' suggests moving beyond colonial frameworks entirely; (8) Only those who were objectified can infuse life into museums; (9) Each artist is a library with their own universe; (10) Artists must decolonize knowledge when working with non-Western cultural objects; (11) Western modernity's relationship between significant and signified differs fundamentally from non-Western cultures; (12) In African cultures like Dan, Pende, and Igbo, illness was celebrated through masks rather than hidden; (13) Artists have the ability to create relationships between unrelated things (ellipse), a technique central to surrealism; (14) Translation problems arise when words from different languages do not mean the same thing; (15) Museum directors inviting non-Western artists may still engage in objectivist practices; (16) Ethnological museums were originally 'Museum of Civilization' but switched to 'Museum of the Others'; (17) Anthropology and ethnology were reserved for non-humans and 'others'; (18) All museum classifications are based on 19th-century hierarchies; (19) In non-Western cultures, broken objects are repaired expressively with injuries carrying the signature of the repairer; (20) Preservation is the death of an object, while traditional repair gives objects new life; (21) John Pepper stated collectors are not collecting objects but themselves; (22) André Malraux suggested giving objects new life rather than formal conservation; (23) Cultural objects like masks existed in kinetic ways, meant to be worn and moved with ritualization.

Etnographic objects carry memory, social relationships, and perspectives on alterity and power. Key questions include: when and how does an object become etnographic? What role does context play? Who collects them and for what purpose? Etnographic collections emerge from encounters between different worldviews. In museums, objects travel, change meaning, and get reinterpreted. Today, these collections are critically reviewed, questioning colonial origins, classification methods, and silences. The term 'etnographic' historically designated objects from non-Western groups, reflecting hierarchical worldviews where non-Western societies were considered at lower evolutionary levels. This classification distinguished 'art' from 'etnographic' objects, with Asian art considered 'art' rather than 'etnographic.'

Ethnological museums have evolved through three overlapping moments: First, pre-1960s salvage collecting viewed westernization as inexorable, functioning as archives of difference organized by anthropological categories. Second, post-1970s critiques brought reflexivity and awareness of neo-colonial power through works like 'Writing Culture.' Third, current decolonization projects interject critical analyses into exhibition spaces. Johannes Fabian criticized anthropology for denying non-Western peoples contemporaneity, but post-ethnological museums work with overlapping times that are contemporaneous differently. These institutions are becoming hybrid spaces accessing interconnected local and global realities, offering non-reductive visions rather than authoritative tours. The paradoxical relation of difference and commonality remains fundamental to ethnology's legacy—engaging dialectically complex realities through serious attempts to render historical moments and socio-cultural ensembles.

Ethnographic refers to fieldwork practices (participant observation), while ethnological refers to classification systems that push ethnicity to the forefront. Collections were organized around ethnic groupings like Luba, Bakongo, Igbo, or Yoruba, creating problematic taxonomies that persist today. The division between these terms reflects colonial-era disciplinary boundaries that continue influencing museum practices. There was a complex interconnection between Christian evangelism, iconoclasm, and European museum collecting—missionaries encouraged destruction of ritual objects, then notified colonial museum directors who would collect them before they could be destroyed. The restitution debate involves fundamental questions about proprietorship versus ownership, with European countries holding millions of artifacts from former colonies. The scale of material makes negotiations complex, as many objects are not iconic artworks but everyday objects of virtue—clothing, tools, and domestic items—that were collected in large quantities through serial kleptomania.

Provenance is the registry of ownership, custody, and location of a historical object, covering documented history from creation to present. It differs from provenance (first discovery location) and legal title. Research challenges include damaged documents from wars, small galleries not preserving records, and collectors not keeping bills. Three main components are: owners' names with acquisition dates, dates of ownership and transference methods (sale, gift, inheritance), and artwork location at all times. The AAM Guide to Provenance Research (2001) provides step-by-step methodology. Artwork inspection reveals provenance through medium, support, signature, date, back of painting (inscriptions, exhibition marks, dealer stamps), and shipping stamps. Key documents include bills of sale, appraisals, loss checks, certificates of authenticity, catalogues raisonnés, and conservation reports. Provenance determines authenticity, valuation, and ownership. It is crucial because 15-20% of museum art is forged or misattributed.

Provenance is the documented transfer and record of ownership of an object, tracing its journey from creator to intermediary to museum; it is essential for museums to establish clear ownership histories to prevent legal disputes, identify fakes, and address ethical concerns related to colonialism and violence, ultimately enabling museums to tell authentic stories about cultural heritage and repatriate objects to descendant communities when appropriate.

Provenance is derived from the French term 'provenir' meaning to originate. It refers to the ownership history of an artwork, documenting who owned it, when, and where. Provenance research involves recording owners' names, dates of ownership, means of transfer (inheritance, sale through dealers or auction houses), and locations where the work was kept from creation to present day.

Provenance refers to the origin, history of ownership, and chain of custody of an object, tracing back to where it came from and who possessed it over time; this concept is crucial for verifying authenticity of artworks, resolving ownership disputes (especially for looted items), and understanding the earliest known history of valuable objects across fields like archaeology, paleontology, and digital security.

Provenance refers to the complete history of ownership of artworks and objects in museum collections, tracking who owned items, when, where, and how ownership transferred. This research has become crucial for museums due to three main categories: Nazi era provenance (examining artworks looted during WWII from persecuted groups), antiquities provenance (ruling out illegal excavation and smuggling), and colonial context provenance (examining objects collected during unequal power relations). The research ensures museums do not hold stolen or looted items, fulfilling ethical obligations. Methods include examining objects for labels and markings, studying painting backs, library research with scholarly publications and auction catalogs, and examining obituaries, wills, inventories, and personal correspondence. The research process involves finding as much information as possible, making it publicly accessible, and identifying gaps in an artwork's history.

Increasingly loud and vocal questioning of how museum collections were formed has led to what has been described as 'decolonizing the museum.' This movement involves examining the colonial legacy of museum acquisitions, connections with slavery and conflict, and addressing how many stories told in museums fail to acknowledge these issues. Central questions include who should tell these stories, who bears responsibility for selecting narratives around objects, and how to address the power imbalances inherent in traditional museum practices.

Rather than requiring museums to acquire new objects or compensate for what they lack, decolonization can involve critically reading existing collections to reveal hidden histories that have been overlooked. Many museum objects contain connections to colonial exploitation that remain invisible to casual viewers—for example, decorative arts and household items from the 18th and 19th centuries often incorporate materials and designs derived from colonies. By training eyes to see these connections, museums can transform their existing holdings into sites for telling stories about colonialism, slavery, and resistance that were previously invisible within Eurocentric frameworks of interpretation.

Decolonization of museums is a movement to review the origins of museum collections and return objects obtained through war, plundering, or unfair colonial practices. This movement challenges the traditional narrative that museums are neutral institutions and instead highlights how colonial powers acquired artifacts through force and exploitation.

Museum collections function as selective memory, representing only certain aspects of reality while omitting others. Historical collections like those from the Real Gabinete de Carlos III (1771) were formed by expeditions selecting objects representing power and prestige, thereby invisibilizing other narratives. Descolonization of museums is not merely changing narratives but represents fundamental institutional transformation involving reviewing collections from new perspectives, listening to demands, and incorporating new narratives. The ethical handling of human remains requires distinguishing between remains belonging to local ancestors versus other communities. Restitution involves returning objects to communities of origin, particularly indigenous groups maintaining cultural continuity. Historical interpretation requires examining multiple levels of reality rather than accepting simplified narratives. Museums must balance respecting activist demands with maintaining institutional integrity and conservation principles. Descolonization can be understood as Western self-reflection and self-criticism, with Western civilizations historically engaging in similar processes of self-definition through categorizing others. Museums must actively engage with diverse communities including migrant populations and indigenous groups to incorporate new perspectives.

UK museums are filled with self-condemnations, with collections filled with condemnations of European colonialism and racism. Museums are effectively abolishing themselves by saying their collections were put together by bad forces and must be saved in the modern era through reinterpretation. This phenomenon is encouraged by organizations like the Museum's Association, which tells collections how to decolonize. The Welcome Collection on London's Houston Road announced it was closing because it had tried to decolonize but couldn't tear itself away from its white male origins. The problem is when criticism becomes a one-directional political hit job. At the Pitt Rivers Museum, visitors learn nothing about the Kingdom of Benin's culture after the British Empire abolished it, leaving the false belief that the rest of the planet lived in Eden until wicked Europeans arrived.