On 11 September 2020, the Head of the UP Museums and Curator of the Mapungubwe Collection, Sian Tiley-Nel, participated in the Javett Art Centre at the University of Pretoria’s (Javett-UP) ongoing Public Program webinar alongside Christopher Till, Director of the Javett-UP. Siseko Kumalo, Editor of the Journal of Decolonising Discipline, was the moderator.

The conversation centred around “African gold: appropriations and misappropriations of culture”. The cementation of the topic focused on The National Treasures exhibition of the Mapungubwe Gold Collection (co-curated by the University of Pretoria Museums), paired alongside the AngloGold Ashanti Barbier-Mueller Gold exhibition at the Javett-UP.

To frame the conversation, Kumalo broadly introduced African gold: its legacy, allure and history. This led to a debate around thorny issues such as appropriation, repatriation and representation. According to Kumalo, “this opportunity presented an ideal marriage between the Javett-UP and UP. The research connections of political theory centres on critical questions of national identity and using artefacts in collections as a platform for engagement on this is a novel idea."

The discussion provided a contextual background to the acquisition and history of both collections. The Mapungubwe Gold Collection was acquired in 1933 through archaeological enquiry and is today renowned as a national treasure of South Africa. The AngloGold Ashanti Barbier-Mueller collection of West African gold returned to Africa in 2001, where it was exhibited in the Gold of Africa Museum in Cape Town. The establishment of the Javett-UP in 2019 put both collections on public display, affording greater accessibility and engagement within an art of Africa context. More prominently, the Javett-UP is the only permanent location to exhibit such unique, finite and valuable African finished artefacts or gold resources.

Gold bovine map

Tiley-Nel explained that the exhibits focus on “the materiality of gold, the high-level of indigenous craftsmanship and reflect on nearly a thousand years of artistry”. The Javett-UP exudes the appreciation of African gold heritage as it resonates on the Mother continent, rather than being inappropriately exhibited in a Western museum.

For hundreds of years, gold on the African continent has been linked to the exchange of goods across land and sea, and a vast gold mining industry. The export of gold opened up Africa's influence on the world and its economic links, including its association with the rise and fall of many empires. Yet, gold remains connected with land, dispossession, the slave trade between the 15^th and 19^th centuries, as well as exploration. Gold has also been one of the reasons for the long-term colonisation and exploitation of Africa.

Sadly, up to 90% of sub-Saharan Africa's material cultural legacy is outside the continent, held within the confines of Western museums. Europe has appropriated African expression – and by default – its identity, and in many cases the misappropriation of African culture and resources is abundantly clear. A large number of African artefacts are held in Western and European museums, appropriated through the ages through conquest, exploration, exploitation and colonialism, perpetuating power and identity struggles.

Pre-colonial gold in Africa was a precious metal, seen predominantly in the Fulani, Ashanti of Ghana and Egyptian cultures. In southern Africa, gold and the political control of the economy marked the rise of elite societies at Mapungubwe and Great Zimbabwe, where it served as a symbol of wealth and status, and drove international trade and exchange long before colonisation.

The topic was not fluid, nor easy and raised issues around legalities, ethics vs moral responsibility and restitution as a vital process of decolonisation. At the same time, the debate recognised that galleries/museums fulfil an important civic, social and political role, acting as custodians and conservers of humanity’s cultural treasures. Cultural appropriation was loosely unpacked, in its broadest sense as: unacknowledged or inappropriate adoptions, use (borrowed) and adaptation of customs, practices and ideas of another culture.

Till raised the issue of the current international debate on the definition of a museum. For example, “What is the role of museums, what should their role be and what should the fate of institutions be in articulating the return of material back to [their] communities?” The Javett-UP's public and exhibition programmes are grounded within a research institution and that sets the centre apart from other contemporary art galleries. These programmes are at the forefront of contemporary art discussions and aim to give the items on display a voice, history, memory and restored dignity.

No finite conclusions were drawn, as cultural appropriation is fast-becoming a hotly debated topic largely within academic, as well as curatorial domains. While South Africa is attempting to align legal frameworks and policies on repatriation, restitution and alienation of heritage, it largely appears uncoordinated and not consultative.

Traditional knowledge, cultural expressions and the protection of communities from cultural appropriation do not feature on the heritage radar as they should. In the same tone, decolonisation remains a veritable academic topic in some disciplines, yet is absent in others. The disparity on the subject of cultural heritage, cultural expressions, misappropriations of information and artefacts are ideal research topics. Taken forward into the public domain, these have much to offer in terms of readdressing past imbalances and attending to social justice.

To mitigate the impact of cultural appropriations, museums across the globe have to acknowledge that curating is not a ‘solo exhibition’, but instead a nuanced partnership between the stewards, the state, communities and engagement with society.  While the valiant function of a museum or art gallery is generally accepted to be that of access, preservation, exhibition and the promotion and appreciation of culture, museum discourse on appropriating heritage remains wanting. For example, art on display is given labels and tags, measurements, descriptions and titles, but the ‘biography’ or oral histories of those items is often absent. Items on display need biographic detail such as creators and authors of history. Anticipating and sharing who the ‘narrator’ or storyteller is in an exhibition is important and it should not necessarily be the curator’s voice.

Discussion, agreements, joint guardianship and shared narratives behind African gold, its history, its appropriation and acknowledgement – including sensitivities about acquisitions, context or provenance and identity – are some critical factors that still need to be readdressed in modern curation. During the webinar, discussions also took place around the implications of removing certain cultural artefacts from their communities. In essence, misappropriation of culture is inappropriate and there is a fine line between cultural appropriation and cultural ‘borrowing’. Perhaps, more cultural appreciation is long overdue.

Having spent 20 years as Curator of the Mapungubwe Collection, Tiley-Nel stated that “striking the balance between a curator’s duty and ensuing professional, ethical, progressive thinking requires compassion, altruism, reasoning and advocacy”. Curating one of the most contested cultural heritage collections has been a humble and challenging experience. She supports the notion that, “Dispossessing people of their cultural heritage and resources misappropriates people of their knowledge, their history and philosophy”. Without being ignorant, museums should be important knowledge keepers and generators of time. One of the primary objectives of a museum is preservation, while art is the portal to the past and multi-layered histories, allowing marginalised and unknown histories to be brought into the present.

The last question posed in the webinar was: "What is the reasoning behind such appropriations? Is there a suitable and acceptable justification?". While there is a dire need to deeply engage and “open a Pandora’s box”, such difficult issues are inevitable if museums and art galleries are to truly become social and polyphonic spaces. The justification for repatriation is just one way to address historical injustice, and the alienation of the 90% of African heritage objects in Western museums needs to be talked about, to restore the agency of Africans as producers of their history.

The candid conversations touched on some exciting and new roles of modern art galleries and museums within higher education institutions. “They have an opportunity to locate and curate dialogues and practices to the wider public, the university, to art practitioners and bring those multi-partied stakeholders to drive discussions on policy and future directions and the trajectory of culture in a South African context,” said Kumalo.

In conclusion, Kumalo remarked that difficult questions about appropriations and misappropriations of culture are suggestive of historical injustice and how cultural institutions respond. Perhaps in 2020, we are at a turning global and historical moment to tap into, and finally deliver on those promises of historical justice in cultural heritage.