Chronicle January 2021

40 ST EDWARD’S CHRONICLE

The Ethics of Display

In September, following a three-year ethical review, a famous collection of shrunken heads, the Shuar tsantsas, was removed from display at the University of Oxford’s Pitt Rivers Museum, home to its archaeological and anthropological collections.

which should not be enhanced or devalued, then their removal is certainly imperative. However, if they can be seen as an accurate and factual reminder of past events, with an objective, impersonal and, if necessary, critical interpretation, then it can be argued that their removal is not necessary. Anthony Mallett The issue with the shrunken heads is not only the nature in which they were presented but also the nature by which they were acquired, as they would have been traded for simple things such as a gun. Westerners would often exploit the Shuar people and representatives have pointed out that their ancestors could not possibly have foreseen the long-lasting outcome of these trades.

The shrunken heads originate from 19th- century Ecuador and South America and were formed from the remains of human, sloth or monkey heads. They were made by the Shuar and Achuar people to capture the power of multiple souls and it was believed that this power could strengthen harvests. The Pitt Rivers obtained its collection in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and, since then, a variety of indigenous people have questioned whether their ancestors’ remains should be on public display. Announcing the decision to remove the display, Pitt Rivers’ Director Laura Van Broekhoven said: ‘Our audience research has shown that visitors often saw the Museum’s displays of human remains as a testament to other cultures being ‘savage’, ‘primitive’ or ‘gruesome’. ‘Rather than enabling our visitors to reach a deeper understanding of each other’s ways of being, the displays reinforced racist and stereotypical thinking that goes against the

Museum’s values today. The removal of the human remains also brings us in line with sector guidelines and codes of ethics.’ As part of her Upper Sixth IB Theory of Knowledge lessons exploring revisionist approaches to colonial History, Paula Diaz Rogado, Assistant IB Coordinator and Theory of Knowledge Coordinator, encouraged pupils to take a virtual tour of the Pitt Rivers and to consider the Museum’s decision to remove the heads from public display. Here are some of their thoughts: Philip von der Linden Some might argue that artefacts such as the shrunken heads should remain at the Museum in order to educate visitors on the past and identify how society has changed since. By keeping the shrunken heads at the Museum, their history would still be introduced to the public and not ‘deleted’ as such. On the other hand, the depiction of the Shuar and Achuar peoples as ‘primitive’ and ‘savage’ is inappropriate, as the Museum’s Director states above. If the artefacts were prizes of war that did not perpetuate racist views it would be acceptable to present them. In our current society, however, the portrayal of such views is unacceptable. Izzy Rees The controversy regarding the removal of these shrunken heads remains poignant, as it aligns with the debate surrounding the removal of statues associated with racism. Therefore, the removal of such ‘contentious displays’ and statues elicits an argument as to whether their removal is necessary. The crux of this argument lies in how such displays are interpreted by the public. If they are enhancing or devaluing an element of history

Joey Feather and Lucy Farrer-Brown

Paula Diaz-Rogado