Next Article in Journal
A Qualitative Exploratory Analysis of Ecological Integrity for Safeguarding World Natural Heritage Sites: Case Study of Shiretoko Peninsula, Japan
Next Article in Special Issue
D-ark—A Shared Digital Performance Art Archive with a Modular Metadata Schema
Previous Article in Journal
Corrosion and Conservation Management of the Submarine HMAS AE2 (1915) in the Sea of Marmara, Turkey
Previous Article in Special Issue
Ethical and Legal Considerations for Collection Development, Exhibition and Research at Museums Victoria
Article Menu
Issue 1 (March) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessFeature PaperArticle

Collections in the Expanded Field: Relationality and the Provenance of Artefacts and Archives

eScholarship Research Centre, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia
Heritage 2019, 2(1), 884-897; https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage2010059
Received: 31 January 2019 / Revised: 4 March 2019 / Accepted: 8 March 2019 / Published: 14 March 2019
  |  
PDF [243 KB, uploaded 14 March 2019]
  |     |  

Abstract

In 2017 archaeological evidence was published which indicates that modern humans first arrived in Australia around 65,000 years ago. Through the countless generations since, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples built deep connections to the landscape, developed rich material culture infused with story and myth, and used oral and ceremonial traditions to transmit knowledge over thousands of years. Yet, since European invasion at the end of the eighteenth century, the provenance of ethnographic and institutional collections has largely been documented with reference to white collectors and colonial institutions. Attitudes are starting to change. Recent decades have seen significant moves away from the idea of the authoritative institution toward relational museums and the co-creation of knowledge. But the structure and content of much museum documentation continues to lag behind contemporary attitudes. This paper looks at the documentation of Australian ethnographic and anthropological collections through the lens of changing perspectives on provenance, including archival notions of parallel and societal provenance. When placed in the context of recent developments in material culture theory, these collections help to highlight the limitations of existing documentation. The paper concludes with a call for community involvement and a more relational approach to documentation which better encompasses the complexities of provenance and the entangled institutional, archival, oral, and community perspectives that accumulate around artefacts in museums. View Full-Text
Keywords: museums; provenance; collections; documentation; archives; Australian history; Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander history; anthropology; ethnography museums; provenance; collections; documentation; archives; Australian history; Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander history; anthropology; ethnography
Figures

Graphical abstract

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).
SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Jones, M. Collections in the Expanded Field: Relationality and the Provenance of Artefacts and Archives. Heritage 2019, 2, 884-897.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Heritage EISSN 2571-9408 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top