Provenance research

In the 19th and early 20th centuries, European scientists researched human diversity and sought evidence for new evolutionary theories on the origin of humans, including the then widespread, now disproved theory of race. This school of thought classified humans into a hierarchy based on physical characteristics, relying primarily on measurements of skulls. The compared skeletons, which came from all regions of the world, arrived in Europe through scientific expeditions, private travellers, or colonial officials and military personnel – often under problematic circumstances of appropriation.

In Europe, the skeletons became part of museum and university collections and entered a veritable market for non-European human “specimens.” Museums such as the former Basel Museum of Ethnology (now the Museum of Cultures) conducted anthropological research. Museum staff at the time dug up, bought, or stole human skeletons – now referred to as “ancestral remains” – in the colonies, or received them as donations. In the collections, the deceased became numbered objects, depersonalized, moved between museums, sometimes exhibited, and thus robbed of their dignity. No consent was sought from relatives or descendants.

Today, the NMB recognizes that the holding of human skeletons from colonial contexts is perceived as a continuing violation and disregard for cultural and spiritual values. Therefore, the museum feels morally obligated to proactively seek collaboration with descendants communities, countries of origin, museum professionals, and other stakeholders.

This commitment is based on the systematic critical examination of the respective parts of our anthropological collection through provenance research (see List of provenances). The aim is to clarify where, when, by whom, and under what circumstances the individual ancestral remains were appropriated. In addition, we strive – where possible – to re-individualize the deceased. This becomes possible when their biography can be reconstructed, and their social relationships traced.

Both tasks shall serve potential forms of restitution and reparation. However, since the origin and circumstances of  appropriation are often only insufficiently documented, this requires extensive historical and collaborative research with the descendants. With their consent, bioanthropological methods may also be employed, which can provide further important insights.