France votes to return Maori heads to New Zealand

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8661231.stm

France votes to return Maori heads to New Zealand

The French parliament has voted to return the mummified heads of at least 15 Maori warriors to New Zealand.

The heads, taken by European explorers in the 18th and 19th centuries, are currently on display in several museums in France.

The decision ends years of debate and is part of a wider discussion in the US and Europe on the restitution of artifacts taken centuries earlier.

The Maoris believed the preservation of the heads kept their spirits alive.

But they became exotic collector items in Europe in the 19th Century, with museum officials saying some men may have been killed for their tattoos.

MPs in France almost unanimously backed the bill to return the tattooed heads, some still with bits of hair and teeth attached, back to their home country.

'Put to rest'

It is the first time that French legislation has allowed an entire division of museum artifacts to be returned.

Catherine Morin-Desailly, the MP who proposed the bill, said it showed France's commitment to human rights.

"There are some things which are above art and which should remain sacred," she told Associated Press.

New Zealand first requested their return in the 1980s but the issue became more prominent in France in 2007 after a city council voted for one head to be sent back.

The decision was later overturned by the French Ministry of Culture, which ruled such a decision could not be taken at local level.

Critics had voiced concerns it might set a new precedent, putting other collections at risk.

Pita Sharples, the New Zealand minister for Maori affairs, said the decision was a "matter of great significance"."Maori believe that, through their ancestors' return to their original homeland, their dignity is restored, and they can be put to rest in a peace among their families," he said.

The heads will be sent to the Te Papa museum in the New Zealand capital, Wellington, and then returned to tribal groups to be buried.

"Restitution of artifacts" has been discussed here before, the pros and the cons. In this case I think it is the ONLY right thing to do - these are not carved statues but human heads and deserve the dignity of a proper internment.

Thanks for making us aware Jason

YEA Repatriation! European explorers had no right to take them in the first place. The question of "opening the flood gates " for collections to be diminished is somewhat selfish on the museums part. Most major museums have warehouses full of ill gotten treasures that never see the light of day. Often times skillfully crafted replicas are on display as to preserve the actual artifact. SO.... I don't see how repatriation can be disputed other than by greed for the perceived value of a museums worth.

It's definitely a tricky subject. On could argue that the Maori chiefs and families willingly TRADED these heads in for goods. But then, sometimes they were heads of the enemies, and the families of the original owners had no say. In general, the whole situation had gone out of control, and was far from any legal or honorable business at the end. This is best described in H.G. Robley's 1986 book "Moko", from which I quoted extensively in the "Hunters and Collectors" chapter in the Book of Tiki. Here is the opening text on the Moko Mokai chapter in Robley's book:

Of course Major Robley was an avid collector of heads himself:

The Maori heads are such a charged subject of un-p.c.-ness, not only do most museums not display them anymore, you hardly can find any good images on the web. I don't like to take sides in these matters, they are too complex and should be considered on a case to case basis. I do like however the macabre humor of an account printed in Robley's book by a man who found himself at a head trader"s stand on a market, during the height of the head trading fad:

One 2010-05-05 23:31, bigbrotiki wrote:
On could argue that the Maori chiefs and families willingly TRADED these heads in for goods.

Then again, one could also argue the same with regard to the African slave trade.

My take on it is that you have to consider issues of this nature in the wider context of Western colonialism and the distortion this caused to indigenous economic systems and ways of life. Yes, the Maoris traditionally collected their enemies' heads, just as certain African peoples traditionally enslaved their enemies - but once western-style demand (backed by the muscle of an industrialised economy) entered the picture, these traditional practices became distorted and expanded out of all proportion. I think that this makes it our responsibility to make amends, and thus I am happy to lend my support to the claims of all colonised peoples for the return of the remains of their ancestors.

However, I also think that the situation can become less clear in the case of particularly ancient remains (maybe once you start counting in thousands of years, rather than hundreds). In this situation, it can become unclear whether the remains in question are actually the ancestors of the people making a claim to them, considering issues of migration, for example.

The case we're discussing here seems crystal-clear to me, though. I also understand that the issue of ancient human remains is incredibly sensitive in New Zealand; a professional archaeologist once told me that archaeological excavations in New Zealand are immediately called off in the event that human remains are found. The archaeologists just pack up and go home and the road or whatever just has to be built elsewhere.

That discussion from Robley's book sounds like something from "The Man Who Would Be King" by Kipling.

I agree that it is good that France is sending the heads back, however it will be even more interesting to see what happens to them once they are in New Zealand.

On 2010-05-06 06:01, Tam Tiki wrote:
That discussion from Robley's book sounds like something from "The Man Who Would Be King" by Kipling.

...or, to me, I can very well picture John Cleese in the part of the bewildered customer. :)

I am sorry, I don't mean to make light of the subject, and I agree with all that has been said here. But in our Tiki pop culture, I appreciate both: It's respect and honoring of the traditions of the ancestors, AND its spirit of irreverence and whimsy in the face of life's darker aspects.

After reading the article, I searched Google Images for "maori heads"..I won't post what I found here but if you look, there are some very interesting pictures. It's amazing how well the heads are mummified...complete with hair and teeth, and of course the moko tattoos after over a century. One picture even shows one of the heads with red hair and a mustache. Wild stuff.

Smashing, I say! When I searched a couple of months ago, I could not find any such depictions! I especially like the one of Robley with his complete collection! So are they gonna go after the New York Natural History Museum's holdings next?

Another Maori story in the news (unrelated to topic) about New Zealand Prime Minister offending Maori's with cannibal joke. Now that's just bad taste (no pun intended) now i have to make an apology! Damnit!

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20100513/BREAKING/100513007/New+Zealand+prime+minister+offends+Maori+with+cannibal+joke

[ Edited by: Mongoloid 2010-05-13 13:55 ]

didn't know they even had them :P