Thousands of African objects — many acquired during the height of the British Empire — have been taken out of storage and put on show at Manchester Museum, yet curators admit they have almost no reliable record of where many of those pieces actually came from. This raises uncomfortable questions about ownership, history and how museums handle objects with gaps in their provenance. But here's where it gets controversial: the museum has deliberately spotlighted those gaps rather than hiding them.
The display, housed in the museum’s new Africa Hub, was created to expose what staff describe as “gaps and silences” in their collections records. The idea is both simple and radical: instead of supplying a tidy backstory for every object, the gallery makes visible the missing information and invites the public into the research process.
To make the problem concrete, consider one item on view: a carved figure of a horse with an ibis perched on its back. All that appears on the label is that it was donated by Mrs M. A. Bellhouse in 1976. There is no recorded name for the object, no clear place of origin and no documented account of how it was used in its original cultural context. For readers unfamiliar with museum practice, “provenance” means the documented chain of ownership and origin for an item — and when provenance is incomplete, it becomes very hard to judge whether an object was acquired by trade, gift, purchase, or through coercion or looting.
The museum says the honest, transparent presentation aims to spark public conversation about what should happen next: should items be further researched, displayed with clearer context, shared with communities abroad, or returned? Lucy Edematie, a curator involved with the project, described the Africa Hub as unusual because it functions as a beginning rather than an end. She framed the space as “a chance to do our thinking in public, with honesty and transparency, and to involve people in that process from the start.” In other words, the gallery is not meant to be the final say but the start of a dialogue.
Manchester Museum holds more than 40,000 objects from across Africa, many of which entered the collection during the era of the British Empire. According to a museum spokesperson, the items arrived by a variety of routes: some came through trade, others through anthropological collecting, and some through confiscation or outright looting. Many have remained in storage for long periods, sometimes decades, with scant information on their labels.
And this is the part most people miss: transparency alone does not resolve underlying ethical questions. The museum, which is part of the University of Manchester, has said that some items could ultimately be returned to their places of origin. Alternatively, the exhibition might catalyse long-term collaborations with diaspora communities to find shared, creative ways to celebrate and manage cultural heritage.
The gallery includes objects from the Igbo people, one of the largest ethnic groups in West Africa, and that section was co-curated with Igbo Community Greater Manchester (ICM). Sylvia Mgbeahurike, vice-chairwoman of the ICM, welcomed bringing those items together locally. She emphasized that some objects were donated, others stolen or taken by force during conquest, and that reuniting them in one place demonstrates inclusivity and shared strength. "It shows there is strength in diversity," she said. "It shows we are one people. Irrespective of our colour or where we are from. Something must hold us together."
Controversial point: some critics will argue that showing objects with incomplete provenance is merely performative if concrete steps toward restitution or collaborative care are not taken. Others will counter that openness about uncertainty is a necessary step that enables research and reparative actions. Which side do you find more persuasive?
The museum hopes the exhibition — by laying bare what is unknown — will encourage research, dialogue, and action. Possible next steps include more detailed provenance work, building partnerships with originating communities and diaspora groups, loan agreements, shared displays, or returning objects when rightful ownership can be established.
What do you think: should museums display items when provenance is unclear, or should those objects stay in storage until full histories are known? Is public transparency enough, or does genuine accountability mean actively returning items to their communities of origin? Share your views — agree or disagree — and explain why.
DISCLAIMER: The views, comments and opinions expressed by contributors on this platform do not necessarily reflect the policies or positions of Multimedia Group Limited.
