Paper short abstract:

While claims for « restitution » appear as an appropriate means to redress colonial wrongs, alternative conceptions allow for imagining novel forms of plural reclaiming and sharing. The paper explores various contemporary cases of processes of « reclaiming » cultural artefacts .

Paper long abstract:

Ethnographic museums in post-colonial times face formidable challenges. Various of them have tried to escape critiques regarding their colonial origins by refashioning themselves, sometimes changing their name; in recent years, they are also feeling threatened by the rising calls for « restituting » artefacts in their collections to their 'legitimate owners'. While claims for « restitution » appear to many as an appropriate means to redress colonial wrongs, the discussion of the issues at stakes should not be limited to this. The principle of restituting objects supposed to belong to its "national heritage" to another state is grounded in Roman law notions of property and sovereignty. In such a framework, property is marked by exclusivity. If it's mine, it can't be yours. However, alternative conceptions, grounded for instance in Mauss' reading of « hau », allow for imagining novel forms of plural reclaiming. The national level is not the only scale involved, as representatives of some indigenous groups, sometimes in conflict with their own national state, ask to be included in new museum narratives, more respectful of their culture. The paper intends to explore various contemporary cases of processes of « reclaiming » or sharing cultural artefacts and some of the various ways museums can deal with it.