PROVENANCE RESEARCH

There has been a change in the assessment of non-European cultural assets in recent decades. Objects were no longer presented as "trophies" or shown as "curiosities" intended to demonstrate Europe's cultural superiority. The supposed civilizational superiority of the Global North gave way to a growing recognition of the equality of cultures, not least due to the appreciation of non-European objects by European artists.

This created an international marketplace in which museums, galleries, auction houses and collectors bought objects for large sums of money. This repeatedly led not only to legal purchases, but also to forgeries, art theft and illegal trade, to which even renowned museums fall victim, as the cases presented in the (virtual) Museum of Looted Antiquities show.

Provenance research, initially related to cultural assets confiscated during the Nazi era, was expanded to include cultural assets from a colonial context. This relatively young discipline is dedicated to the scientific research of the origin of cultural goods - the focus is not only on their geographical location, but also on the so-called acquisition context: the previous ownership structure and the circumstances of the acquisition (purchase, exchange, donation, violent appropriation).

Effects

With the change that has occurred in recent years due to the emphasis on provenance research, the situation is different today. The market for counterfeits and replicas in Africa, for example, has collapsed sharply, even for tourist goods. Museums and dealers strive to only acquire objects with the most complete, well-documented provenance possible.

The central point of contact for all questions relating to provenance research is the German Lost Art Foundation (DZK), an institution of the federal, state and municipal umbrella associations. Our museum is part of a DZK working group on missionary collections. The DZK also maintains the international research database Proveana, which supports provenance research by documenting historical information.

Provenance Research in the Mission Museum

Provenance research is of great importance in the current discussion about demands from nations and ethnic groups for the return of cultural property from colonial contexts. As early as 2007, the mission museum began to investigate the provenances for the key areas of the collection (East / South Africa, Korea) with the help of experts. 

Experts from the Museum 5 Continents Munich (East Africa / South Africa) and the Overseas Korean Cultural Heritage Foundation (Korea) were involved in scientific research in the Museum.

As part of the provenance research, sources from various areas were evaluated in the Mission Museum. On the one hand, these are index card systems, object signs, old museum guides, back labels and entry books. On the other hand, archive materials such as correspondence, invoices and other documents. Literature such as missionaries' diaries, photos and film material were also used. All available sources were evaluated and the research was completed in 2018.

The provenance of our objects is usually difficult to trace due to the incomplete documentation. 
In addition to the local company of origin or region of acquisition, the purchaser is only mentioned in around 50% of cases. The time of acquisition is often not recorded; explanations of the circumstances of the acquisition can only be found for some Korean objects and purchases from the art trade. Numerous missing objects without proof of their whereabouts, lost object numbers and duplication in number assignment make research difficult. From February to June 2024, the mission museum showed a special exhibition on the sources of the collection with detailed information.

About 9% of the inventory (religious, liturgical and ceremonial items) were identified as culturally sensitive objects. Such a situation is typical of missionary collections.

There are no human remains in the museum's collection.

When researching the provenances, no explicit contexts of injustice could be identified. But at least the objects were acquired under the assumption of a power imbalance. Due to the lack of dialogue with the communities of origin that lasted for many decades, the knowledge about the acquisition of our collection objects was lost.