Chair

Heather Gaunt (University of Melbourne)

Panellists

Manuela Ciotti (University of Vienna), Gayathri Iyer (The Jawaharlal University, New Delhi), Kara Kaifang Ma and Chen Shen (University of Toronto), Emily Peacock (University of Maastricht)

Decolonising Collecting: Emergent Actors and novel epistemes for visual-material worlds

Manuela Ciotti (University of Vienna)

In ‘Make No Mystique! Collectables’ (Dis)appearances in a Transoceanic Perspective’, I seek to ‘queer established notions around collections, collectors and collectables – and dispel the mystique around them – to foreground other epistemes and avenues of inquiry’ (Ciotti 2023). To this end, I draw upon cross-disciplinary studies that reflect very diverse positionalities and practices, entanglements across the global south and global north, and a theoretical prism that falls outside logics of symbolic and physical conquest that have largely dominated the study of collecting in many geocultural areas. Indeed, in the field of collecting, research, documentation and theory have overwhelmingly drawn upon materials housed within global north institutions and, as the long-term effects of colonial collecting. Little attention has been given to those figures in the global south that have reshaped the visual material cosmos which had been profoundly altered by colonialism over the centuries. Similarly, objects’ ‘independence’ after the end of colonialism – is a topic that not only exceeds memory studies but also begs the question of their multiple lives as a result of the passage of hands, the development of ‘new eyes’ and purposes at the time of decolonisation. My paper focuses on collectors in the global south who, in an attempt to re-create worlds, have acquired objects from their own geographically and symbolically dispersed past also by buying them back from outside their countries. The paper showcases collecting practices that embody other epistemes vis-à-vis visual-material cultures that are not premised on the acquisition and possession of the ‘other’ through violent appropriation, but on the re- possession of the self. Further, the paper articulates the ways in which recuperating often deteriorated, discarded and dispersed materials from all over the world – together with the creation of new cultural forms, like private institutions – demand attention on the nexus between collecting, equality and social justice. As collecting is often not a gesture by just any citizen –, my paper meditates on collecting visual-material objects across the race, caste, class, religion and gender spectrum.

The curious case of South Indian bronzes: Traction and ‘chola’ identity in the art market

Gayathri Iyer (The Jawaharlal University, New Delhi)

Chola Bronzes have captivated the art market since the early 90’s, with imperial examples that have sold for exorbitant prices. While the stylistic features, iconography and provenance have been the primary indicators of date, it is often the case that bronzes on the cusp of the chola period (perhaps Pallava in origin) have been mislabelled to garner a dramatically higher price. The network of scholars, priests, artisans, dealers and museums operate at the nexus of this Chola identity, revealing networks of knowledge transfer that are far more complex than the many tributaries of the art market.

These issues are complicated by these icons holding tremendous religious value, and continuing to stay in worship in the South Indian context as “living” idols. Bronze icons are ritually bathed, clothed, fed and worshipped as well as taken out in procession. The main source of these icons, therefore, is the temple space. Art historian and repatriation specialist Vijay Kumar and his team have been actively pursuing provenance studies on bronzes around the world, often determining which temples they have been stolen from and pursuing legal measures to return them to India.

The art of making lost wax bronze idols such as the ones in the Chola style still lives on in the small Tamil town of Swamimalai. This introduces another dimension into the market, where ancient idols can be replicated with an eerie amount of precision, allowing for fakes and “replacements” to circulate in both the temple and market. In recent years, there have been several cases of repatriation of Bronzes from prominent museums such as the Cleveland Museum of Art and the National Gallery of Australia (as recently as 2021). This is largely due to the provenance issues arising from notorious art dealer Subhash Kapoor, who is now serving time for his questionable methods of obtaining and selling these religious icons.

This paper seeks to understand the diversification of the art market and the value-making mechanisms of art through the example of South Indian bronze sculpture.

Beyond Curios: The Formation of the Bishop William C. White Collection at the Royal Ontario Museum

Kara Kaifang Ma and Chen Shen (University of Toronto)

Between 1925 and 1934, Bishop William Charles White (1873-1960) acquired more than 8,000 Chinese antiquities for the Royal Ontario Museum (ROM). White was the Keeper of the East Asiatic Collection at ROM and the first professor to teach Chinese archaeology at the University of Toronto (UofT) using the encyclopedic collection of Chinese objects he acquired for ROM as his teaching materials. While past research has focused on a biographical depiction of White’s life, his impact on Chinese art and archaeology remains largely unexplored. This paper takes an interdisciplinary approach, drawing on textual documents and the study of material objects to examine White’s role in the knowledge production of Chinese art through the collecting of Chinese antiquities for ROM. During his collecting years, White made several significant purchases that ultimately cemented his stature as an authority on Chinese art and archaeology, as well as elevated ROM’s reputation as an internationally renowned museum of Chinese antiquities. Using White as a case study, this paper situates him within the established networks of dealers, collectors, and scholars that came to define, shape, and invent Chinese art. This paper seeks to untangle the intriguing yet complex networks of collecting and the global connections White had with individuals who played important roles in producing knowledge that facilitated the imagination of China in the West during the first half of the 20th century. From the strategies White utilized and the people who facilitated his collecting, this paper traces the characteristics of White’s collecting that set him apart from his contemporaries and argues that his heterogeneity of collecting practices broadened the scope of Chinese art. In the process, identifying the cultural, social, and political conditions that enabled White to amass more than 8000 Chinese antiquities for ROM and for Canada.

Art market participants’ perspectives on provenance in the UK online antiquities trade

Emily Peacock (University of Maastricht)

From the point of view of researchers in the trade, provenance information is rapidly becoming an essential component of sales listings for antiquities online. However, many art market associations, such as the International Association of Dealers in Ancient Art (IADAA) and the  Antiquities Dealers  Association  (ADA), have  been vocal in disagreeing with  the assumption common among archaeologists  that unprovenanced objects are likely to be looted material. This divide in opinion by researchers and art market participants leads to a standstill, as both sides make what Locke termed an ad ignorantiam, an appeal to ignorance. For researchers, the lack of provenance for archaeological material suggests that it is likely looted. Yet for dealers, the lack of evidence for an object having been looted suggests that it is likely legal and has just been circulating on the art market for too long to have provenance information attached. There is no way to go back in time and regain provenance information for objects without it. Therefore, we have a lack of evidence, we are all aware that the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. This research is concerned with trying to bridge the gap between these two positions. From an archaeological background, a mixed methodological approach is used to analyse the language pertaining to provenance antiquities dealers who are members of the ADA use on their websites, along with a snapshot of the provenance information included on their online listings. Observations suggest that it is misguided to consider all antiquities dealers as holding the same perspective on provenance information. Indeed, different positions in the antiquities market function completely differently regarding provenance, both in the statements they make and in their online listings. Analysing the unique perspectives of dealers at different ends of the market may aid in moving the debate around provenance forward, which is essential for any progress to be made.