$400,000 seems a little steep for a dress, let alone one made out of the most rudiementary of materials and that hasn’t been worn in nearly 150 years. Yet that exorbitant price is the cost of keeping significant historical artifacts on display in Canada. Had the Royal Alberta Museum not ponied up the dough, the dress, and most of the other 28 items bought by the museum at an auction of the Earl of Southesk’s 1859 collection, would have ended up in private hands south of the border. 

While some are critical of anybody who purchases aboriginal art and artifacts of this nature, arguing (with reason) that these important reminders of heritage and craft be returned to the peoples who created them in the first place, we see it rather differently. Instead of opprobrium, we should be offering our congratulations to those institutions and the donors (including Jasper’s own Pine Bungalows) who would prefer to hold on to these items for the broader public.

The Royal Alberta Museum had the support of several aboriginal groups in the province, and their rationale for making the purchases is, in our view, sound. What makes decidely less sense is the fact that these artifacts were auctioned off in the first place.

The question of how best to handle the repatriation and resale of historically significant art and artifacts is not a new debate, nor is it a question limited to the aboriginal populations of western North America. Indeed, one of the most well-known examples in this area is that of the Elgin Marbles, taken from Greece by Great Britain during the imperial period, and obstinately kept in London at the British Museum.

While there is nothing to suggest that the Earl of Southesk took any of the items auctioned last week by force or illegal means, a certain principle of public interest and cultural right ought to apply in cases like these. If authorities agree that items have a distinct historical and cultural value, then artifacts and garments like the ones sold for millions of dollars should instead be turned over to museums or other institutions serving the public interest. These bodies would be able to display the items to the public. In cases where artifacts were removed by force or against the will of the local population, the items ought to be returned to them.

Such an approach is unlikely to become common practice thanks in large part to the fact that private collectors are typically wealthy and influential members of society that would be unwilling to part with their treasured objects. In some cases, these individuals turn their impressive inventories into galleries or museums in their own right, but too many key pieces of the puzzle representing our human history are kept from public view. It’s long since time for that to change.