CURATING COLLECTIONS AND HERITAGE M.A. 3D PRINTING AS AN ACCELERATION FOR DECOLONISATION ANTHONY S.KALUME University of Brighton. TABLE OF CONTENT SYNOPSIS OF DISSERTATION IMAGES INTRODUCTION CHAPTER ONE:THE BENEFITS OF USING 3D IN HUMANITIES. CHAPTER TWO: THE CHALLENGES OF 3D PRINTING IN DECOLONISATION AND REPATRIATION INITIATIVES. East African Coast :The Vigango Case Study Conclusion ACKNOWLEDGEMENT BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDIX ONE APPENDIX TWO I confirm that the research and text in this Research Project is my own work, is not plagiarised from other unnamed sources and that all references used in producing this work have been properly acknowledged. SYNOPSIS OF MY DISSERTATION 3D as an Acceleration for Decolonisation: M.A. Curating ,Collections and Heritage 2021 My argument is that a long drawn out problem that has plagued the heritage sector is in need of fresh solutions using technology. The restitution and repatriation of contested artefacts basically can be resolved by using replicas in display cases, and returning the original objects to communities of practice but on going complexities and barriers still prevail . My dissertation will look at the advantages and disadvantages of pursuing this line of thought and practice. In turn the dissertation will first look at the current technological scholarship surrounding the use of 3D printing in Museums and the heritage sector as a whole, and then highlight on the problems plaguing the decolonisation and repatriation movement . Especially the value of returning artefacts to communities of origin and barriers imposed by gate keepers like curators in Museum; determined to thwart this, helped by national government policies or lack of legislation , that has made this issue such a volatile element in the 21st century . I will show what literature has already been informed as evidence of good practice and identify, the arguments that have ensued from scholarship pertaining to establishing policies and laws that govern the execution of returning contested collections to communities of Practice . The Vigango case study is a piece of work that is on going example, of neo-colonialism as a barrier to repatriation plus an inside look at communities of practice exposing valuable traditional knowledge through questionnaires ,interviews and on going research methods . I will show the methodology used in accomplishing some of the complex issues that were hard to tackle and need more research in order as to articulate and reflect on future decisions . The use of 3D printing will be a crucial element in my Dissertation. IMAGES Image one: Ethiopian Crown Being displayed in the British Museum- License free stock photography online Image two: Replicas of Ashanti Gold weights 3D printed by Diversity Lewes Members for an HLF funded product: Animating Artefacts. Photograph Author’s own. Image three: The team at Smithsonian Museum getting the Tlingit Mask ready for scanning: Photo by Smithsonian Museums. Image four: Curators from the Smithsonian Museum with the finished original restored and the replica: Photo by Smithsonian Museums. Image five: Kigango: Unknown Photographer Instagram stock photo. CURATING COLLECTIONS AND HERITAGE 3D Printing as an Acceleration for Decolonisation 2021 15,000-word Research Project https://genius.com/Linton-kwesi-johnson-reality-poem-lyrics1 Introduction: This research will examine the on-going issue around the repatriation of contested objects currently housed in museums 1 Linton Kwesi Johnson. Reality Poem (1998) Independent Intavenshan (The Island Anthology) Island Records, U.K. and private collections globally, this heated debate on the coloniality of possessing ‘stolen” goods ,has been exposed by #displayitlikeyoustoleit a campaign waged by Alice Procter, to create awareness on this issue2 This gives a more youthful approach and urgency on the ridiculous assumptions and concept of museology as custodians of knowledge as opposed to acknowledging traditional knowledge previously unacknowledged. More prominent activists to this cause, is the well-known Mwazulu Diyabanza3 who is a radical example of ‘immediate action and ask later’ attitude of activism”. A list of objects itemised from; Egypt wanting back the Rosetta Stone, Nigeria wants the Benin Bronzes, Ethiopia wants the Maqdala crown, and a sacred lock of its emperor’s hair. Various places in the Indian Continent claim the Koh-I-Noor diamond embedded in UK’s royal crown. There is also the matter of the Parthenon Marbles, the list is endless. This dissertation occurred due to personal connections with the history of restitution in regard to the stolen Vigango being housed internationally in public and private collections. The Mijikenda Tribe from the East African coast straddles both the Kenya and Tanzania borders, hence representation, locality is obscured by the colonial borders imposed by the imperialists. My positionality was greatly accentuated by the local elders appointing me as the chief negotiator in returning the Vigango, (M.A.D.C.A.) Malindi district cultural association is formed of members of the Kaya elders who are a secret group. Most of the Vigango are in Hollywood U.S.A. but some are housed in public institutions a er being bequeathed by individual owners. However, the effect that neo-colonialism has on the decolonisation of Museums and the systemic nature of 2 BBC , Colonialism: “ Display it like you stole it” https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/articles/zk6992p accessed 11/07/2021 3 (2019) Support , Bite size, Kim Willsher,”We Want Our Riches Back-The African Activist taking treasures from Europe’s Museums”.(2021) Culture,Lifestyle. www.theguardian.com. Accessed 25/07/2021 . The Guardian.London . colonial hangover, that still controls the day-to-day administration of ex colonial governments, creates biased approach which will be evident in my writing, arguing on the benefits and barriers on the use of 3D printing of replicas, from original artefacts, this technological innovation is also known as additive production and is a very crucial major focus and aspect for this dissertation. This argument Brings out recognised legal rights, intellectual property and other elements pertaining to decolonisation issues, the academic pedagogies being derived from similar research, polarity on the differing opinions from both the heritage and academic schools, enables a vibrant debate on how to use 3D printing technology in solving old, aged problems. The ever-looming shadow of neo-colonialism is evidenced in the Vigango fiasco,4 which had Museums in the U.S. initiating the return of the artefacts, but on arrival in Kenya a red-tape imposed by the neo-colonialist Government demanding a duty tax payment of $50K!!? ; here is a clear example of how post-colonial governments are reenforcing archaic and disputed notions that are heavily influenced by empirical and white supremacist allegations, ideologies based on, Sexism, racism and corruption; barriers blocking a reasonable approach to this argument. The advent of the Black lives matter5 has brought some of these wider issues into the limelight, Leaders of influential nations like France and Germany are pioneering, in 4 Joseph Nevadomsky,”The Vigango Affair:The Enterprise of Repatriating Mijikenda Memorial Figures to Kenya” (2018) African Arts .51 (2): 58-69 doi www.direct.mit.edu accessed 14/08/2021 5 Black Lives Matter (2021) About- www.blacklivesmatter.com accessed 25/07/2021 establishing working committees to deal with the decolonisation and repatriation issue.6 My research will look at how there are still barriers that exist to quash any future plans to implement these initiatives, we are also able to look at the ancient problems and infuse a new take in seeking solutions using innovative technology like 3D printing to accelerate decolonisation. Methodology The structure and procedure in acquiring information through desktop research, identify individuals and projects engaged in similar work, Literature review, Bibliography of pioneers and innovators in the field of 3D printing. From the questionnaires attached on Appendix 1- the research will answer some of these questions already explained above, but the main research will dwell on barriers to the use of 3D technology as a policy to be implemented in decolonising museums. How to identify these barriers, and use solutions based around 3D printing. The methods I have used to tackle this issues have been bogged down by the pandemic, in that I was not able to do face to face interviews, with some of the participants both in the Museum sector and the Communities of origin, the logistics where beyond our capacity hence some of the data from the questionnaire will not be fulfilling in attaining the kind of quality information that travelling to communities of practice and meeting groups of individuals in workshops and brain storming sessions would have provided. Method being used throughout the research is exploring and comparing the different debates highlighted in books on 6 Reuters ,”Germany to Start Returning Benin Bronzes from 2022” (2021) Berlin Reutuers. www.reuters.com accessed 25/07/2021 & BBC “,French MP’s Back Return of Looted African Artefacts” (2020) BBC world service, Europe .www.bbc.co.uk accessed 25/07/2021 London. Digital Humanities aiming especially at 3 D printing or additive manufacturing, desktop research, online articles and journals available, including alerts on innovative ground breaking research around 3D printing ; 35 questionnaires over all were sent( See Appendix one) the 4 from curators, among the 13 returned, I also consulted 5 academics with specialism in this area, 4 from Communities of Practice Mijikenda’s living in the diaspora ,the choice for these individuals were made following the involvement of the academicians in having done research and published on the Vigango ,others having used 3D printing. In the case of the Communities of Practice ;the difficulty of not being able to access the Elders directly, due to the pandemic and the lack of confidential virtual meeting platforms, weakens my research considerably ,but I hope to build on the scholarship that will be derived from this dissertation to pursue in the future “ins ‘hallah7” a more extensive research using face to face, and group workshops to create a rich pedagogy around this topic. Most of the questions were aimed at participant’s expertise and knowledge of 3D technology and the Vigango angle in that the answers clarified, aspects that can influence decisions in designing policies that will allow the use of 3D printing as an acceleration for decolonisation or repatriation. (See Appendix Two) The Advantages of using this method in researching, is participants focus on the intended issue, by answering open ended/close ended questions, as to the disadvantages, participants skilled in other aspects or expertise, are not able to articulate this in the questionnaire there will be no way of capturing this as the document is not flexible. As compared to face-to-face interviews where participants can open up. Some of the participants experienced difficulty in accessing the documents, as they had no access to any other equipment except their phones and some of the emails landed on to the 7 God willing in Arabic. spam folder, plus other technical /logistic issues like the lack of funds, some participants could not download the files and instead ignored the emails. while some phones lacked the necessary so ware to read the files. I looked at the Communities of Practice isolation from, and how the centre of knowledge and skills in inherited coloniality in collections has not valued traditional knowledge and respected the value diversity and a different perspective on an issue can shed light on aspects of scholarships and pedagogies that previously had been ignored and termed as ‘primitive’, the listening to wisdom and skilled ancient narratives in oral histories to understand collections and connections to rich cultural phenomenon and knowledge. Decolonisation-Repatriation and the Restitution of Artefacts using Digital Technology are words being used interchangeably throughout this research hence a definition of these terms is crucial here; what are they and how are they inter-related? The definitions of these three terms are very controversial depending on context. Restitution is the restoration of something lost or stolen to its rightful owner, this can be an individual who has requested to be the sole owner, due to inheritance or family Heirlooms or a Community of Origin reclaiming artefacts that are identified as culturally appropriated. As LaMontagne (2015) states “If we have learned anything about restitution over the years, it is that the cultural materials in question have profound meaning and significance to their claimants, directly or indirectly reflecting collective memory, and cultural knowledge that has been denied them for all kinds of reasons ranging from biological to economic to religious. Repatriation is the process of returning an asset, an item of symbolic value or a person -voluntarily or forcibly- to its owner or their place of origin or citizenship. 8 Kostas(2014) explains that “repatriation sensu stricto—the return of human ancestral remains and cultural items to descendant communities or source nations”9 In Contrast Cuno’s(2008) Book is easy to construe as a recalcitrant or even mischievous defence against, restitution of antiquities from western museums. He states that “ Some of the most expressive artefacts ever made, come from ancient China ,Greece, Italy , Turkey and the like. Commonly, they exhibit influences from many different traditions. Some such pieces were intended to be admired and exchanged. Indeed, many are now in ‘encyclopaedic museums’, where anyone ‘ capable of being moved by beautiful works of art’ can gain ‘global understanding’10He continues to define these encyclopaedic museums and, lo behold !! they all lie within the western Cities. Therefore, the two terms, refer to mechanisms for transfer of cultural objects. This framework uses the term return ,to cover meanings implied by the terms restitution (the transfer of stolen material in the strict sense) and repatriation (the transfer of material ascribed to a particular cultural patrimony) 11 Decolonisation is the undoing of colonialism. This involves identifying Colonial systems, structures and relationships, and working to challenge those systems12.Ngugi wa Thion’go argues that “ the biggest weapon wielded, and actually daily unleashed by imperialism, against that collective defiance is the cultural 8 9 Wikipedia-(2021) “Repatriation” accessed 28/05/2021 . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repatriation Kostas Arvantis, ibid. 10 James Cuno,’Who owns Antiquity?: Museums and our Battle over Our Ancient Heritage’.(2008) pp.157.Oxford Princeton University Press. 11 12 Stichting Nationaal ibid. University of Essex“Decolonising https://library.essex.ac.uk/edi/whatisdecolonisation. Accessed 28/04/2021 the Curriculum”(2021) bomb. The effect of a cultural bomb is to annihilate a people’s belief in their names , in their languages ,in their environment , in their heritage of struggle ,in their unity , in their capacities and ultimately in themselves.”13 In September 2018, the artist Kader Attia publicly questioned, during a conference organized by his hosts, whether or not it was possible to “decolonize the collection”.14 Decolonisation as a buzz word “Increasingly, its triumphant guise as a mid-century finite moment rooted in “flag independence” and its relationship to the realm of high politics has been displaced. Recent historiography has defined decolonisation, as inclusive of formal acts of withdrawal from the colonies, but also acknowledges the impact of anticolonial struggles and neo-colonial models of “freedom,” pointing as well to the social processes of reimagining and practicing European, American, and colonial lives a er empire.”15 Claimants ought to have a greater voice in instructing and informing the process, museums ought to be more accountable to the peoples whose heritages they have in their custody, and we ought to be doing everything to remove barriers to restitution and decolonisation. Why do we ask for burden of proof ,when we know that proof in many cases has never existed?” 16 Further Tythacott and Arvanitis state that “restitution or other 13 Ngūgì wa Thiong’o,’Decolonising the Mind the Politics of Language in African Literature’ (1981)pp.03.Studies in African Literature.Heinemann,Portsmouth. 14 Sarr, Felwine and Bénédicte Savoy, “The Restitution of African Cultural Heritage. Toward a New Relational Ethics”, Paris, November 2018. Available at: http://restitutionreport2018.com/sarr_savoy_en.pdf 15 Ruth Craggs and Claire Wintle, “Introduction: Reframing Decolonisation,” in Craggs and Wintle, eds., Cultures of Decolonisation: Transnational Productions and Practices, 1945–70 (Manchester, 2016), 1–26, 16 Mireille Lamotagne “,Museums and Restitution: New Practices, New Approaches”-(2015) Museum Management and Curatorship,vol.30 2. Pp 169-171.www.tandfonline.com accessed 28/05/2021 Taylor and Francis. transfers of items from museums to claimants in recognition of past losses or injustices ,but without a presumption that those items are directly returning to descendants or previous possessors.”17 The Laws governing this process have been supported by The 1954 UNESCO Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict ,represents the first international multilateral treaty with a universal vocation exclusively focused on the protection of cultural heritage in the event of armed conflict.18 In example argued by Wintle , which is equally reflected in Museums in Europe too, “Despite the assumption that Anglo-American Museum practices lagged behind geopolitical shi s and academic anthropology in the twentieth century, here they are shown to have responded with dynamism to the political and social effects of decolonization in ways that both supported the U.S. rhetoric of anti-imperialism and self-determination and sustained the reality of government activities. In some ways, the museum acted as an agent of decolonization, in the sense that the reflection, selection, and experimentation involved in designing the new galleries required those involved to negotiate and articulate their positions on independence, nationalism, neo-colonialism, and Cold War agendas.” 19 This complex look at decolonisation emphasises on the dilemma faced by museums in Britain 17 Kostas Arvanitis, Museums and Restitution: New Practices, New Approaches.(2014) pp.189. Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate. 18 Stichting Nationaal-Troopeen Museum”,Return of Cultural Objects:Principles and Process National Museum van Wereldculturen”(2019) accessed 17/06/2021 https://www.volkenkunde.nl/sites/default/files/2019-05/Claims%20for%20Return%20of%20Cultural%20Object s%20NMVW%20Principles%20and%20Process.pdf 19 Claire Wintle, “Decolonizing the Smithsonian: Museums as Microcosms of Political Encounter”, The American Historical Review, Volume 121, Issue 5, December 2016, Pages 1492–1520, Assessed 17/06/2021 https://doi.org/10.1093/ahr/121.5.1492 where a body has been formed by the Museum Association to tackle this.20 Emphasis to this should be in the identifying of the benefits that still uphold the archaic system that has been in place since the advent of the museology system of the “cabinet of Curiosity”21The Macron initiative as exemplified by Savoy comes short of actually sending back objects in that “the idea of ‘circulation’ tends to be used to describe temporary loans and other measures deployed by European museums, which, according to the authors, fall short of genuine return of objects to their countries of origin 22,hence making replicas using 3D printing, can accelerate this argument and allow Museums to take on different policies argued by the innovative use of technology. Ethical Issues BREAM procedure in Interviewing vulnerable individuals has been approved. Debate on the ethics of having to compromise, by substituting genuine objects for copies/replicas. The Visitor’ experience can be greatly enhanced if they know, the controversial looted originals have been returned to the rightful Communities of 20 Museum Association “,Decolonising Practice: Museums” (2020) Campaign ,Decolonising Museums, M.A. Assessed 17/06/2021 https://www.museumsassociation.org/campaigns/decolonising-museums/decolonising-practice/# 21 Oliver Impey and Arthur MaGregor, “The Origins of Museums:The Cabinet of Curosities in Sixteenth and Seventeenth Century Europe” (1985) pp1-4, Oxford :Clarendon Press In Ed. Sarah Staniforth, ‘Historical Perspectives on Preventive Conservation’ . Getty Conservation 22 Felix Driver Etal Ibid. practice, and categorically putting up labels, stating that the displays in the exhibition are 3D replicas of originals. Just like offsetting carbon footprint, this can be a relief to the visitor, in that the ethics and proper ,correct procedures for restitution has been performed and adhered to. Hence accreditation or policy to that effect should be encouraged throughout , all Humanities Institutes. The ethics surrounding the ownership of looted ,stolen antiquities. The Laws governing unprovenanced archaeological material falls under several strands first of all a lack of a clear legislative British clause in dealing with policing and convictions in a court of Law ,the police are unable to act when the is merely assumed, as is the case with most unprovenanced antiquities when there is no proof of illegalities (Ellis 1995:223)The Efforts of the police are further obstructed by the presence of a loophole in international law. This allows good titled to a stolen or looted antiquity to be acquired by means of a ‘good faith’ purchase in a third country such as Switzerland , where that country’s law has the effect of giving ‘good tittle’ to a buyer ,thus making its subsequent sale in Britain legal and taking it outside the limits of police competence .This loophole has been recognised in the 1995 UNIDROIT convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects; But the British government has yet to sign it. The Government has failed to ratify the 1970 UNESCO convention on the means of Prohibiting and preventing the illicit import, export and transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property(Palmer1995) 23,the standing conference on portable antiquities established in May 1995 on the initiative of the 23 Norman ,Palmer,.’Recovering Stolen Art”.Chap.In“Current legal problems” Andrew Kenyon .et al (ed) Antiquities Trade or Beyond Western Australian Law review.pp1-37,London: Archetype in Association with UKIC Archaeology Section. www.obs-traffic.museum accessed 09/08/2021 council for British archaeologists & Museums and other heritage professionals(Renfrew 2000)24 is a toothless watchdog. Brexit has ensured that the British government will no longer be bound by the European Union Council Legislation Directive 93/7 on the Return of Cultural Objects Unlawfully removed from the Territory of a member state, which was implemented in 1994, as the Return of Cultural Objects Regulation. However, this directive fails to close the international loophole in property laws and makes no provision for private individuals to reclaim objects Palmer(1995:16)25 This kind of research has capitalized on several decades of investment in digitization on the part of libraries, museums, galleries and archives, which have sought to exploit the possibilities offered by digital media for managing their collections, as well as for increasing public access to, and developing knowledge about the material they hold. In the process, these institutions have created countless digital ‘surrogates’ of objects, images, publications and manuscript material, in the form of database records, electronic transcripts, digital images, sound files, video footage and even 3D scans, all of which are seen to add value in an auxiliary sense to the original object. Yet such innovative solutions throw up as many problems as opportunities – given that researchers o en need to collate material of different types from different sources, for example, how is this technically possible when institutions have catalogued their collections using different programs, on so ware built on different platforms? When platforms become outmoded or obsolete, how is the transition to new ones managed (is it managed?) and 24 Colin Renfrew,. “.Stemming the Flood of Looted Antiquitie” in “Loot Legitimacy and Ownerships:The Ethical Crisis in Archaeology” (2000) Duckworth Debates in Archaeology. Duckworth www.bcin.ca .accessed 09/08/2021 25 Palmer,N.Recovering stolen Art.16. what protections are in place, to ensure important data are not lost? Given that restrictions are sometimes placed on the ways in which certain kinds of material objects may be handled, for reasons of culture or conservation, should the same not also be true for digital material, what provisions exist for audiences to comment and contribute their own knowledge to the information stored by institutions? Who should own and control the dissemination of that knowledge? And what is the nature and value of digital objects themselves, both in relation to the original items they ostensibly ‘stand for’, and in their own right, as cultural and historical artefacts26 As Dutton states “all works of Art can be seen as performances ,and part of aesthetic appreciation involves the performative achievement of the artist. But this only points to the fact that the achievement is an act (of creation) not an object(that has been created)”27 Lessings also argues that “Forgeries lack originality ,but strictly speaking ;what is original or unoriginal in this sense ,is the act of creation and not the object created”28 The ethical barriers encountered when using mobile phones in interviewing the Elders; due to restrictions to travel, and lack of suitable equipment to store confidential data; a noticeable risk in the lack of confidentiality and anonymity when conducting interviews, using high risk phone networks that can be easily intercepted or wrongly posted on social media or sent to the wrong number. These are issues that are quite Amiria Salmond . “Digital Subjects, Cultural Objects” : Special Issue introduction. Journal of Material Culture. 2012;17(3):211-228. www.journals.sagepub.com accessed 09/08/2021 26 27 28 Dennis Dutton,The Art Instict : Beauty,Pleasure &Human Evolution.(2009) pp.184 Oxford , Oxford press. Alfred, Lessing, ‘What is Wrong with a Forgery?’(1965), pp.346 in Neil, Alex and Ridley, Aaron (eds), Arguing About Art: Contemporary Philosophical Debates (New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Inc, (1995) challenging as there are no clear-cut solutions in gaining important information from the elders especially around confronting the 3D printing of Vigango to be substituted, either for preservation through so copies that can be accessed by anyone who has the link to print them. Also, the return of originals to be placed in homesteads that can be attacked by the elements and naturally decay. AIMS: As mentioned earlier we are going to expand on the main aims of this dissertation by showing examples from experts and the case study to give evidence to the argument. The collections within museums tend to have varying narratives ,origins and histories we have example of labelled collections like the Ethiopia’s looted Maqdala treasures29 Here we can see during the celebrations for the 150 th Anniversary of the Battle of Maqdala the V&A displayed the looted collection in London,30but it would have been apt if a 3D replica of the gold crown could have been displayed( See Image 1) and the originals taken to Ethiopia or vice versa. As stated earlier a replica of this crown would have served the purpose instead of a 2D image. Here we can have the original returned to Ethiopia and the replica, retained in U.K. and this is our argument throughout the dissertation. 29 Richard Pankhurst. “The Napier Expedition and The Loot of Maqdala”Presence Africaine Edition,133-134(1985):233-240. www.JSTOR.org web accessed 16 March 2021 . 30 Catherine Poust,(2018) V&A to Commemorate the 150th Anniversary of The Events at Maqdala With Display of Important Ethiopian Objects.Embassy of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, London,U.K. https://www.ethioembassy.org.uk/va-to-commemorate-the-150th-anniversary-of-the-events-at-maqdala-withdisplay-of-important-ethiopian-objects/ accessed 03/08/2021 Image 1- Ethiopian Crown Being displayed in the British Museum. There are several examples available of such collections in museums world-wide some of them containing Human remains Like the Just dismantled Pitt Rivers exhibition of ‘Tsantsas’ Shrunken Heads.31 This research will look at the viability of using technology especially 3D printing to ease negotiations 32 and accelerate decisions in decolonising ,restitution and repatriation of artefacts presently being held in Institutions globally. As Driver explains “Within the world of heritage, meanwhile, the language of circulation has sometimes carried distinctly negative connotations, notably in the debate over repatriation – as in the Sarr–Savoy 2018 report to the French President Emmanuel Macron, where ‘circulation’ in the form of 31 David Batty, “Off With the Heads: Pitt Rivers Museum Removes Human Remains From Display”.Museums.Guardian article (2020) www.theguardian.com assessed 31/02/2021 32 Jacob Reynolds. “Western Museums Should Agree to Repatriate Cultural Artefacts,RePatriation of Artefacts.” Debating Matters.(2019) www.archive.debatingmatters.com. Assessed 23/03/2021. temporary museum loans is figured as the conservative substitute for genuine restitution”33 In our argument we want to show that 3D printing can go far beyond this standardisation. To determine the viability of using 3-Dimensional Digital technology in initiating actions on reinstitution and decolonisation, go beyond the standards being imposed by policy makers; embed this idea into policies and campaigns, aimed at innovating the concept of a 21st Century Museum. The Use of 3D printing in encouraging Museums to acquire skills and knowledge that will be a positive cultural change to the systemic institutional tapestry making it a part of the day-to-day task in the Museum in regard to decolonisation and repatriation. 3D Printing and Digitization: Definitions Definition:34 Digitization is the creation of digital objects from physical, analogue originals by means of a scanner, camera, photogrammetry or other electronic devices 35. It is undertaken as part of a process that includes ,selection by choosing objects that are relevant to an exhibition or research. Assessment, including needs, preferences, value and importance ;Prioritization urgency and popularity, a need for preparation of originals for digitization use of equipment and skilled staff. metadata collection and creation coding and the use of A.I. 33 Felix Driver etal,”Mobile Museums-Collections in Circulation” (2021) pp.2 introduction. From Sarr, Felwine and Bénédicte Savoy. “The Restitution of African Cultural Heritage: Toward a new relational ethics”, 2018. Restitution Report. Accessed 03/08/2021 https://restitutionreport2018.com. 34 UNESCO-Fundamental principles of digitization of documentary heritage http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CI/CI/pdf/mow/digitization_guidelines_for_web.pdf 35 Nick Lievendag,” The Beginners Guide To 3 D Scanning & Photogametry on a Budget” (2017) 3D scan expert Reviews. Accessed 03/08/2021 www.3dscanexpert.com. (Artificial Intelligence), storage in archives that are accessible and can be updated for future use; digitization and creation of data collections, extensive user friendly and apt, platforms like Sketchfab are opening up possibilities internationally to enable storage ,access and distribution.36 Assist to submit digital resources to delivery systems and repositories. Distribution wide world regardless of region. This process is accompanied along the way by management, including intellectual property rights management and quality control, and evaluation at the end. These steps are essential to ensure that the digital objects remain accessible in the long-term. The wider aim of this research is finding answers through a two-way dialogue between Museums and Communities of Practice, on how best to engage in restitution and repatriation of contested artefacts in museums, to map out the barriers causing unequal representation in some of the deals ,identify the argument around lack of / acceptance of museums in accepting / or not accepting the decolonisation of the collections. CHAPTER ONE : THE BENEFITS OF USING 3D IN HUMANITIES. What are the benefits of digitising humanities to institutions and communities of Origin? In this section we will look at how 3D printing can be advantageous in tackling complex and old aged issues, that previously had been regarded as impossible we will look at the proactive and engaging analysis of the benefits derived from 3D usage and innovations. To look at how digitising collections in institutions and communities of origin accelerates decolonising work. 36 www.sketchfab.com The kind of technology available to the Heritage sector, is ever evolving but the main components and advantages are evidence of Improved , Infrastructures and office productivity especially around back-Office Systems, where so copies of 3D files can be stored in huge capacity; Visitor attraction and engagement with 3D models of replicas that can be easily handled. Customer Relation Management (CRM) where data can be harvested on the usage and visits using Data Collection and Analysis.37these main components are also attributed to 3D technology. Museums possess Heritage digitised artefacts that come from varying contested backgrounds, some objects are kept in storage due to the sensitive nature, fragility and value to the museum and Community of origin. These objects tend to be stored in warehouses and vaults that are not readily accessible to the public, as Conn exemplifies that “we think of museums as places where objects enter never to leave” 38 Museums have more objects in storage than those on display-“so much stuff, that some house, thousands of objects that have never been displayed but are preserved ,at considerable cost ,in climate-controlled storage spaces”39 Greater reach supports the decolonisation process in that Traditional Knowledge(TK) that had previously been supressed, is now easily accessible to a wider reach of individuals, opening up debates and facts that previously had 37 Heritage Digital,”Heritage Lottery Fund” .(2020) A Beginners Guide to Digital Tech For the Heritage Sector. https://d13kjxnqnhcmn2.cloudfront.net/AcuCustom/Sitename/DAM/043/A_beginners_guide_to_digital_tech_ for_the_heritage_sector.pdf accessed 15/04/2021 38 39 Steven Conn. Do Museums Still Need Object?.(2010) pp.12. University of Pennsylvania press. Robin Pogrebin, “Clean House to Survive? Museums Confront Their Crowded Basements”. Arts. NY. New York Times(2019) www.nytimes.com assessed 29/03/2021 been regarded primitive and not academic worthy .Greater reach40 is one of the benefits that digital artefacts can be incorporated into dioramas ,of entire museum collections, using the internet and electronic file sharing, to extend their reach to infinitely more people than can physically visit. For example, the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History in Washington, D.C. offers virtual tours of its permanent exhibits, select past exhibits, and specialized departments.41 Virtual Tours have become popular especially during the pandemic; various reputable museums have reverted to this.42 Accessibility is another benefit that institutions like ; The University of Iowa’s43 Office of the State Archaeologist has a collection of 3D scanned Digital Artefacts online for people all around the world to closely examine and learn, about its treasury of local ancient artifacts. This advantageous opportunity that allows specific hereto not acknowledged facts that had never been explored or researched to counteract the white supremacist narrative and view, that all scientific findings were originally ‘founded’ by white male pale Caucasians, while the greater accessibility will let community of origin identify, for example modified surgical tools, surgical practices ‘stolen ‘from traditional 40 Margarida Loran, “Use of Websites to increase Access and Develop Audiences in Museums: Experiences in British National Museums”, Journal of the Humanities and philosophy studies of the UOC,www.uoc.edu/digithum,Digithum,7(2005) web 18/03/2021 41 Smithsonian. (NMNH) ,National Museum of Natural History, “Virtual Tours” (2021) https://naturalhistory.si.edu/visit/virtual-tour (2021) accessed 31/08/2021 Natural History 42 Manuel Charr, “Museums and Virtual Reality” (2021) Virtual Reality . www.culturegeek.com accessed on the 14/04/2021 43 John Doershuk et al “ Preserving Artefacts with 3D Scanning: Blumbergs unusual Iowa Celt” . The Office of The State Archaeology https://archaeology.uiowa.edu/preserving-artifacts-3d-scanning-blumberg’s-unusual-iowa-celt University of Iowa ,Iowa City U.S.A. healers44,especially pharmacological herbal medicine that has been in use in cultural ceremonies and remedial concoctions45 that were improved in Eurocentric laboratories and patented,46 ignoring the originators and pioneers of these procedures, the respect given to these indigenous people on the contribution to the medical fields will make the coloniality of academia less unappealing and more acceptable in accelerating decolonisation. Behind the scenes access to vaults and storage. ‘Never seen before’ artefacts and objects .Original instruments and medical equipment and procedures that were derived from communities in Africa were modified and assumed to have been ‘invented’ by white doctors while examples like the caesarean procedure as Sowemimo(2021)47 states that in African societies around present day Uganda they “had been highly refined” this shows the benefit of collaborative work in changing the narrative. Enhanced interactions48 is an additional benefit that allows users experience to be enhanced by viewing in nano details of what has been scanned, museums use 3D scanning to create a new level of interaction with their exhibits. Visitors can touch, rotate, zoom, and otherwise examine 3D scans to get information that isn’t directly noticeable in the discovery itself. 44 Charles John Samuel Thompson.”The Evolution and Development of Surgical Instruments” (1937) The British Journal of Surgery 25(97) www.academic.oup.com accessed 28/08/2021 45 Haidan Yuan et al ,”The Traditional Medicine and Modern Medicine from Natural Products” (2016) Molecules 21 (559) MDPI, College of Pharmacy,Yanbian University,China. www.mdpi.com/journal/molecules accessed 28/08/2021 46 Chidi Oguamanam,”Patents and Traditional Medicine:Digital Capture,Creative Legal Interventions and the Dialectics of Knoledge Transformation” (2008) Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies 15 (2) Maurer School of Law Indiana University , Digital Repository@Maurer Law www.repository.law.indiana.edu accessed 01/09/2021 47 Annabel Sowemimo, Learning the African history of caesarean sections will help us better challenge stigma” (2021) Decolonising Health care. Gal-dem. www.gal-dem.com accessed 29/08/2021 48 Corey Stern, CUBI:A User Experience Model for Project Success,ux.mag 1314(2014) www.uxmag.com Especially the intricate patterns, and cra manship, skills used in making some of the artefacts. 3D scanning helps museums tell better stories about the past. Infusing metadata 49 into displays enhancing the experience of visitors in engaging and interacting with exhibits in a new way. Here we can see the advantages of using Haptic technology in enhancing visitors experience especially to the visually impaired. 50The Communities of origin can inform and interpret some of the unnamed exhibit and shed light on hereto unknowns or improperly labelled artefacts in collections hence changing the coloniality of inferiority, typical of some collections. This allows the acceleration for decolonisation to take place. The Immersive experience has become very popular with galleries and other displaying institutions incorporating it 51 in their post covid repertoire to attract footfall. As Lewi explains, “Thus within the virtual museum, artefacts and displays are no longer precious in themselves –‘whereas real collections operate to a greater degree or lesser extent on the visceral thrill in the presence of the original ,with the digital world the information potential of objects predominate’(Cameron 52 2001:2)”53 Thus enforcing our argument to shun the idea of keeping contested artifacts from being returned to 49 Kristen M.Schuster, Sarah L.Gills, Digital Humanities,Libraries and Partnerships-A Critical Examination of Labor,Networks and Community, Sciencedirect.com Chandos Publication (2018) 107-123-Chapter 8 -Digital Humanities and Image Metadata: Improving Access Through Shared Practices,wwww.sciencedirect.com accessed 18/03/2021 50 Stephen Brewster “The Impact of Haptic ‘Touching”Technology on Cultural Applications”.(2005) Glasgow interactive Systems Group. Department of Computing Science.www.dcs.gla.ac.uk accessed 25/08/2021 51 Lizzy Hillier,”Blog Ecoconsultancy “(2021) Customer Experience https://econsultancy.com/how-museums-are-using-immersive-digital-experiences/ accessed 14/04/2021 52 Fiona Cameron, “Wired Connection -the Next Generation” International Journal of Museum Management and Curatorship,19(3):309-15(2001)Pergamon. https://www.academia.edu/16713751/Wired_collections_the_next_generation accessed 15/04/2021. 53 Hannah Lewi, Designing A Virtual Museum of Architectural Heritage .in ed.Yehuda E.Kalay ibid. and New Heritage ,Routledge www.taylorfrancis.com accessed 15/04/2021 communities of origin and allowing technology to accelerate this procedure. Enhanced reach54 is another way in which 3D scanning helps the study of animal and plant matter enabling the mapping of areas of bodies and structures that aren’t easily accessible to the human eye or tool. Even a perfectly whole and preserved skull, for instance, has many nooks and crannies that can’t be reached without cracking it open. 3D scanning lets palaeontologists get to the tiniest details while preserving the whole.55 Making knowledge accessible to all in a very unique way that can be utilised by communities of Practice to articulate and allow the acceleration of returning contested artefacts. This Learning aspect of the Pillar within the Museum mores, is emphasised by Falk56 “The Institute for learning innovation has focused its investigations on free choice learning “ Here we can emphasise on the use of free learning as part of decolonising in that it frees learners from didactic top down form of knowledge sharing so that learners can make their own meanings and as Rodney aka.Burning Spear espoused that ‘To help one man to think for themselves” 57 Including ones that speak to their own cultural frameworks and draw on their own contributions and ideas as will be shown in the Vigango Case study that focuses on neo-colonialism and it’s manifestations in the current Kenya Government policies and administration decisions. Ubuntu as described by Tavemaro-Haidaran “Commonly interpreted as 54 Prof.Jungwon Park et al. “3D Reconstructions of Individual Nano-particles, nanotechnology world, science” (2020) Institute for Basic Science (IBS) Korea www.nanotechnologyworld.org,accessed 18/10/2021 55 Garage Staff (2018) “,A Natural History Museum Flies into the Future with 3D printed Birds”. Innovation The https://garage.hp.com/us/en/innovation/3d-printed-birds-taxidermy-peabody-museum.html Garage accessed 14/04/2021 56 John H.Falk et al. Living in a Learning Society-:Museums and Free-choice Learning. chp.19 pp.329 in ed Sharon Macdonald ibid.(2011) 57 Winston Rodney aka Burning Spear -Hail H.I.M.(1980) EMI records- Review by Doggiedogma www.sputnikmusic.com accessed 29/07/2021 ‘I am because we are’ (Mkhize 2008,40;Mnyaka and Motlhabi 2005,218 ;Tutu 1999,35) has been articulated as a normative Moral theory that provides a compelling alternative to normative adversarialism . Ubuntu describes the way humanity is essentially linked together and prescribes self-realization in terms of communal ,harmonious, and cohesive relationships with others (Metz 2011;Metz and Gaie 2010;Mnyaka and Motlhabi 2005) 58This free thinking ,free learning tools are the experimental fulcrums in tackling coloniality and anti-colonialism ideology, that can be greatly utilised in the use of technology like 3D printing in exposing stolen/contested artefacts and employing free learning to highlight on the problematic assumptions and myth burdening efforts that bog down ideas for Restitution. .My research is used to generate theory about learning, and the museum experience and has two uses . First , it informs practise for museum practitioners and other free-choice educators , and establishes the cycle of theory informing practice that , in turn , informs theory again. Second Theories 58 Leyla Tavernaro-Haidarian,”Why Efforts to Decolonise can Deepen Coloniality and What Ubuntu can do to Help”(2019) Critical Arts 32(5-6)(2018) 104-118. www.tandfonline.com University of Johannesburg,S.A. accessed 29/07/2021 Nhlanhla Mkhize,”Ubuntu and Harmony:An African Approach to Morality and Ethics” (2008)in Persons in Community: African Ethics in a Global Culture.,edited by R.Nicholson ,35-44 Pietermaritzburg:university of KwaZulu-Natal Press Mluleki Mnyaka & Mokgethi Motlhabi ,”The African Concept of Ubuntu/Botho and its Socio-Moral Significance” (2005) Black Theology 3(2) :215-237 www.tandfonline.com accessed 29/07/2021 Desmond Tutu,No Future Without Forgiveness (1999) Newyork Random House Print. Thaddeus Metz ,”Ubuntu as a Moral Theory and Human Rights in South Africa” (2011) African Human Rights Law Journal 11 (1):532-59 Thaddeus Metz and Joseph B.R. Gaie, “The African Ethic of Ubuntu /Botho:Implications for Research on Morality” –(2010) Journal of Moral Education 39 (1):273-290. built on research findings are also used to inform and generate new research methods. In our search for more productive and sensitive methodologies , institute researchers have developed a set of five characteristics that any responsive research methodology needs to incorporate in order to yield more meaningful and faithful evidence, of the depth and complexity of free choice learning experiences ,as Freire(1970)59 idea of critical consciousness and posits that colonialism and exploitation are as much a part of the African experience as its traditional models of governance and ‘that they must be acknowledged in the process of renewal’(Blankenberg 1999)60 Allow for the individual’s own unique learning agenda to emerge ,by addressing the effect of the time of learning in respecting that, learning is always situated and contextualised, opening up to a broad range of learning outcomes.(In research speak) Emphasize validity over reliability. Through the use of these points the result was the development of a methodology called Personal meaning mapping ( PMM) developed by John H. Falk and researchers at the institute for `learning and innovation (Falk et al. 1998; Luke et al ;1998. Falk 2003)61 PMM is an approach that we believe addresses all five of the criteria listed above.” Through the PMM methodology, a framework evolved that described the ways in which visitors used the 59 Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1970) Newyork; Continuum Print. 60 Ngaire Blankenberg, “In search of a Real Freedom: Ubuntu and the Media” (1999) :Critical Arts 13 (20) :42-65. 61 John H. Falk ibid. John H. Falk ,”Pushing the Boundaries:Asssessing the long Term Impact of Museum Experiences”. Current trends.(1998) vol.11 :pp.1-6. -Museums as Institutions for Personal Learning(1999). Daedalus,vol.128(3):pp.259-75. -Personal Meaning Mapping(2003) In. G.Cabin. et al (eds) Museums and Creativity : A Study into the Role of Museum in Design Education, pp.10-18.Sidney,Australia.Powerhouse. Luke ,J.(1998) Art Around the Corner :Longitudinal Evaluation Report.Technical Report.Annapolis,MD .Institute for Learning Innovation. interactive gallery to construct their own personal meaning. Here we see technology being incorporated into the daily interaction and visitors display, to understand the experience and benefits derived from both the Institution and the users (Clients) Communities of Practice could now challenge ideas of coloniality and find ways to use technology, like 3D printing to counteract the white supremacist approach to indigenous knowledge suppression. Better data collection: Museums also benefit from comparative data that emerges in the process.62 3D scanning as seen in the Smithsonian Museum’s research with the Tinglit Mask shows how the joint collaborative work benefits and creates a working relationship that reveals knowledge and scholarships hereto never anticipated.63There are collections in institutions that goes beyond names and identity ,organized, compared, showing the evolution of all its findings64. They add new digital artifacts all the time, so the story is constantly gaining detail. New media has also been used in accessing collections, for example “the COMPASS65 (Collections Multimedia Public Access System) project at the British museum which began in 1997. The Stated aims of the project include improving visitors’ experiences , making the collection more accessible , and enabling an enriched understanding of the objects’ original 62 Trilce Navarette,Et al. “The Museum as Information Space : Metadata and Documentation.”pp.111-123 In Borowiecki ,K.et al. Cultural Heritage in a Changing World. Springer Cham.(2016) https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-29544-2_7#citeas Accessed 14/04/2021 63 Eric Hollinger etal ,”Tlingit-Smithsonian Collaboration with 3D Digitization of Cultural Objects” (2013) Museum Anthropology Review 7(1-2) Spring-Fall 2013 www.scholarworks.iu.edu accessed 04/08/2021 64 65 African Fossils. https://africanfossils.org/#bh_info3 accessed 26/03/2021 Contact@turkanabasin.org COMPASS (Collections Multimedia Public Access System) first launched in 2000-2007. British Museum. https://www.ssl.co.uk/ixbin/indexplus?record=PRO101 accessed 18/04/2021 cultural contexts (Callender 2002)66 by including voices that had previously been excluded in the narrative. Museums have gained experience and expertise in the use of technology an example is the PeopleplayUK project at the V & A as explained by Hudson 67 “provided us with a very effective training experience that taught us all the basic skills needed” 3D printing technology need to be encouraged as part of Museum solution to decolonising and returning of contested objects. The acquiring of Skills within the Museum sector can be seen in a report by Abungu 68 “At the National Museums of Kenya (NMK) ,in Nairobi ,the computer department has traditionally been used for Data management for such mundane purposes as personnel and payroll records. When in 1998 , a few computer department staff utilized their self-taught HTML skills ,Kenya’s natural and cultural heritage made a splash on the world wide web. The NMK website (https://www.museums.or.ke ) made a huge step in the region by putting Kenya’s Heritage on the world map. ”These initiatives of using existing staff to acquire new skills are good examples of museums taking a step further in using technology like 3D, readily available to accelerate, the decolonisation of objects within their collections. Various funds have been available to the Museum sector to encourage ,support and assist them to move into the digital realm. In 1999 the National Museum Directors’ Conference Published its landmark report, A Netful of Jewels : New Museums 66 Elliot Maras,” The British Museum Exhibits its Kiosks”.(2002) Kiosk Market place https://www.kioskmarketplace.com/articles/the-british-museum-exhibits-its-kiosks/ accessed 18/04/2021 67 68 Claire Hudson, The Digital Museum chp. 3 pp.38 in ed. Lorna M. Hughes ,ibid. Lorna Abungu, “Access to Digital Heritage in Africa:Bridging the Digital divide” chp.8, pp.183 of ed. Ross Parry’s Museums’s in a Digital Age.(2010) Routledge ,School of Museum Studies, University of Leicester, Perpetua by Saxon Graphics Ltd.Derby. Print in The Learning 69It foresaw a digital future for museums established on the foundations already being built .This would comprise a broad spectrum of digital initiatives, including a relevant participatory galleries and digital exhibits that are interactive and engage the visitors. Plus, the use of digital cameras ,smart cards, contact less (VR) virtual reality goggles ,holograms, and other media for use (Like QR codes) during visits. Allow content to be created by Visitors as well as museum staff as a showcase digital gallery ,provide equipment and facilities for searching the collections, in ways that are relevant to visitors ,have skilled and trained staff to help visitors learn and manipulate the technology. Enable easy access to interactive websites and online services. Online information to help in planning visits. (Hudson 2012) 70 Therefore here we see connections between the actual and the virtual museum ,and also with other cultural resources locally and worldwide for ease of collaborative work and networking , accelerating decolonisation. In the 3D additive manufacturing process there has yet to be connected the advantages and disadvantages of using replicas or copies, in allowing museums to retain collections derived from the technology, to be scanned and archived in virtual clouds owned by museums or in platforms like Sketchfab ,for a wider circulation and have the originals sent back to the communities of practice, hence allowing repatriation to occur amicably; here is an example of a project which comes very close in using the concept of decolonisation or repatriation in accelerating the idea by using technology ; Henning 71 69 National Museums Directors’ Conference (1999) A Netful of Jewels :New Museums in the Learning Age.www.nationalmuseums.org.uk/media/documents/publications/netful_of_jewels.pdf. accessed 14/04/2021 70 71 Claire Hudson,ibid pp.41 Michelle Hemming New Media chp.18 pp.315 In ed. Sharon Macdonald A companion to Museum Studies.(2001) Companions in Cultural Studies. Blackwell.John Wiley & Sons. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Chichester. U.K.Print emphasises that “ at the British museum , the computer graphics simulation accompanying the display of the Elgin Marbles, shows the statues isolated and spun through three dimensions ,completed ,animated ,and “repainted” .In a conference paper Wood interprets this simulation as an intervention in the debate about the repatriation of the marbles. He argues that ,in place of actually returning the marbles ,the museum has produced “a virtual restoration and a virtual repatriation,” which implicitly denies the necessity for a real return of the Elgin Marbles to Greece, making the things themselves the justification for a “larger ,virtual Museum experience of cultures past”(Wood 2001)72 Here we see an example of how 3D technology hinders instead of accelerates the return of artefacts. Such installations can be reversed in that frictionless policies can be designed, to allow museums to return original contested artefacts and accelerate the decolonising of collections and the restitution thereof, solving ancient painfully sensitive issues. The main benefits of institutional planning for decolonisation allows the use of technology in looking at the viability of policies that will enable the circulation of virtual objects that can be interpreted and given new meanings by a wider audience especially input from communities of Practice. COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE:73 What is the definition for this term Communities of Practice or as others say Communities of Origin? Here we are looking at individuals coming together as shown by Roegiers (2007) 72 Gillen D’Arcy Wood. “The Virtual Elgin Marbles”. Paper presented at the American Comparative Literature Association Annual Conference, Boulder ,Colorado (2001) April 20-22 print. 73 Sara Roegiers et al , History is 3D:Presenting A Framework for meaningful Historical representations in digital Media chp.5 pp.74 in “New Heritage-New Media and Cultural Heritage” ed.Yehuda E.Kalay et al.(2008) Routledge.Taylor & Francis Group.Newyork,N.Y. who calls them Cultural Practitioners to find ways to exploit possibilities ,and opportunities provided by technology to create their own solutions based on their own expertise. Digitization’s main purpose is to enable and enhance access to a diverse array of material digitized artefacts-of text documents, images or audio-visual material.74 Therefore there is a great benefit in digitization especially storage space ,file longevity, accessible ,distribution and cost effective. Communities of practise can benefit from digitization by accessing data, that will assist them in searching for objects and artefacts stored in museums world-wide and other private collections, housing artefacts, specifically catalogues and archive inventories. Retell stories that are sensitive and difficult to narrate like Tayiana explains “This form of engagement is more direct, more personal. It is also an act of recognition; recognition of the fact that British colonialism didn’t just shape certain countries in a structural, political, or abstract way - it shaped every single life it touched. And, in many ways, continues to do so, even today.”75 Who uses 3D imagery to decolonise? the Mau-Mau story of freedom fighters and the detention centres in Kenya during the emergency is an example of a project by the Museum of British Colonialism a collaborative look at the tools available in assisting and accelerating decolonisation.76 Checking the accuracy of information especially misspelt words, vernacular translation is a pillar stone of decolonising archives; especially finding out contradicting facts, 74 Milena Dobreva et al .User Needs in Digitization Chp.6 pp.74 in “Evaluating and Measuring The Value and Impact of Digital Collections.” ed.Lorna.M.Hughes.Facet Publishing (2012) MPG Books Groups, U.K. 75 Chao Tayiana et al, “Kenya:The MauMau Emergency” (2020) Projects. www.museumofbritishcolonialism.org accessed 05/08/2021. 76 Tayiana Chao, “The Museum of British Colonialism” (2021) About www.museumofbritishcolonialism.org accessed 26/08/2021 assumptions ,derogatory racist overtones, and provide interpretation on the gaps and missing knowledge around decolonisation and other Negative Eurocentric depiction of communities of origin therefore enhancing the educational value of analogue resources. Able to identify objects that belong to them even if only digitally but distinctively own them as long-lost possessions. “Virtual reunification” is a term used by Hughes to recognise where collections held in disparate archives around the world can be combined in digital facsimiles.77 Recognisable master cra designs and styles that are uniquely regionalised and popularly known, therefore capitalizing on the opportunities that increased access offers and safeguarding the integrity of fragile ,rare or heavily used analogue material 78 Preservation of these fragile and sometimes rare artefacts by incorporating 3D printing and Holograms to bring the items into life79 re-animating using technology to enhance visitors experience, partially visionary impaired ,Alzheimer’s and Dementia individuals. Can benefit from this as a form of well-being, these are by products from 3D technology.(Kalume 2019) Restoration of damaged or vandalised monuments like in Palmyra in Syria.80The forming of iconic objects from 2D 77 Lorna Hughes. “Evaluating & Measuring the Value ,Use & Impact of Digital Collections” (2013) Literary and Linguistic Computing- 28 (3).pp6 Facet Publishing ,London www.academic.oup.com accessed 09/08/2021 78 UNESCO,IFLA and ICA,(2002) Guidelines for Digitization Projects:for Collections and Holdings in the Public domain,particularly those held in Libraries and archives.www.archive.ifla.org/VII/s19/pubs/digit-guide.pdf 79 Anthony Kalume ,”Reanimating Artefacts:Exploring the stories of Ashante Gold weights.”(2019) https://research.brighton.ac.uk/en/activities/re-animating-artefacts-exploring-the-stories-of-ashante-gold-wei ghts. University of Brighton. Assessed 03/04/2021 80 Grace O’Neil, “Rebuilding Palmyra: 3D Printing an Ancient City” (2016) World the Wire. https://thewire.in/world/rebuilding-palmyra-3d-printing-an-ancient-city .assessed 23/03/2021 images that are digitally enhanced and enable the formation of long-lost relics through replicas into 3D additive manufactured replicas artefacts. Active learning for building historical competencies as for example “the Maerlant Centre has constructed an e-learning model to teach transferable historical critical thinking skills to youngsters81 This framework can also be used by communities of practice to form networks within the wide world web and exchange ideas and knowledge without going through a third party ,thus forming an active learning environment of ‘experts’ passionate about their historic treasures. ‘Without historical critical thinking competencies, digital artefacts about the past are in danger of remaining mere toys”(Roegiers 2008) 82 Reintegrating and working with large scale data across disciplinaries allows communities of practice to navigate vast amounts of data pertaining to their topic of interest “emphasising the opportunities to reintegrate the cultural record ,connecting its disparate parts and making the resulting whole, available to one and all, over the network (ACLS 2006) 83 Here we see the advantages of “ a multi-staged assessment project […} adopted a er the completion of a resource but before its ‘publication’ hence harnessing previously unknown knowledge and enhancing it using 3D technology to accelerate decolonisation of this data. There is a role for learned societies and subject organisations (Communities of practice) in such a process. Exchanges 81 Raphael De Keyser et.al “Historical Skills and ICT” (1998),Informations.international society for History Didactics.18.(September):pp107-120.www.researchgate.net.assesed 23/03/2021 82 83 Sara Roegiers et al,History is 3D. American Council of Learned Societies (ACLS) ,”Our Cultural Commonwealth:The Report of the American Council of Learned Societies Commission on Cyberinfrastructure for the humanities and Social Science.” http://www.acls.org/uploadedFiles/Publications/Programs/Our_Cultural_Commonwealth.pdf. (2006) The Andrew Mellon Foundation. Accessed 23/03/2021 between reviewers and resource creators should be made publicly available”84 Value of digital resources vary according “to different audiences for different reasons and some value may not be realized immediately. Digital collections come about for different reasons. Many research projects for example , have produced digital images or digital text as a by -product of scholarship, and a need to put these digital images online for public access may not be the first priority of the project team.”85 For example The Museum Affordances Project as explained by Basu “ In our Work so far it is evident that in order for the decolonial possibilities of colonial collections to be activated the collections must be liberated from their institutional seclusion. This requires an investment of imagination, as well as resources , to expand our ‘museum methods’ (by using 3D technology) and to experiment with new ways of reassembling ,remediating ,recirculating ,reconfiguring of collections so that a wider range of stakeholders and communities can access them in their own terms, in pursuit of their own goals.”86We are therefore creating ,maintaining and sustaining ‘digital content’ that may have value for future scholars or communities of interest. Subsequently as Dobreva states that “ User evaluation is a fascinating and multi-faceted area of research .User studies are, however still not utilized widely and in-depth in 84 David Robey,Improving Sustainability of Publicly Funded Digital Resources Chp.11 pp.155 of ed.Lorna Hughes ibid. 85 Lorna Hughes , Evaluating & Measuring The Value ,Use & Impact of Digital Collections,Introductions.pp.5(2012) Facet Publishing.CILIP: The Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals.London. 86 Paul Basu, Re-mobilising Colonial Collections in Decolonial Times: Exploring the Latent Possibilities of N. W. Thomas’s West African Collections (2021) Chapter 2 pp 44-70 in ‘Mobile Museums: Collections in Circulation’-Felix Driver et al. UCL press www.jstor.org accessed 05/08/2021 digitization projects”87 Some access digitised data for the benefit of individual or scholarly research hence 3D printing can be used to specifically tackle the thorny issue of returning artefacts to communities of practice. Blogosphere and other digital libraries are example of excellence that can be greatly enhanced if communities of practise control the administration, moderation and Editorship of the material produced this “model of excellence and innovation in these domains […] facilitates the formation of networks of knowledge, production ,exchange ,and dissemination that are at once ,global and local (Schnapp and Presner,2009)88 By passing the Multi-Million dollar media houses that act as gatekeepers for corporate approved information. The Sociologist Castells 89describes networked structures ‘consisting of knowledge-based information technologies that enhance and accelerate the production of knowledge and information, in a self-expanding ,virtuous circle. The network represents the divergence of production, access , and display of nodes of knowledge .While traditional models of production in the field of display-based technologies tend to concentrate on either the product (the game) or the Hardware (display)’ Digital Songlines, this Australian initiative highlights some of the issues already touched here and this includes projects that develop protocols ,methodologies and toolkits to facilitate collections, by educating and sharing of indigenous cultural heritage 87 Milena Dobreva et al.” User Needs in Digitization” chp.6 pp.84. ed. Lorna Hughes (2012)ibid. 88 59.2(2015) accesed 89 of Jeffrey Schnapp et.al “Digital Humanities Manifesto” 2.0, Multitudes https://www.cairn-int.info/article-E_MULT_059_0181--digital-humanities-manifesto-20.htm 04/04/2021 Manuel Castells,”Materials for an Exploratory Theory of the Network Society “.British Journal Sociology.51(1) January/March.2000.:5.www.onlinelibrary.wiley.com accessed 08/08/2021 knowledge. 90sees workflows and methodologies that incorporate and evolve the two in a constant communication for the life of the product.”91 This project has been part of the ongoing emphasis on “ indigenous knowledge and has only recently received an elevation, specifically in terms of scientific and medical knowledge in the western science realm(Nakata 200292,Reddy 200693) In the Human sciences it has also been encouraged by the increased valuation of social and cultural diversity(Agrawal199594) This recent evolution of ideology is termed by some to be a process of ‘de-colonisation’ and relies on indigenous people retaking control of misappropriated items from the past. A good example is a case study done with the Smithsonian Museum and the Tlingit Community. On September 25th, 2019, the Tlingit Kiks.ádi clan of Sitka, Alaska, which is situated in the Southeastern Coast95 ,conducted ceremonies to dedicate a new clan crest hat only this hat was not really new. It was a replica made of Alaskan 90 Digital Songlines is an Australasian Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) for interaction Design (ACID) project that is developing protocols,methodologies and toolkits to facilitate the collection , education ,and sharing of indigenous cultural heritage Knowledge. 91 Brett Leavy et al. “Digitising the Aboriginal Heritage Landscape” in ed. Yehuda E.Kalay et al’s ,”New Heritage-New Media and Cultural Heritage” .Heritage studies/MuseumStudies(2008), Routledge ,Taylor and Francis Group.Keyword Group.Antony Rowe Ltd.Wiltshire print 92 Martin Nakata , “Indigenous Knowledge and the Cultural Interface: underlying issues at the intersection of knowledge and information systems” accessed 08/08/2021 (2002) IFLA Journal :28 (5/6) 281-188 www.journals.sagepub.com 93 Sita Reddy . “Making Heritage Legible: Who Owns Traditional Medical Knowledge?”(2006) International Journal of Cultural Property : 13(2) pp.161-188. www.cambridge.org accessed 08/08/2021 94 Arun Agrawal “Indigenous and scientific knowledge: Some critical comments.”(1995) Indigenous Knowledge Monitor, 3 (3): 1-6 Antropologi Indonesia 3(3) www.researchgate.net accessed 08/08/2021 95 George Emmons,The Tlingit Indians.(1991) History, American Museum of Natural History ed. Frederica De Laguna.University of Washington press. woods carved by 3D milling machines and ornamented with traditional materials such as deer hide and sinew, ermine skins, copper horns, swan down, and shell inlays. The clan held ceremony in Juneau to put spirit into the newly restored artefact so that it could be danced again and put into use for clan ceremonies. The broken hat, in the form of a sculpin or bullhead fish, had rested in the collections of the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History(NMNH) for the past 135 years. The Smithsonian worked closely with the clan to study the broken hat, and used technology to carve it,96 with a computer numerically controlled milling machine and then finish it by painting it and adding attachments similar to those which had originally adorned the hat. This collaboration is the first cultural restoration of an important religious object for an indigenous community using 3D digitization and replication technology97. As Deidre(2019) explains “In age when simulation is generally judged on its truth to form, AR( Augmented reality) and VR( Virtual reality) offer an even more ‘real’ experience, and it is perhaps timely to ask what essential Maori qualities are transferred from an object, person or environment to their digital copy?”98 The project with the Tlingit Hoonah Indian Association (HIA) of the village of Hoonah, Alaska, shows as Isaac(2015) explains “ the digital 3-D replica projects, carvers from the Tlingit Community and participants at the SAA(Society of American 96 Smithsonian Digitization Program Office. Sculpin .https://3d.si.edu/explorer/kiks-ádi-sculpin-hat-restoration. Accessed 09/06/2021. Hat (2019) 97 Eric Hollinger “Smithsonian Uses 3D Tech to Restore a Broken Sacred Object for Tlingit Indians.”(2019)Home Si Digi Blog.National Museum of Natural History.accessed on 09/06/2021 www.dpo.si.edu. 98 Deidre Brown,”Ko to ringa k inga rakau a te Pakeha”-Virtual Taonga Maori and Museums “(2008)Visual Resources .International Journal on Images and their uses Vol.24:1 pp. 59-75 accessed on 09/06/2021 www.tandfonline.com Archaeology) session raised concerns about the technology and the challenges it presented when being introduced into a context already fraught with ambiguity over who has control over culturally specific knowledge and reproduction rights. It is worth noting, however, that the collaborative 3-D projects of the NMNH Repatriation office are coordinated with these challenges in mind. In fact ,the Tlingit case study ought to alert museums to the extremely high degree of cooperation across the different cultural contexts that were required to make the killer whale hat replica materialize. Its creation necessitated all participants to corroborate intimately with each other’s cultural values, as well as how these manifested in each other’s context; the outcome appears to be one of knowledge exchange and the establishing of shared guidelines around cultural heritage in a public space.”99This case study is a good example of how respect for indigenous culture and knowledge goes a long way in putting back skills and acquired expertise from communities of practice, back into the knowledge and pedagogy of scholarships, that had previously been ignored, such initiatives are positive and exploring details of such proceedings, helps other similar projects like the Vigango Resting Place project (V.R.P.)100; insight into collaborative work in assisting other practitioners, acquire information and insight when doing similar things in the future. Parkins(1986) 101 explains that “ in representing the spirits of deceased dignitaries, Vigango are comparable to the smaller ,unembellished sticks or pegs made of so er wood” here we 99 Gwynera Isaac,”Perclusive Alliances-Digital 3-D, Museums and the Reconciling of Culturally Diverse Knowledges”(2015) Current Anthropology vol.56 #S12.Wenner-Gren Foundation of Anthropological Research. Accessed 09/06/2021 www.journals.uchicago.edu Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C.U.S.A. 100 101 A M.A.D.C.A. led repatriation of Vigango Newly created project. David Parkins, Chapter “An Introduction to the Society and culture of the Mijikenda” pp.23 in Ernie Wolf III’s “Vigango-Commemorative sculpture of the Mijikenda of Kenya”.(1986) Williams College Museum of Art ,Williamstown, Massachusetts.United States of America. see the prominent respect placed on the Vigango commemorative sculptures. Likewise, as explained further (Isaac,2015) “These kinds of shaman objects contain spirits called Yeik, that could be harmful if not handled appropriately. As the replicas would not contain yeik, the HIA argued that they could be handled and used in educational programming for the community members and possibly exhibited for the public” 102 However the Tlingit case study looked at how the objects were brought back to reverence by invoking rituals so that the spirits governing its existence can be respected and acknowledged, in order as to value the object, this implies, that it was accepted as a ceremonial entity even though it was not the original but a replica. As Isaac states that “An object on which the clan Kills money takes on sentient and effective powers. Objects and regalia that evoke the same crest symbol as something that is at.óow(consecrated ritualised) do not have the same sacred status , but they do inspire respect by representing a sacred being”103 Scholars see digitisation as a compromise or step towards repatriation and a positive influence linking indigenous cultural information with indigenous communities (Smith 1999)104” Makkuni105 explores “the Crossing Project ,brought together futuristic ,mobile ,multi-media technology and archetypal content , dealing with one of the world’s most ancient living cultures, Banaras .With Respect to technology ,it 102 103 Isaac,Ibid Isaac,Ibid. 104 Kirsten D.Francis et al.”Digitised indigenous Knowledge in Cultural Heritage organisations in Australia and New Zealand:An Examination of Policies and Protocols” (2010) Proceedings of the American Society for information Science and Technology.46 (1) www.asistdl.onlinelibrary.wiley.com accessed 08/08/2012 105 Ranjit Makkuni, “Culture as a Driver of Innovation “chp.23 pp.221.in ed.Ross Parry . “Museums in a Digital Age “ibid. questioned the very form of a computing system and the Graphical User Interface paradigm ,which has served as the substrate of modern computing systems for thirty years;(see Wellner 1993;Ishii and Ulmer 1997 106 Want et al.1998) The Crossing technology presents alternate paradigms of information access, integrating the hand and the body in the act of computer -based communication and learning . With respect to Content ,it brought to focus a traditional society’s notion of eco-cosmic connections through mobile , multimedia technology-based connections. With respect to design , it incorporated the expressions of traditional arts and cra s in the design of expressive information delivery devices ”Once objects are scanned they can be used for non-Museum forms of interpretation as shown by Husein of the Nomad Project where artefacts are derived from day to day objects, in personal collections are brought to life with metadata and animation, using various technology like 3D printing and Virtual reality (V.R.)107Allowing communities of practice a platform where initiatives like decolonisation and free thinking can be reinterpreted and indulged. Heritage sites situated among communities of practice tend to be lucrative in ‘themselves become places of pilgrimage and leisure time diversion, venues for school visits ,community 106 Pierre Wellner.”Interacting with Paper on the Digital Desk .”Communications of ACM (1993) ACM digital library - https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/159544.159630 accessed 17/04/2021 Hiroshi Ishii et al ,”Tangible Bits:Towards Seamless Interfaces Between People,Bits and Atoms”((1997). ,Conference Proceedings on Human Factors in Computing Systems , Atlanta ,ACM press,NewYork Roy Want et al. “Bridging Physical and Virtual Worlds with Electronic Tags.” (1999) Xerox PARC report ,Submitted to CHI 99. CHI '99: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/302979.303111 accessed 18/04/2021 107 Abira Husein, The Nomad Project (2018) Mnemoscene.British Library and British Museum https://nomad-project.co.uk accessed 05/08/2021 commemorations and tourist circuit’108 They have been valorised ,glamorized, and relentlessly merchandised by regions’ municipalities, local communities, and now even private management companies. seeking to attract visitors and the prospects for economic development that they bring 109 Image 2 Replicas of Ashanti Gold weights 3D printed by Diversity Lewes Members for an HLF funded product :Animating Artefacts. Photograph Author’s own. Communities of practice can benefit from ‘Employment opportunities and stimulate regional tourism and Trade (Hutter and Rizzo 1997)110Public funding programs like those of the European Commission’s Interreg programs and culture 2000 (DG Education and Culture 2002)111 and the World 108 Neil Silberman,”Chasing the Unicorn” chp.6 pp.84 in New Heritage-New Media and Cultural Heritage ed. Yehuda E.Kalay et.al Heritage Studies/Museum Studies Routledge(2008) Taylor & Francis Group. Anthony Rowe ltd. Wiltshire.Print 109 Neil Silberman, ibid 110 Micheal Hutter etal. “Economic Perspectives on Cultural Heritage”,(1997) Palgrave Mcmillan. New York: St.Martins Press.Print 111 Directorate-General for Education and Culture ,(2002) “European Funding for the Cultural Heritage Sector”,Luxembourg: European Commission. www.catalogue.nla.gov.au accessed 25/08/2021 Bank’s ‘Framework for Action in Cultural Heritage and Development in the Middle East and North Africa’ 112 ‘have set standards-and offer substantial economic incentives-for investment in the form, structure and even presentation design of major archaeological sites.’ This also allows ‘the creation of venues for carefully processed leisure time entertainment, structured and marketed with the same modes of tour booking, entrance fees ,restaurants ,gi shops ,overnight accommodations as other packaged visits of the modern mass tourist industry. Borrowing design concepts from theme parks and interactive museums , site planners now o en utilize digital heritage’s creative and energetic interpretive solutions , such as interactive applications ,computer 3D constructions and virtual reality experiences when the project budget permits’(Seaton & Bennet 1996 ;Addison 2003)113 This shi of power through economic largesse allows the acceleration of decolonisation by putting the communities of practice in charge of their future and decision making in anti-colonialism exploitation and corruption. Commercial enterprises and retail markets that can benefit Communities of practice selling of Curios, locally cra ed merchandise and using 3D printing to make replicas that can be either magnified if they are small artefacts or miniature monuments like the Pyramids in Egypt. 3D technology can be used in making replicas of current objects being exhibited in Museums and Galleries; hence enabling the changing of stock in the gi shops in line with events ,timely and cost effective, Cultural Heritage and Development: A Framework for Action in the Middle East and North Africa. Washington: World Bank.Print 112 Micheal Cernea, 113 Anthony Seaton, et al. “Marketing of Tourism Products:Concepts ,Issues and Cases “.(1996) London. Thomson Business Press. Alonzo C. Addison .”Virtual Heritage :Technology in the Service of Culture.In VAST” (2001) Virtual Reality :Archeology and Cultural Heritage ,ed. N.S.Stephen .New York;Association for Computing Machinery pp.343-354 www.dl.acm.org accessed 10/04/2021 this was one of the recommendation from a Heritage Lottery fund project by Diversity Lewes (Kalume 2019) 114 (See Image 2)We have touched on the various ways that digitisation can be very effective in accelerating initiatives focused on decolonising collections and subsequently paving ways for repatriation which the next chapter will cover. CHAPTER 2 :THE CHALLENGES OF 3D PRINTING IN DECOLONISATION AND REPATRIATION INITIATIVES. What are the challenges and limits of using 3D replicas for Reinstitution and repatriation.? In this chapter we look at the ongoing debates, innovative steps and setbacks that the decolonisation and repatriation movement has encountered especially in the wake of the Black Lives Matter initiative. 115 Most of the contested artefacts and objects hold different values to the Institutions hosting them and the communities of practise requesting repatriation. Using 3D printing we will show how the technology can take into consideration the barriers, problems ,suspicions and solutions to create a win-win situation. Our research questions were geared towards understanding attitudes and assumptions specific towards the barriers and challenges that the use of replicas as substitutes for the original artefacts; professionals working in museums and heritage institutions shared their opinion on this thorny issue .Hicks(2021) “European and American museums need to consider what consent looks like for 3D printing of objects 114 Anthony Kalume,”Reanimating Artefacts”.(2019) Diversity Lewes. University of Brighton. https://research.brighton.ac.uk/en/activities/re-animating-artefacts-exploring-the-stories-of-ashante-gold-wei ghts. Word press Blog Djtaskalume. https://wordpress.com/view/djtaskalume.wordpress.com accessed 10/04/2021 115 Black Lives Matter, “8 Years Strong” (2021) About https://blacklivesmatter.com/about/ accessed 17/08/2021 taken under colonialism. In some cases, the right to make copies of sacred, royal or ancestral material culture cannot be assumed" 116 The Brutish Museum book written by Hicks is a very scathing criticism of what colonialism has done to the heritage sector, and our dissertation is looking at remedies that can accelerate decolonisation. Specifically looking at how does 3D printing technology continue colonial and neo-colonial agendas rather than addressing decolonisation?' As Samaroudi and Rodriguez state “Yet, in most cases, these efforts are scattered, or one-off events still infused with colonialist spirit. A more concerted effort to use 3D copying technologies could help overcome this.”117 There are no joint approaches towards the use of 3D technology as a force to bring like-minded individuals together to do a consistent program with Higher Education institutes, Museums and Private companies to present a solid front in the repatriation debate, this can be due to the advantage of hosting “treasures” looted from colonial expedition to show white supremacy or lucrative deals in the ancient artefacts market, that even the power of an esteemed body as the UNESCO cannot penetrate.118 The Elgin Project earlier mentioned closely reenforces this phenomenon of allowing technology to hinder the acceleration of repatriation. The Elgin Marbles also known 116 Professor Dan Hicks ,The Brutish Museum. On Twitter mail posted July 15th 2021 @profdanhicks www.twitter.com accessed 27/08/2021 117 Myrsini Samaroudi et al.”3D Printing is Helping Museums in Repatriation and Decolonisation Efforts” (2019) Science + Technology. https://theconversation.com/3d-printing-is-helping-museums-in-repatriation-and-decolonisation-efforts-1264 49 accessed 04/07/2021 118 Sigrid Van Der Auwera, “UNESCO and the Protection of Cultural Property During Armed Conflict” (2011) International Journal of Cultural policy.vol 19,2013-1, www.tandfonline.com. Accessed 04/07/2021 as the Parthenon Marbles are a collection of classical Greek Marble sculptures (mostly by Phidias and his assistants) inscriptions and architectural members that originally were a part of the Parthenon and other buildings on the Acropolis of Athens. Thomas Bruce ,the 7 th Earl of Elgin claimed to have obtained a permit in 1811 “not to remove statues but what he might discover in specific excavation’ from the Ottoman house ,which then ruled Greece. Here we see an example of how the British empire easily acquired artefacts, collections and cultural objects which also included the stripping of identities as Ngūgī wa Thiong’o states, ‘the real aim of colonialism was to control the entire realm of the language of real life[…]most importantly the area of domination was the mental universe of the colonised, the control through culture ,of how people perceived themselves and their relation to the world” 119 This whole business around the Elgin Marbles is steeped with coloniality where the dominant culture is envious of the indigenous cultures and assumes power, by belittling and exploiting artefacts to the extent of deploying and resituating them into their institutions of learning, so as to ‘protect’ and hoard the catch, hence depriving communities of practice of their cultural treasures and dignity ,stripping them off their incredible heritage and rendering it as an artefact, work of art, to be displayed. Such examples tend to limit the advancement of decolonisation because it will not allow the system to change; the British Museum will not make any effort to release the Elgin Marbles120 ‘Scan the World” a joint project of the British Museum and My Mini Factory firm have successfully digitised the collection and is accessible online but this has set a notion that the marbles can remain in situ while 119 120 Ngūgi wa Thiong’o, pp.16 Ibid The British Museum Trustees , “The Parthenon Sculptures” (2021) The Trustees Statement https://www.britishmuseum.org/about-us/british-museum-story/objects-news/parthenon-sculptures/parthen on-sculptures-trustees. www.britishmuseum.org accessed 19/08/2021 the digitised files can be accessible to anyone hence making it easy to dismiss any plans to return the collection. As Parry (2007121) has shown that 3D models of museum artefacts hold a mercurial position in between the historically and materially grounded sphere of the museum and the volatile realm of digital media.122 How has 3D printing ,to support decolonisation been prevented from happening? “Decolonisation is not a metaphor” as Yang and Tuck articulates in an article bearing this name, we have to emphasise that this also does not give in to the white guilt by providing a ‘get-out-of-jail-card’ to assuage various barriers in play ;here our research will look at the non-starter initiatives that have fallen on the wayside and been unable to create in roads to achieve this. In 3D printing some of the technical challenges are for example , the Material used for making replicas will not match the colour, texture, weight and age of the original, as the technology is still relatively ‘New’. The various 3D printers and filaments being used to produce replicas tend to be restricted by the cost and innovative leaps and bounds, that the 3D or additive production is experiencing at the moment ,research into more efficient tools and gadgets continues at a very quick pace, each waking day a new invention is announced, hence allowing more accurate production and manufacture of replicas that are true to self. Expertise equipment when using technology, such as 3D printing ,VR ,Holograms models are being invented to 121 Ross Parry . Recoding the Museum:Digital Heritage and The Technologies of Change (2007) Museum Meaning 122 Sarah Younan (M.A.) ,”Towards a Digital Dream Space: How Can the Use of Digital 3D scanning,Editing ,and Print Technologies Foster New Forms of Creative Engagement with Museum Artefacts”? Thesis(2015)Cardiff Metropolitan University. Cardiff School of Art and Design. www.repository.cardiffmet.ac.uk accessed 17/08/2021 accommodate the jobs in demand. Some organisations are commissioning engineers to construct specific equipment like scanners to capture data of huge structures, while others are constructing extruder robotic arms to allow big Printers to compete in the building construction industry.123Special skills from trained experts and experienced Universities and Industrial partners are collaborating in making available better machinery and accessories. The health and safety standards are written constantly to ensure fumes and other radiation hazards are taken into consideration. My question here will be looking at the ethics of using digital technologies to facilitate the restitution/repatriation of cultural property (or as a substitute for return)? This controversial issue will look at the copies if they are fit for purpose, can they pass as the real thing? how real are they? ,can we have them on display and attract visitors if they know they are copies?, Can we use the argument that our conscious and guilty feelings will be appeased once we learn that the objects being displayed are replicas but the original ones have been returned to communities of practise hence giving Kudos to the Museum for allowing this to occur hence attracting more visitors who are able to identify with the cause and purpose of repatriation, restitution and decolonisation? the joy of handling objects instead of just seeing them behind glasses? Examples of arguments pertaining to this issue lean on the concept that “The looting of African objects by anthropologists, curators and private collectors took place in war as well as in peaceful times. It was justified as an act of benevolence; as saving dying knowledge.”124 Hence causing resistance towards and institutionalised unwillingness to 123 Anna Zanina, “3D Models of Buildings of the Future for use in Construction Printing” (2021) E3S Web Conferences 2021.Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University,Russia www.e3s-conferences.org accessed 08/09/2021 124 Yirga Gelaw Woldeyes,”Repatriation:Why Western Museums should return African Artefacts”.(2019) Arts +Culture. The conversation. www.theconversation.com Accessed 03/07/2021 repatriation. This argument is also emphasised by Rodriguez(2019) saying that using 3D scanning and printing technology can "support museums through their transformation from colonial institutions to more modern and open organisations".125 Allowing them to acknowledge that 3D scanning is still reliant on all the imperialist structures that support the museum concept taking into consideration the systemic organisation of the documents, filing, acquisition ,and interpretation of day to day running of the heritage institutions stemmed with archaic rules, and unspoken regulations. This transformation can never happen if most museums cannot acknowledge the fact that the whole concept of the entity of the museum lies on the principal of white supremacy and empire appeasement126. Hence having the articles ,artefacts or objects within an Eurocentric setting signifies the conquest of the ‘primitive’ world and subjugation of the native possessions as a show of trophy and dominance. Yang and Tuck clearly state that “ However the front loading of critical consciousness building can way lay decolonisation even though the experience of teaching and learning to be critical of settler colonialism can be so powerful it can feel like it is indeed making change. Until stolen land is relinquished ,critical consciousness does not translate into action that disrupts settler colonialism .So we respectfully disagree with George Clinton and Funkadelic (1970) when they assert that if “you free your mind ,the rest(your ass) will follow”127 125 Karina Rodriguez etal. 3D Printing Could Democratise Heritage and Help in the Repatriation Debate (2019) Health Club Management https://www.healthclubmanagement.co.uk/health-club-management-news/3D-printing-could-democratise-he ritage-and-help-museums-in-repatriation-debate/344307 Accessed 04/07/2021 126 Gretchen Jennings et al “Museums White Privelege and Diversity: A systemic Perspective (2017)Dimensions Special Opinion/ Edition Section. www.nemanet.org accessed 08/08/2021 127 Eve Tuck et al.”Decolonization is Not a Metaphor”.(2012) Decolonization:Indigeneity,Education & Society 1(1) 1-40 pp19 Creative commons www.clas.osu.edu accessed 19/08/2021 Some collections still have tittles like the Looted Sudanese Collections128 The Value of the objects for Museums verses that of the Original Communities. Here is a research question that needs to be resolved in the ethics of using digital technologies (3D printing) to facilitate the restitution/repatriation of cultural property(or as a substitute for return).What determines the Institutions priority as Ferguson emphasises that “as we look at the work of Jeremy Bentham for an instance of classification that continually suggest that insoluble-or inexact epistemological identification can be; when considered apart from classification”- the determinant of why the objects are justifiably valuable to the Institutions ;as opposed to the notion where Levis-Strausse points that ‘pointing out to something whose sacredness to a particular group is demonstrable(Particularly due to the Implausibility that anyone outside the group would recognise the power)129 As Standis(2016) argues “If it is typically better to have originals in local museums and replicas abroad this is not because locals are better at distinguishing originals from replicas. Rather, it 128 Folarin Shyllon, “Cultural Heritage Issues; The Legacy of Conquest,Colonisation and Commerce”.Chapter 6. “Unraveling History: Return of African Cultural Objects Repatriated and looted in Colonial Times” (2010) www.brill.com accessed 04/07/2021 129 Claude Levis-Strausse, ,The Savage Mind, (1962) pp.214. University of Chicago press. Translated from the French ,La Pensée savage Librarie Plon.Paris. www.web.mit.edu accessed 23/05/2021 would be a matter of honouring a people's desire to feel a direct connection with their culture. 130 Participants in my research showed the significance of this in that Participant i) states that “I do not see the purpose which they serve in overseas museums except to fulfil the "wow" factor. Meanwhile, those artefacts are of both strong cultural and social/religious significance to their communities of origin”, Like wise scholarly voices have joined in, as seen by Participant iv) who said that “There are communities who prefer original artefacts and others that do not focus on “who keeps the original” as they emphasize the knowledge, meaning or spiritual aspect that an object encompasses”. . However, Standis also concludes by saying that “ questions arising from aesthetic theory and museum management. In particular, I relate a contextualist account of the value of copies to a pluralistic understanding of the purpose of museums. I begin by offering a new defence of the no longer fashionable view that the aesthetic (as opposed to the ethical, personal, monetary, historical, or other) value of artworks may be detached from questions regarding their provenance. My argument is partly based on a distinction between the process of creating a work of art and the artwork in question. Next, I defend a pluralism about the purpose of museums and their exhibitions. I combine this with a pluralist account of the value of replicas which falls out of the above argument, exposing our preference for originality as being frequently fetishist, as also emphasised by Participant viii) “In my view I don’t think the spirit of “koma” can retain in a 3D print or be rendered in that 130 Constatine Standis,”An Honest Display of Fakery: Replicas and the Role of Museums”.(2016) Royal institute of Philosophy Supplements, Vol. 79 Philosophy and Museums: Essays in the Philosophy of Museums, pp.241-259. The Royal Institute of Philosophy and the contributors 2016. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/royal-institute-of-philosophy-supplements/article/an-honest-dis%20 play-of-fakery-replicas-and-the-role-of-museums/1ACC673D0C49BD1B7B0784FEC33464F1#. Accesed 23/05/2021. particular form. Secondly, the purpose of a 3D print I believe is radically different from that of a Kigango that is curved and decorated using high skills and commissioned through an elaborate sacred ritual”. The Secrecy surrounding the commissioning and manufacturing of a Kigango is kept closely by the Gohu society as it is only members from this elite, Elders’ genre that have the burial totems carved a er their demise. Generally, the Elders appoint a healer to identify and ‘Talk’ to the tree about to be cut and be used for carving the burial totem(Sin.Kigango) these and other ritualistic processes get lost when using 3D printing. I maintain that the importance of the provenance of artworks is relative to the specific purposes of any given exhibition or museum. Those that are primarily educational (such as encyclopaedic ones) are in many cases best served with high-quality replicas. This view may be extended to artifacts that are not artworks, such as fossils and dinosaur skeletons. Finally, I relate the variety of roles that replicas may play in museums and relate these to notions of authenticity”131. Technology as a whole has hindered or cobbled the advancement of repatriation in that the gatekeepers who are the heritage institutes and custodians of the vital data are not ready to give out that control, and the advancement of innovative technology, renders communities of practice incapable of gaining the skills and equipment to benefit from them. Cubitt (1998) purports that the North American based Windows operating system interface is a political vocabulary as powerful as colonial English[…]he goes on to say that “it forges powerful links between the Windows OS ,capitalism ,and the cultures of colonisation[…]his analysis demonstrates the critical apparatus we can assemble to identify the meanings 131 Sandis (2016) Ibid Introduction abstract of media reminding us how to read new media like 3 D printing critically within the museum sector. 132 What is the value of owning the Digital artefacts as compared to the original? Who owns the objects or derivatives from the Digital artefacts?? Determining the Intellectual property rights from the original communities of practice to the replicas? How to endorse or verify copies? We are looking at the Invisible ink used in haptics and bio nano technology to produce “watermarks” or barcoded infusions into the filaments. Due to lack of verification of 3D produced objects this area is quite controversial as it is a new concept that has still to be researched on but for the purpose of this research, we will note that the advantage of having a means to categorically be able to identify a product by infusing nano particles. The Innovative uses that (Non-Fungible Tokens) NFT can play in changing the concept of ownership can also be equally transferred to replicas to enhance the value and authenticity of original copies.133 Our research will explore value and ownership issues to both the Communities of origin and the Curators in the Museums and how technology can be used to accelerate and solve some of these contentious issues. To explore (Western) understandings of ancestors and tease out the limitations here? For example, the images of the Vigango are, by the community of origin's Traditional knowledge system ;images of an ancestors’ spirit (Koma). This 132 Sean Cubitt “Digital Aesthetics” (1998) Language arts & Disciplines Sage publications. London,Thousand Oaks CA New Delhi. www.journals.sagepub.com accessed 23/05/2021 133 Manuel Charr,”What Do Non-Fungible Tokens Mean for the Arts. (2021) Culture Geek Conference accessed 17/05/2021 https://culturegeek.com/article/what-do-non-fungible-tokens-mean-for-the-arts/ London. example might be used to inform and interrogate whose values should be applied when deciding what should or shouldn’t be reproduced for digitisation and decolonisation purposes. Should we be digitising someone’s soul/spirit? Isaacs(2011) dwells on this issue and as explained by Parezo134 “Debate centres on whether reproductions of artefacts should be returned as sacred objects or objects of cultural patrimony . In one sense these materials can include non-community made artefacts including those made by anthropologists(or as in the case of the Vigango those made specifically for the collectors’ market)”135 Language use is also important in articulating that we need to refer to Western museums as "communities in possession" or "host institution” rather than “owners"; and use “hold” rather than “own" when discussing the artefacts bringing out the temporality. Referring to them as possessors or holders does not suggest that possession is legal or justified. But using terminology like “own” carries a meaning that presumes the possession is legal to begin with. By contrast, you could refer to the communities of origin as the "owners”. This requires the reader to question their own assumptions when engaging, and the myths of neutrality embedded in this wider narrative. Some scholars also use ancestral remains instead of human remains too, because it communicates the direct link to descendant communities stronger link with the objects. Is digitisation appropriate when a work was acquired through dubious circumstances? 134 Nancy Parezo “Introduction to Zuni Ceremonialism”. (1992) Fourty Seventh Annual Report of the Bureau of the American Ethnology 1929-30 by Ruth Bunzel pp vii-xxxix Albuquarque .University of New Mexico .Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC. Accessed 23/08/2021 www.cedarcitylodge.org. 135 Gwyneira Isaac ,”Whose Idea Was this? Museums Replicas and the Reproduction of Knowledge” (2011) Current anthropology 52 (2) 211-233 University of Chicago press & Wenner-Gren Foundation for anthropological Research. Accessed 23/08/2021 www.-jstor-org.ezproxy.brighton.ac.uk This research has tackled this issue in the specific content of the Vigango case study in that the community of Practice had never consented for the artefacts to be displayed as works or art or as collections within the Museum setting, hence the idea of even having them in such circumstances renders the display inappropriate and blasphemous as they are (Koma) spirits of ancestors stolen from homesteads and instead of being digitised they need to be returned to their rightful owners not copied or 3D printed. Here we can reflect on the Elgin Marbles or the Parthenon136 contested artefacts that still are held in the British Museum and who owns the right to digitise and benefit from the 3D printed replicas? Does possession of the object entitle the host to make additional decisions around it? As with the above-mentioned artefacts held in the British Museum the administration has seen it fit to go ahead and make digital copies of them137Disregarding ongoing debates and ignoring petitions to return the Elgin Marbles. Who should make those decisions when the agenda is to decolonise? Traditionally curators have been the gatekeepers of knowledge within the museums my research is emphasising on allowing different voices into the narrative especially when making crucial decisions. 136 Abi Himan “The Story of The Parthenon Marbles” (2016) Culture Trip. www.culturetrip.com accessed 24/08/2021 137 Jessi Stumpfel et al ,”Digital Reunification of the Parthenon and its Sculptures” (2003) 4th International symposium on Virtual Reality ,Archaeology and Intelligent Cultural Heritage (VAST) www.citeserx.ist.psu.edu accessed 24/08/2021 Image 3 : The team at Smithsonian Museum getting the Tlingit Mask ready for scanning : Photo by Smithsonian Museums. Image 4 : Curators from the Smithsonian Museum with the finished original restored and the replica: Photo by Smithsonian Museums. The Inclusion of diverse voices and the importance of acknowledging traditional communities of practice allows projects like the Songlines in Australia to create a positive outcome when all those involved are treated as equal partners and inputs are valued to deliver a decision that benefits all 138 138 The National Museum of Australia ,”Songlines:Tracking the Seven Sisters” (2012) University of New England www.nma.gov.au accessed 24/08/2021 Likewise the Tinglit case study emphasises on the positive adaptation of technology in processing and creating content “ the collaboration between the Tinglit and the Smithsonian Museum illustrates the potential for responsible applications of digital technology to transform museum-indigenous relations in a wide range of areas” 139(See Image 3 & 4) allowing decolonisation to take place and valuing the traditional knowledge abundant. As participant xi) exposes this value by saying that “Vigango are not cartoons ( Caricatures) of things ;they represent Spirits of Good Luck” However 3D printing has been used to generally make artefacts that are delicate, fragile, sensitive to light, temperature and touch, easily accessible. This includes very expensive collectable items and miniatured objects that the intricate cra smanship is lost unless handled and put under a microscope or using a magnifying glass ,hence 3D technology can enhance such beauty by enlarging the files so that the whole splendour and magnitude can be enjoyed; Diversity Lewes140 successfully made a bid for a Heritage lottery fund project and was awarded £10K, to research, train and produce 3 D prints on a project called Re-animating Artefacts: Exploring the Stories of Ashante Gold weights 141( See image 2) The relevance and benefits derived from 3D printed replicas is greatly emphasised in the way communities of origin embrace the technology but hindered by the cost of purchasing equipment and training qualified staff. Where will the objects be housed/destroyed? The Vigango Resting Place Project(V.R.P.P.) Research will be looking at the 139 Eric Hollinger et al (2013) ibid 140 Diversity Lewes,ibid 141 Karina Rodriguez,Re-animating Artefacts.(2019) ibid possibilities of when not being able to identify the owners of the artefacts especially Vigango and here we are advocating or allowing the communities of practice to design a solution that can be mutually acceptable in putting them in a ‘Resting Place’.142 Contested objects have strict cultural viewing procedures while others need to be buried or destroyed. ,this is also the case with the Vigango. Whose intention was the natural decay of the hardwood into the eco-mix and organically holistic incorporation into the earth. Historical significance of the object will they unite or divide the community? Due to boundaries and imposed borders some communities have been divided by lines imposed by colonial powers, 143 this division has caused numerous traditional societies great duress especially the Masai between Tanzania and Kenya the Luo being identified in all the 3 East African countries; for the Vigango ,the presence of communities of practice, both in Kenya and Tanzania , makes negotiations difficult and restrictions hinder any progress towards any amicable returns being done. As Participant ii) Barely touches on the sensitive issue of Boundaries and location “Even considering something like Kilifi County government as a possible institution to receive them would raise all kinds of issues”, this is why negotiations are crucial in any venture. East African Coast :The Vigango Case Study 142 M.A.D.C.A. (Malindi District Cultural Association) is looking at possible future research on this Resting Place for the Vigango. 143 Bethwell A.Ogot ,”Zamani A Survey of East African History”.(1968) East African Publishing House.Longman Group Ltd,Kenya pp249 Print Image 5: Kigango : Unknown Photographer Instagram stock photo. Image 5: A Kigango sin, From the Mijikenda Tribe these are revered as spirits (Koma). Photo: Unknown source via Instagram. Throughout my research I have mentioned the Vigango pl.( See Image 5) by definition these are carved wooden totems that are placed in homesteads to commemorate the spirit of a dead ancestor specifically from the secretive Gohu Secret society( Elders holding healing and spiritual powers within the Mijikenda communities) These totems became collectors’ items during the 80’s and caused a rise in stolen goods flooding the market which included fake ‘made for the market’ cheap copies. In this section we will dwell on the significance of using the Vigango as a case study to showcase short comings and coloniality in handling repatriation issues. Communities of Practice tend to interpret iconic artefacts that have a spiritual meaning, in a very different way from the Curators in Museum’s. as seen in my research conducted by issuing questionnaires to relevant participants.(See Appendix Two) My study of the Vigango artefacts is looking at how this infusion of,(Koma) ‘the spirit belongs to the memorial post, where it is propitiated when things go wrong in the homestead, libations of palm wine are regularly and sometimes daily made to the collection of posts by men when they are drinking. The spirit and its wooden memorial have become identified one with the other, as is evident in the use of the term “koma” to refer to both” 144 Can there be acceptance by the Mijikenda if the object has been 3D printed? will the Elders still see it as a receptacle of conduiting spiritualism or will they regard it as an imposter? As Participant iii) acknowledged that “The 3D replica is not made in the same cultural context as the original. For example, vigango are made by carvers from the Gohu society only, through a very specific ritual process, for a specific, religious or supra-human purpose. Creating a 3D replica of a kigango is done for an entirely different purpose, in an entirely different setting, through an entirely different process. Hence, the context, process and purpose of creating vigango is lost in the making of a 3D replica of it.” We have seen that the Tlingit readily allowed technology and took it as an innovative way of replicating traditional practices by incorporating it into their rituals hence gaining knowledge on how to use 3D technology. If the elders are trained to use 3D as another way to preserve and educate the younger generation will this be accepted? As exemplified by Abunga(2002) Communities of practice will have to find a way of freeing themselves from a curatorial practice that belonged to an increasingly irrelevant colonial 144 David Parkin,(1991) Ibid past that never took into consideration the Traditional knowledge abound.145 This Case study was chosen due to the complex nature and visibility of Neo-colonialism at play in thwarting efforts to repatriate artefacts willingly deaccessioned and made ready for returning to communities of origin and how the bureaucratic coloniality ,red-tape barriers that still haunt ex colonies. So far, we have been engaging predominantly with examples from a colony/colonialist model perception of accelerating decolonisation through 3D technology, this case study will shi us into an internal colonisation model that specifically highlights aspects of neo-colonialism that have hindered or raised barriers towards decolonisation. The Kenyan Government is a good example of forces that still uphold the neo-colonialism doctrine, The historical content underlying within this study shows how tribes within the country are marginalised and discriminated on depending on the population ,the Majority 2(Luo & Kikuyu) tribes take the lion share of the political power and private sector economy pushing away the other 40+ minority tribes from getting an equal share; the Mijikenda being one of the least populated tribe on the Eastern coast have no influential clout in the capital Nairobi City, hence the Vigango being regarded as less priority as seen in the fiasco, in that example of the taxation of the returned Vigango by the Income and Revenue department shows lack of appreciation of ‘Primitive” objects. 146 The National Museum of Kenya is a Legacy of the Colonial era, in that no academic collaboration with the various counties (47) has generated any tangible programs, financed by both the 145 Lorna Abungu Access To Digital Heritage in Africa:Bridging the Digital Divide.(2002) Museum International 54(3) 29-34 www.tandfonline.com accessed 18/08/2021 146 Joseph Nevadomsky,The Vigango Affair: The Enterprise of Repatriating Mijikenda Memorial Figures to Kenya.(2018) African Arts Vol. 51 ,2 www.direct.mit.edu accessed 04/07/2021 central government, and devolved county Governors, in sensitising the various tribal ethnic cultures and Languages; in incorporating the rich heritage into the curriculum ,syllabus or even modules in the Higher Education Institutes, this lack of acknowledgement, of the numerous languages and traditional practices, that are dying, getting extinct, due to the shunning of “primitive” or so called devilish dark archaic rituals, being exposed by the Abrahamic religions; This renders the youth helpless in acquiring ancient skills ,doctrines ,wisdom and positive knowledge, that is gradually dying off with each generation. The Western Eurocentric values are still being upheld by neo-colonialist government up to the present time, and as Miers states “But this was simply to apply western concepts of ‘slavery’ ( and here we can say traditional culture) and ‘freedom’ to institutions in other cultural and Historical contexts and, perhaps worse , to treat the African phenomenon as a deviation from the western one-the latter being seen as the true norm. This begs the important question as to which is the norm in comparative historical and cultural perspective”147 it seems like The Government of Kenya has other priorities other than preserving cultural artefacts from Minority tribes like the Mijikenda. (MADCA ) Malindi District Cultural Association is a non-profit group that does not want this to happen hence the slogan “KIUYEUYE’ vaguely translated as ‘bringing it back’. 148 The rise in popularity towards traditional practises especially among the youth, popular songs are sung in vernacular or ‘Mother Tongue” languages, the embracing of colourful 147 Suzanne Miers et al, ”Slavery in Africa: Historical and Anthropological perspectives”.(1977) pp.5-6.The university of Wisconsin press Ltd.The Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. Madisin Wisconsin. Print 148 Rebecca Gearhart et al “Contesting Identities: The Mijikenda and Their Neighbours in Kenyan Coastal Societies” (2013) Scholarship .17 www.digitalcommons.iwu.edu accessed 04/07/2021 African print into contemporary fashion149 has made it possible for groups like MADCA, to ride on this energetic wish to incorporate historical figures like Mekatilili wa Menza 150 into the narrative, together with the rise of contemporary music and fashion fusing indigenous and vernacular lyrics and styles, straight from the ancient cultural sounds and compositions as their own, regardless of the economic push for Eurocentric /Americanised pop culture; the emergence of this new wave of interest can be reflected in Foucault’s understanding that a generalised negative judgement through conventional liberal notions of ‘power’ and ‘freedom’ actually obscures the operation of power. As long as it remains possible to juxtapose theses terms ,thereby locating power in certain spheres(the law ,the state, and so on) a wide domain of social practice can be imagined to be outside or beyond the operation of power .In contrast ,one of Foucault’s major insights has been to show that power relations (subjects acting upon themselves and others) are not an aberration but an ubiquity in social life. As the normative effects of the operation of power are not the focus of Foucaultian analysis ,this issue needs to be addressed in other ways. One possibility in this regard is evaluating the extent to which development practices close down or open up lifestyles and individual identities151 ”Vigango”152 spiritual totems of the Mijikenda. These are mainly housed in public and private collections world-wide.3D replicas can be substituted for the originals to be returned 149 Hannah Azieb Pool, “Fashion Cities Africa” (2016) pp.32 Intellect,The Mill,Parnall Road, Fishponds Bristol .U.K.Print 150 Elizabeth Orchardson-Mazrui, “The Adventures of Mekatilili” (1999) East African Educational Publishers .Westlands Nairobi,Kenya.Print 151 Morgan Brigg, “Post-Development,Foucault and the Colonisation Metaphor” (2002) Third World Quarterly 23 (3) 421-436 Taylor & Francis ltd. www.jstor.org accessed 27/07/2021 152 Linda Giles et al “Cultural Property as Global Commodities The case of Mijikenda memorial statues”(2003) Cultural Survival Quarterly Magazine Dec.2003 https://www.culturalsurvival.org accessed 27/07/2021 hence accelerating repatriation and subsequently decolonisation. My research has managed to fill various gaps, initiate actions and allow future considerations on the viability of, and access to field recordings and material.(Transcribed interviews from Elders of the targeted community- Mijikenda with the rituals interpreted to the primary researchers enables me to circumnavigate this, by allowing me to absorb the direct narrative due to no Language barrier) The use of oral transcripts to bring out valuable epistemology that will define existing scholarship on the value of artefacts to the community. These prompts are important in analysing and creating robust projects as a follow up to this research. This can include ,creating replicas through 3D printing, but infusing invisible ink, coded file system to ensure authenticity, an initiative being developed by Rodriguez to differentiate fakes. Creating watermarks to identify batches and commercial use and distribution. Designing a way to keep stock of produced models. Barcoded, Non-Fungible Tokens (NFT) Legal policies lobbied so that they will allow enforcement of Repatriation laws globally and the trade in contested Artefacts.(UNESCO lobbying?) Conventions on the Illicit trafficking and trade of artefacts. In order as to address the topic of discussion on the use of technology especially 3D scanning or Additive Manufacturing in answering calls for the restitution of cultural property as well as accelerating decolonisation ;The Vigango case Study was chosen as an example of what not to do when returning artefacts ,highlighting on the fiasco and barriers that can befall ,well intentioned projects. through these difficult circumstances, identifying stolen artefacts “Vigango” first of all locating all the 400+ artefacts being housed in Private collections and public institutes, compile a list and system that can be easily accessed ,check catalogues of Auction houses for lots being auctioned, try to accurately pinpoint the rightful owners from the communities of origin using soil samples from the homesteads they were stolen from ,type of wood; as authentic Vigango are carved from the Hard wood variety or cultivars, from the totems cra smanship and intricate patterns ,to identify regional locations and possible original owners or fakes( Made for the collectors market only) The Vigango now housed in Museums Institutions and private collections, fall into two categories authentic stolen objects and made for market replicas, the whole issue of Vigango can provide a discussion about the use of digital technologies, in answering calls for restitution in that the original uses / trends for the vigango apart from being used for ablution, was to allow them to deteriorate naturally without preserving or maintaining them, to resist the elements; however presently museum curators have seen the need to counter this, by using chemicals ,temperature controlled environment to assist in increasing the lifespan of the objects, with 3D printing the objects can be allowed to follow their natural course and at the same time have files on an accessible platform like Sketchfab 153 that will enable anyone in the world to download and 3D print. Some of the Vigango currently on display are very fragile, due to the age and material used, these need special treatment and care to be displayed, hence 3D printing them will ensure that future generations will benefit from this; plus, the idea of transporting them, will be possible as the originals can be carefully conserved and returned to communities of origin, and the replicas retained to be displayed in museums and private collections wide world. Some of the Vigango are quite unique and expensive hence a need for security measures, every time, 24 hours round the clock CCTV cameras, this is prohibitive, therefore making it 153 www.sketchfab.com impossible, for them to be displayed; However, having replicas of them will enable more people to view and handle them without any fear or risk. Methodology used was, desktop research on available data to locate the stolen Vigango in museums and Private collections wherever they are housed globally?(on going) How many have been repatriated? Census of all in Public and private collections approx..400?(Monica154) How to Identify and justify the choice of the theoretical framework(s) and/or theory/theories to position my own work in relation to various literature available. My interest and positionality as a member of the community, Conflict of interest influenced by personal benefits. The passion to see the return of the objects and housing them if no known owner emerges is the driving force in creating a working group of Elders and academicians “Vigango Resting Place” WhatsApp Group being the appointed or designated Chief Negotiator for the M.A.D.C.A. entity makes this quest a personal venture. Conclusions The main arguments made throughout the dissertation are that the ever-looming debate that has not yet taken place on the proper handling of contested artefacts can be amicably resolved if 3D printing is allowed into the remit, enabling an acceleration of returning objects to communities of practice and retaining replicas in Heritage institutions. What further research that needs to be done in order as to answer the questions on how to overcome the present barriers hindering the progress of this is that 154 Monica Udvardy, et al “The Transatlantic Trade in African Ancestors.Mijikenda Memorial Statues (Vigango) and the Ethics of Collecting and Curating Non-Western Cultural Property” (2003). American Anthropologist 105 (3):566-580 www.archeologicalethics.org www.jstor.org/stable/3566906 accessed 26/07/2021 policies and legislations need to be in place to emphasise the importance of returning contested objects to communities of practice, secondly to make it mandatory for museums to have a special department dedicated to digitising their collections and identify contested objects can be retained in either so copies in a cloud or printed to be displayed with a caption stating that the originals have been successfully returned to communities of origin. The impact this current and future research would have on wider scholarship and practice and the wider projects I am interested in progressing is that the Humanities sector can resolve age old issues like the Elgin Marbles simply by retaining the 3D images in the British museum and sending the originals back to Greece, hence wise the Benin Bronze and the other mentioned contested artefacts can be rightfully re-joined to their ancestral homes solving a hotly contested debate. More research being undertaken by the V.R.P. Project to articulate on the tools and procedures(Best Practice) to be in place in order as to avoid future fiascos and barriers, like those highlighted in my research. And lastly to emphasise on the Traditional knowledge still available within communities of practice, that is valuable in interpreting and disseminating information and pedagogies pertaining to collections held in museums. In African fables, animals are our alter egos used to convey a social message in poignant and enthralling stories155 the idea that all creatures, plants included have value and spirits, makes it even harder to accept sacred ritualised artefacts like vigango; Meer works of art but actual spirits of the departed (Koma) Ferguson156 states that “as a manner of speech; endowing non-human objects, abstractions or creating with life and human characteristics” quotes Preminger157 giving objects a sacred value and spiritual powers. The Vigango as stated by Spears(1978) 158 holds these powers and other secrecy that enhances the aura of iconic and sacrilege objects Miguel Tamen states that ‘just as icons are not reducible to their true theological meaning ,so sensorial perception is not reducible to the status of reflection of what is perceived ,but indeed is a necessary condition not only for the definition but also for the very existence of what is defined’ 159 All these can render a 3 D printed replica inconsiderable, but a representation is closer to the original when an authentic artefact is not available. M.A.D.C.A. is keen to have all the Vigango returned, and my project will move on from here to accomplish that. 155 David Western, In the Dust of Kilimanjaro.Island press/Shearwater books Washington Dc(1997) Frances Ferguson, , “Canons, Poetics, and Social Value: Jeremy Bentham and How to Do Things with People”, 156 MLN Vol. 110, No. 5, French Issue (Dec., 1995), pp. 1148-1164 (The John Hopkins Universal Press.) www.frances-ferguson.com accessed 24/07/2021 157 Alex Preminger ,et al.”The New Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and poetics” (Princeton,New Jersey Princeton University Press 1993) p.902. www.socrates.acadiau.ca accessed 24/07/2021 158 Thomas T. Spear “The Kaya Complex : A History of the Mijikenda Peoples of The Kenya Coast to 1900”(1978) Kenya Literature Bureau. Nairobi pp 61. Print 159 Miguel,Tamen. “Friends of Interpretable Objects”. (2001) p 24 Harvard university Press Print “KIUYE-UYE” ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF IMPORTANT CONTACTS:MUSEUM,INSTITUTIONS & COMMUNITIES OF ORIGINDr.Karina Rodriguez.University of Brighton Collaborator/Advisor/ Questionnaire Dr. Myrsini SamaroudiUniversity of Brighton Collaborator/Advisor- Questionnaire *Professor Monica Udvardy of University of KentuckyAdvisor/ Questionnaire-( V.R.P.) Vigango Resting place member Dr.Celia Nyamweru,St. Lawrence University- Consultant/ Questionnaire-( V.R.P.) Vigango Resting place member Joseph Mwarandu, Founder M.A.D.C.A- Colleague/Advisor/ Questionnaire x2( V.R.P.) Vigango Resting place member Jimbi Katana- Questionnaire-( V.R.P.) Vigango Resting place member- Kenya Dr. Mtana Lewa- Questionnaire-( V.R.P.) Vigango Resting place member- Kenya Dr. Linda Giles- Formerly of University of Illinois Questionnaire-( V.R.P.) Vigango Resting place member John Baya Mitsanze- Questionnaire-( V.R.P.) Vigango Resting place member- Kenya Justice Chonga- Questionnaire-( V.R.P.) Vigango Resting place member- Kenya Rachel Heminway Hurst -The Royal Pavilion TrustQuestionnaire J.C.Niala – Horniman Museums- Questionnaire Dr.Helen Mears-Wellcome Trust- Questionnaire Dr. Richard Benjamin & Fracoise Museum of SlaveryQuestionnaire Margaret Otieno -NMK- Questionnaire- Nairobi Kenya Dr. Dan Hicks- Quote from Twitter Ian Kithiy – Questionnaire Diaspora Communities of practice -Austria Thomas Mlanda - Questionnaire Diaspora Communities of practice- University of Nairobi- Kenya Titus Unda Phares a.k.a. Mitaa Kisauni- Questionnaire Diaspora Communities of practice- Mombasa Kenya Bibliography: Abungu,Lorna, “Access to Digital Heritage in Africa:Bridging the Digital divide” chp.8, pp.183 of ed. Ross Parry’s Museums’ in a Digital Age.(2010) Routledge ,School of Museum Studies, University of Leicester, Perpetua by Saxon Graphics Ltd. Derby. Print Addison, Alonzo C. .”Virtual Heritage :Technology in the Service of Culture. In VAST” (2001) Virtual Reality :Archaeology and Cultural Heritage ,ed. N.S.Stephen .New York; Association for Computing Machinery pp.343-354 www.dl.acm.org accessed 10/04/2021 African Fossils. https://africanfossils.org/#bh_info3 African fossils accessed 26/03/2021 Contact@turkanabasin.org. Agrawal,Arun .“Indigenous and scientific knowledge: Some critical comments.”(1995) Indigenous Knowledge Monitor, 3 (3): 1-6 Antropologi Indonesia 3(3) www.researchgate.net accessed 08/08/2021 American Council of Learned Societies (ACLS) ,”Our Cultural Commonwealth:The Report of the American Council of Learned Societies Commission on Cyberinfrastructure for the humanities and Social Science.” http://www.acls.org/uploadedFiles/Publications/Programs/Our _Cultural_Commonwealth.pdf. (2006) The Andrew Mellon Foundation. Accessed 23/03/2021 Arvanitis, Kostas and Louise Tythacott, 2014. Museums and Restitution: New Practices, New Approaches. Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate Auwera, Sigrid Van Der. “UNESCO and the Protection of Cultural Property During Armed Conflict” (2011) International Journal of Cultural policy.vol 19,2013-1, www.tandfonline.com. Accessed 04/07/2021 Basu,Paul. ‘Re-mobilising Colonial Collections in Decolonial Times: Exploring the Latent Possibilities of N. W. Thomas’s West African Collections’ (2021) Chapter 2 pp 44-70 in ‘Mobile Museums: Collections in Circulation’-Felix Driver et al. UCL press www.jstor.org accessed 05/08/2021 Batty, David, “Off with the Heads: Pitt Rivers Museum Removes Human Remains from Display”. Museums. Guardian article (2020) www.theguardian.com accessed 31/02/2021 Bienkowski, Piotr. "A Critique of Museum Restitution and Repatriation Practices." (2015.)The International Handbooks of Museum Studies: Museum Practice, edited by Conal McCarthy: John Wiley & Sons, Black Lives Matter,”8 years strong" (2021) www.blacklivesmatter.com accessed 25/07/2021 About- Blankenberg, Ngaire “In search of a Real Freedom: Ubuntu and the Media” (1999) :Critical Arts 13 (20) :42-65. Print. Brewster, Stephen. “The Impact of Haptic ‘Touching ‘Technology’ on Cultural Applications”.(2005) Glasgow interactive Systems Group. Department of Science.www.dcs.gla.ac.uk accessed 25/08/2021 Computing Brigg, Morgan. “Post-Development, Foucault and the Colonisation Metaphor” (2002) Third World Quarterly 23 (3) 421-436 Taylor & Francis ltd. www.jstor.org accessed 27/07/2021 British Broadcasting Corporation BBC, Colonialism: “Display it Like You Stole It” (2019) Support , Bite size, https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/articles/zk6992p accessed 11/07/2021 Brown ,Deidre,”Ko to ringa k inga rakau a te Pakeha-Virtual Taonga Maori and Museums” (2008)Visual Resources .International Journal on Images and their uses Vol.24:1 pp. 59-75 accessed on 09/06/2021 www.tandfonline.com Cameron, Fiona “Wired Connection -the Next Generation” International Journal of Museum Management and Curatorship,19(3):309-15(2001)Pergamon. https://www.academia.edu/16713751/Wired_collections_the_n ext_generation accessed 15/04/2021. Cameron, Fiona etal. Theorizing Digital Cultural Heritage: A Critical Discourse,Books Gateway ,MIT press 2007 print. Castells, Manuel,”Materials for an Exploratory Theory of the Network Society “.British Journal of Sociology.51(1) January/March.2000.:5.www.onlinelibrary.wiley.com accessed 08/08/2021 Cernea, Micheal .Cultural Heritage and Development: A Framework for Action in the Middle East and North Africa. Washington: World Bank. Print Chapman, Nigel, and Jenny Chapman, Digital Multimedia , Worldwide Series in Computer Science (Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley, 1999). Charr, Manuel. “What Do Non-Fungible Tokens Mean for the Arts.” (2021) Culture Geek Conference accessed 17/05/2021 https://culturegeek.com/article/what-do-non-fungible-tokensmean-for-the-arts/ London. Charr, Manuel, “Museums and Virtual Reality” (2021) Virtual Reality . www.culturegeek.com accessed on the 14/04/2021 Christen, K. ‘Ara Riitta: Protecting the Past, Accessing the Future - Indigenous Memories in a Digital Age. A Digital Project of the Pitjantjatjara Council” (2006):, Museum Anthropology, 29 (56-60.) [online library] Cleere, Henry. “The Uneasy Bedfellows: Universality and Cultural Heritage”,(2001) in Destruction and Conservation of Cultural Property, ed. by Robert Layton. London: Routledge,. [363.69/DES] Cole Herbert. 1987. Vigango: Commemorative Sculpture of the Mijikenda of Kenya by Ernie Wolfe [Book review]. African Arts 20 (4): 74–75. COMPASS (Collections Multimedia Public Access System) first launched in 2000-2007. British Museum. https://www.ssl.co.uk/ixbin/indexplus?record=PRO101 accessed 18/04/2021 Conn, Steven. Do Museums Still Need Object?.(2010) pp.12. Arts and Intellectual life in America series University of Pennsylvania press. U.S.A. Print. Craggs R. et al, “Introduction: Reframing Decolonisation,” in Craggs and Wintle, eds., Cultures of Decolonisation: Transnational Productions and Practices, 1945–70 (Manchester, 2016), 1–26, Cubitt, Sean. “Digital Aesthetics” (1998) Language arts & Disciplines Sage publications. London,Thousand Oaks CA New Delhi. www.journals.sagepub.com accessed 23/05/2021 Cuno, James,Who owns Antiquity? Museums and our Battle over Our Ancient Heritage.(2008) pp.157.Oxford Princeton University Press. Directorate-General for Education and Culture ,(2002) “European Funding for the Cultural Heritage Sector”, Luxembourg: European Commission. www.catalogue.nla.gov.au accessed 25/08/2021 Diversity Lewes,Re-Animating artefacts: Exploring the Stories of Ashante Gold Weights (2019) WordPress Blog. https://djtaskalume.wordpress.com/2019/05/14/reanimating-ar tefacts/ accessed 12/06/21 Dobreva, Milena, et al .User Needs in Digitization Chp.6 pp.74 in “Evaluating and Measuring The Value and Impact of Digital Collections.” ed.Lorna.M.Hughes.Facet Publishing (2012) MPG Books Groups, U.K. Doershuk, John. et al “Preserving Artefacts with 3D Scanning: Blumbergs unusual Iowa Celt”(2017) The Office of The State Archaeology https://archaeology.uiowa.edu/preserving-artifacts-3d-scannin g-blumberg’s-unusual-iowa-celt University of Iowa ,Iowa City U.S.A. Driver, Felix, etal,”Mobile Museums-Collections in Circulation” (2021) pp.2 introduction. From Sarr, Felwine and Bénédicte Savoy. ‘The Restitution of African Cultural Heritage: Toward a new relational ethics’, 2018. Restitution Report Accessed 03/08/2021 https://restitutionreport2018.com. Dudley, Sandra. “Museum Materialities: Objects, Sense and Feeling”, in ‘Museum Materialities: Objects, Engagements, Interpretations,’ ed. by Sandra Dudley. Abington: Routledge, 2010. [069.132/MUS and as eBook] Dutton, Dennis,The Art Instict : Beauty, Pleasure &Human Evolution.(2009) pp.184 Oxford , Oxford press. Edwards, Elizabeth, el tal. eds. Sensible Objects: Colonialism, Museums and Material Culture. Oxford: Berg, 2006. [306.074/SEN] Emmons, George ,The Tlingit Indians.(1991) History, American Museum of Natural History ed. Frederica De Laguna.University of Washington press. Factum Foundation ,The Aura in The Age of Digital MaterialityRethinking Preservation in The Shadow of An Uncertain FutureFactum Foundation( Silvana Editorials) 2020 Fahy, Anne. "New Technologies for Museum Communication." In Museum, Media, Message, edited by Eileen Hooper-Greenhill: Routledge, 1995. Falk, John H. “Pushing the Boundaries :Assessing the long-Term Impact of Museum Experiences”. Current trends.(1998) vol.11 :pp.1-6.print. Falk John H et al. Living in a Learning Society:Museums and Free-choice Learning. chp.19 pp.329 in ed Sharon Macdonald ibid.(2011) Felwine S. et al, The Restitution of African Cultural Heritage. Toward a New Relational Ethics, Paris, November 2018. Available at: http://restitutionreport2018.com/sarr_savoy_en.pdf Ferguson, Frances, “Canons, Poetics, and Social Value: Jeremy Bentham and How to Do Things with People”, MLN Vol. 110, No. 5, French Issue (Dec. 1995), pp. 1148-1164 (The John Hopkins Universal Press.) www.frances-ferguson.com accessed 24/07/2021 Fforde, Cressida, J. Hubert and P. Turnbull (eds.) 2002. The Dead and Their Possessions: Repatriation in Principle, Policy and Practice. London: Routledge. Francis ,Kirsten D. et al.”Digitised indigenous Knowledge in Cultural Heritage organisations in Australia and New Zealand: An Examination of Policies and Protocols” (2010) Proceedings of the American Society for information Science and Technology.46 (1) www.asistdl.onlinelibrary.wiley.com accessed 08/08/2012 Freire, Paulo, Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1970) Newyork; Continuum .Print. Garage Staff “,A Natural History Museum Flies into the Future with 3D printed Birds”. (2018) Innovation The Garage https://garage.hp.com/us/en/innovation/3d-printed-birds-taxi dermy-peabody-museum.html accessed 14/04/2021 Gearhart, Rebecca. et al “Contesting Identities: The Mijikenda and Their Neighbours in Kenyan Coastal Societies” (2013) Scholarship .17 www.digitalcommons.iwu.edu accessed 04/07/2021 Geary Patrick-“Sacred Commodities: The Circulation of Medieval Relics”.(2014) The Social life of Things. Commodities in Cultural Perspective. University of Florida.www.cambridge.org accessed 04/07/2021 Giles, Linda. et al “Cultural Property as Global Commodities The case of Mijikenda memorial statues”(2003) Cultural Survival Quarterly Magazine Dec.2003 https://www.culturalsurvival.org accessed 27/07/2021 Hemming , Michelle, New Media chp.18 pp.315 In ed. Sharon Macdonald A companion to Museum Studies.(2001) Companions in Cultural Studies. Blackwell.John Wiley & Sons. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Chichester. U.K.Print Heritage Digital, “Heritage Lottery Fund”.(2020) A Beginners Guide to Digital Tech For the Heritage Sector. https://d13kjxnqnhcmn2.cloudfront.net/AcuCustom/Sitename /DAM/043/A_beginners_guide_to_digital_tech_for_the_heri tage_sector.pdf accessed 15/04/2021accessed 31/08/2021 Hicks, Dan. The Brutish Museum. London, Pluto Press (2020) print Hicks Professor Dan , The Brutish Museum. On Twitter mail posted July 15th, 2021 @profdanhicks www.twitter.com accessed 27/08/2021 Hillier,Lizzy“Blog Eco-consultancy” (2021) Customer Experience https://econsultancy.com/how-museums-are-using-immersive -digital-experiences/ accessed 14/04/2021 Himan, Abi. “The Story of The Parthenon Marbles” (2016) Culture Trip. www.culturetrip.com accessed 24/08/2021 Hollinger, Eric, et al ,”Tlingit-Smithsonian Collaboration with 3D Digitization of Cultural Objects” (2013) Museum Anthropology Review 7(1-2) Spring-Fall 2013 www.scholarworks.iu.edu accessed 04/08/2021 Hollinger Eric, “Smithsonian Uses 3D Tech to Restore a Broken Sacred Object for Tlingit Indians”.(2019)Home Si Digi Blog. National Museum of Natural History. Accessed on 09/06/2021 www.dpo.si.edu. Howells, Richard, and Joaquim Negreiros. Visual Culture, Polity Press, 2019. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ubrighton/detail.action? docID=5725367. Created from ubrighton on 2020-11-16 02:34:30. Hudson, Claire, The Digital Museum chp. 3 pp.38 in ed. Lorna M. Hughes ,ibid. Print. Hughes, Lorna. “Evaluating & Measuring the Value ,Use & Impact of Digital Collections” (2013) Literary and Linguistic Computing28 (3).pp6 Facet Publishing ,London www.academic.oup.com accessed 09/08/2021 Husein, Abira. “The Nomad Project” (2018) Mnemoscene.British Library and British Museum https://nomad-project.co.uk accessed 05/08/2021 Hutter, Micheal. etal. Economic Perspectives on Cultural Heritage,(1997) Palgrave McMillan. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Print Impey, Oliver et al, The Origins of Museums: The Cabinet of Curiosities in Sixteenth and Seventeenth Century Europe (1985) pp1-4, Oxford :Clarendon Press In Ed. Sarah Staniforth, Historical Perspectives on Preventive Conservation . Getty Conservation Isaac, Gwyneira ,”Whose Idea Was this? Museums Replicas and the Reproduction of Knowledge” (2011) Current anthropology 52 (2) 211-233 University of Chicago press & Wenner-Gren Foundation for anthropological Research. Accessed 23/08/2021 www.-jstor-org.ezproxy.brighton.ac.uk Isaac, Gwynera,”Perclusive Alliances-Digital 3-D, Museums and the Reconciling of Culturally Diverse Knowledges”(2015) Current Anthropology vol.56 #S12.Wenner-Gren Foundation of Anthropological Research. Accessed 09/06/2021 www.journals.uchicago.edu Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C.U.S.A. Ishii, Hiroshi. et al ,”Tangible Bits: Towards Seamless Interfaces Between People, Bits and Atoms”((1997). ,Conference Proceedings on Human Factors in Computing Systems , Atlanta ,ACM press,NewYork Jennings, Gretchen. et al “Museums White Privilege and Diversity: A systemic Perspective (2017)Dimensions Special Opinion/ Edition Section. www.nemanet.org accessed 08/08/2021 Johnson, Dr.Linton Kwesi. Reality Poem (1998) Independent Intavenshan (The Island Anthology) Island Records, U.K. Jones, Mark: Why Fakes Matter: Essays on Problems of Authenticity , Antique Collector’s club, British Museums Publication1992 Kalume, Anthony ,”Reanimating Artefacts: Exploring the stories of Ashante Gold weights.”(2019) https://research.brighton.ac.uk/en/activities/re-animating-arte facts-exploring-the-stories-of-ashante-gold-weights. University of Brighton. Word press Blog Djtaskalume. https://wordpress.com/view/djtaskalume.wordpress.com accessed 10/04/2021 Keyser,Raphael De et.al “Historical Skills and ICT” (1998),Informations.international society for History Didactics.18.(September):pp107-120.www.researchgate.net.asses ed 23/03/2021 LaMontagne, Mireille, “Museums and Restitution: New Practices, New Approaches” (2015) Museum Management and Curatorship,vol.30 2. Pp 169-171.www.tandfonline.com accessed 28/05/2021 Taylor and Francis. Layton,Robert etal.(2001)Destruction Cultural Property.Routledge.London and Conservation Of Leavy, Brett. et al. “Digitising the Aboriginal Heritage Landscape” in ed. Yehuda E.Kalay et al’s ,”New Heritage-New Media and Cultural Heritage” .Heritage studies/MuseumStudies(2008), Routledge ,Taylor and Francis Group. Keyword Group.Antony Rowe Ltd.Wiltshire print Lessing, Alfred,‘What is Wrong with a Forgery?’(1965), pp.346 in Neil, Alex and Ridley, Aaron (eds), Arguing About Art: Contemporary Philosophical Debates (New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Inc, (1995) Levis-Strausse, Claude ,The Savage Mind, (1962) pp.214. University of Chicago press. Translated from the French ,La Pensée savage Librarie Plon.Paris. www.web.mit.edu accessed 23/05/2021 Lewi, Hannah, “Designing A Virtual Museum of Architectural Heritage” .in ed.Yehuda E.Kalay ibid. and New Heritage ,Routledge www.taylorfrancis.com accessed 15/04/2021 Lievendag, Nick.” The Beginners Guide To 3 D Scanning & Photogrammetry on a Budget” (2017) 3D scan expert Reviews. Accessed 03/08/2021 www.3dscanexpert.com. Loran, Margarida. “Use of Websites to increase Access and Develop Audiences in Museums: Experiences in British National Museums,” Journal of the Humanities and philosophy studies of the UOC ,www.uoc.edu/digithum,Digithum,7(2005) web 18/03/2021 Macdonald Sharon. A companion to Museum Studies, (2011)Wiley-Blackwell,Blackwell publishing ,Chichester, Makkuni, Ranjit. “Culture as a Driver of Innovation “chp.23 pp.221.in ed.Ross Parry (2009). “Museums in a Digital Age” ibid. Maras, Elliot,” The British Museum Exhibits its Kiosks”.(2002) Kiosk Market place https://www.kioskmarketplace.com/articles/the-british-museu m-exhibits-its-kiosks/ accessed 18/04/2021 Mears, Helen, and Claire Wintle, “Brave New Worlds: Transforming Museum Ethnography through Technology - an Introduction”, (2014): Journal of Museum Ethnography, 27 3-11. Merryman, John Henry, ed. Imperialism, Art and Restitution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. Metz, Thaddeus et al.“The African Ethic of Ubuntu /Botho Implications for Research on Morality” –(2010) Journal of Moral Education 39 (1):273-290. Metz, Thaddeus ,”Ubuntu as a Moral Theory and Human Rights in South Africa” (2011) African Human Rights Law Journal 11 (1):532-59 Miers, Suzanne. et al, Slavery in Africa: Historical and Anthropological perspectives.(1977) pp.5-6.The university of Wisconsin press Ltd. The Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. Madison Wisconsin. Print Mkhize, Nhlanhla ,”Ubuntu and Harmony:An African Approach to Morality and Ethics” (2008)in Persons in Community: African Ethics in a Global Culture., edited by R.Nicholson ,35-44 Pietermaritzburg:university of KwaZulu-Natal Press Mnyaka, Mluleki et al ,”The African Concept of Ubuntu/Botho and its Socio-Moral Significance” (2005) Black Theology 3(2) :215-237 www.tandfonline.com accessed 29/07/2021 Museum Association, ‘Decolonising Practice: Museums’ (2020) Campaign ,Decolonising Museums, M.A. Assessed 17/06/2021 https://www.museumsassociation.org/campaigns/decolonising -museums/decolonising-practice/# Nakata, Martin , “Indigenous Knowledge and the Cultural Interface: underlying issues at the intersection of knowledge and information systems” (2002) IFLA Journal :28 (5/6) 281-188 www.journals.sagepub.com accessed 08/08/2021 National Museums Directors’ Conference (1999) A Netful of Jewels :New Museums in the Learning Age .www.nationalmuseums.org.uk/media/documents/publication s/netful_of_jewels.pdf. accessed 14/04/2021 Navarette, Trilce,Et al. “The Museum as Information Space : Metadata and Documentation.” .(2016) pp.111-123 In Borowiecki ,K.et al. ‘Cultural Heritage in a Changing World’. Springer Chamhttps://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-29544-2 _7#citeas Accessed 14/04/2021 Nevadomsky, Joseph, ‘The Vigango Affair: The Enterprise of Repatriating Mijikenda Memorial Figures to Kenya’ (2018) African Arts .51 (2): 58-69 doi www.direct.mit.edu accessed 14/08/2021 Newell, Jenny. "Old Objects, New Media: Historical Collections, Digitization and Affect." Journal of Material Culture 17 (2012): 287-306. – see this whole edition of Journal of Material Culture Ogot, Bethwell A. ,”Zamani A Survey of East African History”.(1968) East African Publishing House. Longman Group Ltd,Kenya pp249 Print Oguamanam, Chidi. ”Patents and Traditional Medicine: Digital Capture, Creative Legal Interventions and the Dialectics of Knowledge Transformation” (2008) Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies 15 (2) Maurer School of Law Indiana University , Digital Repository@Maurer Law www.repository.law.indiana.edu accessed 01/09/2021 O’Neil, Grace. “Rebuilding Palmyra: 3D Printing an Ancient City” (2016) World the Wire. https://thewire.in/world/rebuilding-palmyra-3d-printing-an-a ncient-city .assessed 23/03/2021 Orchardson-Mazrui, Elizabeth. “The Adventures of Mekatilili” (1999) East African Educational Publishers .Westlands Nairobi,Kenya.Print Paine, Crispin. Religious Objects in Museums: Private Lives and Public Duties. Bloomsbury, 2013. Palmer, Norman. ‘Recovering Stolen Art”.Chap.In“Current legal problems” Andrew Kenyon .et al (ed) Antiquities Trade or Beyond Western Australian Law review.pp1-37,London: Archetype in Association with UKIC Archaeology Section.www.obs-traffic.museum accessed 09/08/2021 Pankhurst,Richard “The Napier Expedition and The Loot of Maqdala”Presence Africaine Edition,133-134(1985):233-240. JSTOR web 16 March 2021 Parezo, Nancy. “Introduction to Zuni Ceremonialism”. (1992) Fourty Seventh Annual Report of the Bureau of the American Ethnology 1929-30 by Ruth Bunzel pp vii-xxxix Albuquarque .University of New Mexico .Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC. Accessed 23/08/2021 www.cedarcitylodge.org. Park Prof. Jungwon, et al. “3D Reconstructions of Individual Nano-particles, nanotechnology world, science” (2020) Institute for Basic Science (IBS) Korea www.nanotechnologyworld.org,accessed 18/10/2021 Parkins,David. Chapter “An Introduction to the Society and culture of the Mijikenda” pp.23 in Ernie Wolf III’s “Vigango-Commemorative sculpture of the Mijikenda of Kenya”.(1986) Williams College Museum of Art ,Williamstown, Massachusetts. United States of America. Print. Parkin,David. Sacred Void-Spatial Images of Work and Ritual Among the Giriama of Kenya. Cambridge Studies in Social and Cultural Anthropology. Cambridge University Press.1991print Parry Ross, Museums in a Digital age, Routledge, Taylor and Francis group, New York, 2010 Print. Pogrebin, Robin. “Clean House to Survive? Museums Confront Their Crowded Basements”. Arts. NY. New York Times(2019) www.nytimes.com accessed 29/03/2021 Pool, Hannah Azieb. Fashion Cities Africa (2016) pp.32 Intellect, The Mill, Arnall Road, Fishponds Bristol .U.K.Print Poust, Catherine “V&A to Commemorate the 150th Anniversary of The Events at Maqdala With Display of Important Ethiopian Objects” (2018). Embassy of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, London. https://www.ethioembassy.org.uk/va-to-commemorate-the-15 0th-anniversary-of-the-events-at-maqdala-with-display-of-im portant-ethiopian-objects/ accessed 03/08/2021 Preminger Alex,et al.”The New Princeton Encyclopaedia of Poetry and poetics” (1993) Socrates (Princeton, New Jersey Princeton University Press p.902. www.socrates.acadiau.ca accessed 24/07/2021 Reddy.Sita. “Making Heritage Legible: Who Owns Traditional Medical Knowledge?”(2006) International Journal of Cultural Property : 13(2) pp.161-188. www.cambridge.org accessed 08/08/2021 Renfrew, Colin. “.Stemming the Flood of Looted Antiquities” in “Loot Legitimacy and Ownerships: The Ethical Crisis in Archaeology” (2000) Duckworth Debates in Archaeology. Duckworth www.bcin.ca .accessed 09/08/2021 Reuters , ‘Germany to Start Returning Benin Bronzes from 2022’ (2021) Berlin Reutuers. www.reuters.com accessed 25/07/2021 & BBC ,French MP’s Back Return of Looted African Artefacts (2020) BBC world service, Europe .www.bbc.co.uk accessed 25/07/2021 London. Reynolds, Jacob. “Western Museums Should Agree to Repatriate Cultural Artefacts, Repatriation of Artefacts” Debating Matters.(2019) www.archive.debatingmatters.com. Assessed 23/03/2021. Robey, David, “Improving Sustainability of Publicly Funded Digital Resources”(2013) Chp.11 pp.155 of ed.Lorna Hughes ibid. Rodney, Winston aka Burning Spear – ‘Hail H.I.M’.(1980) EMI records- Review by Doggiedogma www.sputnikmusic.com accessed 29/07/2021 Rodriguez, Karina etal. “3D Printing Could Democratise Heritage and Help in the Repatriation Debate” (2019) Health Club Management https://www.healthclubmanagement.co.uk/health-club-manag ement-news/3D-printing-could-democratise-heritage-and-hel p-museums-in-repatriation-debate/344307 Accessed 04/07/2021 Rodriguez, Karina, “Re-animating Artefacts”.(2019) Diversity Lewes. Heritage Lottery Fund Project. https://research.brighton.ac.uk/en/activities/re-animating-arte facts-exploring-the-stories-of-ashante-gold-weights. Accessed 12/06/21 Roegiers, Sara, et al , “History is 3D:Presenting A Framework for meaningful Historical representations in digital Media” chp.5 pp.74 in “New Heritage-New Media and Cultural Heritage” ed.Yehuda E.Kalay et al.(2008) Routledge.Taylor & Francis Group.Newyork,N.Y.Print. Salmond,Amiria . “Digital Subjects, Cultural Objects” : Special Issue introduction. Journal of Material Culture. 2012;17(3):211-228. www.journals.sagepub.com accessed 09/08/2021 Samaroudi, Myrsini. et al. ‘3D Printing is Helping Museums in Repatriation and Decolonisation Efforts” (2019) Science + Technology. https://theconversation.com/3d-printing-is-helping-museums -in-repatriation-and-decolonisation-efforts-126449 accessed 04/07/2021 Sandis,Constatine, ‘An Honest Display of Fakery: Replicas and the Role of Museums’(2016),Metrics. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements. Cambridge University Press. Accessed 21/05/2021 https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/royal-institute-of-ph ilosophy-supplements/article/abs. Cambridge. U.K Sarr, Felwine and Bénédicte Savoy, The Restitution of African Cultural Heritage. Toward a New Relational Ethics, Paris, November 2018. Available at: http://restitutionreport2018.com/sarr_savoy_en.pdf Schnapp, Jeffrey. et.al “Digital Humanities Manifesto” 2.0, Multitudes 59.2(2015) https://www.cairn-int.info/article-E_MULT_059_0181--digital -humanities-manifesto-20.htm accessed 04/04/2021 Schreiner,Klaus, 'Discrimen veri ac falsi. Ansatze und Formen der Kritik in der Heiligen- und Reliquien- verehrung des Mittelalters', Arcbivfur Kulturgcscbicbte, xlviii (1966), 1-53 and esp. 31-33 ( translation) .Schuster, Kristen M et al, “Digital Humanities, Libraries and Partnerships-A Critical Examination of Labor,Networks and Community”, (2018) Sciencedirect.com Chandos Publication 107-123-Chapter 8 -Digital Humanities and Image Metadata: “Improving Access Through Shared Practices” Science Direct ,wwww.sciencedirect.com accessed 18/03/2021 Seaton, Anthony et al. Marketing of Tourism Products: Concepts ,Issues and Cases .(1996) London. Thomson Business Press. Print Shyllon, Folarin. “Cultural Heritage Issues; The Legacy of Conquest, Colonisation and Commerce”. Chapter 6. “Unravelling History: Return of African Cultural Objects Repatriated and looted in Colonial Times” (2010) Brill www.brill.com accessed 04/07/2021 Silberman, Neil, “Chasing the Unicorn” chp.6 pp.84 in “New Heritage-New Media and Cultural Heritage” ed. Yehuda E.Kalay et.al Heritage Studies/Museum Studies Routledge(2008) Taylor & Francis Group. Anthony Rowe ltd. Wiltshire. Print Smithsonian.(NMNH)“,National Museum of Natural History, Virtual Tours” https://naturalhistory.si.edu/visit/virtual-tour (2021) National History accessed 31/08/2021 Smithsonian Digitization Program Office. Sculpin Hat (2019) .https://3d.si.edu/explorer/kiks-ádi-sculpin-hat-restoration. Accessed 09/06/2021. Sowemimo, Annabel “Learning the African history of caesarean sections will help us better challenge stigma” (2021) Decolonising Health care. Gal-dem. www.gal-dem.com accessed 29/08/2021 Spear, Thomas T. The Kaya Complex : A History of the Mijikenda Peoples of The Kenya Coast to 1900 (1978) Kenya Literature Bureau. Nairobi pp 61. Print Srinivasan, R., J. Enote, K.M. Becvar, and Robin Boast, “Critical and Reflective Uses of New Media Technologies in Tribal Museums”, (2009) Museum Management and Curatorship, 24 (169-89). [online library] Srinivasan, R., Robin Boast, K.M. Becvar, and J. Enote, “Diverse Knowledges and Contact Zones within the Digital Museum”, (2010) Science, Technology and Human Values, 35 (2010): 735-68. [online library] Standis, Constatine. ”An Honest Display of Fakery: Replicas and the Role of Museums”.(2016) Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements, Vol. 79 Philosophy and Museums: Essays in the Philosophy of Museums, pp.241-259. The Royal Institute of Philosophy and the contributors 2016. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/royal-institute-of-ph ilosophy-supplements/article/an-honest-dis%20play-of-fakery -replicas-and-the-role-of-museums/1ACC673D0C49BD1B7B0 784FEC33464F1#. Accessed 23/05/2021. Stern, Corey “CUBI:A User Experience Model for Project Success”(2014) Ux Magazine ,ux.mag 1314(2014) www.uxmag.com accessed 24/06/2021 Stumpfel, Jessi. et al ,”Digital Reunification of the Parthenon and its Sculptures” (2003) 4th International symposium on Virtual Reality ,Archaeology and Intelligent Cultural Heritage (VAST) www.citeserx.ist.psu.edu accessed 24/08/2021 Tamen.Miguel “Friends of Interpretable Objects”. (2001) Harvard university Press Print Tavernaro-Haidarian, Leyla”Why Efforts to Decolonise can Deepen Coloniality and What Ubuntu can do to Help”(2019) Critical Arts 32(5-6)(2018) 104-118. www.tandfonline.com University of Johannesburg,S.A. accessed 29/07/2021 Tayiana, Chao, et al, “Kenya: The Mau-mau Emergency” (2020) Projects. www.museumo ritishcolonialism.org accessed 05/08/2021. Tayiana, Chao. “The Museum of British Colonialism” (2021) About www.museumo ritishcolonialism.org accessed 26/08/2021 The British Museum Trustees , “The Parthenon Sculptures” (2021) The Trustees Statement https://www.britishmuseum.org/about-us/british-museum-story/objec ts-news/parthenon-sculptures/parthenon-sculptures-trustees. www.britishmuseum.org accessed 19/08/2021 The National Museum of Australia ,”Songlines: Tracking the Seven Sisters” (2012) University of New England www.nma.gov.au accessed 24/08/2021 Thompson, Charles John Samuel. “The Evolution and Development of Surgical Instruments” (1937) The British Journal of Surgery 25(97) www.academic.oup.com accessed 28/08/2021 Tuck, Eve et al. ”Decolonization is Not a Metaphor”.(2012) Decolonization:Indigeneity,Education & Society 1(1) 1-40 pp19 Creative commons www.clas.osu.edu accessed 19/08/2021 Turnbull, Paul, and Michael Pickering, eds. The Long Way Home: The Meaning and Values of Repatriation: Berghahn, 2010. Tutu, Desmond,No Future Without Forgiveness (1999) Newyork Random House Print. Smithsonian Digitization Program Office. ‘Sculpin Hat’ (2019) Explorer .https://3d.si.edu/explorer/kiks-ádi-sculpin-hat-restoration. Accessed 09/06/2021. Stichting Nationaal-Troopeen Museum, ‘Return of Cultural Objects: Principles and Process National Museum van Sericulture’(2019) Cultural Objects accessed 17/06/2021 https://www.volkenkunde.nl/sites/default/files/2019-05/Claims %20for%20Return%20of%20Cultural%20Objects%20NMVW%20 Principles%20and%20Process.pdf Udvardy, Monica. et al “The Transatlantic Trade in African Ancestors. Mijikenda Memorial Statues (Vigango) and the Ethics of Collecting and Curating Non-Western Cultural Property” (2003). American Anthropologist 105 (3):566-580 www.archeologicalethics.org www.jstor.org/stable/3566906 accessed 26/07/2021 UNESCO-“Fundamental principles of digitization of documentary heritage” (2021) UNESCO http://www.unesco.org accessed 26/06/2021 UNESCO,IFLA and ICA,(2002) ‘Guidelines for Digitization Projects: for Collections and Holdings in the Public domain, particularly those held in Libraries and archives.’ UNESCO www.archive.ifla.org/VII/s19/pubs/digit-guide.pdf University of Essex- Decolonising the Curriculum(2021) https://library.essex.ac.uk/edi/whatisdecolonisation. Accessed 28/04/2021 Vermeylen, S,. and J. Pilcher, “Let the Objects Speak: Online Museums and Indigenous Cultural Heritage”, International Journal of Intangible Heritage, 4 (2009): 60-78. [online library] Want, Roy. et al. “Bridging Physical and Virtual Worlds with Electronic Tags.” (1999) Xerox PARC report ,Submitted to CHI 99. CHI '99: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/302979.303111 accessed 18/04/2021 wa Thiong’o, Ngūgì, Decolonising the Mind the Politics of Language in African Literature (1981)pp.03.Studies in African Literature.Heinemann,Portsmouth.Print. Wellner, Pierre. “Interacting with Paper on the Digital Desk .”Communications of ACM (1993) ACM digital library https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/159544.159630 accessed 17/04/2021 Western David, ‘In the Dust of Kilimanjaro’. (1997) Island press/Shearwater books Washington DC. print Witcomb, Andrea. “Understanding the role of affect in producing a critical pedagogy for history museums.” Museum Management and Curatorship. 28:3 255-271.www.researchgate.net accessed 17/04/2021 Wikipedia-(2021) ‘Repatriation’ accessed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repatriation (2013): 28/05/2021 . Willsher, Kim, ‘We Want Our Riches Back-The African Activist taking treasures from Europe’s Museums’.(2021) Culture,Lifestyle. www.theguardian.com. Accessed 25/07/2021 . The Guardian. London . Wintle,C, ‘Decolonizing the Smithsonian: Museums as Microcosms of Political Encounter’, The American Historical Review, Volume 121, Issue 5, December 2016, Pages 1492–1520, https://doi.org/10.1093/ahr/121.5.1492 Woldeyes, Yirga Gelaw,”Repatriation:Why Western Museums should return African Artefacts”.(2019) Arts +Culture. The conversation. www.theconversation.com Accessed 03/07/2021 Wood, Gillen D’Arcy. “The Virtual Elgin Marbles”. Paper presented at the American Comparative Literature Association Annual Conference, Boulder ,Colorado (2001) April 20-22 print. Yehuda Karley, New Heritage :’New Media and Cultural Heritage’, Heritage studies, Routledge ,London 2008 Virtual Repatriation: It Is Neither Virtual nor Repatriation https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4614-6077-0_1 3 Younan, Sarah.,”Towards a Digital Dream Space: How Can the Use of Digital 3D scanning,Editing ,and Print Technologies Foster New Forms of Creative Engagement with Museum Artefacts”? (2015) M.A.Thesis .Cardiff Metropolitan University. Cardiff School of Art and Design. www.repository.cardiffmet.ac.uk accessed 17/08/2021 Yuan, Haidan. et al ,”The Traditional Medicine and Modern Medicine from Natural Products” (2016) Molecules 21 (559) MDPI, College of Pharmacy,Yanbian University,China. www.mdpi.com/journal/molecules accessed 28/08/2021 Zanina, Anna. “3D Models of Buildings of the Future for use in Construction Printing” (2021) E3S Web Conferences 2021.Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University,Russia www.e3s-conferences.org accessed 08/09/2021 APPENDIX ONE Research questions: The two main players to be engaged with are the Communities of origin versus The Institutions both public and private housing the contested artefacts. QUESTIONNAIRES’ TEMPLATE FOR MUSEUMS AND GALLERIES 1. . Are curators aware of the use of replicas to accelerate Repatriation/Restitution by allowing 3D copies to replace existing objects on glass displays? 2. What advantages or disadvantages are there in using replicas as opposed to original artefacts will the visitors feel cheated or excited to know that the originals have been returned to communities of origin? 3. Do you put the same value on replicas made through 3D printing for exhibitions/Displays as opposed to the originals? 4. Would you make 3D copies and retain the originals or give ,the originals to Communities of practice and remain with 3D replicas? 5. Is decolonisation, anti-colonialism and the outright distancing museum from neo-colonialism by using technology the way forward? 6. Is the use of other innovative technology like V.R. (Virtual Reality) ,Holograms and the use of NFT’s (Non-Fungible Tokens) to enable Risk free Intellectual property tracking a way forward for Museums? 7.Can your institute invest in 3D technology i.e. Engage a third-party entity, Purchase equipment or train staff? Why should You? Why Not? 8. Can you sell in your gi shop, enlarged or miniaturised 3D copies of artefacts currently held or being exhibited in the museum? 9. Should museums be a hub for well-being and healing; especially for Alzheimer’s/Dementia patient, those visually impaired individuals who otherwise would not be able to enjoy the museum experience and communities of Practices’ access to artefacts unless technologies like 3D printing is readily available? FOR COMMUNITIES OF ORIGIN 1. How do you feel about collecting all the Vigango in a central place first in America/Europe or Asia and then distribute to communities of Origin later? Or Can we collect All the Vigango into a central location in the Diaspora or should we ship them directly to Mombasa? 2. Should All the Vigango be shipped directly to Kenya and then distributed regardless of the G.O.K. stance? 3. Should Vigango be made available to all or given back to the families/clans? 4. Should we build a resting place for those not claimed or identified? 5. How do you value replicas made through 3D in exchange of the original( Kigango) object? 6. Can All the Vigango be 3D printed for future generations to see and the originals le to decompose naturally as that was the initial purpose? Can the Spirit of the “Koma APPENDIX TWO Participant i) Communities of Practice Mijikenda in Kenya 1. Over the past few years, there has been a movement across Europe and the USA to return such artefacts/vigango to their communities of origin. However, what I have observed is that there is no systematic way in which such is done. For instance, I am aware of a museum in the USA which gave the artefacts to the national museums of Kenya in 2019. I therefore welcome the idea of a central place in the diaspora where the artefacts can be collected then returned to their communities of origin. However, I'd like to suggest that the process should be all-inclusive, one that involves all stakeholders: from community representatives, local authorities, etc. 2. The government of Kenya is an important player in the process. It does not serve any benefit to exclude the government. Therefore, there is need to have shared objectivity between the government and all stakeholders (including the communities of origin), with the end goal being to return the artefacts to their owners. 3. Yes. They should be returned to the families and clans. I do not see the purpose which they serve in overseas museums except to fulfil the "wow" factor. Meanwhile, those artefacts are of both strong cultural and social/religious significance to their communities of origin. 4. Generally, the cultural consensus of all communities across the world is to have the dead buried in respect and dignity. Whether the dead have been identified or not should not be an issue. For instance, in the UK, unidentified soldiers who died in the 1st and 2nd world wars were given decent burials. The same should apply in this situation. 5. I can't reject the impact of the modern technology in our lives today. However, I am of the opinion that 3D replicas should be the ones to remain in the overseas museums where they can serve purposes like research. If the original artefacts exist, it is only fair to have them returned to their rightful communities. 6. The first step should be the effort to preserve them in their original form for as long as possible. We have seen artefacts from ancient Egypt survive to date. However, should preservation be impossible in certain instances, then the 3D replicas are a welcome alternative to reproduce the originals and store them for future generations. 7. No. I believe an alteration of the artefacts strips them of the powers that their original communities attribute them to. However, this should be explained in finer details by the elders. I do not claim expertise, whatsoever. Participant ii)Academic based in the U.S.A. My personal sense is that this would depend largely on the funds and administrative structures that would be available to support the return of vigango to Kenya. If they were to be collected together in a location outside Kenya, it would be necessary to locate a respected and well financed institution to hold the vigango, to which the institutions and/or individuals who would wish to return vigango would feel comfortable handing them over. Based on the experience of the three vigango returns so far [two that succeeded and one that seems to have failed] my sense is that in working on their return to Kenya, vigango would need to be sent to an official internationally recognized institution – and at present that would ONLY be the National Museums of Kenya and their headquarters in Nairobi. Even considering something like Kilifi County government as a possible institution to receive them would raise all kinds of issues.  2. Should All the Vigango be shipped directly to Kenya and then distributed regardless of the G.O.K. stance? Again – who would pay for this? And would people/institutions holding vigango be comfortable trying to return them with no reference to NMK/GOK?  3. Should Vigango be made available to all or given back to the families/clans? If some of them can be reliably identified by a particular family/clan that is willing and able to take them back, this would be the ideal solution – though we need to look very carefully at the experience at Chalani to see how this might best be handled. My own sense after so many more years have passed is that many of them will not be easily identified and even the process of identification may give rise to local conflicts.  4. Should we build a resting place for those not claimed or identified?  This would be a sensible solution though there will be issues about WHO is to do this – and above all, who is to pay for its construction and maintenance. It should be recognized that such a place would never be a major source of income – most museums and cultural sites are NOT money spinners, even in the pre-covid era. 5. How do you value replicas made through 3D in exchange of the original ( Kigango) object? These items could have some value, possibly so that the replicas could be left in Europe / North America; if the institutions or individuals that currently hold the vigango wanted to arrange and pay for this, before the originals were returned to Kenya. It could be a way for institutions and individuals to feel more willing to return the originals to Kenya if they had 3D replicas to retain.  6. Can All the Vigango be 3D printed for future generations to see and the originals left to decompose naturally as that was the initial purpose? The ones returned to families could be left to decompose – but in a central place I assume they might be under some kind of roof and maybe would be treated with chemicals to prevent attack by termites etc. So they would decompose much more slowly. Under the care of NMK, the NMK is probably required to provide adequate care / conservation / preservation of the objects in its collections.  7. Can the Spirit of the “Koma” be the same in a 3D print? As a non-Mijikenda, I am not qualified to answer this – though I would also question whether after a Kigango has been uprooted, stolen, sold, transported thousands of miles, stored in a gallery or museum … even before a 3D print were to be made, would the spirit of the koma have been retained? A FINAL POINT – ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE VIGANGO IS GOING TO COST MONEY – EVEN IF SOME OF THEM WERE EVENTUALLY IN A SITE WHERE PEOPLE WOULD PAY TO SEE THEM, THIS WILL NEVER BE A PROFIT-MAKING ENTERPRISE – EXPERIENCE AT THE CULTURAL TOURISM SITES AT RABAI AND KAYA KINONDO HAS SHOWN THIS. FOREIGN TOURISTS WHO CAN BE CHARGED A DOLLAR ADMISSION FEE WERE FEW [EVEN BEFORE THE PANDEMIC] AND THE KENYAN YOUTH AND STUDENTS [RANGING FROM PRIMARY TO UNIVERSITY LEVEL] WHO MAY COME ON FIELD TRIPS CAN ONLY AFFORD MINIMAL CHARGES. Participant iii) Academic based in U.S.A. . Have you heard of 3D replicas being produced to stand in on displays for objects that have been repatriated ? YES 2. What advantages or disadvantages are there in using replicas as opposed to original artefacts in museum displays, in your opinion? Advantages: 1. It gives the public and interested professionals an opportunity to experience the object without having to travel to the location of the original object. This, in turn, is important because the onlooker can experience the object in all its 3D format from all sides, size, and in relation to the human looking at it. 2. It may also stand in for the original in cases where exposure of the original may harm it, e.g., by light or climatic conditions (humidity or lack thereof, etc), or potential wear and tear of an object that is part of a travelling exhibit. For example, excellent, cast reproductions of skulls of ancient human ancestors/ancestresses have been used for decades in classrooms to teach human evolution. 3. If it is an object with many layers, such as a palimpsest, then 3D replicas of each layer can make each layer more visible to the onlooker or researcher. 4. If the object in question is one for which there can be an advantage in the public holding it in their own hands, or manipulating or using the object (such as tools), and if the 3D replica is an exact copy, both in terms of material, size and weight, then the 3D replica can be used for this purpose without any damage or wear and tear to the original object. 5. 3D replicas, or versions thereof, have already been used in museums or other scientific venues for a long time. For example, flintknappers made projectile points to look exactly like those created by Native Americans long ago, and children visiting museums are allowed to handle the former in order to get a feel for the object at no risk of damage to the original. How is this different from a 3D replica? Or, when expert ceramicists create pieces of pottery to “fill in” missing pieces of ancient Greek or Roman vases to complete them around the ancient potsherds that have been unearthed, isn’t this a form of creating a 3D replica? Hence, how exactly is a 3D replica defined (food for thought!)? Disadvantages: 1. I am not familiar with the state of the art of making 3-D replicas today, so there may be some loss of detail or accuracy in the process of making the replica, including in the material used to make the replica. In that case, then obviously the viewer is not seeing or experiencing the same object as that of the original. 2. Even if what appears to be an exact replica can be made, humans are drawn to the “authentic,” and will always prefer the original to the replica, if exhibiting the original is possible. For example, no matter how well a flintknapper can reproduce a projectile point made by native Americans 6,000 years ago, a person will always experience a greater sense of wonder if holding the original in their hands than by holding the 3D replica. Nonetheless, depending on the state of the art of making 3D replicas, it may be a viable and valuable alternative to displaying original objects, where there are sound reasons for not displaying the original. 3. The 3D replica is not made in the same cultural context as the original. For example, vigango are made by carvers from the Gohu society only, through a very specific ritual process, for a specific, religious or suprahuman purpose. Creating a 3D replica of a kigango is done for an entirely different purpose, in an entirely different setting, through an entirely different process. Hence, the context, process and purpose of creating vigango is lost in the making of a 3D replica of it. 3. Do you put the same value on replicas made through 3D printing for exhibitions/Displays as opposed to the originals? If not, why not? I repeat my answers from Question 2 above: 1. Even if what appears to be an exact replica can be made, humans are drawn to the “authentic,” and will always prefer the original to the replica, if exhibiting the original is possible. For example, no matter how well a flintknapper can reproduce a projectile point made by native Americans 6,000 years ago, a person will always experience a greater sense of wonder if holding the original in their hands than by holding the 3D replica. Nonetheless, depending on the state of the art of making 3D replicas, it may be a viable and valuable alternative to displaying original objects, where there are sound reasons for not displaying the original. 2. The 3D replica is not made in the same cultural context as the original. For example, vigango are made by carvers from the Gohu society only, through a very specific ritual process, for a specific, religious or suprahuman purpose. Creating a 3D replica of a kigango is done for an entirely different purpose, in an entirely different setting, through an entirely different process. Hence, the context, process and purpose of creating vigango is lost in the making of a 3D replica of it. And here I add a third response: 3. When does a 3D replica merge with the original? See discussion of recreating a pot from ancient potsherds above, but also, here is another example: Guns, revolvers and pistols are traditionally made of metal – that is part of the definition of such weapons. But today, they can be made through 3D imaging technology out of plastic and they work just like the traditional ones. So here is an example of the 3D replica merging with the original in terms of the use, process of creation and context of the object. Has the 3D replica now become the original? 4. In general, would your preference be to make 3D copies and retain the originals or give the originals to Communities of origin and retain the 3D replicas in the museum? I am in favor of asking the Communities of origin whether they want the original(s) returned to them, or whether they want them retained in the museum where they are now, or whether they want them somewhere else. The fate of the 3D replica(s) follows from this, i.e., depends on their response. This is based on knowledge about what has happened with the implementation of NAGPRA (Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act) here in the USA. Nagpra requires that museums inform native American groups about the religious artifacts and human remains that U.S. museums have in their collections. Native American groups may then decide to take those objects, leave them in the museum in question, borrow them for specific religious events, etc. The point is that it is the Native Americans who decide what to do with the religious artifacts and human remains. Counter to expectation, many Native American groups have opted to leave such objects in museums. They have done so because they do not feel they have the state of the art facilities in their own communities to house the objects, and want them cared for until such time as they do. Often, they will come to the museum and “check out” the artifact in order to use it in a religious ritual, returning it to the museum afterwards for safe-keeping. Human remains are another matter – in the majority of cases, they will take the remains and bury them in a private ceremony. Since NAGPRA became law in 1990, the processes described above have had the unintended consequence of improving museum/native American community relations. 5. Do you think that technology can support decolonisation, anti-colonialism and the distancing of the museum from neo-colonialism? Of course it can. For example, communications technology such as the mobile phone and the internet has allowed indigenous peoples around the world to communicate with one another instantly, and hence to learn from one another successful strategies for improving their lives. It also allows indigenous communities directly to reach out to people in the global North or to various constituencies in their own countries to communicate about their conditions and their plights, and to seek help and support, both financial and non-financial. With respect to the specific examples of how technology can improve museums, zoom and skype capabilities allow for international conferences on any number of topics without ever leaving one’s own home or office. This is a way of increasing participation between the global North and South without expensive travel and lodging fees. Discussions about decolonisation, anti-colonialism and the distancing of the museum from neo-colonialism can in this way be had over the internet to great advantage. Digital access to collections via museum websites greatly increase access to museum collections. There are countless ways that technology can serve in the interest of decolonization! 5. Could the use of other innovative technology like V.R. (Virtual Reality) ,Holograms and the use of NFT’s (Non Fungible Tokens, to enable Risk free Intellectual property tracking) be useful for museums in other ways too? Yes. Holograms are already being used in Holocaust museums in the USA. They are a little creepy, but provide an immediacy for the viewer/participant that no other currently available technological medium can provide. No doubt virtual reality and NFTs could be adapted for use in similar ways. 6. Does your institution invest in 3D technology (ie. by engaging third-party specialists, purchasing equipment or training staff)? Do you think it should? Why? 7. Do you sell in your gift shop, enlarged or miniaturised 3D copies of artefacts currently held or being exhibited in the museum? Would this be feasible? This question is not relevant to me as I am not part of a museum, but I have certainly seen replicas of artifacts on sale in gift shops, although they are usually cheap knockoffs made in China. Participant iv) Academic based in U.K. Questions for Curators in MUSEUMS AND GALLERIES 1. . Have you heard of 3D replicas being produced to stand in on displays for objects that have been repatriated ? Yes, I have heard of examples of replicas or originals being used for repatriation, including companies who develop replicas from 3D scan of the originals. 2. What advantages or disadvantages are there in using replicas as opposed to original artefacts in museum displays, in your opinion? Advantages include the ability to allow users to touch or handle artefacts without the risk of damaging them, as well as adapt them to the needs of users. Disadvantages might be visitors of museums not feeling a full connection with the object due to its missing ‘aura’ if not seeing he original one. 3. Do you put the same value on replicas made through 3D printing for exhibitions/Displays as opposed to the originals? If not, why not? Yes, there is some value on replicas in particular if they have been carefully made to support the interpretation of the originals and good attention has been paid on their development, including matching the original properties of the original as well as addressing user needs for engagement. 4. In general, would your preference be to make 3D copies and retain the originals or give the originals to Communities of origin and retain the 3D replicas in the museum? No preference. At the core of this argument I believe that there is great potential on exploring 3D technologies including digital and physical replicas. The technology is there and currently is going through a “negotiation” phase as far as it concerns the range of its application and the establishment of best practices for heritage management and interpretation purposes. 5. Do you think that technology can support decolonisation, anti-colonialism and the distancing of the museum from neo-colonialism? Technology can support communication, sharing of information and access which is more multi-sensorial and engaging when it is not possible to have access to the authentic and fragile artefact. As such, they can support multiple purposes including conversations and efforts from organisations including decolonising museums (both in terms of knowledge and artefacts) as well as finding new paths for the museum and its role in a global contemporary society. Some of the ways in which technologies can offer support include: · Enabling participation · Exploring different types of dialogue with communities rather than one authoritative voice · Opening access to information, while examining copyright, ethics and other topics related to representation and ownership 6. Could the use of other innovative technology like V.R. (Virtual Reality) ,Holograms and the use of NFT’s (Non Fungible Tokens, to enable Risk free Intellectual property tracking) be useful for museums in other ways too? Yes, these technologies can provide different type of access while still keeping a link to the knowledge and care which is part of the custodianship role of a museum. This will differentiate objects which are “sanctioned” by an organisation to other potential replicas made for other type of uses. 7. Does your institution invest in 3D technology (ie. by engaging third-party specialists, purchasing equipment or training staff)? Do you think it should? Why? As I am an academic, we develop expertise in 3D technology as we believe in its potential for further enhancing preservation and access efforts of heritage collections. 8. Do you sell in your gift shop, enlarged or miniaturised 3D copies of artefacts currently held or being exhibited in your Institution? Not Applicable Participant v-Academic based in U.K. Questions for Curators in MUSEUMS AND GALLERIES 1. . Have you heard of 3D replicas being produced to stand in on displays for objects that have been repatriated ? Please have a look at the following indicative cases, where replicas have been used in repatriation efforts. More examples emerge currently, and the use of 3D replicas might fulfil different purposes than just displaying the object in a closed case. https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/mar/article/view/2173/456 7 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S12962074173049 09 https://hyperallergic.com/274635/artists-covertly-scan-bust-of-nefertiti-an d-release-the-data-for-free-online/ 2. What advantages or disadvantages are there in using replicas as opposed to original artefacts in museum displays, in your opinion? The advantages are related to the power of replicas as means to enhance interpretation (see response in the following question), while enabling audiences to use more than sight when experiencing a museum object. Replicas can be also customised for children, people with impairment and so forth to make cultural heritage accessible. There is certainly scepticism around the “authenticity” of replicas, but replicas do not “compete” with the originals, but rather support their interpretation and help to narrate a story. 3. Do you put the same value on replicas made through 3D printing for exhibitions/Displays as opposed to the originals? If not, why not? Replicas do not exist to substitute original artefacts, but rather to enhance their interpretation. Hence, they are powerful means which add value to the cultural heritage experience and have the power to contribute to “authentic” multisensorial experiences that are close to people’s hearts. 4. In general, would your preference be to make 3D copies and retain the originals or give the originals to Communities of origin and retain the 3D replicas in the museum? I personally believe that there is not one solution that fits all and that there should be a case by case examination. There are communities who prefer original artefacts and others that do not focus on “who keeps the original” as they emphasize the knowledge, meaning or spiritual aspect that an object encompasses. 5. Do you think that technology can support decolonisation, anti-colonialism and the distancing of the museum from neo-colonialism? 3D technologies have a lot to offer with respect to these topical issues. At the same time, how technologies can best be deployed for such purposes is an open field of exploration. The key is to keep an open mind, respect all voices and work towards the benefit of all. 6. Could the use of other innovative technology like V.R. (Virtual Reality) ,Holograms and the use of NFT’s (Non Fungible Tokens, to enable Risk free Intellectual property tracking) be useful for museums in other ways too? The use of 3D technologies is beneficial for heritage institutions for a variety of purposes ranging from conservation and restoration, to exhibition planning, loans, interpretation and more. As far as it concerns NFTs, while the purpose of such technology and efforts is understood, it might be also perceived as coming in contrast to the spirit and purpose of replicating 3D artefacts through digital fabrication technologies. The expansion of digital fabrication (and particularly 3D printing) technologies is based upon the desire to enable people to access the manufacturing chain as well as heritage artefacts. This is an act of democratisation which might be endangered if we focus on NFTs, watermarking etc for heritage objects. Recent efforts work on the opposite direction of releasing content under creative commons public domain dedication. On the other hand, and under the current difficult financial circumstances in the heritage domain, it is understood that heritage stakeholders might be seeking ways to monetise through digital/replicated heritage offerings and indeed some alternative options might be found. 7. Does your institution invest in 3D technology (ie. by engaging third-party specialists, purchasing equipment or training staff)? Do you think it should? Why? Speaking as a researcher who has collaborated with institutions in projects that involve 3D technology, I would say that most collaborations have happened under the research remit or scope. Lack of funding is a major issue in the heritage domain, hence often there are no means to digitise in 3D or use 3D resources for a variety of purposes, from dissemination of heritage content, to educational interactive activities and more. 8. Do you sell in your gift shop, enlarged or miniaturised 3D copies of artefacts currently held or being exhibited in the museum? Would this be feasible? N/A in my case, as I am not a museum curator. There are though museums in the UK selling replicas in their gift shop, such as the British Museum and the Natural History Museum. Participant vi) Curator based in U.K. 1. . Have you heard of 3D replicas being produced to stand in on displays for objects that have been repatriated ? Only in discussion – not in practice. 2. What advantages or disadvantages are there in using replicas as opposed to original artefacts in museum displays, in your opinion? There are access benefits, as replicas can be touched / handled in ways difficult with ‘original’ historical objects, which might be fragile. As a curator I feel there is something important and special about unique objects, particularly how they can connect us to people distant in space and time. There’s something about holding a historic textile, for example, and seeing the signs of wear created by someone who wore the garment more than a hundred years ago, that enables a sense of human connection which I think would be difficult to replicate. However, I don’t know whether museum publics have the same concern with accessing ‘original’ ‘historic’ ‘unique’ objects, or whether many museum visitors would be happy to see replicas. I would be interested to know whether research has been undertaken on this, and what its findings were. 3. Do you put the same value on replicas made through 3D printing for exhibitions/Displays as opposed to the originals? If not, why not? I’ve not worked with replicas / 3D prints to date. 4. In general, would your preference be to make 3D copies and retain the originals or give the originals to Communities of origin and retain the 3D replicas in the museum? Personally, after returning original objects to communities of origin, I would rather find means of commissioning new creative work by artists/artisans in that community, to ensure the community is still represented in the UK museum collection, but on their own terms. I’m sceptical about the benefits of creating replicas and in many cases, where the items which were repatriated were culturally sensitive, it is unlikely to be appropriate to create replicas. Once material has been requested/identified for potential repatriation, any further research to be undertaken on it (for example digital scanning) could only be undertaken with the agreement of the claimant community. 5. Do you think that technology can support decolonisation, anti-colonialism and the distancing of the museum from neo-colonialism? Yes – I’m interested in the potential of emerging digital curation tools, for example Mukurtu (Home - Mukurtu CMS), a digital platform which allows communities to manage and share their cultural heritage. Also – initiatives like Local Contexts (Local Contexts – Grounding Indigenous Rights) which enable non-Indigenous cultural institutions like museums and archives to flag up material which may be of interest to Indigenous researchers and communities, as well as enable these communities to assert their sovereignty over materials held in non-Indigenous collections. my colleagues who work with the (vast) global manuscript collection also talk about the benefits of Text Encoding Initiative (Projects Using the TEI – TEI: Text Encoding Initiative (tei-c.org)) which enables catalogue information relating to non-English language manuscripts to be entered and made searchable in the original language (be it Sanskrit, Burmese or Xhosa). These digital tools seem to me to offer more potential than creating replicas, as they facilitate the fuller sharing of collections information. 6. Could the use of other innovative technology like V.R. (Virtual Reality) ,Holograms and the use of NFT’s (Non Fungible Tokens, to enable Risk free Intellectual property tracking) be useful for museums in other ways too? Sorry Tony – I don’t know enough about these forms of technology to be able to comment. 7. Does your institution invest in 3D technology (ie. by engaging third-party specialists, purchasing equipment or training staff)? Do you think it should? Why? 3D scanning has been used to undertake research on human remains (3D scanning helps scientists unwrap the secrets of ancient mummies (dailydot.com)). I am working with WC staff on revisions to its human remains policy and would be arguing for a more sensitive and collaborative approach to this kind of research in the future. 8. Do you sell in your gift shop, enlarged or miniaturised 3D copies of artefacts currently held or being exhibited in the museum? Would this be feasible? Post-Covid (☹). I don’t know whether they sold 3D replicas but think it unlikely. I would definitely warn them against making copies / replicas of culturally sensitive material as this would potentially be an infringement of cultural / intellectual property right Participant vii) Curator based in U.K. 1 : No 2 : Advantage : protection of the original .. Disavantage losing the power of the real object . 3 : Absolutelty not : the difference of value is called : " Authenticity" 4 : It's a question of ethic and honesty you MUST give back the original to the communitie of origin and keep the replica . 5 : Yes 6 : Yes 7 : Not in my knowledge at this moment . 3D printing is a good solution for producing replicas but not the onlu one and not the better depanding of the case 8 : a) not actually b) not a good idea for us Participant viii) Diaspora Mijikenda Questionnaire for COMMUNITIES OF ORIGIN 1. How do you feel about collecting all the Vigango in a central place first in America/Europe or Asia and then distributing them to communities of Origin later? Or Can we collect All the Vigango into a central location in the Diaspora or should we ship them directly to Mombasa? I believe that the Vigango should be shipped directly to Mombasa where they will be put safely in a community centre, some kind of a Vigango Resting place that will be the trustees of the Vigango on behalf of the community. This trusteeship will of course be handled by a legally registered entity, a trust to be specific. 2. Should All the Vigango be shipped directly to Kenya and then distributed regardless of the G.O.K. stance? Indeed, I believe that these Vigango should be shipped directly to Kenya and distributed to the respective families and those that could not be placed with their families for reasons of identification difficulties be kept safe at the trust centre, i.e the Vigango Resting place. The role of the G.O.K I believe should be limited in the whole exercise due to the excesses of its red-tape and its lackadaisical record in the past when called to act in the repatriation of these Vigango. 3. Should Vigango be made available to all or given back to the families/clans? Well, the Vigango that can be identified by the particular families they were taken from should be returned to those homesteads. However, there are those that will not be able to be properly identified with any families, these ones should be left under the care of the trust. 4. Should we build a resting place for those not claimed or identified? A Vigango resting place is quite in order for those Vigango that will not be claimed or properly identified. A trust can be tasked with taking care of these ones. 5. How do you value replicas made through 3D in exchange of the original( Kigango) object? My view of the replicas is that they play the role of representing what the Vigango look like to those quarters who have no proper access to a real Kigango. So quite naturally they are second to the original Vigango. 6. Can All the Vigango be 3D printed for future generations to see and the originals left to decompose naturally as that was the initial purpose? All the available Vigangos can be 3D for the sake of circulation and accessibility to many audiences in this digital age. Nonetheless, this is not to mean that the originals should be left to decompose. The originals should be preserved using available technology and designed laboratories/safes. 7. Can the Spirit of the “Koma” be the same in a 3D print? In my view I don’t think the spirit of “koma” can retain in a 3D print or be rendered in that particular form. Secondly, the purpose of a 3D print I believe is radically different from that of a Kigango that is curved and decorated using high skill and commissioned through an elaborate sacred ritual. Participant ix)Curator based in Kenya Questions for Curators in MUSEUMS AND GALLERIES 1. . Have you heard of 3D replicas being produced to stand in on displays for objects that have been repatriated? A: Yes, especially for sensitive/sacred or delicate objects 2. What advantages or disadvantages are there in using replicas as opposed to original artefacts in museum displays, in your opinion? Advantage: Replicas are very important especially when dealing with sensitive/delicate/highly important collections or artefacts of national importance as a measure of protection in the event of calamities such as theft, mishandling or fire outbreaks as these are collections of a kind whose replacements can never be got. An example is that of the Turkana Boy (Nariokotome Boy) human skeleton believed to have lived about 1.6 million years ago. The fossil is very significant as it allowed scientists to make ground breaking discoveries about the Homo Erectus species. What is on display is the replica. Interactive museum programmes are also better carried out with replicas as a measure of protection to the originals Disadvantage: The real feel of the artefact may not be achieved by the replica (especially on the material) 3. Do you put the same value on replicas made through 3D printing for exhibitions/Displays as opposed to the originals? If not, why not? A: Not quite, because a similar replica can be made in the event that the older breaks or gets lost. A replacement to the original may however not be found 4. In general, would your preference be to make 3D copies and retain the originals or give the originals to Communities of origin and retain the 3D replicas in the museum? This depends on the type of artefact and the circumstances of acquisition. There are those that are very sensitive and significant to the communities of origin that can only be taken back especially if they were unjustly acquired. However, there are some that are of national importance that would be best stored/kept at the museums for the benefit of the community and country as a whole. In this case, replicas could be given to the communities. 5. Do you think that technology can support decolonisation, anti-colonialism and the distancing of the museum from neo-colonialism? Yes 6. Could the use of other innovative technology like V.R. (Virtual Reality) ,Holograms and the use of NFT’s (Non Fungible Tokens, to enable Risk free Intellectual property tracking) be useful for museums in other ways too? Unfortunately I’m not quite conversant with these. 7. Does your institution invest in 3D technology (ie. by engaging third-party specialists, purchasing equipment or training staff)? Do you think it should? Why? Yes it does though the one I’m most aware of is the use of casting technology 8. Do you sell in your gift shop, enlarged or miniaturised 3D copies of artefacts currently held or being exhibited in the museum? Would this be feasible? No we do not. I guess this can only be possible on some collections, especially the not so sacred/sensitive ones and not all. Participant x) Curator based in U.K. 1. Have you heard of 3D replicas being produced to stand in on displays for objects that have been repatriated ? No I haven’t heard of this. 2. What advantages or disadvantages are there in using replicas as opposed to original artefacts in museum displays, in your opinion? The advantages and disadvantages would depend on exactly what aspects of an object you are hoping to provide context/interpretation/access to. Some advantages might be that a replica can provide access to objects that cannot be displayed otherwise by providing a physical ‘presence’ in a display case to help provide context along with other media/context material, and a replica could allow an object type/shape to be explored through touch. The disadvantages would be that a replica has a limited range of characteristics, that are not equal to a real object. For example a replica might give the audience an idea of the size/shape/texture and general ‘look’ of an object but it cannot in anyway stand in for or act as an object. The beauty of an object is that it is unique, and is an individual (in the way that a person is an individual), and I do not think a replica can provide you with the ‘essence’ of an object or the nuances, complexities and uniqueness of an object. But it could play a part in providing some information and a form of access to the object/type of object. 3. 3. Do you put the same value on replicas made through 3D printing for exhibitions/Displays as opposed to the originals? If not, why not? The short answer would be no, because the replica is not unique, and the object is, and no material that we create for or use for displays will have the same value as the objects being displayed. Having said that this a more complex issue – I guess it comes down to if the object is ‘accessioned’ or not, if it is formally accepted into the collection. For example, as most museums do, we have some ‘moulds’ of original objects, that have been accessioned and become part of the collection (we do not have the original objects,) and these are seen as and treated as ‘objects’ as they are accessioned. We are debating whether to keep some of these or dispose of them, and debating their value. So I would say the value is about uniqueness, ie.if a replica was made as a one of it might become over time a valued object, but they would not have the same value as a matter of course. 4. In general, would your preference be to make 3D copies and retain the originals or give the originals to Communities of origin and retain the 3D replicas in the museum? Speaking generally about repatriation my preference is that museum objects are returned to communities of origin, if this is the wish of a community of origin. I think the idea of a museum making and retaining 3D replicas of objects that are returned to a community of origin is an interesting idea, but the replica would in no way serve as the object or replace the object, but replacing the object is not an important element of the repatriation process. The object is unique, and can and only should be situated in one place, but I like the idea of the museum retaining a ‘feel’ of an object the ‘ghost’ of an object, through a replica, that once lived in the collection and has now returned to it's place and people of origin. 5. Do you think that technology can support decolonisation, anti-colonialism and the distancing of the museum from neo-colonialism? Yes I do think that technology can support this de-colonial work, in terms of access and dissemination of objects and knowledge, and I think that we should harness and embrace new technologies and practices that enable this work to happen. 6. Could the use of other innovative technology like V.R. (Virtual Reality) ,Holograms and the use of NFT’s (Non Fungible Tokens, to enable Risk free Intellectual property tracking) be useful for museums in other ways too? Yes definitely, I have seen interesting use of holograms to interpret objects from the Sudan, where viewing holograms of people using and interacting with objects, helped to bring the objects to life, and see how objects are used by and important to people and communities. 7. Does your institution invest in 3D technology (ie. by engaging third-party specialists, purchasing equipment or training staff)? Do you think it should? Why? No they do not, but we have worked with local universities to try this technology out on museum objects[….]. is limited in terms of technology due to lack of funding, resources and staff with specialist knowledge and this is a problem! Yes maybe it would be good to invest in 3D technology for access purposes, but in terms of the museums digital needs I do not think this is a priority, I think we have more pressing and basic access needs that need addressing, i.e. getting our collections online and making sure we have photographs of all of our objects etc. 8. Do you sell in your gift shop, enlarged or miniaturised 3D copies of artefacts currently held or being exhibited in the museum? Would this be feasible? We do not have 3D copies of objects in our collections for sale in the shop, we do however often have ‘generic’ models of types of objects on display. This isn’t something I’ve really thought about, it is an interesting idea, but I think this is more a question for staff who work in museum retail, they would have a better idea about what audiences are looking to buy, and whether this was feasible. Participant xi) Mijikenda based in Kenya Participant xii) Curator based in U.K. 1. . Have you heard of 3D replicas being produced to stand in on displays for objects that have been repatriated ? Yes 2. What advantages or disadvantages are there in using replicas as opposed to original artefacts in museum displays, in your opinion? Advantage - Replicas can be used to be handled by members of the public – for example in handling collections used by schools. Disadvantage – Replicas do not have all of the same information encoded within them as an original artefact 3. Do you put the same value on replicas made through 3D printing for exhibitions/Displays as opposed to the originals? If not, why not? I do not put the same value on replicas because the original has been through experiences which are encoded in the artefact that are not in the replica. 4. In general, would your preference be to make 3D copies and retain the originals or give the originals to Communities of origin and retain the 3D replicas in the museum? It would depend on what the community of origin wanted. 5. Do you think that technology can support decolonisation, anti-colonialism and the distancing of the museum from neo-colonialism? Yes 6. Could the use of other innovative technology like V.R. (Virtual Reality) ,Holograms and the use of NFT’s (Non Fungible Tokens, to enable Risk free Intellectual property tracking) be useful for museums in other ways too? I don’t know enough about them to be able to answer fully. 7. Does your institution invest in 3D technology (ie. by engaging third-party specialists, purchasing equipment or training staff)? Do you think it should? Why? Yes it does and I think that it should because it provides another avenue by which to engage the public with collections 8. Do you sell in your gift shop, enlarged or miniaturised 3D copies of artefacts currently held or being exhibited in the museum? Would this be feasible? I would have to check with the shop as I have not been into it since the start of COVID-19 pandemic but I do believe that it would be feasible. Participant xii) Mijikenda Community of practice 1. As a matter of fact, these Artefacts néed to be given a highest Respect n placed at a specific selected Holy Place at the Coast. Where’s will be a Memorable Area for whoever would be interested to go see n learn a little bit of Our Culture. 2. They should be shipped direct to Mombasa n delivered direct to Wazee wa Kaya under the supervision of the GOP, when necessary. Should be available to All to learn it’s profound Status of the Giriama Culture n Tradition. It will be difficult to be handed over to Families/Clans, most of them cannot be traced of their actual localities. 4: Best idea proposed a Resting place for the unidentified , unclaimed of their Ancestral Domain. 5: Due to lack of Original Vigangos, objects in 3D might be the best solution for visualization than loosing trace of the entire History of our culture. Initially that’s the best way we can value replicas by maintaining the right images of the lost Artefacts. 6: For security purposes Vigangos can be in 3D printed for the identification for future reference. The Original Vigangos be preserved well in secured environment not to decomposed due to weather conditions. 7: The Spirit of KOMA can only remain within the Artefacts unchangeable as we’re all aware spirit is a natural Paraclete Christians name it the Holy Ghost. Participant xiii) Academic based in U.S.A. 1. How do you feel about collecting all the Vigango in a central place first in America/Europe or Asia and then distributing them to communities of Origin later? Or Can we collect All the Vigango into a central location in the Diaspora or should we ship them directly to Mombasa? It might be cheaper for shipping to collect a certain number of them all together in Europe/N. America and than ship rather than sending them one by one, but the logistics of dealing with storing and processing large numbers of vigango might be problematical. There are large numbers abroad and if too many of them were returned all at once it would probably cause logical problems. 2. Should All the Vigango be shipped directly to Kenya and then distributed regardless of the G.O.K. stance? GOK? Government of Kenya? It is hard for me to see how vigango can be repatriated without government participation in some way; at least there need to be lasting government approval for them to be imported without taxation. And someone needs to cover the many costs of repatriating, transporting locally, and storing safely. 3. Should Vigango be made available to all or given back to the families/clans? They should be given back to families if these can be determined and they want them back, but in many cases this may be difficult to determine. In this case the Gohu need to come up with a joint solution about what they would like done with returned vigango. IF they decide they should be put in the kaya or some other ritual space, then that should be done. Getting a joint opinion from the Gohu that all agree with though seems to have proven a bit difficult. A proper meeting of the Gohu concerned woud be needed though, and enough time needs to be given for them to deliberate. If given back to family owners, the Mwakriu case has demonstrated that families may not agree on who the kigango should be given to and where it should be placed and how it will be cared for. 4. Should we build a resting place for those not claimed or identified? Hopefully the Gohu can have input on this. A resting place needs to be secure though so that they are not restolen. Supposedly vigango cannot presently be legally exported but it seems that this is not effectively enforced as it seems new thefts still take place. How to make the vigango secure and at the same time ritually accessible and effective however could be problematical. 5. How do you value replicas made through 3D in exchange of the original (Kigango) object? I think this would a good option for the former owners who repatriate vigango if they desire a replica. One big drawback is that museum in the past valued the authentic object and did not value replicas highly; this has led to lucrative trade in illicit objects or cultural heritage that should remain in the place of origin. 6. Can All the Vigango be 3D printed for future generations to see and the originals left to decompose naturally as that was the initial purpose? IF the Gohu and Mijikenda think vigango need to be allowed to decompose, then this should be done for some vigango. I doubt it is necessary to 3D print all vigango for use in Kenya itself. Perhaps this would be a good though for some which could be kept in Kenyan museums if the Gohu and owning families want all vigango in Kenyan museums to also be given back to the Mijikenda community. 7. Can the Spirit of the “Koma” be the same in a 3D print? I doubt the koma would be thought to occupy a replica, though of course I am not a Mijikenda myself. But I don’t think you are thinking about making replicas for ritual use by the Mijikenda are you? The Gohu would the ones to decide if this was possible and if a replica could stand in for a missing kigango for ritual use.