Archival material constitutes a central element of provenance research, offering critical insights into the history of ownership and objects' biographies. However, the concept of ‘provenance' is subject to differing interpretations depending on the ontological framework in which it is situated. Within the field of provenance research, it is understood as encompassing the various associations an object accrues over time with individuals, communities, collections or institutions (Milosch and Pearce 2019; Tompkins 2020), and is distinct from the notion of ‘origin', which refers to geographical provenience (Joyce 2012; Anderson 2024). On the other hand, in archival studies the term is typically associated with the entity – whether individual or institutional – that generated, gathered or maintained, and sometimes donated the records, underpinning the principle of ‘respect for provenance’ (Hurley 2005b, p. 125; Barr 1989, p. 141). While these two concepts coexist within the same socio-historical and institutional contexts and face similar challenges, particularly with regards to colonial collections, they largely operate independently.The disjunction is particularly apparent when archival materials, generated within the imperial systems that enabled the creation of museum collections, are treated solely as sources of information, divorced from their material realities. This disconnection neglects the archival materials' potential to be considered as colonial artefacts themselves – created, transported, and now kept within colonial frameworks, often without the consent of Indigenous and colonised communities. This paper seeks to reframe archival material as integral components of colonial assemblages, with their materiality grounded in the data and knowledge extracted.Through a case study examining archival materials related to provenance research from museums across Europe and North America, this paper engages with emerging archival theories, particularly the concepts of multiple or parallel provenances. Employing an interdisciplinary lens, it aims to challenge prevailing ontologies in provenance research and to advocate for its inclusion within contemporary decolonial archival practices. In doing so, it seeks to contribute to a more nuanced understanding of the entangled histories of colonialism, knowledge production and institutional stewardship. This paper discusses topics including colonial violence, and the collecting of ancestral remains and some readers may find these subjects distressing.
Marie Hoffmann (Fri,) studied this question.