We must get our facts right about slavery
Since Sarah Blackstock's comments about slavery (Museums Journal November 2006, p29) would appear to be directed at the Ironbridge Gorge Museum, we would like the opportunity to reply.
During the past 50 years or so, the iron industry of east Shropshire, and the surviving documents relating to it, have probably been more intensively studied by academics than anywhere else in this country or overseas. None has found any factual evidence that shackles or iron restraints for slaves were made here. We would like to know if new evidence has come to light.
The most influential family of ironmasters were staunch Quakers, and we have references to them campaigning for the abolition of slavery and collecting funds for this cause. The only direct link Ironbridge has with slavery is the visit of the freed slave Equiano to a coalmine in Shropshire in 1783 - a key reason why we will be pleased to host the Equiano travelling exhibition in 2007.
Far from being scared to tackle the subject of slavery, we welcome the opportunity of discussing it with visitors or anyone else. Indeed our archaeology team has recently begun a research project into aspects of slavery in Bermuda, in cooperation with the Bermuda National Trust.
This work has investigated plantation and shipbuilding sites, and is attempting to elucidate the role of slave ownership in the development of industrial and commercial activity in the 18th and 19th centuries. However, as far as direct links regarding the Ironbridge area are concerned, the historical evidence is scant.
As a founding member of the West Midlands hub, we support its activities fully and enthusiastically. We would like to reassure our partners that we are open to new partnership opportunities across the region.
Steve Miller, chief executive, Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
The efforts museums are making to commemorate the 200th anniversary of Britain's abolition of the slave trade, as discussed in last month's Understanding Slavery round-table debate, are admirable.
But we are worried by the silence in museums across Britain in telling the stories of the many Scottish and Irish men, women and children sold into slavery from these shores.
From at least 1612 until after the Irish Rebellion of 1798, Scottish and Irish political and religious dissenters, Jacobites, prisoners of war and refugees evicted by Anglo-Irish planter families were sold to West Indian and North and South American settlers as slaves. It has been estimated that 25,000 Irish slaves were sold in St Kitts and the adjoining islands in 1650 alone.
As two professionals in a national museum we are concerned that this episode in British history has been forgotten. The only museum we know of that mentions the subject is the British Empire and Commonwealth Museum, Bristol.
But only Irish slaves are mentioned - and only briefly. Here the omission of Scottish slaves is probably a misunderstanding of the term 'Irish' as used by 17th-century English writers, which then meant all Gaelic-speaking people.
The appalling treatment of British slaves has also been ignored. In 1657, Richard Ligon wrote in his True and Exact History of Barbados: 'I have seen cruelty there done as I did not think one Christian could have done to another.'
The trade in Scottish and Irish slaves was not on the same scale as that which engulfed Africa, nor was its legacy so damaging, and we would never want to detract from the horror of the transatlantic slave trade. We only wish to draw attention to a little-known, but undeniable, chapter in the history of Britain's trade in slaves.
Fergus Cannan and Ethan Hayes Kalemjian, London
Entrance fee hinders peace centre's aims
It was a surprise to see the Nobel Peace Center in your publication (Museums Journal October 2006, p48-49), given that its director Geir Lundestad has stressed that it is not a museum but rather 'a living centre for communicating the ideals of the Nobel Peace Prize and focusing attention on current conflicts' (implying that museums are neither alive nor particularly communicative).
Roland Lloyd Parry's sensitive review revealed some uncertainty as to the precise identity of this institution. He described it perfectly as 'part-museum and part-showcase for the peace laureates' which on occasions 'verges on gallery territory', while 'veering inevitably into contemporary politics'.
Given this and the fact that it has no collection, why could it not have been a genuine 'museum without walls' going where it is needed most and thus 'focusing attention on current conflicts'? Instead, its heavy reliance on costly interactives renders it akin to a sort of walk-through website.
This, plus its location in an expensive listed building, means it has to charge for admission (about £4.75 for an adult). Is such an entrance fee not a serious impediment to the aim of making this a 'living centre' striving to promote peace and conflict resolution?
Recent developments make an interesting postscript to Lloyd Parry's review. His comments that peace work is as controversial today as it was 100 years ago, and that 'the centre knows how to win the attention of Norway's government', were more telling than he perhaps realised. For while visitor numbers have been good, they are lower than predicted and have contributed to a first-year deficit of NOK10.6m (£0.8m).
And, recent media reports have revealed that the private foundation which runs the centre has used up all the NOK85m (£6.7m) sponsorship money that was supposed to last until June 2008.
This year, it anticipated NOK30m (£2.4m) in state support, but has been allocated just NOK17.3m (£1.4m).
Norway's culture minister, Trond Giske, has expressed shock at what he considers to be the irresponsible actions of the institution, adding that 'the Peace Center bears the name Nobel and risks discrediting that name'.
Unless a solution is reached involving greater state support, additional private sponsorship or contributions from the Nobel Foundation, then the future of the Nobel Peace Center and its 25 employees is in doubt.
Stuart Burch, lecturer in museum and heritage management, Nottingham Trent University
Small-budget exhibitions merit coverage
Each month I read the temporary-exhibition reviews as I am interested in finding out more about current ideas and innovations. However, I am consistently disappointed that the focus is firmly on exhibitions from larger museums, with budgets to match.
One exhibition reviewed recently cost £127,000 and another £25,000. While I appreciate these are suitably flashy and eye-catching to grace your pages, I would like to draw your attention to the wonderful temporary-exhibition work of smaller museums. At the Grosvenor Museum we have recently opened Monsters Under the Bed & Manners at Table: Memories of Childhood.
The exhibition cost just £1,960 but our talented technicians managed to transform the gallery into a giant doll's house, complete with an oversized bed, chair and building blocks. The local community was involved every step of the way and lent us a delightful collection of objects with personal stories to tell.
We have managed to incorporate 11 interactives into the room, which encourage visitors to draw, write, read, listen, play, crawl and try on clothes.
Why not come and see the doll's house for yourselves? The budget may not be big, but the set, ideas and effort involved are all substantial.
Hannah Crowdy, keeper of local and social history, Grosvenor Museum, Chester
Content matters more than our spelling
We let ourselves down with our spelling on a sign at the Royal Geographical Society, which Rebecca Mileham picked up on (Museums Journal November 2006, p19).
Thankfully, the sign - 'Opening on Tusday. Free admision' - was only a temporary one. I am fairly certain that the next day's sign was spelled correctly.
We have all let a typo or two through, and all kick ourselves when we see them. However, for the several thousand visitors who have passed through our doors to our current exhibition, the focus wasn't on our dodgy spelling, but rather the stunning photos of west African architecture.
Steve Brace, head of education and outdoor learning, Royal Geographical Society
We have had transparency since 1994
Jane Morris's article (Museums Journal November 2006, p16-17) was an interesting look at the Tate's decision to provide information about the price paid for acquisitions. Readers may be interested to hear of our experience at the Cheltenham Art Gallery & Museum.
In 1994, we published Good Citizen's Furniture, the first of three volumes cataloguing Cheltenham's important collection of arts and crafts movement exhibits.
My co-author, Annette Carruthers, wrote an essay for the catalogue about the development of the collection. In that context, she felt that the changing prices paid for arts and crafts items was significant information for historians.
We therefore took the decision to include the prices paid for items from the 1920s to the present day, as well as any grants received, and continued this policy in the subsequent publications.
Of course, decorative arts items rarely have the same monetary value - and are therefore less likely to cause controversy - as fine art. However, over the years we have received several positive comments with regard to this transparency about prices, and absolutely no criticism of our acquisitions policy.
Mary Greensted, curator, decorative arts & designated collections, Cheltenham Art Gallery & Museum
Clarification: The Victoria and Albert Museum would like to point out that all the pictures featured in the article on art and hospitals in the November issue of Museums Journal, p28-31, were purchased for the Julie and Robert Breckman Print Fund.
Since Sarah Blackstock's comments about slavery (Museums Journal November 2006, p29) would appear to be directed at the Ironbridge Gorge Museum, we would like the opportunity to reply.
During the past 50 years or so, the iron industry of east Shropshire, and the surviving documents relating to it, have probably been more intensively studied by academics than anywhere else in this country or overseas. None has found any factual evidence that shackles or iron restraints for slaves were made here. We would like to know if new evidence has come to light.
The most influential family of ironmasters were staunch Quakers, and we have references to them campaigning for the abolition of slavery and collecting funds for this cause. The only direct link Ironbridge has with slavery is the visit of the freed slave Equiano to a coalmine in Shropshire in 1783 - a key reason why we will be pleased to host the Equiano travelling exhibition in 2007.
Far from being scared to tackle the subject of slavery, we welcome the opportunity of discussing it with visitors or anyone else. Indeed our archaeology team has recently begun a research project into aspects of slavery in Bermuda, in cooperation with the Bermuda National Trust.
This work has investigated plantation and shipbuilding sites, and is attempting to elucidate the role of slave ownership in the development of industrial and commercial activity in the 18th and 19th centuries. However, as far as direct links regarding the Ironbridge area are concerned, the historical evidence is scant.
As a founding member of the West Midlands hub, we support its activities fully and enthusiastically. We would like to reassure our partners that we are open to new partnership opportunities across the region.
Steve Miller, chief executive, Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust
The efforts museums are making to commemorate the 200th anniversary of Britain's abolition of the slave trade, as discussed in last month's Understanding Slavery round-table debate, are admirable.
But we are worried by the silence in museums across Britain in telling the stories of the many Scottish and Irish men, women and children sold into slavery from these shores.
From at least 1612 until after the Irish Rebellion of 1798, Scottish and Irish political and religious dissenters, Jacobites, prisoners of war and refugees evicted by Anglo-Irish planter families were sold to West Indian and North and South American settlers as slaves. It has been estimated that 25,000 Irish slaves were sold in St Kitts and the adjoining islands in 1650 alone.
As two professionals in a national museum we are concerned that this episode in British history has been forgotten. The only museum we know of that mentions the subject is the British Empire and Commonwealth Museum, Bristol.
But only Irish slaves are mentioned - and only briefly. Here the omission of Scottish slaves is probably a misunderstanding of the term 'Irish' as used by 17th-century English writers, which then meant all Gaelic-speaking people.
The appalling treatment of British slaves has also been ignored. In 1657, Richard Ligon wrote in his True and Exact History of Barbados: 'I have seen cruelty there done as I did not think one Christian could have done to another.'
The trade in Scottish and Irish slaves was not on the same scale as that which engulfed Africa, nor was its legacy so damaging, and we would never want to detract from the horror of the transatlantic slave trade. We only wish to draw attention to a little-known, but undeniable, chapter in the history of Britain's trade in slaves.
Fergus Cannan and Ethan Hayes Kalemjian, London
Entrance fee hinders peace centre's aims
It was a surprise to see the Nobel Peace Center in your publication (Museums Journal October 2006, p48-49), given that its director Geir Lundestad has stressed that it is not a museum but rather 'a living centre for communicating the ideals of the Nobel Peace Prize and focusing attention on current conflicts' (implying that museums are neither alive nor particularly communicative).
Roland Lloyd Parry's sensitive review revealed some uncertainty as to the precise identity of this institution. He described it perfectly as 'part-museum and part-showcase for the peace laureates' which on occasions 'verges on gallery territory', while 'veering inevitably into contemporary politics'.
Given this and the fact that it has no collection, why could it not have been a genuine 'museum without walls' going where it is needed most and thus 'focusing attention on current conflicts'? Instead, its heavy reliance on costly interactives renders it akin to a sort of walk-through website.
This, plus its location in an expensive listed building, means it has to charge for admission (about £4.75 for an adult). Is such an entrance fee not a serious impediment to the aim of making this a 'living centre' striving to promote peace and conflict resolution?
Recent developments make an interesting postscript to Lloyd Parry's review. His comments that peace work is as controversial today as it was 100 years ago, and that 'the centre knows how to win the attention of Norway's government', were more telling than he perhaps realised. For while visitor numbers have been good, they are lower than predicted and have contributed to a first-year deficit of NOK10.6m (£0.8m).
And, recent media reports have revealed that the private foundation which runs the centre has used up all the NOK85m (£6.7m) sponsorship money that was supposed to last until June 2008.
This year, it anticipated NOK30m (£2.4m) in state support, but has been allocated just NOK17.3m (£1.4m).
Norway's culture minister, Trond Giske, has expressed shock at what he considers to be the irresponsible actions of the institution, adding that 'the Peace Center bears the name Nobel and risks discrediting that name'.
Unless a solution is reached involving greater state support, additional private sponsorship or contributions from the Nobel Foundation, then the future of the Nobel Peace Center and its 25 employees is in doubt.
Stuart Burch, lecturer in museum and heritage management, Nottingham Trent University
Small-budget exhibitions merit coverage
Each month I read the temporary-exhibition reviews as I am interested in finding out more about current ideas and innovations. However, I am consistently disappointed that the focus is firmly on exhibitions from larger museums, with budgets to match.
One exhibition reviewed recently cost £127,000 and another £25,000. While I appreciate these are suitably flashy and eye-catching to grace your pages, I would like to draw your attention to the wonderful temporary-exhibition work of smaller museums. At the Grosvenor Museum we have recently opened Monsters Under the Bed & Manners at Table: Memories of Childhood.
The exhibition cost just £1,960 but our talented technicians managed to transform the gallery into a giant doll's house, complete with an oversized bed, chair and building blocks. The local community was involved every step of the way and lent us a delightful collection of objects with personal stories to tell.
We have managed to incorporate 11 interactives into the room, which encourage visitors to draw, write, read, listen, play, crawl and try on clothes.
Why not come and see the doll's house for yourselves? The budget may not be big, but the set, ideas and effort involved are all substantial.
Hannah Crowdy, keeper of local and social history, Grosvenor Museum, Chester
Content matters more than our spelling
We let ourselves down with our spelling on a sign at the Royal Geographical Society, which Rebecca Mileham picked up on (Museums Journal November 2006, p19).
Thankfully, the sign - 'Opening on Tusday. Free admision' - was only a temporary one. I am fairly certain that the next day's sign was spelled correctly.
We have all let a typo or two through, and all kick ourselves when we see them. However, for the several thousand visitors who have passed through our doors to our current exhibition, the focus wasn't on our dodgy spelling, but rather the stunning photos of west African architecture.
Steve Brace, head of education and outdoor learning, Royal Geographical Society
We have had transparency since 1994
Jane Morris's article (Museums Journal November 2006, p16-17) was an interesting look at the Tate's decision to provide information about the price paid for acquisitions. Readers may be interested to hear of our experience at the Cheltenham Art Gallery & Museum.
In 1994, we published Good Citizen's Furniture, the first of three volumes cataloguing Cheltenham's important collection of arts and crafts movement exhibits.
My co-author, Annette Carruthers, wrote an essay for the catalogue about the development of the collection. In that context, she felt that the changing prices paid for arts and crafts items was significant information for historians.
We therefore took the decision to include the prices paid for items from the 1920s to the present day, as well as any grants received, and continued this policy in the subsequent publications.
Of course, decorative arts items rarely have the same monetary value - and are therefore less likely to cause controversy - as fine art. However, over the years we have received several positive comments with regard to this transparency about prices, and absolutely no criticism of our acquisitions policy.
Mary Greensted, curator, decorative arts & designated collections, Cheltenham Art Gallery & Museum
Clarification: The Victoria and Albert Museum would like to point out that all the pictures featured in the article on art and hospitals in the November issue of Museums Journal, p28-31, were purchased for the Julie and Robert Breckman Print Fund.
