HBC’s artworks and collections help us understand Canada’s origins — and can be auctioned off

The of many of the Hudson’s Bay Company’s (HBC) collections that together trace over three centuries of Indigenous and European interaction across this continent represents a profound threat to Canada’s collective memory and identity.

An Ontario Superior Court judge ruled that the company could move forward with an auction of historic artifacts and artworks.

Several government and non-government cultural agencies, including the Manitoba Museum and , have and the financial advisory firm it’s working with.

First Nations leaders say many of the objects likely have and are .

As an art history professor who has researched curatorial and museum practices, I can attest to the cultural and scholarly value of or disappearing into private hands.

This situation exposes the reach and limits of Canada’s . The act has provisions to delay or block export of cultural property, defined broadly as “, which may be important from an archaeological, historical, artistic or scientific perspective.” Yet, this legislation offers no guarantees that the objects will end up in Canadian museums or under Indigenous stewardship.

Hudson’s Bay Company Archival material reflects centuries of trade, cultural exchange, and history in Canada. (Adobe)

Importance for memory

After moving its head office from them in 1994 to the province. The vast collection includes about 130,000 images and all minute books from meetings of HBC’s governor and committee from 1671 to 1970.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) designated a as part of the . Items with this designation are recognized as .

If the items heading to auction are similar, they, too, would be embedded with stories of political negotiation, cultural exchange and economic transformation that helped forge Canada over three centuries.

Some HBC records have provided a window into , offering valuable long-term data to environmental researchers. Others show evidence of Indigenous trade, land occupation and cultural presence relevant to , band membership documentation and .

The Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, citing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, has called for in any discussion concerning the disposition of HBC items and stopping any sale or transfer of artifacts that “may belong to or be linked with First Nations.”

Hudson’s Bay Company Archival material reflects centuries of trade, cultural exchange, and history in Canada. (Adobe)

1977 legislation

Prior to Parliament passing the CPEIA legislation in 1977, the federal government had few legal mechanisms to safeguard cultural heritage at home or abroad.

The into the development of Canadian arts and culture acknowledged the sale and export of important collections, including Indigenous cultural belongings. It noted that some Canadian museums had been requesting

Global concern for cultural property

An emerging global consensus on the need for a stronger cross-border regulatory system also shaped CPEIA’s development. The 1954 was the first international legal framework for the protection of moveable “cultural property.” This was created in response to the .

By the 1960s, Canada was studying British and French laws, particularly the U.K.’s 1952 , as models for export controls. Borrowing from the Waverly Report, CPEIA relied upon, in the words of Canadian diplomat Ian Christie Clark, a working together with the government to ensure compliance.

The final push to develop national policies flowed from the . This obliged signatory states to develop their own laws to protect cultural heritage and facilitate the return of illegally exported property. To claim the reciprocal benefits of the convention, Canada had to act.

Relevance of the CPEIA

An independent committee of specialists, established through , can designate parts, or the entirety, of the HBC collection as “” if the HBC .

In such a circumstance, the HBC, in tandem with a collecting institution, can request a review to unlock if certified.

This designation could also arise if the owner — either the HBC or a successful buyer — applied for an export permit to move the collection out of Canada. This application would be screened against CPEIA’s export control list, which covers everything from archaeological and scientific specimens to documentary records and artworks that exceed age and value thresholds.

If those thresholds were met, and an export permit is denied, the works would be referred to an expert examiner for a full assessment. A private sale within Canada would not alone prompt the review.

The store plaque at Toronto’s downtown Hudson’s Bay store. (Adobe)

Receiving a cultural property designation would, at least temporarily, .

Importantly, the delay would give federally to preserve and support Indigenous heritage, an opportunity to purchase cultural property that has been denied an export permit. For this, CPEIA offers for designated institutions to match the appraised value. Those grants and loans can also be used to repatriate collections that are abroad.

HBC’s historic archive is a prism through which we view Canada’s origins.

Dispersing or exporting this collection would significantly diminish our understanding of Canada. While CPEIA may play a role in retaining it, it offers no certainties.

, Associate Professor of Art History and Head of the Department of Art History and Art Conservation,

This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license. Read the .

��Ӱֱ��