Officials from Canadian Heritage have confirmed the federal government has neither the means nor the ability to acquire any of the estimated 4,400 items in the Hudson Bay Company’s (HBC) collection of art and artifacts. The items in question, some of which date back to the 17th century and many Indigenous in origin, are set to hit the auction block at some point in the near future.

In addition, Ricochet has learned that parties interested in reviewing the catalogue of items have been required to sign non-disclosure agreements. Canadian Heritage confirmed that this was stipulated by the company in order to protect the art auction.

And while Canadian Heritage is aware of the existence of the HBC collection catalogue, it has not consulted it. 

“Responsibility for examining the collection rests with Canada’s national museums, which are Crown corporations with relevant collecting mandates, as well as Library and Archives Canada, all of whom are currently examining the available information regarding the HBC collection,” said Canadian Heritage in a statement to Ricochet.

The government’s inability to acquire the collection — or even some of its better known items — was illustrated recently when the Canadian Museum of History announced the Weston family was looking to acquire the royal charter signed by King Charles II in 1670 that established the Hudson’s Bay Company, and donate it to the museum.

That Canadian Heritage is not coordinating an effort to acquire the entirety of the collection, and appears resigned to the idea that the artifact collection will be dealt with separately from the art collection, is a concern to academics who argue that the collection’s sum is worth more than its parts.

“The collection should be kept together as it forms an archive of settler and Indigenous life and relations that can be useful for scholars and the public to better understand the complexities and unresolved tensions of Canadian history,” said Dr. Gloria Jane Bell of McGill University.

Artifacts that help piece together Canada’s colonial history

The exact contents of the collection are not known to the public despite the fact that the collection likely forms one of the most comprehensive and historically significant collections of Canadiana in the entire world.

“It could be spectacular,” said Dr. Norman Vorano, Department Head and Associate Professor of Art History and Art Conservation at Queen’s University, “but we just don’t know.”

Vorano told Ricochet that the collection likely includes paintings, some of which may date to the late 1600s, as well as historical trade objects, blankets, and other memorabilia, artifacts, and documents.

“I have heard from colleagues in the museum world that the items are currently stored in Toronto, under the watch of Heffel Fine Art, the auction house overseeing the sale,” said Vorano in a statement to Ricochet. 

“Various museum professionals have viewed the collection, though they are unable to comment due to an NDA. The court document acknowledges the sale of ‘more than 4,400 pieces of art and artifacts comprising the art collection that reflects the rich heritage and cultural legacy of the company.’ So it’s not small.”

While it’s only speculation, Gloria Bell imagines the collection may include a wide variety of items of profound cultural value far beyond the much-discussed royal charter.

“It is highly probable that there are oil paintings and drawings that document the HBC’s colonial trade routes, and Indigenous knowledge over the past several centuries,” said Bell in a statement to Ricochet. 

Documents that may lead to questions of accountability

Bell suggested there may be historical trade documents that would attest to the company’s colonial endeavours, as well as portraits of Indigenous leaders that could “provide evidence of Indigenous negotiations and sovereignties.”

Bell thinks the collection may have considerable Indigenous content. 

“The HBC holds thousands of artworks, sacred belongings, and archival documents relevant to Canadian history and understanding Indigenous and settler relations across Turtle Island,” said Bell. “What may be included are historical documents relating to Indigenous families employed in the fur trade, items of daily use in the fur trade, birchbark canoes, and ancestral beadwork and quillwork.”

Bell cautions that even the distinction between what constitutes an artwork and an artifact requires special attention given the role HBC played in the development of Canada and HBC’s very specific and particular relationship with Indigenous communities.

“In the collection there are historical documents and artworks made by settler artists and Indigenous artists that were employed by the HBC,” said Bell. “We know that Indigenous understandings of culture bring more complexities to understanding Canadian history. Many Indigenous artifacts and artworks have historical, cultural and spiritual significance that needs to be respected and recognized.”

That Canadian Heritage hasn’t coordinated with Indigenous communities and/or museums is concerning in its own right, but Bell is also worried about a general lack of transparency and sensitivity in how this case is being handled.

“The fact that a judge ruled there should be an auction immediately without transparency or consultation with First Nations, Métis, and Inuit leaders shows a lack of cultural sensitivity to Canadian history and understanding of Indigenous and settler relations and art and culture,” said Bell.  

“The government should be working with Indigenous leaders and researchers to identify collections of historical significance (such as the HBC collection) and take concrete measures to move forward with restitution and repatriation given their collusion with the Hudson’s bay Company in colonial expansion and Indigenous land seizure.” 

Items considered sacred by communities and families

An additional factor that should have been taken into consideration is that what might only be considered a work of art or an artifact to some could be a sacred item to others.

“It is highly possible there are sacred belongings in the collection including wampum, quillwork, moccasins, and other belongings that should be restituted to Indigenous communities and families,” said Bell, who believes it may be possible some of the items in the collection could have been stolen from Indigenous communities. 

She also notes that for much of its history, HBC operated under the idea that consent was not needed in acquiring Indigenous artworks and sacred belongings. 

“A significant amount of historical collections of Indigenous art were created through colonial paradigms without Indigenous consent and the HBC collection is part of that legacy,” Bell said, noting that Indigenous ancestors are held in the Canadian Museum of History, at the Canadian Museum of Anthropology and at the Vatican Museums. 

“There is a shifting landscape now of redress and restitution, but the process is far from complete or transparent, and many Indigenous artworks and ancestors remain held in colonial vaults across the globe.” 

Ricochet reached out to several major Canadian museums for comment, including the Royal Ontario Museum, the Canadian Museum of History, and the Art Gallery of Ontario, but none would answer any specific questions, only stating that they were aware of the situation and following it closely. Josée-Britanie Mallet, Senior Officer, Media and Public Relations with the National Gallery of Canada said that the gallery has “been involved in preliminary discussions with both HBC and Canadian Heritage” but had no additional details to share.

Ricochet also contacted the Canadian Cultural Property Export Review Board, but was similarly told they too have no jurisdiction to intervene or investigate any aspect of the eventual sale of the HBC Collection. In an emailed statement, a spokesperson for Board Secretariat told Ricochet that they can only become involved “if asked to review an export application permit that has been refused by the Canada Border Services Agency.” 

That so many invaluable items could potentially be auctioned off to the highest bidder without consideration to their inherent social value to all Canadians or their value as a collection, and that neither HBC nor Heritage Canada had any plan, is indicative of significant deficiencies in how Canada handles cultural property. Unfortunately, it doesn’t appear that the Canadian government has either the means or motivation to acquire the entire collection, nor to prevent the sale so as to allow academics a chance to assess the historical, cultural, and social value of the artworks and artifacts.

“I have so many questions,” said Dr. Norman Vorano. “Did HBC sell any of the artifacts prior to its liquidation proceedings? Did HBC ever have a full inventory and appraisal of the 4,400 objects for sale? Why weren’t those objects donated to the Manitoba Archives in 1994? Have recent cuts to Canadian Heritage impacted Canada’s ability to acquire, retain, preserve and share our cultural heritage like this?”