Milwaukee Art Museum Returns David Drake Ceramics to Descendants

In December 2023, two small jars left the Milwaukee Art Museum for Edgefield, South Carolina. Made by David Drake, an enslaved potter in the 19th century, these jars had been part of the museum’s collection since 2005. Their return to Drake’s descendants signifies personal restitution and institutional reckoning.

Drake, born enslaved around 1800 in Edgefield, was renowned for his alkaline-glazed stoneware. Despite prohibitions against literacy, he inscribed many of his pots and jars with poetry and his signature. These inscriptions are rare expressions of self-identity. The jars returned by Milwaukee, both dated 1840, feature such inscriptions—one reads, "I made this jar for cash though its called lucre trash."

Marcelle Polednik, the museum's director, led the decision to return the works in consultation with Drake’s descendants. "This isn’t just about correcting an isolated wrong; it’s part of a systemic shift in how museums view their collections," said Polednik. The museum acquired the jars from a private collector, but their provenance—stemming from Drake's forced labor—remains inseparable from their artistic value.

This return is part of a larger movement. In the past decade, institutions across Europe and North America have faced growing demands to return objects acquired during colonial or oppressive regimes. In 2022, Germany formalized agreements to return over 1,100 Benin Bronzes to Nigeria, while a 2021 French commission recommended the restitution of 26 royal artefacts to Benin. These actions reflect a consensus that context and ownership matter as much as conservation.

In the United States, discussions about the restitution of works by enslaved artisans are particularly complex. Unlike artefacts looted during colonial conquests, items like Drake’s ceramics originate from a domestic system of enslavement, complicating their legal and ethical status. "The jars represent both cultural achievement and a history of exploitation," said Adrienne Spinozzi, an American decorative arts curator at The Met. "Returning them to descendants acknowledges that duality and begins to address the harm."

The practicalities of restitution are intricate. The descendants plan to house the works in a community cultural center in Edgefield. "These jars are part of a story that belongs here, with the people who inherited it," said Elijah Jenkins, a direct descendant of Drake. This decision mirrors efforts in Nigeria, where many returned bronzes are set for display in a new museum in Benin City.

Financial concerns complicate matters. Museums often cite insurance costs and potential loss of donor confidence as challenges to restitution. Yet many institutions now view restitution as a means to enhance their reputations and forge new partnerships. In 2020, the Smithsonian Institution adopted a policy framework supporting the return of looted or unethically acquired items.

The return of Drake’s ceramics raises questions about the visibility of enslaved artisans in art history. Works by Drake have been celebrated within Southern folk art, but the identities of their creators have often been overshadowed by collectors and institutions. Returning these works reframes them as deliberate acts of creation by a man who used his skill to leave a mark on history.

For the Milwaukee Art Museum, the jars’ departure does not end engagement with Drake’s legacy. The institution plans a digital exhibition to share the objects’ inscriptions and historical context. According to Polednik, "Restitution is not erasure. Instead, it opens up a dialogue that might not have happened otherwise."

One unresolved question remains: how far should restitution efforts extend? If institutions return physical artefacts, should they also redirect financial resources toward the communities tied to those objects? Drake’s jars, now back in Edgefield, serve as touchstones in a larger debate about the cost of historical injustice and who ultimately bears it.