Controversy Over Auction of Slave Neck Shackles
An antiques auction featuring chains linked to the enslavement of African people in Zanzibar has sparked accusations of “profiting from slavery.” The neck irons, dated to the Omani-Arab dominated period which ended following African resistance and British intervention in the late 19th century, are set to be sold this weekend in Scotland.
Marcus Salter, auctioneer at Cheeky Auctions in Tain, Ross, stated that his intention was to confront history through the sale of this “sensitive artefact” without causing offense.
However, Labour MP Bell Ribeiro-Addy, chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Slavery and Human Trafficking, criticized the trade in such items, saying it perpetuates profit from the slave trade.
Nigel Murray, a retired lawyer from the Scottish Highlands, contacted after seeing the chains advertised on Facebook. He expressed his disapproval, stating he would no longer purchase from Cheeky Auctions.
The shackles, dated 1780 and valued at approximately £1,000, are part of a collection listed under the auction titled “Challenging History.”
Salter explained that he was selling the chains on behalf of a dealer whose father had owned them for 50 years. He remarked,
“No matter what happens there’s going to be money made out of it from somewhere.”
He argued that donating the item to a museum might result in it being stored away and never displayed, and noted that slavery-linked mahogany is sold and used without controversy.
“I think it’s important not to upset and offend, but shock people into learning the whole truth,”Salter said.
“There are certain things we’re not allowed to sell at auction. We had to check with the platform we’re selling with that we could do this. They consider the slave chains to be a historical artefact, therefore we can.
“We’ve had people we’ve never met say they’re boycotting us. We’ve had people who educated us and we educated them. There have been others who just disagree and never want to come in.”
Ethical Concerns and Public Reactions
In 2024, Ronnie Archer-Morgan, an expert from the Antiques Roadshow, refused to value an ivory bangle connected to enslavement.
Ribeiro-Addy commented on the chains,
“If they were to be put in a museum I would understand, but buying and selling them like oddities is the same thing that people do when it comes to slave ships – treating them as collector’s items, something to be fetishised rather than items that should be looked at in horror.
“Why are you selling it for profit? Unless you’re trying to re-enact the history of enslavement by profiting from something used to inflict pain and oppression. We’ve got people trying give valid reasons for continuing to profit from the slave trade – that’s all it sounds like to me.”
Murray described the auction as “vile,” adding,
“An auction is the way enslaved people were sold, and here you are auctioning these chains off.
“[Descendants of plantation owners] have millions of pounds gained from slavery, to see people making more money out of it just made me feel very angry.”
Legal and Ethical Perspectives
Caecilia Dance, an associate at London law firm Wedlake Bell who specializes in Nazi-looted art, stated she could not comment directly on the auction but noted there is “no specific law against” trading objects linked to slavery.
She added that “public interest stewardship” — including donation, sale, or long-term loan to museums with relationships to affected communities — would be the “ideal management pathway” for such items.
Dance remarked,
“It’s reached a point in the art trade where if there’s any sign an item might have been looted in the Nazi period, no one wants to buy it.
“It’s probably only a matter of time that that ethical framework extends to objects associated with enslavement because you risk commodifying trauma, even if the sale is completely lawful. Public opinion is definitely turning in favour of restitution.”
