Table of Content
The Power of a Photograph: When History Demands Justice
For fifteen years, Tamara Lanier’s unwavering pursuit transformed two haunting daguerreotypes of her ancestors—Renty and Delia—from historical artifacts locked away at Harvard into powerful symbols of justice reclaimed.
These images, captured in 1850 at the request of Harvard professor Louis Agassiz, were created not to honor their subjects but to justify racist pseudoscience. Instead of cherished family portraits, they became painful evidence of exploitation and forced subjugation, hidden within the archives of an institution far removed from their true story.
In May 2025, the tide finally turned. Harvard agreed to relinquish ownership of these daguerreotypes, transferring them to the International African American Museum in South Carolina. This moment is much more than a simple change of custody for a pair of old photographs; it is a reckoning.
The transfer challenges long-held assumptions about the value, preservation, and rightful control of images rooted in trauma. For photographers, historians, and anyone who has questioned who owns the stories frozen by a camera, this case sets a transformative new precedent—one that reverberates far beyond the museum walls.
Harvard’s Decision: Why These Photographs Matter
Harvard’s decision to transfer the daguerreotypes marks a seismic shift in both photographic and institutional history. These are not just archival curiosities. They are the earliest known photographs of enslaved people in the United States, captured under coercion as part of a “study” designed to support racist ideologies. The images’ existence is a stark reminder that photographs can be both evidence and weapon—tools wielded in support of oppression, and, in time, instruments for seeking justice.
The legal struggle over these daguerreotypes was epic. While some reports describe a six-year formal lawsuit, others trace the conflict’s origins back fifteen years, reflecting the full arc of Tamara Lanier’s fight for her family’s dignity. Joshua Koskoff, Lanier’s attorney, described the outcome as “one of one in American history, because of the combination of unlikely features: to have a case that dates back 175 years, to win control over images dating back that long of enslaved people—that’s never happened before.”
Harvard’s agreement to relinquish the images does more than resolve a legal dispute. It sends a powerful message to museums and universities: Stewardship of photographs rooted in trauma and exploitation demands more than careful storage—it calls for ethical courage and humility. This move is described as “unprecedented” in every major outlet covering the story, and it reshapes the standards for institutional accountability and restitution.
Restorative Justice and the Cultural Impact
The transfer of the daguerreotypes to the International African American Museum is a watershed moment for restorative justice. For the first time, the descendants and communities most affected by these images have genuine agency over their stewardship. This is not merely a symbolic act; it is a tangible step toward healing historical wounds and restoring dignity to those whose stories were once silenced.
Tamara Lanier’s words capture the gravity of the moment: “Harvard played a role in the darkest chapter in American history.” The images of Renty and Delia, stripped to their waists and stripped of agency, were not created to honor their humanity. Yet in the hands of the International African American Museum, these same photographs will serve as tools for education, remembrance, and ultimately, for healing.
For photographers and archivists, this transfer sets a new model for accountability. Newsrooms and public radio outlets have highlighted how this case establishes a standard for restorative justice, one that not only acknowledges historical wrongdoing but actively seeks to repair it. The precedent raises important questions: How should institutions handle other images with traumatic backgrounds? What does true restitution look like, and who should decide?
Lessons for the Photography World: Ethics, Ownership, and Legacy
Harvard’s decision has already made waves throughout the photography and museum communities. The analysis from PetaPixel emphasizes that this move “sets a precedent for future repatriation and ethical stewardship discussions in the photography world.” Institutions can no longer overlook the voices of descendants or communities whose suffering and resilience are preserved in their archives.
The conversation is no longer just about legal ownership. It is about who gets to decide how a photograph is contextualized, exhibited, and remembered. This case revives critical discussions around consent, historical narrative, and the responsibilities inherent to preserving images of trauma. For working photographers and curators, these questions are more urgent than ever.
Significant gaps do remain. Few reports have addressed whether Harvard will review other similar holdings or how future disputes might be handled. The absence of commentary from Harvard’s representatives also leaves open the question of whether this settlement signals deeper institutional change. Still, this milestone marks a crucial step forward in redefining ethical stewardship.
What This All Means: Ethical Photography Moves Forward
When a photograph transcends its role as a mere keepsake and becomes a testament to survival, exploitation, and the ongoing quest for justice, its stewardship becomes a moral responsibility. Harvard’s decision to relinquish the Renty and Delia daguerreotypes, after years of legal and emotional struggle, sets a new benchmark for responsible ownership. Museums, universities, and photographers are now called to examine not just how they preserve the past, but how they honor the dignity and agency of those represented in it.
This case now stands as the gold standard for ethical restitution in photography. It demonstrates that persistent advocacy, community involvement, and public accountability can transform even the most entrenched institutional practices. For photographers, the lesson is clear: every image carries weight far beyond its frame. Ownership, context, and consent matter—especially when the stakes involve lives and legacies.
Looking ahead, more institutions will likely confront their own archives, and more communities will demand agency over images of their ancestors. The future of the industry will be shaped not only by technological innovation but by a renewed commitment to justice, respect, and the ethical stewardship of our visual history.
Key Takeaways
- Harvard’s transfer of the earliest known U.S. slave daguerreotypes to the International African American Museum resolves a historic legal and ethical battle.
- This case sets a new standard for ethical stewardship and restitution in photographic archives, particularly those linked to trauma.
- Persistent advocacy by descendants such as Tamara Lanier can drive institutional change.
- Photographers, curators, and archivists must now consider not just preservation, but the lived impact and rightful ownership of powerful images.
Quotes That Resonate on Ethics and Ownership
- “I think it’s one of one in American history, because of the combination of unlikely features: to have a case that dates back 175 years, to win control over images dating back that long of enslaved people—that’s never happened before.” — Joshua Koskoff, Lanier’s attorney
- “Harvard played a role in the darkest chapter in American history.” — Tamara Lanier
Statistics That Matter
- 175-year-old daguerreotypes, believed to be the earliest photos of enslaved people in the U.S.
- 15-year campaign for their return, culminating in a landmark legal settlement.