Talking About Benin Artefacts Is Not Enough: Return The Looted Treasures!
‘ To fall under the spell of an object, to be touched by it, moved emotionally by a piece of art in a museum, brought to tears of joy, to admire its forms of ingenuity, to like the artwork’s colours, to take a photo of it, to let one’s self be transformed by it: all these experiences-which are also forms of access to knowledge – cannot be reserved to the inheritors of an asymmetrical history, to the benefactors of an excess of privilege and mobility.’
FelwineSarr- and Bénédicte Savoy (1)
It has now become a ploy for gaining time to express readiness to discuss whenever an African country asks a Western museum to return looted objects.
A most recent example is the reaction of the Bristol Museum to a plea made by Prince Edun Akenzua for the return of looted Benin artefacts in that museum. The prince made the plea in the course of a BBC TV show, Inside Out West.
Prince Edun declared:
“We are appealing to Bristol Museum to blaze the trail for the international community or private holders of the Benin cultural property to get them returned. Bristol Museum officials responded that they were prepared to work with the Prince to find a solution to the Benin issue. (2)
Prince Edun, the grandson of Oba Ovonramwen, in whose reign the British stole the Benin artefacts, and an uncle of the present Oba, Oba Ewuare II, is a veteran campaigner who submitted in 2000 a petition for restitution to the British Parliament that has become known as Appendix 21. (3) Many Westerners prefer to act as if there had not been any demand for the restitution of the looted Benin artefacts and often act as if they were hearing about such demands, which are natural, for the first time.
Jon Finch, head of culture at Bristol City Council that runs the museum, said that when the museum took over the commemorative head, they did not know that it had been stolen. The sculpture had been used to educate thousands of children about other cultures.
The offer to discuss and work with Prince Edun comes after the Sarr-Savoy report on restitution that recommended restitution of looted African artefacts, after Jesus College, Cambridge, had decided to return the Benin sculpture of a cockerel they had in their dining hall. Moreover, many European countries have tried to improve their rules regarding restitution and handling of looted colonial objects. Germany has issued new guidelines, Dutch museums have revised their rules on the restitution of looted colonial artefacts. The Arts Council of England has placed an advertisement seeking a research group to prepare new guidelines for English museums on restitution. The international scene has been pointing to future restitutions.
In view of the above, an offer to discuss the issue with the prince is no real advance: “We’d like to have correspondence with him to see what the specific request is and how we can progress.’
To hear now that some persons, working in the museum or with authority over a museum holding one of the finest specimens of Benin artefacts, that they or their museum was unaware that the commemorative head was stolen, is more than discouraging. Have they read the information provided by their own museum on this sculpture? Have they not heard about or read the Sarr-Savoy report that shook many Western museum officials by its recommendation on the restitution of looted Africa artefacts? Have they missed all the discussions and articles concerning Benin artefacts that have been published in the last few months?
It was said that the museum had used the artefact to teach hundreds of children about other cultures, implying that the children would be deprived of such an education if the object were to be returned. This reminds one of the equally cynical answer from Julian Spalding, Director of Glasgow Museums, dated 10 January 1997 to Bernie Grant, Labour Member of British Parliament: ‘We believe, however, that these artefacts have an important role to play in the public sector by informing over 3 million visitors here about the culture of Benin and, it has to be said, the history of British Imperialism’.’
Is the Bristol museum aware that thousands of children in Benin City and Nigeria have not had the chance to learn about their own cultural objects stolen 100 years ago? What about other African children and their parents who do not have the privilege of seeing any Benin artefacts in their museums? Do they matter at all? It makes you wonder what kind of education children in Bristol may be getting when museum officials are not aware that they are dealing with stolen objects. Do Western museum officials realize that countries such as Ghana, Togo and Cameroon, Nigeria’s neighbours, do not have Benin artefacts that most Western museums have? Do Africans not need to know about Nigerian culture as much as the British, Germans, French, and Dutch who hold large numbers of looted artefacts? Contrary to the view often expressed by Westerners that Benin artefacts are spread all over the world, the truth is that these Benin artefacts are concentrated in Western museums and institutions. Incidentally, the view that the Ethnology Museum/Humboldt Museum, Berlin has the greatest number of the looted Benin artefacts does not appear to be true. The British Museum has always had more of these artefacts than any other museum. Western museums are not willing to restitute the artefacts even if they have 700 pieces.. Selfishness and sheer greed are the reigning principles in these venerable institutions. (4)
Any argument based on the allegation that a museum or its officials were not aware when they acquired a Benin artefact that it had been stolen, must be rejected outright. Ever since 1897 when the Benin artefacts were stolen in the notorious invasion of Benin City by the British army and sold in the same year, it has been common knowledge that all Benin artefacts, (as opposed to forgeries which some experts are unable to detect) in the Western world came from the nefarious invasion. Ever since then, many Westerners have taken the position that however reprehensible the mode of acquisition may have been, the holder should not have any moral qualms. Thus, many museums had until recently not bothered about the mode of acquisition of African artefacts and felt authorized to hold them.
Jon Fonch is heard in the BBC show responding to the interviewer’s statement that Nigerians have been making such requests since Independence in 1960, that there has not been any direct request to Bristol Museum. Such a response has been dealt with several times in my articles in modernghana.com. The response of Jon Fonch is as useless as it is old. If you come to the conclusion that an object in your collection is stolen property, you should not wait until the owner asks you directly. After the various Nigerian requests including Prince Edun’s plea to the British Parliament, it seems odd that a British official should argue that there has been no direct request to him.
The hint that Bristol Museum would be joining or working with the Benin Dialogue Group (BDG) does not really improve matters. That group has decisively rejected any idea of restitution of Benin artefacts but has offered instead to loan looted artefacts to the Nigerian owners. (5) Are the Bristol Museum officials aware of this? The idea of a loan of a looted artefact to its owners is an insult to the intelligence of mankind and should be rejected by all Africans and others who are informed about the nature of colonial hegemony and supremacy:
‘Macron had shamed them,[BDG] and a loan is a face-saving way to avoid parting with possession. It is also an insulting and unacceptable way – even a permanent loan is infused with the taint of colonialism, betraying a fixed belief that good title was legitimately obtained by colonial aggression and plunder The British Museum used the excuse that it was not allowed to de-access but its trustees were not prepared to ask the government to amend this law. They are not prepared to acknowledge the wrongful acts of the British army in wars of aggression in Africa, namely by returning possession of its plunder. (6)
There is no real will on the part of Western museums to share anything, not even the looted Benin artefacts. Humbold Forum/Ethnological Museum are holding 580 Benin artefacts, why can they not restitute 100 to Benin from where they were stolen? Do Germans participate in Benin traditional culture to require so many Benin artefacts? Are they required for teaching their children about Benin culture? The British Museum holds 700 pieces but is only willing to lend a few to Benin and still retain ownership. The venerable museum does not want to make the successors of Oba Ovonramwen or any Benin/Nigerian person or institution owners of the looted Benin artefacts. The owners of the loaned looted objects would still be in Bloomsbury and not in Benin City.
Nigerians will be the only ones who practise their culture with artefacts borrowed or loaned from Western museums. Could future generations even be sure they are capable of manufacturing artefacts for their own cultural activities since they would seem to have borrowed Benin artefacts from their former colonial masters and their allies?
But can we blame the Europeans and their allies alone for the present state of affairs? Generations of Africans have accepted or been forced to accept colonial propaganda and allowed colonial masters to decide the fate of our countries even after Independence and, naturally,it seems, the fate of African artefacts whilst the colonialists proclaim boldly and loudly that we are unable to produce anything worthwhile after they had stolen our gold, timber, and artefacts. In any case, they argue, Africans are unable to protect our artefacts. The proof? Obvious. Those who have stolen our artefacts with military force believe that we are incapable of protecting them. Their evil deed is evidence of their ability and their right. Thus they benefit from their own wrongful deed. The legal principle that no right can be derived from one’s own wrongful doing does not seem to apply here. ‘ex injuria non oriturius. There should be a modicum of shame on the part of Europeans when they consider what they have done in Africa. An apology would be more appropriate than the insults and innuendos that always flow from Europe when the issue of restitution comes up. But have we given Europeans any reason to act otherwise when there are Africans ready to criticise and challenge any African who suggests that the present state of affairs must be changed? Slavery, colonialism, neo-colonialism and now, the worst form of imperialism, cultural imperialism, seems to be acceptable to some who should be leading the fight against oppression. Will there ever be an end to the domination of Africa and Africans by Western imperialism as long as we maintain a servile and accommodating attitude to those who have stolen our treasures and eliminated uncountable brothers and sisters?
We urge the peoples of Nigeria and Africa to reject insulting offers and continue pressing our case until Western nations are finally prepared to restitute some of the estimated 3500 Benin artefacts that were brutally wrenched from the Oba’s Palace in 1897 and now decorate Western museums and homes. No valid argument has been presented why a museum, such as the British Museum, cannot restitute to Benin 100 of the artefacts the British army stole in 1897. No argument has been presented to explain why Benin/Nigeria would be better served by a loan rather than full restitution of the artefacts.
Selfishness, greed, and racist arrogance seem to rule in Western museum circles.
After 123 years in detention and exile, Benin heroines and heroes must return home, free from chains and shackles of colonialism and imperialism. The Benin Dialogue Group cannot sell to Africa and its peoples continued or renewed bondage as liberation. We are a little more sophisticated than previous generations that made it easier for imperialism to take over. We also have the benefit of hindsight of 500 years of history and know very well the intentions and methods of our past colonial masters.
’Cultural heritage constitutes an inalienable part of a people’s sense of self and of community, functioning as a link between the past, the present and the future; it is essential to sensitize the public about this issue and especially the younger generation’. (7)
Athens Conference on the Return of Cultural Objects,1958.
1.Felwine Sarr and Benedicte Savoy, ‘The Restitution of African Cultural Heritage:Toward a New Relational Ethics,’ November 2018,ntroduction,p.4.
K. Opoku, Further Comments on Sarr-Savoy Report on Restitution
2. Benin prince calls for Bristol Museum to return stolen sculpture
3. See Annex I
4. See Annex II.
5.. Benin Dialogue Group Removes Restitution Of Benin Artefacts …
www.modernghana.com › news › benin-dialogue-group-removes-rest.
6. Geoffrey Robertson, Who owns History? Elgin’s Loot and the Case for Returning Plundered Treasuer, Biteback Publishing, London, p.178.
7. Conclusions of the Athens International Conference on the Return of Cultural Objects to their Countries of Origin Athens, 17-18 March 2008.
Conclusions of the Athens International Conference on the Return of … www.unesco.org/culture/laws/pdf/Conclusions_Athens_en.pdf
Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport Appendices to the Minutes of Evidence
The Case of Benin
Memorandum submitted by Prince Edun Akenzua
I am Edun Akenzua Enogie (Duke) of Obazuwa-Iko, brother of His Majesty, Omo, n’Oba n’Edo, Oba (King) Erediauwa of Benin, great grandson of His Majesty Omo n’Oba n’Edo, Oba Ovonramwen, in whose reign the cultural property was removed in 1897. I am also the Chairman of the Benin Centenary Committee established in 1996 to commemorate 100 years of Britain’s invasion of Benin, the action which led to the removal of the cultural property.
“On 26 March 1892 the Deputy Commissioner and Vice-Consul, Benin District of the Oil River Protectorate, Captain H L Gallwey, manoeuvred Oba Ovonramwen and his chiefs into agreeing to terms of a treaty with the British Government. That treaty, in all its implications, marked the beginning of the end of the independence of Benin not only on account of its theoretical claims, which bordered on the fictitious, but also in providing the British with the pretext, if not the legal basis, for subsequently holding the Oba accountable for his future actions.”
The text quoted above was taken from the paper presented at the Benin Centenary Lectures by Professor P A Igbafe of the Department of History, University of Benin on 17 February 1997.
Four years later in 1896 the British Acting Consul in the Niger-Delta, Captain James R Philip wrote a letter to the British Foreign Secretary, Lord Salisbury, requesting approval for his proposal to invade Benin and depose its King. As a post-script to the letter, Captain Philip wrote: “I would add that I have reason to hope that sufficient ivory would be found in the King’s house to pay the expenses incurred in removing the King from his stool.”
These two extracts sum up succinctly the intention of the British, or, at least, of Captain Philip, to take over Benin and its natural and cultural wealth for the British.
British troops invaded Benin on 10 February1897. After a fierce battle, they captured the city, on February 18. Three days later, on 21 February precisely, they torched the city and burnt down practically every house. Pitching their tent on the Palace grounds, the soldiers gathered all the bronzes, ivory-works, carved tusks and oak chests that escaped the fire. Thus, some 3,000 pieces of cultural artwork were taken away from Benin. The bulk of it was taken from the burnt down Palace.
NUMBER OF ITEMS REMOVED
It is not possible for us to say exactly how many items were removed. They were not catalogued at inception. We are informed that the soldiers who looted the palace did the cataloguing. It is from their accounts and those of some European and American sources that we have come to know that the British carried away more than 3,000 pieces of Benin cultural property. They are now scattered in museums and galleries all over the world, especially in London, Scotland, Europe and the United States. A good number of them are in private hands.
WHAT THE WORKS MEAN TO THE PEOPLE OF BENIN
The works have been referred to as primitive art, or simply, artifacts of African origin. But Benin did not produce their works only for aesthetics or for galleries and museums. At the time Europeans were keeping their records in long-hand and in hieroglyphics, the people of Benin cast theirs in bronze, carved on ivory or wood. The Obas commissioned them when an important event took place which they wished to record. Some of them of course, were ornamental to adorn altars and places of worship. But many of them were actually reference points, the library or the archive. To illustrate this, one may cite an event which took place during the coronation of Oba Erediauwa in 1979. There was an argument as to where to place an item of the coronation paraphernalia. Fortunately a bronze-cast of a past Oba wearing the same regalia had escaped the eyes of the soldiers and so it is still with us. Reference was made to it and the matter was resolved. Taking away those items is taking away our records, or our Soul.
In view of the fore-going, the following reliefs are sought on behalf of the Oba and people of Benin who have been impoverished, materially and psychologically, by the wanton looting of their historically and cultural property.
(i) The official record of the property removed from the Palace of Benin in 1897 be made available to the owner, the Oba of Benin.
(ii) All the cultural property belonging to the Oba of Benin illegally taken away by the British in 1897, should be returned to the rightful owner, the Oba of Benin.
(iii) As an alternative, to (ii) above, the British should pay monetary compensation, based on the current market value, to the rightful owner, the Oba of Benin.
(iv) Britain, being the principal looters of the Benin Palace, should take full responsibility for retrieving the cultural property or the monetary compensation from all those to whom the British sold them.
LIST OF HOLDERS OF LOOTED BENIN ARTEFACTS.
Almost every Western museum has some Benin objects. Here is a short list of some of the places where the Benin Bronzes are to be found and their numbers. Various catalogues of exhibitions on Benin art or African art also list the private collections of the Benin Bronzes. Most museums refuse to inform the public about the number of Benin artefacts they have and do not display permanently artefacts in their possession since they allegedly do not have enough space. See Dohlvik, Charlotta (May 2006). Museums and Their Voices: A Contemporary Study of the Benin Bronzes (PDF). International Museum Studies, p.26.
A museum such as World Museum, Vienna, formerly Ethnological Museum, Vienna, closed for 17 years (2000-2017) the African section where the Benin artefacts were, apparently due to repair works which were not finished before 2017. The museum re-opened on25 October,2017.
World Museum, Vienna, Re-Opens: Renovated Premises For …
www.modernghana.com › news › world-museum-vienna-re-opens-re.
Western museums holding looted Benin artefacts appear not to be interested in readers knowing the exact number of the looted Benin artefacts they are holding. Even the Benin Dialogue Group(BDG) does not appear to be interested in the public knowing the exact numbers of Benin artefacts they hold. One could have expected that the major museums would have provided an accurate list of museums and number of Benin artefacts they hold so that we could assess the importance of their proclaimed intention to loan Benin artefacts to Benin/ Nigeria. It does make a difference whether a museum lending one(1) artefact to Nigeria holds two, hundred or five hundred objects. Any pretence of the museums having a mandate or duty to educate the public becomes difficult to sustain in view of this singular failure.
Commons/Reginald Kerr Granville British looters looking at their precious loot. The remains of the metal roof gives an idea of the damage done to the building by the British invaders.
The following list does not pretend to be exhaustive but aims at giving an idea about numbers of the artefacts some major museums hold so that arguments about the policies of the museum can be measured against numbers. Hopefully, readers in cities where the museums are located would be able to ask a few questions based on this list and above all, ask whether figures given here are accurate and if not, what the correct figures are.
Berlin – Ethnological Museum/Humboldt Forum 508-580.
Boston, – Museum of Fine Arts 28.
Bristol, Bristol Museum 8
Chicago – Art Institute of Chicago 20,
Field Museum 400
Cologne – Rautenstrauch-Joest-Museum 73.
Frankfurt am Main -Museum of World Cultures 51
Glasgow _ Kelvingrove and St, Mungo’s Museum of Religious Life 22
Hamburg – Ethnological Museum, Museum of Arts and Crafts 200.
Dresden – State Museum of Ethnology 182.
Leipzig – Ethnological Museum 87.
Leiden – National Museum of Ethnology 98.
Lisbon- Sociedade da Geografia-3
Museu Nacional de Etnologia-3
Museu nacional da Arte Antigua-1
Liverpool- World Museum 40.
London – British Museum 700.
Munich-Museum Fünf Kontinente 25
New York – Metropolitan Museum of Fine Art 163.
Oxford – Pitt-Rivers Museum/ Pitt-Rivers country residence, Rushmore in Farnham/Dorset 327.
Philadelphia -. University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology 100.
Stockholm – Museum of Ethnography 43
Stuttgart – Linden Museum-State Museum of Ethnology 80.
Vienna – World Museum, formerly Ethnological Museum 200.
Zurich-Rietberg Museum 11.
According to Kathy Curnow, the following German cities have each not more than 25 Benin artefacts – Braunschweig, Bremen, Dusseldorf, Freiburg, Göttingen, Hannover, Heidelberg, Hildesheim, Mannheim, and Ulm. Kathy Curnow, IYARE! Splendor & Tension in Benin’s Palace Theatre, 2016,p. 201, WWW.IYARE.NET Printed in the USA by Amazon.com
There are considerable numbers of Benin artefacts in leading American museums and galleries.
Altar Group with Oba Akenzua I, Benin, Nigeria, now in Ethnological Museum, Berlin,
The notorious William D.Webster whose trading firm sold the loot from the invasion of Benin to collectors and museums in Europe.
Relief plaque with Oba Esigie with Ugie Oro Staff, Benin, Nigeria, now in British Museum, London, United Kingdom.