Should Britain do the same as Germany with stolen artefacts during colonialist times?

[EerieSilence]

I think every country should follow the suit, Britain, France, etc. It's time to own up to the shame that was stealing artefacts and filling museums with stolen objects they never intended to return in the name of civilisation.

www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/30/germany-first-to-hand-back-benin-bronzes-looted-by-british

They absolutely should be given back.
The Benin Bronzes could be toured by the Nigerian government, in much the same way the Egyptian government did with the Tutankhamen exhibition in 2019. It would be a fantastic way to raise money for the new Edo museum.

Oh please! I'm absolutely aware that Britain is just as corrupt as anywhere else in the world but there are policies and procedures here that at least lead to some accountability somewhere along the line. The country I'm referring to wouldn't think twice of bumping off people along the way if they questioned officials in the event of missing treasures. The empire was vast so I'm not sure how 'your' countries operate @RuggerHug and @VladmirsPoutine but the one I'm referring to, I wouldn't trust as far as I could throw them.

Also, the world has changed since the fall of the empire and some countries have been left fractured/split into new countries. For example, the Kohinoor diamond in the Queen's crown- which country would get it if it were to be returned? India because it was taken from Indian as it was back then? Or Pakistan since the Prince who owned it had a kingdom in an area that is in present day Pakistan?

Leave things as they are now and just make sure history isn't repeated again. As I said, there should be clear signs/information available so museums label where the artefacts are from and how they were acquired.

That should've said 'Corruption and crime are rife where my parents are from...

"taken from India..." not Indian 🤦🏻‍♀️

Okay so for full disclosure, my parents are SE Asian. This is an area where funds from emergency relief goes missing with no one having any idea where those funds have gone/where they've been spent. Also, historical places in the country are left to rot away so how will the go about preserving/conserving priceless artefacts that are much smaller in scale?!

cerealgamechanger I get that, I do but what I said was it's not the same situation here. When they can be returned and 'minded' (I just can't think of a better word to use there) then they should be.

How can you tell if items were purchased in good faith or stolen?
Some things have been in the UK for 600 years and obviously no paperwork.

Art looted by the Nazis is easier to identify but I think unless other items can be shown to be looted/smuggled, this will be hard to resolve.

@cerealgamechanger the country your parents are from sounds suspiciously like the country I was born and grew up in!

Look I get what you're saying, but honestly some countries are perfectly capable and have the resources to look after their own historical artefacts. And they are asking for them back - so why refuse them if they are being asked for?

Yes the world has changed, but is the specific diamond you mention being asked for by either India or Pakistan? Why not give back the ones that are being asked for.

And I said upthread, the UK could send their experts and resource to these countries to help them care for these artefacts, if it is indeed the artefacts that they care about.

@Mintjulia

How can you tell if items were purchased in good faith or stolen? Some things have been in the UK for 600 years and obviously no paperwork.

Art looted by the Nazis is easier to identify but I think unless other items can be shown to be looted/smuggled, this will be hard to resolve.

I actually don't think the question should be "was this acquired without stealing/deception/fraud" but "was this as a direct or indirect result of colonialism". There are absolutely some artefacts that were acquired through trade or as gifts but in many cases are as a result of colonialism and have greater meaning in and to their country of origin than they do in the UK. We don't need these artefacts in the UK and while we can try to understand them and gain understanding of the circumstances of them arriving in the UK they will never be in context in the UK.

I don't think it's highly likely that Egypt isn't going to want the hundreds of sarcophagus in the UK back so I don't think we're going to see all non-UK cultural heritage going back to their country of origin. Even my tiny local authority museum has a sarcophagus or 2 in its collection.

If, for example, French archaeologists had dug Sutton Hoo or Skara Brae (ancient site older than the Great Pyramids) and had the artefacts displayed in their national museums, would we expect their repatriation as we have a proven track records of being able to preserve, conserve and present our own cultural heritage. If we asked for them back but France refused I imagine we'd have a similar response to that of Greece and the Elgin Marbles.

There's so many other ways to experience cultural heritage now from virtual museum tours, digital collections and in-person visits nevermind the plethora of documentaries available, you no longer have to be in the same country as the artefact to see in, quite possibly more of it (3d online collections) than you would in person without all the queueing and crowds.

@RuggerHug

The whole idea of 'well you can come and see it here if you want and we'll charge you for the privilege rather than give it back' isn't something anyone here actually agrees with is it?

No, I don’t think so. But it’s also living in fantasyland to think a lot of this stuff won’t end up in the president’s hallway (in some countries, like the one I’ve lived in for a long time... not all). I think government needs to put thought into what all the options are, ask people in the relevant countries what they want, and find a way for them, not their politicians, to benefit economically.

Benin bronzes are a good first step and will be a helpful test case- if it works, there’s no argument to keep other stuff here.

If artworks and other antique objects hadn't left China before the 1960s, they would have been destroyed by rampaging red guards during the Cultural Revolution, because their mission was to destroy anything old. So there are often two sides to the issue.

Difficult.

When I see the obelisk on the Thames, in poor condition, not suited to our weather - I think yes absolutely.

Then I think back on my visit to Egypt in 2018 and the museum in Tahrir Square. During the revolution, Supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood broke into the museum, destroyed mummies and stole artefacts only half of which have been recovered.

So it is very difficult to truly say the artefacts we hold safely would maintain that level of security in their home countries. It becomes an argument of preservation at all costs or accepting risks in less stable countries as they originated there.

No idea what the answer is.

Boris Johnson is not about to put the Elgin marbles in his country home, no. And he’s not about to let them to be blown up by insurgents either (see: Palmyra.)

I am relatively sure that Greece is not a known terrorist hotspot, and all they did was ask nicely for the return of their national treasures. Unless you can tell us differently, I doubt the Greeks will be blowing anything up. Or letting anything be blown up.

@VeganVeal

Then our museums would be half empty, plus I think we look after them well

The guide at the Acropolis made very pointed remarks about the Elgin marbles but when asked What happened to the rest? she said they had been smashed and destroyed by the Turks! The Germans are apparently returning some bronzes, bully for them, brownie points all round, but are they going to dismantle the Pergamon Museum and the rest of Museum Island? Many of the treasures in the museums of the wicked colonialists are only able to be viewed because of where they are!

@Moondust001

Boris Johnson is not about to put the Elgin marbles in his country home, no. And he’s not about to let them to be blown up by insurgents either (see: Palmyra.)

I am relatively sure that Greece is not a known terrorist hotspot, and all they did was ask nicely for the return of their national treasures. Unless you can tell us differently, I doubt the Greeks will be blowing anything up. Or letting anything be blown up.

Really? Ask the Greeks where the rest of the Elgin marbles are.

@Mintjulia

How can you tell if items were purchased in good faith or stolen? Some things have been in the UK for 600 years and obviously no paperwork.

Art looted by the Nazis is easier to identify but I think unless other items can be shown to be looted/smuggled, this will be hard to resolve.

The Kohinoor diamond mentioned above has a long and detailed history of provenience and there is no doubt it was forcibly taken by the British off of a 9 year old prince (whose father himself had had it 'given' to him by a Mughal nobleman through torture):

www.historyextra.com/period/victorian/koh-i-noor-diamond-what-happened-who-owns/

As it stands, it's not just India and Pakistan who are demanding the diamond back, Iran has also laid claim to it as have the Taliban who think it belongs to Afghanistan!

Look I get what you're saying, but honestly some countries are perfectly capable and have the resources to look after their own historical artefacts. And they are asking for them back - so why refuse them if they are being asked for?

Because these countries are corrupt to the core (yes, more than the UK) and once their treasures are returned to them, they'll likely never be seen again as they'll be sold to the highest bidder! Sticking to the topic of jewels, the Mughals had the world's largest, most organised and envious collection of jewels. The Kohinoor aside, where are the rest of the diamonds, precious stones, jewellery that showcase Mughal/Indian splendour and that would've been genuine national treasures? Not in the governments state collection but in some private collectors vault:

www.christies.com/auctions/maharajas-and-mughal-magnificence

It makes my blood boil.

Look I get what you're saying, but honestly some countries are perfectly capable and have the resources to look after their own historical artefacts. And they are asking for them back - so why refuse them if they are being asked for? And how will you differentiate between them? How can you say to Country A ‘you’re quite civilised and your citizens behave quite well, so you can have your stuff back’ but Country B gets ‘we’re not returning your stuff because we think you’ll sell it to the highest bidder and your citizens are a bit too fond of destroying things in museums during riots for our liking’? There’s no way of sugar coating that. It puts Britain in the position of moral arbitrator of the world, which is what caused this mess in the first place.

Has anyone seen James Acaster’s comedy routine on this subject? Very funny.

No. It's pointless virtue signalling.

I think they are mainly in the museums that are free to visit in the UK. I think there really is a case for the return of the Elgin marbles now however. The general trouble with giving things back is that as we know, if you give something to someone because it is theirs, you can't really put caveats on it like "keep it well maintained on free public display". You'd only want to do it if you thought you were enriching the world and to me that means not keeping it in a president's vault.

@FaceyRomford

No. It's pointless virtue signalling.

Care to expand on that?

@cerealgamechanger

I'm cautious to pass judgement and require more evidence because history has generally been very kind to Ranjit Singh and he is considered to have been a good example of what a good leader should be like (This was being circulated on Twitter only last year Who is the greatest leader in world history?).

Regarding the Kohinoor, history was written by the victors who cynically exploited Ranjit Singh's child son Duleep; it was in British interests to suggest that Ranjit Singh had acquired the diamond through torture to make it look ok for how they themselves acquired the diamond. Even if Ranjit Singh did acquire the Kohinoor diamond through torture, then two wrongs don't make a right. Truth is, we may never know the truth...

There's a movie on Netflix called 'The Black Prince' about what happened to Ranjit Singh's son, Duleep.

What happened there seems to be more of an injustice than taking the jewel itself imo. Duleep converted to Christianity, so had a good grasp of what British values in Victorian times were. However, when his mum had explained the other side of the story later on in life she basically said, "the British Empire are not the good guys, look it up." After she died, Duleep read up about what happened to him as a child in the British Library and became very angry about the injustice because it was also blatant hypocrisy from Victorian Christian Britain. Queen Victoria was acutely aware of the advantage that had been taken of Duleep, which is why she befriended him.

Not much is written about what happened and it seems a lot of British people don't care.

Personally, I find it hard to reconcile how the current Queen's Mother could have worn a crown adorned with the Kohinoor as its main diamond and not perceive the loaded moral issues she was carrying on her own head.

It is a charged issue. If the British Royal Family never gave the diamond back to the Duleep Singh family who it was taken from in the first place (Duleep did ask for it back), then it's unlikely they will be wilfully giving it to anyone else. The attitude is more like, "We have it and that's that", but I suspect it's the risk of humiliation and an admission of "we stole this, here it is back." Not a good look for the Defender of the Faith, is it?

Pretty sure Old Testament God has a few commandments and one of those is "Thou Shalt Not Steal". Sound commandment even if you don't believe in God.

Britain could return the Kohinoor, but they can't return the lost/ended royal bloodlines.