‘This short-term restitution is no cause for celebration’
Campaigners say objects looted in colonial times should be returned to countries of origin, not loaned back to them, as in the case of the Asante treasures
When an exhibition of gold and silver regalia linked to the Asante royal court goes on display in Ghana’s Manhyia Palace Museum later this year, it will be the first time any of the artefacts have been seen in the country for 150 years.
In an agreement with the Victoria & Albert Museum (V&A) and the British Museum, all 13 pieces of Asante royal regalia, looted by the British army during the raid on and destruction of the royal palace in the 19th century, will be returned, including a number of other objects, on loan to Ghana. The items were acquired by the museum at an auction in April 1874.
Dr Tristram Hunt, director of the V&A, described the threeyear agreement as “part of our commitment to sharing collections with a colonial past”. Ghana's chief negotiator took an optimistictone,sayinghehoped for "a new sense of cultural cooperation" after generations of anger.
Academics and campaigners for thereturnofcolonial objects, however, were less positive.
“This is short-term restitution,” says Dr Nathan Bossoh, research fellowattheuniversityofsouthampton and expert in colonial museum collections. “True restitution is when items are sent back to the Asante and loaned by British museums. I don't think it is a cause for celebration necessarily, although it is a stepfurtherthanwhatmayhave happened in previous years.”
He warned continued ownership of objects taken in colonial times was a reminder of a painful history. “The Asante people are very proud of their heritage and cultural heritage and their memory of their history of war withbritainhasneverleftthem, sotheseitems,whichhavebeen since kept in Britain, for them represent that historical reality into the present,” he said. "They certainlywanttobefullyreunited with their items and I think for many of the Asante, they will only feel half joyful about this. Given the colonial history, the ideal situation would be a full restitution, not just for the Asante nation, but for various African nations and groups with looted material.”
The loan of the Ghanaian objects is part of an exhibition planned to celebrate the silver jubilee of Otumfuo Osei Tutu II, the Asante King known as the Asantehene. Osei Tutu II attendedthecoronationofking Charles III last year and made a state visit to the University of St Andrews in September. This is the latest return of artefacts obtained by Britain as a result of colonial rule.
The near-200-year-old row overthereturnoftheelginmarblessurfacedagainattheendof last year, when Prime Minister Rishisunakcancelledhismeeting with the Greek prime minister after Kyriakos Mitsotakis said in an interview with the BBC that he wanted the sculptures to be returned. This broke a promise not to publicly discuss the issue, which the Prime Minister’s office described as “long-settled”.
The sculptures known as the Elgin marbles – 17 figures and part of a frieze that decorated the 2,500-year-old Parthenontempleonthe Acropolis – were taken by Fife-born Lord Elgin in theearly19thcentury.theyhave since been the subject of a longrunning dispute over where they should be displayed.
National museums are tied to a certain extent to government policy, which has so far been concerned that returning any colonialera-obtainedtreasures couldstartanavalancheofsimilarrequests,decimatingnational collections. The 1963 and 1983 British Museum Act and National Heritage Act essentially means that full returns are prohibited.
“It seems like the current government is not really keen to work on restitution and repatriation cases,” says Dr Bossoh. “France and Germany, on the other hand, have recently funded a major research initiative, of which it seems to logi
cally follow will likely lead to active returns
Scotland’s national museums have similar issues. In 2022, Glasgow Museums agreed to return seven stolen artefacts to India.sixoftheitems,including 14th-century carvings and 11thcentury stone door jams, were stolenfromshrinesandtemples in the 19th century.
Meanwhile,theseventhobject, aceremonialswordanditsscabbard was stolen in 1905 from the collection of the Nizam of Hyderabad by his prime minister and then sold to the British general Sir Archibald Hunter. All of the artefacts were gifted to Glasgow Museums.
In August, the return of the Ni’isjoohlmemorialpoletocanada from the National Museum of Scotland was hailed by campaigners as not only a victory for the Nisga'a Nation, but for all activists fighting to have artefacts returned to their native countries. It has placed further pressure on institutions to return disputed objects to their native lands.
The pole was carved from red cedar in 1855 by artist Oyea Tait inmemoryofts’aawit,anisga’a chief. Nisga'a researchers say the pole, which was sold to the museum by Canadian anthropologist Marius Barbeau in 1929, was stolen without consent while locals were away from their villages for the annual hunting season.
The museum believes it acted in good faith, but now understandstheindividualwho"sold" it to Mr Barbeau did so "without the cultural, spiritual, or political authority to do so on behalf of the Nisga'a Nation".
National Museums Scotland said at the time it had only one outstanding request for the return of an item in its collection–totransferitsbeninbronzes, taken from the West African nation by British troops during an 1897 raid on the royal palace of Benin, which were later sold to the museum. However, the Scottish Government would have to approve any such transfer.