Decolonising British Museums

In 2007 an exhibition featuring the treasures found in the tomb of Tutankhamun came to London. With the school curriculum focusing heavily on Ancient Egypt, I had an incredible fascination and my grandparents kindly took me to see what I had been learning about in school. I remember walking around in awe at these artefacts, before stopping completely in my tracks. I was faced with the sarcophagus of Tutankhamun, an image I had seen all over books for years, but here it was in person. The glimmering gold made it almost impossible to imagine that it was over 3000 years old, and yet here it found itself on the banks of the river Thames, in London. The story of the excavation made this day even more exciting, with the tales of curses being placed upon Howard Carter and those that helped him open the tomb. 

Being a giant lover of history, I feel incredibly lucky that I have seen some of the most famous treasures from human history, yet as the innocent curiosity of youth wears off, a greater degree of questioning begins. Does Britain have a right to house artefacts from other lands, especially those taken forcibly by the British Empire? Tutankhamun’s most fragile artefacts no longer leave Egypt, however there are a vast array of artefacts housed within Britain that are a point of contention. Having worked in medieval castles and producing podcasts centred around historical figures, I find myself fascinated by this almost polarising argument between those who believe Britain has a right to house these artefacts and those who want them returned to their homelands. However, despite these debates raging online, I feel it important to dig deeper, to find out what these artefacts truly mean and why handing them over to their place of origin may not be so simple.

I find it important to immerse oneself in history, it is only then where the vastness of human existence is made clear. Therefore, a trip to the British Museum was the first port of call on this journey into the artefacts housed in Britain. Founded in 1753, the architecture of the building leaves an almost Greek like impression due to the pillars as you walk up into the entrance. For a lover of history, this is a literal gold mine, and for those inquisitive as to the history of Britain, it raises many questions. The artefacts housed here are collected from all corners of the globe, and some questions are raised as to the acquisition. It is, however, important to note this is not just true of the British Museum, but museums everywhere. It was then I found myself in the lower levels of The British Museum, confronted by the Benin Bronzes. Created in the West African kingdom of Benin from the 16th century onwards, the Benin Bronzes are a collection of sculptures made from bronze and brass. The sculptures include commemorative heads, cast plaques, both human and animal figures as well as royal regalia. Having seen that Germany and France had recently returned the Benin Bronzes they housed, I searched into Britain’s position. I was struck by the openness of how these objects were obtained. The British Museum’s website reads ‘By the end of the 19th century, the Nigerian coast and its trade were largely dominated by the British. It is in the context of this aggressive expansion of colonial power that the Benin Bronzes came to the British Museum’. Digging further I discovered that in 1897, British forces launched an assault on Benin City, and whilst no official number of casualties was released, it’s clear there were many. The city suffered mass destruction, including the burning down of the Benin Royal Palace. It was then that the Benin Bronzes were looted and transported to Britain.

It is very easy to point a finger at the British Museum and demand them to return these objects, a trap I fell in to, and there has been a formal request for their return from the Federal Ministry of Information and Culture, Nigeria. Being the most recognisable museum in Britain, the British Museum often finds itself in the centre of debates such as this, however to frame this from one institutions perspective is an unhelpful narrative. This was made apparent to me when I had a conversation with Dan Hicks, a professor of Contemporary Archaeology at The University of Oxford, curator of the Pitts Rivers Museum and author of ‘The Brutish Museums’. His book highlights the more than 150 institutions that house more than 10,000 objects taken from Benin. Dan explains to me that “In many ways, a big part of my work has been to de-centre the British Museum from our conversations about museums, to have a more international conversation that talks about the many very significant non national museums in the UK”. 

It was at this moment I realised that I had fallen into a common issue of looking to the British Museum as the be all and end all of objects housed in the UK, without considering the scope of the conversation but in Britain and internationally. Dan cemented this by saying: “The majority of objects that were taken from the continent of Africa under colonialism, these are now in the UK museums such as Oxford and Cambridge. They're in Ipswich and Belfast, they're in Liverpool, Edinburgh and so on. More than 30 museums across the country with really significant world culture collections, most of which are essentially orphaned collections.”

I felt almost embarrassed that I had walked into a world about colonial artefacts and framed my questions from the perspective of what I had seen at one institution in London. It was this conversation with Dan where I realised that simply being interested and active within history does not mean I understood the true scale of what I was researching. “What's far, far more interesting, and I think far more constructive, is to look at those institutions that are making change and are finding out ways of dealing with stasis at legacy institutions that have in the past represented ideologies that have failed, that have no place in our contemporary world that relate to cultural supremacy” Dan explains.

So what happens next? With contentious discussions such as this can there be a middle ground that appeases everyone? Ed Stankus works for the National Trust and completed her masters thesis looking into 3D printing and whether this could be a possible solution for repatriation. “It's not just copying the Benin Bronzes and then having the fakes in the British Museum and sending the bronzes back." She explains, "It was if the museums can't have the real object because they haven't got the right levels of community or the museum temperature controls, they have the replicas and the museums keep the originals, or whether it's more of a trade or replica.”

From my discussions with Victor I am of the understanding that 3D printed replicas being sent to Nigeria would miss the purpose of what the bronzes represent. However Ed raises a very interesting idea. Could Britain repatriate certain items and then showcase 3D printed versions in our museums, with complete transparency? It is clear to me that these issues are so much greater than the objects themselves as Dan informs me: “The question of restitution is a question of consent. It's about consent in the past as to whether things were taken against people's will or in acts of violence. But it's also about consent in the present.”

Consent in the present. This relates to the argument as to whether Britain has a right to these objects as cultural ambassadors of other nations. It is not down to Britain to decide that, but it is down to the people of the lands in which were colonised by the British forces.

But could we not just write a label explaining how they were obtained? A question that many considered, particularly on a larger scale after the 2020 Black Lives Matter movement. Dan doesn’t think it is that simple: “You hear some voices that say ‘what we need is to hold on to these items and tell the story of how they were looted in all of its full horror’. That's what they were, that's what they were got for in the first place, so that isn't the answer. We have to find ways to actually dismantle this kind of legacy infrastructure of ideas over cultural supremacy  linked into colonial war.”

Ed explains to me how her trip to the Pitts Rivers museum, of which Dan is the curator, made her realise the ways in which items can be displayed in a transparent manner: “They're very aware of the fact that some of their objects have had contentious levels of acquisition. They were talking about how it's the real community that they want to hone in on, and the community rather than the object itself. They want to decolonize in communication and relationship rather than just the simple decolonisation of the object or the object label.”

Working for the National Trust, Ed has had to consider the relevance of the organisation. This is not to say she does not value where she works or how they work, but instead how they should operate going forwards. The demographic of National Trust members is ageing, and the ways in which they conduct their locations will need to change for younger audiences to engage with. "The National Trust is going to stay relevant and it is going to push for change, because that's what the general consensus is. Everyone's become more aware and conscious of colonial history" Ed tells me. It strikes me that the transparency that Dan is seeking will make its way through Britain due to a younger audience demanding more honesty with history. Ed explains:“I know currently, there's a big treasure house scheme at the National Trust. It's all about showing off our treasure houses and showing the history and actually appreciating the objects. Because I come from a decolonisation background, all the programs that I'm focused on now are very much like no, what can we tell them? What's the actual history?”

Standing in the British Museum seems like a lifetime ago, and the hunger to go to other institutions to see how decolonisation is taking place is compelling. However, the man who stood there shaking his head and almost virtue signalling now understands the importance of being open with our colonial past, as Ed articulates: “In a sense, British identity is having places like the British Museum, because colonialism was a part of our strongest identity”. It is easy for myself and others to demand the British Museum close its doors and return the objects, however this is a misinformed view. Whilst places like the British Museum are at the forefront of these debates due to their status in this arena, we should be looking at those working towards a more transparent version of history, both in terms of open dialogue with communities and relationships with other cultures.

Ed ends on a call for bigger institutions to get the ball moving faster. Due to financial burdens, smaller museums look to places like the British Museum to begin this research in order to validate their own work and gain funding. “In the short term, it starts with the British Museum, and then it trickles down throughout the museum sector as time goes by. So it's not a quick fix. Personally, I think the bigger museums need to start now. Because otherwise, there won't be any funding for the smaller museums, and there won't be any evidence and research to trickle it down later on” she tells me.

A 12 year old boy standing in front of Tutankhamun’s treasures 15 years ago takes it at face value, and does not consider the implications of housing items from a previously occupied land. Perhaps, with a shift in narrative and closer relations with communities and other cultures, a 12 year old boy today could understand the history of the Benin Bronzes, and the history of the land from which they originated. There is no harm in schooling about colonialism, but we must ensure that the stories of the lands that were taken are not lost.