Benin and Ethiopian Looted Artefacts in the British Museum

Organisations like the Monuments Men were tasked with finding and returning artworks and artefacts stolen by invading Nazi forces during WWII, although other organisations have instead chosen to keep the artefacts that they have found, and subsequently stolen, throughout their respective histories. While the act of looting tangible cultural history may once have been common practice in colonial expansion, artefacts that were stolen by invading nations and still remain in the collections of the invaders, now serve as a reminder of the deep wounds caused by imperialism and as a demonstration of the neo-colonialism that modernises these wounds. 

Most famous in the extensive list of collections built upon the practice of looting in the name of colonial expansion, is that belonging to the British Museum whose collection includes more than 900 looted artefacts stolen by the British army during the sacking of Benin City in 1897, most of which have never even been on display and have been denied repeated repatriation requests.1

Figure 1: Benin Bronze Plaque stolen from Benin city by British troops in 1897.

Similarly, the British Museum’s collection also holds 80 Ethiopian artefacts, including 11 altar tablets that were pillaged in 1868 during the British colonisation of Africa and these have also been denied repeated repatriation requests. Although, unlike the Benin Bronzes, the artefacts stolen from Ethiopia have been subject to significantly less public scrutiny likely due to the fact that, in the 156 years they have been held in the British Museum, none have ever been out of the storage vaults they were placed in when they arrived at the Museum in the 19th century. 

It is also important to note my inability to here add an image of any one of the 11 tablets because the British Museum has neglected to properly archive, photograph or publish all of the 80 artefacts.

Figure 2: Ethiopian cross stolen from Ethiopia in 1868 by British troops.

Often cited as reason for refusing repatriation is the British Museum Act of 1963 which the Museum board asserts bars them from de-acquisitioning any objects in the collection and while this legal barrier could have been seen as a genuine obstacle, 12 of the Benin plaques looted in 1897 by British forces have since been de-acquisitioned by the Museum and sold or exchanged with private dealers and collectors, the last instance of this was in 1972, 9 years after the Act came into effect.2

In 1972 Trustees of the British Museum exchanged two looted Benin plaques, then valued at £4,000-5,000, for a bronze horseman that was of “great importance” and privately owned by American collector, Robin Lehman.3 In order to do so, the Trustees cited Section 5 of the Act ‘Disposal of objects’, which states that “The Trustees of the British Museum may sell, exchange, give away or otherwise dispose of any object…in their collection if - (a) the object is duplicate of another object, or…(c) in the opinion of the Trustees the object is unfit to be retained in the collections of the Museum and can be disposed of without detriment to the interests of students”.4

Figure 3: Bronze Horseman exchanged for 2 Benin Bronzes in 1972.

The two plaques were chosen for the exchange as they were deemed duplicates, "because the figures on them occurred, not necessarily in the same arrangement, on other plaques".5 It is also important to note that, despite being of “great importance”, the bronze horseman that the plaques were traded for has been on display once since the Museum acquired it some 50 years ago - from February to April in 1991.

If, then, Section 5 of the Act allowed for the exchange of two plaques, one could easily question why Section 5 would not also allow for the return of the Ethiopian Tablets that have been held in storage since they were acquired as, having never been on display, taken out of storage or made available for the public to access in any way, they serve no museological or academic purpose to the Museum nor its visitors and therefore could be de-acquisitioned and returned to their rightful owners exactly how the Act requires - “without detriment to the interests of students”.6

The Ethiopian government has made several requests to have the stolen artefacts returned to which, after the latest request in 2022, the British parliament stated that, while they “recognise the importance” of the artefacts, they would only be willing to lend these objects to an Ethiopian Orthodox Church in the UK but they would not be willing to allow the artefacts to leave the UK for any reason or for any period of time.7

1 Dan Hicks, The Brutish Museum: The Benin Bronzes, Colonial Violence and Cultural Restitution (London: Pluto Press, 2020). 

2 Hicks, The Brutish Museum.

3 Katie Lynn Waltman, "A History of the British Museum’s Repatriation Debates of the Parthenon Marbles and Benin Bronzes," (MA thesis, San Diego State, 2020), ProQuest (28539938). 

4 British Museum, British Museum Act, 1963 (UK Parliament: London, 1963), https://www.britishmuseum.org/sites/default/files/2019-10/British-Museum-Act-1963.pdf

5 Waltman, "A History of the British Museum’s Repatriation Debates of the Parthenon Marbles and Benin Bronzes."

6 British Museum, British Museum Act, 1963.

7 UK Parliament House of Lords, British Museum: Ethiopian Sacred Altar Tablets, Volume 820: debated on Wednesday 30 March 2022. (London, UK Parliament House of Lords, 2022), https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2022-03-30/debates/D4615593-4C9D-40ED-95F8-A6575E74F257/BritishMuseumEthiopianSacredAltarTablets#:~:text=The%20museum%20has%20said%20that,Government%20fully%20support%20the%20trustees.

Figure 1: Benin Bronze Plaque (16th-17th century). Iron and brass, 49 cm x 34 cm x 6 cm, British Museum London. Item number Af1898,0115.31.

Figure 2: Cross, Bronze and gold, 41.8 cm x 24.3 cm x 2.0 cm, British Museum, London, Item number Af1868,1001.20

Figure 3: