The Fate of Stolen Treasures
Should art and artifacts that were looted, or dubiously
purchased during colonial periods be
returned to their countries of origin? That was the topic of debate at a recent
dinner hosted for a German visitor working
at the controversial new Humboldt ethnographic Museum in Berlin.
The Parthenon Marbles of Greece, and the Egyptian Rosetta
Stone at the British Museum: the bust of Egyptian Queen Nefertiti and the Babylonian Ishtar Gate in Berlin, the Kohinoor Diamond now in the crown of the Queen of
England are the more known objects at
the centre of the tug of war. However
there are tens of thousands of objects in Museums and private collections
across the world that were taken by force or subterfuge.
In Roman times museums or ‘seat of the muses’, were places
for philosophical discussion. By the 17 C European museums housed curiosities
collected from all over the world. The
public display of artifacts as a consequence of war or conquest became symbols
of triumph for the conqueror and defeat for the conquered. The current debate about restitution or return
of these objects reflects a collective colonial guilt with strong arguments on
both sides of the debate. In 2017, President Macron of France
shocked the museum world by promising to return, within five years, the cultural heritage taken by France from
Africa.
It is difficult to imagine world famous museums stripped of
their collections and many suggest that acknowledging their provenance or how
they were acquired is enough restitution. A new
thought is to build regional branches of Western museums such as the Louvre in
Abu Dhabi where collections relevant to that region can be displayed.
There is also the question of who the objects now belong to
as new countries are formed, old families have dispersed. The Mughal Empire has
ended and in the new nationalist India there is no ownership of that culture. Should
Mughal artifacts be returned to Lahore, a Mughal city? Some countries argue they are deprived of
symbols of national history and income from tourism . Anthropologist, Charlotte
Joy, points out the irony of wanting to keep the cultural artifacts of
countries whose people are not welcome as migrants.
War Booty has a long ignominious history as long as war
itself. It is interesting that art and
artifacts retained such value in the midst of war. Tipu Sultan was barely cut
down in battle before British soldiers stripped his person and his palace of
valuable artifacts, now housed at Windsor Castle. Timur who built towers of skulls of the
vanquished, spared artisans to build palaces in Samarqand filling it with
artists, architects and intellectuals from across Asia. Nadir Shah devastated Delhi and 700 elephants,
4000 camels and 12,000 horses,
carried
out looted treasures, including the peacock throne. Art was stolen in
both World Wars, the Afghan and Iraq wars, and during the 1860 destruction of
the Forbidden City of Peking by British
and French troops. This was less a gesture of subjugation, as Changez Khan put
it “to vanquish your enemies ... to rob them of their wealth,” but more for
personal financial gain.
While most plundered
art has been preserved in its new locations, Cortez and his Spanish
conquistadores melted exquisite gold and silver artifacts taken from the
Aztecs. The ISIS destroyed numerous heritage sites. After the 1857 uprising in
India, British soldiers systematic ally destroyed almost all of Delhi’s Mughal
palaces, gardens, including some mosques and shrines. While restitution of objects is being
considered, what restitution can there be for cultures destroyed, native and
aboriginal lands confiscated? The claim
for Israel is based on reclaiming ancient rights. After 10,000 years of
civilizations defined by trade, migrations, exiles and conquests, of cross
fertilization of cultures, what and how much can be returned and to whom?
Durriya Kazi
September 30, 2019
Comments
Post a Comment