New Indian Initiative on Repatriation of Artefacts Taken During British Rule

.

There has been considerable coverage in the past few weeks about the Cairo Conference on repatriation and now as a sequel about this or that nation which "wants its antiquities back please". Today the media stornm is about India's efforts. An example: New Indian initiative for art looted during British rule

"London, June 1 (IANS) Britain expects India to shortly ask yet again for the return of its artefacts allegedly looted during the colonial period and now showcased in various British museums.

According to The Independent newspaper, the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) is compiling a list of the stolen riches before launching a ‘diplomatic and legal campaign’ for their restitution from institutions, including the British Museum, the Royal Collection and the Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery.

Among the items quoted by the newspaper from the list are the 2.3 metre-tall bronze Buddha statue, excavated from Sultanganj in India’s Bihar state and which now resides in Birmingham, and the Amravati railings, a series of limestone carvings dating from around 100 AD and acquired from a Buddhist temple in Andhra Pradesh by Victorian explorers.

Also on the list are the Kohinoor diamond that sits at the heart of a crown made for the Queen Mother as the last empress of India".

These issues are highly complex. First of all, I am not sure about the use of the verb "looted" in these cases, the vagueness of the term is not helpful as in cultural property issue discussions it is being used to describe a wide variety of phenomena - as in the cases of the artefacts India wants back. There is a dug-up (the Sultanganj ["Birmingham"] buddha, 1861), a "detached from/knocked off (a monument)" [the Amravati railings, 'late 19th century'] and a "given" (OK, coerced at the the beginning of British rule in Lahore in 1849), the Koh-i-Nor . Now this is different from the Parthenon marbles ripped off in a foreign country and taken to England in accordance with the norms of the time but now seen as dodgy by ours. At the time these items were taken (or "looted' if you like) India was - like it or not/ rightly or wrongly part of the area ruled by the British (as the Raj and later - 1876- British Empire). This makes the Indian repatriation in some ways somewhat different from the calls to repatriate other stuff the Brits have stashed away. In others, the issue, imperialism and colonialism, are the same.

I think it is highly simplistic however to see Indian claims as mere "nationalism" as Cuno and his private collector and dealer supporters would have it. It is not "internationalism" or "cosmopolitan" simply to crate up and cart off the nicest loot (here the word does fit) from any country that happens to come under another's influence.

The Koh-i-Nor is an interesting problem. Even though the stone was recut in 1852, and the crown it is in at the moment dates only from 1937, it is one of the Crown Jewels, sort of fundamental to British national culture. But then for the same reason the stone is important to to Indian identity. Some interesting issues are raised by these new calls.

.

Vignette: the Satanganj Buddha 7th/8th cent AD (Birmingham Museum)