In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

  • Reflection on Benin Repatriation Conversation
  • Ndubuisi C. Ezeluomba

No doubt that the conversation about the repatriation of the cultural patrimony of Africa rages on […]. While the extraction and deprivation of cultural heritage and cultural property concerns the generation who participates in the plundering, as well as those who must suffer through the extraction, it also becomes inscribed throughout the long duration of societies, conditioning the flourishing of certain societies, while simultaneously continuing to weaken others. Repatriation efforts are commendable and important activities, which are carried out for the continuous reminder of indigenous people’s artifacts in someone else’s possession. It helps to cast light on the history and cultural relevance of these objects. By engaging with such debates, the essence of its importance will unfold and we can begin to implement concrete action towards the repatriation of the cultural patrimony of Africa, especially those looted from Benin kingdom in 1897.

The strategy, if any, adopted by American cultural institutions cannot be completely articulated at the moment. While some think that these institutions should be active participants in the drive to support returning looted artifacts, especially in line with the Native Americans Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), others feel that American institutions should only take their cue from the fallout of European cultural institutions’ action with regards to the repatriation of looted African cultural patrimony. Another aspect of this conversation that has been made silent is that of individual collections that remain kept away from the glare of the public. How do we reach these collectors to encourage the return of objects in private collections?

At the roundtable conversation at the de Young Museum in San Francisco held in February 2020, in which I was a participant, Dr. Barbara Plankensteiner and I looked closely at the restitution of art from the Benin Kingdom in the light of the Sarr-Savoy report (de Young Museum 2020; Sarr and Savoy 2018). Our discussion centered on the repatriation of Benin materials that were looted and removed from the kingdom after the military raid of February 1897. After a carefully orchestrated raid that led to the looting of over 2,000 objects created for the religious and social use of the Oba and a number of powerful chiefs, these objects were sold and resold to individuals and insitutions in many Western European countries and North America. The way that these objects have been used within the Global North has been subject to different critical debates. Even though it can be argued that the objects were kept and cared for in the various museums holding them, active conversations about their repatriation are what have enabled us to realize the tenets for which the objects were created in the first place. These conversations can further begin to repair the strained cultural relations precipitated by that historical event.

I have carefully listened to both sides of the argument on repatriating the cultural patrimony of Africa, and it is important to note that I advocate for a more nuanced approach. Returning these cultural patrimonies by fiat, as some have suggested, is not going to solve the problems caused by their forcible removal. Equally, ignoring the demand for repatriating these objects will continue to reflect the arrogance of occidental cultures toward the African cultures where these looted objects originate. However, the ongoing dialogue indicates that change is rife and, when adequately harnessed, can bring about the necessary conditions to help to usher the objects home— what I have termed “repatriate, but with sense.”

American cultural institutions’ approach should be careful and methodic. It entails trying to understand the contours of the brutal history of colonialism that got those works out of Africa in the first place. And as the case of the Rhode Island School of Design museum demonstrates, repatriating Benin art objects back to Nigeria is a complex endeavor (Raicovich 2019) that entails navigating the modern nation-state government to reach the appropriate cultural group, and all the nuances that accompany that bureaucracy. Similarly, there is the question of who to return the objects to. Bypassing the federal and state government and dealing directly with the Oba and people of Benin City amounts to undermining the modern...

pdf

Share