David Cameron’s point of view on the return of the Koh-i-noor diamond has had a lot of coverage in recent days. In many ways, the view that he gives is very similar to the line taken by the British Museum on items such as Parthenon Marbles & the Benin Bronzes – that the British are ideally placed to display these artefacts as part of collections from all corners of the globe, where they can be seen by many people. This reasoning always reeks of imperialism to me however – it is an entirely self-appointed role – the artefacts weren’t generally taken with this purpose in mind originally & giving the great museums of the world this role was never something decided by the original owners of the artefacts either. Surely, if the aim is for these works to be seen by as many people as possible, then India would be an ideal location anyway. England may once have been at the centre of the world, but with the rise of the Middle East, South East Asia & China, India is ideally placed to be a hub linking these regions. There is little in reality to link the Koh-i-noor to England, although it should be remembered that is an object that has always moved from place to place. No doubt, one day it will move on, beyond England’s borders, but where it ends up at that stage, is ass yet unknown.

From:
Daily Star (Bangladesh)

Sunday, February 24, 2013
Sunday Pouch
Who owns history, Mr. Cameron?
Ashfaqur Rahman

Last Week, British Prime Minister David Cameron, during his official visit to India, made a disconcerting statement in Amritsar. He said his country would not return the 105 karat Kohinoor diamond, one of the largest in the world, which was taken in 1850 from South Asia as a “gift” to the British monarch Queen Victoria. He reiterated that the “diamond in the Royal Crown is ours.” “I do not believe in returnism, as it were. I don’t think it is sensible. The right answer is that the British Museum and other cultural institutions around the world should make sure that the things which we have and look after so well are properly shared with people around the world,” he said.

The history of the Kohinoor diamond is a fascinating one. It was mined in the thirteenth century in Andhra Pradesh, and was initially in possession of King Prataparudra in that region. Kohinoor stayed with the Mughals for a long time. Emperor Shahjahan affixed it on his Peacock Throne to add glamour to the piece. The Kohinoor fell into difficult times when it was seized by Persian King Nadir Shah when he attacked Delhi.
Read the rest of this entry »

Most common phrases we here about diamonds today (not least the one used in the title of this post) were created by the De Beers cartel – an organisation that’s main aim is to boost the price & sales of diamonds around the world. Even without De Beers though, diamonds have always been highly valued & sought after by the wealthy.

The fact is though, that there is a long story to the Koh-i-noor – it only became British property relatively recently & was taken in circumstances that many today would see as morally / ethically questionable. It had been valued by others for a long time before Britain got hold of it & various countries still claim that it is theirs. Many analogies / parallels can be drawn with this case, although I personally feel that the comparison to the Parthenon Marbles is a particularly poor one & merely serves to highlight how uneducated David Cameron is about both of the cases.

That said though, the cases can still both be equally valid – and something needs to be done to work towards resolving them rather than merely brushing off requests with flippant remarks.

From:
First Post

Diamonds are forever… British. Why Cameron really can’t give back the Koh-i-noor
by Sandip Roy Feb 22, 2013

Diamonds are forever and they are for your EYES only.

So India, you can look but don’t even dream about getting the Koh-i-noor back.

Instead David Cameron has given India a parting gift – a post-colonial word – returnism.
Read the rest of this entry »

Costas Tzavaras, Greece’s minister responsible for cultural affairs has responded to David Cameron’s comments that he does not support the return of the Elgin Marbles.

From:
Athens Macedonian News Agency

Athens Macedonian News Agency: News in English, 13-02-21
Culture minister on Parthenon Marbles issue

AMNA — Greece and the United Kingdom have a different approach on the issue of the Parthenon Marbles, alternate Education Minister responsible for cultural affairs Costas Tzavaras said on Thursday in reply to statements by British Prime Minister David Cameron.

There is a clear “difference in approach and conception separating us (Greece) from the United Kingdom on the issue of the Parthenon Marbles”, he said.
Read the rest of this entry »

Following David Cameron’s comments that there were no plans to return the Koh-i-noor diamond, a group in Mumbai is proposing that India could leas the diamond from Britain rather than it being returned. Similar deals has been proposed in the past for the Parthenon Marbles, where they could return to Greece as a long term loan, to avoid the anti-deaccessioning clauses in the British Msueum act – although, all such proposals have been rejected by the museum.

I do not know what the legal status of the Koh-i-noor is. Unlike the Parthenon Sculptures, it is not held by a museum, but is part of the crown jewels. Now, this is a far more unique situation & I have no idea of the legal framework attached to items such as this belonging to the Crown – so whether any sort of loan is possible without changes in the law is unclear. If anyone knows more about this, please clarify the details for me.

You can vote for the return of the Koh-i-noor on the Made In India website.

From:
Times of India

‘Kohinoor must be given to India on lease’
TNN | Feb 22, 2013, 03.46 AM IST

MUMBAI: A citizens’ group has provided a unique solution to the tug-of-war over the Kohinoor diamond. It has suggested to the British Prime Minister that the UK government lease it to India for a period of 25 years.

“We do appreciate the safety and preservation that you have offered to the Kohinoor,” a letter from Shailendra Singh, head of Made in India, to British PM David Cameron says, before going on to offer a solution: the British government can lease the Kohinoor back to India for 25 years. The organization had asked Indian citizens to vote for a petition on its website, http://www.iammadeinindia.com, asking for the return of the gem to India.
Read the rest of this entry »

David Cameron’s comments on the Koh-i-noor diamond have provoked huge amounts of controversy amongst Indians everywhere, with thousands of posts on twitter speaking out against his attitude. The vocal attitude of the restitution supporters is to be encouraged – and perhaps other countries could learn from some of their techniques and apply them to their own campaigns. I was particularly intrigued by this comedy routine discussing the diamond – and its continued retention by Britain.

The British Prime Minister made apologies, for some of the worst acts committed in India during the time of the British Empire – something that may have required much thinking & soul searching (& possibly even a few conversations with lawyers about any potential increase in liability / culpability). At the same time though, this was only a statement, something that required no physical or financial commitment. On the case of the Koh-i-nor however, making any sort of commitment would mean that he had to actually do something rather than just talking about it.

The saying that actiona speak louder than words is well known – but the very different approach to these two issues by David Cameron suggests that our Prime Minister would far prefer to be a man of (cheap) words, than one of (expensive actions). Words are meaningless unless they are followed up by some physical commitment.

In part, the British PM is no doubt worried that the return of such a high profile artefact as the Koh-i-noor, a diamond famous around the world, that forms part of the crown jewels. He is worried that restitution could be a vote loser, whereas, the clamour of voices for return is still not loud enough for its continued retention to be seen as cause for concern. Where people think that there is a just case for return (of any artefacts), they must continue to make their feelings known – letting the current owners know that the issue is not going to go away if it is ignored – that some sort of compromise or negotiated agreement needs to be met. Almost always, there is potential for an agreement that can benefit both sides – but it often involves thinking outside the box, to consider what each side has that may benefit the other & most of all, to put aside worries about any temporary loss of face that may be caused by doing the right thing.

Throughout all of this, we must remember that the Koh-i-noor (like many other restitution cases) is a complex issue. Different parties take different positions on the circumstances of the original acquisition – was it a spoil of war, or a legitimate exchange? If someone’s hand is forced in making a deal, does the deal still hold the same legitimacy? Furthermore, India is not the only country claiming ownership of the gem – so even if it returned, they might then have to deal with other restitution claims from Iran, Pakistan & Afghanistan (these are the potential claimants that I know of – there may well be others).

Modern India is a very different place, from the one that gave up the diamond to Britain in 1849 – in much the same way as contemporary Greece bears little resemblance to 1800, when it formed an outpost of the Ottoman empire. If Britain wants to deal with (& benefit from the wealth of) these modern countries, perhaps it needs to do something to put right some of the actions that reduced their culture in the past – rather than just returning again wanting to take more (albeit in a very different way).

Where does this all leave the Elgin Marbles? Well, Cameron has previously made his (ill informed) views on this subject clear in the past, so the fact that he has not had a sudden change of heart should not be seen as a big surprise. What is ridiculous however, is his lumping of completely different cases together under the one umbrella – the suggestion that all cases should be dealt with by a single statement, rather than even starting to consider the varying individual merits & circumstances of each one.

Cameron upsets many with the use of the term Elgin Marbles – a phrase that has for a long time been deprecated by the British Museum & that (while known to the public), is no longer taken as being the correct name for these sculptures. Use of such terms in public statements, suggests that he has only a passing acquaintance with the actual facts of these cases, meaning that his cursory brushing away of any suggestions of restitution is all the more galling.

I spoke before of his use of the word returnism – a term that does not seem to have many other mentions elsewhere – perhaps I should not complain too loudly about this though – particularly as the title of this blog is equally guilty of nealogizing… I actually quite like the term – if I hadn’t named this site Elginism, perhaps returnism would have been a good alternative name.

From:
Global Post

Faine Greenwood
February 21, 2013 07:20
Britain doesn’t plan on returning Koh-i-Noor diamond to India, says Cameron

The enormous Koh-i-Noor diamond may have originated in India, but it won’t be returned to its original owners, reiterated British prime minister David Cameron on the third day of an official visit to India this week.

The 105-karat Koh-i-Noor diamond once graced the crown of Queen Elizabeth I and remains an integral part of the British collection of crown jewels, displayed at the Tower of London.
Read the rest of this entry »

British Prime Minister, David Cameron had already indicated in 2010, that he had no interest in considering the return of the Koh-i-noor diamond to India. During his current visit to the country, he has once again re-iterated his point – but this time extended it to cover other cases such as the Parthenon Marbles (although it is not the first time he has mentioned his views on that case either).

Taking this approach is a great shame. He wants to encourage greater trade links with India, and he has made limited apologies for some of the worst atrocities of colonial rule, but at the same time, his actions suggest that he still believes we are in the age of empire – that Britain can lay down the way problems are to be dealt with & that everyone else had to just buy into it, without any real option to put their point of view across properly.

He argues that the British Museum is already linking up with other museums around the world, but whenever this has taken place, it is very much the British Museum that sets the terms of how the relationship will operate – and in most cases is created to promote a two way traffic (i.e. to enrich the permanent collection in London with high quality temporary loans). Any reciprocal loans are something that they accept as part of some deal, yet it rarely feels as though they are a driving factor.

Cameron talks of returnism – labeling complex cases as though they are all basically the same & can be dealt with by a short comment, whereas the reality is that each case is very different. There is a huge range between cases, from those strong restitution cases where there is a clear argument for return & relatively weak ones, where for most people, the balance might sway in favour of them being retained, perhaps because their original purchase was legitimately made, or perhaps because of when / how they were taken etc.

Certain sectors of Britain’s ruling classes need to wake up to the fact that we no longer have an empire & that times have changed – we might have once led the world, but dragging our heels in the attempts to cling onto the past will be of no help in trying to regain this position.

From:
Kathimerini (English Edition)

Thursday February 21, 2013
Cameron rules out return of Parthenon marbles

British Prime Minister David Cameron has ruled out the return of the so-called Elgin marbles to Greece.

Speaking from India, where he is on an official visit, on Thursday the Tory leader turned down requests for the return of the Koh-i-noor diamond to Britain’s former colony saying he did not believe in “returnism.”
Read the rest of this entry »

David Cameron made apologies to India, about some of the wrongs committed by the British within the country during the colonial period. The apology stops far short of rectifying all the problems – for instance many in India are unhappy that the Koh-i-Noor diamond still occupies pride of place in the Crown Jewels. There are many more treasures in institutions such as the British Museum that India would also like returned.

From:
BBC News

20 February 2013 Last updated at 13:11
Andrew North South Asia correspondent
What David Cameron did not apologise for

By making a statement of regret over the Jallianwala Bagh massacre, David Cameron has opened up a can of other questions and grievances over Britain’s colonial past.

What about the British museum returning all the treasures looted from India during the Raj? What about sending back the Kohinoor diamond still embedded in Queen Elizabeth’s crown?
Read the rest of this entry »

India, like many countries has suffered heavily, both in the past & in modern times, from looting of its ancient heritage for profit by art dealers, who sell it on to private collections. In recent years however, they have started to make more efforts to put a stop to this trade – culminating in the arrest of dealer Subhash Chandra Kapoor in Germany & his subsequent extradition to India to face charges. Kapoor is accused of smuggling eighteen 18 temple idols from Tamil Nadu.

Intriguingly, the article refers to an artefact in the British Museum – that was returned to India, following a legal case. It does not elaborate on how this was possible however, as it appears that such actions would be in conflict with the anti-deaccessioning terms in the British Museum act, unless there are other relevant points to the case that have not been mentioned.

From:
The Hindu

CHENNAI, July 15, 2012
The murky trail of stolen antiquities
A. Srivathsan

When antique dealer Subhash Chandra Kapoor, 61, arrested in Germany and extradited to India for his alleged role in spiriting away 18 temple idols from Tamil Nadu, was produced before the Ariyalur court on Saturday, it marked the second most sensational development of its kind in the country. It also pointed once again to the inscrutable ways of the idol-smugglers and their ruthlessly creative potential.

The trail of the biggest such racket revealed so far was traced back to Jaipur. In July 2003, after a year-long surveillance, the police arrested Vaman Narayan Ghiya, the owner of a handicrafts shop in the Rajastan capital. His shop was only a front; in reality it was a hub of illicit trading in antiquities.
Read the rest of this entry »

It is nearly three years now since the New Acropolis Museum opened. Whilst it undeniably represents the best place for displaying the Parthenon Marbles, the sculptures in the British Museum still seem no closer to returning than they were five years ago. This is for a variety of reasons – the financial crisis has been a major distraction for the Greek government during this time, but even before it had started to really kick in, the government did little visibly to follow up requests for return with the British Government. The Parthenon Marbles can return, but it requires unrelenting pressure on the British Government & the British Museum for them to see that the issue is not one that is going to go away any time soon.

From:
Indian Express

Astonished by the Acropolis
Rupika Chawla : Sat Mar 03 2012, 00:31 hrs

The Acropolis Museum in Greece is a reminder of the lost Elgin Marbles and a rebuke to the British. It could also be an inspiration for India

What the strike is to the Greeks is akin to what the bandh is for us — a way of achieving results from the government when action is required. I suspect the Greeks have a strong, determined side to them that takes them to the heart of a matter with great clarity. Think of their response to the challenge thrown by the British, when the Greeks recently asked for the return of the Elgin Marbles — large sections of the Parthenon frieze, pediments and metopes carried away two centuries ago by Lord Elgin, the British Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire. Such a demand had been brought into prominence in the ’80s by Melina Mercouri, the actress, singer and forceful culture minister.
Read the rest of this entry »

Clearly, the British Museum is called that, because it’s a national museum, located within Britain. But beyond that, there’s not a lot of logic to the name.

It has been pointed out many times in the past, by many different people, that the British Museum is not really very British. That is to say, that not much of the stuff on display is actually from Britain. You have to really look to spot the exhibits from Britain, amongst all the artefacts taken from other places around the world. In this sense, it is more a museum of British imperialism, than it is one of modern Britain.

From my point of view, many of the artefacts there are legitimately acquired – however, the vague descriptions on the information panels next to them give you little idea of the real stories behind the acquisition of many of the items in their collection.

From:
Dawn

A pilgrim’s progress
From the Newspaper | M.J. Akbar | 2 days ago

THE British Museum should, in all propriety, be renamed the British Empire Museum. The largest repository of human genius is a magnificent tribute to three centuries of commercial and political power.

The Empire and its diaspora had three overlapping shores: lands that were directly ruled; regions under domination (hence Dominions) and an arc of grip sanctified by treaty (as in the Indian or Malaysian princely states) or justified by gunboat diplomacy (as in China).
Read the rest of this entry »

The British Museum is working with the Indian Ministry of Culture, to help to improve their country’s museums. This is a great idea, & shows a useful way that museums can collaborate with one another abroad. During an interview about this, MacGregor was also asked about the Parthenon Marbles & stated that they had been offered to Greece as a loan. In much the same way though, as the British Museum claims that Greece has never in recent years made an official restitution request, it could be argued that the British Museum has never really made any sort of official offer to Greece. There have been statements in the press, but as far as I’m aware, no sort of proper discussions with high level Greek officials. The British Museum seems instead to rely on previous assertions of ownership by Greece as rejections of such as loan offer, allowing them to assume that the loan would be unacceptable on this basis & therefore never even make a proper offer…

From:
Times of India

‘Get people into your museums’
TNN Jan 15, 2012, 06.20AM IST

Indian museums badly need overhauling and who better than the director of British Museum, Neil MacGregor, to help do it. In Delhi recently on an ambitious project in collaboration with the ministry of culture to train Indian professionals, he tells Archana Khare Ghose that exchange between all parts of the world has to go up.

Your team will be training Indian museum professionals. What do you think are the disadvantages that Indian museums suffer from but could improve upon? Fortunately for India, it has two of the hardest things to acquire in a museum – scholarship and great collections. All you need now is to get people into the museums. I think Indian museums are right now focused on their collections but it would be of immense interest for the public if they were to get opportunities to see collections from say, Mexico, China, Iran, etc., in their own museums through loaned exhibitions. The collection of the British Museum is available to see for free to all those who are “curious or studious, native or foreign” and we could loan them for exhibitions.
Read the rest of this entry »

The Asia Society in New York has discussed the benefits of a Wikiloot type database at their most recent meeting.

From:
The Art Newspaper

Asia Society debate: the dos and don’ts of collecting antiquities
Establishing a “Wikiloot” website to track illicitly traded antiquities is among the issues discussed
By Eric Magnuson. Web only
Published online: 22 March 2012

The Asia Society in New York held a panel on collecting ancient art in the 21st century on 18 March along with the American Committee for Cultural Policy.

The first half of the panel primarily covered legal aspects concerning collecting art from China and India. The international art dealer James Lally went into depth about some of the misconceptions that the collecting community has about the memorandum of understanding between China and the US, and Naman Ahuja, a professor of Indian art and architecture from Delhi, spoke adamantly about how he believed that western collectors should help museums from source countries by lending their expertise.
Read the rest of this entry »