How did crown jewels from Ghana end up in London, and is there any way to bring them back home?
At the end of January, the British Museum and Victoria & Albert (V&A) Museum announced that more than 30 Asante
‘crown jewels’, gold artifacts that once belonged to the royals of Asante (or Ashanti) in modern-day Ghana,
would be brought to the Ghanaian city of Kumasi in April.
This, however, is only a loan deal between the UK museums and the Ghanaian Manhyia Palace Museum. British laws
ban museums from permanently returning contested artifacts to their original owners, which means that despite
the announced ‘repatriation’, the golden items, illegally extracted some 150 years ago, will only be temporarily
placed in Ghana. Will they ever be returned for good?
Historical artifacts aptly depict the culture of a people. Given the waning influence of African traditional
institutions, largely eroded by Westernization and cultural importation, societal narratives find resonance when
historical events and souvenirs are relied upon. When discussing the legacy of culture, tracing back to a time
of overpowering community influence on legal, religious, and nuptial relationships, these artifacts lend
credence to the veracity of handed-down stories.
Despite fluctuations in the gold trade over the years, Africa’s role as a significant player in the gold market
is firmly established. In 2022, a cohort consisting of Switzerland, the UK, US, Hong Kong, and the United Arab
Emirates accounted for about 60.6% of global gold sales. However, Africa still holds over 40% of the world’s
gold reserves. This reality underscores the enduring importance of the continent in the gold industry.
Central to this narrative is the story of the Ashanti Gold. The Ashanti region, formerly known as Asante, holds
historical significance for its involvement in the trans-Atlantic slave trade during the 19th century. Despite
this dark past, it was also renowned for its exquisite gold and brass craftsmanship, as well as its production
of Kente, a brightly colored woven cloth. These contributions to the global trade market earned the region,
which later became part of Ghana, the moniker ‘Gold Coast’.
It was an easily targeted spot for slave traders and gold grabbers who covertly masqueraded as traders.
Therefore, it features prominently in the African historical narrative of capital and human exploitation by
Europeans. Dr. Judith Spicksley, a historian at the Wilberforce Institute for the Study of Slavery and
Emancipation (WISE) at the University of Hull, in her seminal article ‘Pawns on the Gold Coast’, describes how
early in the trade relationship, Europeans took gold pawns as security for debt. However, as unorthodox rules
for slave operations weakened and the lust for more gold overshadowed the emergent supply, Europeans turned
increasingly toward the use of human pawns. This is no different from other exploitative processes that led to
the loss of precious resources on the continent.
Africa’s secret weapon: Extracting this resource will help present the continent’s true potential to the world
Read more Africa’s secret weapon: Extracting this resource will help present the continent’s true potential to
the world
Official evidence of the looting of Ashanti Gold began during the Anglo-Asante War of 1874, when Britain’s
military invasion of the Kumasi empire, sitting on the largest gold reserves in the region, inflicted much
damage. Armed with explosives and superior firearms, the British military went on a sordid quest for Ashanti’s
Gold Royal regalia – like the Mponponsuo sword created 300 years ago by the Kingdom’s Okomfo (spiritual leader)
Anokye, which led the list of looted items in 1874. Under the pretext of ending slavery, British military
incursions and lopsided trade treaties enforced with superior military might on African leaders occurred.
Leaders who resisted were exiled, like the Asantehene Agyeman Prempeh, who was exiled to Seychelles in 1874.
The British established trading ports, ensuring Britain declared itself a legitimate ruler on foreign soil. The
rulers of several African kingdoms acted as middlemen in these trades, often against their will, but had to
consent for self-preservation. The spoils from these conquered kingdoms paid for these wars. In Asante, the
Asantahene, ruler of the Ashanti people, signed the harsh Treaty of Fomena in July 1874 to end the war. A
standout clause in the treaty between Queen Victoria and Kofi Karikari, King of Ashanti, was the payment of
50,000 ounces (over 1,400kg) of approved gold as indemnity for the expenses caused to the Queen of England by
the war. Britain incurred costs from these wars at the expense of its opponents, destroying Africa’s biggest
empires.
1874 wasn’t the only instance of looting. In 1896, ceremonial swords, cups, and other vital items measuring a
palace’s royalty were stolen. In his 2020 book ‘The Brutish Museums: The Benin Bronzes, Colonial Violence and
Cultural Restitution’, Dan Hicks, a British archaeologist, anthropologist, and professor at the University of
Oxford, repudiates the presence of these artifacts in Western museums, which perpetuates a narrative of colonial
superiority and cultural dominance while erasing the histories and voices of the communities from which they
were stolen.
Although discussions about the restitution of African artifacts predate independence in most African countries,
they intensified in the latter half of the 20th century. Archaeologist and Nigeria’s head of the Federal
Department of Antiquities, Ekpo Eyo, sent circulars to several European embassies in 1972 about the repatriation
of the Benin Bronzes (thousands of 14th- to 16th-century plaques and sculptures taken by the British from the
African Kingdom of Benin in the late 19th century) and spurred official pronouncements like the 1970 UNESCO
Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export, and Transfer of Ownership of
Cultural Property. This convention offers a shared framework among state parties regarding actions required to
prohibit and prevent cultural property import, export, and transfer.
The convention emphasizes that the return and restitution of these cultural properties are the linchpin of the
convention, which mandates safeguarding the identity of peoples and promoting peaceful societies to strengthen
the spirit of solidarity and stifle the expansionary rise of black-market trades across the continent.
‘A violation of human rights’: Will the UK government get away with deporting asylum seekers to Africa?
Read more ‘A violation of human rights’: Will the UK government get away with deporting asylum seekers to
Africa?
After 150 years, the Ashanti Gold artifacts are held in various museums around the world, including major
museums in Europe and North America. The British Museum in London holds 32 of the 39 historical artifacts, while
seven treasures are at the Fowler Museum of the University of California in Los Angeles. Other minor artifacts,
which receive little attention, are held in museums such as the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City, the
Musee du quai Branly-Jacques Chirac in Paris, and other smaller regional museums or private collections.
In restitution efforts for the Ashanti Gold artifacts, complex legal and logistical hurdles are at play.
Firstly, there has to be established provenance through examining documentation, archives, and historical
records, owing to the difficulty arising from the long years of history and multiple transfers. Variations in
international laws governing the repatriation of cultural property also add to the myriad of challenges.
Transporting the artifacts from current holders to their destination and settling associated legal disputes or
financial concerns provides further complication. Collaboration among international partners toward this is
essential for successfully repatriating these artifacts.
In conclusion, this extensive discussion about restitution aims to deepen existing Euro-African diplomatic
relationships. The emphasis on restitution primarily lies in its utility as a building block for reconciliation;
it aims to rectify pre-colonial injustices, foster international dialogue, and advance the growing bilateral
trade between countries on both continents. The Ghana restitution experience will provide the policy framework
and lead the roundtable engagement for restitution claims from other countries in Africa. As noted earlier, this
action will not only demonstrate contrition but also make the most declarative statement from the West and other
collaborators regarding their penitence during this ruinous expedition in colonial Africa.
The mayor of Paris has reiterated her proposal that Russian and Belarusian contestants stay away from this
summer’s Olympic Games in the French capital, despite them being officially allowed to compete as neutrals.
“I want to tell the Russian and Belarusian athletes that they are not welcome in Paris,” Anne Hidalgo told
Ukrainian athletes at a training center in Kiev on Thursday, while on a visit to Ukraine.
The International Olympic Committee (IOC) initially pushed for a complete ban on competitors from Russia and
Belarus after the outbreak of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. However, last December the IOC ruled that a
limited number of people from the two countries could participate as AINs (individual neutral athletes).”
Hidalgo told Reuters earlier this month that she would prefer for Russian and Belarusian contestants not to come
at all. “We cannot act as if [the Russian military operation in Ukraine] did not exist,” she told Reuters.
When asked about Israel’s Olympic participation – in the context of the Gaza war, raging since the Hamas attack
on October 7 – Hidalgo insisted there was no comparison to be made.
Sanctioning Israeli athletes is “out of the question because Israel is a democracy,” she stated.
Russia has slammed the IOC’s difference in approach to Israeli and Russian contestants. Russian Foreign Minister
Sergey Lavrov has accused the Switzerland-based body of “political activism” and called its approach
self-discrediting.
The maximum numbers of Russian and Belarusian athletes that can qualify for the upcoming games are 55 and 28,
respectively. The IOC has noted that the teams are unlikely to actually meet the quota, with some 36 Russian and
22 Belarusian athletes expected to make it to the games, according to IOC director James Macleod.
Participants from the two nations can only compete in individual events, and not team sports, under a neutral
flag, and are barred from the Olympic opening ceremony.
Commenting on the restrictions faced by Russian and Belarusian competitors, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said
the move “destroys Olympic ideals and discriminates against the interests of Olympians.” Such restrictions run
“absolutely contrary to the entire ideology of the Olympic movement,” he insisted.