Benin-Kings and Rituals

”The exhibition is showcasing some of the works that made Benin (Nigeria) famous. It once again, reminds the world of a civilization truncated by the imperial forces of the colonialist. The works on show at this exhibition are some of the 3000 odd pieces of bronze and ivory works forcibly removed from my great grandfather’s palace by some Britons who invaded Benin in 1897. The British kept some of the loot for themselves and sold the rest to European and American buyers. These works now adorn public museums and private collectors’s galleries, all over the world.” [1]

The Exhibition Benin-Kings and Rituals was opened on 8 May, 2007 amid a lot of excitement and expectations. Statements were made by the authorities of the Museum für Völkerkunde, Wien and by a very large and strong delegation from the Royal Family of Benin as well as by the Nigerian Minister for Culture and Tourism, Prof Babalola Borisade. The Director-General of the Nigerian National Commission of Museums and Monuments also spoke. Traditional dances and music of the Edo people were provided by the Edo Community in Vienna, giving a befitting welcome to the Royal Princes as well as to the Minister of Culture and Tourism. On the whole, the opening was a very spectacular and exciting event in the recently renovated premises of the Museum in the Neue Burg. The presence of the Nigerian delegation and the Benin Royal Family in their splendid colourful dresses undoubtedly added to the glamour of the event which was attended by more than 800 persons.

The Royal delegation made it absolutely clear in their statement that they wanted their art objects back in Benin. Prince G.I. Akenzua, Enogie of Evbuobanosa, brother of the Oba, acknowledged that the Museum für Völkerkunde and all associated with the Exhibition had done a very commendable work in assembling the 300 pieces of Benin art objects in Vienna. .However, he cautioned that the participation of the Royals in the exhibition should not be construed as condoning in any way the British aggression against Benin in 1897. Some of the pieces are being shown to the public for the first time. The Benin Royals were also seeing for the first time some of the pieces which were looted from them by the British in 1897.They were grateful that their art works were being displayed in Vienna but they would have preferred to have this exhibition in Benin where they belong. On the so-called shift from the evaluation of Benin art objects in Europe, from curios objects or ”primitive art” objects to objects of high aesthetic value, the Benin Royals emphasized that these objects were evidence of their culture which were required for dating their history and teaching their people about their culture and history.

The Benin demand for the return of these cultural objects was made in a clear, simple and firm language by the brother of the present Oba and there is no way anybody could misunderstand their desire and demand. Obviously, there was no response from the Austrian delegation which spoke at the opening.

The Austrians who spoke at the opening seemed keener to praise the craftsmanship of Benin artists rather than address the issue of restitution.

An attempt to justify the unjustifiable

In the Introductory Note already cited above, the Oba of Benin, declared:

”We are pleased to participate in this exhibition. It links us, nostalgically, with our past. As you put this past on show today, it is our prayer that the people and government of Austria will show humaneness and magnanimity and return to us some of these objects which found their way to your country.”

On the third page of the Catalogue, p17, after the Oba’s very modest request to those countries and museums holding pieces of the illegally acquired objects, comes, in my opinion, the response of four museum directors of Western countries in a very remarkable preface which in its eurocentricism, arrogance, immorality and cynicism is only surpassed perhaps by the infamous declaration on universal museums:

”In 1897 a British punitive expedition seized outstanding works of art and ivory from the Benin royal palace. These subsequently entered museums across Europe, the United States, and Nigeria. From our 21st century perspective the military action taken seems unjustifiable; however, we must recognize the role it played in bringing these works of art to far broader attention. They are now forever on the map of world art and we are uplifted by the extraordinary aesthetic and cultural achievement they present…….The present consideration of these works within multi-layered discourses on the past - and on identity in the competing contexts and claims of local tradition, the nation state, and globalization - is part and parcel of the continuation of shifts in meaning and the persistent viability of the material documents of the past. Rather than catering only to western notions of other cultures, museums strive to explain the general causes and specific articulations of the past and present cultural diversity of the world. This approach enhances the pleasure of aesthetic enjoyment, while providing the necessary basis for the understanding of the cultural content behind the visible forms. History, whether tragic or glorious, lies forever behind us. We stand on its shoulders and direct our gaze to what lies ahead. We trust that this exhibition contributes to an ongoing dialogue between the past and the present, and between Africa and Europe and NorthAmerica, and thus to the collective shaping of the future against the backdrop of the lessons offered by the past.” [2]

We leave aside the way in which the brutal and unprovoked aggression against Benin and the burning and sacking of Benin City is presented in the text. No mention is made of the fact that the stolen objects were sold later on. The text merely states ”These subsequently entered museums”. An attempt is also made to implicate the state of Nigeria and Nigerian museums in the illegal activities even though that State had not been born in 1897.

The Preface by the Western Museum Directors is a brazen attempt to justify the unjustifiable and to cover up matters which should be made open. True, elsewhere in the catalogue these matters are discussed in detail but for a proper understanding of the implications of their peremptory statements we need some facts.

What are the implications of the statement in the Preface?

a) Even if we think the British aggression against Benin was unjustified and illegal (and the directors are not taking any position on this matter). ”we must recognize the role it played in bringing these works of art to a far broader attention.” In other words the subsequent spread of these objects in the world is being advanced to justify or reduce the gravity of the initial aggression. If we follow the logic of the directors, one could advance the argument that however bad slavery was (and one is not taking any position on this), it developed America or, to stay within the arts, it brought to the attention of a broader public the immense richness and the great variety of African culture. Would anyone buy this argument?

b) Whilst in their original context, the Benin objects expressed values determined by religious believe and dynastic interests, through their enforced sojourn in the west they have acquired new values based on the ”technical brilliance, formal elegance and iconographic complexity of their execution.” This shift in attribution of values should at present be seen within the ”competing contexts and claims of local tradition, the nation state, and globalization”. Packed in this argument is a claim by the Western holders of Benin works of art that in the past these works symbolized religious believes and could be claimed by the Benin dynasties but now, because of a shift in their values, mainly aesthetic, technical and formal elegance (determined by their Western owners) they do not belong to Benin alone. The authors throw in the nation state of Nigeria as having its own claims and in addition, there are claims said to derive from globalization. ”Globalization” here presumably represents the interest of the authors and the western holders. Even if there were competing interest of the state of Nigeria in this (as opposed to Nigeria assisting Benin to recover its stolen property), and I have no concrete evidence of this, it seems really strange that this should be articulated by western museum directors and not by the Nigerian state.

c) The declaration that ”History, whether tragic or glorious, lies forever behind us is quite remarkable as it comes from a group of western scholars in whose countries history seems to be of tremendous value and from directors of museums where evidence of history, whether in the form of objects or documents are of primary importance. Here we have these scholars telling the people of Benin (and by implication all Africans) to forget their history or at any rate, not to put too much emphasis on historical facts such as the aggressive British attack on Benin in 1897. They should forget their past and accept the present situation of continued illegal detention of their cultural goods by western museums and private collectors.

This confirms my theory that when it comes to dealing with Africa, some western intellectuals and their governments often request us to suspend our common sense and our ability to think. How else is one to explain such declarations? Can one imagine such a declaration being made with regard to the British, French, Germans, or Austrians or US Americans?

It seems the dialogue which is called for in various speeches and in the Preface is not seriously meant or it is a dialogue with pre-determined conclusions but not a call for a serious and genuine examination of the complex relations between Africa and the west in this area. A genuine dialogue presupposes an honest and open intellectual exchange of ideas. But how is this possible when we are presented with arguments guided by partisan intentions that are so clear to all who reflect a little.

Anmerkung

This Exhibition of the Museum fur Völkerkunde Wien-Kunsthistorisches Museum is in cooperation with the National Commission for Museums and Monuments, Nigeria, the Ethnologisches Museum-Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, The Art Institute of Chicago and the Musee du Quai Branly, Paris.

The Exhibition is in Vienna from 9thMay to 3rd September, 2007, in Paris from 2nd October to 6th January 2008, in Berlin from 7th February to 25th May, 2008 and in Chicago from 27th June to 21st September 2008.

Fußnote

[1] OMO N’OBA EREDIAUWA CFR, Oba of Benin, in his Introductory Note to the Catalogue of the Exhibition, Benin Kings And Rituals, Court Arts from Nigeria, (Snoeck Publishers, 2007, p.13)

[2] The Preface is signed by Prof. Christian Feest, Director, Museum für Völkerkunde Wien, Jean-Pierre Mohen, Director, patrimoine et collections, musée du quai Branly, Paris, Dr.Viola Koenig, Director, Ethnologisches Museum, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin and James Cuno, President and Eloise W.Martin Director, The Art Institute of Chicago.