Chinese Artifacts in Repatriation Row Were ‘Given Willingly’ to British Museum

The British Museum, renowned for its extensive collection of Chinese antiquities, has been at the center of debates regarding the repatriation of artifacts. Historically, many assumed that these treasures were obtained through imperialist plunder. However, recent findings by US historian Justin Jacobs present a different narrative, suggesting that a significant number of the artifacts in question were willingly given to the British Museum by Chinese officials.

A New Perspective on Historical Acquisitions

According to a report in The Guardian, Justin Jacobs, a history professor at American University in Washington, has unearthed compelling evidence that contradicts the widely held belief of imperialist theft. His research revealed historical documentation that Chinese officials in the last century actively cooperated with Western archaeologists, including British-Hungarian archaeologist Aurel Stein. Jacobs discovered that Chinese authorities valued the relationships they were fostering with these foreign scholars and the diplomatic advantages these relationships offered.

He said:

“These things did not have priceless valuations that we project on to them today… I have found new evidence that hasn’t been looked at before that will change our view of objects in the British Museum and other institutions.”

The British Museum has one of the largest collections of Chinese artifacts in the world. Glazed stoneware figure of a judgement figure, Ming Dynasty, China, 16th century. (British Museum/CC BY-SA 3.0)

Diplomatic Gifts and Scholarly Exchange

Jacobs’ findings indicate that many Chinese officials saw the removal of artifacts by Western archaeologists as an opportunity to build diplomatic and scholarly connections. Letters and records from Chinese officials and scholars reveal a perspective that these transactions were not seen as morally dubious at the time. Instead, they were considered beneficial for enhancing China’s international relations and scholarly exchanges.

For instance, Jacobs found a 1914 letter from a Chinese magistrate praising Aurel Stein’s archaeological methods. This and other documents suggest that Chinese authorities were not only aware of but also supported the export of antiquities for study and preservation. This cooperation was often framed as a way to enhance China’s standing and knowledge in the global arena.

The Complex Reality of Museum Collections

Jacobs’ forthcoming book, “Plunder? How Museums Got Their Treasures,” aims to challenge the simplistic narrative of imperial plunder. While acknowledging that some items, such as the Benin Bronzes, were indeed looted during military expeditions, he argues that not all museum collections share this origin. The book advocates for a nuanced understanding of how artifacts were acquired, emphasizing the need to consider the historical context and the attitudes of the time, notes the Guardian report.

This Benin Bronze, one of many seized by British forces during the Benin Expedition of 1897, resides in the British Museum. (CC  BY 2.0)

Reevaluating Moral Outrage

Jacobs posits that much of the current moral outrage over Western museum collections is based on projecting contemporary values onto historical events. He contends that both Western and non-Western actors of the time did not share today’s ethical standards regarding cultural property. This perspective encourages a reassessment of how we view historical acquisitions and the relationships that facilitated them.

Moving Forward in the Repatriation Debate

As the debate over repatriation continues, Jacobs’ research adds a critical layer of complexity. It suggests that not all artifacts in Western museums were obtained through coercion or theft, but rather through mutually beneficial arrangements that were contextually appropriate at the time. This insight could influence ongoing discussions about the return of artifacts, highlighting the need for a case-by-case evaluation based on historical evidence.

China’s state-run English-language newspaper Global Times argues:

“As long as Britain cannot prove which collection was acquired legally and honestly, then the mother country of these collections has the right to seek their repatriation.”

In light of these findings, institutions like the British Museum may need to reassess their policies and narratives regarding their collections. Acknowledging the cooperative aspects of historical acquisitions could pave the way for more informed and balanced discussions about repatriation and cultural heritage.

Top image: Two porcelain Ming Dynasty flasks, not necessarily part of the dispute.                Source: British Museum/Public domain

By Gary Manners