Published:
Table of Contents
Editorial: Prof. Gloria Emeagwali
Eniola Adediran-Olade: Aso-Oke: Color Techniques, Archaeological Findings, and Semiotics
Gloria Emeagwali: The Raw Materials and Implements of Classical African Textiles
Kwame Opoku: The British Museum and the Victoria and Albert Museum artifacts of Ghana
SOUTH AFRICA AT THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE, JANUARY 11, 2024
Editorial
This issue of Africa Update explores various dimensions of textile production and creativity in Africa, including the raw materials used, and the implements invented by Africans, to produce various types of fabric. Diverse types of cloth were invented and popularized across the continent. Africans can boast of the invention of unique types of fabric such as raffia from species of the palm tree, and specific types of cloth such as Sanyan. Kente, Aso-Oke, Adire and others. Ancient northeast Africans were no less inventive, starting with ceramic spindle whorls from Nubia, dated around 6000 BCE, the first of such invention known, in the world, for the production of cotton. Egyptian linen was the product of creativity as well, and based on the processing of flax. The articles by Eniola Adediran- Olade and Gloria Emeagwali, the present writer, provide more details of Africa's extraordinary contribution to the world of textiles. Africa's creativity soared high above the famous Africanized wax prints.
In this issue, Kwame Opoku an award-winning activist and advocate for the return of expropriated pilfered artifacts, discusses Asante looted artifacts in the British Museum and the Victoria and Albert Museum. The original article, published in Modern Ghana on 28.02.2024, displays some of these exquisite artifacts.
Included in this issue is a link to South Africa's historic legal case that was launched at the International Court of Justice on December 29, 2023.
Professor Emeagwali
Chief Editor, Africa Update
Aso-Oke: Color Techniques, Archaeological Findings, and Semiotics
Eniola -Adediran- Olade *
Universidade Nova de Lisboa
Introduction
Historically, clothing has been integral to African communities' social, religious, political, economic, and cultural lives. In addition to spinning, carding, weaving, and dyeing, techniques were used to exploit and preserve raw materials in Yoruba communities before Arab and European intrusion. Aso-Oke is a "top-cloth," or fabric worn on top, illustrating the people's robust dress culture.[1] Aso Oke may contain 15–17 strips while Iborùn are shawls composed of 10–12 strips. They can be draped over the shoulder or tied around the waist following the fashion of the time. The Bùbá is a basic round neck T-shirt that is fashioned into a wide-loose blouse, and the Gèlè is a head-wrap or gear made up of 7–10 strips wrapped around the head. Aso Oke is popularised in three major types. Sanyanis an expensive Yoruba handwoven and valuable fabric. It is made from spun silk collected from the cocoons of the Anapbe infracta moth. Sanyan is popular for ceremonial occasions such as weddings and chieftaincy ceremonies. Alaariis also made from silk thread. It is either crimson or magenta, and there is a belief that it can be woven from Sanyan thread, dyed red or maroon. Etù (Fowl) has striped warps, a blue checkerboard, and a pattern-weave structure. The white stripes are woven from wild silk in the local area. Etù is repeatedly dyed in indigo blue, and removed for drying and stretching, at intervals. Elders and chiefs typically wear it during significant ceremonies. Weaving was one of the earliest methods of textile production in the areas occupied by the Yoruba people. In West Africa, where Yoruba people reside, the earliest clothing was made from animal hides, baobab trees' bark, and raffia palm leaves[2] But from a historical viewpoint, Olaoye proposes that African textile technology stemmed from early experiments with and use of fibrous materials[3] Before spinning yarn into weaving, these experiments used flat or round vegetable materials to make basketry and matting. Wool was readily available in some regions before the year 1000. As these resources became available and procured, clothing gained value, and weaving became a form of art, long before the 19th century.
Complex Color Techniques and Classifications
Documented evidence in Clarke asserts that there had been interregional trade in the 19th century between Fulani-ruled Sokoto from the North, to the southern margin of a trading system that included cotton farmers, spinners, weavers, indigo dyers, and cloth beaters (Clarke, 1998).
Tailors, embroiderers, and traders were also prominent.4 The Nupe and Yoruba were all part of this trading system. According to Perani, Yoruba terms such as alaari and sanyan are derived from Hausa terms such as alharini and tsamiya, and Hausa and Nupe terms such as saki and zabo (i.e., guineafowl) are used for etu.5 However, there have been recent attempts to prove this wrong by comparatively historicizing color terminologies and techniques.
Clarke talked to Chief Taiwo Francis, an engineer, and the famous Chief Ikarun of Oyo, who used Yoruba color terms to look at the differences. He claimed the popularized Islamic effect could not have happened because the Yorubas wove with wild silk from the era before cotton was widely available. Anaphae, a type of wild silkworm, has been used by local and regional indigenous people. Sanyan, usually pale grayish brown, is made of yarn spun from cocoons by anaphae caterpillars.6 It is found in many places in intertropical Africa, such as Nigeria, Uganda, Kenya, Cameroon, Congo, and Togo. Additionally, the Iseyin aso oke is woven from locally obtained wild silk called Tussah.7 Alaari is made from Sanyan and red camwood, resulting in an intensely red color. To make camwood dye, you need to get the roots of Baphia nitida, a forest plant widely used to make dyes, found worldwide, especially along the coasts of West Africa.8
Ademuleya accounts that Etù' is predominantly dark blue (indigo) with fine light blue accents. It is usually made of indigo-dyed cotton.9 The earlier ones supposedly had a high percentage of Sányán silk.10All these ways of dyeing came before the Trans-Saharan trade, and Yoruba philosophy and oral tradition support this claim. Some scholars have attributed the Yoruba terminologies for colors and the use of dyes to Orunmila, the Yoruba God of wisdom and divination, who created a pattern of dyes in different colors. This is according to the Eji Ogbe, the first of 256 chapters of Ifa divination oral literature. Some say that the gods guided the Ifa pioneer to use the material technology of specific birds to create colored fabrics with patterned designs.: Agbe (Lamprotonis chalybaus, the Greater Blue-eared Glossy Starling), Aluko (Merops nubicus, the Carmine Bee-eater), Odidere (Psittacus erithacus, the African Grey Parrot), Akuko, Lekeleke, and Agbufon.11 According to Yoruba mythology, the birds that Areo details were each divinely inspired and authorized to utilize indigo, camwood, palm oil, chalk, and other color pigments at the time of their creation in the primordial era. She also referred to a passage from the Eji Ogbe that describes the use of color in daily life, showing that the Yoruba have known these colors from their inception.
Ifa says it is primal and inimitable.
I say it becomes imitable.
It was inquired which of the birds wishes to distinctively portray God's Creative Will.
They said it is Agbe,
lamprotonis chalybaus, the Greater Blue-eared Glossy Starling.
It was then decreed that Agbe be directed to dip its plumage in (indigo) dye.
Ifa says it is primal and inimitable I say it becomes
imitable.12
Socially among the Yoruba, the color classification in Aso oke usage reflects the culture itself. The magenta/crimson-red designs of Alaari represent the noble nature of weddings. Akanle describes the reddish patterns as reflecting the colorful environment surrounding marriage in Yorubaland. 13 Dark blue is the color for funerals. It can thus be inferred that respect for the dead is demonstrated in the Yoruba culture, in part, through special colors. In other contexts, Etu is associated with people of high societal caliber, while other colors are synonymous with the indigent. 14
The antiquity of the production of aso oke centers around the Yoruba triad of basic colors: pupa, funfun, and dudu.
Table 1
| Triadic Terms | Pupa (Red) | Funfun (White) | Dudu (Black) |
| Colors | red, yellow, orange | white, all pale shades, including beige | black, dark blue, dark brown, dark green |
Colors have been associated with deities. The divination deity Orunmila and Esu, also known as the trickster, have been associated with the color black. Red has been associated with Ogun, the God of iron and warfare. The color white has been associated with Obatala, the creative deity, whose name is frequently translated as "Lord of white cloth." 15 Most productive activities revolve around these three sets of colors, particularly farmers describing their soil, and weavers who work with a broad spectrum of hues, which Okediji refers to as "Pidgin Chromacy."
Orunmila's documentation of color classifications, references to color dyeing techniques, silk production that predated cotton production, and color classification techniques with widely held symbolic associations, show that references to Islam, Northern Nigeria, or trans-Saharan trade as motivating factors in the development of the Aso-oke industry may no longer be valid, after decades of additional research.
Direct and Indirect Archaeological Evidence
Many will say that Orunmila is mythological. Still, radiocarbon evidence has dated Orunmila back to the duration of the pre- Oduduwa period, which was initially unknown. Akínjógbìn, arguing from some radiocarbon dates obtained in Ilé-Ifè, suggests that the Odùduwà period had already begun by the ninth century.16 Some sources have written that Orunmila predated Oduduwa's existence by at least 10,000 years, while Oluwole asserted that Orunmila was a historical personality born around 500 B.C.17 Consequently, if Orunmila was real, his color classifications, symbolism, and dyeing procedures supported a well-established weaving business before Islamic and European influence.
As shown and documented in the works of Olajide, Ajiboye, and Ajayi, the origins of textile production and usage in Nigeria, especially among the Yoruba, are among the most common challenges for researchers.18 It is possible to date Nigerian textile products. Archaeological evidence at Igbo Ukwu in southern Nigeria, suggests and dates textile production back to the 9-11th century A.D. Various textiles made from vegetable fibers were discovered together with metal artifacts.19 A reference from Shaw dates Igbo Ukwu wood using an uncalibrated radiocarbon age B.P. (940 ± 370), giving it a median probability of 1046 AD.20 The Yoruba are well-known neighbors of the Igbo, and, the Igbo and Yoruba relationships predate Oduduwa. They are dated back to 500 - 800 AD. Asakitikpi alleges that the broadloom weaving techniques probably date back to the 15th century when the Oduduwa conquered the Igbo people. By this time, textile industries had already been established. 21 In Esie, figures depict males and females in various occupations and social statuses. Many sculptures portray affluence, as seen in their luxurious woven clothes, bulky beads, and intricate designs. Caps seemingly made of fabric, can be seen on several heads,22 probably woven. Archaeological evidence subsequently established that the fragments of stone sculptures discovered on the site date to between the 16th and 17th centuries A.D.23 Additional excavations placed their creation somewhere between the 10th and 17th centuries A.D.24More complex cotton and raffia textiles from Benin were dated to the late 13th or early l4th centuries. Fragments of indigo-dyed cotton and best fiber blend textiles dating to the 13th century have been found in royal graves in Benin City.25 In addition to being linguistically related, the Edo people of Benin city and the Yoruba share a long history of cultural exchange. This could have found its way or already established in nearby Yoruba kingdoms or municipalities close to the Benin Kingdom.26 This means that the Igbos were more likely to influence the Yoruba industry than the Hausa-Fulani, as major interactions with the North did not occur until the 15th century when power moved from Ile-Ife to Old Oyo.
Weaving and Motif Semiotics
Europe sourced large quantities of cloth for resale to Brazil, Gabon, and the Gold Coast in the 16th and 17th centuries. Although no examples have been found, the single heddle vertical loom appears to have produced cloth for this trade. According to Clarke, Dutch traders recognized and described the Aso oke as plain as possible. The Royal Scottish Museum, Edinburgh, has Ijebu Aso-olona dated from the 1790s.27 There was a highly established textile industry before the year 1000 since wool and locally produced cotton were available in certain locations. Weaving became one of the oldest essential skills of civilization because of the high emphasis placed on textiles.
In semiotics, one emphasizes signs and symbols' functions in both artificial and natural languages and their syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic properties.28 These symbols were commonly used in pre-Islam and pre-European contact. In ancient Yoruba writing, gestures, images, and objects used as motifs are considered to have the same semiotic significance as spoken texts. 29Among the forms of writing defined by Asakitikpi are inscriptions, drawings, engravings, and carvings that allow both visibility and comprehension for the reader, as well as allow the reader to absorb the information so written, and make sense of it. 30 The core of Aso-Oke may be observed in the weaver's use of smaller geometries to fill in the empty spaces surrounding the main picture. Motifs transmit messages, and unique patterns and beauty are created. Aso- Oke could, in this state, present itself as a pre- colonial written primary source of a rare kind.
Rather than draw from Arabic inspiration, the Yoruba designs on the Aso- Oke are deeply engraved in the culture of its people. Aremu exemplifies this point using the gecko (Omoole) and the cricket teeth ((Eyin-Ire). 31Traditional beliefs hold that geckos were always present in every dwelling place and represented a sense of comfort, security, confidence, and intimacy, which makes a gecko motif an important symbol. As a result, mothers feel their children will experience similar feelings towards their parents and society, when they wear such clothes. Mothers hope that as the gecko is always present in the place, so should their children never leave their parents' place. This symbolic clothing was specially designed for Abiku children. Pregnant women use cricket motifs designed to facilitate the delivery of healthy babies who cry sharply like crickets. When crickets appear on earth, they sound happy and healthy, and mothers hope their babies will grow up to be happy and healthy. 32
Furthermore, Asakitikpi asserts that this demonstrates a four-way dimensional communication; the first level is the metaphysical communication of the mother to her unborn child, the second is a positive or negative communication from the child, and the third level is the society's pleas to the gods not to give them a sickly child. The fourth dimension is the reply of the gods, which is either positive or negative.33
Geometric motifs are also popular general design motifs of Aso Oke. Geometric motifs come in various forms on Yoruba textiles, but generally in straight lines on Aso Oke. Lines in the Yoruba world view are an imprint of culture or one's civilization. According to Thompson, as cited in Areo, lines impose human order into the disorder of nature.34 Areo maintains that lines connect different realms in human and spiritual experience. To Yorubas, a line is an art rooted in the culture. Etu is known for its checkerboard lines and Sanyan and Alaari usually have striped warps. With Aso Oke, there are also some abstract arrangements of triangles and squares.
Conclusion
Most of the evidence in this research points to the introduction of Islam or contact with Europeans as being very unlikely to be initial sources for weaving among the Yoruba, particularly, Aso Oke. Archaeological evidence provides empirical and rational proof of the existence of the culture and civilization from which they were unearthed. Radiocarbon dating is an excellent technique for calculating the age of allegedly legendary people, such as Orunmila or Obatala. Supposing that these prominent deities initially had a place and a date in history, additional research might widen the knowledge of the kind of civilizations in which they lived, and the occupations that were prevalent at the time including weaving. Figures shown on Esie soapstone were correctly identified as wearing headdresses and belts.If historians felt that sculptures from the 10th to 17th centuries were true expressions of society, they should be prompted to delve further into the origins of weaving among the Yoruba of Southwestern Nigeria.Even though Houlberg and Stevens believe that the Esie statistics must have been obtained from someplace, they invalidate the use of "soft data." However, when employing archaeological approaches to trace the origins of weaving, "soft data" cannot be overlooked. Oral traditions, mythological and religious textual accounts, cosmological interpretations, comparisons with motifs, and certain possible symbolisms cannot be overlooked because most of these "soft data" are West African artistic traditions inherent in "hard data" based on core archaeology and geology. Aso Oke reflects not just abstracts but the culture of the Yoruba. Through the symbols on the cloth, a glimpse of Yoruba weaving history is revealed, and through these symbols, a glimpse of its past can be discovered. As a result, this article asks whether more segments of archaeology and the study of motifs and color technology can be employed to shed light on the origins of weaving in Southwestern Nigeria, focusing on other factors besides the ambiguity of the term "unknown" and the over flogged and questionable influence of Islam and Europe.
*Doctoral Student, Universidade Nova de Lisboa
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Notes
1. John Picton and John Mack, African Textiles (London: British Museum Press, 1999).
2. Eniola Adediran-Olade, "Changing Patterns in Aso-Oke Industry, 1900-2000" (M.A. Thesis, 2015).
3. R.A Olaoye, "A Study of Twentieth Century Weaving in Ilorin Nigeria," Africa Study Monographs 10, no. 2 (1989): 84.
4. Duncan Peter Clarke, "Aso Oke: The Evolving Tradition of Hand-Woven Textile Design among the Yoruba of South-Western Nigeria" (Thesis, 1998), https://eprints.soas.ac.uk/33975/1/11015719.pdf.
5. Judith Perani, "History, Design, and Craft in West African Strip-Woven Cloth: The Cloth Connection: Patrons and Producers of Hausa and Nupe Prestige Strip Weave in History, Design, and Craft in West African Strip-Woven Cloth (1992).
10. Venice Lamb and Judy Holmes, Nigerian Weaving (Oxford England: H.A. & V.M. Lamb, 1980).
11. Margaret Olugbemisola Areo and Razaq Olatunde Rom Kalilu, "Origin of and Visual Semiotics in Yoruba Textile of Adire," Arts and Design Studies 12 (2013): 22–34.
12. Margaret Olugbemisola Areo and Razaq Olatunde Rom Kalilu, "Origin of and Visual Semiotics in Yoruba Textile of Adire," Arts and Design Studies 12 (2013): 22–34.
14. Titi Euba, "Dress and Status in Nineteenth Century Lagos" in a History of the Peoples O F Lagos State, ed. A. Adefuye, B. Agiri, and J. Osuntokun (Lagos: Lantern Books, 1987), 146.
15. Moyo Okediji, "Yoruba Pidgin Chromacy," in Oritameta Proceedings: International Conference on Yoruba Art edited by Moyo Okediji, pp. 16-29. Ile-Ife, Nigeria: Dept. of Fine Arts, Obafemi Awolowo University, 1991.
16. Obaro Ikime and Historical Society of Nigeria, Groundwork of Nigerian History (Ibadan, Nigeria: Published For The Historical Society Of Nigeria By Heinemann Educational Books, 2001).
17. Sophie B. Oluwole, Socrates and Orunmila: Two Patron Saints of Classical Philosophy
(Lagos, Nigeria: Ark Publishers, 2017), 44
18. Makinde David Olajide, Olusegun Jide Ajiboye, and Babatunde Joseph Ajayi, "Aso-Oke Production and Use among the Yoruba of Southwestern Nigeria," The Journal of Pan- African Studies 3, no. 3 (2009): 55–72.
20. Thurstan Shaw, Archéologue, Igbo Ukwu - an Account of Archaeological Discoveries in Eastern Nigeria. Vol. 1 (London: Faber and Faber Limited, 1970).
21. Aretha O Asakitikpi, "The Rise and Fall of Broadloom Weaving among the Yoruba: An Historical Overview," Research Review of the Institute of African Studies 22, no. 1 (July 3, 2007), https://doi.org/10.4314/rrias.v22i1.22962.
22. F. Daniel, "The Stone Figures of Esie, Ilorin Province, Nigeria.," The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 67 (January 1937): 43, https://doi.org/10.2307/2844169.
23. O.A. Ige and Samuel E. Swanson, "Provenance Studies of Esie Sculptural Soapstone from Southwestern Nigeria," Journal of Archaeological Science 35, no. 6 (June 2008): 1553–65, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2007.11.001.
24. S.O. Olabanji et al., "PIGE Analysis of Esie Museum Soapstone Sculptures," Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms 56-57 (May 1991): 726–29, https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-583x(91)95013-4.
27. Lisa Aronson, "Ijebu Yoruba' Aso Olona': A Contextual and Historical Overview," African Arts 25, no. 3 (July 1992): 52, https://doi.org/10.2307/3337001.
28. Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, s.v. "semiotics," accessed October 4, 2022, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/semiotics.
29. O.A. Asakitikpi, "Cloth Motifs as Semiotic Expression among Yoruba of Southwestern Nigeria," Journal of Environment and Culture 3, no. 2 (2006): 113–22.
30. Asakitikpi, 114
31. P. S. O. Aremu, "'Yoruba Traditional Weaving: Kijipa Motifs Colour and Symbols.,'"
Nigeria Magazine 140 (1982): 3–10.
32. O.A. Asakitikpi, "Cloth Motifs as Semiotic Expression among Yoruba of Southwestern Nigeria," Journal of Environment and Culture 3, no. 2 (2006): 116.
33. Asakitikpi, 116
34. Robert Farris Thompson, Yoruba Artistic Criticism" in the Traditional Artists in African Societies, ed. Warren D'Azevedo (Indiana University Press.: Bloomington and London., 1973), 19–61. In Margaret Olugbemisola Areo and Razaq Olatunde Rom Kalilu, "Origin of and Visual Semiotics in Yoruba Textile of Adire," Arts and Design Studies 12 (2013): 22–34.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adediran-Olade, Eniola. "Changing Patterns in Aso-Oke Industry, 1900-2000." M.A. Thesis, 2015.
Asakitikpi, Aretha O. “Cloth Motifs as Semiotic Expression among Yoruba of Southwestern Nigeria.” Journal of Environment and Culture 3, no. 2 (2006): 113–22.
Lamb, Venice, and Judy Holmes. Nigerian Weaving. Roxford England: H.A. & V.M. Lamb, 1980.
Obaro Ikime, and Historical Society of Nigeria. Groundwork of Nigerian History. Ibadan, Nigeria: Published for the Historical Society of Nigeria By Heinemann Educational Books, 2001.
Okediji, Moyo. "Yoruba Pidgin Chromacy," in Oritameta Proceedings: International Conference on Yoruba Art edited by Moyo Okediji, pp. 16-29. Ile-Ife, Nigeria: Dept. of Fine Arts, Obafemi Awolowo University, 1991.
Olajide, Makinde David, Olusegun Jide Ajiboye, and Babatunde Joseph Ajayi. "Aso-Oke Production and Use among the Yoruba of Southwestern Nigeria." The Journal of Pan-African Studie 3, no. 3 (2009): 55–72.
Olaoye, R.A. "A Study of Twentieth Century Weaving in Ilorin Nigeria." Africa Study Monographs 10, no. 2 (1989): 84.
Oluwole, Sophie B. Socrates and Orunmila: Two Patron Saints Of Classical Philosophy. Lagos, Nigeria: Ark Publishers, 2017.
Patrick Pender-Cudlip (1972) Oral Traditions and Anthropological Analysis: Some Contemporary Myths, Azania: Archaeological Research in Africa, 7:1, 3- 24, DOI: 10.1080/00672707209511556
Perani, Judith. "History, Design, and Craft in West African Strip-Woven Cloth: The Cloth Connection: Patrons and Producers of Hausa and Nupe Prestige Strip Weave in History, Design, and Craft West African Strip Woven Cloth." In Symposium Organized by the National Museum of African Art, Smithsonian Institution.
Washington, D.C.: The Museum, 1992.Picton, John, and John Mack. African Textiles. London: British Museum Press, 1999.
Thurstan Shaw, Archéologue. Igbo Ukwu - an Account of Archaeological Discoverie in Eastern Nigeria. Vol. 1. London: Faber and Faber Limited, 1970.
The Raw Materials and Implements of Classical African Textiles
Gloria Emeagwali
Central
Diverse raw materials have been used in the production of textiles, in the African continent, over time and space. Geographical and ecological diversity had direct implications for the types of raw materials accessible to textile producing communities, city states, kingdoms, and empires, during the approximately five thousand years of textile history, on the continent. This was a period that was by no means static. In this article, the focus is on silk, linen, cotton, and raffia, with a discussion of some of the various implements that were invented and innovated upon by cloth- producing communities. Ginning, spinning, weaving, dyeing, and other specialized processes such as water retting, scutching and degumming, were done with the aid of various devices and chemical processes, throughout the continent.
SILK
Species and Viability of African Moths
There are both wild and domesticated silk moths. Scholars have identified about sixty species of wild silk- producing species of moths in east Africa, in addition to Bombyx mori, of the moth family Bombycidae, the domesticated silk moth (Teshome et al., 2013). Gonomela postica, Anaphe panda, Argema mimosa, Epiphora bauhinae and Anaphe panda, are also domesticated silk moths. Historically, various factors have determined the viability of silk production from degummed cocoons, on the continent. Crucial variables in African sericulture include factors such as the weight, length, and width of cocoons, their structure and properties, larval food supplies, spatial distribution of the host plants, and the stress and endurance capacity of the fibers. The level of productivity of the moth species has been another important variable.
Historic silk producing areas of the continent include West Africa, northeast Africa, and southern Africa, inclusive of Madagascar. Wozniak & Belka (2022), state that “silk was never produced in Sudan,” and that it appeared only as an import, but Nettie Adams (2002) does not rule out the possibility of local production, for silk specimens found in an ancient Nubian site dated between 300 CE and 500 CE. Douny (2017) points out that silk had cosmological and spiritual functions in Mali. Combined with a range of protective mechanisms, including amulets, the wearer felt empowered. In the case of the Dogon of Mali the processing of silk fibers from local moths, enabled the production of luxury cloths called tombe toun. Some Malians believed that the sheen of the cloth embodied a living force called doula that was inherent to wild silk, and associated with magical and mystical powers. (Douny, 2013; Hill-Thomas, 2012). Similar features have been observed for Nigeria. The silk thread used in embroidered garments such as riga yaki (war gowns), or riga layu (undershirt gowns) in Hausaland, northern Nigeria, was believed to be endowed with mystical powers, offering protection from malevolent spirits and bad luck. In Yorubaland, Sanyan, an indigenous silk, produced largely from Anaphe panda, continues to be of high value, and constitutes one of the components in the prestigious cloth called Aso-Oke that has been used for ceremonial activities, including weddings (McKinney Eicher, 2009). The cloth may not be associated with mystical powers, however.
In the southern African region, the Kalahari Tussah silk was historically the product of the silk moths Gonometa postica, and Gonometa rufobrunnea, and was produced by the San people of southern Africa (Peigler, 2020). It is not clear as to when they began the practice of silk making. Crucial to the silk yarn is sericin, a natural adhesive in the silk fiber, that would be removed in the degumming process, leaving another protein called fibroin as the basic component of the degummed yarn. Fibroin is converted into raw silk. The cocoon itself may have a thread as long as 1500 meters, or 1640 yards, being a protective mechanism for the silk moth, from pests and even bacteria (Ines et al. 2016). Veldman observes that in the case of South Africa, three tons of material, when degummed created 1.9 tons of raw silk, in NW province around 2001. Data from other parts of South Africa would help to establish whether this is a common tendency in South African sericulture. Africans used various methods in the degumming process, including the application of soda ash, in preparation for spinning and interlocking the fibers, on vertical and horizontal looms - devices that the next section focuses on.
LINEN
Cushions, towels, bed covers and bedding, cloth bags, shawls, scarves, kerchiefs, full length and half-length tunics and cloaks were among the many products that were made of linen in ancient northeast Africa. Add to these, flowing and tightly fitted skirts, wrap - around garments, and V-necked dresses. Linen, made from a natural fiber, flax (Linum usitatissimum) was the favorite material used in cloth manufacture in ancient Egypt, although not exclusively there (Vogelsang-Eastwood, 2009). Other Africans including ancient Ethiopians and Nubians also produced this material. Even though cotton was a dominant material in Nubia, linen was also manufactured. Phillipson advises against ruling out its prominence in pre-Aksumite Ethiopia (Phillipson, 2014).
Flax cultivation involved tillage of the soil, the sowing of seeds, and the eventual pulling out of the stems from the light, rich, sandy soil found in parts of the Nile valley. The young plant seemed to be more conducive to the manufacture of fine textiles, as compared to the coarse material used for ropes, and other less luxurious items. The next step was to separate the fibers from the tissue, and a process called water retting, was one of the early steps taken to do so, by allowing the tissues to rot away - to separate them from the bast fiber (Foulk et al., 2002). To do so, the stems were completely inundated with water and left to bacteria. A process called scutching was next, and this entailed the use of a small scraper, or wooden implement, to complete the fiber separation process. This procedure entailed beating the bundle of separated bast fibers, to ensure that unwanted fragments were removed, in preparation for combing, seed removal, and ultimately, spinning and weaving (Melelli et al. 2001).
Devices used in linen production
Large wooden bats were used by ancient Egyptians to shake out loose ends during scutching.
Knives and scrapers were also used. Flat surfaces facilitated the rolling of the fibers into balls of thread. Twisting the thread, in preparation for weaving, was facilitated by spindles made from slender rods. Spherically - shaped spindle whorls, accelerated the process of spinning. The earliest evidence of such whorls would be found in Nubia as early as 6000 BCE (Ehret, 2019). Other tools included bone picks, thread beaters, weaving combs as well as shuttles to carry the movable weft thread and looms. Wooden jacks were used on each side of the Egyptian loom, measuring between 20 - 40cm, and were incised with notches to accommodate the heddle rod since antiquity (Vogelsang -Eastwood, 2009).
Vertical and horizontal looms were the most important tools for interlacing two or more sets of thread, in the weaving process. These were utilized not only in linen manufacture but in the production of most other types of fabric. One of the earliest representations of an ancient African loom dates to the predynastic era, through a depiction on a bowl in Badari in northern Egypt. There are also generous representations from the 11th and 12th dynasties in three tombs (Elsharnouby, 2014). Two beams of wood were constructed to support stationary warp threads that were held in support of the weft thread that moved in and out of the warp threads. Heddle rods were important mechanisms for operating the loom and the creation of sheds and counter sheds, when the heddle rod was lifted. In the case of the vertical loom, the warp thread was extended in a vertical position and wrapped between the upper and lower beams of wood. Elsharnouby (2014) points out that vertical looms have been depicted in numerous tombs of the 18th Dynasty. Variations of these two types of looms show up in diverse parts of the continent, in terms of cotton, wool, and raffia textiles. Some of these variations will be elaborated on in the discussion of cotton and raffia.
COTTON
Christopher Ehret has argued that independent cotton production activities emerged in four parts of the ancient world, namely south Asia, South America, Central America, and Africa.
Discoveries of ceramic spindle whorls for spinning cotton thread in Nubia around 6000 BCE, place Africa as a leader in this sphere (Ehret, 2019). This observation correlates with the findings of Chowdhury and Buth for a neolithic origin of Old-World cotton in Nubia (Chowdhury & Buth, 1971). Each of the four areas domesticated local species of cotton, independently, inclusive of Gossypium barbadense, G. arboretum, G. hirsutum and, in the case of Africa, G. herbaceum, The evolution and diversity of the cotton genome are masterfully discussed by Guanjing Hu et al. (2021). Sequencing of G. arboretum took place in 2014. The cotton plant develops through four main stages, namely, germination, development of the leaf area, flowering, boll development, and maturation (Oosterhuis, 1990). The third stage is crucial for cotton textile development. The positive qualities of the fiber such as dyeability, durability, strength, softness, absorbency, and ability to withstand heat, are linked to genomic profile, climatic conditions, the method of harvesting and storage of the cotton, the actual procedure of extracting the cotton fibers from the cotton seed, and the availability of water (Clarke, 2011).
Spindles and spindle whorls were made of a range of material, including stone, wood, bone, ceramics, and clay, some of which were decorative. Tools also included loom weights of clay, bone picks, shuttles, thread beaters and needles (Bouchard, 2018). Yvanez and Wozniak point to weaving combs, and ceramic spindle whorls with incised concentric circles, about a thousand in number from ancient Northern and Central Sudan. Those from Central Sudan were made of baked clay and others of wood. African looms were of various dimensions, and the vertical loom was utilized by several nationalities, including the Hausa, Nupe, Ebira, Yoruba and Igbo. Joseph Ohiare (1993) identified thirteen components in the device, including the two vertical frames that supported the beams: the beams made of wood or bamboo; the shuttle and the thread used to warp and weft; a heckler stick that created flexibility between the warp and the heddle, a flexible rod attached to the warp threads; cross pieces or shed sticks that facilitated the “shed and countershed” movements. Note also that rope secured the beams and shed sticks, the mechanism that facilitated consistency. In the case of “kente” cloth produced by the Ashanti, however, a horizontal loom with four to seven heddles would be used. The material, woven into narrow strips, would be about 4” wide and 5 to 6 ft long (Fening, 2006).
Before 1900, primary and secondary colors were obtained primarily from natural dyestuffs. For example, teak, henna, the leaves of guinea corn, or the bark and roots of African rosewood, produced shades of red for dyers in Abuja and Bida, in central Nigeria. Ground kolanuts were used in the adjacent Ebira speaking region to produce red pigment. A yellow dye was obtained from the rhizome of Curcuma longe, or the flowers of Cochlospermum tinctorium blended with ash, and Borassus aethiopum, locally known as deleb palm. Indigo blue was obtained from the leaves of Indigofera arrecta, and Indigofera tinctoria. These plant-based dyeing methodologies were not confined to cotton cloth. Plant- based dyes and earth pigments, tainted by iron dioxide and other minerals, were used by dyers of various types of fabric, across the African continent, before the emergence of synthetic dyes (Teklemedhin, 2018). We have added other sources of pigment in Table 1.
| Pigment | Plant-based source |
| Red | Stalk of Sorghum bicolor (Guinea corn) |
| Lawsonia inermis (Henna) | |
| Yellow | Rhizome of Curcuma longa (Turmeric) |
| Roots of Catharanthus roseus ( Zabiba ), Lime juice and ash | |
| Deleb palm roots | |
| Cochlospermum tinctorium | |
| Black | Leaves of Borassus aethiopium ( Deleb palm) |
| Khaya Senegalensis (African Mahogany) | |
| Black mud | |
| Rust | Leaves of Tombolo Tree |
| Brown | Potash and leave of Sakin Marike |
| Green | Indigo Leaves, Zabiba roots, lime juice and wood ash |
| Buff | Bark of Parkia biglobosa ( locust bean tree) |
| Bark of Mangifera indica (mango tree ) | |
| Bark of Vitellaria paradoxa ( shea tree) | |
| Dark blue | Saccharum officinarum (sugar cane), seeds of acacia arabica, potash and guinea corn mixture |
TABLE 1
Source: National Archives Kaduna (NAK) NAK MINPOF. 194.
Accessed and compiled by Gloria Emeagwali
If Egypt were indeed the cradle of linen, the cradle of cotton was probably Nubia, not only because of the longevity of its presence, in ancient northeast Africa, but given the substantial findings and assemblage of cotton fabric found in archaeological contexts. Nettie Adams (1996) points to the numerous samples of cotton found at Qasr Ibrim in a temple destroyed around 550 CE. These included remnants of large cotton curtains, pile weave blankets, tapestry, and bags. Yvanez and Wozniak (2019), point to “tens of thousands of textiles” found in various structures, in graves and shrines dated from the Kingdom of Kerma 2500 BCE, and after. They point out that eighty percent of the textiles dated between the 1st century BCE and the 3rd century CE in Qasr Ibrim, Nubia, was made of cotton. In Karanog, a provincial capital of the Nubian Meroitic kingdom, cotton fabric comprised one hundred percent of textiles found. In the Swahili region, discovery of spindle whorls reveal vibrant cloth making activities, considered to be at its height between 100 CE and 1500 BCE. There is evidence of an active export of textiles to the Persian Gulf, from the region, and textiles were produced in many coastal towns, including Mogadishu, Pate, Kilwa and Sofala (Wyne -Jones and La Violette, 2018). Export to other parts of Africa such as Egypt also took place. The use of imported Indian threads, undoubtedly developed in response to the high demand.
RAFFIA
Origins, Diffusion & Implements
The genus Raphia consists of about 28 species, 20 of which abound in West Africa.
The leaf is soaked to facilitate access to the individual leaflets. Soaking in water also facilitates dyeing (Edem n. d). Raffia fiber is accessed from stripped raffia palm leaves. Raffia cloth weaving originated in Southern Nigeria and Cameroon five thousand years ago (Ehret, 2019).
Ikot Ekpene in Akwa Ibom state, Nigeria, is associated with raffia cloth, locally known as “Ipaya” (Edem n.d). The diffusion of ideas and techniques associated with this mode of clothmaking, moved further south into the Congo by1000 BCE. Some of Africa's most exquisite raffia cloth would emanate from this region. It is interesting to note that Africans were the first in the world to transform raffia palm into textile (Ehret, 2019). Raffia cloth makers made use of a broad loom, in contrast to the general tendency to use the narrow loom, for cotton, and other types of raw material. The raffia leaf produced the fibers that would be interlocked in the weaving process. The end product would be colored, decorated, and embroidered. Implements for making raffia textile historically included heddles, thread, beaters or swords and shuttles.
La Violette (2018) points to the early usage of raffia- based clothing in the Swahili region, a tradition that continues in the Comoros Islands. The areas of greatest specialization of the art and science of raffia cloth making would be in Southern Nigeria and the Congo region, in polities such as the Kongo and Kuba Kingdoms. Embroidered raffia was an indicator of status in the Kongo Kingdom. Specific forms of raffia also implied spirituality and interconnections between ancestral forces and the living. Standardized measurements for the cloth enhanced its feasibility as a medium of exchange and currency, in the region. Dyed raffia cloth called “laimasaka” in Madagascar was often used as a burial shroud (Bortolot, 2003). Raffia textile continues to be one of the most significant legacies of the continent of Africa.
Conclusion
Through invention, innovation, trial and error experimentation and testing, Africans made use of various plant-based and animal - derived resources, with respect to textiles. In the process they produced exquisite textiles that reflected the climatic and ecological variations within the continent. This article focused on silk, cotton, linen, and raffia, and highlighted some of the technical devices used in the course of production. African invention of raffia cloth about five thousand years ago was highlighted and so, too, the likelihood that the oldest loom in the world was also of African origin, from northeast Africa.
Bibliography
Adams, Nettie. “Sacred Textiles from an Ancient Nubian Temple.” In Sacred and Ceremonial Textiles. Proceedings of the Fifth Biennial Symposium of the Textile Society of America. Chicago. Illinois, 1996.
Bortolot, Alexander. “Kingdoms of Madagascar: Malagasy Textile Arts.” Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History. NY: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2003
Bouchard, Charlene et al. “Cottoning on to cotton in Arabia and Africa during Antiquity.” In A. M. Mercuri et. Al (eds). (2018) Plants and People in the African Past. Springer.
Chowdhury, K. A & G. M. Buth (2008). “Cotton Seeds from the Neolithic in Egypt: Nubia and the origin of Old-World cotton.” Biological Journal of the Linnean Society. Vol. 3. Issue 4. 1971.
Douny, Laurence. “Wild Silk Textiles of the Dogon of Mali: The Production, Material Efficacy, and Cultural Significance of Sheen,” TEXTILE (2013) 11:1, 58-77, DOI: 10.2752/175183513X13588738654891
Douny, Laurence. “Silk-embroidered garments as transformative processes: layering, inscribing and displaying Hausa material identities.” Journal of Material Culture 16 (2011): 401 - 415.
Edem, E.B. “Using Raffia as Costume for Theatre Performance.” Intercontinental Journal of Education, Science and Technology. Vol. 3. No. 1.
Ehret, Christopher. “Ancient Africa in World History: Invention, Innovation and Impact.”
https://hutchinscenter.fas.harvard.edu/event/huggins-lectures-christopher-ehret-1-3. 2019
Accessed September 5, 2022.
Elsharnouby, R.A. “Linen in Ancient Egypt” JGUAA. 22-1, (15) 15, 2014.
Ohiare, Joseph. “Textile in the Ebira speaking region: An aspect of its technological development since the 19th century.” In Emeagwali, G.T. African Systems of Science Technology and Art. London: Karnak, 1993.
Fening, Ken. (2006). “History of Kente cloth and its value addition through design integration with African wild silk for export market in Ghana.” Fourth International Workshop on Textiles.
2006. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260074003 accessed September 1, 2022
Foulk, J. A. et al., (2002). “Flax Fiber: Potential for a new crop in the Southeast.” Trends in new crops and new uses. No. 361.
Hill-Thomas, G. “Silk in the Sahel.” Africa Arts. Vol. 45. Issue 2. 2012
Ines, Regina et al. “Silkworm Sericin: Properties and Biomedical Applications” Biomedical Research International. 14 November 2016.
La Gamma, Alisa. (No date). Sahel: Art and Empires on the shores of the Sahara. New Haven: Yale University Press & Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.
Mc Kinney, Ellen & Joanne Eicher. “Unexpected Luxury: Wild silk textile production among the Yoruba of Nigeria.” Cloth and Culture. Vol. 7. Issue 1. 2009.
Melelli, Alessia et al. “Lessons on textile history and fibre durability from a 4000-year-old
Egyptian flax yarn.” Nature Plants, Nature Pub. Group. 2021.
Oosterhuis, D. M. “Growth and Development of a cotton plant.” In Miley, W. N and D.M Oosterhuis. Eds. Nitrogen Nutrition of Cotton: Practical Issues. Publications of the American Society of Agronomy, Madison, 1-24. 1990.
Phillipson, D. W. Foundations of an African Civilisation: Aksum and the northern Horn, 1000 BC-AD 1300. UK: James Currey, 2014
Teklemedhin, T. B. “Environmentally friendly dyeing of silk fabric with Natural Dye extracted from cassia singueana plant.” Journal of Textile Science and Engineering.2018. S3
.
Veldman, Ruth. “Southern Africa's silk moths: Diamonds in the rough.” SABINET. 1. April 2001.
Vogelsang-Eastwood, Gillian. Textiles. In Nicholson, P., and Ian Shaw. Ancient Egyptian Materials and Technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.
Wang, Kunbo et al., (2012). “The draft genome of a diploid cotton Gossypium raimondi.” Nature Genetics. 2012.October. 44 (10).
Wozniak, M. M & Z. Belka. “The provenance of ancient cotton and wool textiles from Nubia: Insights from Technical Textile Analysis and Strontium Isotopes.” Journal of African Archaeology. 1. 1-15 (2022).
Wynee -Jones, Stephanie. and Adria La Violette eds. The Swahili World. NY: Routledge, 2018.
The British Museum and the Victoria and Albert Museum artifacts of Ghana*
Kwame Opoku
“Gold gleams throughout the Ashanti story: one
wonders in retrospect whether the punitive expedition
would have been quite so dedicated if the significant
product of Ashanti had been anything else but the
potent lure. - Russell Chamberlin, Loot: The Heritage
of Plunder (1)
There has recently been a lot of excitement about the‘returns' of looted Asante/Ghanaian artefacts to Ghana. (2) These artefacts were looted by the British Army in invasions of Kumasi, the Asante capital, especially in the so-called punitive expedition of 1874. (3) What have the British done? Two British museums, the British Museum and the Victoria and Albert Museum have agreed to return to Asante/Ghanarespectively fifteen and seventeen looted objects, respectively.(4) The return of thirty-two objects from the 10,000 thousand objects looted in 1874 leaves nine thousand and sixty-eight objects in Britain. How long will it take, at the rate of thirty two objects per 150 years, to return all our Asante artefacts? The returned artefacts are on loan to Asante/Ghana for three years after 150 years of exile in Britain. Should those who admittedly stole our artefacts not be generous, at least on the loan term? When Nigeria loaned Benin artefacts to Germany, the ten-year term was to be automatically renewed unless there was an objection. (5)
Loans, instead of outright restitution, will affect the demands of Nigeria, Egypt, Ethiopia, and other African countries for their looted artefacts in Britain. We have for a long time argued that Britain will use such an acceptance by one African country, or people, against subsequent African demands. Ghana's acceptance will be used against Nigerian demands. In their usual“concern” for fairness, the British will tell the Nigerians that we cannot give you a better deal than Ghana. This will not be fair. We have to maintain the principle of equality. (6)Having halfway done what many consider, despite all criticisms, the right thing to do, British museum officials have gone to disabuse anyone who may think that Britain is joining the number of European and Western States that have accepted that looted colonial artefacts must be restituted. It is almost as if the British feared the world would commend them for returning some looted artefacts to Ghana.
Tristram Hunt, Director of the Victoria and Albert Museum, who told the BBC that the gold items of court regalia are the equivalent of "our Crown Jewels," stated that this new arrangement was ‘not restitution by the back door" - meaning it is not a way to return permanent ownership back to Ghana. The British government said the Ghana deal did not set a precedent for the Parthenon Marbles, the subject of a long-running diplomatic battle between the U.K. and Greece. But why are the British authorities at pains to explain that the loan agreement with Asante/Ghana does not constitute restitution and does not set a precedent? They have the Parthenon Marbles in mind. But surely everybody knows that the circumstances under which the notorious Lord Elgin managed to persuade the Ottoman Authorities to allow him to dismantle and ship the Parthenon Marbles to London, cannot in any way be compared to the Anglo-Asante war that led to the looting of the Asante gold artefacts in 1874.As most readers know by now, the Musée du Quai Branly- Jacques-Chirac, Paris, has returned some twenty-six artefacts to the Benin Republic. Germany has also returned legal rights in 1,300 Benin artefacts, to Benin/Nigeria. The Dutch are preparing to return Benin artefacts to Benin/Nigeria, and Belgian is preparing to return looted artefacts to the Republic of Congo. American museums, such as the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, and the Smithsonian National Museum of African Art, have returned artefacts to Benin/Nigeria. Jesus College, Cambridge, and Aberdeen University have also returned each, a Benin bronze to the Oba of Benin. Horniman Museum has also returned legal rights in 72 Benin Bronzes to Benin/Nigeria.
Following the restitutions above, where full ownership rights were returned to Nigeria, it became clear that the Western museum world had a fundamental shift of ideology concerning the restitution of looted colonial artefacts. This change in attitude has been accompanied by a shift in the role of morality in questions of restitution. Previously, most Western museums and scholars declared that morality had no role in restitution. It was argued that colonial loot had been acquired in accordance with International Law, even though this assertion was rejected by those who argued that after the Napoleonic spoliations in Europe, and the restitutions imposed on the French State in 1815, looting of cultural artefacts of defeated enemies was no longer legal after the Congress of Vienna in 1815.
Professor Vrdoljak has stated:
“By mid-1815, there was broad agreement that the French
confiscations of cultural objects were contrary to contemporary rules of law and that objects
could not remain in Parisian collections.” (7)
President Emmanuel Macron declared at Ouagadougou University Burkina Faso on 29 November, 2017:
“I cannot accept that a large part of cultural heritage from several African
countries is in France. There are historical explanations for that, but there are no valid
justifications that are durable and unconditional. African heritage can't just be in European
private collections and museums. African heritage must be highlighted in Paris, but also in
Dakar, in Lagos, in Cotonou. In the next five years, I want the conditions to be met for the
temporary or permanent restitution of African heritage to Africa. This will be one of my
priorities.”(8)
After the historic Declaration of President Emmanuel Macron and the subsequent report he Commissioned Felwine Sarr and Benedicte Savoy (The Restitution of African Cultural Heritage, Toward a New Relational Ethics, 2018), it was obvious that attempts to justify colonial confiscations were no longer tenable. Moreover, the United Nations and UNESCO had since 1973, in numerous resolutions entitled ‘Return of Cultural Property to its Country of Origin, urged the Western States to return looted artefacts, but to no avail. (9)Recent restitutions are based on a solid moral conviction that it is time and right to return looted African artefacts. There are many declarations on this moral paradigmatic revolution. Many speakers referred to ethics and morality at a ceremony on 12 October, 2022, transferring legal rights in 29Benin artefacts from the Smithsonian to Nigeria. Lonnie G. Bunch, Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, Washington, declared:
“Not only was returning ownership of these magnificent artefacts to their rightful home the
right thing to do, but it also demonstrates how we all benefit from cultural institutions making
ethical choices.”
Bunch highlighted the Smithsonian's new collection policy, which authorizes the repatriation of objects for moral reasons:
We hope that today's ceremony sets an example for all cultural institutions,”
‘There is a growing understanding at the Smithsonian and in the world of museums generally
that our possession of these collections carries certain ethical obligations to the places and
people where the collections originated. Among these obligations is to consider, using our
contemporary moral norms, what should be in our collections and what should not. This new
policy on ethical returns is an expression of our commitment to meet these obligations.” (10)
Ngaire Blankenberg, then Director of the Smithsonian National Museum of African Art, stated at the ceremony:
“We're not the guardians of the world. Western museums are not the custodians of all things
of the world, There's so many false premises around the debate. People are like, ‘Oh, no, if
you give everything back, there'll be nothing in this museum.' Honestly, we have 12,000
[objects in our] collections. And if our whole museum is based on stolen objects, then
frankly we shouldn't exist.” (11)
Lai Mohammed, Culture Minister of Nigeria, told The Guardian, recalling how British MPs told him the museum was bound by law not to deaccession items in its collection:
“They used the law as a shield. This is not about law; this is about ethics. (12)
Monika Grütters, former German Federal Minister for Culture, commented on the German decision to return 1,130 artefacts to Benin, Nigeria, as follows:
‘We are facing the historical and moral responsibility to bring Germany's colonial past to
light and to come to terms with it. Dealing with the Benin bronzes is a touchstone for this.
The declaration passed yesterday is a historic milestone in dealing with the colonial past. I
am happy and grateful that we could agree on the common goal of developing a coordinated
position in Germany and reaching a common understanding with the Nigerian side. In
addition to the greatest possible transparency, substantial returns are sought above all. We
want to contribute to understanding and reconciliation with the descendants of the people
who were robbed of their cultural treasures during the colonial era'.
Monika Grütters and Michelle Müntefering stated in their guest article in Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) newspaper:
"How can museums and collections justify having
objects with colonial contexts in their collections
whose [past] transfer to Germany contradicts our present-day values system?" (13)
Ingrid van Engelshoven, former Dutch Minister of Culture, said in a statement that, because of the imbalance of power during the colonial era, many cultural objects were “effectively stolen” from former colonies:
“There is no place in the Dutch State Collection for cultural
heritage objects that were acquired through theft. If a country wants them back, we will give
them back.” (14)
Eve Salomon, Chair of the Trustees of the Horniman Museum has stated:
‘The evidence is very clear that these objects were acquired through force, and external
consultation supported our view that it is both moral and appropriate to return their
ownership to Nigeria. The Horniman is pleased to be able to take this step, and we look
forward to working with the NCMM to secure longer-term care- for these precious artefacts. (15)
Belgian scholars declared in a report entitled Ethical Principles for the Management and Restitution of Colonial Collections in Belgium:
‘Although the existing legal framework is not favourable to the original owners of the objects
in colonial collections, there are opportunities for change. Indeed, the law should try to be in
tune with the social and ethical issues of its time, reflecting the demands for equity and
reconciliation with the past that are increasingly resonating within society. A moral duty to
return the colonial heritage is emerging, inviting us to go beyond the limitations of the
existing legal framework in order to make an ethical responsibility heard in law.' (16)
Prof. George Boyne, University of Aberdeen, commenting on the decision of his university to return a Benin commemorative head to Nigeria, declared:
It would not have been right to have retained an item of such great cultural importance that
was acquired in such reprehensible circumstances. We therefore decided that an
unconditional return is the most appropriate action we can take and are grateful for the close
collaboration with our partners in Nigeria." (17)
Neil Curtis, Head of Museums and Special Collections, University of Aberdeen, supporting the decision to return a Benin artefact, said:
“An ongoing review of the collections identified the Head of an Oba as having been acquired
in a way that we now consider to have been extremely immoral, so we took a proactive
approach to identify the appropriate people to discuss what to do.” (18)
His Royal Majesty, Oba of Benin, Omo N'Oba N'Edo Uku Akpolokpolo, Ewuare II, welcoming the decision of the University of Aberdeen, expressed his thanks as follows:
‘We thank the University of Aberdeen for this noble act of returning our bronze work. We hope
that other institutions worldwide will see the injustice when they insist on holding on to items
which in fact should be a reminder to them of the great injustice that was inflicted on a
people so far away and so long ago “(19)
Sonita Alleyne, Master of Jesus College, which returned a Benin cockerel sculpture to Nigeria, said:
“This is a historic moment … it is the right thing to do out of respect for this
artefact's unique heritage and history. (20)
The British elite, the British Museum, and the Victoria and Albert Museum recognize the historical and fundamental change of attitude towards restitution, as exemplifiedby French, German, Dutch, and American practices. British institutions such as Aberdeen University,Jesus College, Cambridge; Horniman Museum, London; Pitt-RiversMuseum, Oxford; and Archaeological and Anthropological Museum, Cambridge, have embraced the new attitude toward restoring looted colonial artefacts. However, the British and Victoria and Albert Museum, supported by the British Government, remain recalcitrant, and advance untenable reasons for their reluctance to join the rest of humankind in this historic march towards decolonization and reparative justice. The prominent British museums allege that they are prevented by the British Museum Act,1963, from returning objects, including looted artefacts in their museums. We have argued that the 1963 Act does not prohibit restitution but clearly defines the circumstances in which such restitution would be acceptable. The museums have read their own restrictive policy interpretation into the Act. According to Section 5(1) of the Act, the British Museum can dispose of articles under its control if:
1. The object is a duplicate of another such object,
2. In the opinion of the Trustees, the object is unfit to be retained in the collections of the museum,
3. If satisfied that it has become useless for the museum because of damage or physical deterioration.
Thus, if it wanted, the museum could declare some Asante artefacts and Benin bronzes as Duplicates, or unfit to be retained. The museum chooses to put a strict and limiting interpretation on its powers. Alexander Herman of the Art and Law Institute has expressed a similar view after studying the Act with regard to Ethiopian tabots:
''The British Museum seems to enjoy telling the world about its statutory restrictions.
Whenever would-be claimants approach the museum seeking restitution of an object from the
collection, the almost mechanical response from the museum is that its trustees are prevented
from doing so, even if they wanted to, because of the onerous restrictions on deaccessioning
collection items found within the British Museum Act 1963.
The trustees should honour Parliament's decision and use their powers appropriately. In this
case, that should lead to only one result: the permanent restitution of the tabots to the
Ethiopian Church.'' (21)
But even assuming that the 1963 Act prohibits the museum from returning an object even though it may want to do so, the question is why has the museum not asked Parliament toamend the 1963 Act? A specific law, the Holocaust (Return of Cultural Objects) Act 2009,has been passed to make it possible for museums to restitute Nazi-looted artefacts. Why can a similar law not be passed for African artefacts looted in colonial times? Is there here a colour differentiation? The majority of owners of valuables confiscated by the Nazis were white but victims of colonial confiscations are in the majority, Africans. Those who go about declaring that the British Museum Act1963 forbids the British Museum from returning looted artefacts should stop advancing an argument that does not derive explicitly and directly from the text of the Act:
'The Trustees of the British Museum may sell, exchange, give away or otherwise dispose of
any object vested in them and comprised in their collections if '—'
This does not sound like a prohibition. It sounds more like permission subject to certain conditions. Moreover, what efforts have British Museum and the Victoria and Albert Museum made to have the British law amended since the Asante demand for restitution in 1974? They simply have no interest to see changes in the law. We should compare the British plea that the British Museum Act of 1 963 prevents restitution with the French attitude to the doctrine of inalienability, which prevents objects that have become State property from being restituted. Most museum objects in France, especially from former French colonies, are State property. President Macron was faced with this prohibition, and persuaded the French Parliament to pass a law permitting the restitution of twenty-six looted colonial artefacts to the Republic of Benin, and two to Senegal. In the meanwhile, the French Parliament is working on a draft law based on the Luc Martinez report, that would make resort to legislation for each artefact unnecessary. (22) Why can Britain not follow the example of her sister imperialist France, with whom it colonized Africa and looted African artefacts? The British, including many who support restitution, often speak, and write as if laws were immutable and God-given. They expect us to understand their difficulties with British law, but do they understand our difficulties in having the best of our art, looted with violence, and kept in Britain for one hundred and fifty years? The British should not be allowed to advance the restriction of their laws as excuse for failing over decades to restore artefacts they should have returned, at the latest, at the independence of their former colonies. With a change of attitude towards restitution of colonial loot, and the new emphasis on morality, the British Museum, and the Victoria and Albert Museum could determine that, for example, the looted Asante artefacts are unfit to be retained in the museum collections because of the violent circumstances under which they were acquired. This will be in accordance with the moral standards of today. Stolen colonial items should not be kept in respectable museums of the West. We are discussing the objects that are at present in the museums, and not concerned with apportioning blame for past acts. We apply standards of today in dealing with objects that are now in museums and we do not worry about standards of bygone decades. Lonnie Bunch, Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, has stated we must use our contemporary moral norms in determining what objects should be in our museums. (23).
The text of the Agreement between Victoria and Albert Museum, British Museum, and Manhyia, has not been made available to the public, and we have to rely on the press release issued by the parties, and newspaper reports. We notice that unlike many such agreements ,this agreement is not with the central government, the Government of Ghana. Apparently, a text had been sent to the Government of Ghana which was rejected. What are the implications of an agreement that was not signed by the government of Ghana, but by another body? Will the government be bound by the obligations contained in the agreement? Will the financial implications be borne by the Government of Ghana without the representatives of other parts of the country being consulted? We have no information on whether Manhyia paid insurance to a British insurer, and what premium, monthly, yearly, or lump sum, was paid. Packaging and transport costs would generally be paid on loan of objects from museums. Does the agreement by Manhyia imply that in the future, other peoples of Ghana, for example, Fante,Ga, or Ewe, who claim looted artefacts, would have to sign agreements on their own, and notby the Government of Ghana? Is this a new policy of the Ghana government or a colonialist divide and rule method?
Obviously, the British government will be content to be kept out of such restitution discussions and arrangements. After all, it was the British government which ordered the violent attacks on Magdala (Ethiopia, 1868), Beijing (China, 1860), Kumase (Ghana, 1874),and Benin City, (Nigeria, 1897). Questions of apology and reparation become irrelevant since the museums, even the so-called universal museums are not responsible for the massacres and attacks that always brought them thousands of artefacts. If Ghana has to discuss with all the museums and institutions in Britain that have looted Ghanaian artefacts in their collections, we will need many years. Restitution will take ages and be complicated. I believe Ghana should request the British government to assume its responsibility of ensuring that the various institutions return the stolen objects. In the case of the Benin objects, it was the Germangovernment that organized their restitution.
Asante made artefacts, including the gold artefacts for our daily and normal usage: head wear, earrings, necklaces, pendants, chest badges, armbands, bracelets, leg bands, anklets, sandals, footrests, chairs, stools, pots, and pans. The British stole these artefacts and put them in museums behind glass and in other containers. Often these artefacts are not available to the British public. They are hidden in storerooms, and one needs permission from the museum director in order to view the Asante objects. We made this experience when we visited the British Museum and the Victoria and Albert Museum. Their homepages still indicate that Asante gold items can only be viewed with permission. Where then is the educative and informative functions of the museums?
Many people in Ghana are disappointed that the British did not return full legal ownership of artefacts to Asante/Ghana and are perplexed by the very notion of owners borrowing their artefacts from those who stole them. Discussions in social media point to a great degree of anger and frustration over this aspect. (24) I have expressed my views on the difficulty with loans of this nature (25). Some may see the short-term loan as a good beginning and hope that a loan can be transformed into the transfer of legal ownership of the artefacts. But there is no evidence to support this optimism, and the remarks of Tristram Hunt and other British authorities make it clear that there is no such intention of transformation. Hunt told the BBC reporter Katie Razzall that “the new cultural partnership is not restitution by the back door" –meaning, it is not a way to return permanent ownership to Ghana.(26)
Those who still have hopes or illusions that the British Museum will convert loans to restitution, despite all contrary evidence, must bear in mind the attempts in Britain to put pressure on the small museums and institutions to return their looted African artefacts so that the major museums may keep their loot. The UK Government excludes major museums from the application of sections 15 and 16 of the Charities Act 2022 that would have allowed themto seek authorisation from the Charity Commission if they felt compelled by a moralobligation to make a goodwill gesture to transfer of charity property. The Arts and Heritageminister, Lord Parkinson declared that:
‘The potential consequences of those provisions were
not made clear by the Law Commission when the bill was introduced and were not the
subject of parliamentary scrutiny or debate during the passage of the bill.' (27)
This is an interesting attitude towards parliamentary procedure. How would the British react if a Minister in Africa took such an action that would be to the disadvantage of the British? Pan-Africanism has undoubtedly failed in negotiations for the restitution of looted artefacts. Despite African Union conferences and various Pan-African meetings in Accra and elsewhere, there appear to be no agreed positions. Each African country deals with the former colonial masters without regard for consultations with other African countries. Nigeria refused loans of its looted Benin artefacts from the Germans, but Ghana seems unworried by short-term loans of looted Asante artefacts from Britain.
A Nigerian friend said to me:
Ghanaians are so used to borrowings and loans to such an
extent that even your own artefacts could only be returned to you in the form of loans.
Nigerians made it clear they would refuse a British offer of loans for Benin artefacts.If the British elite had respect for Asante/Ghana, this could have been anexcellent opportunity for reconciliation of Asante/Ghana with Britain. The occasion of the 150th commemoration of the end of the Anglo-Asante war of 1874 could have been the moment for the great historical gesture of restituting a large number of the famous Asante artefacts, signifying the definite reconciliation of Asante and Britain after decades of wars. There cannot be full reconciliation without the restitution of looted artefacts that signified Asante defeat by superior arms. If there had been less mercantile calculations-fees, insurance premium, possible tourist attractions in Ghana — the occasion could have contributed to solidifying relations between Ghana and Great Britain to the benefit of all, and especially, for those born and bred in the colonial era. They would have been freed from resentments and irritations created by the colonial system with its evident discriminations and glaring inequalities.
The Asante artefacts have deep spiritual connotations, but their absence from Asante for 150 years surely requires cleansing and resocialization that will reconnect the Asante/Ghanaians to their ancestral spiritual support. But how can such resocialization be effected and consolidated if the loan must be approved by the conquerors, every three years, as required by the loan arrangements? How can Ghanaians rely on the spiritual support that is traveling every three years to the land of the conquerors, whose primary aim in seizing those artefacts, was precisely to break, finally, the spiritual strength of the Asante, and thus, make them subservient, to British colonial rule? After the defeat of Asante in the Sagranti war, the control of other areas in the Gold Coast became easier for the British colonialist. How can we expect Ghanaians born after colonial rule to develop any spiritual connections to those artefacts that demonstrate the strength of their cultures in the face of hostile foreign cultures, if they are subject to the approval of the British every three years?
We may as well forget about any spiritual or cultural connections to artefacts that depend on the goodwill of foreign authorities for their very presence in our country. This is testing the credibility of African religion and our religious beliefs. We would have to modify our cosmology to accommodate the influence of this foreign element, and assess what attributes can be reasonably assigned to our ancestral deities. How would the British feel if the presence of their saints and angels in Britain depended on three-years renewals by Ghanaian authorities, taking into account insurance premiums and other payments? Loans reinforce the pre-existing neocolonial relationship between Britain and Asante/Ghana, whereas restitution would have freed both countries from the shackles of the past. Some persons have suggested that the three years may be converted into permanent ownership or restitution. We should have no illusions no matter what a certain press may suggest or say. As have often stated, a loan of an artefact, is not half-way or pre-step to restitution. There is no evidence for the belief that those who are now not ready to accept restitution will somehow change their minds in due course, and accept restitution. This can be a misunderstanding or under- estimation, of the determination of the British not to part with artefacts they have looted and kept, for one hundred and fifty years. The nervousness created by the thought, or mention of the Parthenon Marbles, alone testifies to the British resolve, not to give the impression that they will follow the current trend of restitution. Restitution signifies the beginning of a new era; a loan guarantees the continuation of the existing relationship of power and powerlessness, with all the possibilities of disputes- not about the previous relationships, but about the contract for the recent loan.
Hunt and other British officials may travel to Kumase in April, or May, to participate in festivities. But what will they be celebrating or commemorating? The defeat of Asante by the British in 1874, or the second humiliation in 2024, one hundred and fifty years after looting, and the return of thirty-two artefacts, out of thousands of looted objects, on a three-year loan, instead of restitution - which would have signified their willingness to apologize for constant British invasions, destruction of Kumase, and the loss of countless lives and properties in the decades of wars? Could they honestly participate in the commemoration of the 100 year anniversary of the return to Kumase of Prempeh I whom the British sent into exile for 28 years in the Seychelles? They could perhaps pay compensation for the wanton destruction of Kumase, instead of making Asante/Ghana pay for the transport of artefacts to Ghana, transportation made necessary by their looting our artefacts and detaining them for one hundred and fifty years. Now is the time for us to reclaim our artefacts looted by the colonialists and imperialists. There has never been a better time for this since Independence. Nigeria has set a good example in rescuing the Benin bronzes from German possession, and most Western countries and museums have shown their interest in enabling restitution. The three-year loan is not SANKOFA-take back but SANFAKO-send back; this is ‘bosea,' loan, as the Asantehene said during the celebration of the 150th anniversary of the Sagrenti War.Readers will no doubt notice that the recent returns do not include the famous Asante gold head trophy and other gold items still in the Wallace Collection, London. The Collection describes this trophy as:
‘One of the largest historic gold objects from Africa outside Egypt.
This head is among the most important and famous works of Asante art.'
Are the British not worried that they are keeping the best work of art of a people outside their country ? Is this attitude acceptable for persons of culture as the museum officials are supposed to be? Is there no obligation for museums to assist in developing culture or, at least, a moral obligation not to prevent the development of other peoples' cultures? Hijacking the cultural objects of another people is surely no help for developing cultures unless one thinks like the former Director of the British Museum who said that Lord Elgin's wrenching of the Parthenon Marbles from the Acropolis, Athens was a creative act.
British museums could perhaps learn from the Fowler Museum, Los Angeles, USA, whichhas recently returned to the Asantehene Asante artefacts in the possession of the museum.The University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Fowler Museum returned seven objects to Asantehene, Kumase, on Monday, 5 February. The museum had done provenance research on its artefacts and concluded that the seven objects were among the British loot in 1874 from the Asantehene's Palace, Manhyia. The seven objects had been donated to the museum in1965 by the Wellcome Trust in London. A senior curator at the Fowler Museum said:
“In the case of pieces that were violently or coercively taken from their original owners or
communities, it is our ethical responsibility to do what we can to return those objects. It is a
process that will occupy generations of Fowler staff, but it is something that we are
unwavering in our commitment to accomplish.” (28)
It is interesting to consider two of the methods of returning looted African artefacts inWestern museums: The Bloomsbury Way and the Fowler Way.
The Bloomsbury Way: Here, the holders of looted artefacts seek to use every possible means to delay restitution to the original owners. Arguments are advanced based on legal obstacles and the inability of the original owners to take proper care of objects. The original owners will have to bear insurance premiums and other costs and may wait a half-century for a response,
which is, at best, a short-term loan. The holders may fear reparation as accomplices if they participated in the original acquisition as the British Museum did in the invasion of Magdala,Ethiopia,1868, or as accomplices after the fact in keeping artefacts known to have been violently acquired. Morality does not function in the Bloomsbury way. The Bloomsbury Way rejects 3D Scanning for replicas of the artefacts.
The Fowler Way: Efforts are voluntarily made to contact original owners, without demands for restitution, if objects are proved to have been acquired with violence or under objectionable conditions. This way is based on ethical principles, and advances no legal obstacles. Morality takes precedence over law here. This approach accepts the idea of 3D scans and commissions artists to produce replicas for teaching purposes.
The massive violations of our human rights since contact with the West must cease. Implementing the UNITED NATIONS/UNESCO resolutions since 1973 on the return of cultural property to its country of origin could be a sign of a genuine change of attitude regarding respect for human rights of humanity outside the Western world. The struggle for the recovery of looted Asante artefacts must include the 400,000 ounces of gold that the British stole . Professor Thomas Mccaskie mentioned this in his lecture during the 150th anniversary of the Sagrenti War. The massive transfer of wealth to the British through looting cannot be ignored:
‘The amount of gold contained in Adakakese alone at
Kwaku Dua's death was in excess of 400,000 ounces. This in 1867 was worth 1.2 million
pounds sterling. The current value of the Adakakese is somewhere over two billion pounds.' (29)
It is remarkable that such a large amount of gold dust could disappear from the loot of the residences of Asante royals and the Manhyia Palace in 1874 without much notice or any record. Henry M. Stanley, who gave us a comprehensive account of the looting of Manhyia Palace and the houses of Asnate nobles, ends his extended inventory of looted items with the observation:
‘Had Sir Garnet Wolseley planted a cordon of
guards around Coomassie when he first arrived and ordered every person desirous of leaving
the city, to be searched, he might have been able to have secured much wealth of gold dust
and valuable plunder.' (30)
The question of lost gold dust must be pursued further.In what world are we living in which looters determine under what conditions owners may view their artefacts? Many wonder whether Ghana is truly independent or whether the old colonial structures, both physical and mental, are still in place and determine the direction of the development of our culture in the service of imperialism. Sixty-seven years of Independence have apparently not enabled us to shake off the domination of the former colonial masters. The intransigence of Western museum on the question of restitution of looted African artefacts has driven many youngAfricans to think about alternative ways of rescuing our artefacts from Western detention. A good example is Mwazulu Diyabanza. (31)We call on Western museums to follow the Fowler Way to restitution, adopting the Smithsonian ethical returns policy, shed their established reputation as citadels of imperialist loot of cultural objects of others, as described by Geoffrey Robertson in Who owns history? and to ponder seriously over the thoughts of Neil MacGregor in his Louvre lessons (32):
‘The question of the meaning of the ‘Benin bronzes' or ‘Elgin Marbles' in London-1900 or
2000-is inseparable from the issue of British attitudes towards Africa and the Orient as sites,
once for direct military and political colonization, and now for their post-imperial economic
exploitation and indirect manipulation. To return them would imply the belief, on the part of
the British that the peoples of those parts of the world were now capable of competently
looking after artefacts that were removed because the local inhabitants were unfit, because of
the ‘degeneration, of their societies, to act as curators. Their return would also imply
admission of their illegal possession by the British. Both implications remain unthinkable
because post-imperial racism continues to be a highly significant aspect of British foreign
policy. Though British society may be relatively ‘multicultural' now, its ruling elite, like that
of the US, is still predominantly white, middle-class, and male.'
Jonathan Harris, The New Art History- A Critical Introduction. (33)
*This article was first published in Modern Ghana 28.02.2024. The author, Dr. Kwame Opoku, is an award - winning activist and advocate for the return of the artifacts plundered by colonial powers.
The original title of the above article is as follows: “British Museum And Victoria And Albert Museum Loan Looted Asante Artefacts To Asante /ghana: Where Is The Morality?”
NOTES:
1. 1983, Thames and Hudson, London, p. 79.
2. Reuters: UK to return looted royal regalia to Ghana in loan deal
Tristram Hunt, The Guardian: V&A's ‘return' of looted Ghana gold is a new way to tackle Britain's painful past
Katie Razzall, BBC NEWS: Asante Gold: UK to loan back Ghana's looted 'crown jewels'
Kwame Asare Boadu. Graphic Online: Looted Asante gold artefacts on their way back to Kumasi from UK, USA
Craig Simpson, The Telegraph: British Museum to return gold artefacts to Ghana in historic loan deal
Zachary Folk, Forbes: British Museum Lends Ghana Looted Gold Artefacts—Here's Why It Won't Fully Return Them
Tessa Solomon, ARTnews: British Museum and V&A to Loan Asante Gold Looted from Ghana
3. Dr. Kwame Opoku, Modern Ghana: When Will Britain Return Looted Golden Ghanaian Artefacts? A History Of British Looting Of More Than 100 Objects
Dr. Kwame Opoku, Modern Ghana: British Museum And Victoria And Albert Museum Loan Looted Asante Artefacts To Asante /ghana: Where Is The Morality?
Dr. Kwame Opoku, Modern Ghana: Reclaiming Looted Asante Gold (Ghana): Triumph Of Morality Over Brutality?
7. Ana Filipa Vrdoljak: International Law, Museums and the Return of Cultural Objects, Cambridge, University Press, Cambridge, 2006, p. 26.
9. United Nations (UN) General Assembly (76th sess. : 2021-2022): Return or restitution of cultural property to the countries of origin : resolution / adopted by the General Assembly
Dr. Kwame Opoku, Modern Ghana: Restitution Day: Remembrance and Reckoning
Dr. Kwame Opoku, World Affairs Council of Philadelphia: UK Rejection of Restitution of Artefacts: Confirmation or Surprise?
10. Linda St. Thomas, Smithsonian: Smithsonian Adopts Policy on Ethical Returns
11. Kelsey Ables, Washington Post: Smithsonian gives back 29 Benin bronzes to Nigeria: ‘We are not owners'
Dr. Kwame Opoku, Modern Ghana: British Museum And Victoria And Albert Museum Loan Looted Asante Artefacts To Asante /ghana: Where Is The Morality?
15. The Horniman Museum: Horniman to return ownership of Benin bronzes to Nigeria
16. Ethical Principles for the Management and Restitution of Colonial Collections in Belgium (June 2021). 2.3 Towards a New Legal Framework
17. Neil Curtis, The University of Aberdeen: University to return Benin bronze
18. Emily Burack, Town and Country: Smithsonian to Return Looted Collection of Benin Bronzes to Nigeria
19. Nadia Khomami, The Guardian: Cambridge college to be first in UK to return looted Benin bronze
22. Linda St. Thomas, Smithsonian: Smithsonian Adopts Policy on Ethical Returns
24. Kenneth Awotwe Darko, MyJoyOnline: How Ghanaians are reacting to UK's decision to ‘loan back' looted gold artefacts
YouTube: BBC News: 'Crown jewels' looted by British soldiers returned to Ghana on loan
Dr. Kwame Opoku, Modern Ghana: British Museum And Victoria And Albert Museum Loan Looted Asante Artefacts To Asante /ghana: Where Is The Morality?
YouTube: Ghana Broadcasting Corporation: Items LOOTED by the BRITISH from ASANTE KINGDOM do not belong to GHANA
YouTube: Kwado Sheldon: Asante Gold: UK to loan back Ghana's looted 'crown jewels'
YouTube: Times Radio: Britain's plan to loan Ghanaian jewels back to Ghana comes under fire
26. Katie Razzall, BBC NEWS: Asante Gold: UK to loan back Ghana's looted 'crown jewels'
27. Geraldine Kendall Adams, Museums Association: National museums to be excluded from law enabling restitution on moral ground
Angelica Villa, ARTnews: UK Government Updates Restitution Law, Keeps Approval Process Intact for Museums
28. Harrison Jacobs, ARTnews: UCLA'S Fowler Museum Returns Gold Objects to Asante King in Ghana
The Fowler Museum at UCLA: The Fowler Museum at UCLA Permanently Returns Objects to the Asante Kingdom in the Republic of Ghana
YouTube: Grand Durbar "Kuntunkuni" in commemoration of the 150th Anniversary of the Sagrenti War
29. YouTube: NYANSAPO TV: Thomas McCaskie, at 150 Anniversary of the Sagrenti War
GhanaWeb: Looted artefacts from Asante Kingdom now worth £2B – Prof. McCaskie
30. Henry M. Stanley, Coomassie and Magdala: The Story of Two British Campaigns in Africa, Rediscovery Books East Sussex, p.23431.31. Neil MacGregor, Éditions Hazan, Paris, 2021.
31. YouTube: Times Radio: Britain's plan to loan Ghanaian jewels back to Ghana comes under fire
YouTube: ZIANA TV: 1 Mwazulu Diyabanza Siwa Lemba récupère une statue au Musée du Quai Branly à Paris
Dr. Kwame Opoku, Modern Ghana: British Museum And Victoria And Albert Museum Loan Looted Asante Artefacts To Asante /ghana: Where Is The Morality?
AFP in Paris, The Guardian: Five activists on trial in France for trying to seize African funeral staff from Museum.
Gareth Harris, The Art Newspaper: Man tries to take artefact from Louvre-just two weeks ago after being charged for the same crime at Quai Branly.
32. Neil Macgregor, À monde nouveau, nouveaux musées : Les musées, les monuments, et la communauté réinventée, Éditions Hazan, Paris,2021.
33. Routledge, London, 2001, p. 275.
````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
YouTube: United Nations (UN): SOUTH AFRICA AT THE ICJ, JANUARY 11, 2024