NIGERIA has rejected the prospect of borrowing the Benin Bronzes from the British Museum, with Director General of the National Commission for Museums and Monuments (NCMM), Olugbile Holloway, describing the proposal as an insult to a nation seeking the return of artefacts looted by British forces in 1897.
Speaking at the 2026 Quramo Festival held in Lagos from October 1 to 3, Holloway said the proposal was insulting, and that restitution must involve transferring ownership, not merely temporarily returning objects.
“We are constantly in communication with the British Museum, and in one of our meetings, I clearly told them that insinuating you want to loan us our artefacts, I find it quite insulting,” he said. “I’d rather you keep them till the end of time than for you to loan something that was looted.”
Holloway spoke during a panel discussion, ‘Loot, Restitution and African Heritage’, alongside Director General of the Centre for Black and African Arts and Civilization (CBAAC) Aisha Adamu Augie, and journalist and author Barnaby Phillips. Ore Ogunbiyi, African correspondent for the Economist, chaired the discussion.
British forces seized the Benin Bronzes, a collection of bronze plaques, sculptures and ivory objects, during the invasion of Benin in 1897. Many were subsequently sold or dispersed to museums and private collections, including the British Museum.
Phillips, a former BBC and Al Jazeera journalist, traced the events leading to the invasion to Britain’s commercial and territorial ambitions in West Africa. At the time, European powers were competing for control of African territories and resources, including palm oil.
The killing of a British expedition led by James Phillips, an official who had travelled to Benin to press the Oba to accept a treaty, gave Britain a pretext for military intervention. British forces captured Benin City, deposed the Oba and exiled him to Calabar, while looting objects from the royal palace.
“These are trophies of war that were taken back in 1897 to Britain,” Phillips said.
Augie argued that the loss extended beyond the objects themselves. The artefacts carry histories, languages and cultural knowledge, and their removal has made them less accessible to successive generations of Nigerians and other Africans.
“Imagine having all your books stolen, and you have no way to access them,” she said.
She called for restitution to address this wider cultural loss, with policies that recognise the relationship between objects, historical memory and traditional storytelling.
Holloway rejected the argument that Nigeria must first prove it has adequate facilities to house returned artefacts. “You don’t take a person’s object and have the moral right to ask what they will do with it when you return it,” he said. “Even if Nigeria doesn’t have a single museum, we would still be in our rights to ask for our objects back.”
He also challenged the assumption that the Western museum model should determine how African societies preserve their heritage. Shrines, festivals and other cultural institutions had long served as places of collective memory, he said, adding that museums should be understood in their African context.
Holloway cited the renovated gallery at the National Museum and its exhibition ‘Echoes of the Past’ as evidence of Nigeria’s ability to care for returned objects.
Augie argued that museums should not be defined solely as buildings in which artefacts are stored. She also pointed to digital museums as a way to reconnect African audiences with objects that remain abroad.
The question of ownership has been addressed, in part, by a Nigerian government gazette issued in 2023 under former president Muhammadu Buhari. According to Holloway, it established that looted Benin objects returned to Nigeria, or awaiting repatriation, belong to the Oba of Benin.
The NCMM has agreed to manage the objects in partnership with the monarch, who lacks the specialist staff and institutional infrastructure required to administer them, Holloway said. He described uncertainty over ownership and management as a major obstacle to restitution.
Phillips said the British Museum’s ability to return objects permanently was constrained by the British Museum Act 1963. The legislation restricts the museum’s power to dispose of items in its collection, which he said helps explain its continued preference for loans.
Holloway argued that legal restrictions should not be allowed to legitimise the continued possession of looted heritage. He said restitution could begin with a transfer of legal ownership even if an object remained temporarily outside Nigeria.
“The loans should be us agreeing to loan you, not loaning us what you looted,” he said.
Augie cited CBAAC’s experience as an example of the consequences of continued foreign possession. The centre was inspired by an ivory mask from Benin held in Britain, but when it sought to borrow the original, permission was refused, and it had to make a replica instead.
She called for African countries to coordinate their efforts to secure restitution, arguing that British legislation could be changed through political action and sustained public pressure.
For Holloway, the dispute is also about how African history and achievement are represented internationally. He argued that the continued absence of the Bronzes reflects wider assumptions that diminish the importance of African cultural heritage.
Restitution, he said, must form part of a broader effort to strengthen African institutions and challenge portrayals of the continent defined primarily by poverty and humanitarian need.
The return of the Benin Bronzes, he argued, is therefore not simply a question of where objects are held, but of who has the authority to preserve, interpret and present African history.
Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc. (Syndigate.info).
