During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the British people established the largest empire in History. At its peak, the empire controlled 25% of the total land area of Earth, and 23% of its population. Due to the exploitative and colonial nature of the British Empire, it took or stole (depends on who you ask) many artefacts and objects of religious and cultural value. As the sun set on the British Empire after the second World War, many of its colonies gained independence and established their own countries. These countries now began demanding their precious artifacts back from the British. However the British remain adamant and have refused to return many artefacts. The most contested artefacts in the British Museum are the Benin Bronzes from West Africa, the Maqdala collection of Ethiopia, the Maoi heads from Easter Island, sculptures from the Parthenon in Greece and many weapons of Aboriginal Australians. But none are as famous or sought after as the precious Koh-i-noor diamond of India.
Until 1725, India was the sole source of diamonds in the world. Owing to this history the largest uncut diamond was found in one of its mines. The exact source of the Koh-i-noor is contested, with Karnataka, Andhra and Hyderabad making claims. Its history is one of blood and conquest as its distinctiveness made it a very prized possession. It changed hands numerous times among Indian and Iranian rulers, before the British took it from Gulaab Singh of Punjab. It adorned many famous artefacts, such as the Peacock Throne of Shah Jahan, the bracelet of Shah Durrani, the armlet of Ranjit Singh and now Queen Mary's crown. Even as a part of something, the Koh-i-noor stands out with its own spotlight as its beauty is too great to be lost. It is also said that the diamond is cursed, bringing great victory to the bearer, but never letting them enjoy or rest in their victories. It is said only gods and women can wear it with impunity.
.png)
Having such a long and complicated history, many countries have laid claims on the Koh-i-noor. Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan and even the Taliban have laid claims to the Koh-i-noor along with India. At the behest of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Indian diplomats will be filing a request and engaging in a campaign to bring back the Koh-i-noor and other treasures. The move has been a rather big statement that has brought back the conversation of returning stolen items. The British even decided to coronate Camilia (the Queen Consort) without the Koh-i-noor to avoid controversy during King Charles' coronation. Many diplomats such as David Cameroon have said that "returning the diamond would not be in everyone's best interests" and the British Govt claims that the Koh-i-noor was obtained legally in a surrender treaty by Gulaab Singh with the British. However the public has a different opinion as Sathnam Sanghera (author of Empireland) states, "Young people in Britain feel the same way about loot in museums as we felt about animals in zoos". This indicates that the youth feel the guilt of having taken these national treasures from other countries.
It is also helpful to understand the UK-India relations that play in the background of the whole Koh-i-noor saga. Post-independence, India joined the Commonwealth as a Republic in 1950. However since India followed the policies of Non-Alignment (NAM) and had close ties with the USSR, Britain did not particularly like India. Being one of the founders of NATO, the UK went against India and challenged it on a number of occasions such as the annexation of Goa and Sikkim and on the issue of Kashmir. India too challenged the UK on the invasion of Egypt and on rights to the Indian Ocean. Thus on this sour relationship, Britain would never give the Koh-i-noor. However once the USSR collapsed and Britain realized that the Indian economy was booming, it hurriedly improved relations. British Prime Ministers started visiting Delhi very often to establish better trade deals and economic ties. Today, the largely independent post-Brexit Britain has signed a Free Trade Agreement with India. With the British Finance Minister going so far as to dismiss the BBC on its documentary on PM Modi and affirming the desire to build strong economic relations. Thus it is a much more docile Britain from whom we ask the Koh-i-noor this time.
The demand of return of stolen artefacts is a product of a larger movement in society. In the past decade or so, we as communities of the world have started to look back on our history and have been trying to strengthen it. We can see that conservation and rediscovery of one's own culture and history has been the trend among most societies in the world. Be it nationalists in India, blacks, Indians and Latinos in America, conservatives in Europe, groups in East Asia, tribes and communities in Africa, all of us have been rediscovering and cherishing our history and past that was subdued by some force or another. However along with the history comes also the subjugation and the bloody past which when remembered brings anger and hurt. Thus we can see that most communities are asking for reparations for actions done in the past.
The blacks of America have already started demanding reparations for slavery, with California already passing bills to realize such an action. It has become a very hot debate as reparations are given to only black people, however not all blacks are descended from slaves. In fact many blacks were slave owners and this brings confusion to the problem as is always the case with historical reparations. Conservatives argue that most people receiving reparations for slavery do not deserve it as they have never had any issues or problems in their lives due to slavery. This is because systemic racism has not existed in America ever since the civil rights movement.
Thus we can see how historical reparations can quickly be a slippery slope of demands and aggression. What has started as demanding back colonial artefacts may snowball into other demands.
If Britain needs to pay back for looting India, does Iran too need to pay us back ? Since Iranian rulers have raided India for centuries.
The matter and argument could also stand for casteism. Is the reservation and benefits of the Scheduled Castes enough or do higher castes need to pay reparations ?
Do descendants of rulers and zamindaars have an obligation to give reparations to descendants of serfs and farmers ? As we can see it becomes problematic to consider.
Structures such as the Taj Mahal and Qutub Minar have been criticized for being symbols of foreign rule. However we could never destroy or defame them as they stand as symbols of our great nation today.
As we can see, in the process of removing colonial and foreign influence on India, we may just destroy Indian history. Steps such as renaming Indian cities was important, but we can never truly remove British influence from India. Therefore it is always important to look at history with a contemporary lens. We cannot judge conquerors and rulers of the past with the thoughts and morals of the 21st century. Reparations are a very good means of giving back to a subjugated community, but it quickly becomes a slippery slope of resentment and anger.
Until we can accept our history for what it is and move on from it, we will never be able to create our own.
Written by Ariyaan Moktan.
Comments
Post a Comment