Sotheby's has scrapped its February sale of a controversial £4.5m mask believed to have been looted by British forces from 19th-century West Africa.

Sotheby's cancels sale of 'looted' Benin mask

Online protests halt auction of 'plundered' 16th-century artefact

By Rob Sharp, Arts Correspondent at independent.co.uk5.html

A number of private individuals contacted the auction house last week to complain about the sale of the 16th-century ivory mask, once thought to have belonged to an ancient Nigerian king. Local government officials in Nigeria have publicly condemned the sale and criticised the object's current owners, the descendants of a former British government official involved in an 1897 British invasion of Benin, a city-state in what is now Nigeria.

The mask, one of the last great masterpieces of Benin sculpture remaining in private hands, is believed to have been worn by the "Oba" or king of Benin on ceremonial occasions.

It was due to be sold by the descendants of Lt-Col Sir Henry Lionel Galway, who took part in 1897's punitive expedition in southern Nigeria. This was carried out by British forces in retaliation for a massacre of a previous British-led invasion force. Troops deposed the king and looted the city.

The British confiscated many of the treasures they found, auctioning them off to finance the expedition. Many of the artefacts ended up in the British Museum, which currently holds another of the same group of masks, although some remained in private hands.

"The Benin ivory mask and other items consigned by the descendants of Lionel Galway which Sotheby's had announced for auction in February 2011 have been withdrawn from sale at the request of the consignors," said a Sotheby's spokesman.

Protests against the sale emerged on social networking sites last week. An online petition was organised by the Nigeria Liberty Forum, which describes itself as a "UK-based Nigerian pro-democracy group".

"They should seek good counsel and refrain from selling the mask," Orobosa Omo-Ojo, an official in the state government of Edo, which contains the modern city of Benin, told the press in Nigeria. "Anything that makes them ignore this call [from] the Edo state government will [make us] use this as a starting point to protect our intellectual properties."

The mask, which depicts the head of the queen mother of the Edo peoples, was due to be auctioned along with five other rare pieces collected from Benin at the same time. According to Sotheby's, the masks "rank among the most iconic works of art to have been created in Africa".

The mask had previously been on public view in 1947 as part of an exhibition at London's Berkeley Galleries. It was shown in 1951 in another show at the Arts Gallery of the Imperial Institute in London.

"It has an amazing untouched surface which collectors love," said the director of African and Oceanic Art at Sotheby's, Jean Fritts. "Its honey colour attests to years of rubbing with palm oil."

Comments:

durkheim

Am I missing something here? Surely if Lionel Galway was acting in the course of his employment when he looted the mask then it belongs to his employer - the British Government. It would seem that two thefts have been committed one from the original African owners and a second from the British Government (I believe that legally stolen property can itself be stolen!). Perhaps some measure of justice can be achieved by the British State taking immediate steps to reclaim the property and by prosecuting both Galway's family for handling stolen goods and Sotherby's for attempting to do so! The mask could then be displayed in the British Museum where it would enhance and extend the existing collection of stolen property. At least this would allow the public in whose name the original theft was carried out to see the results of imperial plunder.

Michael Kirkpatrick

The issue needs to be put in perspective for those not involved in the art world. Let me make an analogy. Imagine if African tourists stole historical artifacts from Buckingham Palace or the White House or the Vatican and took them back to their country to display as art in a museum or gallery. We would not hesitate to identify that as a crime. What has happened to thousands of pieces of African artifacts is no different.

The general public needs to start asking important questions about Africans artifacts when they see them on exhibit in museums. How were these items originally aquired? What is the difference between art and artifacts? How have the countries of origin benefitted from these items being exhibited?

I want to commend those involved in bringing attention to this issue. This is not just about the physical items. It’s about justice. It’s about dignity. It’s about eliminating neo-colonial, imperialist attitudes. It’s about Africa becoming self-reliant.

6 people liked this.

Timmhotep

British to Africans: "Hey what gives? We gave you our language and this cool Bible."

1 person liked this.

Lexy Uyi Osunde

And the Bible is not your property either. Ask the Jews and The Greeks, they can shool you better.

2 people liked this.

Katrin Schulze

@ franvalc: While I do have sympathy for the concerns you raised, surely you agree that there is a difference between this case and arguments for or against repatriation of objects currently in public museums. Whether you believe public display and the roles of museums in the preservation of objects, research and education are sufficient to refute all objects is not the point here (some museums don't seem to think so either as they have relatively quietly started repatriating some of objects). This concerned the sale of artefacts from the private collection of the descendants of a man who was closely involved in some of the events that led to the so-called punitive expedition into, most likely, another private collection at what appeared would have amounted to an enormous personal profit. In that sense, I cannot see how that is opening any Pandora box (note, Sotheby's has not acknowledged any wrongdoing nor even felt the need to comment), whether you think that would have been a good thing or not.

Flag

lynn68b

Sotheby's cannot facilitate the sale of stolen goods or someone making a quick buck out of a sacred object. The mask should be returned to the government of Edo with an apology for insulting the historical heritage of the ancient civilisation of Benin. Too much sacred art stolen during colonial times has been lost to private collectors. It doesn't all end up in the British Museum and it is even rarer for artefacts to be returned to their place of origin without an enormous debate e.g. it is embarrassing we are still only talking about returning the Elgin marbles to the Parthenon.

Flag

3 people liked this.

RidersontheStorm

The British Museum has no intention whatsoever in returning the Parthenon Marbles acquired/looted by Elgin

1 person liked this.

franvalc

And what´s going to happen to the mask? It is like opening Pandora´s box, isn´t it?
Surely Nigeria has a genuine claim to this piece but ... will the present owners dutifully return the mask that was stolen in the first place? I think this piece belongs to Nigeria, in all fairness. But then of course Greece will want the Elgin marbles back even if they were ¨purchased¨ etc. etc. Will be interesting to see the development.