\u201cFrom the point of view of the people whose spiritual identity was taken away, there has been a constant grief. Repatriation is a recognition that an injustice was done, and that we recognise these items are owned by the people they were taken from,\u201d Woldeyes says.<\/p>\n
The importance of an artefact<\/h2>\n
For the past four years, Ethiopian-born Woldeyes has been campaigning for the return of stolen artefacts through the Australian, Ethiopian, South African and US media.<\/p>\n
Of particular significance to him are the 11 tabots <\/em>of Ethiopia stored in the British Museum\u2019s archives, which were seized during the Battle of Maqdala in 1868 by the British Empire. These wooden plaques \u2013<\/em> replicas of the Ark of the Covenant \u2013 are sacred to the Ethiopian Orthodox Church. The remaining tabots are located in churches across the country.<\/p>\n To his fellow Ethiopians, tabots<\/em> also represent the country\u2019s long-time struggle against Western colonisers.<\/p>\n Twenty-eight years after the Battle of Maqdala, the Ethiopian army defeated an invading Italian force at the Battle of Adwa<\/a>. They were supported by the clergy from the holy city of Axum, who carried the tabots <\/em>of Mary and St George into battle.<\/p>\n The victory, considered to be an act of God, halted Italy\u2019s expansion and subsequently, Ethiopia was one of only two African countries to remain uncolonised.<\/p>\n \u201cPeople organise their lives and social interactions on the basis of these spiritual treasures. We persisted against the Italians because we carried them to war. And yet many tabots still sit in Britain. The British refuse to repatriate them,\u201d Woldeyes says.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n In recent years, there has been increased demand to return stolen artefacts, with governments in France<\/a>, Germany<\/a>, the Netherlands<\/a>, UK<\/a> and US<\/a> taking positive steps.<\/p>\n But resistance still occurs \u2013 particularly over concerns the artefacts could be sent to politically unstable countries and destroyed. Others argue the institutions can better preserve the artefacts and make them more accessible to visitors.<\/p>\n \u201cWe need to stop this claim that artefacts should only remain at institutions with good facilities and make people aware of why repatriating is important. It\u2019s a question of cultural survival. You cannot maintain your culture without the existence of artefacts representing that culture,\u201d counters Woldeyes.<\/p>\n \u201cAnd it\u2019s not just artefacts \u2013 it\u2019s human remains, body parts, taken from people who were struggling against colonial invasions and sent for scientific studies in the West.\u201d<\/p>\n Beyond a matter of justice, Woldeyes is concerned that keeping these artefacts in Western hands is creating a dangerous colonial interpretation of historical events.<\/p>\n Woldeyes has researched The Life and Struggles of Our Mother Walatta Petros<\/em>, an award-winning English translation of a stolen, 17th<\/sup> century manuscript written in the ancient Ge\u2019ez language on one of Ethiopia\u2019s female saints. As part of winning a Humanities Travelling Fellowship<\/a> in 2019, Woldeyes consulted Church scholars about the accuracy of the translation.<\/p>\n \u201cI discovered<\/a> the Western professors had not only disregarded the testimonies of local scholars who had studied the language for more than 30 years: they had sensationalised some of the stories to make their translation more popular.<\/p>\n \u201cKeeping these treasures with professors who don\u2019t have adequate training not only strips away the original culture, it allows them to produce misrepresentations that mislead the entire world.\u201d<\/p>\n The looting of artefacts is a practice that still continues today. Last year, thieves pillaged archeological sites in North Africa and the Middle East during Coronavirus lockdowns, attempting to sell<\/a> the treasures they had discovered on Facebook.<\/p>\n Woldeyes says it\u2019s a \u201csad reality\u201d there\u2019s still a market for stolen artefacts, but is hopeful that the growing calls for repatriation will lead to a crackdown on looting and encourage further reconciliation between the current and original owners.<\/p>\n \u201cWhile not every artefact can be returned, acknowledging where they came from could have a tremendous healing effect. Alternatively, institutions could form a partnership with the original owners and keep the digitised copy of the artefact, while returning the treasures to their homes.<\/p>\n \u201cWe need to have a perspective that honours the ideals of all cultures and I think that can only be created through public pressure.<\/p>\n If we are guided by that spirit, repatriation will not be a question of competing nationalisms: it will become a matter of nurturing diversity, dialogue and reimagining colonial, war-like understandings of the past.\u201d<\/p>\n This article was inspired by an episode of\u00a0The Future Of<\/em>, the podcast where experts share their vision of the future and how their work is helping shape it for the better.<\/p>\n![\"Priests](\"https:\/\/www.curtin.edu.au\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/Ethiopian-Orthodox-Church-Priests-Tabot.jpg\")
Nature of the repatriation debate<\/h2>\n
![\"Dr](\"https:\/\/www.curtin.edu.au\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/Yirga-Gelow-Woldeyes-Fieldwork.jpg\")
What\u2019s the future of stolen artefacts?<\/h2>\n
Hear more on\u00a0The Future Of<\/i> <\/span>podcast<\/span><\/h2>\n