The Royal Artillery is under fire for its refusal to allow public access to a remarkable artefact looted from the Asante Kingdom during the British colonial expansion in the 19th century. The golden ram’s head, a symbol of cultural heritage, remains hidden away in the officers’ mess at Larkhill barracks in Wiltshire, raising questions about the handling of colonial spoils and the ongoing legacy of imperialism.
A Hidden Treasure from the Past
The stunning golden ram’s head, measuring approximately 19cm across, is a relic of the Anglo-Asante wars that saw British soldiers pillage the royal palace in Kumasi, now part of modern-day Ghana. The artefact was seized during a military campaign in 1874, when British forces not only looted the palace but also set the city ablaze. This act of cultural destruction was justified by the British as a demonstration of power, with one commander later reflecting, “I had shown the power of England.”
The ram’s head is not merely a trophy of war; it embodies the rich cultural history of the Asante people, whose gold artefacts represent ancestral spirits. Despite its significance, it remains inaccessible to the public, cloaked in the secrecy of military protocol. While the Victoria and Albert Museum and the British Museum have taken steps to return some looted treasures to Ghana, the Royal Artillery’s steadfast refusal to exhibit this artefact raises ethical concerns.
Diplomatic Efforts for Return
Barnaby Phillips, a journalist and author with extensive experience in Africa, sought access to the ram’s head for his upcoming book, “The African Kingdom of Gold: Britain and the Asante Treasure.” However, his request was met with a curt dismissal, citing security and insurance concerns. “It’s an army institution holding the spoils of war, but they say it’s not safe to show it to me. That’s somewhat ironic,” Phillips remarked.
In response to the ongoing negotiations for the return of Asante treasures, Ivor Agyeman-Duah, an influential historian and director of the Manhyia Palace Museum, has been engaged by the Asante king, Otumfuo Osei Tutu II, to facilitate discussions with British institutions. Agyeman-Duah expressed his intention to pursue talks with the Royal Artillery regarding the return of the ram’s head, which he described as “iconic evidence of Asante prowess over two centuries.”
Embarrassment and Ethical Implications
The Royal Artillery’s decision to restrict public access to the ram’s head may stem from the discomfort surrounding its historical context. Phillips pointed out that the stand commissioned for the artefact, depicting three young boys holding the ram aloft, serves as a painful reminder of colonial attitudes. This portrayal, along with engravings commemorating British victories, transforms the artefact into a trophy, reinforcing its ceremonial role within the officers’ mess, yet leaving it shrouded in a cloud of controversy.
Moreover, the presence of another looted item, a silver cross taken from a church during the contentious 1868 expedition to Abyssinia, further complicates the narrative of these artefacts. Phillips argues that such significant pieces of history should not be relegated to the private domain of the military but rather offered to public museums, enriching cultural understanding and fostering dialogue about the implications of colonialism.
An army spokesperson reiterated that access to military locations is tightly controlled for security reasons, but many critics believe that this stance only serves to perpetuate a culture of secrecy surrounding Britain’s colonial past.
Why it Matters
The refusal to exhibit the Asante ram’s head is more than just a bureaucratic decision; it reflects a broader issue of accountability and restitution for colonial injustices. As discussions about the return of looted artefacts intensify, the Royal Artillery’s stance raises pressing questions about how institutions grapple with their colonial legacies. In a world that increasingly values transparency and reconciliation, the continued secrecy surrounding such significant cultural treasures only deepens the wounds of history, underscoring the urgent need for dialogue and restitution in the post-colonial era.
