This year, 2005, has been dubbed 'the worldwide year of Africa'. A year during which prime minister Tony Blair has promised to put Africa high on the global political agenda at the G8 Summit, at the EU and the UN, and by means of the Commission for Africa.
It is therefore fitting that Africa 05, 'the biggest celebration of African culture ever organised in Britain', led by the British Museum and involving the participation of many other leading British museums, should be held during this year.
But perhaps Africa 05 might also provide an occasion to question the relationship between Britain's museums and Africa's material culture. A chance to highlight the legacy of Britain's colonial and imperial past, particularly in regard to the many looted artefacts still retained in museums here, despite demands for their return to Africa.
It might be hoped that the leading museums, such as the British Museum and the Victoria & Albert Museum, would use the occasion of Africa 05 to begin to make amends for the injustices of the past and send out an unequivocal message to other museums in Britain, and throughout the world, that stolen goods remain just that and must be returned to their countries of origin, accompanied by the necessary reparations to compensate the peoples and cultures from whom they were looted.
In fact nothing of the kind has occurred. There has either been total silence on this important question or, as in the case of the British Museum's director, Neil MacGregor, an attempt at a defence of the indefensible.
To be fair to MacGregor, his approach, as presented in an article in the Guardian last year, is non-discriminatory; that is to say he argues that the museum should continue to retain all contested goods, not just those originating from Africa.
According to this philosophy, the British Museum should be celebrated as the 'trustee' of the world's cultural treasures, such as the Benin Bronzes and the Rosetta Stone.
Many other British museums and libraries seem to have adopted a similar stance, one that is fully supported by the government, and is unfortunately reminiscent of the justifications that were once advanced for colonial rule in Africa, when the white man's burden required that the peoples of Africa and their resources should remain under the trusteeship of civilising Europe.
Of course, the British Museum would point out that as well as fulfilling its 'worldwide civic purpose' by holding on to looted artefacts, it is also developing and extending its partnerships with museums in Africa through such means as the Africa Project.
This programme, funded by the government and in partnership with the British Council, facilitates skills sharing, curatorial exchanges and training with museums in Africa and, as if to add insult to injury, even allows the British Museum to lend to African countries some of their own stolen treasures.
But just how many of Africa's plundered cultural artefacts are still held in 'trust' by Britain's museums and libraries, and is this an issue that only concerns the major national institutions?
The magnitude of the offence can perhaps be gauged by examining the looting that occurred in just one African country, Ethiopia, which has been documented by Afromet (the Association for the Return of the Maqdala Ethiopian Treasures).
Afromet estimates that at least 478 individual items were looted from Ethiopia's former royal capital of Maqdala during Britain's invasion of 1867-68, and that only 10 of these items have been returned.
The remaining 468 items are held in museums and archives throughout Britain including: the British Museum, the British Library, the Bodleian Library, the National Archives of Scotland, Edinburgh University Library, the Museum of Mankind, the Royal Library Windsor Castle, the V&A and the National Army Museum.
Several items are held in regimental museums, such as those of the Border Regiment in Carlisle Castle and the King's Own Royal Regiment Museum in Lancaster. Some of the loot, plundered from Ethiopian churches, has even found its way into churches in Britain, while other items remain in what are referred to as private collections.
It is worth noting that an official from the British Museum's manuscripts' department actually accompanied the British forces that invaded Ethiopia and played a leading role in the looting of Maqdala.
One wonders what worldwide civic purpose is fulfilled by the retention in Britain of these treasures, which include a gold crown and chalice, many illustrated manuscripts and various religious artefacts plundered from Ethiopian churches, and even cuttings from the Emperor Tewodros' hair?
Much of what has been stolen is not even made available for public enlightenment and is stored in repositories such as the British Museum, a fact illustrated in the documentary film You Hide Me made in the early 1970s.
It is also sobering to reflect that Ethiopia was never a colony and that therefore the looting of the cultural heritage of those African countries that were blessed by colonial 'trusteeship' can be judged to have been even greater.
In the context of Africa 05, should not the Department for Culture, Media and Sport take a lead on this issue, with all its overtones of eurocentrism and racism?
And what of Tony Blair, with his well-known humanitarian concern for Africa: surely he recognises the need to address the legacy of Britain's colonial and imperial past? It was a question I put to him following his keynote speech on the occasion of the British Museum's 250th anniversary in 2003.
The speech was full of references to Africa and the role the British Museum could play, but why did it not address the key question of all those plundered items? 'It was not in the script,' the prime minister replied, as if to suggest that the fault lay with the script and he and his government were entirely exonerated.
Britain's museums do not need prime ministers or governments to tell them how to act. The return of Africa's looted treasures is surely a simple matter of righting an historic wrong. But in this worldwide year of Africa and during Africa 05, perhaps another question should be asked.
Who should decide what happens to Africa's stolen cultural treasures - the people, museums and governments of Africa, or the museums of Britain?
Hakim Adi is the reader in the History of Africa and the African Diaspora at Middlesex University
It is therefore fitting that Africa 05, 'the biggest celebration of African culture ever organised in Britain', led by the British Museum and involving the participation of many other leading British museums, should be held during this year.
But perhaps Africa 05 might also provide an occasion to question the relationship between Britain's museums and Africa's material culture. A chance to highlight the legacy of Britain's colonial and imperial past, particularly in regard to the many looted artefacts still retained in museums here, despite demands for their return to Africa.
It might be hoped that the leading museums, such as the British Museum and the Victoria & Albert Museum, would use the occasion of Africa 05 to begin to make amends for the injustices of the past and send out an unequivocal message to other museums in Britain, and throughout the world, that stolen goods remain just that and must be returned to their countries of origin, accompanied by the necessary reparations to compensate the peoples and cultures from whom they were looted.
In fact nothing of the kind has occurred. There has either been total silence on this important question or, as in the case of the British Museum's director, Neil MacGregor, an attempt at a defence of the indefensible.
To be fair to MacGregor, his approach, as presented in an article in the Guardian last year, is non-discriminatory; that is to say he argues that the museum should continue to retain all contested goods, not just those originating from Africa.
According to this philosophy, the British Museum should be celebrated as the 'trustee' of the world's cultural treasures, such as the Benin Bronzes and the Rosetta Stone.
Many other British museums and libraries seem to have adopted a similar stance, one that is fully supported by the government, and is unfortunately reminiscent of the justifications that were once advanced for colonial rule in Africa, when the white man's burden required that the peoples of Africa and their resources should remain under the trusteeship of civilising Europe.
Of course, the British Museum would point out that as well as fulfilling its 'worldwide civic purpose' by holding on to looted artefacts, it is also developing and extending its partnerships with museums in Africa through such means as the Africa Project.
This programme, funded by the government and in partnership with the British Council, facilitates skills sharing, curatorial exchanges and training with museums in Africa and, as if to add insult to injury, even allows the British Museum to lend to African countries some of their own stolen treasures.
But just how many of Africa's plundered cultural artefacts are still held in 'trust' by Britain's museums and libraries, and is this an issue that only concerns the major national institutions?
The magnitude of the offence can perhaps be gauged by examining the looting that occurred in just one African country, Ethiopia, which has been documented by Afromet (the Association for the Return of the Maqdala Ethiopian Treasures).
Afromet estimates that at least 478 individual items were looted from Ethiopia's former royal capital of Maqdala during Britain's invasion of 1867-68, and that only 10 of these items have been returned.
The remaining 468 items are held in museums and archives throughout Britain including: the British Museum, the British Library, the Bodleian Library, the National Archives of Scotland, Edinburgh University Library, the Museum of Mankind, the Royal Library Windsor Castle, the V&A and the National Army Museum.
Several items are held in regimental museums, such as those of the Border Regiment in Carlisle Castle and the King's Own Royal Regiment Museum in Lancaster. Some of the loot, plundered from Ethiopian churches, has even found its way into churches in Britain, while other items remain in what are referred to as private collections.
It is worth noting that an official from the British Museum's manuscripts' department actually accompanied the British forces that invaded Ethiopia and played a leading role in the looting of Maqdala.
One wonders what worldwide civic purpose is fulfilled by the retention in Britain of these treasures, which include a gold crown and chalice, many illustrated manuscripts and various religious artefacts plundered from Ethiopian churches, and even cuttings from the Emperor Tewodros' hair?
Much of what has been stolen is not even made available for public enlightenment and is stored in repositories such as the British Museum, a fact illustrated in the documentary film You Hide Me made in the early 1970s.
It is also sobering to reflect that Ethiopia was never a colony and that therefore the looting of the cultural heritage of those African countries that were blessed by colonial 'trusteeship' can be judged to have been even greater.
In the context of Africa 05, should not the Department for Culture, Media and Sport take a lead on this issue, with all its overtones of eurocentrism and racism?
And what of Tony Blair, with his well-known humanitarian concern for Africa: surely he recognises the need to address the legacy of Britain's colonial and imperial past? It was a question I put to him following his keynote speech on the occasion of the British Museum's 250th anniversary in 2003.
The speech was full of references to Africa and the role the British Museum could play, but why did it not address the key question of all those plundered items? 'It was not in the script,' the prime minister replied, as if to suggest that the fault lay with the script and he and his government were entirely exonerated.
Britain's museums do not need prime ministers or governments to tell them how to act. The return of Africa's looted treasures is surely a simple matter of righting an historic wrong. But in this worldwide year of Africa and during Africa 05, perhaps another question should be asked.
Who should decide what happens to Africa's stolen cultural treasures - the people, museums and governments of Africa, or the museums of Britain?
Hakim Adi is the reader in the History of Africa and the African Diaspora at Middlesex University
