India’s history and civilisation, as we know, spans at least eight thousand years. However, it has taken us over a century of archaeological finds just to qualify that. But why has it taken so long? We know that India’s history is so rich, and there are so many ancient structures throughout India that should tell us its history, right?

The problem began a millennium ago, when Turkish ghazis invaded India and launched seventeen campaigns aimed at looting and destroying temples, converting the local populations to Islam, and humiliating and enslaving said populations. This continued over the following centuries with other Islamic empires like the Ghaznavids, Khilji and Tughlaqs of Delhi, the Timurids, and finally the Mughals, who became chiller (but not good).

My recent trip to Thamizh Nadu in southern India was an eye-opener. I noticed that some of the façades of one of the most famous temples in India, the Ramanathaswamy Kovil in Rameshwaram, looked different than the smooth, black stone of which the foundation consisted. I then learned that Allaudin Khilji had launched a campaign and destroyed much of the temple in the 14^th century, and it was rebuilt in the 15^th century by the Vijayanagar Empire.

After this came the British, under whom many archaeological discoveries were made, alongside exploitation, oppression, and cultural degradation. We thought the exploitation left after 1947, but about fifty years later, it turned out it had not left. Founded in 1744, Sotheby’s has been one of the largest fine arts auctioneers in the world ever since, and there are myriad valuables and masterpieces in their stores, many of them Asian, but where are they from? The arrest of millionaire antiques trader Vaman Ghiya sent shockwaves through an investigation into the illegal sales of Indian artefacts connected to Sotheby’s. An undercover operation outside a temple led police to arrest four men for attempting to steal items in the temple, and Ghiya’s home was subsequently raided. Alongside a plethora of Armani suits were found dozens of Sotheby’s catalogues. Bank statements revealed that Sotheby’s was paying commission through false names to Ghiya².
For example, an auction in September 2000 had for sale a 12th-century red sandstone figure priced for $35K. Indian police identified this sculpture as stolen from the Visargarh temple almost exactly a year prior².

These criminal acts are not exclusive to India. Even terrorist groups like the Taliban, who famously blew up the monumental and treasured stone Buddhas in Afghanistan, generate a large share of their income through the selling of similar artefacts found in the area.

In neighbours like Nepal, whose culture and history are entwined and connected with India’s, interest in Asian art has increased significantly over the past fifty years, and this has led to disastrous side effects. Renowned artist and art historian Lain Singh Bangdel returned to Nepal in 1961 and noticed that many of the temples where he worshipped were missing some things. To be specific, stone sculptures—culturally significant sculptures—were disappearing fast, some of them mutilated and deformed in the process¹.

Subhash Kapoor, an art dealer based here in NYC, was arrested in Germany for illegal smuggling of artefacts, but that’s not all. Further investigation pointed to Nancy Wiener, an established dealer of Asian art in Manhattan who traded Kapoor’s smuggled items. Wiener was found guilty in 2016 after confessing to knowing the illegal origins of the artifacts¹.

There is something sad about the nature of these thefts. The appearance of these cultural artefacts in museums in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Yale’s art museum, and Honolulu Art Museum has been linked not just to thieves and greedy dealers, but scholars, as well. Trusted officials were involved in the theft of history and culture, and it was all too easy. The position of scholars as the appraisers and evaluators of artefacts¹ puts them in a scarily powerful position in the illicit smuggling of history.

One example is Mary Slusser, who frequently published works regarding antiquities that she knew were stolen. A glaring example was the theft of three paintings from Itumbaha vihara in Kathmandu, Nepal. She had taken pictures of the paintings in the monastery before they were stolen. Including the stolen paintings in her articles, she wrote

“Well, we could still do it very simply without spelling out that the paintings were stolen or that repatriation efforts are in the works. . . . One could just sidestep the whole issue of how it got from Itum-bahal to where it is now. This way we’re not being quite so wimpish as not saying anything” (MSC, email from Mary Slusser, May 8, 2004).¹

Her facilitation is clear, and it has been done several other times throughout her decades-long career, but the worst thing is her justification.

With respect to the question you asked about my preservation efforts, what can I say? In my view, I did the right thing in taking Nepalese paintings out of a country where they were disintegrating from lack of care to a country where, at great cost, they would be restored professionally and housed in the protected environment of a US museum of art. . . . In the nationalistic view common to many countries, the Nepalese argue that better to let the paintings rot than to leave Nepalese soil. So the question is, which of us is right? As you well know, to protect objects abroad or leave them unprotected in their country of origin is an international issue that so far seems insoluble [Slusser Reference Slusser2017].¹

The same can be extended to several others, whose justifications reveal the issues in our museums. Most of the galleries in the world are in Western, formerly colonial countries, and a lot of the artefacts in those galleries are from Eastern, formerly colonised countries. Western museums also have a habit of displaying these with some condescension, perhaps not intentional after so long, but still present¹.

Colonial examples that gave degrading theories, such as the Aryan Invasion/Migration Theory, which was written ignoring other evidence that contradicted it, are still being followed to this day.

While scholarly codes have been implemented, there is always the problem of the dreaded system. The rich and exploitative who control these schemes are not going to easily let the damage be repaired because there would be less wealth and exploitation.

India, Nepal, and Cambodia have taken the most steps towards regaining their lost history. Recently, Indian PM Narendra Modi brought back some 11th-century copper plates from the Chozha Dynasty’s pivotal reign. Even Mayor Mamdani was considering asking King Charles for the Koh-I-Noor (mountain of light) diamond back.

Cultural identity is so important; it provides us with an understanding of ourselves and our surroundings that can be hard to find sometimes, and every country and every human has a right to that identity.

Sources:

1 – https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/advances-in-archaeological-practice/article/scholarly-facilitation-of-the-illicit-trade-in-cultural-objects-providing-a-veneer-of-legitimacy/58651F895BE6237EC23C0948D3055DC5

2 – https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2003/jul/06/arts.artsnews

Also – https://youtu.be/lr7Bb93-ZaE