April 10, 2005
Pankhurst on the obelisk
Here is an interview my wife Amber did with Richard Pankhurst - son of suffragette Sylvia Pankhurst and leading campaigner for the return of the Axum Obelisk. It has got all the background on the obelisk - how it was stolen and why people think it should come back. It appeared first in the Sub Saharan Informer (still no website). The pic shows Richard with one of his many models of the obelisk in his study in Addis Ababa. He will be up here as a guest of honour on Wednesday.
Could you give us some background about how the obelisk ended up in Italy?Mussolini in the early 30s was trying to establish what he considered a new Roman Empire. He knew that the emperors of ancient Rome had taken obelisks from Egypt. He wanted to do the same. And he gave orders that one of the famous historic Axum obelisks dating back to the early Christian era should be taken to Rome and it was arranged that it should be inaugurated on the 15th anniversary of his march on Rome, that is ti say his seizure of power in Italy. And it was placed in front of what was to be the Ministry of Italian Africa.
Your mother Sylvia Pankhurst brought the theft of the obelisk to the public's attention in the 1930s. Can you tell me how she first got involved with Ethiopia and its obelisk?She had studied art in Italy and in 1919 she saw the Fascists fighting their way to power. She saw them beating up the public and became almost overnight an anti-fascist. She felt that Italy was the first victim of Fascism and there would be others. When the invasion of Ethiopia started in 1935 she founded a newspaper in defense of Ethiopia, a weekly newspaper in London called the New Times and the Ethiopia News. In that paper she published a picture of the obelisk and a statement by Emperor Haile Selassie that the taking away of the obelisk was one of many crimes carried out by Fascist Italy in Ethiopia.
When did you first get involved in campaigning for the obelisk's return?
Coming to Ethiopia to teach Ethiopian history, I was studying the period of the Italian occupation and wrote an article for the French journal Presence Africaine on the loot from Ethiopia, telling my old friend a former Senator Berhanu Tessema about this, he told me that the parliament was protesting the non-return of the obelisk. I published the resolution of the Parliament. However, not much could be done at that time. It was really not until 1991, which was the 50th anniversary of the Fascist collapse in East Africa, that the Italian left wing newspaper L'Unita asked me to write an article in May 1991 which was the first exposition for the case of the return of the obelisk. Several Italian thinkers then became involved writing a letter asking for the return in the Italian journal La Republica and immediately after that three Italian scholars wrote a petition asking for the obelisk to be sent back to Ethiopia. I happened to be in Italy at that time. I brought the news of this petition to Addis Ababa and somew 500 prominent Ethiopians signed a petition asking for the return of the obelisk and following on from the request by the three Italian scholars.
Why do you think it is so important for the obelisk to be returned to Ethiopia?
I think really for three reasons. Firstly, it brings us back to the origins of Ethiopian civilization. It is important in terms of Ethiopian history. Secondly because it is for the first time a recognition by Italy that it should honour its treaty obligations and not treat Ethiopia as a second class country. For example, when the invasion of Ethiopia took place in 1935, it took place without any declaration of war. In other words Fascist Italy did not consider Ethiopia worth dealing with. And then thirdly, it means that as far as Italy is concerned, what was in effect a Fascist symbol as it was put up to commemorate Mussolini's seizure of power, is removed.
What does it mean to you personally for the obelisk to be returned after all these years of campaigning?
Well, it gives one a certain degree of satisfaction to see that justice has at last triumphed. On the other hand, it is an incomplete return because other artifacts have not been returned. Most notably in Rome you still have part of Ethiopia's national archives - the so-called Ministry of the Pen archives. And the airplane Sahai (**), called after Emperor Haile Selassie's daughter during his time. That is wanted as part of the decoration of the new Addis Ababa airport. And Italy has so far refused to return it. So it is satisfaction marred by the fact that Italy has failed to return all that it should return.
Do you think that the return of the obelisk will help strengthen Ethiopia's case to get other stolen treasures returned by countries like the UK?
I think you can't return a piece of stone weighing more than 100 tons without it having implications. I think it will have implications for the return of Ethiopian loot taken by the British as well as by the Italians. But also for the return of loot taken by colonial powers from other parts of the world.
What do you thing this return will mean for "ordinary" Ethiopians?
I think it will be a source of satisfaction that the international community in the shape of Italy has at last honored an obligation. And that Ethiopia receives an important piece of its heritage. And after all it is a recognition of Ethiopia's status. If Italy had madfe an agreement with France or Britain to return something in 1947, I can't believe that they would have kept a European power waiting for almost 70 years.
Posted by aheavens at April 10, 2005 12:55 PM
Comments
After visiting Axum last November I have a few questions.
1. is there a picture of this stele in Axum before 1937?
2. was it standing? In a picture on "thereturnoftheaxumobelisk" it lies down.Did the Italians cut it in 3 parts?
3. how did it travel in 1937 : by train to Djibouti?
Thank you
Posted by: A.H.Herold, MD at April 24, 2005 7:13 PM
I am Italian and I'm happy the obelisk came back to Etiopia. But did you ask to Mr. Pankhurst to spend his efforts also to allow a return in Italy of all the Italian art masterpiece that were stolen and sent to British and French Museum???
British Museum and Louvre are full of Italian Paintings and sculture stolen from Italy.
British are the last people allowed to speak about the importance of giving back artcrafts to their rispective land. They even stole pieces from the Greek "Partenone" in Athens.
Wouldn't you ask Mr. Pankhurst to ask British Government to give back Partenone's sculpture??
Thank you
Posted by: David at May 18, 2006 10:10 AM
Andrew, thanks for your integrity and wit, and the diversity and comprehensiveness of your writings on Ethiopian life.
Regarding the posting by A.H. Herold, April 24, 05, has anyone come up with the answers to the three questions asked about the Axum obelisk? Would be interested for research.
Also, is there an update on the state-of-play on the obelisk's restoration and placement in its original position? Is it on track for the end of 2006? Thank you.
Posted by: Vanilla at May 26, 2006 2:12 AM
THE RETURN OF THE OBELISK TO ETHIOPIA: A VICTORY FOR ETHIOPIA, ITALY AND THE RULE OF LAW.
The return home of the final piece of the Axum obelisk to Ethiopia is an undoubted victory for Ethiopia, Italy the rule of law and democracy
The Ethiopians must be congratulated for their persistent and unwavering struggle for the return of a cultural object and a symbol of their identity which was forcibly removed by the Italian fascists under Benito Mussolini in their attempt to colonize Ethiopia some 68 years ago. Years of protests, anger and anguish have preceded this final and historic victory of Ethiopia. All Africans must rejoice with them, in the hope that this signals a new beginning in our relationship with former colonizing European powers as far as the return of stolen or illegally transferred cultural objects are concerned. France, Great Britain, Germany, Portugal, Spain, Holland, Belgium and the rest of those countries, whether former colonizers or not, such as Austria and Switzerland, should take note of this historical event for which the Italians are to be congratulated.
It surely was not an easy task to convince many Italians who, like the rest of Europeans, have been subjected to false propaganda for many decades by the so-called experts who claim that it is legal and right to deprive others of their cultural objects through the use of force. They have been convinced that if you are strong enough, you can take whatever you want from another country, particularly, African and Asian countries and keep it despite claims for return by the countries of origin. They have been taught that Resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly, the Conventions of UNESCO and other bodies discouraging such practices and urging the settlement of outstanding disputes are not binding and should therefore be ignored.
They have heard important museum directors, from museums such as the Louver, The British Museum, Musée du Quai Branly, Museum für Völkerkunde Wien, Ethnologisches Museum, Staatlische Museen zu Berlin, The Art Institute of Chicago, Opificio delle Pietre Dure, Florence, Prado Museum, Madrid and others state that these stolen objects are now part of the culture of the countries which stole them and are now keeping them. The supporters of Mussolini’s fascists in Italy must have seen this return as a final and definite confirmation of the defeat of their racist ideology which places the African at the bottom of their racist ladder of human development: a return to Africans of the 160-tonne obelisk which El Duce himself has ordered to be taken to Rome as a war trophy. The return of such cultural objects to their owners should be seen as part of a long-term process to discard racist and imperialist superiority complexes. These racist complexes have hindered in the past the observance of the principles of equality and the respect for human rights in Europe and elsewhere.
The return of the obelisk is also a triumph for the rule of law and democracy. The rule of law is incompatible with the use of force and certainly the acquisition of cultural objects, whether in war or in peace through the use of force cannot be considered as compatible with democracy. You cannot preach democracy and resort to the use of force to deprive other nations of their cultural objects. I am well aware that there are many voices in the United States, Great Britain, France, Italy, and elsewhere who do not think the use of force to remove cultural objects from Asia and Africa have anything to do with the rule of law and human rights. Some may consider the return of these cultural objects as a necessary catharsis.
The return of the obelisk also gives the lie to those museum directors who act as if the removal of stolen cultural objects from their countries will somehow affect their cultural identity. Italian culture will surely survive the removal of the Axum obelisk. Will the British, French, German and Austrian cultures survive the removal of stolen African cultural objects from their countries? Will Berlin survive the return of Nefertiti to Cairo?
What can the reader do to help this process of restitution? The main problem, as far the average reader is concerned, is the absence of information on what objects have been stolen from which country and by which country. Many museums do not even list most of these items in their handbooks or catalogues and keep them safely in their depots.
A first step would be to consult the internet sites of movements such as the African Reparation Movement to see the list of stolen items from your country or other countries. If there are museums near where you live, visit them to see if you can look at some of these objects and try to ask questions. You should also look at the UNESCO homepage to find some literature on the subject.
The main problem for us as Africans is the lack of interest on the part of most of our governments for this issue. Many have not even bothered to request from the former colonial governments for the return of our cultural objects which were taken away during the colonial period. You must ask why. Many of our intellectuals and museums experts have also kept a deafening silence. Many of our countries have not even bothered to ratify the UNIDROIT and UNESCO Conventions on this matter. It almost looks as if our leaders are not interested in cultural matters. Where then is the famous pride in our culture?
Kwame Opoku,Vienna,29 October
Posted by: DR.KWAME OPOKU at October 29, 2007 8:17 PM