The Benin bronze plaque

The Benin bronze plaque presents a tightly composed martial scene in which a dominant central figure, likely a high-ranking war leader, has unhorsed his opponent and delivers a decisive sword strike. The fallen figure’s vulnerability is emphasized by his lower position and the forward thrust of the victor’s weapon, suggesting the imminence of death. Surrounding them are smaller attendants, rendered in hierarchical proportion, some bearing weapons, others musical instruments, underscoring the ceremonial as well as violent dimensions of warfare in the Benin Kingdom. The horse, whose head projects beyond the relief plane, heightens the dramatic immediacy and demonstrates a sophisticated manipulation of spatial illusion within the medium of cast brass. Technically, the plaque stands among the most accomplished examples of Benin relief work. The controlled variation in relief depth, the articulation of regalia, and the integration of figural and animal forms attest to the mastery of court guild casters working under royal patronage. Its preservation, aside from minor dents, allows for an unusually clear reading of surface detail and compositional intent. Within the corpus accessible through Digital Benin, only a limited number of plaques display comparable narrative intensity and compositional cohesion. The scene foregrounds violence not merely as historical record but as a structuring principle of royal imagery. As Britta Hauser-Schäublin has noted in a widely discussed essay, such works invite reflection on the entanglement of aesthetic achievement and histories of violence, a perspective that resonates uneasily with interpretations of the Benin Expedition of 1897 and subsequent historiographic debates.. In her FAZ article, Brigitta Hauser-Schäublin argues against what she sees as an overly simplified moral interpretation of the Benin Bronzes and their restitution to Nigeria. Her central point is that the bronzes should not be viewed only as victims of European colonial looting, because they were themselves produced within a historical system shaped by warfare, slavery, and court violence in the Kingdom of Benin. She describes the Kingdom of Benin as a powerful royal state whose wealth depended partly on military expansion and participation in the slave trade. According to her argument, the famous bronze plaques and sculptures were court artworks created to glorify royal authority and political power. For this reason, she claims that “blood sticks to the Benin plaques,” meaning that the objects are historically connected not only to colonial violence but also to earlier forms of violence within the kingdom itself. A major concern in the article is the question of who actually receives the objects after restitution. Hauser-Schäublin criticizes the idea that the bronzes are simply being “returned to the Nigerian people.” Instead, she argues that many objects may ultimately come under the control of the present Oba of Benin, whose monarchy historically profited from the same systems of warfare and enslavement that produced the court’s wealth. She also criticizes German cultural politics and the broader restitution debate for becoming highly moralized and symbolic. In her opinion, colonial guilt alone is used as the main framework for discussion, while the complex historical realities of African kingdoms are often ignored. She calls for more detailed provenance research that includes both colonial looting and the internal political and economic structures of the societies where the objects originated. The article caused strong reactions. Critics accused her of relativizing British colonial violence, especially the violent British expedition against Benin City in 1897, during which thousands of artworks were looted. Others defended her position as an attempt to make the debate more historically nuanced and less politically simplified. Hauser-Schäublin, Brittain der FAZ erschien am 12. Januar 202. In her FAZ article, Brigitta Hauser-Schäublin develops a fundamental critique of Germany’s restitution policy regarding Nigeria and the so-called Benin Bronzes. The starting point of her argument is the observation that the public debate has become heavily moralized, while historical complexity increasingly disappears behind symbolic political gestures. In political and media discourse, the return of the bronzes is often presented as a straightforward act of postcolonial justice. Her article challenges precisely this interpretation. Hauser-Schäublin describes the historical Kingdom of Benin as a militarized court society whose economic and political power was closely connected to warfare, the taking of captives, and participation in the slave trade. The bronzes themselves are interpreted as representational court art created for a ruling elite that maintained its wealth and sacred authority through systems of violence. When the objects are discussed today exclusively as “looted art,” she argues that one must also consider the historical conditions under which they were originally produced. Her provocative statement that “blood sticks to the Benin plaques” refers to this entanglement of artistic production, political power, and human exploitation. A central aspect of the article concerns the question of ownership after restitution. Hauser-Schäublin points out that many returned objects may ultimately fall under the influence of the present-day Oba of Benin rather than becoming broadly accessible public heritage. She therefore questions the assumption that restitution automatically represents a democratic return of cultural property to “the Nigerian people.” In her view, restitution can also reinforce existing dynastic or political structures and become part of contemporary identity politics. The article further criticizes German cultural policy and the moral tone of the restitution debate. According to Hauser-Schäublin, symbolic acts of repentance increasingly replace nuanced historical scholarship. Provenance research, she argues, should not focus exclusively on colonial looting, but must also investigate the internal systems of violence, enslavement, and power that shaped the societies from which these objects originated. The article provoked strong controversy. Critics accused her of relativizing colonial violence and reproducing argumentative patterns historically associated with colonial justifications. Supporters, however, regarded the text as an attempt to reintroduce historical complexity into a debate that had become politically and morally polarized. The intensity of the reactions demonstrated that the Benin Bronzes today function not only as artworks, but also as symbols within broader struggles over memory, guilt, ownership, and historical responsibility. Hauser-Schäublin, Brittain der FAZ erschien am 12. Januar 2022 Selected literature Hauser-Schäublin, Brittain der FAZ erschien am 12. Januar 2022 Hauser-Schäublin, FAZ-Artikel Mai 2023. „An den Benin-Platten klebt Blut“ bezieht, Paula Girshick Ben-Amos, The Art of Benin Barbara Plankensteiner (ed.), Benin: Kings and Rituals Dan Hicks, The Brutish Museums Kathy Curnow, “Benin Court Style and Iconography” Digital Benin Project Database Wolfgang Jaenicke, blog: "History, Restitution, and the Politics of Moral Retrospection" Jaenicke-Njoya Arvchive CAB 45930 Text created by AI Height: 48 cm Width: 41 cm Weight: 10,5 kg