One nation’s hero is another’s villain. While Major-General Charles Gordon is regarded as an outstanding military commander and administrator in some quarters of Britain, he is seen as a villain by the Chinese people because of his barbaric acts in the Summer Palace in Beijing in October 1860. Lord Elgin (James Bruce, 8th Earl of Elgin) and Gordon were responsible for directing the burning of the palace. Most notoriously, Gordon trampled on the bottom line of morality by plundering the palace. In a book written by Alfred Egmont Hake in the late 19th century, it was reported that all the invaders were wild for plunder.

In spite of the heinous sins of Gordon, he has a memorial in the northwest tower chapel near the west entrance to Westminster Abbey. The looting of the Summer Palace provides a historical lens for understanding the tragic loss of a large number of Chinese artifacts from the mid-19th century to the mid-20th century. We hope the following discussion will help readers understand how much of our cultural identity depends on these invaluable artifacts. Most importantly, we want readers to understand why it is unconscionable for the British Museum to rely on Britain’s self-serving domestic laws to retain control over these stolen artifacts.

In an editorial published in late August 2023, the Global Times of China asked the British Museum to give back all Chinese cultural relics free of charge. The Global Times also supported the legitimate claims for the restitution of cultural relics that had been looted from other countries, such as India, Nigeria, and South Africa. It is worth noting that the vast majority of the British Museum’s collection of some eight million items came from countries other than the UK, and a significant portion of it was acquired through improper channels.

READ MORE: UK must return looted relics to where they belong

In a belated effort to repair the tarnished image of the British Museum, the British Museum and London’s Victoria and Albert Museum announced in January 2024 that 32 gold and silver artifacts from Ghana, which were looted during the Anglo-Ashanti Wars in the 1800s, would return to the country for the first time in 150 years. The above attempt by the British Museum to whitewash its record of handling and retaining stolen artifacts is doomed to failure. There is no doubt that a large number of Chinese artifacts flowed into Britain during a period when China was suffering from foreign invasions and internal upheavals.

For example, the Great Bell of Tianning Temple was looted by British invaders during the First Opium War (1839-42) and presented to Queen Victoria, who donated it to the British Museum in 1841. Some of China’s oldest surviving paintings on silk and inscribed bronze ritual vessels are in the British Museum. It is estimated that 10 million artifacts were stolen from China between the First Opium War and the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression (1931-45).

Most Chinese people view the loss of these cultural relics as a potent source of national humiliation and a painful reminder of the destruction of Chinese culture by imperialist invaders. Besides being invaluable symbols of national identity, these cultural relics are important because the soft power of a nation is often viewed through the prism of its cultural attractiveness. Being one of the oldest civilizations in the world, China is undoubtedly a culturally attractive nation. To steady the course of the ship of national rejuvenation, we should boost the cultural confidence of Chinese people and resume control over these Chinese artifacts.

Long gone are the days when Western museums, which have been the major recipients of Chinese artifacts, could form a united front to frustrate the legitimate calls for repatriation of stolen artifacts. Public opinion in major Western countries has shifted decisively in China’s direction. In 2023, seven German museums initiated a collaborative research project with Chinese peer facilities like the Palace Museum to carry out an inventory of relics in their collections that were looted during the Boxer Rebellion (1899-1901).

ALSO READ: China's heritage: British Museum should return plundered antiquities

In April 2024, a total of 38 Chinese cultural relics, including a Buddhist pagoda, were repatriated from the United States to China. In January 2009, China and the US signed a memorandum of understanding to combat the unlawful entry of Chinese cultural relics into the US. In 2023, Switzerland’s Federal Office of Culture also returned five relics, including a 2,000-year-old equestrian statue, to China.

But the attitude of the British Museum is far from cooperative. Over the years, the British Museum has refused to return the cultural relics by relying on the unjust protection offered by the British Museum Act of 1963. The Act basically prohibits the museum from returning any of its collections. As the editor of the Global Times has correctly pointed out, it is hypocritical and ridiculous to use a law set by oneself as an excuse for refusing to obey international morality and fulfill international responsibility. Allowing the British Museum to retain control over these Chinese artifacts is a gross miscarriage of justice. Finally, it remains doubtful whether the British Museum can safely protect these invaluable exhibits.

In an interview, the late Lord Monson (1932-2011), who was a former member of the House of Lords in Britain, urged the British Museum to return the stolen artifacts to China. Standing on the right side of history, Lord Monson deserves our deep respect. In addition to improving Sino-British relations, the return would plant the rediscovered seeds of British charm and righteousness deep in Chinese people’s hearts.

Yin Zihan is a community services officer of BPA Eastern District, a coleader of the Rainbow Pair-mentorship program launched and administered by the Chinese Dream Think Tank; Kacee Ting Wong is a barrister, part-time researcher of Shenzhen University Hong Kong and Macao Basic Law Research Center, chairman of the Chinese Dream Think Tank and a district councilor.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily