West African musical instruments languishing in a Los Angeles museum’s storerooms are creating a restitution challenge, because they have human skulls attached to them.
The drum and the ivory trumpet were looted by British troops in the late 19th century in Kumasi, the capital of the Asante kingdom, so the Fowler Museum at the University of California, Los Angeles is determined to return them to Ghana. But although the musical instruments may be Asante, they appear to have been transformed into gruesome war trophies—the attached skulls could be the decapitated heads of the Asante’s enemies.
One possibility is that the cranium was added later, in order to enhance its value for a buyer with macabre tastes
Although it would be appropriate to restitute the musical instruments to the present Asante king, it would be widely regarded as unethical to return the bones of their former enemies, victims from neighbouring communities. And it would seem inappropriate to remove the skulls from the instruments, splitting up historical ensembles which have probably been together for two centuries.
In 2024, with considerable fanfare, the Fowler Museum restituted seven other items to the Asante king. These have no human remains and are now on display in Kumasi’s Manhyia Palace Museum. But what was not publicised at the time was that the two musical instruments remain in limbo at the Fowler. Their existence is revealed in a new book by the London-based journalist Barnaby Phillips, The African Kingdom of Gold: Britain and the Asante Gold.
The musical instruments appear to have been seized separately by British soldiers in Kumasi during military operations in the late 19th century. The soldiers’ unidentified families later sold them in London: the trumpet in 1919 and the drum in 1930. Both were bought by Henry Wellcome, whose wide-ranging collection comprised items with a medical connection.
In 1965, when the Wellcome collection was being dispersed long after the founder’s death, the two instruments were donated to the Fowler. Since then they have never been displayed or illustrated in published photographs.
Trumpet with skull
The bones on the instruments have now been examined, with surprising results. The trumpet has a skull coated with a red-orange substance, which is attached to the instrument with a strap. At the 1919 London auction at which it was sold, a description of the trumpet read: “A very large old Ashanti ivory horn with fetish skull attached, sounded only at human sacrifices. Collected at the same time as the executioner’s sword [in the same sale].” Both objects had been “found by an officer of the expedition in King Prempeh’s compound”, presumably when British troops invaded Kumasi in 1896.
Jawbones are sometimes found attached to Asante trumpets. These are believed to have a symbolic significance, suggesting praises sung from the mouths of defeated enemies. However, it is unusual in Asante historical culture to attach a skull to a trumpet.
Research by the Fowler’s senior curator of African arts Erica Jones and her former colleague Carlee Forbes suggests that the skull on the trumpet “belonged to a male who might have died in battle”. A scientific examination of the teeth shows that he was aged around 40. The man appears to have been attacked with a sharp instrument, which had created a one-inch slit in his skull. There is no evidence of healing, indicating a quick death.
Drum with unexpected cranium
Nothing is known about how the goblet-shaped drum left Kumasi. When it was being researched, it had initially been expected that the cranium attached to it would also be that of a male victim. According to Kwasi Ampene, a Ghanaian musicologist at Tufts University in Massachusetts, after the Asante had captured a powerful enemy in the 19th century, they would “decapitate that person and put their head on a drum”, as an act of humiliation.
What the Fowler’s investigation revealed came as a surprise: the cranium attached to the drum is actually that of a woman, and one aged around 50. This suggests that she may not have been a defeated enemy, but perhaps even a prominent member of the Asante court. Another possibility is that the cranium was added later to the drum, either in Kumasi or England, in order to enhance its financial value for a European buyer with macabre tastes.
Research on the two instruments has raised more questions than it has answered. Are the trumpet and drum really Asante, or could they have come from a neighbouring area, even if they were acquired in Kumasi? The distinctive mouthpiece of the trumpet suggests that it may have been made north of Kumasi, in an Akan area outside the Asante empire. The Asante did not normally use drum mallets, but these are also attached to the Fowler example.
Even if the instruments were created by non-Asante makers, could they arguably have become part of the royal heritage after their acquisition for the king’s palace? The question then arises as to whether the trumpet and drum were peacefully acquired from neighbouring areas or were looted by the Asante during wars before being looted again, this time by British troops.
Research into the two instruments may have been hampered by the fact that the Fowler is unwilling to allow publication of images of them (even with the skulls obscured) on the grounds that this would be disrespectful to the dead. Images have been privately supplied to trusted specialists in Ghana. However, concerns about images of human remains might not actually cause difficulties in Ghana. Kodzo Gavua, the chairman of the country’s National Focal Team on Restitution and Repatriation, tells The Art Newspaper that exhibiting the actual instruments and skulls “would not be a problem in Ghana, as we are used to such displays”.
The next move
Jones says that with items that were “violently or coercively taken from their original owners or communities”, it is our “ethical responsibility” to return them. The difficult question is to whom they should be restituted. She adds: “Given that there could be many potential claimants—the Asante, the original makers of the horn and trumpet, and any descendant communities of the ancestral remains—we didn’t think it was appropriate for us to determine where they should be returned.”
Confidential discussions have now been underway for seven years with Ghana’s ministry of tourism, culture and creative arts and, since last July, with the National Focal Team on Restitution and Repatriation. There is still no sign of an imminent solution.
The current Asante king, Otumfuo Nana Osei Tutu II, might like the musical instruments to go to the Manhyia Palace Museum, where the artefacts previously returned by the Fowler are now on show. But some non-Asante Ghanaians might feel that it would be insensitive of the Asante to display the skull of a defeated (and possibly decapitated) member of a neighbouring Akan group. An alternative solution would be restitution to the National Museum in the Ghanaian capital, Accra, although to display the skull of an executed man might be regarded by some as disrespectful.
Gavua points out that an eventual decision will require “a consensus between various stakeholders, including the ministry, the Ghana Museums and Monuments Board and, most importantly, the local people and their leaders”. Community engagement, negotiations and dialogue are “essential to the return process, which is not as simple as it may appear”.
If an agreement is eventually reached, the return might simply result in a transfer from a museum store in Los Angeles to one in Accra. As the Fowler case vividly demonstrates, even when all parties involved are acting in good faith, restitution can raise difficult ethical dilemmas.
