Why the showcase of Indian idols at The British Museum must spark debate on colonial loot

Have you ever wondered how Indian gods have their unique physical characteristics? The British Museum in London recently addressed this question in an exhibition titled . Ancient India: Living Traditions.

The nearly five-month-long exhibition, supported by Reliance Industries and Reliance Foundation, concluded on October 19 and traced the evolution of idol craftsmanship in Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism over 2,000 years. It promised visitors a comprehensive journey through centuries of Indian religious art. Educational ideas and trying to explain the value of these objects were a good step towards accountability and collaboration, but the enduring irony remained: this story is being told not in Varanasi, Amravati or Nalanda, but in Britain, whose colonial history included the wholesale removal of these idols from their homes in India.

Given that celebrities attending the museum’s inaugural fundraising gala, the glamorous Pink Ball co-chaired by businesswoman Isha Ambani, coincided with the exhibition’s closing, one wonders whether there was at some point a surreal awareness of dissonance as curators and art critics debated the “aesthetics of engagement.” Many of the idols on display likely came through the legally and morally dubious channels of the British Empire and its well-oiled cultural plunder machine.

Exhibitions like this are layered cultural explorations of cultural dispossession. They offer an opportunity to think about what happens when spiritual symbols become permanent immigrants; When they move from their warm homes in India to cities where their names are unknown and often mispronounced. But like other such efforts, the exhibition largely missed the chance to start a robust dialogue about reparations and how constructive communication around this idea can be improved.

Devotion over wealth and ostentation

The presence of Indian idols in Britain is no coincidence. Both during and after colonial rule, countless works of art found their way into the UK by being looted, “gifted” under duress, or smuggled. Many such works were cataloged as curiosities by colonial administrators who treated Indian art as anthropological data rather than a living belief. By the late 19th century, Indian deities were to be found in Bloomsbury as well as in Bodh Gaya.

The London exhibition cleared up this story with its scientific catalogs and glossy posters. He presented idols as aesthetic milestones. Although the exhibit served its educational purpose, its location betrayed its purpose. He displayed the idols in an environment free from the adoration of devotees who once anointed them with sandalwood paste or adorned them with marigolds. Worship, sweat, and acts of penance were replaced by ostentation, wealth, and privilege. This is the legacy of cultural plunder: not just physical displacement but also transformation of meaning.

From this perspective, the long corridors of the British Museum and the latest exhibition in London do not resemble a mausoleum, but rather the display of a curio cabinet. Idols, once central to the living of religious practices by multitudes of devotees, have now become objects of dispassionate admiration. To see an idol of Lord Vishnu in a sterile glass box at the heart of an air-conditioned and humidity-controlled room with monochrome walls is to witness discontinuity, not continuity. A story that broke in transit.

A view of the exhibits at the ‘Ancient India: Living Traditions’ exhibition at the British Museum in London. | Photo Credit: British Museum

making money from sacred things

A deeper irony is that these idols are not only preserved; they make money. Visitors in London pay for admission, buy catalogues, and perhaps even buy idol-inspired souvenirs on their way out. These idols, which were once objects of social presentation, were turned into sources of income for institutions far from their origins. While many museums in India struggle to find funding, especially in the more remote parts of the country, and the government struggles to protect village shrines from theft, the British Museum continues to transform colonial acquisitions into cultural and literal capital.

This is where the exhibition reveals more than it intended. This was not just about the “evolution of idols” but also the evolution of property.

‘Gaja-Lakshmi’, circa 1780, in the British Museum. | Photo Credit: British Museum

Their return should demonstrate their respect for the culture, imagination and foresight of the judges of the Court of Appeal for England and Wales. Bumper Development Corporation – Police Commissioner of Metropolis and Others [1991] EWCA Civ J0213-5 In this case, trying to identify the owner of a stolen Nataraja idol, judges ruled that the temple in South India from which Nataraja was stolen could be a legal person in the UK, and also that the idol could ‘speak’ through the temple priest and express a ‘longing to return home’.

lessons for india

Ancient India: Living Traditions The exhibition was undoubtedly deemed a success as a cultural event. But it also served as a silent indictment against a system that still unapologetically profited from colonial gains and against Native Americans with incomplete knowledge of their own history. When discussing the “evolution” of idols, refusing to send them back to their homes is an act of selective memory.

Ganesha made of volcanic stone in Java, 1000-1200 AD. | Photo Credit: British Museum

The lesson for India is not just about creating a transparent framework for claiming compensation. It’s about building dialogue and real education. Idols are more than stone and bronze; they are the embodiment of faith, history and identity. In order for them to come into contact with their original environment again, they must be allowed into their original context and correct explanations must be given for them by then. Every exhibition abroad will carry with it the compelling and dizzying shadow of dispossession.

India’s generosity in participating in redundant institutions such as the Commonwealth should also enable the country to balance the importance of cultural identity with the ideas of the world as a single family. There is some indication from international organizations that recognition of cultural dispossession should take precedence over exposure. In September 2025, UNESCO announced a virtual database of stolen objects. However, it is still very bare as it contains only three objects offered by India. To be truly effective, the database must also reflect the understanding of UNESCO’s 1970 ‘Convention on Measures to Prohibit and Prevent the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property’ and create a comprehensive database of cultural objects looted during the colonial period.

For now, gods can travel between continents, but sentience is left behind.

Sahibnoor is a Lecturer at Jindal Global Law School and Lavanya is an Advocate, RFKN Advocate.

It was published – 24 October 2025 16:09 IST