THE return of the Stone of Destiny to Scotland sparked mass restitution fears as civil servants criticised the then-prime minister John Major for “setting a precedent”.
The Department of National Heritage had a serious disagreement with the prime minister over the return of the 13th-century Stone of Destiny, also known as the Stone of Scone, to Scotland in 1996, a newly released UK government file has revealed.
The heritage department was furious with Major for failing to consult it over this “precedent to mass restitution” and that if he had spoken with them regarding returning the stone, they would have advised against it, documents from 1996 by the National Archives have shown.
Lynn Gates, the head of the cultural property unit, wrote to the then-secretary of state, Virginia Bottomley, stating that the return of the stone would lead to a flood of claims from countries including Greece, Egypt and Nigeria for the return of objects held by British institutions.
Gates wrote that after Major agreed to return the Stone of Destiny, the Greek politician, Alexandros Alavanos, immediately asked the prime minister to show the “same sensibility” over the Elgin Marbles.
She added that the British high commissioner in Nigeria said he “feared a request for the return of the Benin Bronzes and other Nigerian artefacts”.
Meanwhile, the British Embassy in Egypt said it anticipated a formal request for the return of the Rosetta Stone and a fragment of the Sphinx’s beard held by the British Museum.
Gates concluded: “We would be in an invidious position if we were to respond to the current correspondence by defending the Prime Minister’s decision.”
The Stone of Destiny had been used as a crowning seat for Scottish monarchs at Scone Palace, near Perth, up until the late 13th century when Edward I of England took it to Westminster, where it was then used by English monarchs.
In 1996, Major said it was “appropriate to return it to its historic homeland” on the 700th anniversary of its removal.
In a statement to the House of Commons on July 3, Major said that the slab of sandstone held a “special place in the hearts of Scots”.
In the memo released at the National Archives, first reported by the Art Newspaper, Gates wrote to Bottomley on July 18: “Had we been consulted, we would have advised against return because of the likely fall-out, ie, other countries seeing the return of the Stone as setting a precedent for mass restitution.
“We are already being proved right.”
Gates added: “We would be in an invidious position if we were to respond to the current correspondence by defending the prime minister’s decision.”
Britain’s most prestigious cultural institutions, such as the British Museum, oversee national collections and have found themselves limited in any restitution discussions throughout the years.
While trustees and museum directors have said they sympathised with restitution claims for objects taken during Britain's colonial era, they are prevented by statute from deaccessioning items from their national collections.
Successive governments have declined to revise the legislative restraints.
