Buddhist Piprahwa relics have finally returned, but is India's heritage free yet?

Economic Times

2 days ago

Urn our keep: Late Mauryan Brahmi inscription on a steatite vase from a Piprahwa stupa that reads, 'Relics of the Buddha Lord', Indian Museum, Kolkata On July 30, gem-encrusted relics believed to be linked to the Buddha's ashes finally returned to India. In 1898, a team led by British civil engineer and indigo plantation owner William Claxton Peppe excavated a stupa in his estate in Piprahwa, in today's Uttar Pradesh. The team found relics associated with Shakya clan, the community to which the Buddha belonged.
The most sacred caskets were handed over to colonial authorities and deposited in the Indian Museum in Calcutta. But Peppe, reportedly with state consent, retained a portion of the find: roughly 20% of the stones, categorised at the time as 'duplicates'.
Narendra Modi rightly called the repatriation of the Piprahwa relics 'a joyous day for our cultural heritage'. The items, including over 300 gem-encrusted stones, had vanished from public view, and were taken outside colonial India. Last month, they were about to be auctioned off by Sotheby's in Hong Kong on behalf of Peppe's descendants for an estimated $13 mn, when GoI intervened. On the 78th anniversary of India's independence, behind the deserved celebration of the relics' return lies a deeper reckoning: what legal memory still governs ownership of culture in postcolonial India? It's a reminder of what remains unreconciled: colonial-era laws that governed whose heritage was protected, whose discoveries were criminalised, and whose claims still shape the institutional memory of India's cultural past. Indian Treasure Trove Act of 1878 was repealed in 2018. But its legal and moral legacy continues to haunt our understanding of cultural ownership.
Peppé, reportedly with state consent, retained a portion of the find: roughly 20% of the gem-encrusted stones. The Piprahwa repatriation is not just an act of diplomatic triumph. It is also a case study of the legal double standards that once underwrote empire, and which linger in the deep and accommodating shadows of museums and markets. Now that repatriation has gained momentum across former colonising and colonised states, what structural work remains to be done?Unlike the treatment meted out to the Peppe family, there were many cases of Indian villagers unearthing buried objects. These finders were subsequently prosecuted under the Indian Treasure Trove Act. In the 1914 'Mala Naicker And Anr. vs Unknown' case, two Tamil labourers were sentenced for failing to report a discovery of 'treasure' to the 'nearest government treasury'. In the 1938 'Govindaraja Pillai vs Vanchinatham Pillai' case, six men in Madras Presidency were convicted for not disclosing an uncovered 'treasure trove'.These cases reflected how the Act operated in practice. On paper, the 1878 law required anyone who found treasure worth more than ₹10 to report it to the collector. If no rightful owner could be identified, the treasure was to be claimed by the British crown. In principle, the law applied to all. In practice, enforcement targeted Indian subjects, particularly poor and/or rural finders, while British officials and landowners were often exempt from scrutiny or prosecution.We do not have a complete registry of enforcement actions under the Act. But, to date, no public record exists of cases involving prosecution of British or European residents. The Peppe case illustrates how easily colonial privilege could reclassify sacred relics as private heirlooms, all under the law. The result was a selective legal ecosystem: privatised for some, and weaponised against others.The Buddha's relics were, for over a century, kept from Indian scholars, pilgrims and institutions. Their retrieval is both overdue and meaningful. But restitution is not the same as redress - not for those whose names were never remembered, whose prosecutions were never questioned and whose claims were dismissed, not because they were weak, but because they were 'native'.Even now, the Act's influence endures in regulatory ambiguity, including gaps in enforcement of Antiquities and Art Treasures Act 1972 that surrounds antiquities, in the often-unchallenged authority of global auction houses, and in the persistent hesitation of museums to revisit the provenance of their collections.If we are to move from symbolic restitution to substantive redress, India must begin a historical inventory. That means building a transparent, public database of repatriated and contested cultural objects, including those held in private collections, auction pipelines or museums abroad.It also requires a systematic review of acquisition records in our institutions, many of which still carry the legacy of colonial-era curatorial practices. Without such a reckoning, we risk treating each return as an isolated triumph, rather than part of a broader, unfinished narrative - one in which cultural memory is still being negotiated, and justice remains incomplete.It means revisiting narratives we tell - and don't tell - about who found what, who kept it and who was punished. It means acknowledging that many stories of cultural theft are not just about missing objects but also, and importantly, about missing voices.The return of the Piprahwa relics is a rare act of historical rightness. But it should not be mistaken for closure. Cultural heritage is not just about the past. It is about power: who defines what is sacred, what is legal and who is allowed to remember.The Buddha has come home. Now, let us ask: whose stories are still in exile? (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this column are that of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of www.economictimes.com.) Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. Tariffs, tantrums, and tech: How Trump's trade drama is keeping Indian IT on tenterhooks
Good, bad, ugly: How will higher ethanol in petrol play out for you?
As big fat Indian wedding slims to budget, Manyavar loses lustre
As 50% US tariff looms, 6 key steps that can safeguard Indian economy
Stock Radar: JSPL forms Ascending Triangle pattern on weekly charts, could hit fresh 52-week high soon
Nifty and business are different species: 5 small-cap stocks from different sectors with upside potential of up to 30%
F&O Radar | Deploy Bear Put Spread in Nifty to play index's negative stance amid volatility
Wealth creation: Look beyond the obvious in some things; 10 fertilizer sector companies worth watching