Why it’s important to read anti-restitutionist articles – The truth behind History Reclaimed

Published on 20 Dec 2025

Some readers wonder why articles by authors, who oppose or are highly critical of restitution, or who publish in anti-restitution channels should be distributed. Some do so in a personal capacity. Others do so on behalf of a conservative institution established specifically for this purpose. RM* offers a three-fold answer.

Dear readers,

In recent weeks, some articles have led to critical questions. Julien Volper, penning on a personal basis but working for the AfricaMuseum in Tervuren, wrote about the comedy of some returns by The Netherlands. Bella d’Abrera published on decolonisation in Australian museums and libraries, Andreas Roth on the re-examination of some Benin objects, and David Abulafia on why the Rosetta Stone doesn’t belong in Egypt. These last three authors are connected to History Reclaimed in Great Britain.

Why should these be distributed, and why are they worth reading? RM*’s three-fold answer to this is:

  • RM* is open to all viewpoints about restitution issues, regardless of their position.
  • RM* thinks it’s crucial that readers (most of whom are sympathetic to restitution) are informed about the arguments of opponents. Reading offers an opportunity to unravel arguments and refute them (instead of getting upset only).
  • RM*invites its readers to be open, as some of the information and insights provided in these articles, can be valuable.

 

Amal Chatterjee has found some interesting quotes about History Reclaimed that we’d like to share with you.

Prof. Corinne Fowler (University of Leicester)

“In August 2021, a group of scholars including Robert Tombs (appointed by Boris Johnson to a new Heritage Advisory Board in the wake of Colston’s toppling), Niall Ferguson, Andrew Roberts and Biggar, banded together to create the History Reclaimed Project. It has since registered as a private company. According to the Daily Mail, the group was established to battle Black Lives Matter’s ‘woke war on our great leaders’. The company has overlapping membership with Restore Trust, a private company first established to block the National Trust’s efforts to tell the full history of its properties in the wake of the report co-authored by Fowler. This company has tried to get its candidates elected to the National Trust’s council, aiming to reverse the charity’s moves towards greater inclusivity. At least some of its members oppose the National Trust’s engagement with Gay Pride events and its rewilding projects.”

 

Prof. Alan Lester, University of Sussex

Although obtuse about their funding model, there are indications that both History Reclaimed and Restore Trust are part of a network of conservative lobbying groups and ‘think tanks’ associated with addresses at Tufton Street in London.  One of six people in Restore Trust’s Meet the Team webpage is Neil Record, a billionaire former currency risk manager who backed the Institute of Economic Affairs, the think tank which encouraged Liz Truss’ minibudget in 2022. Record also chairs the Global Warming Policy Forum and ‘Net Zero Watch’, which believes that ‘a narrow “groupthink” and “cancel culture”’ guides climate change concerns.  Zewditu Gebreyohanes, the co-author of the Policy Exchange report that misrepresented the Churchill College panel worked at Policy Exchange, is a former director of Restore Trust and is deputy editor at History Reclaimed. She was appointed by Nadine Dorries as a trustee of the Victoria and Albert Museum, and is now a senior researcher at the Legatum Institute, which is directed by the former special adviser to Jacob Rees-Mogg.”

So, dear reader, don’t be not surprised if we make you feel uncomfortable again. We must keep challenging ourselves.