Bristol considers permanent display for toppled Edward Colston statue
Bristol City Council has applied to keep the statue of Edward Colston in its current state, following its toppling and vandalization by Black Lives Matter protesters in 2020, as a permanent exhibit in museums.
The statue, which was retrieved four days after it was torn down and has been on temporary display in the M Shed museum since 2021, was damaged and defaced with red and blue spray paint during the protest.
Bristol City Council (BCC) filed an application to ensure the statue remains included in the permanent collection of the Bristol City Council Museums service as it stands now. The council’s Development Control Committee is set to review the application on Feb. 21.
If approved, the damaged statue will be part of an upcoming exhibition at M Shed, centered on the theme of “protest,” opening in March 2024.
In the application, BCC stated that the statue should be left “preserved in its current state,” and they also proposed several plans for its exhibition and presentation, including a plaque with a description attached to the empty plinth where the statue was located.
These plans were developed in response to recommendations from the We Are Bristol History Commission, which suggested that the statue should be kept in a museum. According to the commission’s report, 80 percent of Bristolian respondents agreed with this proposal.
Edward Colston was a 17th century merchant and Bristol benefactor who was involved in the transatlantic slave trade. Bristol served as one of the main centers of the British Empire’s slave trade, and Colston’s ties to this trade have sparked much controversy and debate.
Colston Hall, a well-known music venue in Bristol, was renamed the Bristol Beacon in September 2020 following this controversy. The school that was initially established by Colston more than 300 years ago in Bristol also changed its name to Collegiate in 2022.
The four individuals involved in the toppling of the statue and its disposal were acquitted of causing criminal damage, despite admitting their involvement. The Court of Appeal argued that human rights defense should not have been applied in the case, highlighting the violent nature and significant damage caused by the toppling of the statue.
Chris Summers contributed to this report.
- Republicans on House Oversight Committee Request Testimony from FTC Staff
- Senator Manchin Upset by Snub on Border Security
