Sure, but let's not forget that these weren't just beautiful, historic structures sitting on display. They were used daily to inflict countless horrors on the citizens of Benin or really anyone who was unlucky enough to be captured by someone operating in Benin

> But the way Benin treated its slaves and the public display of large quantities of human remains hardened British attitudes towards Benin's rulers. Since 1863, the British had been trying to force the King to stop selling slaves to the Arab traders who had replaced the Portuguese after 1836 and to stop the practice of human sacrificial crucifixion.

A very good point. I didn't even stop to consider what the kingdom of Benin were up to. And it is true that many western african kingdoms were involved in the slave trade.

Kinda off topic but the empire of Mali for example were claimed to have traded with people in south america before columbus set sail. Some documents claim that the king of spain instructed columbus on his second or 3rd voyage to find land south of where he originally landed, based on documents from the empire of Mali.

And sure enough he found south america.

But I'm sure the Malinese were also heavily involved in the slave trade.

Surely, it was quite noble of them to stop the slave trade in Benin while colonising, exploiting and draining their wealth.

This is an ignoratio elenchi - the parent discussion was regarding the destruction of the Walls of Benin; other matters of British occupation of Benin as a whole are irrelevant unless related.